Saturday, December 26, 2009

Got Sick? No Worries!

Americans already have universal access to health care, say's Missouri State Senator Jane Cunningham (R-Chesterfield), even if they didn't realize it. Thus President Obama can keep his meddling health care legislation out of Missouri and away from the greatest health care system in the world. Cunningham broke this news to listeners of KMOX this past Wednesday on the Hancock and Kelly show.

How can one access this hospital on a hill? Simple! Just drive on down to your local E.R. and sign up for a slot. As Cunningham explained, all hospitals are required by law to provide treatment to anyone who crosses their threshold.

How is it that this golden opportunity has been overlooked by legislators and advocates who have struggled to legislation that would protect the sick and give those who have little means access health care?

Well they haven't. In fact, the wave of uninsured patients who utilize Emergency Rooms as primary care facilities have been a major factor in the skyrocketing cost of health care. Every dime the hospitals spend on helping someone without insurance is tacked onto the bills of all of the other patients. Where do you think the $15 dollar Aspirin come from?

Not only does the use of hospital E.R.'s drive up costs for everyone, it results in worse health outcomes for those who do use it as a primary means of getting care. Monitoring personal health through preventative health care and regular doctors visits mean catching some health problems early or preventing the arise of others. Sicker people are more expensive to treat and when the untended-to uninsured finally do seek out care at the hospital, they are in even worse health and those additional costs are all passed on to the insured.

That a sitting State Senator would offer this up as a reason to reject efforts to make the health care system more equitable with better protection for patients and access for all Americans demonstrates how out-of-touch the opponents of health care reform truly are.

And yes, under the just-passed U.S. Senate version, all Americans would have access to the health care plans members of Congress currently have.

- Murphy

Saturday, September 05, 2009

Republicans on Education

The response from the DNC about wild-eyed Republican furor over Obama's education address is pretty funny (via Washington Monthly).

“What this absurd episode shows is that the GOP can in fact come up with new ideas. For example, it’s now clear that the new Republican education platform will argue against personal responsibility, hard work and staying in school.”

Cheeky it may be, but very appropriate for opposing a President who wants to talk to kids directly and encourage them to do well in school. It helps that it would have come from a President who didn't descend from a legacy or a well-heeled family.

Remember when having the President as a messenger of the positive effects of school was a widely accepted notion?

- Murphy

What Student Could Learn From the Education Address

There is certainly one aspect of this tempest in a teapot that students could benefit from, they have cat-bird seats for the decline of modern political discourse.

Now, American politics has always been a rough game. And the insults and accusations have even involved trading charges of adultery (see the war between Jefferson-Hamilton in those esteemed days of the founding fathers).

But the immediacy of modern communications, compounded by the declining standards of the major news networks, has allowed the sideshows of politics to be elevated to acceptable dialogue.

There have always been heated debates over contentious topics. These debates often draw in the fringe, like moth to a flame. It's why meetings about Airline security are interrupted by 9/11-truthers claiming President Bush was part of the CIA conspiracy. It's also why folks who claim the government will off everyone over 65 who gets sick show up at Congressional town hall meetings and work themselves into a froth.

Yet in the past these claims were treated for what they were: baseless accusations that evolve from an overheated imagination. The media would listen and even check out those things that could be checked out, even if it sounded outside the realm of possible ("It's true! The law says everyone will be required to donate one kidney. Everyone!"), and would dismiss the rest (trust me, if you have ever attended public meetings as a member of the media, you will meet no end of people with pamphlets and theories-all as convinced as former Governor Sarah Palin of their correctness).

Now, however, the fact that a charge has been made is reason enough to let it stand in the daylight. Engaging reason and asking for evidence draws accusations of bias-something no mainstream journalist is apparently able to stand up to.

To go even further, to stop providing a forum for those who consistently repeat false statements is apparently even more heinous, verging on black-listing. Just because it is a prominent figure blowing smoke, doesn't obscure the truth any less.

This is not to place blame on journalists entirely. Those with an axe to grind have found the modern media a fine whetstone. They have learned how to game the system and have turned its some of its fine attributes (openness and even-handedness) against itself.

Others have simply built their own Trojan horse and let it lose in the world of journalism. They can then reference their own broadcasts as justification for continuing the spiral. The ultimate in self-reference.

