Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

H.R. 861: To terminate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA shouldn't be eliminated but it does need some serious reform.)

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools (Private schools already get tax dollars. I assume you mean tuition vouchers?)

H.R. 899: To terminate the Department of Education (Good.)

H.J.R. 69: To repeal a rule protecting wildlife (allow hunting in Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge) (Hunting is fine as long as controls are in place to prevent over-hunting)

H.R. 370: To repeal the Affordable Care Act (There needs to be a complete replacement bill ready before repeal can happen, otherwise it'll be the biggest feth-show this century.)

H.R. 354: To defund Planned Parenthood (Good.)

H.R. 785: National Right-to-Work legislation (While I generally support right-to-work, I'm not sure this would pass Constitutional muster. R2W is a states rights thing, isn't it?)

H.R. 83: Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act (Not sure what's in this nor why it's necessary.)

H.R. 147: To criminalize abortion (it want to prosecute pregnant women) (Not sure what's in this but I'm really leery about it, especially if anyone from North Carolina has their hand in it.)

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


You don't really think all right-wing US groups are squeaky clean or have AAA Ace security. Pence doing state business on AOL is a clear example.

And a clear example right wing targets DO get hacked.

Exactly. The question is why the Kremlin hasn't released the dirt it no doubt has gathered by hacking right-wingers. The reason is the Kremlim has no reason to do so, because the right wing doesn't threaten its interests, and has various points of congruence.

You DO realize RNC emails WERE released, right? It is just there were a lot less because no one there fell for the phishing attempts, the hacks were all of personal email accounts of RNC workers. They were released via DC Leaks instead of Wikileaks, but they were released.

And again, the RNC got help from the FBI, The DNC refused to allow the FBI access to their servers... Wonder why they did that?

 Breotan wrote:
Hunting is fine as long as controls are in place to prevent over-hunting

It wasn't said that there was anything wrong hunting so not sure why the need to say it is "fine" but as for controls you mean something like having a huge state to hunt in except for a wildlife refuge?

 Breotan wrote:
(Good.)

Why is defunding women's health services a good thing? It isn't defunding abortion services as Federal dollars don't go to that and even then abortion services make up 3% of the total of what PP does. Are we happy with cervical cancer, stds, breast cancer et al?

 Ahtman wrote:
Some exciting bills the House has going on:

H.R. 861: To terminate the Environmental Protection Agency

Because feth poor people being able to breath and drink, amiright!

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools

I mean it's not like our schools are severely underfunded or something, oh wait.

H.R. 899: To terminate the Department of Education

Because feth non-rich people being able to got to school, amiright!

H.J.R. 69: To repeal a rule protecting wildlife (allow hunting in Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge)

After all, if it doesn't make profit it's not worth protecting!

H.R. 370: To repeal the Affordable Care Act

Because feth sick and poor people, amiright!

H.R. 354: To defund Planned Parenthood

After all it's not like they provide much needed services are low cost to poor neighborhoods or something!

H.R. 785: National Right-to-Work legislation

I mean it's not like people need protection from immoral business practices on the part of employers.

H.R. 83: Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act

States rights, amiright!

H.R. 147: To criminalize abortion (it want to prosecute pregnant women)

I mean it's not like the constitution really matters after all.

As someone who works in an industry normally seen on the "losing" end of the EPA (HVAC), I seriously dont see why there's all this hate on the EPA or where the EPA is in such dire need of reform. We actually have a relatively good relationship with the EPA, the big issue with them isnt regulation, it's clarity and certainty. If we know a change is coming that bans a certain refrigerant, that is fine, we just need to know all the compliance details so we can clear that out of the supply chain and move to a different product. The problem with the "pro business" people wanting to kill the EPA or defang it is that they're actively undermining the clarity and certainty that we rely on.

If the EPA puts out seriously bad regulations, we tell them and they are pretty accommodating. We can have a voice in that process, and have a hand in guiding those regulations. That all already exists. What sucks is when we cant plan for anything.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools

I mean it's not like our schools are severely underfunded or something, oh weight.

