Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (459011)	9/15/2003 2:44:08 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 769670

jewishworldreview.com

To: calgal who wrote (459011)	9/15/2003 2:45:07 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 769670

A strategy for renewal By Arnold Beichman The mere facts that Arab guerrillas are shooting American and British soldiers daily, that the saintly United Nations can no longer offer sanctuary to its employees in Iraq and that Iraq's Shi'ite population is at risk means the war we thought had been won on May 1 has not been won, not yet. And this despite the belief that the coalition military's achievement in six weeks "must rank as one of the signal achievements in military history," as Max Boot has written in the current Foreign Affairs. As I read Mr. Boot's essay, I recalled with a slight shiver a statement made in 1964 by then Defense Secretary Robert McNamara: "America's military strength alone or in combination with that of our allies today adds up to the greatest aggregation of force in human history. It has been harnessed into flexible, usable power which can be controlled with remarkable precision. It is a triumph of strategy, science and human ingenuity." Mr. McNamara's calculation was right; nevertheless, 10 years later the U.S. was in full retreat. The second Gulf war is not being lost, but it will go on a lot longer than had been foreseen. What the coalition was obviously not prepared for was the urban and countryside guerrilla warfare being waged against our soldiers. Simply put, Saddam Hussein or his successors and their network still flourish. The three bombings — the Jordanian Embassy, the local U.N. headquarters, the Shi'ite mosque — prove that. Coalition forces can't be everywhere. Guerrillas can, because they are able pick their point of attack. All our unsurpassed military might could not prevent the attacks of September 11 two years ago. Today it is one or two soldiers a day; tomorrow it may be more than two a day. How can that be when we have superiority in every branch of military power? In Vietnam, we had 100 percent air superiority, fixed-wing and rotary. Same in Iraq. In Vietnam, we had 100 percent superiority in armor. Same in Iraq. In Vietnam, we had superbly trained Green Berets, the Special Forces, the bravest of the brave. Same in Iraq. What happened in Iraq? Who is running the Iraqi insurgency and how are they doing it? Saddam Hussein's armies collapsed in set-piece battles but somebody is supplying rockets and manpower at strategic road spots. A century and a half ago, Karl Marx wrote: "Mass uprisings, revolutionary methods, guerrilla bands everywhere; such are the only means by which a small nation can hope to maintain itself against an adversary superior in numbers and equipment. By their use, a weaker force can overcome its stronger and better organized opponent." The coalition victory over Saddam's Ba'ath is as irreversible as the victory of the Taliban in Afghanistan. But what the guerrilla network in Iraq is demonstrating with a frightening reality is a credible power projection. One might say it is Gulf War III. The network ability to kill coalition forces, to bomb mosques and U.N. installations means there is an underground functioning so efficiently it cannot be penetrated by any outside intelligence. The Ba'ath network knows its history: The U.S. retreated from Vietnam, from Lebanon and from Somalia. Why not Iraq? Iraq is not Vietnam, Lebanon or Somalia. But in Iraq, the U.S. undertook a war in which the leadership did not foresee that victory would not come as cheap at Gulf War I and II did. If the postwar guerrilla war had been foreseen, would President Bush have announced the end of hostilities — as he did on May 1 — and would he have in his recent address to the nation asked for a supplemental $87 billion? I am sure men like Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz are aware there has been not a defeat in Iraq but a failure to understand Muslim culture, both as religion and as politics. And since coalition forces are going to be in Iraq for several years, a different approach must be created. A quick recommendation: A delegation of American businesspeople, male and female, Muslim-Americans included, should be organized for a monthlong tour of Iraq to meet their Iraqi counterparts, not necessarily to trade but to bring them into the 21st century. And if any other countries want to send in such delegations, they should be welcome. I would even invite the AFL-CIO, the British Trades Union Congress or the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions to send a delegation. The State Department has potential candidates for cultural attaches who might be assigned to L. Paul Bremer's office. What about American or British delegations from the sciences, the universities, the foundations, soccer and basketball leagues? People-to-people contacts are as important as Humvees. Arnold Beichman, a Hoover Institution research fellow, is a columnist for The Washington Times.