The ultimate in dust-jacket credibility.

If students of today are going to have a shot at having a future in which they can be proud to get involved in public life, they are going to have to learn the value of critical thinking, the skills to educate themselves about an issue, and the confidence to stand behind their ideas.

The current climate of public discourse is currently providing them with a template not for the rebirth of civil society but for its further cheapening.

- Murphy

President's Address Doesn't Pass the Test for Some Missouri School Districts

While I am sympathetic to the concerns of School Board members who don't wish to be drawn into a manufactured controversy, it is somewhat surprising that they aren't embracing an effort by the President of the United States to highlight education.

That said the one concern they seem to share, according to today's Post-Dispatch report, falls under the headline of "does it fit the curriculum." In a the modern public school world, educators have little time to do more than prep their students for the next round of NCLB-required tests and worry whether a small drop in performance will hang a scarlet letter around their otherwise acceptable curriculum.

It makes sense that rather than be drawn into some debate spurned-on by fringe-minded, conspiracy types, they would rather be left to teach their students.

While an address by the President lauding the benefits of education and encouraging kids to stay is school may not count as the standard supplemental materials, I think it certainly falls in-line with any good civics curriculum.

- Murphy

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Gates Preps For Potential N. Korean Missile

While the most recent North Korean missile launch was notable for less for its aeronautics than its ability to broadcast underwater (the missile fell into the sea shortly after launch-despite N. Korean claims to the contrary), Defense Secretary Gates is giving the Norks the benefit of the doubt that they may achieve something closer to success in their next (rumored) launch.

The initial Japanese media reports that the N. Korean government has plans to test a ballistic missile was not a surprise, but its intended flight path-in the direction of Hawaii-was. 

Despite the lack-luster track record of N. Korean ballistic missiles, Gates is taking the threat seriously and has decided to deploy the experimental missile shield radar to Hawaii

Gates decided against deploying the missile shield during the March N. Korean missile test, despite some reports that he might due so for monitoring purposes. At least part of the evident reasoning was that it was in dry-dock for maintenance. The March missile's aquatic ambitions bore out Gate's decision.

Now however, the radar is out of the shop and while it is unlikely there has been no great advancement in N. Korean missile tech to point to any major concerns, the opportunity of another test plus the N. Korean threats certainly warrants a watchful eye.

The folks over at Arms Control Wonk have some great information on history of N. Korean tests, and will also be keeping a close eye on events (likely including some deep-in-the-details trajectory analysis).

- Murphy

Good Sources on Iranian Protests

The web has been a great source of stories, photos and video documenting the protests that have upturned modern Iranian society. The one issue is narrowing down the volume of information.

Here are a few good sources to start:

The Field: Al Giordano Reports America  - Giordano provides a mix of analysis with up-to-date reports. He has even gotten the early word on some important events, such as the unions declaring solidarity with the protestors.

Daily Dish by Andrew Sullivan  - Commentator Andrew Sullivan has been keeping tabs on a variety of Twitter feeds and YouTube channels and reposting them on his website.

- Murphy

Saturday, June 20, 2009

New Sources on Iran

- Murphy

The Twittering of Iran

The many tools of the internet have begun to demonstrate they are actually worth a least a portion of the praise heaped upon them by those who promise kittens and flowers and peace, if only everyone had high speed internet access available.

Even the lowly Twitter-which is actually an appropriate adjective to describe some of the most avowed acolytes of the tool-has shown itself to be a veritable life-line for many inside and outside of Iran.

Thanks to the distributed nature of its architecture, there is no single point for the Iranian regime to clamp down on, as when the blocked access to Facebook after students flocked to Mir Hossein Musavi's page (the former prime minister challenging Ahmadinejad for the Presidency). Their only recourse is to shut down entire networks, which it did to the text-messaging network on the day of the election.

While we are likely to quickly regret the proliferation of the term "Twitter revolution" there is little doubt that it and the proliferation of quick and comprehensive (text, voice, video) communication available through the modern networks has helped coordinate the efforts of the Iranian protestors as well as spread the word to the wider world.

Let's let the Iranians decide what to call their efforts. After all,  despite the integral role of pamphleteers in fomenting and organizing the American rebellion, no one called the War of Independence the "Pamphleteer Revolution".

