I need a hug - my Kerry love got bruised...

[jillan]

and I can't get over it. Can't shake it off.

While getting ready to go out New Years eve, listening to the local AAR show, they were talking about Kerry. My guess the discussion was about the concession. A caller called in and said;(
"I will never vote for Kerry again. If he is the dem nominee in '08, I won't even bother going to the polls."

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

It felt like a knife in my heart, and I started yelling at the radio (my family is ready to have me committed - always yelling at the tv...now yelling at the radio). And the worst part, I had to leave it at that. We had reservations, and my kids were having friends over.

And then to hear that dork Tucker on top of it -
I just need a Kerrycrat hug. You guys understand how I'm feeling.

[TayTay]

1. This will get worse.

Ignorant people are everywhere. They make thoughtless and stupid comments. That doesn't change anything. You know what you believe in and you know what certain people stand for. You have to wrap yourself in that belief. It will get worse, you know.

I do have hugs, and you can lean on me whenever you need it. That's what we are here for, my dear.

[jillan]

2. Thanks - After venting here, I figured out my therapy

My Kerry for President sticker is going back on my car TODAY!
So take that you idiot that called in and tried to ruin my weekend - ah that felt better.

I think it got to me because I know deep inside that the concession issue is going to be huge.

[TayTay]

3. Maybe. But that is only for a very small percentage of people

There are a certain number of people who were never really Kerry supporters to begin with and used the concession speech and the issue of election fraud to justify their dropping him after the election. But remember, this is a small percentage of Democrats and they are vastly over-represented on lefty forums and blogs and on talk radio. (The more activist base tends to check on on those forums.)

If it wasn't this issue for these people, it would have been something else. Their support was always an inch thick. You can't change them, but you can't let them get to you either. These people are simply negative, all the time and for everyone and everything. Occasionally, they find someone they like and can latch onto for a while. But that person inevitably disappoints them and they return to their happiest and most stable state of depression, inaction, moodiness and irrationality. Try not to let them get to you. Just because they are this way, doesn't mean you have to be. (Hey, there's a reason why I often blow off my frustrations by writing parodies. Either you learn to laugh or you'll go crazy.)

again, hugs! Hang in there kid, you are among friends. (And it will get worse again. Toughen up.)

[Luftmensch067]

4. Tay's right, of course...

I would just add (for Harry Potter fans) that when the Dementors (and that's what those Lefty Freepers are, make no mistake -- to borrow an oft-used phrase from our future President), when the Dementors, I say (now I'm Senator Byrd) get you down, the best remedy is...CHOCOLATE!!!!! :hug:

[jillan]

6. Lol! You're so right - chocolate is great medicine.

Thx!

[jillan]

5. I think why this got to me is because I couldn't do anything about it

All I wanted to do was pick up the phone and call in and give them a piece of my mind.
It was unfinished business, and it was a zinger that needed to be dealt with.

I have one of those "be in charge" personalities. If I need to do something, I don't rest until it's done.

Since I couldn't call in, venting here is the next best thing. sigh!

[TayTay]

7. It's a positive action to take.

Literally, that's what we are here for: to talk to other Kerry people and give each other a hug, a pep talk, a few laughs and a chance to share about the cold, cold world. This is a positive action to take.

[whometense]

8. Many hugs

:hug: :hug: :hug:

If there's one thing a fellow Kerrycrat knows, it's how that dagger feels going in. And twisting. The pain. :cry:

Tay's right, of course - this is just the beginning. The better he looks, the nastier it will get. And anytime you feel the need we can delve back into the dark days of late 2003 when he was referred to nonstop EVERYWHERE by such lovely phrases as "the walking dead".

One thing that may give you some solace is the knowledge that (though no one wants to be called "the undead") JK operates very well from a position everyone else might consider hopeless underdoghood. He likes flying just beneath the radar. And fortunately, the majority of voters are more influenced by his wonderful self than by polls or talking heads.