Wow. Now that's some serious irony there.

 Breotan wrote:
H.R. 861: To terminate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA shouldn't be eliminated but it does need some serious reform.)

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools (Private schools already get tax dollars. I assume you mean tuition vouchers?)

H.R. 899: To terminate the Department of Education (Good.)

H.J.R. 69: To repeal a rule protecting wildlife (allow hunting in Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge) (Hunting is fine as long as controls are in place to prevent over-hunting)

H.R. 370: To repeal the Affordable Care Act (There needs to be a complete replacement bill ready before repeal can happen, otherwise it'll be the biggest feth-show this century.)

H.R. 354: To defund Planned Parenthood (Good.)

H.R. 785: National Right-to-Work legislation (While I generally support right-to-work, I'm not sure this would pass Constitutional muster. R2W is a states rights thing, isn't it?)

H.R. 83: Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act (Not sure what's in this nor why it's necessary.)

H.R. 147: To criminalize abortion (it want to prosecute pregnant women) (Not sure what's in this but I'm really leery about it, especially if anyone from North Carolina has their hand in it.)

Wow. It's as if half of the US was deeply intent on rolling back the last 50 years of social progress.

H.R. 83, btw, threatens to defund for a year a state of a local government that would, for any reason, refuse to share information on an immigrant within it's border to federal agencies. Given the amount of absolute contained in this, one can only assume that Lou Barletta is a Sith.

 Breotan wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools

I mean it's not like our schools are severely underfunded or something, oh weight.

Wow. Now that's some serious irony there.

In my defense, I blame auto-correct.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools

I mean it's not like our schools are severely underfunded or something, oh weight.

Wow. Now that's some serious irony there.

In my defense, I blame auto-correct.

At least you didn't misspell "tap"

 Kovnik Obama wrote:


Wow. It's as if half of the US was deeply intent on rolling back the last 50 years of social progress.

Not insignificantly less than half of 60%, roughly.

 CptJake wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


You don't really think all right-wing US groups are squeaky clean or have AAA Ace security. Pence doing state business on AOL is a clear example.

And a clear example right wing targets DO get hacked.

Exactly. The question is why the Kremlin hasn't released the dirt it no doubt has gathered by hacking right-wingers. The reason is the Kremlim has no reason to do so, because the right wing doesn't threaten its interests, and has various points of congruence.

You DO realize RNC emails WERE released, right? It is just there were a lot less because no one there fell for the phishing attempts, the hacks were all of personal email accounts of RNC workers. They were released via DC Leaks instead of Wikileaks, but they were released.

And again, the RNC got help from the FBI, The DNC refused to allow the FBI access to their servers... Wonder why they did that?

There's no Kremlin dirt, so blah di blah.

H.R. 861: To terminate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA shouldn't be eliminated but it does need some serious reform.) I agree that it should stick around, and agree that it needs "reform" but for me, reform means giving them stronger teeth and, as another poster alluded to, a mandate for clarity

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools (Private schools already get tax dollars. I assume you mean tuition vouchers?) This one should be axed as of yesterday, as this is clearly designed to promote DeVos' businesses and her pals in the private school industry. It would also serve to further dumb down the country, as so many students would be learning non-academic things as academic "fact"

H.R. 899: To terminate the Department of Education (Good.) why?? I mean, when you have states doing as poorly as Mississippi and other bible belt states, or states like Michigan, I'd say we need to make Education even stronger. Now, if you're saying "good" to axing the department to get rid of DeVos, and then reconstitute the department, then maybe I'd be on board

H.J.R. 69: To repeal a rule protecting wildlife (allow hunting in Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge) (Hunting is fine as long as controls are in place to prevent over-hunting) because Feth Bambi, right?