- Murphy

Unions Add Their Weight in Iranian Protest

The Autobus Workers Union has joined with the Auto Workers Union in criticizing the ruling government's brutal crackdown of the students, shopworkers, businesspeople and parents who have taken to the streets in the wake of what many believe to have been a rigged election.

In a stunning rebuke to the threats issued by Supreme Leader Ali Khomeini that the violence that meets the protesters will be of their own making, thousands have taken to the streets u. In doing so they will have to dodge the batons of the Iranian police and the bullets of the Basij-a brute squad made up of irregulars and thugs who form the steel toe of the ruling class.

In addition to the world-wide rebuke that would follow a violent suppression of the protests (which the already blighted regime may swat aside), the efforts of the industrial workers and others to cause slowdowns or even strikes may turn a protest into a full-blown revolution.

The people of Iran who have taken to the streets did not do so to overthrow the government, they merely wanted to see what little legitimacy existed return to the elective process. 

Mousavi, the man who challenged the sitting President Ahmadinejad, is known to be a hard-liner himself. In  his previous role as prime minister in the 1980's. Mousavi is believed to have given the approval to obtain the centrifuges used for uranium enrichment.

In the Iranian sphere, reformer is a relative term.

Yet the regime may have taken its game to far, tossing aside any pretense of self-rule. Thus, those who saw their country's future diminish under the Ahmadinejad presidency-the young, the reformist, the realists-saw the specter of their fate in the regime's meat-paw manipulation of the election.

- Murphy

Thursday, April 09, 2009

McCaskill Holds Grant-Writing Workshop

One of the great sources of funding for the entrepreneurial class in both the private and public sector has been through federally-funded grants. The grants spur research and development in areas as different as preventing friendly-fire incidents on the battlefield and helping address infant heart disease.

In this time of tight credit and wary investors, federal grants can provide the seed money to help get new businesspeople from the drawing board to the board room. They can also help expand existing programs and businesses by allowing them to hire new researchers or employees or to launch that new idea.

To help those ambitious folk here in Missouri, Sen. Claire McCaskill held a grant-writing workshop today in Columbia, Mo. Representatives from a dozen or more agencies were to be on-hand to help the hopeful craft their proposal.

Anecdotally, Talking Points Memo managing editor David Kurtz (who is based here in Missouri) wrote that his wife was going to attend, but after seeing the crowd of people, decided against it.

- Murphy

S(l)ay again?

That sound you heard was the collective yawn of the voting public in St. Louis City.

Despite a match-up that could have provided a vigorous debate between a long-time incumbent facing simmering anger from a large portion of the city voters, and a bright and ambitious former State Senator who has both worked with the Mayor, and felt free to criticize him, the result was a lopsided wallop.

It's not as if this was completely under the radar. There were some bright spots in the media coverage of the race, even if it barely rose above the NCAA wrestling coverage in many outlets.

It's likely that the feeling of Slay's inevitability coupled with a non-existant independant campaign by former State Senator Maida Coleman resulted in few swing voters. Most likely had made up their minds when they pulled the lever on primary day.

While the St. Louis American did try mightily to fire up interest in the race by pushing for answers on some of the difficult issues the city faces, Slay was able to walk away with some stock answers and Coleman's counters barely made it out of weekly circulation.

The American did a good job setting it up, and KWMU did try and press the candidates in their interviews, much of the rest of the media failed to even take a swing.

- Murphy

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Not-so mighty shield...

While it was suspected at the time, President Obama's reason for offering to pull the proposed "missile shield" in Europe may be related to questions over its viability. The USA Today reports on some European doubts.

While there have been successful tests of the interceptor missile, and portions of the system have seen progress, a complete system is still some time off.

In other words, while it has moved from starry-eyed hope in the 1980's to a nuts-and-bolts project, the ballistic missile shield remains a political pawn than shield-wielding knight.

- Murphy

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Colleen Campbel used her column this week to criticize President Obama for what she saw as "amateurism". Yet instead of scalpel-sharp analysis, she instead offered spitballs.

So what-in the wake of the passage of Obama's top legislative priority, the largest stimulus bill of its kind, ever-does she offer as evidence of this presumed amateurism? An overly verbose press conference and Obama's decision to accept responsibility for the mistakes of his staff.