You should never hesitate to rant here - at one time or another, every one of us (well, except for the smart and VERY politically tough Tay) will feel the same way. We need to lean on each other to keep our spirits up so we can help him. :-)

[TayTay]

11. Well, some of the LF are just funny.

Sorry, my humor meter is just stuck in the 'on' position. (Sigh!) The LF amuse me more than make me mad. The Rethugs make me mad. That's where the battle is. It is the nature of politics to be biting and difficult. This often results in the most horrendous and mean things being said. I tend to just 'suck it up' disregard the naysayers and move on. Naysayers are always, always, always there. They have always been there. Naysayers were there at the beginning of this countries origins telling people to shut up and pay the tax. (Who cares about this 'No taxation without representation' issue anyway. Stop rocking the boat.) Naysayers were there for the women's rights movement (the whole 150+ years of it) and for the whole of the civil rights movement (which is over 220 years old in this country.)

If you listen to these people, they will suck out your soul and your will to go on. Blow them off. They don't actually know anymore than you do. They just manage to bleat about the little they do know much more. (And way more shrilly.)

You know, I was thinking about this stuff this morning. It struck me that my favorite speech Kerry made last year was probably the eulogy for Rosa Parks. There is something about that phrase that he used in issuing the call to service and action, "For Rosa Parks and for our country' that I just really, really liked. You don't put up with the negativity and the smears for personal reasons. You do it for a greater goal. '... and for our country.' I just loved that. That sort of thing sustains me.

[YvonneCa]

10. Hug...

...for you!:hug: I heard the Tucker thing...and I did email him...a nice, polite email about how he should do some research on Kerry, listen to a couple 'specific' speeches, and stop dissing the senator because the country needs his leadership now.:patriot:

[Noisy Democrat]

21. For some people the concession was positive

Some Republicans said Kerry's statesmanlike concession made them think they'd consider voting for him in the future. One Democrat I met recently, not a blogger but just a normal Democrat, had heard a rumor Kerry had ruled out running in 2008 and asked me sadly, "Isn't there any chance Kerry will run again?" She was happy when I assured her he was keeping the option open. She said, "After the graceful and dignified way he conceded, I can't see why he wouldn't be able to." She meant that he didn't have a circus like Gore -- not to say I disapprove of what Gore did, but it made it harder for him to run again.

Not everyone reacts to the concession the way they do on DailyKos.

[karynnj]

13. I really don't think the issue is as huge as it appears

- it's only on the very extreme edge. Remember that until Al Gore said he wouldn't run - the view was that he should have a second shot because it was stolen. That Gore won was more easilly proven - but the fact is that nothing in the constitution really deals with stolen elections. Kerry could not prove that he won (if he did) - his brother's statement on what they did know was very clear that there were many things wrong with Ohio, but there was no way to actually prove that he got the majority of votes cast. (Some of the descpancies in the vote count were due to voter error, it's obvious but you can't correct the totals for it.)

What's ironic is that Al Gore is let off the hook for not staying and making clean elections an issue. Instead Kerry is blamed because while running for President he didn't simultaneously head a major effort to insure the election was run cleanly. (That this would have had to start prior to March 2004 and their favorites were not working on it either is beside the point.)

As to the concession speech itself - it was the right thing to do. Kerry had no support from the media, the official counts, the Ohio courts, the Democratic party, the Congress, or the federal courts. I'm not even sure what he could have done other than to say in place of his concession speech that he wasn't conceding because there were so many discrepancies in Ohio. What lever would he then use to check out Ohio? They haven't found a smoking gun and there probably wasn't one - just little matches burning one potential vote after another while burning up themselves.

I can't even imagine what the response would have been. Would Clinton, happily explaining why Kerry lost within a week have backed him - uh, no. In reality the concession speech is a civilied formality. Ohio would have likely gone on and certified its electors. It is unlikely that significantly more Congressmen or Senators would have voted no - at any rate, they would have been approved and Kerry would still lose.

These people say that had Kerry done that they would support him - but no one else would. The majority of people would think that it was likely that Ohio was closer than it seemed - but the idea that it would lead to a huge turnaround in public opinion and everyone would see that the election was stolen is naive. I can't even imagine what Kerry would have faced - he would have caused a crisis in government (not a constitutional crisis because he couldn't stop the process) in a time of war. But as a sitting Senator, I really think the Senate would, at minimum, have censured him. In addition to the Republican majority, there would be plenty of Democrats who would, given public pressure, would take to floor to very harshly condemn him. I doubt it would have been pretty.

