WOW! You read minds, too? sm
Posted By: m on 2008-11-28
In Reply to: well since you - potatopeeler
Amazing!!!!
I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10. C'mon, I know you can do this.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
We do have minds of our own
I have a mind of my own. I listen to the politicians and decide who I feel is a better candidate for me. When you put Obama up against the other two candidates it isn't hard for me to decide who I want in the white house and as a representative of our country. Yes it's true that most politicians do lie and most politicians are crooks, but some are good. Not once in my lifetime has there been a candidate that's been for the middle class. They all say they are going to get rid of tax cuts for the most wealthiest but they don't (both sides are guilty). They all promise us everything and never deliver once they are in. I too am sick of crooked politicians, but I just don't get that feeling from Obama. Out of any of them I believe he will do the most good for the country and the citizens of the country. I like his ideas and his plans. I like his family and he's got a good sense of humor. There is no way I'll vote for McCain, and the Clintons should be in jail for half the stuff they've pulled in their careers (both of them).
While one side of me says to protest bad candidates and not vote, my conscience tells me I should vote for who I think would be the better candidate and would do the best job in there and have compassion for the middle class. Someone who is concerned and has the best plan about education, the economy, security at our borders, illegal immigration, health care, and the list goes on.
To say that everyone who votes for Obama is voting for him just because everyone else is voting for him is an insult to everyone who believes in him. So if you don't want to vote then don't. However, most of us do have a brain and can think for ourselves. What you said is just rude and insulting to us.
Only in the minds of the
x
Only in the minds of the
x
A lot is on our minds
With this election, there's a lot on most people's minds right now and most are scared beyond words that can be expressed. As I sit here I seriously imagine what our country would be like with Obama as a president, after all polls are in his favor, right? so most assume he has already won. On a more uplifting note though the polls are now changing in McCains favor and that is hopeful for people like me and others who care so deeply to preserve this great country. As I sit and think what our country would be like if he gets in just really hits a nerve and is so frightening I'm glad a lot of my loved ones have passed on so they will not have to face what lies ahead if he gets in. Of course the liberals will come back with "give me a break" or "please", and they will not see this post the same as a lot of us do. And most will not even read this whole post, but will cut it down anyway without knowing the full content of it. But why don't you sit and imagine what the country would be like with McCain and you will understand what we feel with Obama (or maybe you won't). However, our fears are based on facts. The most important issues for me is is the safety of our country, our economy, and upholding our constitution and preserving the freedoms our founding father's risked their lives for. I'll attach a link at the end of this that describes what happened to them. But know this...they risked their lives and they were scared beyond words. If you ever watched the HBO series John Adams the actors portrayed those men very well, and the looks on their faces and what they must have felt when they were creating the Declaration is the same way I feel as I sit and think about an Obama presidency. It scares me beyond all imaginings. I think back to our founding father's and what they must have gone through to sign The Declaration. Here is a quote I found from an article which I will put the link below. The link is not a verification of anything, I just found it just a very interesting article and I wanted to pass it on. The article states (I'm copying and pasting so please forgive if the spacing or alignment is off):
So, on July 4th, 1776, our Continental Congress dared to declare that we 13 colonies, the United States of America, must be and are free and independent of King George. They knew that this was a treasonous act. They knew that signing the Declaration of Independence meant a death sentence for every one of them if they were caught.
Where did these 56 men get the courage to sign the Declaration of Independence? "
If Obama is elected (and we do not know yet if he will be), but if he is our lives will change dramatically (and not for the better). First and most importantly to me and others is that you will have the first president ever who was able to change the constitution to allow a person born on foreign soil to "rule" our country. But that should not surpirse a lot because Obama does not believe in the constitution. His words are "The constitution reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day". Then if by some chance we have all 3 branches of the government democrat, no doubt in many's mind is that he will change the constitution. Everything our founding fathers did to make this a free country for all will be gone. The truth about Obama is out for many to see, but many who have been mesmerized by his good looks and calming voice they have a hard time differentiating what is real from what Obama tells you what you want to hear.