To: calgal who wrote (459011)	9/15/2003 2:47:44 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Why we fight By Donald Lambro Despite some impressive victories in our war on terror since September 11, 2001, the fast pace of events seems to have swept them by in a blur, with much of their significance lost in the chaos of a global offensive. As we pass the second anniversary of the attacks, it's important to reflect on what has been accomplished since 3,000 American civilians were forever silenced and our collective sense of safety and invincibility was shattered. To believe President Bush's critics, little has been done in the last 24 months to protect our way of life. But look at the 22-page progress report the White House released last week and you'll see how exaggerated the criticisms have become. Consider these major events: c We have brought down the repressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan, killed or routed its leadership, and destroyed the terrorist training camps where Osama bin Laden plotted the September 11 attacks. A free and moderate government, allied with the United States, has been installed. • The United States and our allies have pursued once-hidden terrorist networks on a vast global scale. More than 3,000 suspected al Qaeda agents and supporters have been caught and imprisoned in more than 90 countries. • We have destroyed Saddam Hussein's brutal regime and a free, new Iraqi governing council is emerging to take over Iraq's operations and infrastructure. • We have destroyed terrorist cells here at home, charged more than 260 people with terrorist-related crimes, and detained, convicted or deported hundreds of noncitizens who were in the United States illegally. Meanwhile, I believe the United Nations will approve a resolution to provide a multinational force under U.S. command to help strengthen peacekeeping operations in Iraq. That will further free up our soldiers to pursue and kill the enemy, and help stabilize the country. Recent news reports note that U.S. military forces "have become a less visible presence in the Iraqi capital." The increased deployment of Iraqis to police Baghdad and other key cities is also freeing up U.S. soldiers to go after terrorist forces. Other developments give us reasons to be more optimistic about Iraq's immediate future (and the likelihood that some U.S. forces will be coming home sooner). At Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's urging, the timetable to train a new Iraqi army to take over the defense of their country has been stepped up. Though you would never know it from the nightly news broadcasts here, more than 70,000 Iraqi men have signed up for police, civil defense and military duties to restore order and law enforcement in their country. Pointing to several Iraqis who were pulling guard duty in Baghdad's Karrada shopping district, Pfc. George Lopez of Salt Lake City told a reporter, "They're starting to do more of their job, so our job has become less and less." Lawmakers recently traveled to Iraq to find Iraqi children back in school; a plethora of free, independent newspapers on the streets; shops and businesses opened; and markets filled with shoppers. Life, it seems, has begun to stabilize somewhat in Iraq, but this hardly means there will not be difficult days ahead in Iraq. Thugs and terrorists still roam the region and are flooding in from surrounding areas, the infrastructure still needs work, and, most important, American soldiers are still dying. It does mean, however, that progress is being made in our war on terrorism — proof that the hunger for freedom over tyranny still remains the strongest force in the world. And, in the end, freedom will win. Donald Lambro is a columnist for The Washington Times and is nationally syndicated.