[TayTay]

15. There is also the 'sore loser' faction from the primaries.

Some people never got over that loss and believe that a savior was denied. So, they feel that the wrong person won the nomination and, of course, messed it up. This justifies their belief that they were right in the primaries and were denied. Really, they need to get over it.

[karynnj]

17. Definitely true

Even when illogical - I esp like when they say that Dean, unlike Kerry, would have stood up to the Rove lies. Was this the "I don't want to be a pin cushion" Dean? The thing is that you never know how the path not taken works out, so they may be right, but then again (to accept their other point) it would have been stolen anyway.

[ginnyinWI]

9. why I'm not worried about that

That's the perspective from a lot of people on the far left,but just remember, they are not, repeat not a majority. People on DU, people who listen to a lot of political shows, talk shows, Cspan really aren't the majority of Dems. I mean, they are there, but you can't take any candidate's political temperature only based on these kinds of opinions.

We have our fringe left, the GOP has its fringe right (who happen to have snookered their party but good, and are currently (and temporariliy) running things--but each party has a solid moderate base, and then there are the independent swing voters. So we'll have to wait and see what all of those folks think. ;)

If I can judge Kerry's appeal just looking at this group, he appeals to fairly normal people. We are average Americans, are we not? Ok, we are a little more "political junkie" than maybe a lot of people, but one reason I am is because of Kerry. So there. More and more, I look at the left and am able to see people who are too extreme, too partisan, too willing to overlook facts in favor of slanting something toward the left and am losing respect for them. Mark Crispin Miller for one. Give me the truth, dammit, not just red meat for the base! I have lost patience with being pandered to.

So I'm not going to worry so much about opinions from the far left. ;)

[jillan]

12. I believe the reason people are still so upset about this

are the people that will not accept that bsh is in the WH.
And Kerry is getting the blame. If Kerry would have, should have - then we could kick the repugs out of office, and Kerry could move in. Yeah, I had the same dream for a few months after the election, but then reality set in. They are taking it out on Kerry, and the most ridiculous statement ever made is the one about how Kerry didn't want to be Prez, that's why he didn't fight:banghead:

Trying to remember back to my Psych 101 class, many moons ago, to what that term is for when you project your anger onto someone else. That's what I think of when the lefty freeps lash out against Kerry.

[TayTay]

14. It is also dangerous.

It is not easy and has never been easy to affect real change. (That's why we look up to the people who have actually been able to do this. Most people get discouraged and quit. The precious few who stay with it are very worthy people indeed.)

Look at what the Washington Monthly magazine wrote about DKos and it's influence among some libs who read it:

There was another reason, though, why hundreds of thousands of liberals around the country found themselves addictively checking and rechecking Daily Kos as the 2004 election approached. It made them think Democrats were going to win. Moulitsas wasn't just posting any polls, he was selecting those that suggested Democrats—from John Kerry to congressional candidates—were heading for victory, while downplaying less encouraging signs. It left liberals trapped in a bubble of reassurance. Heading into the election, it would have been reasonable to assume from the evidence presented on Daily Kos that Kerry was the clear favorite to beat Bush, and that Democrats were likely to pick up seats in both houses of Congress. When none of these things happened, there was a sense of incomprehension. All of Kos's confident predictions had been wrong. “It's a valid criticism. Looking back, I was too optimistic,” Moulitsas told me. “ the beginning, I didn't even know what a margin of error was.”

Worse, Kos hadn't just fared poorly as an armchair quarterback—he'd been beaten on the field, too. In the Democratic primaries, he first backed Dean, then Wesley Clark. Both sparked grassroots excitement, but ultimately, of course, flamed out. Then, of the 13 Democratic candidates for Congress that Moulitsas handpicked for his readers to support—and for whom he raised over $500,000– not a single one prevailed.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0601.wallace-wells.html

The libs didn't get what they wanted, even though it was portrayed as an easy prize that was within their grasp. The fact that 04 was never an easy race doesn't penetrate. Nonsensically enough, some of the same people who are afraid of Rove and afraid of the Rethug tactics, discount those same things in looking back at the 04 race. This is insane. We can never learn anything or move forward if we can't realistically assess what happened. (Honestly, how can smart people be so damned dumb? How can they not grasp the illogic of their positions?)

[karynnj]

20. Gee maybe they should have turned on Kos

who set himself up as a pundit and struck out repeatedly.