So between him not being American born and refusing to provide proof, him refusing to release his medical records, his relationship ship with Ayers, Weather Underground, Wright (which I'm sure a lot of people don't know that Obama said in an interview that he went twice a month for 20 years, which meant that he sat through hate-filled sermons twice a month for 20 years and never got up and walked out), his redistribution of weath, his ties to radical muslims, receiving money for his campaign from the enemies who want us wiped off the planet, ACORN, voter fraud, buying votes, etc., etc., those are just a few of the many worries I think about when I imagine what it will be like if Obama gets in.
While I know most of the posters on this board are set in their minds on who they will vote for (or have already voted for), maybe there are a few that are just not quite sure. So while this post will not pursuade anyone for or against Obama it is just to express my fears (though no words can express the feelings).
Anyway...here are a couple good links I found below.
http://asburyerie.org/files/sermon%20written/Our%20Country,%20'Tis%20of%20Thee%20-%20July%206,%202008.doc
http://swordattheready.wordpress.com/2008/10/27/obama-says-constitution-is-a-charter-of-negative-liberties/
http://keelynet.com/4th99.htm
http://www.americasright.com/2008/10/update-update.html
He's probably trying to win the *hearts and minds*
of the Iranians........before he nukes 'em. 
No need to make up our minds.
nm
Everyone has already made up their minds
Why berate the point? There are no undecideds here.
You got that right...there is nothing you can say to change our minds!
:D
I think you underestimate the young minds...sm
Thought I'll agree the walkout probably was not for political reasons so much so as for what they believe is right. Do you think they probably have a lot of respect for this teacher? Maybe. It is possible to be passionate about something other than cutting class as a teenager. I know I was, and so is my daughter who just turned 13.
I also have to give you the point that the teacher should have stayed on the subject matter of the class. If you're hired to teach geography then teach geograpy BUT we don't have the privlege of seeing the course outlines, book, etc. It may not be so cut and dry as capitols, states, and what have you. So before you call for his head on a plank you should at least know that much. Whose to say that this course was not comingled with history and this teacher was within his right to bring up subjects to provoke thought. I don't see the problem with that.
Listening to the message in a whole, I don't see a problem in what the teacher said excpt that he may have deviated from the subject matter. And the fact still remains that we don't know the totality of the course description.
Okay....then let's just say neither of them are liars. They just changed their minds.
I'll go with that. My entire point is that you can't really call one of them a liar and say the other just "changed his/her mind."
And only those with completely closed minds would
Years ago, it might have seemed ridiculous and been dismissed as a conspiracy theory that there were terrorists living amongst us right here in the USA, learning how to fly our planes, and being groomed for YEARS to attack and kill us on 9/11. Based on that alone, I would not for one second put it past a crazed bunch to groom someone from birth to serve their purpose.
Things that make you go hmmmm....
No one is trying to change your closed minds...
we are discussing, just like you are. O, as you call him, is the candidate of change...right down the slippery slope further into socialism. That is change I DON'T believe in. No amount of spin on his part is going to change that fact.
Great minds think alike! LOL ; )
nm
People who use their minds to decide what they do
*
Only in the minds of the deluded partisans
unable to justify McSame's own evil associations, the W being top of the heap.
Tiny minds = easily boggled...nm
nm
He sure is, the far libbies minds kind of weed that out.
Closed minds don't get nourished and thus can't grow. nm
Truman and Johnson both had sharp minds.
They may not have been polished but they could think on their own and put an entire sentence together all on their own. Truman, I believe, said **The buck stops here.*** Being a war time president, he took full responsibility for what was going on on his watch for which he was much admired, here and abroad. Johnson gave us civil rights. I did not much like Johnson personally but I admired what he did. He said **I have just given the south to the Republicans** when he signed civil rights into law, but, he had the courage of his convictions and did the right thing, control or no control, votes or no votes. I cannot say the same about the current administration. To them the buck stops anywhere but with them and they would do ANYTHING to keep their party in control, sacrifice a few seats here and there in order to do the right thing, not in this lifetime, not if it means losing control.
Interesting you should mention 2 Democrats as unpolished but (I assume) decent presidents.
It IS important that our president can express himself well. We as a nation look more and more weakened because our leader does not read and cannot produce a complete sentence to save his soul; and he was elected to be OUR president and the leader of the free world. What does that say about all of us. The more situations deteriorate the more inarticulate he becomes. America has always been the mediator in the Middle East but this time, the Italians and the French OMG showed up first. Norway and Greece were the first on the scene to move Americans out of Lebanon. When asked if they were surprised that the first to show up were not Americans, the Americans in Lebanon said ***NO, I mean, look at Katrina. We thought we would be here a long long time.*** I know that many on the right don't care what the world thinks of us but I do and I think it is always best to have allies. This administration just burns bridges. Scary Scary Stuff.
I agree. I do not post to change minds that...
cannot be changed. However, a lot of people come here to read and never post, and I think people should see both sides of an issue posted. You can't make an informed decision with only one side of things...or you shouldn't. That is what America is about. Thanks for your post!
In other words, they speak their minds like Keith
and every other idjit liberal news outlet out there? What's the big deal. CNN sent out a whacko nutjob reporter who provoked and harrassed and accused protestors who were just minding their business. Don't see you on here ranting about that.....
Great minds think alike...I'll be watching as well.nm
x
Involving is one thing....not allowing them to make up their own minds...
is quite another. Called indoctrination. It worked on you, I have to admit.
Americans have lost their minds or just dont care.
nm
You mean, it's impossible to change intelligent people's minds!
You can call us what you want; however, intelligent people are not fazed by the comments of those who live in fear and enjoy wallowing in their own misery.
Yes, I agree, let's try a juicier subject, as the political minds
of the Republicans showed to be confined to a CAGE.
Maybe in this subject they have more experience and can contribute better.
Look, I offered to leave once and gt asked me to stay. So which is it? Make up your minds. SM
You all are doing plenty of bashing on the conservative board right now, but that probably isn't YOU. wink wink nod nod.. I don't want to destroy the collective consciousness that is putting our soldiers lives at risk so I'll leave, but only cuz you asked so nice.
Look I offered to leave and gt asked me to stay. Make up your minds. nm
Simple minds, shriveled old souls who get their jollies stirring up muck.
nm
This looks interesting. A long read, so will read it when I get home from work. nm
nm
Obviously u didnt read, I said NONE of them are moral. Read the post before spouting off.
I read on CNN (yes, I do read liberal stuff too..hehe)...sm
...that Karl Rove was actually very disappointed in the McCain campaign for airing negative type ads against Obama.
So I would say that Rove is definitely not in the hip pocket of the McCain campaign.
Good research sam - but a lot to read right now so gotta read it later
I've been goofing off too much from work. I appreciate what you wrote and will read when I'm done with work here.
sorry, should read I did not read post that way.
,
All you have to do is read up on Marxism, read up on...
black liberation theology, and look at what Obama is proposing. All of it a matter of public record, most of it from his own mouth. Your denial of it does not change the facts. If you support socialism, vote for him. Certainly your right. You are already wanting to squelch any kind of dissent...what's up with that? If you seriously consider calling someone a socialist a smear, you really need to read up on your candidate. I did not post a smear, I posted a fact. Redistribution of wealth is socialist and he already said he was going to do it...I heard him say it and it is now a campaign commercial. Sigh.
Some on this board can only read what they want to read (nm)
x
READ THE ARTICLE-READ OTHER
READERS COMMENTS!!!
Nan please read what I have to say
I've read your latest posts. You fit the decription of a troll at times, but I don't really care about that. DOesn't matter. What I do notice is that you incite other posters with calculated insults, condescension and twisted and sometimes cruel logic. Then when the object of your insults becomes angry and lashes back you pretend to be an unfairly accused innocent and the object of someone else's crazy, uncalled-for rage.
This is compatible with borderline personality disorder. My mother had it, a brother-in-law battles it and I am all too familiar with it.
I did read it.
Not posting the whole article puts the quote out of context. It's not really a way to do things on a chat forum, but then maybe you don't post in a lot of other forums. Those I frequent always post the whole article or at least a link. It would give you a lot more credibility. Take it for what it's worth.
Read this...
Pandora's Box
September 22, 2005
By Ken Sanders
You have to hand it to the Bush administration. No matter how bad things might be in Iraq, and no matter how dim the prospects are for Iraq's future, Bush & Co. still manage to look the public straight in the eye, smirk, and insist that the decision to invade Iraq was a good one. Call them determined, even stubborn. Call them dishonest, perhaps delusional. Regardless, the fact is that by invading Iraq, the Bush administration opened a Pandora's Box with global consequences.
Bush and his apologists have frequently promised that the invasion of Iraq will spread democracy and stability throughout the entire Middle East. That naive declaration could not be farther from the truth. Not only is Iraq itself in the clutches of a civil war, the U.S.-led invasion threatens to destabilize the whole of the Middle East, if not the world. It may have irrevocably done so already.
By most definitions and standards, Iraq is already in the throes of civil war. Whether defined as an internal conflict resulting in at least 1,000 combat-related fatalities, five percent of which are sustained by government and rebel forces; or as organized violence designed to change the governance of a country; or as a systematic and coordinated sectarian-based conflict; the requirements of civil war have long since been satisfied.
While our television screens are saturated by images of chaos and death in Iraq, the stories beneath the images are even more disturbing. Purely sectarian attacks, largely between Iraq's Sunni and Shiite populations, have been rising dramatically for months. According to Iraqi government statistics, such targeted attacks have doubled over the past twelve months. Police in Iraq are finding scores of bodies littering the streets, bodies of people who were blindfolded or handcuffed, shot or beheaded. The Baghdad morgue is constantly overwhelmed by bodies showing tell-tale signs of torture and gradual, drawn-out, agonizing death.
In Baghdad, Sunni neighborhoods live in fear of Shiite death squads like the Iranian-backed Badr Brigade of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), Iraq's leading Shiite governing coalition. Such death squads operate openly, in full uniform, and with the deliberate ignorance, if not outright sanction, of the Iraqi government. On a single day in August, the bodies of 36 Sunni Arabs were found blindfolded, handcuffed, tortured and executed in a dry riverbed in the Shiite-dominated Wasit province.
At the other end, Shiites face each day burdened by the terror and trauma of being the targets of constant suicide bombings. The army and police recruits killed by suicide bombs are predominantly Shia. In Ramadi, a Sunni stronghold, Shiites are fleeing their homes, driven out by murder and intimidation. On August 17, 43 Shiites were killed by bombings at a bus stop and then at the hospital where the casualties were to be treated.
There are less-violent examples of the deepening rifts between Iraq's Sunnis and Shiites since the U.S.-led invasion. By some estimates, nearly half of the weddings performed in Baghdad before the invasion were of mixed Sunni/Shiite couples. Since the invasion and its resulting instability and strife, such mixed weddings are all but extinct. This new-found reluctance of Sunnis and Shiites to marry each other is just another indication of the increasing isolation and animosity between the two populations.
The recently finalized Iraqi constitution does little to bridge Iraq's growing sectarian divides. The culmination of sectarian feuds passing for political debates, Iraq's constitution only ratifies the sectarian divisions of the nation. In the north are the Kurds who long ago abandoned their Iraqi identity, refusing to even fly the Iraqi flag. In the south is a burgeoning Shiite Islamic state, patterned after and influenced by Iran. Both groups have divvied up Iraq's oil reserves amongst themselves. Left in the nation's oil-free center are the Sunni Arabs, dismissed as obstructionist by the Kurds and Shiites. So unconcerned are the Kurds and Shiites with a unified Iraq that they both maintain their own large and heavily-armed militias.
Of course, the constitution still has to be ratified. If it is ratified, it will likely be by a Shiite/Kurdish minority, effectively maintaining the status quo that motivates, in part, the Sunni-led insurgency. If, on the other hand, the constitution is defeated, there's little reason not to believe that the three major factions in Iraq won't resort to forcibly taking what they want. Either way, in the words of one Iraqi civilian, God help us.
The discord in Iraq is not limited to fighting between Shiites and Sunnis. In Basra, for instance, rival Shiite militia groups constantly fight each other. The notorious Badr Brigade, backed by SCIRI, have repeatedly clashed with dissident cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi militia. The Badr Brigade frequently works in conjunction with Basra police and are suspected of recently kidnapping and killing two journalists. Suspecting that the Basra police have been infiltrated by both the Badr and Mehdi militias, the British military sent in two undercover operatives to make arrests. The British operatives were themselves arrested by the Basra police. When the British went to liberate their men, they found themselves exchanging fire with the Basra police, their heretofore allies, and smashing through the prison walls with armored vehicles.
Iraqis aren't merely growing increasingly alienated from each other, as well as progressively opposed to coalition forces. Iraq's estrangement from the rest of the Middle East and the Arab world is widening as well. Seen more and more as a proxy of the Iranian government, the Shiite/Kurd dominated Iraq finds itself at odds with the Sunni-dominated Middle East. For instance, since the U.S.-led invasion, not a single Middle East nation has sent an ambassador to Baghdad. And, despite promises to do so, the Arab League (of which Iraq was a founder) has yet to open a Baghdad office.
There are, clearly, many reasons other than sectarianism for Iraq's estrangement from the Middle East and Arab nations, security being the foremost. However, Iraqi diplomacy, or lack thereof, is also to blame. From chiding Qatar for sending aid to Katrina victims but not to Iraq, to arguing with Kuwait over border issues, to blaming Syria for the insurgency, Iraq's fledgling government seems to have taken diplomacy lessons from the Bush administration. In fact, with the exception of Iran, Iraq has butted heads recently with nearly every Middle East nation.
Iraq's constitution hasn't won it any friends in the Arab world, either. For instance, Iraq drew strong condemnation from the Arab world when a draft of its constitution read that just its Arab people are part of the Arab nation. Only after the outcry from the Arab League and numerous Arab nations, did Iraq change its constitution's offending language. (The argument by Bush's apologists that the Iraqi constitution's alleged enshrinement of democratic principles threatens neighboring countries is unconvincing. Syria and Egypt both have constitutions that guarantee political and individual freedoms. In practice, however, such guarantees have proven meaningless. Why, then, should they feel threatened?)
Iraq's varied relationships with Middle Eastern nations will be immeasurably significant should Iraq descend further into civil war. For example, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Jordan would most likely come to the support of Iraq's Sunnis. (There are already signs that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq has impacted Saudi Arabia's Sunni population. According to a recent study, the invasion of Iraq has radicalized previously non-militant Saudis, sickened by the occupation of an Arab nation by non-Arabs.) Iran would only increase its already staunch support for Iraq's Shiites. Turkey would also likely be drawn in, hoping to prevent any Kurdish success in Iraq from spilling across its border. Moreover, Iraq's violent Sunni-Shiite discord could easily spark similar strife in Middle East countries like Bahrain, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.
In such a worst-case scenario, Iraq's instability would spread and infect an already unstable region. If the Gulf region were to further destabilize, so too would the global economy as oil prices would skyrocket, plunging the U.S. and so many others into recession.
Put another way, Bush's illegal, ill-conceived, short-sighted, and naive venture in Iraq could reasonably result in total chaos in not just Iraq and the Middle East, but the world over.
A Pandora's Box, if there ever was one.
Sorry, but can you read?
pizza. Don't you think they've thought of moving? It isn't always practical to simply uproot. In this case, there is an elderly family member and children. Again, from the throne passing judgement.
This makes no sense: I'm talking about a certain segment of our society who refuse to learn, refuse to work, and who YOU wish to bring up to an equal place as the rest of society who works hard and earns what they have. Huh? You still missed the point...good grief.
I read that. And then MT goes on
to criticize you for suggesting that posters visit eXtremely Political and is aghast at the post that calls for shooting someone who doesn't agree...... she just FAILS to mention that it's a NEOCON who wants to shoot LIBERALS!!!
This is what she wrote:
Sorry, had to answer this one. There have a Whine to Management option. That is PERFECT for gt. Talking about shooting other posters, atheism and porno. Yeah, that's a great place alright. And now they have THE gt as a member. Does it get any better than that. Although, my thoughts are they won't suffer her long. Those people are pirrhanas.
Well, if that ain't the pirrhana calling the shark hungry!
Perhaps you need to read
No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief... All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546
Our civil rights have no dependence upon our religious opinions more than our opinions in physics or geometry. --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:301, Papers 2:545
We have no right to prejudice another in his civil enjoyments because he is of another church. --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:546
I am for freedom of religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendency of one sect over another. --Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799. ME 10:78
Religion is a subject on which I have ever been most scrupulously reserved. I have considered it as a matter between every man and his Maker in which no other, and far less the public, had a right to intermeddle. --Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, 1813.
I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others. --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Dowse, 1803. ME 10:378
Our particular principles of religion are a subject of accountability to God alone. I inquire after no man's, and trouble none with mine. --Thomas Jefferson to Miles King, 1814. ME 14:198
and many more: http://www.theology.edu/journal/volume2/ushistor.htm
You need to read that again.
Yes, it is US law, according to the Constitution.
The United States signed the UN Charter -- which is a treaty. Let me repeat:
Article VI of the U.S. Constitution makes treaties into which the U.S. has entered the supreme Law of the Land.
In other words, we made a treaty with a bunch of other countries to abide by certain rules, including the use of force. Since we entered into this treaty with the UN, that makes it the supreme Law of the Land -- US Law.
Sure, you can say, So what? Nobody's going to take us to court. We can do anything we want. But if we as a country aren't going to respect our agreements with other countries and our own laws, why should anybody else? Nobody is above the law, right?
By the way, I think we were fully justified in invading Afghanistan.
I have read this...
So what. At one point you say he was involved with AIM and had a lackey break someone's arm. Now you are providing us with an article that disavows any connection with AIM at all. Which is it? Could it be that some folks who were involved with AIM in the late 60s early 70s are no longer involved, or are dead or have had major disagreements along the way about what should be done. Banks, Russell Means and Peltier don't even speak to each other any more. That is sad, in my opinion. Trudell, on the other hand, is still around. (I had the pleasure of meeting him last Saturday in Hollywood Florida at the Native American Music Awards) and still fights the good fight although his wife and children were burned to death in an FBI arson. There is a video, called simply Trudell. It has aired on PBS stations. It is also available from Trudell's web site. It you get a chance, see it. There is so much information out there that no one seems to care much about as regards the American Indian from Columbus to today. The history is always written by the victor and the American Indian history is distorted.
You can read whatever you want...
into what people say. Some are not very tactful and some, like our president, just can't get a syntax together to save their souls. I still think the sentiment was not that these Americans do not want democracy. I still think they thought we **deserved** to be surprised because we have ignored Middle East history, the British colonization, the politics, the culture, the nature of Islam when, in reality, bearing in mind our support for Israel and our dismissal of the Arab states, it should not have been a surprise. This has been brewing for quite some time. That is not the same thing. I really don't know what those 2 had in their hearts but I truly believe that one saying the US has treated the Arab states badly in the past does not make one a **terrorist** or a communist or a democracy hater. These people attempt to see all sides of things, in all colors, not just black and white. Those are the people who will ultimately garner peace if it is at all possible. It will not come at the barrel of a gun, no matter what has happened in the past.
Yep, I know, I can read. NM
Well, I don't read the
leftist blogs or any other blogs for that matter, too much like talk radio. I also don't need to plagerize anything; I can think for myself, thank you very much.
I have read this one over and over...s/m
What has happened in this country over the years? Why the almost blind acceptance of things, almost anything that is done? Where are the idealistic youth? Their future is at stake, so many, many issues, yet, where are they? Why the banket of almost deafening silence? It scares me.
have you read...
anything written by Michelle Obama? she is truly a racist. Your remarks about her scare me. Make sure you are truly informed. John McCain is a down-to-earth person who would do well in office, but the reality is no president can make the changes outlined above. It takes all the members of the house and senate to begin to make change, not just one man.
Where can we read about this? TIA - nm
|