To: calgal who wrote (459011)	9/15/2003 2:50:16 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Who's in Dean's way? By Barry Casselman I have recently asserted on these pages that former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean has almost won the Democratic nomination for president in 2004. I did then offer some caveats — after all, the nominating convention is ten months away — but I think that some establishment types thought I was way ahead of myself. Needless to say, it's time to get beyond the predicting, and ask some practical questions. One, if Mr. Dean is to be denied the Democratic nomination, who stands in his way? Two, what is the 2004 race really all about? The first question is, what really prompted my earlier prediction that Mr. Dean was on his way to a convention victory? There are nine announced candidates, of which six are considered "serious." Of the latter, Sen. Bob Graham's campaign, while making a certain amount of noise, has not seemed to register with the public. I would now put him with Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley Braun as an inevitable also-ran. Of course, there is Gen. Wesley Clark. For those of us who have observed presidential campaigns for a long time, however, this is a candidacy probably too-long-delayed. There is an air of indecisionnowfirmly established about the general as a presidential candidate — hardly a positive argument for a military knight who is to rescue the Democrats from themselves. My caveat is that Gen. Clark might have a remarkable public personality, including his manner of speaking, that would somehow give Democratic voters political goose bumps and thrust him into the thick of this nominating battle. Lacking that, the Clark candidacy is just talk. This leaves four men standing in Mr. Dean's way. Sen. John Edwards seemed like the man who might be the surprise candidate of 2004. To date, it has not happened. His personal charm and attractiveness has been superceded by the astute assessment of the contest by the Dean campaign. Mr. Edwards has put forward little so far that distinguishes him from his rivals. Rep. Richard Gephardt brings considerable credentials and experience to the race, but has been thwarted by the hesitation of organized labor, his largest political ally, to roll up its sleeves and get behind him. Mr. Gephardt showed great courage in supporting President Bush's military efforts in Iraq early-on, but he has failed so far to come up with compelling new approaches to the complicated problems the nation now faces. Sen. John Kerry, dubbed the early front-runner, has brought no clarity yet to his campaign. As a moderate who also supported the presidentinIraq,he seemed well-positioned to articulate a dynamic campaign. But, perhaps more than any of his fellow contestants, he has seemed to wander among the issues, allowing Mr. Dean's initiatives to contain him. Finally, there is Sen. Joseph Lieberman. It seems that everyone likes Joe, but no one thinks he can win. More than any of the four serious rivals to Mr. Dean, he has expressed a clear and thoughtful worldview about foreign policy and domestic issues. After some early backing and filling in response to the usual objections about political correctness, Mr. Lieberman has decided to tell it like he thinks it is, drawing boos at some special-interest gatherings, and thoroughly turning off the populist wing of his party. Mr. Lieberman, it needs to be recalled, is the only candidate consistently espousing the principles that got Bill Clinton, the only truly successful national Democratic politician of the past quarter-century, elected. (I would also point out that Mr. Gore, also an heir to those principles, turned his back on many of them in 2000.) Mr. Lieberman's problem is that the populist wing of his party usually has far more influence on the presidential nomination than the centrist wing. And while many like Joe, many of them don't find him exciting. My second question asked what the 2004 election is all about. Many political observers think the answer to this question has already been answered. Some of those think it is that elegant cliche, "It's the economy, stupid!" Others say it is a referendum on how we are doing in Iraq, Afghanistan and North Korea. But I think that the actions and words of the Democratic wannabees tells us what the most significant issue of 2004 really is: President Bush. Their attempts, and the attempts by those in the liberal media, to deconstruct the president tell us all that we really need to know. While his poll numbers are, for the moment, declining, and he seemingly faces a thousand crises all at once, the true relationship of the president with American voters remains inextricably linked to the days and months following September 11. If we look beyond the clouds of today, it will take more than clever slogans and predictable criticism to break this bond between the president and voters. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I have not yet seen any true signal from the Democrats that they know how to do it. Barry Casselman has reported on and analyzed presidential elections since 1972.

To: calgal who wrote (459011)	9/15/2003 2:53:42 PM
From: Bill	Respond to of 769670

LOL! Good one!

To: calgal who wrote (459011)	9/15/2003 2:55:06 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 769670