[karynnj]

16. It's partly childish (no matter the age of the person)

I remember having a couple really young kids furious with me because I promised to take them to something that was cancelled. All I heard for 2 days was "you promised". It similar with these people; some of them remembering Kerry's heart felt genuine statement that they would win, bought it. Kerry wanted the victory far more deeply then they, but he didn't get it. But he promised they say. (What I would think is that for the hurt to be that deep, Kerry had to have reached them at some point - though they would never admit it and they were emotionally swept up in his possible win.)

[ginnyinWI]

18. Displacement?

I had Psych 101 too, and also many moons ago. But I think it's "displacement". People are angry and can't express it to the right target, so pick an easier one. Otherwise known as scape-goating, I guess. Yeah, as if Kerry didn't want to be president--that's a laugh! Only since he was like, 12 or something!

Also, we must always be aware that a lot of DU anger is indeed coming from genuine freepers. We know this because every time Kerry gets headlines for doing anything courageous, bam--the predicable Kerry-bashing threads appear on DU. Coincidence? I think not!

[jillan]

29. That's it! Displacement!

That is what I think is going on here.
Hate Bsh - take it out on Kerry.

Thank you for helping my middle-aged mind:silly:

[ginnyinWI]

19. a related thread

This one talks about MCM's book and attacks those who dare to raise any questions about it. I took exception to their dissing a review that appeared in Mother Jones, which I felt was a reasonable treatment of the subject of the 2004 election. But that fell on deaf ears--no shades of gray are wanted, obviously.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=182451&mesg_id=182451

[MH1]

22. Here's one

:hug:

But like everyone said upthread - the concession will not be a negative for most average Democrats. And some people, including me, saw it as a positive. I was initially mad at him for conceding but that didn't last long, because I realized the logic of it (which is described well in a few posts upthred).

The thing that pisses me off most about the people who are mad at JK for conceding, is that they ignore what DIDN'T happen after the election was CLEARLY stolen from Gore. Want to be mad at someone? Be mad at Gore for walking away. Although frankly I can't find it in my heart to be mad at Gore either. But he is more deserving of their anger than Kerry, IMO. And the people they should really be mad at is AMERICANS for a) not caring about what happened in 2000 and b) being stupid enough to make it close enough to steal in 2004.

[ProSense]

23. So true.

Then there are those average Americans who voted for Kerry and have only become more angry (a shift from tolerance to anger) at Bush and the Republicans as a result.

[FreedomAngel82]

24. Aw

:hug:

[zann725]

25. Next time, CALL IN and argue pro-Kerry. (I've gotten thru twice on 2 AAR

shows almost immediately.)

Depression comes from inaction. Power comes from fighting back, speaking up. Your comments, instead of at your radio/TV would better DIRECTLY effect those 'in the dark'...particularly since you sound so politically passionate.

Having grow up around many conservatives, I find a few carefully placed words can "shape" even the most unthinking Neanderthal.

Many hugs! Next time, fight back by lifting a phone, OR blogging the show. People read those too.

[jillan]

30. see my earlier posts

I was getting dressed rushing to leave for New Years, had reservations.

That's why I took it so hard, because I couldn't call.
Haha - maybe I should have brought my cell phone into the restaurant. Could you picture that?
I'm not very good at keeping my voice down when I'm mad. Maybe I should have - I could have
given my 'why I love John Kerry' speech for all to hear. lol

[zann725]

43. Okay, so you didn't have time to call THAT time, but do so in future.

Believe me, it IS emplowering. AND spreads the word.

[_dynamicdems]

26. It really sucks.

These fools don't even know what they are talking about, but hearing it really hurts. Yelling at the tv and radio is just part of being a Kerrycrat, I suppose. My family starts an intervention every time I get started on politics. They are ready to have me locked up too, so I feel for you.

How about a Kerrycrat Teddy Bear? I never did give it to the Senator, so if you would like it, send me your address and I'll get it right out to you with a couple of buttons. :)

[JI7]

27. FUCK THEM

you must not let these assholes get to you. also, you should be glad someone who is such an asshole to call up and waste time with a stupid tantrum about how they just will never ever vote for Kerry is not on our side. dumb piece of shit with all that is going on decides to call up with some stupid shit about how they will not vote for Kerry. i hope Kerry is the nominee and i will tell the fucker. "don't vote for him asshole". the fucker will most likely get angry at being blown off.