Parker dutifully ignores the singular issue which has dominated the world of media talking heads, radio jocks and writers and bloggers everywhere.

President Obama asked that there be a stimulus bill on his desk by the first week of February. Instead the bill has arrived in the middle of February.

That's not a bad start considering it's nearly $800 billion price tag makes it the largest stimulus ever (the Wa Po calculated it a 5% of GDP versuss 2% for Roosevelt's New Deal).

Despite its sheer size, the bills passage is also remarkable for the lengths to which Obama reached out to try and draw Republican support. Nearly $300 billion in tax cuts were included, and cuts were made to social programs and relief funding for states in an effort to include Republican suggestions. An open hand which was smacked away by the Republican leadership and-minus three Senators (Collins, Snowe, Specter)-Congressional Republicans.

Ironically, in voting against

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Akin: Stimulus Bill A "Hurricane Katrina"

Rep. Todd Akin has a news release on his website explaining his perspective of the bill.

""Watching this wasteful, spending bill come closer to passage is like watching a financial Hurricane Katrina head toward our shores."

Considering Akin supported making Bush's $2 trillion in tax cuts permanent, $800 billion should be a lesser squall.

- Murphy


Republican commitment to attacking the stimulus bill, regardless of both reality and necessity, is impressive. 

In today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Missouri Representative Roy Blunt (R-Springfield) criticized the bill saying some of the spending wouldn't occur for a decade. Blunt, along with every other Republican in the House voted against the stimulus bill.

Blunt should have checked with the Congressional Budget Office, the office that provides estimates of spending, debt and other budget impacts. It released a report (pdf) on Saturday showing the majority of the stimulus would be released by 2010, about 18 months.

Update: It appears Blunt's office did see the report. A press release on his website adds a note confirming that the bill would provide the short-term stimulus sought by the President. It tosses in a caveat, however, saying the CBO determined there might be a potential for a negative impact beginning after 2014.

The negative impact the CBO estimates in this report (This is the only recent report referring to a 2014 turning point. Blunt's office declines to indicate which reports it is getting its information from) is a potential 0 to 0.2 percent negative impact after 2014. Meaning there could be no negative impact at all. The report only looks at the earlier proposal, not the final bill passed this weekend.

 The CBO attributes this to potential "crowding out" of private investment. It balances this prospect by noting that much of the government-financed investment in areas such as education and infrastructure could improve long-term output, thus the providing continued positive growth.

That said, the potential for a slight drag 5 years down the road is nothing compared to an imminent crash. 

- Murphy

When logic fails....

Representative John Boehner, chief Republican in the House, criticized the stimulus bill-which now awaits President Obama's signature-as "spending, spending and more spending." 

This sits neatly with other Republican criticisms of the bill that used visual aids to describe how large a stack of money this represents.

It was, perhaps, unintended comedy. Given that this was by definition a spending bill, and that the trillion-dollar plus shortfall in consumer spending expected by economists over the next year ($2.9 trillion over the next three years) necessitated the government stopgap in order to try and help keep business activity up, the Republican comments were less criticism than descriptions.

Local Republican Representative Todd Akin explained his no vote this way, "“This is spending beyond any we’ve ever seen. The question is: How far can we push ourselves into debt?”

While it is true that we should concern ourselves with how the country will eventually pay the debt, it is hard to see how we would be able to make any dent even in the existing debt (which at the end of the 1990's was on the decline, until the recent administration took office. Much of whose war-related spending remains off the books, so the debt figures are likely to end up far higher) with an economy that has completely crashed. With no business activity, there is no tax revenue and thus no debt payments.

To be fair, this is a lot of money, $787 billion is no small change. Yet in a country that had a $14 trillion dollar economy in 2008, but has just shed 3 million jobs in the last few months and seen businesses cutting back left and right as the recession deepens, it may be a small price to pay to keep us away from the tipping point.

- Murphy

Friday, January 30, 2009

An idea....

Opponents of fiscal stimulus in the form of government spending regularly point out that the U.S. wasn't pulled out of the Great Depression until the enormous ramp-up that was the U.S.'s involvement in World War II.

Leaving aside the point that during the war the U.S. Government laid out enormous sums of money and funded a massive expansion in manufacturing, agriculture, transportation and scientific research.

The much lauded post-war prosperity was possible because of the enormous growth in capacity and know-how driven by government funding. Add to that the return of millions of trained workers to the labor market and the-mistakenly but consistently-overlooked fact that the U.S. retained the only fully-functional industrial base for at least a decade.

Critics say the government shouldn't be pouring money into the economy, that it will only leave us burdened with debt in the future. Yet right now the U.S. is one of the few that has the ability to do so. While should be directing funds into the hands of consumers to spend, but perhaps more importantly, we should be directing the funds into rebuilding the U.S. infrastructure and subsidizing a boom in industrial and technological growth. 

Financial services have gotten all the glory when it comes to wealth creation, but they were also directly responsible for the bubble that has blown the global economy. Perhaps we should focus on areas where self-sustaining growth can be developed and once again return the U.S. to its leadership position in the world economy. 

- Murphy

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Limbaugh: "I hope [Obama] fails."

 Rush Limbaugh wasted no time in reigniting the rancor that has distinguished conservative commentary since the mid 1990’s.

Rush said he doesn’t need a long statement to say what he means, merely four words. “I. Hope. He. Fails.”

The American people, however, may quibble with Rush’ hunger for the failure of the newly minted Obama administration. Pollster’s aggregate poll shows that Obama maintains a growing favorability rating, currently 71%.

Since the election, Obama’s favorability has gone nowhere but up; potentially related to the deepening crisis and the close of the Bush administration.

Rush's jumping off point was his insistence that the government should not control things; not the banks, not the auto industry and not health care. 

I am sure somewhere in his mind there's a little asterisk noting that all of the efforts to extend government into these areas were initiated by his favorite President, G. W. Bush.

- Murphy

Wednesday, January 21, 2009


Jonah Golberg, editor of the National Review, was just on NPR's Talk of the Nation discussing the new role of conservative commentators during the Obama administration.

Goldberg started out saying that being "out in the wilderness" is actually "fun" and is the natural home of the Goldwater Conserervatives; that opposition is in their DNA.

After lauding the conservatives for their principled opposition, he then immediately went on to decry liberal critics of the Bush administration, referring to some of them as "warewolves" who "need to feed".

He contrasted that with his view of conservatives as the constructive critics-that none harbor any personal animus toward the new President; unlike his liberal opponents who apoplecticly decry anything Bush has done merely because they were done by Bush.

He apparently hasn't received notice from his friends in the Republican National Committee, who-in their principled opposition-giggle away at "Barack the Majic Negro" and pledge to become Obama's "worst nightmare".

- Murphy

Sunday, January 11, 2009

U.S. Refused to Back Israeli Strike on Iran

In a piece in today's New York Times, David Sanger reports on some of the details behind the complicated balancing act between the United States and Israel, which teeters on attempts to disrupt the Iranian nuclear program.

Some of the efforts have been circulating around for some time on different foreign policy blogs, but this piece-which comes ahead of a more detailed book by Sanger to be released this week-ties them together.

The bold-faced point, however, is that the U.S. not only refused to aid an Israeli attack, but took a number of steps to deter their action.

White House officials never conclusively determined whether Israel had decided to go ahead with the strike before the United States protested, or whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel was trying to goad the White House into more decisive action before Mr. Bush left office. But the Bush administration was particularly alarmed by an Israeli request to fly over Iraq to reach Iran’s major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country’s only known uranium enrichment plant is located.

The White House denied that request outright, American officials said, and the Israelis backed off their plans, at least temporarily. But the tense exchanges also prompted the White House to step up intelligence-sharing with Israel and brief Israeli officials on new American efforts to subtly sabotage Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, a major covert program that Mr. Bush is about to hand off to President-elect Barack Obama.

In essence, the release of a 2007 intelligence report stating that Iran was further behind in it's efforts to build and deploy a nuclear warhead than previously believed, prompted to different reactions by the U.S. and Israel.

Israel-which believed the report to be inaccurate-saw the it as a sign the U.S. would not take its own military action, and thus stepped up its efforts to plan an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. The plans reached the point of attack exercises over the Mediteranian and requesting bunker-buster bombs and permission to fly over Iraq from the U.S. None of the Israeli efforts to prod the U.S. into aiding their efforts panned out.