Interesting: All is Vanity (plates) jewishworldreview.com \| (KRT) The Chicago Tribune asked readers for a peek at their personalized license plates and the stories behind them. More than 600 people responded, from Jenny (EGG FOO) Young to Dee Dee (TOPLS MA) Garee. Hey, she drives a convertible. There were plates referencing occupations, hobbies, philosophies, kids, dogs, favorite entertainers, ex-spouses and the vehicles themselves. Some were obvious (Y HE WRKS, on Sharon Salzberg's Lexus). Others took some thought (Brian and Lin Classon's APPL 314, if you think about it, is as easy as apple pi). A good number were clever and amusing. That car up ahead with PPMD plates? It belongs to Dr. Lawrence Ross, the head of the department of urology at the University of Chicago. If you see TRN N CGH, that's Jay Symowicz, a first-year medical student. L HI M_L'Chiam, Hebrew for "to life"_belongs to Sharlene Sherman, who sells cemetery plots. Burt Thomas' motorcycle sports BOLEGS. "Ever ride a motorcycle for more than one hour?" he asked in his e-mail. Beth Weis' maiden name is Kahn. Her plate? X KAHN. Pam Teasley has had I AM PST, her initials, for about 15 years. "I have people hanging out of their vehicles on Lake Shore Drive and the Kennedy to ask me what I'm mad about," she wrote. "Last week a construction guy . . . told me, `You are too pretty to be p___.' That made my day." Valerie Binkowski is a math teacher with ABS VAL U on her car. On a calculator, the absolute value button is marked ABS. She put a space after VAL to highlight her name. "I offered extra credit to my class to create a new vanity plate for my car. After brainstorming, we came up with two options: ABS VAL U and ALGBRA 1. However, if a non-mathematical person looked at the second choice, he/she may read it A LG BRA, a large bra." So ABS VAL U it was. Fredi Dangoy's plate is CLASFYD. "People like hotel front desk personnel who ask for my license plate sure give me a puzzled look when I answer `CLASFYD,' Dangoy wrote. "`Oh, it's a government secret?' `No, really, it's CLASFYD.' `Don't worry, I won't tell.'" Terry Cummings' PILE IT plate has a double meaning. Cummings used to be a pilot and also used to live on a small farm and cleaned stalls. Angelo Campanella loves coffee, hence JAVAHED. "My front plates have been stolen twice. One person was nice and actually left an apology note with $10 for ordering my replacements." Daniel Hyman's wife rides and raises horses, so he thought he'd get his own horse: His Mercedes 2003 SL 55 sports HY HORSE. Angela Berka's husband is a Mike Ditka fan. When he once saw the coach standing his ground against a heckler, he knew what plate he had to have: AW SHD UP. Some folks use their vanity plates to take shots ... at vanity plates. Greg Gallier has AN T VNTY "because I dislike vanity plates ... or do I?" Pat Kauffold's plate is ECCL 128, for Ecclesiastes 12:8, which says "Vanities of vanities, saith the preacher; all (is) vanity." "I think it's the ultimate vanity plate," Kauffold wrote. "It has been a very private joke since nobody else seems to get it." Until now. By far, most of the personalized plates that were sent along convey messages or commemorate something personal in the driver's life. Former Indiana State Rep. Jerome J. Reppa, sponsor of that state's mandatory seat belt law, has BKL UP as his plate. Reppa would probably like Jesus Perez, a UPS driver who has KLK R TKT ("click it or ticket") on his car. The Kennedy family of Green Oaks, Ill., has TI EVOM, which becomes MOVE IT when a pokey driver sees the Kennedys bearing down on him in his rear-view mirror. Becky Baumann and Lois Price took different routes to the same message. Baumann's plate reads AU VOIR 6, while Price has OR WVA. Occasionally, a message is easy to figure out. Paul Zubinski has no trouble telling his fellow commuters IOTOMCH. Others are tougher. Barbara Mecca, after a rough divorce, got LWITBR, for "living well is the best revenge." She points out_gleefully, it seems_that the plate has since appeared on a Lincoln, a Mercedes and a Jaguar. Causes also get advertised. There's BANFUR 3 (Eileen Kinney), FEMNST 1 (Judy Jepsen-Popel) and TREHGR (that noted tree-hugger Regina Drahnak). Sheryl Altman (CAR SIK 2) tells us her occupation and an interesting fact. "My initials were SIK, my occupation was a Commercial Account Rep," she writes. "(And) I get car sick." Michael Foster's plate makes a statement: NO WIFE. Fred Blanford sports GRUMPY 3. "My wife felt my plate should be easy enough to decipher and that all who knew me would understand why." Darlene Heslop is QTE BLND, "a cute blond," she says, also filling us in on her height (5-foot-3), weight (96 pounds) and eye color (green) and telling us she's single. Maybe we should fix her up with Michael "NO WIFE" Foster. Matt Sommer's plates are CHEMO 93; he had cancer in 1993 and now mixes chemotherapy for a living. "Would never have gotten into health care if I hadn't gotten sick," he says. Other folks highlight their military connections. Wayne Miller's plates read ETO B24. During World War II, he served in the European theater of operations and flew in a B24 bomber. Danny Yates has NAM N 67_"the year I served in Vietnam." Ex-Marine Mike Pawelek has 1 LNECK on his Dodge Ram truck. And Lester J. Hartrick, who spent 40 years in the Illinois Army National Guard and retired as a lieutenant colonel, has LTC RET 1. Some plates are touching once you know the story. Toni Lee's plates read EMASKID. "Emma's kid. It's my favorite nickname. My mom died in 1989 at 41 of breast cancer. I was 21, and I'm her only child. She was my best friend." Kathy Mudroch went with LO2BVE. "It means `to be in love.' It says this because I am madly in love with my husband." And the story behind Vicki Dvorak's VKIWNI 1 is really sweet. And long. And we don't have the space for it here. But believe us, it's sweet. Some personalized plates express an owner's religious beliefs. Jefferson C. Lewis has ALL MY TI on his car. "It is a reference to God," he wrote. "Basically it means that He goes before me and follows me when I am in my car." Phil and Barb Leo GOT JOY. "When people ask what our plates are about, I simply say, `Well, we've got joy because we've got Jesus!' " Religion was popular, but pets were even bigger. Lindy Korner's plates read MUGGS UD, in honor of her Shetland sheepdog Muggsy, who has an advanced obedience trial title, utility dog. Marie and Paul Schmidt have a Lab and a springer; their plate reads DOGSRUS. "The plate is not popular with our two good-looking daughters for obvious reasons," Marie wrote. Basset hound owners Brian and Kim Lukanic have AHROOO_and if you've ever been around bassets you know why. And cats were not without their supporters, such as I PURRR 2 (Nancy Kay Parise) and Carl and Sandy Zapffe's slightly more cerebral FELIDAE, which is "the scientific name (in proper Latin) for all members of the cat family." Kids were only slightly less popular than pets. As it should be. There was 2EGLES (Michael Hamer, father of two Eagle Scouts) and BRYNSMA (from Barbara Eaves, the proud mother of Brian). Others are more direct. Leadia Dzurisin has three kids under the age of 5. "No matter where I go or what we are doing I must hear 30 times a day, `Boy, you've got a handful' or `You sure do have your hands full.' " Her plate: HNDFUL. Equally realistic is Pam Lome, mother of four teens, "all very close in age." Her car sports LUNYMA 1. Cora Dutkiewicz, the mother of twins, has TU FER 1. Sports and hobbies are big too. Barb Fritz's family still hasn't gotten over Michael Jordan's departure from Chicago (MISN 23). Brenda Malin (RACNCK 3) says she's a "racing chick" who followed the late Dale Earnhardt (No. 3). Brian McCudden is Scottish and he loves golf. So, AYE GOLF. And there was a whole team of Chicago Cubs fans. Wendy Zumpano told us about her husband's BRK N IVY, which isn't too far from Diane Egebrecht's BRXNIV 1; Kristal Davis is ACUBFN 1; Donald Rendler-Kaplan is CUBZFAN; Karen Gross loves her CUBBEEZ; Bob Angone honors Greg Maddux, who wore No. 31 as a Cub and is a four-time Cy Young Award winner now that he is with Atlanta, with CY YNG 31; and Reed Snyder's LTS PLY 2 is a nod to his hero, Ernie Banks. (To answer the next question: No White Sox plates were submitted, even though they are the superior team.) Personalized plates are often a way to make a comment about the car they're on. Carol Davis' purple 2001 PT Cruiser tells other drivers to CMYCAR. Tom Nasuta advises drivers to C TOM FLY as he roars by in his 2000 Pontiac Formula. Dick Hartop says that Earnhardt once said that if Darth Vader were an automobile, he would be a `96 Impala SS; so Hartop gave his `96 Impala plates reading DARTH V 8. Chicago motorcycle officer Lee Ann Neubauer rides a Harley. "I took a short trip of about 2,000 miles and when I got off the bike I had a scathingly brilliant idea," she wrote. "I have since named my motorcycle `The Vibrator!' " She has also slapped VBRTR1 plates on it. "You should see the looks that I get out on the road." Then there are the plates that get misinterpreted. When Heather Peck got BLOPEC 8, "everyone made comments about it meaning something dirty. I still haven't figured out what dirty little message the plates 1/8a combination of the first three letters of her maiden name and the first three letters of her husband's last name3/8 give out." And Melody Savage's husband bought her a car and got the plates SAVAGED. "This was his way of branding it," she says. "Our last name is Savage and his first initial is D. It just happened to create a word_but you should see some of the looks I get."

To: calgal who wrote (459011)	9/15/2003 2:56:12 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 769670

George Will The other Choice War newsandopinion.com \| Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) no longer attends the annual picnic held here by District of Columbia supporters of school choice. During the picnic there are lottery drawings to award scholarships empowering a few children to escape from the nation's worst -- and, in per-pupil spending, third-most lavishly funded -- school system. Boehner stopped attending because he could not bear the desperate anxiety, and crushing disappointment, of parents whose hopes for their children hung on the lottery. "I'd stand there and cry the whole time," he says. Bill Clinton, who could cry out of one eye, was dry-eyed about the plight of D.C.'s poor: He vetoed a school-choice bill for them in 1998. He felt the pain of the strong, the teachers' unions who were feeling menaced by the weak -- by poor parents trying to emancipate their children from the public education plantation. Boehner, who understands the patience of politics, began championing school choice as a state legislator two decades ago. Last Tuesday the House passed a small ($10 million) experimental school choice voucher program for at least 1,300 of the District's 68,000 students. This bill, skillfully managed by Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) passed, 209-208, only because two Democratic members, presidential candidates Dick Gephardt and Dennis Kucinich, were in Baltimore at a debate sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus, proclaiming their compassion for poor people. "I have 11 brothers and sisters -- my father owned a bar," says Boehner, who is not suggesting effect and cause but rather that "growing up in a large family and around a bar was great training for what I do every day" -- an intriguing commentary on the House. Boehner understands the privations parents often must endure to give their children educational opportunities. He knows D.C. parents are motivated by research showing that the longer a child attends D.C.'s schools, the worse are the child's chances in life. Also, the D.C. teachers union, a tentacle of the national unions fighting to prevent what they call the "flight" of parents to better schools, has been looted of millions of dollars, much of it allegedly spent by some union officials on personal purchases of luxury goods. For years opponents of school choice for poor children have leapt from one sinking argument to another. All their arguments have now sunk: Choice programs that empower parents to choose religious schools are unconstitutional? Seven consecutive Supreme Court decisions say otherwise. Choice programs take money from public schools? The D.C. program takes not a penny -- the $10 million would be new money. Choice programs skim the best students from the public system? Davis's bill gives priority to students in the District's 15 worst-performing schools. Choice programs lack accountability? The academic progress of participants in the program will be measured against the progress of the students who sought but failed to get any of the 1,300 scholarships. Given all this, why did the D.C. program barely pass? With states' budgets forcing painful cuts, it can be difficult to vote money for D.C. children. Even more important is the fact that teachers unions are especially effective at the state level, where they establish relationships with legislators -- and 233 current representatives and 42 senators are former state legislators. In the Senate committee vote on D.C. school choice, two Democrats, West Virginia's Robert Byrd and California's Dianne Feinstein, supported the program. Mary Landrieu, the Louisiana Democrat who abstained, explained to some disappointed D.C. parents that the maximum grant under the proposed D.C. program -- $7,500 -- would not be enough to send a poor child to the $21,000-a-year private school her children attend. Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter, recently selected by National Review as "the worst Republican senator," showed why by opposing the D.C. program. His challenger in Pennsylvania's Republican primary, Rep. Pat Toomey, says he "definitely" expects conservatives around the country to increase their support for him because of Specter's obedience to the teachers' unions that are already campaigning for him. School choice for poor children is, Boehner says, today's principal civil rights fight. The lottery of life, not choice, determines a child's parents and family situation. There should be choice about schools for children placed by life's lottery in difficult conditions. Otherwise, Boehner says, "It's like saying you can only buy bread in the grocery store closest to your house -- and the government will run the grocery store."