[jillan]

31. wow - maybe I should have had you call :)

You expressed what I was feeling very well.

[Vektor]

28. I also think that's a lot of cock-and-bull talk, too.

That person is bitter and venting. I'll bet you dollars to donuts if Kerry wins the nomination again, they will go vote for him again.

Know why?

Anyone THAT bitter about Bush winning is pretty anti-Republican. They will go vote for the Dem.

Whether they want to admit it right now or not.

[saracat]

32. I heard that call too! and reacted the same way!

But concession is going to be huge and the base is going to have to work around it. Contrary to many opinions there are many in the base who are NOT happy with the early concession. I understand "Why" he conceded, I am too much my parents daughter NOT to understand inaccessibility to evidence, but I also think he conceded too early. Following the lack of effort on the Swift Boat issue combined to make JK look like he wasn't a "fighter". Even John Edwards was pissed by the early concession. The fact that Kerry "knew" what was coming down the pike shouldn't have prevented him from putting some lipstick on the pig.And their is no question he lost support as the result of that decision. I have never had a blind adoration of Kerry. When he is wrong , he is wrong, just like anyone else. He conceded too early. It was wrong and it was stupid. It was a PR disaster and it will now have to be dealt with. It needs to be handled very carefully and honest to God, I wouldn't know the correct way to handle it. I think the only thing to do is to take every opportunity to present yourself as a fighter and I think that is what he is doing. The other thing is to work like hell on getting those machines released and tested in Ohio so you can prove something. It may be too late for that.

[TayTay]

33. I disagree. (As ever. You and I are fated to disagree.)

It's that same birthday thing. We are two sides of the same twin. I thought the concession was the right thing to do at the time. I didn't think there was any way to reverse that vote in Ohio. I understand the ceremonial aspect of holding out, but it served no real purpose and he would have had to make the same concession speech no matter what.

But I understand where you are coming from and it obviously did cause a lot of people pain. But, it was what it was and had to be faced.

[jillan]

34. All I wish, is that Kerry would come out with a statement about it.

It's not going to go away.
It's kind of like the swift boat issue. It's out there. It's hanging over our heads. It's never going to be put to rest unless Kerry puts it to rest.

I see Saracat's point, because I know how she feels. And have listened to many that feel the same way.
I see your point, because I believe Kerry did the right thing.

I want him to put a fork in it already. Since the election, I have emailed everyone I could think of to try to explain the importance of this issue. And dammit - I don't want this to be the one thing that keeps Kerry out of the WH.

The fact is, this topic is not going away. No matter what anyone of us feels.

C'mon Kerry - talk about it!
....and if any of you Kerrycrats have some special connections....

[saracat]

36. We are not really disagreeing Tay Tay! I thought he was right to concede.

It was just a question of "when" or how quickly. I am talking the image of the situation, not the reality. As long as the GOP controlled Courts in Ohio won't release the evidence there is not much Kerry could do. And he would have looked dresdful if he tried to pursue this issue without proof. That is what some refuse to understand.They think he can just magically produce the evidence they say is there. His restraining orders and supeana were rejected.What do they think he should have done? Stolen the voting machines? I suppose they do, but Kerry has , as a former prosecutor, too much respect for the law to play games with it.I just hope that he hits on a way to rehabilitate this "non fighter' image as it is so patently untrue. Much of this is because his team was, and from what I still observe, a PR disaster. I wish he would fix it! Hell, I'd work for free as would any of us I am sure to fix this issue. I wish this could be dealt with and we could stop eating our own! The fact that Kerry stays a Dem after the way he was treated is one of the only things that keeps me in the Party. If he can do , so can I! And if this is JK's party of choice, I will support it.And I will continue to hope we can be united! Sigh. It is hard sometimes though.We will prevail.

[TayTay]

42. One of the saddest things about last year was the strange hype

here in DU after the election. So many people held out the false hope that something could be done that would reverse the election results. That was not ever a possibility. (Not realistically.) I stayed far, far away from those discussions because they were pure fantasy. They were also no-win situations. It came down to: John Kerry lied about his vow to count every vote, which is not true or John Kerry would magically pull a rabbit out of his hate and reverse the election results which was never going to happen.

