Sports-University Incest and Greed

This was the headline on the front page of the sports section of the 23 June Lexington Herald-Leader: A.D. Celebrates Partnership. Accompanying the article is a mile-wide-smile picture of the athletic director at the University of Kentucky and the caption “Mitch Barnhart’s department will contribute $3 million to scholarships.” Try not to gag. It was Barnhart who fired the basketball coach two seasons ago…oh yes…and gave him $3 million for the privilege. Some partnership! Everything carrying the UK name belongs to the university, so Barnhart wasted $3 million that could have gone for academic scholarships three years ago.

According to the article, UK President Capiluto asked Barnhart if he could “do something,” presumably about the financial constraints into which UK is currently mired, as are virtually all universities. On paper, the athletic department is somehow disconnected from the university and has its own budget but is the tail that wags the dog. Reading between the lines, one suspects Capiluto made it plain to Barnhart that he was not mincing words, if indeed the two even if had that conversation.

UK joins most universities, especially in the Southeast Conference, in corruption so palpable as to bounce off the walls. Capiluto began a change last fall when he persuaded the heretofore athletic-rubber-stamp board of trustees to dissolve the UK Athletic Association, over which Barnhart has been the emperor since he was hired in 2003, with UK paying off $100,000 to his former employer, Oregon State, since Barnhart walked out on his contract. Surprised? Contracts mean nothing in the world of sports.

The athletic department is awash with funds owing to the fact that college/university games have become entertainment gold-mines, with millions of TV dollars, as per conference rules, flowing to the universities or their “disconnected,” front organizations such as the former UKAA. Capiluto may have decided to gradually do what a former Vanderbilt University president did a few years ago, make the athletic department directly responsible to him, not some organization of fat-cats and grossly overpaid athletic department parasites out to milk the system for all it can.

The UK athletic department has 167 employees, give or take a few at any one time. University presidents are often complicit in the down-and-dirty game. For instance, just before he retired and without a word to the board of trustees in 2011, former UK president Lee Todd raised Barnhart’s base salary from $475,000 to $600,000 (for losing $3 million?), a whopping increase of 26% overnight and “extended” his contract by three years to 2019, worded, ironically, so that if Barnhart should be let go by Capiluto he would be well-paid (could be millions) for the trouble.

As a further example of corruption, the board of trustees awarded Todd $825,138 cash when he stepped down in June 2011, about half of it in the form of a contract-provision “retention bonus” (he stayed on the job for ten years). This is the way business is done in the universities, much if not most of the shakedown accounted for vaguely as bonuses, no matter how poorly the job has been done…the good ole boy network in full sleaze. Oh yes, Todd then went on staff at a cool $162,000 per year.

According to the Lexington Herald-Leader of 18 June, Todd’s predecessor stayed on for two years as a fundraiser of sorts at a cool $265,000, with about the only record being a record of expenses, and then stayed on from2003 until this month at $212,484 per year as a tenured associate professor at the Bluegrass Community and Technical College and [supposedly] researching for a book with the dean of libraries. It’s not known here if he taught any classes. One wonders if a book will ever make the scene. The H-L: “The university has struggled at times to quantify the specifics of Wethington's work since he left the president’s office.” Yeah!

The base salary of both the football and basketball coach is $400,000, with the former actually raking in $1.7 million and the latter closer to $3.7 million, each doing endorsements, talk-shows, etc., for extra money. According to USA Today (10 November 2009), on the UK football team in 2009 there were some nine(?) assistant coaches making a total of $1,946,213, the least paid at $159,625 and the best paid at $323,460, with the average at $216,245. Current figures are hard to come by but they doubtlessly are much higher.

Presently, there are also a grad assistant, student assistant and three video analysts, for a total of 15 staffers to handle 85 full-scholarship football athletes, though only eleven can be on the field at any one time. The basketball coach has three assistants, a special assistant (whatever that is), a strength coach and a trainer. The prime responsibility of probably most assistant coaches is recruiting. After all, how long does it take an already well-trained linebacker to learn how to knock down a wide receiver and, hopefully, give him a concussion in the bargain?