In the U.S., efforts turned towards non-military options. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others believed the military effort would bear little fruit: it was unlikely to deal a decisive blow, drive the Iranian further underground, and could spark even greater destabilization in the region. Instead they continue to pursue covert efforts to disrupt the Iranians ability to keep their program running: including disrupting the electrical infrastructure, computer network attacks, and the sabotage of key parts.

Despite the bellicose nature of the Bush administration in the first administration, it appears that they have taken a more nuanced and deliberate approach in recent years; combining international diplomatic efforts and strong-arm sanctions, as well as low-level covert actions that may delay functional capability.

The Obama administration will have a number of major issues on its plate beginning on day one, but at least a third war isn't one of them.

- Murphy

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Burris' Path

While Roland Burris' granite mausoleum (complete with footnoted resume) may point to a playful intellect, one must admit that he could have taken a slightly different tack when approaching his appointment. 

Perhaps he could have backed off claims that Blagojevich's decision was touched by the hand of God, or that the Democrats were barring the door to racial progress by denying him a seat in the Senate

Citing divine providence while surrogates accuse your own party of reclaiming the mantle of Bull Connor-a party which just months prior nominated and then elected the first African-American President-Likely inspires anger amongst your potential colleagues. Beyond that, the fact that your benefactor faces a long stint in prison for attempting to sell the seat you now hold, a seat just vacated by the now first African-American President-elect, tempts the fates in a way only Bill Murray could make funny.

Perhaps a more effective path could have been to take the turn of the statesman.

In a single stroke, Burris could have: satiated his ambition, cemented a sterling reputation, and maybe even earned the gratitude of a Democratic Party that sits on pins a needles.

To land this trifecta Burris could have begun by accepting the seat. Following his acceptance, Burris would announce that he has taken the seat despite the Governor's leaden touch, and he was accepting it as a place-holder and would not run for election in two years. 

In doing so, and assuming he found some way to cement people's trust that he would follow through on is promise, he could have reached his pinnacle position and perhaps even had the chance to leave his mark. And by bowing out in two years he would earn a measure of respect rare in this modern age.

Now, it's unlikely someone thinking along these lines would have landed on the Governor's radar. While Burris is roundly respected, his glaring ambition is unlikely to have lain quietly under a basket lo these many years. 

Yet, as a politician nearing the end of his career, what a coup he could have struck. Instead, Burris looks more a card-carrying member of a cynical, pay-for-play world of politics, the one Blagojevich typifies more than any other modern actor.

[This, of course, ignores the question of whether the appointment is legal or not. That will be left for the lawyers.]

- Murphy

Monday, January 05, 2009

Sen. Cornyn: We'll Filibuster Franken

Despite the numerous court rulings that have gone against incumbent Minnesota Republican Senator Norm Coleman, Republican Sen. John Cornyn (TX) pledged on CNN this morning that Republicans would block the seating of challenger Al Franken's because it "ignores Minnesota law."

During the long effort to resolve the narrow election, matters such as the type and manner of ballot counting have appeared regularly before the Minnesota courts, which have ruled regularly against the Coleman efforts. The result is that the Minnesota Secretary of State is ready to certify the election in favor of Franken.

The Coleman campaign, which in November encouraged the Franken campaign to concede defeat in the face of a vote difference measures in the dozens in order to begin the "healing process" has now pledged to tie the matter up in court. Coleman's Republican colleagues in the Senate have pledged to reinforce his efforts in the Senate.

- Murphy

Thursday, January 01, 2009

Gaza and the Wider Picture

Lara Rozen posted some thoughts from an analyst who notes that destabilizing Egypt may be the real target of the coalition of militants that include Hamas in Gaza.

There are two domestic agendas here. The Israeli one is very familiar... But what people are not asking and is at least as important: what are the f**** rocket firers hoping to do? ... If you look at what people are saying, there is a disconnect between what Haniyah and people in Gaza are saying, and what Nasrallah and Meshal and regional actors say. ... The Hamas leadership in Gaza is saying, we want a ceasefire on our terms. What Nasrallah and Meshal and Iran are saying: Egyptians, rise up ... What’s missing in every analysis I see is that Egypt is the prize, the low hanging fruit ...

Read on...

- Murphy