H.R. 370: To repeal the Affordable Care Act (There needs to be a complete replacement bill ready before repeal can happen, otherwise it'll be the biggest feth-show this century.) Like a true Bismarkian system, or full on single-payer? IMHO, it's the only viable options for our country

H.R. 354: To defund Planned Parenthood (Good.) because feth poor people, right? Seriously, this bill wouldn't get rid of the thing these idiots think it will get rid of. Now... IF we adopted single-payer or a Bismarkian system, we really wouldn't need PP in it's current form. But, until other things change, this is a necessary organization to have.

H.R. 785: National Right-to-Work legislation (While I generally support right-to-work, I'm not sure this would pass Constitutional muster. R2W is a states rights thing, isn't it?) YAY!!!! More wage suppression and more trickle-down bs. Again... feth poor people, right?

H.R. 83: Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act (Not sure what's in this nor why it's necessary.) First thing that we agree on...

H.R. 147: To criminalize abortion (it want to prosecute pregnant women) (Not sure what's in this but I'm really leery about it, especially if anyone from North Carolina has their hand in it.) as others have pointed out, this should get thrown out due to things like Roe v. Wade, and personal rights, combined with states rights issues.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:


Wow. It's as if half of the US was deeply intent on rolling back the last 50 years of social progress.

H.R. 83, btw, threatens to defund for a year a state of a local government that would, for any reason, refuse to share information on an immigrant within it's border to federal agencies. Given the amount of absolute contained in this, one can only assume that Lou Barletta is a Sith.

Also known as "The Republican Party; we're all for small government, except when it is anything other than a white Christian utopia."

 LordofHats wrote:

 Kovnik Obama wrote:


Wow. It's as if half of the US was deeply intent on rolling back the last 50 years of social progress.

H.R. 83, btw, threatens to defund for a year a state of a local government that would, for any reason, refuse to share information on an immigrant within it's border to federal agencies. Given the amount of absolute contained in this, one can only assume that Lou Barletta is a Sith.

Also known as "The Republican Party; we're all for small government, except when it is anything other than a white Christian utopia."

You forgot to include "...male..." in there.

US SUV sales, so great GM is cutting more jobs:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/06/news/companies/gm-layoffs/index.html

With advances in automation, GM could be selling like hotcakes and they could still cut factory floor staff.

No amount of Trump lies and platitudes can slow the rise of the robot worker. Fast food, stocking, checkout and driving jobs will all be gone soon. 3D building in in it's infancy, too.

Does society have a plan to deal with a whole class of permanently unemployed?

 Ahtman wrote:


Why is defunding women's health services a good thing? It isn't defunding abortion services as Federal dollars don't go to that and even then abortion services make up 3% of the total of what PP does. Are we happy with cervical cancer, stds, breast cancer et al?

A) That isn't to defund women's health services... it redirects fundings to other community health providers. PP is a private organization that doesn't 'deserve' federal fundings... any more than NRA 'deserves' federal funding for the exercise of the 2nd amendment.

B) The 3% is misleading in that it treats it PP transactions equally.

C) PP takes donations! Donate away if you feel strongly about this.

 whembly wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:


Why is defunding women's health services a good thing? It isn't defunding abortion services as Federal dollars don't go to that and even then abortion services make up 3% of the total of what PP does. Are we happy with cervical cancer, stds, breast cancer et al?

A) That isn't to defund women's health services... it redirects fundings to other community health providers. PP is a private organization that doesn't 'deserve' federal fundings... any more than NRA 'deserves' federal funding for the exercise of the 2nd amendment.

The NRA is a private membership advocacy and interest group, much like the ACLU, while PP provides health services to the general public and is often the only provider of certain services (not limited to just abortions) for large areas (filling a direct public health care need, hence the public funding) there's a big difference, and this is being done largely for culture wars purposes rather than out of any legitimate concern over PP's provision of services or ability to carry out their mission.

It's necessary for the greater good to fund PP, until the state can take over their job, or another organization can do it.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
H.R. 861: To terminate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA shouldn't be eliminated but it does need some serious reform.) I agree that it should stick around, and agree that it needs "reform" but for me, reform means giving them stronger teeth and, as another poster alluded to, a mandate for clarity

You can mandate for clarity without giving the EPA stronger teeth.

H.R. 610: Tax dollars for private schools (Private schools already get tax dollars. I assume you mean tuition vouchers?) This one should be axed as of yesterday, as this is clearly designed to promote DeVos' businesses and her pals in the private school industry. It would also serve to further dumb down the country, as so many students would be learning non-academic things as academic "fact"

This anti-private school is really weird and devoid of any concerns for children's access to better schools.

H.R. 899: To terminate the Department of Education (Good.) why?? I mean, when you have states doing as poorly as Mississippi and other bible belt states, or states like Michigan, I'd say we need to make Education even stronger. Now, if you're saying "good" to axing the department to get rid of DeVos, and then reconstitute the department, then maybe I'd be on board

That terminates the department, but leaves the funding streams intact, to be allocated in 'block-grants' to the states. ( assuming the avg 9% of fed money that makes up the state's budget remains).

H.J.R. 69: To repeal a rule protecting wildlife (allow hunting in Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge) (Hunting is fine as long as controls are in place to prevent over-hunting) because Feth Bambi, right?

Veal is awesome. As someone who has family and friends in Alaska, this is a good thing. Also, Alaskans are HUGE conservationist... even has State laws on the books that are stricter than some Federal regulations.

H.R. 370: To repeal the Affordable Care Act (There needs to be a complete replacement bill ready before repeal can happen, otherwise it'll be the biggest feth-show this century.) Like a true Bismarkian system, or full on single-payer? IMHO, it's the only viable options for our country

Kill it with fire and start over.

H.R. 354: To defund Planned Parenthood (Good.) because feth poor people, right? Seriously, this bill wouldn't get rid of the thing these idiots think it will get rid of. Now... IF we adopted single-payer or a Bismarkian system, we really wouldn't need PP in it's current form. But, until other things change, this is a necessary organization to have.

See my response above...

H.R. 785: National Right-to-Work legislation (While I generally support right-to-work, I'm not sure this would pass Constitutional muster. R2W is a states rights thing, isn't it?) YAY!!!! More wage suppression and more trickle-down bs. Again... feth poor people, right?

I like the principle... but, this is so totally NOT a Federal issue. Leave it to the states and let the states compete with each other.

H.R. 83: Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act (Not sure what's in this nor why it's necessary.) First thing that we agree on...

Good. Immigration is a federal issue and states can't willfully ignore the federal mandate. The state is free to continue practicing sanctuary policies... just know that some federal moola is at stake. The state need to determine the tradeoff...

H.R. 147: To criminalize abortion (it want to prosecute pregnant women) (Not sure what's in this but I'm really leery about it, especially if anyone from North Carolina has their hand in it.) as others have pointed out, this should get thrown out due to things like Roe v. Wade, and personal rights, combined with states rights issues.

This is what the bill states:

This bill imposes criminal penalties on anyone who knowingly or knowingly attempts to:
(1) perform an abortion knowing that the abortion is sought based on the sex, gender, color or race of the child, or the race of a parent;
(2) use force or the threat of force to intentionally injure or intimidate any person for the purpose of coercing a sex-selection or race-selection abortion;
(3) solicit or accept funds for the performance of such an abortion; or
(4) transport a woman into the United States or across a state line for the purpose of obtaining such an abortion.
...
...
...
Medical or mental health professionals must report known or suspected violations to law enforcement authorities. Criminal penalties are established for a failure to so report.

A woman having such an abortion may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable.

No... this bill doesn't seek to prosecute the pregnant in anyway shape or form.

 feeder wrote:


Does society have a plan to deal with a whole class of permanently unemployed?

They just should have worked harder, and would have if all us damn liberals weren't so concerned about solving social problems like unemployment and education standards!

Don't worry. With all the toxins soon to be pumped into our water and air, (not rich) people will start dying off in droves and the Republicans will finally have the Randian dream they've been fapping for all these decades.

 whembly wrote:

A) That isn't to defund women's health services... it redirects fundings to other community health providers. PP is a private organization that doesn't 'deserve' federal fundings... any more than NRA 'deserves' federal funding for the exercise of the 2nd amendment.

How many of those community health providers can carry out abortions? You fail to realise that lack of access to abortion clinics affects even those who many pro-life people think should have access, such as people who have been impregnated during rape.

There was a case in Texas where a 13 year old girl, who was raped and became pregnant, was unable to get an abortion because of state laws requiring an anaesthetist during the procedure, whether the actual procedure requires one or not. She was poor and could not afford to travel out of state.

Is that what you want? To have a system where 13 year old girls who were raped cannot abort a foetus which was forced into them?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:

A) That isn't to defund women's health services... it redirects fundings to other community health providers. PP is a private organization that doesn't 'deserve' federal fundings... any more than NRA 'deserves' federal funding for the exercise of the 2nd amendment.

How many of those community health providers can carry out abortions? You fail to realise that lack of access to abortion clinics affects even those who many pro-life people think should have access, such as people who have been impregnated during rape.

There was a case in Texas where a 13 year old girl, who was raped and became pregnant, was unable to get an abortion because of state laws requiring an anaesthetist during the procedure, whether the actual procedure requires one or not. She was poor and could not afford to travel out of state.

Is that what you want? To have a system where 13 year old girls who were raped cannot abort a foetus which was forced into them?

As long as it protects those little bundles of cells just like the Bible says

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:

A) That isn't to defund women's health services... it redirects fundings to other community health providers. PP is a private organization that doesn't 'deserve' federal fundings... any more than NRA 'deserves' federal funding for the exercise of the 2nd amendment.

How many of those community health providers can carry out abortions? You fail to realise that lack of access to abortion clinics affects even those who many pro-life people think should have access, such as people who have been impregnated during rape.

There was a case in Texas where a 13 year old girl, who was raped and became pregnant, was unable to get an abortion because of state laws requiring an anaesthetist during the procedure, whether the actual procedure requires one or not. She was poor and could not afford to travel out of state.

Is that what you want? To have a system where 13 year old girls who were raped cannot abort a foetus which was forced into them?

"Guess what, elections have consequences,"

I'm...confused. What does removing protections for animals in a wildlife refuge have to do with veal? Whembly, do, uh, do you know what veal is?

You don't get up at the crack of dawn to go hunt it, unless you're really bad at hunting.

 feeder wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:

A) That isn't to defund women's health services... it redirects fundings to other community health providers. PP is a private organization that doesn't 'deserve' federal fundings... any more than NRA 'deserves' federal funding for the exercise of the 2nd amendment.

How many of those community health providers can carry out abortions? You fail to realise that lack of access to abortion clinics affects even those who many pro-life people think should have access, such as people who have been impregnated during rape.

There was a case in Texas where a 13 year old girl, who was raped and became pregnant, was unable to get an abortion because of state laws requiring an anaesthetist during the procedure, whether the actual procedure requires one or not. She was poor and could not afford to travel out of state.

Is that what you want? To have a system where 13 year old girls who were raped cannot abort a foetus which was forced into them?

"Guess what, elections have consequences,"

Spoiler:

I rolled my eyes in exasperation, then I realized it wasn't Whem who posted this.

 whembly wrote:

You can mandate for clarity without giving the EPA stronger teeth.

The issue is, is the EPA overtoothed? I deal with the EPA in a business capacity, my VP meets with them multiple times a month. The only people "in industry", at least in the HVAC world, that have a problem with EPA's "teeth" are generally those that are doing what the EPA was created (with good reason) to prevent, aside from issues of execution (e.g. not giving us enough notice on things). They really are usually very good about working with all sides.

This anti-private school is really weird and devoid of any concerns for children's access to better schools.

This sentiment is driven by the fact that private and home schooling is overwhelmingly driven by religious motives and pressures and very sketchy for profit organizations, and their effectiveness in providing quality education is generally no better than or often worse than public schools. It comes off either as tax support of religious education or scams or both.

Kill it with fire and start over.

This seems to be the common mantra but with no thinking beyond the "kill it with fire" part where the entire concept largely seems to begin and end, with the "start over" part being an open question mark with the potential to kill or economically ruin far more lives than the ACA's issues ever did. I know people who are alive today specifically because of ACA provisions, and without some clarity on such provisions being maintained and what replacement for health care provision will be put in place, "kill it with fire and start over" isnt particularly compelling.

Good. Immigration is a federal issue and states can't willfully ignore the federal mandate. The state is free to continue practicing sanctuary policies... just know that some federal moola is at stake. The state need to determine the tradeoff...

Except what are states going to do about it? These are municipal and county governments being targeted, not States. Meanwhile, the Fed may have obligations to provide those services and courts are likely to strike this legislation down on those grounds.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:

A) That isn't to defund women's health services... it redirects fundings to other community health providers. PP is a private organization that doesn't 'deserve' federal fundings... any more than NRA 'deserves' federal funding for the exercise of the 2nd amendment.

How many of those community health providers can carry out abortions?

Many don't... unless the mother's health is in danger.

You fail to realise that lack of access to abortion clinics affects even those who many pro-life people think should have access, such as people who have been impregnated during rape.

There was a case in Texas where a 13 year old girl, who was raped and became pregnant, was unable to get an abortion because of state laws requiring an anaesthetist during the procedure, whether the actual procedure requires one or not. She was poor and could not afford to travel out of state.

Is that what you want? To have a system where 13 year old girls who were raped cannot abort a foetus which was forced into them?

Look... I'm bias'ed about this, admittedly. I personally know of two people who were conceived from rape. A friend I met in college and my ex's sister who was raped, who decided to keep her daughter. I can't look in their eyes and say I support elective abortions.

Rape and incest are base horrific wrongs.

I know I've been a honk for Judicial/Incarceration reform... but this? The fething perp must be punished to the absolute fullest extent of the law... but does the helpless child, who is guilty of no crime, deserve death? Is the violent act of abortion a good solution to the violent act of rape?

A woman, violated in a sexual assault should be surrounded by love and support. If that assault results in pregnancy, aren’t there now two people affected by the assault? Two people in need of protection and care?

Yes, as a conservative I'm willing to put my taxes where my mouth is and I fully support programs to help these victims after such events.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Spinner wrote:
I'm...confused. What does removing protections for animals in a wildlife refuge have to do with veal? Whembly, do, uh, do you know what veal is?

You don't get up at the crack of dawn to go hunt it, unless you're really bad at hunting.

Whoops... may brain some how said veal=venison.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 feeder wrote:


"Guess what, elections have consequences,"

Spoiler:

I rolled my eyes in exasperation, then I realized it wasn't Whem who posted this.

*preens*

And on to the OTHER SIDE of the whole Trump/Russia saga - the FBI/MI6 anti-Trump dossier collusion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/322553-grassley-probes-fbis-ties-to-british-spy-who-investigated-trump

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has opened an inquiry into allegations the FBI worked with the British spy who authored a controversial opposition research dossier on President Trump during the 2016 election.

Well, as long as everyone wants investigations, I guess we might as well investigate everyone, right?

I've always kind of struggled working out my own views on abortion. - Not that it ever really mattered in the UK, it's been a settled issue in the UK as long as I can remember but yeah, being adopted, I've been very conscious of the potential of a slight change of fate could mean...

But yeah, anyhow. Like I said, I've always had difficulty working out my feelings on the topic, until relatively recently.

It must have been during one of the various Republic primary marches, I was wandering across twitter when I came across something like this...



I was confused... Wasn't sure of the context. Looked up and down, saw it was about womens reproductive rights. I went, "oh...." Still mildly confused.

A moment passes... "Hmm..."

A few more moments pass...

"OHHHHHHH. Well... Frak."