President Capiluto has already learned that UK, like all SEC schools but Vanderbilt, is always to be suspected of athletic-department skullduggery in finances, recruiting. Presidents usually have the prerogative of hiring the athletic director. The Todd-Barnhart institutional incest and greed are obvious at UK.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

President Obama’s tenure up to this point may well be noted by the historians for primarily three things: his misunderstanding or willful violation of both the intent and substance of the U.S Constitution; total ignorance of or willful manipulation concerning economics; and attempting to govern with the weakest, most incompetent Congress in history, in both its terms.  Obama’s contempt for the latter, occasioned by an unbelievable personal arrogance and animus, is about the only thing that has been transparent during his presidency.

Obama’s airtight, impeachable offense occurred in March 2011 when he by executive order, only, preempted Congress’s constitutional responsibility concerning war-declaration and apparently willfully violated the War Powers Act, as well.  The republican-dominated House could have, with little preparation-time needed, voted to impeach him.  He would not have been convicted and expelled from office by the democrat-controlled Senate, just as Clinton wasn’t when he was impeached, but the House should have taken a stand.  It stood down, perhaps fearing that such action would have been seen as politically or racially motivated.

The War Powers Act has a number of provisions but its main thrust is that no military action can be taken by the president unless the offending nation poses an immediate threat to the United States.  Libya posed no threat to this nation or any other nation, with its 76,000 troops and total population two million less than that of New York City.  Indeed, Qaddafi agreed to dismantle his weapons program in December 2003, with verification by the U.S.

Libya was/is 97% Muslim officially but has not been a serious terrorism-threat to this country since the 1980s, notably then by the 1986 bombing of a discotheque in Berlin and the downing of PanAm 103 over Scotland in 1988.  In 1986, ten days after the Berlin bombing, President Reagan ordered the bombing of targets in Libya.  Indeed, former headman Qaddafi warned Obama that al Qaeda was HIS enemy as well as this country’s.  It turns out that he was right.

So…why doesn’t Romney make the Libya issue front and center as he battles for the presidency?  Like the other republican candidates, except Ron Paul, of course, he was for doing-in Qaddafi even though the facts, as mentioned above, obtained during the Primary season.  Actually, the candidates were all over the map concerning Qaddafi and had no better excuse for doing anything than Obama had.

Romney brought himself to say ultimately that he was for going after Qaddafi but that the decision officially should have been made by Congress as per the Constitutional requirement concerning a declaration of war (or even according to the War Powers Act) and not as an executive order by the president.  Of course, Obama would deny that he gave an executive order but as a practical matter he did just that.  He would also deny that he precipitated an act of war against a sovereign nation but that’s precisely what he did.

The consensus seems to be that Obama acceded to the pressure for attacking Libya that was brought by three women – State Secretary Clinton, UN Ambassador Susan Rice and special assistant to the president and member of the NSC Samantha Power – on the basis of Qaddafi’s being a mean man who would kill all his citizens if he thought he had to…sort of like Syrian strongman Bashar Assad currently.  Clinton lately has been stamping her foot like a three-year-old and screaming that Assad has to go but she’s about as convincing and silly as Tweety Bird.

The consensus, mainly formed in the mainstream media, which is virtually a propaganda arm of the administration, may be the result of attempting to keep the onus for the Libyan bloodletting off Obama’s back, since his decision was dumb at best or criminal at worst.  Let the ladies take the heat, but blame them benignly since their motives were pure as the driven snow.  Hogwash!

The president, especially with the economy in the tank and unemployment remaining high, needed a diversion that could do two things: get the citizens’ minds off the recession, still in full bloom in March 2011 (and still is), and demonstrate his macho side, i.e., kill some folks and break some things.  Libya, without any sponsors, was the perfect patsy since it had no serious defenses and a military manpower quotient that was near zilch, especially when compared to other nations in the Muslim world.  The ladies had nothing to do with it…it was Obama’s show.

Mitt Romney could fly with this subject but he’s had virtually nothing to say, never mind his approach during the Primary season.  The technicalities of the Libya fiasco (does anyone know who’s in charge there now?) are totally unimportant.  The important aspect is twofold: (1) the Libya “event” was constitutionally illegal and (2) decent American military personnel were ordered to kill innocent Libyans.  Bombs and missiles are not addressed like a postcard.  They tend to kill everyone in the vicinity of their use, or their mistaken use…and did, even in residential areas.

Romney is obsessed with the economy, about which he may or may not have a clue.  Obama is obsessed with his reelection and certainly does NOT have a clue.  Romney could point a finger at the president and ask about Syria, where the murdering of citizens by the government is front-page daily news and infinitely worse than anything that happened in Libya by Qaddafi.  Romney could ask if Obama intends to set up a “no-fly zone/killing field” in Syria and then “lead NATO from behind,” despite Syria’s sponsors – Russia, China.

This makes too much sense…won’t happen, even in the hardball politics of an election year.

And so it goes.

Jim Clark

Romney & Obama’s “Achilles Heel!”

Newspaper's Race-mongering Continues

University of Kentucky President Eli Capiluto took office about a year ago and inherited the same mess endemic to practically all education institutions from public schools right through the universities, to wit, increased expenses coupled with recession-driven cutbacks of governmental funding. He’s now in the process of making the often painful adjustments that should have been initiated years ago. Instead, the former administration and trustees seemed too mesmerized by basketball to see the academic problem.

From the Obama “stimulus,” UK received some $38.5 million over the last two years that was supposed to create vast numbers of new jobs and improve the economy, neither of which has been accomplished. The money simply represented badly needed cash-flow. Now, the chickens have come home to roost and the problem has to be faced squarely.

In a recent message to university personnel, Capiluto explained the problem and enumerated steps to be taken because of it, as well as indicating immediate personnel-reductions amounting to 130 losses of jobs and the non-filling of 164 vacant positions that will help alleviate it. The cuts were made across the board in as fair a way as possible but with the faculty kept intact.

The Lexington Herald-Leader newspaper, which has made deep personnel cuts itself, predictably chose to make this circumstance into a front-page race issue since pension-eligible 65-year-old Chester Grundy, for more than 30 years the director of the UK Martin Luther King Cultural Center, was impacted, though, of course, with the golden parachute provided by the retirement system. Nine members of the administrative/executive/managerial staff, who were at least equal in rank with Grundy, were also laid off but they didn’t make the front page.

The newspaper mentioned that nine of those laid off were within a year of retirement but neglected to mention that they may be granted leaves until their retirement date so they will lose no benefits. Strangely, since it actually neutralizes the racism-thing, the paper messed-up and indicated the ethnicity of those being terminated. Eighty percent are white but only 7.7% are black and just 1.5%, Asian. Nationally, blacks make up about 13% of the population. The paper didn’t mention that UK has a department of African-American studies involving 18 staff and teachers.

The paper cited remarks by two UK graduates, whose Lexington experience didn’t seem to ruin them, one in a letter to Capiluto, though apparently also sent to the paper, and the other in a blog. Both are African-Americans and now professors, the former at Brooklyn College and the latter, Boyce Watkins, at Syracuse University. Watkins wrote, “he [Grundy] is an intelligent and conscientious black man, which is an academic felony on campuses like the University of Kentucky.” The paper should have considered this sophomoric bit of rubbish from a black-racist beneath contempt but apparently thought it was important. Watkins wrote the book, “What if George Bush were a Black Man?.” Nuff said!

The reporter/commentator (or somebody at the paper) interviewed Watkins by phone and quoted the professor as claiming that either UK or Lexington or both (she didn’t say) “was deeply committed to being on the wrong side of history.” Watkins, of course, knows what the right side of history is but he didn’t define it. Neither did the reporter. Indeed, one wonders how history can have two sides – right and wrong. History has nothing – it just is. Watkins knows, though, because he’s discovered that UK is on its wrong side and deeply means to be there. What hogwash! Watkins advertises himself on the Internet as a “Great Black Speaker.” Just call for fee information…when you stop laughing.

Grundy reckoned, according to the paper, that UK focuses on a multicultural agenda that doesn’t have much accountability for past wrongs. What wrongs? Whose wrongs? This is the kind of race-baiting that the community doesn’t need. If Grundy, made eminently successful by UK, was referring to slavery or the pre-1960s era before the rights-legislation and blaming the current generation for either, he was spouting the same old racist taunts to white people who have bent over backwards since the 1950s to practically make African-Americans a privileged class. The result has been disastrous to the black community.

For her part, the reporter/commentator claimed that UK “has had an uneasy relationship with Kentucky’s black community,” and gave as an example, most famously, that a former basketball coach, long since departed, was reluctant to recruit black players. This is an example of how the paper has lost no opportunities to foment racial strife for decades. Dredging-up something like that, especially since there are some actually compelling reasons for tension not just in Lexington but throughout the country, is banal if not childish.

The paper’s African-American publisher is the one man, because of his ethnicity, who could most justifiably put a stop to the paper’s decades-long attempt to make race an issue in Lexington. Instead, he most likely will join the pressure-group that will set out to make Capiluto, now a front-page goat, rehire Grundy…but no one else. Sad!

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

The Richard Land Affair

Much has been made in the media of the “Richard Land Affair.” Land is the head honcho, beginning in 1988, of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, with offices in Nashville and Washington, D.C. According to its Web-site, the ERLC “is dedicated to addressing social and moral concerns and their implications on public policy issues from City Hall to Congress.”

A graduate of Princeton University, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary and Oxford University in England (Ph.D), Land picked up some political experience as an administrative assistant to Texas Governor William Clements in the late 1980s. The media firestorm was precipitated by remarks he made on his 31 March radio show, in which he called African-American leaders such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton "race mongers" and "racial ambulance chasers" who are politicizing Trayvon Martin’s murder by George Zimmerman on 26 February in Sanford, Florida.

Land also indicated that young black men are understandably considered threatening since statistically they are more threatening than a white man to do harm. His statistics-reference probably had to do with the prison population of young black men, which is inordinately large compared to their overall population-percentage.

Land has apologized for the incident, of course, including for the fact that he plagiarized his comments from a column in the Washington Times. A prolific writer, he simply may have neglected to give the proper attribution through negligence. His radio program has been cancelled by the ERLC trustee executive committee.

As both a citizen and a Baptist, I inveighed heavily against the ERLC back in the day, figuring neither the Southern Baptist Convention nor any other denomination had any business messing in politics and also resenting the fact that one man, Richard Land, could speak for all Baptists about anything. The current brouhaha regarding the Martin-thing is yet another opportunity for ridicule to be heaped upon the denomination, as it has been before in Land’s appearances on TV talk-shows such as the former Larry King Live.

Having said that, I believe the plagiarism charge is the only one that holds any credibility. His remarks concerning the actions of Obama and others in fomenting racial upheaval was spot-on. Al Sharpton is best-known for his Tawana Brawley hoax, for which he was successfully sued. Jesse Jackson is best-known for using his organization’s hundreds-of-thousands-of-dollars to support his mistress and their “love-child.” These are the guys who made a 14-carat circus out of the Martin-affair and then got out of Dodge. Their moral bona fides were/are nonexistent.

When the president, without knowing any facts, solemnly intoned that if he had a son the boy would be a Trayvon Martin look-alike, he pushed the envelope too far. That remark reminded of his 2009 comment that, without his knowing any facts, the Cambridge police (specifically a white policeman) acted stupidly. Both instances involved race-baiting and were beneath contempt. Even Obama finally got it – or somebody in his mélange did – and he invited the policeman down to D.C. for a beer with him and Veep Biden, an incredible bit of hypocrisy.

The National African American Fellowship (about 3,400 predominantly black churches in the SBC) got in the usual snit regarding the need for an apology but Fred Luter, an African American pastor expected to become the SBC president this month, magnanimously spoke out in Land’s defense, another way of saying that Land had it right.

The SBC 1995 official resolution offering an “apology” for slavery, besides being wrongheaded since all the pre-Civil War SBCers had been long dead, was scorned by the head honchos of the African-American denominations. They knew that a person can’t apologize for something he didn’t do, which is what the naïve Baptist leadership tried to do.

The ERLC has outlived its usefulness, assuming it ever existed. It reminds of an organization initiated in September 2003 called the Clergy Network and later called the Clergy Network for National Leadership Change. It was a "527" organization, meaning that it was not tax-exempt. Its head was Albert Pennybacker of Lexington, Ky., a retired minister and former National Council of Churches honcho, and its headquarters was in the nation's capital. Sitting on its National Committee was James M. Dunn, former executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, an organization dedicated to the "separation of church and state."

As explained on its web-site and indicated by its name, the CNNLC was formed for one purpose only, the defeat of President George Bush. It was made up of ministers and partly funded by the infamous billionaire anti-American, George Soros. It was a prime example of clerical mischief-making. Serving with Dunn was…yep…the Rev. Jesse Jackson. The ministers furnished the prime example of exponential hypocrisy.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

Obama's Impromptu Press Conference

Most people, if asked what would tee them off more than anything else, would probably respond with something like “to be treated as a moron,” i.e., gullible to the point of ridiculousness. I was surfing the TV during some free time the other morning and happened upon President Obama giving what was termed an impromptu press conference. There likely was nothing impromptu about it since he said nothing new, at least while I was noticing, therefore bearing no expediency for a special session.

The “conference” was simply a campaign gimmick. The president seemed to look constantly at notes while he was drawing out his usual long a-n-n-n-ds, the clear implication being that many if not most/all reporters’ questions were planted. It was a press-secretary-Carney moment.

About the most profound thing I heard him say was simply that the nation has short-term and long-term problems, a stating of the obvious, to be sure, but one wonders if he believes most people don’t know that and that the enlightened must help the peasant-class understand. Actually, everyone and every institution has short-term and long-term problems.

The thing that rankles even now was his statement that the private sector of the economy was doing just fine. The unemployment rate has just officially (Washington-figured) increased to 8.2%, though the actual rate is much higher. This rate indicates that the private sector is operating nowhere near capacity, else there would be something close to full-employment.

This circumstance means that millions of Americans are not working and paying their taxes to the government, which is operating on funds borrowed from mostly China, so the private sector is not just fine and contributes zilch by its niggardliness vis-à-vis the taxes not paid by millions of unemployed workers the much needed funds to stabilize the economic situation. That’s economics 101, easily understood by high school seniors. Obama’s solution: higher taxes.

The president went to some lengths to explain that the happenings in Europe represent a huge problem for the U.S. economy since Europeans are not buying as much U.S.-made stuff as usual. European banks are in jeopardy, the unemployment-rate is high (something like 25% or more in Spain, for instance) and the president seemed to be saying that European economies need a stimulus plan, something every knowledgeable American knows was a complete failure in this country.

The strangest thing perhaps was his referencing his great accomplishments of 2009-10 (stimulus stuff & healthcare) without blinking an eye. Remember the “cash for clunkers” and the takeover and bankrupting of GM and Chrysler, thus paying back the unions. The nation is still in recession though the administration insists that it was over long ago. Former president Clinton recently suggested that the recession is not over.

The president mentioned that the country is now part of the global economy and, apparently, must sort of “roll with the punches,” good and bad. The nation has been part of the global economy since the time of its inception…nothing new there. Remember the rum/crops/slave trade of the 1700s, with the 13 former colonies in big business with Europe, Africa and throughout the Caribbean? Nothing has changed since then, so it’s an insult to the intelligence to be constantly reminded that other countries are to be blamed for what happens in this country.

The president specifically pointed out what to him, at least, is the big problem, to wit, that state and local governments are not hiring enough people and thus lowering the unemployment rate. This is the patently socialistic approach to the economy, i.e., that the state should be the primary employer. He specifically mentioned policemen and firemen and perhaps teachers and triggered remembrance of his 2008 campaign position that there should be a national police force commensurate to the military, in other words some 32,000 policemen on average for each state.

What he didn’t mention is the fact that the local/state governments took their share of the federal “stimulus” windfall borrowed from China and dumped it in their general funds because they were broke. Now, they’re cutting back on employment, not hiring, thus triggering lessened tax-revenue, meaning that the stimulus meant absolutely nothing as far as the economy (jobs) is concerned…money down the proverbial rat-hole, with no end to the colossal drain in sight…at least as long as Obama is in office. Obameconomics is a killer.

At bottom is the fact that stagnation will remain as long as entrepreneurs are convinced Obama was telling the truth in 2008, i.e., that he intended to “transform” this country, which has always been an unbelievably successful capitalist society, so the only transformation available is to the opposite economic model – socialism/communism, thus certain death for the American way of life.

Obama has materially delivered the disastrous “change” he promised in 2008. Now, a reverse-change is in order but it will not materialize – or at least quickly – unless Obama is turned out of office and the business of at least one house of Congress is overwhelmingly conducted by republicans.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

POTUS & Image-makeover

Dear President Obama:

First, a word of commendation for your clarifying your remark the other day about “Polish Concentration Camps.” It was a gem of wisdom to imply that the teleprompter was prepared that day by Vice President Biden or one of his aides, not that any sane person would have thought a person of your superior intellect made the remark, in the first place.

In light of your recent pronouncement that homosexuals should marry each other if so inclined, I’m offering the services, as CEO, of the Institute for Modifying All Governmental Entities (IMAGE, for short). Since there has been much backlash over this new position (predictably brought on by Biden the Blabbermouth, who didn’t see the November picture), IMAGE can guide you as you approach the election in the bravest manner possible, explaining that your thinking has “evolved,” something most people won’t do…either thinking or evolving, except, of course, as from ape to politician – little joke there.

The designer arm of IMAGE that will be operative for you is called Exigent Variances Offsetting Lurid Victimization of Erotic Reverse-Sexers (EVOLVERS, for short). It’s the business of EVOLVERS to make sure you do not appear as acting stupidly, as you rightly said police sometimes do in Cambridge. The argument will center on the sexual aspect of “diversity,” of course, the current guru/god of everything from academia to penitentiaries, where inmates are said to understand sexual diversity perfectly, i.e., that every form of human behavior, even if it is animalistic in nature, must be granted validity. This is called fairness, as you know. You exhibited this most nobly and fairly in your apology tour in 2009, inviting everyone in the world to ridicule and despise this nation for being so bad.

There are many people, especially in the South and especially among those squirrelly Baptists, who consider homosexual behavior unseemly, even sinful, though it is no longer illegal, even in Texas. Anachronistically, they insist that body orifices and appendages are meant by God for things like talking, singing, eating and exhausting detritus…and nothing else. The department of IMAGE that will help you is the Bureau Legitimizing Alternative Same-sex Parenting and Handling Errant Misbehaving Exes (known, of course as BLASPHEME).

Since homosexual promiscuity is consensually deemed by the anthropologists to be of inordinate proportions (also true for common-law marriages), the in-and-out appearances of same-sex parents can be traumatic for children and even sometimes dangerous for the parents, especially in the “legal-carry” states. Cuckolded straight hubbies could once just slap the old lady around but a cuckolded “partner” might beat the other “partner” to death or just shoot him. BLASPHEME prepares materials that validate the use of the body in any old way, never mind God’s design, and materials for explaining the whole hard-to-understand situation to the children.

Since technical help is needed in this unnatural and heretofore implausible setup, IMAGE provides the program, Management Accruing to Reverse Roles Inculcating Arrangements for Gender Establishment, or MARRIAGE, by its acronym. Most kids think in terms of mom-and-dad, not dad-and-dad or mom-and-mom. Partner-and-partner doesn’t sound very family-friendly, so what’s a kid to do, especially when asked on school questionnaires who his father and mother are? Partner-1 and partner-2 don’t sound right since nobody wants to be number two, with the kids perhaps obeying Partner-1 and dissing number-two. You and A-G Holder need to know the answers. IMAGE can help with this and other matters such as in how to decide which partner will be cloned.

On the basis of the heterosexual divorce rate of about 50%, the homosexual divorce rate will probably run to 85% or so – that promiscuity thing. IMAGE’s arm in this area is the Department for Instituting Various Options Regarding Concupiscent Errors, or DIVORCE, for short. The options, of course, have to do with property, custody of children, alimony, child-support, just as in the case of straights. Since partners may not know who-is-who (no mom or dad stuff), sharp lawyers may easily confuse them, not to mention that the agreements may not hold in any other state. You and A-G Holder need to assign proper appellations to the partners, something like accommodating the partner concept to the natural order of things.

MARRIAGE and DIVORCE can help with these latter problems and has prepared materials designed for marriages, courtroom and family-court appearances, protective orders in the case of an overzealous partner that cover everything from Saturday-night-specials to Sherman tanks, and suggesting who moves out and who stays. Since everything is eventually litigated in this country, Barney Frank and Bill Clinton, both lawyers, have agreed to head up these departments, the former account his orientation and the latter for the brilliant discovery of what IS is, vital to legal matters.

Your evolution in three short years from mom-dad – only – to dad-dad and mom-mom indicates your brilliance but also has its problems. I hope to hear from you soon.

Respectfully,
B. Appropriate Self, CEO
IMAGE

And so it goes.
Jim Clark