In 2000 there was a 500,000 vote count FOR Al Gore. That gave the recount legitimacy. In 2004, despite the fact that Sen. Kerry got 6 million more voters than Al Gore did, he was behind nationally by 3.5 million votes. (There is reason to believe that vote padding was going on. That is an investigatory problem and it was NOT a part of the media story of the vote in 2004.) There is no overt 'smoking gun' from 2004 that would have made the media sit up and take notice. Without the media, we were dead in the water. (There was NO national outcry against the results. There was and continues to be an undercurrent of anger and suspicion about the vote, but it is not overt.)

What people don't seem to want to come to terms with is that this is a long-term fight. It can be fought in the courts, but that fight is technical and is not going to attract much media attention. The fight has to be nationalized, and it has to be personalized. It's not about Democrats or Republicans, it's about us as a democratic country and the sacred principle of the right to vote. This is the flag-waving, American as Mom and apple pie, argument that needs to be made. It's not about John Kerry, though he can be a significant and important voice in the fight. It's about us. There might be an opening for this in the Republican corruption scandals, but it is too early to tell. (If they did this bad thing, then maybe they did this other bad thing as well.)

We have to find a way to engage the media in this fight. Again, I believe we are dead without them. The entrenched power structure in places like Ohio is against us. The national government is against us. The press doesn't understand the issue and doesn't really want to understand the issue. (It is a very scary thing. It will take time and effort and money to bring people up to speed on what the issues are, how vote stealing can be done electronically and so forth.) This is a very, very hard case to make. The fact that the left is fracturing on it and eating their own doesn't help. In fact, it nearly guarantees that it will not make it on the national radar as anything more than a fight between liberals. (MCM's tactics suck for example. He is driving away all but the people who already believe in fraud. How is that supposed to generate a national movement to ensure democracy and the vote? Some of these people are worse than Rethugs when it comes to helping out the cause.)

All is not lost. It does appear that people like Kerry are trying to convince people in Congress that this is a genuine area of concern, but progress has been slow. Unless there is some sort of catalyzing event that shows glaring fraud in a way that even lazy reporters can see it, we are in for a very long fight.

[ProSense]

35. Myth debunked.

Kerry did respond vigorously to the SBVT:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x2555

[jillan]

39. I know, It was just one of those issues that would not go away.

Still gets brought up.

Swift boats and the concession. Still floating over Kerry's head.

This is just for pondering -
how do the repugs do it? Rovegate, Scooter, Cindy Sheehan, on and on.
Somehow people just forget. They debunk; rapid response over and over again. Even look at what they are doing with the NSA story. Turning it around to their advantage.
Yet when it comes to John Kerry, no one forgets these two issues. Post in GD or GDP, and what comes up? As much as I despise Republicans these days, I sure wish democrats could take a lesson from their playbook. I am sick, sick of the association of Kerry with these two topics.

btw - great post ProSense. You are like a human version of Wikipedia. :)

[ProSense]

40. Thanks!

But imagine how it would be if we had to fight this battle without the Internet. That's one of the glaring differences between now and 2000, IMO.

[jillan]

41. Can you imagine if we had the internets in 2000?

And all of the dem/progressive/liberal/independent/green/libertarian blogs got together?
Gore would be in his second term.
Wonder what his second term scandals would have been? Refusing to touch the social security lockbox?
Sigh - if only we could turn back time.

[karynnj]

37. This is a very ambiguous situation

If ne didn't concede then when the numbers - if real - made things not winnable, I'm not sure when he would have conceded or what he would have said as his reason for not conceding. For every person he lost by conceding then, there are some he would have lost by holding out for what would be deemed - no logical reason. The media would show it as mathematicly impossible. If he then conceded 2 weeks later after all the provisional ballots were counted and the numbers did not change anywhere near enough - he would lose a hugh portion of the people who think he shouldn't have conceded.

I really can't see a Ukraine type movement led by our Kerry loving media(?).

[BlueIris]

38. HUGS.

:grouphug:

Not everyone who says that now will be saying that later on. And in my opinion, few saying that now are serious Progressives, let alone serious Democrats. In short, their opinion doesn't hurt me 'cause...it's not based on much that is valuable. (You can be on my meditation list for today--it's to give people healing energy.)

:grouphug: