Why not Pennacchio?
At MyDD today, Albert Yee comments on an announcement for a "NetRoots ActBlue" fundraising effort the site is launching:

How about adding Chuck Pennacchio to the list? He's a Progressive in a primary in PA up against a huuuuuuge DINO. Pennacchio's got an Act Blue page up already for linking...

MyDD blogger Matt Stoller's response, in full:

He's not viable.

The thing is, this seems to be more or less completely based on Pennacchio's financial situation, which admittedly looks precarious, despite the fact that I've sent him upwards of $15 a couple of times now.

The further thing is, though, that Pennacchio has pretty excellent positions on most issues I care about, and I would think most issues Stoller and Markos Zuniga* care about. He's solid about the Supreme Court nominees, cares about accuracy in voting and publicly funded election campaigns, and would be an ally for OSHA and labor in the Senate. He's also for a timetable for getting out of Iraq.

And the other thing is that meanwhile, Democratic frontrunner Bob Casey, Jr. seems to be making a career of being (a) former governor Bob Casey's son and (b) as similar as possible to the Pennsylvania's notorious Republican senator Rick Santorum. Like Santorum, Casey is anti-choice, pro death penalty, and for an indefinite stay in Iraq. He appears to say whatever he hopes listeners will want to hear about gay rights. Perhaps worst, Casey came out for confirming Alito the week before the Senate vote -- not just against a filibuster, but for the confirmation. He says he would have voted for Roberts as well.

eRobin ("factesque") has been doggedly pounding the table for Pennacchio for months now; I've sort of watched from the sidelines because, well, I'm not from the state and it hasn't seemed like my place to weigh in. But between the Alito thing and something about Stoller's dismissal, I'm over that. I registered with the site, and left a message, which read in part:

...Let's say Pennachio is a long shot. But so is the whole project of reversing 10 years and more of triangulation, playing it safe, running out the clock, and still losing by a field goal every single time.

It ought to be important to the kind of people reading this site and the kind of people running this site to prefer Pennachio over the kind of Vichy Democrat you just absolutely know Casey is going to be. ...

There was a time when I'd have been more on the Stoller/Kos side of this; focus, husband your resources, don't spread yourself thin. But there's one more thing about Pennacchio: there's reason to believe he'd do better against Santorum with his unequivocal stands than Casey would with his "follow the leader" strategy -- as the Santorum campaign cruelly but accurately described it. A recent Zogby poll actually had Pennachio doing better than Casey in head-to-head contests with Santorum, once voters knew each candidate's positions.

So defeating a play-it-safe, me-too Democrat like Casey -- or at very least trying to give him a good scare -- has to become part of the game plan of outfits like MyDD and dailyKos, too, or they're kidding themselves about being "NetRoots" and about playing a "progressive" role.

The Pennsylvania primaries are on May 16. Check out Pennacchio and Casey, and think about what kind of Democratic Party you'd rather have.



=====
* Zuniga appears to have weighed in on the same comment thread. While Stoller and Zuniga are household names inside the American blogging world, they aren't necessarily well known beyond it; Zuniga is better known as "kos" and runs "daily Kos," one of the bigger liberal/progressive/whatever megasites out there, with people maintaining their own blogs on site, rating systems, and weekly prize drawings for all I know. Stoller helps run MyDD, a site that likes to focus on surveys, campaigns, and political science analysis.
UPDATE, 2/12: Yee discusses the MyDD exchange.
posted by Thomas Nephew at 1:30:00 AM -- |    

 
Looking up helps
Spiral galaxy NGC 1309; image by Hubble Space Telescope in August/September 2005. The link explains that observing a supernova in this galaxy helped confirm the relatively recent finding that the universe is not just expanding, but that the expansion is accelerating.



My God, it's full of stars. posted by Thomas Nephew at 12:30:00 PM -- |    

 
Yes, I suppose that's the difference
Jyllands-Posten, the brave Danish defender of unorthodox free speech, draws the line somewhere after all, the Guardian reports:

Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that have caused a storm of protest throughout the Islamic world, refused to run drawings lampooning Jesus Christ, it has emerged today.

The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.

The cartoons were submitted unsolicited by Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler, who got a letter back from editor Jens Kaiser saying he didn't think his readers would enjoy the cartoons.

But the Jyllands-Posten editor in question, Mr Kaiser, said that the case was 'ridiculous to bring forward now. It has nothing to do with the Muhammad cartoons.

'In the Muhammad drawings case, we asked the illustrators to do it. I did not ask for these cartoons. That's the difference,' he said."

Via Fistful of Euros. We all stick up for the speech we prefer, I guess. Again, I don't dispute the right to choose what to say and what not to say. I do dispute this paper's judgment and good faith. posted by Thomas Nephew at 12:30:00 PM -- |    

 
Heh. Indeed.
I'm Offended (Chris Bertram, Crooked Timber) ---

I’m offended. Those people, by their actions, have demonstrated the essentially corrupt nature of their society and culture. Their behaviour, which all right-minded people should be offended by, should be universally condemned. If anything shows that we are right and they are wrong, this is it. And I call upon all of those who agree with me to take action, while there is still time.

Why [current events] Mean That We Must Support My Politics (jsm, Adequacy: News for Grown-ups) ---

Of course [current events] are a uniquely tragic event, and it is vital that we never lose sight of the human tragedy involved. However, we must also consider if this is not also a lesson to us all; a lesson that my political views are correct. [...] Although what is done can never be undone, the fact remains that if the world were organised according to my political views, this tragedy would never have happened. But we must also not lose sight of the fact that I am right on every significant moral and political issue, and everybody ought to agree with me. Please, I ask you as fellow human beings, vote for the political party which I support, and ask your legislators to support policies endorsed by me, as a matter of urgency.

It would be a fitting memorial.

Taking a Stand (Belle Waring, Crooked Timber) ---

I points the fingerbone of scorn at those inhumanly cruel Republicans who drink puppy blood for breakfast. When I consider the sharp, tiny milk-teeth of those puppies, protruding from gums now white with blood loss, I am filled with a righteous and long-abiding anger. [...]

UPDATE 3: I find it odd that so many Republicans who do not—and in fact have never been accused of—drinking puppy blood felt it necessary to object to my claims. Perhaps each of these people should look in his own heart. No matter how small the number of Republican puppy-blood drinkers is, so long as it is >1, then clearly this “group” should be denounced. I find it difficult to see how any fair-minded individual could object to this.

The Crazification Factor (John Rogers, Kung Fu Monkey): An important political constant is derived ---

John: Hey, Bush is now at 37% approval. I feel much less like Kevin McCarthy screaming in traffic. But I wonder what his base is --

Tyrone: 27%.

John: ... you said that immmediately, and with some authority.

Tyrone: Obama vs. Alan Keyes. Keyes was from out of state, so you can eliminate any established political base; both candidates were black, so you can factor out racism; and Keyes was plainly, obviously, completely crazy. Batshit crazy. Head-trauma crazy. But 27% of the population of Illinois voted for him. They put party identification, personal prejudice, whatever ahead of rational judgement. Hell, even like 5% of Democrats voted for him. That's crazy behaviour. I think you have to assume a 27% Crazification Factor in any population.

Tom Burka (Opinions You Should Have) ---

White House Staff Hit Hard By Human-Animal Hybrid Ban
Chickenhawks at Risk, Among Others

=====
NOTES: Bertram and "Why [current events] ..." via Patrick Nielsen Hayden, whose title introducing them was "A most wondrous Labor-saving Contraption." The bracketed passage originally contained the words "the World Trade Center bombings"; the post was published on 9/12/01. Words not to live by; feel free to show me when I've done so anyway, and I'll wear sackcloth and ashes. In your weird dreams, though. Waring, Kung Fu Monkey via Koufax Most Humorous Post Award post at Wampum. Waring's post was published in August and Rogers' in October, 2005. posted by Thomas Nephew at 9:30:00 PM -- |    

 
Retailers sue Maryland over Fair Share Health Care law
A retail industry association is suing Maryland to overturn the Fair Share Health Care Act, which requires companies with over 10,000 employees to pay at least 8% of payroll in health benefits to workers and/or to a state Medicaid fund. Douglas Tallman of the Montgomery County Gazette reports:

In its U.S. District Court suit, the Retail Industry Leaders Association claims the law violates the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA, a 1974 federal law that leaves all regulation of health benefits to Congress.

Tallman adds that RILA is also claiming that the Maryland law violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution because it allegedly singles out one company (Wal-Mart) for arbitrary treatment.

As noted here at the time, the ERISA argument was also made by the Maryland Chamber of Commerce the week of the January veto override that made the bill law. Legal experts including the Maryland State Attorney General considered the claim weak. In its coverage of the suit, the Baltimore Sun noted:

Attorney General J. Joseph Curran Jr. issued his own advice letter last month, arguing that the Maryland law did not conflict with federal rules because it does not force employers to provide a specific level of health benefits. Rather, it gave companies the option of spending a certain amount on health care or paying a tax to the state.

A 1995 Supreme Court ruling explicitly gave states more discretion in this policy area vis-a-vis ERISA, as long as specific benefits weren't prescribed.

The "singling out" charge has also been popular, though not usually dressed up as an equal protection issue. The argument seems nonsensical to me; the Fair Share bill doesn't target Wal-Mart by name, but by its size, just as different laws and regulations are made to apply to large vehicles than to smaller ones. Developing... posted by Thomas Nephew at 6:29:00 PM -- |    

 
"My answers would be the same"
Gonzales to Senate Judiciary Committee:

Good morning, Chairman Specter, Senator Leahy and members of the committee. I'm pleased to have this opportunity to speak with you.

And let me just add for the record, when Chairman Specter asked me whether I would be willing to go under oath, I did say I would have no objections.

I also said that my answers would be the same, whether or not I was under oath or not.

Not truthful, necessarily, just the same.

Transcript via the Washington Post. posted by Thomas Nephew at 2:12:00 AM -- |    

 
Obligatory cartoon riots statement
Rumors are trickling in that Michelle Malkin et al are on their high horses about the cartoon riots and "the Left's" alleged silence in the face thereof.* Abashed and ashamed, I hasten to draft a reply.

I start from a rather mainstream American position (I think) that Denmark as a nation has nothing to apologize for -- rather the opposite: death threats and embassy arson are the tools of bullies, and there's more than a whiff of orchestration to the outrage on the streets of Muslim countries. Getting past my gut reaction -- *bleep* you -- to attempted intimidation of this sort has been a challenge.

That may be one of the few mainstream positions I share on the subject, though. As I see it, a Danish newspaper published some egregious, slanderous depictions of Mohammed -- and by well understood convention, those he is the symbol of and for -- as a terrorist, for example with a bomb in his turban. That paper does have some apologizing to do, both to those it slandered, and to the Danish people for getting them into a terrible mess -- the more so because its editors apparently did the whole thing just to get over the feeling that they couldn't. "Poor little us, tied hand and foot by our own political correctness -- well, we'll put an end to that!" Let's hope aggrieved Danish scribblers have got all this out of their system for a while.

Still, two subjects I've written about on this blog have given me some pause about this; one is long past, and one quite recent. The first was a British cartoon published in early 2003 that I was quite indignant about (and still am) , which seemed to cleverly edge right up to the infamous "blood libel" against Jews by depicting Ariel Sharon astride the Gaza Strip, eating a Palestinian baby. A difference was that the cartoonist had (almost as much to his discredit as the cartoon itself) constructed an elaborate dodge involving the Spanish painter Goya and the Greek god Saturn -- I kid you not. But on the whole the issues seem similar to me: one is free to utter tasteless speech, but it doesn't deserve praise or much defense (much less honors). And it generally doesn't work, for me, at least, at being either humorous or insightful.

To tell the truth, I felt somewhat similarly about the recent Toles cartoon featuring a Iraq veteran quadruple amputee. I could see what Toles was saying, but it wasn't anywhere near as good as his usual stuff, and that image got in the way a lot, to put it mildly. But I say "somewhat similarly" because in the end, while Toles "objectified" the suffering of wounded veterans, his free speech was pointed "up", so to speak, at those in power: Rumsfeld, not the soldier, was Toles' target.**

By contrast, the British and Danish cartoons' speech was pointed "down" or "sideways," from a comfortable distance (or so they thought) at lesser people who needed to be taught how to think correctly. Put that way, there's still nothing wrong with aiming "downwards" or "sideways" with one's cartoon or other rhetoric, but it doesn't enjoy the same kind of status in my mind that speech aimed "upwards" does.

This is also how I square my relative -- relative -- disapproval of the Danish cartoons with my high approval of Sheehan's T-shirt the other day at the State of the Union speech. While I've come to realize that "Cindy Sheehan" is a charged message all its own -- I'm slow, I know -- I think there was an audacity about her specific message and action that day that deserves praise in its own right, aimed as it was "straight up," at the very heart of the system she questions.

So my upshot is that free speech is always an ideal and a goal, and there are instances of it that I'd absolutely go to the mat for. But the Danish cartoons, on the whole, are not among them; they're too ill-conceived and badly targeted to qualify. The value and point of free speech is when truth is spoken to power, not when slander is coughed up like a hairball.


=====
* Those willing to look could find a great deal of pretty reasonable discussion, in my opinion. There's a good summary at this Mahablog entry, with links to sensible comments by Josh Marshall, Juan Cole, Atrios, and others. It's probably only an update or two shy of including the most interesting reaction I've come across, by tristero, the "other" blogger at Hullabaloo.
** Thus, while I winced at the Toles cartoon, I was furious to read that the Joint Chiefs of Staff saw fit to respond to it as they did. A government of, by, and for the people, when criticized, often has a duty to shut up anyways for reasons that you or I don't: the balance of power is all wrong, the risk of chilling speech is too great. And that goes double, in my view, for officers in the armed forces. posted by Thomas Nephew at 1:01:00 AM -- |    

 
Feds to Gulf coast: drop dead
Well, except for the garbage removal and mobile home companies, anyway. Writing in "Balkinization," Stephen Griffin explains why the $85 billion figure Bush touted in and before the State of the Union address doesn't impress Louisianans:

First, this is money authorized, not spent. Second, it is for all the states affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, not just Louisiana and certainly not just New Orleans. Third, about $20 billion is for tax credits, mostly for business, which are of dubious value given the most substantial problem facing the state – housing. Fourth, a substantial fraction of the money goes to FEMA simply to pay the ordinary expenses of running the agency. Fifth, the rest is largely devoted to three necessary, but not very productive, items: (1) picking up debris; (2) fixing some important infrastructure like bridges and roads; and (3) temporary housing. The last point is important. What New Orleans and Louisiana need is a solution to the problem of the vast number of destroyed and damaged permanent housing, not temporary trailers (which, for New Orleans, haven’t arrived yet). And eventually New Orleans in particular will need some funding to make any local plan happen.

Griffin draws attention to the February Brookings Institute Katrina Index, whose authors Bruce Katz, Matt Fellowes, and Mia Mabanta observe:

Hundreds of thousands of households continue to face major obstacles restarting their lives. Nearly 750,000 households remain displaced by Katrina, of which about 650,000 are receiving rental assistance, or about $800 a month. Mortgage delinquency rates skyrocketed between the second and third quarter of the calendar year. In the state of Louisiana, for instance, nearly one out of every four loans is now 30 or more days past due.

Griffin supports Louisiana Republican Congressman Richard Baker's bill (HR 4100) to create a Louisiana Recovery Corporation that would purchase and redevelop ruined properties, providing their owners with with capital to rebuild, and helping the devastated areas rebound more quickly. Specifically,

...the Corporation shall, after consultation with State and local officials and pursuant to agreement that eligible properties are not likely to be redeveloped without Corporation assistance, locate and acquire real property (commercial and residential) in such a manner and subject to such conditions that, upon the consummation of any acquisition of real property securing a mortgage loan—
(1) the mortgagee’s debt shall be considered paid in full by the mortgagor; and
(2) all title and interest in the real property securing such mortgage loan passes to the Corporation.

...with the original owner retaining the right of first refusal once the property is up for sale.

But the Bush administration opposes the plan; in a February 2 Washington Post op-ed, federal Katrina rebuilding coordinator Donald Powell first mischaracterized the plan -- it calls for offering property owners prices in line with the expected expenses and returns on investment, not automatically the full pre-Katrina value -- and then argued that the LRC lacks adequate state and local plans to work with:

State and local leaders have made some progress in creating recovery plans: Mississippi is starting to implement one, and in Louisiana, New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin's commission has submitted a recovery proposal, while those of other parish leaders are underway. The state should pull all these plans together, identify gaps and overlaps and develop the tools to implement the strategy.

This "wait until all the ducks are in a row" objection is hard to square with the next one -- that setting up a federal bureaucracy will take too much time. More to the point, to make New Orleans wait while Lower Bayou Parish gets its own redevelopment plans ready makes little to no sense -- New Orleans is the beating heart of the region, and it's of paramount importance that it get on its feet (and behind Category 5 levees) as quickly as possible.

Powell's real objection comes last, and not surprisingly it's frankly ideological:

I do not believe making the government a broker and landlord for the region will ensure a healthy long-term recovery. Doing so -- at a cost of up to $30 billion with an option to renew, and little chance of recouping those funds -- would destroy free-market mechanisms.

First, "free markets" function best once everything else is taken care of -- infrastructure, security, and governance chief among them. More fundamentally, free-market mechanisms are not an end in themselves, they're a means to an end -- as is the federal government when a catastrophe hits. At any rate, the LRC would not be a permanent agency, but would be authorized to operate for ten years. Powell's arguments against Baker's plan do not seem persuasive to me, and what Griffin describes of the federal efforts to date leaves me -- and apparently many Gulf coast residents -- underwhelmed.

Meanwhile, the clock is ticking on even more urgent problems. On Friday, the Katrina Information Network (KIN) warned that "Deadlines on short-term housing are coming up next week without real long-term solutions," and called for measures to help people caught in that crunch:

Contractors providing outreach and referral services must be monitored and held to clear standards. Housing and rebuilding services, including temporary housing like hotels, must be made to honor their agreements. Those that evict survivors for profit should be penalized and prevented from access to federal contracts in the future. [Congress must make] public housing available and eliminating rental price gauging. We want a long-term housing solution with more community control of property decisions.

Most importantly, Congress must act now to provide viable, long-term solutions for a comprehensive recovery that does not undermine the critical safety net upon which millions of Americans depend.

The Louisiana Recovery Corporation seems like one of the right steps in that direction to me. You might consider adding that to the message KIN would like you to send your representative and senators. posted by Thomas Nephew at 5:30:00 PM -- |    

 
Cool internet stuff
fd's flickr toys --- "Billboard", "Captioner" and much, much more! You don't have to have a flickr account for Billboard and Captioner to work, by the way.

BlogsLikeThis --- According to this site, as of July 2005 my blog was most like the Poor Man, David Corn, and TPM Cafe Coffeehouse, The BM Rant, Life Like Weeds, and The Tattered Coat.* I'll take that in a heartbeat.

The site assigned "communities" based on shared keyword patterns, probably something like the "word cloud" business I posted about a couple of days ago; my particular community apparently shared an obsession about a focus on Rove and Plame that month. I write "assigned" and "shared" because the programmers sampled blogs during July, 2005 only. So if you started after that -- or changed course drastically -- you're out of luck.

Rijksmuseum Widget --- And Widgets, generally, which I for one hadn't heard of before. Widgets are little programs that fetch information from your computer or the Internet, depending on what they're for (weather forecast, photo display, whatnot) and what you prefer, and put it in a little display on your desktop. The Rijksmuseum one fetches a "painting of the day" from that museum's electronic archive and lets you learn a bit about it if you like. Seems like it's potentially a painless art history course, and some nice images on my desktop at any rate.



=====
* "Tattered Coat" is a Koufax "Most Deserving" award nominee -- who stopped blogging last November. I assume people don't need help finding the Poor Man, David Corn, or TPM Cafe; that sentence was getting a little overlinked as it was.
NOTES: Rijksmuseum Widget via marbel, flickr toys via Jens Scholz. posted by Thomas Nephew at 3:24:00 PM -- |    

 
"The document that inspires their barbarism"
I often meditate on what a spectacular jerk, hack, and/or fool Charles Krauthammer can be, so I've already taken up this pronouncement on Guantanamo once before:

Our scrupulousness extends even to providing them with their own Korans, which is the only reason alleged abuses of the Koran at Guantanamo ever became an issue. That we should have provided those who kill innocents in the name of Islam with precisely the document that inspires their barbarism is a sign of the absurd lengths to which we often go in extending undeserved humanity to terrorist prisoners.

Previously, I focused on Krauthammer's harmful slander in claiming that the Koran (or Qur'an, as you prefer) per se inspired terrorist barbarism.* But it turns out that Koran-provisioning at Guanatanamo has been anything but scrupulous, even if you throw out the Koran-flushing allegation, and that the barbarisms inspired have been our own.

The evidence comes via a new book by James Yee and Aimee Molloy, For God and Country: Faith and Patriotism under Fire. James Yee is an American of Asian descent who converted to Islam shortly before serving in the Gulf War. Yee was eventually recruited to be a Muslim chaplain, and initially enjoyed nothing but praise from superior officers for his work. That would change at Guantanamo.

Yee's mistake there was to intercede on Muslim prisoners' behalf, eventually drafting an SOP (standard operating procedure) governing the handling of Korans, which was always a sore point with prisoners and, initially, merely a clueless point with their wardens.

But -- as with so much else in detainee treatment -- guidelines in the hands of people like Lt. General Geoffrey Miller became documents to be gamed, rather than principles to be observed in spirit as well as letter. Guards told never to touch the Koran itself were also given free rein to knock it out of the slings provided to store the book in the bare cells of Guantanamo.

Prisoners started refusing to have the Koran at all under such circumstances -- but that wasn't an option, either. The Army insisted: Korans in the cells -- but more as a humiliation and a pressure point than as genuine religious tolerance. Writing for the New York Review of Books ("The Strange Case of Chaplain Yee"), Joseph Lelyveld (on whose report this account is based) reported what Yee saw:

A detainee who refused to accept a Koran in his cell would be subject to what was known as "a forced cell extraction" by an IRF (for "initial response force")—six to eight MPs in riot protection gear (plastic masks, chest protectors, shin guards, shields) who would burst in on a cell to subdue a problem detainee in what was commonly known as an IRFing. Here is Yee's description of these stampedes:

After they suited up, they formed a huddle and chanted in unison.... Then they rushed the block, one behind the other.... The sound of their heavy boots hammered down the steel corridor and their chants ricocheted off the tin ceiling.... The IRF team stopped at the detainee's cell.... The team leader in front drenched the prisoner with pepper spray and then opened the cell door. The others charged in and rushed the detainee.... The point was to get him to the ground as quickly as possible, with whatever means necessary.... When it was over, there was a certain excitement in the air. The guards were pumped.... They high-fived each other and slammed their chests together, like professional basketball players...an odd victory celebration for eight men who took down one prisoner.

Once "extracted," the recalcitrant prisoner was placed in isolation in an MSU (for "maximum security unit") until he was ready to accept a Koran. What are we to make of this struggle in which alleged Islamic "terrorists" refuse to accept Korans from their insistent captors until they've been pounded into submission?^[*] And how, the chaplain rightly asks, was it "good for the mission?"

As is well known, Yee eventually came under suspicion of being an Al Qaeda ringleader, and was held in the same brig housing Jose Padilla. But all suspicions were answered or proved trumped-up at best: calls he made to Damascus were to his wife, a Palestinian with family there; alleged secret documents he shouldn't have had were never produced. Eventually the prosecution descended to the level of alleged adultery -- also a false allegation, Yee claims, but one that wrecked his marriage.**

The government's treatment of Chaplain Yee seems at this time to be an example of how official rot and corruption spreads beyond the initial infection site to attack those who come into contact with it. It also serves as confirmation of my initial concern with Krauthammer's statement -- that we are systematically alienating the very Americans (Muslim Americans) who might have a lot to offer as we conduct a long struggle with terrorists professing a debased variety of Islam.

Meanwhile, as Lelyveld concludes:

We didn't need Chaplain Yee to remind us that Guantánamo has become an embarrassment. What this former insider shows us is that it's a place of misery day in day out, year in year out.

We shouldn't be surprised. But we can be sure the prisoners still have their Korans.

=====
* Passing over, by the way, the implied but false claim that all Guantanamo prisoners are terrorists
** The adultery charge seems to be levelled quite often against military officers who don't toe the Rumsfeld Pentagon line on detainee issues; see this item by Scott Horton at Balkinization.
EDIT, 2/7: free rein, not free reign. posted by Thomas Nephew at 12:51:00 AM -- |