Obama Supporter Can’t Name Any Obama Accomplishments
Hat tip Real Debate.
HAHAHA!! “Senator Obama inspires . . . lays out solutions” How can he lay out solutions if he doesn’t accomplish anything?????
Posted by Brandon on February 21, 2008 at 1333 hrs
Well, I believe that he wrote and introduced the World Poverty Act, which I believes has the potential to increase spending by $865 billions over 10 years. It will possibly commit the US to allocate .7% of GDP to fight world poverty.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1342 hrs
The local media have been having a lot of fun with this. Kirk Watson is the Texas state senator from Austin. He’s actually handling it fairly gracefully, with a good deal of self-deprecating humor. There are a lot of deer in the headlights jokes going around. Here’s the statement his office put out:
http://www.kirkwatson.com/media/whats-new/2008/02/20/msnbc-and-me
I particularly liked his line about his “stunning televised defeat in “Stump the Chump.”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1359 hrs
Haha the press release from kirk watson is actually quite humorous. interesting way to spin it, for sure.
Posted by Brandon on February 21, 2008 at 1404 hrs
My friends in Texas are also telling me that this clip is everywhere down there. It is all over the blogs and I myself have recieved it on email numerous times.
Might be a problem for Obama, then again, nothing seems to phase his supporters, so maybe not.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1413 hrs
nothing seems to phase his supporters, so maybe not.
I don’t think his supporters care what he as accomplished or what he hasn’t.
I think they think he’s going to make their life better.
I think they think when he’s elected all their problems are going to be solved. By the government.
As far as accomplishments go. I’d for a nobody with no accomplishments as long as they promised to move us away from socialism instead of propelling us towards it.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1422 hrs
Another non-issue issue. Someone on TV tried to promote him but didn’t prepare too well and totally screwed up. it doesn’t change his actual record or speak to his fitness for office in any way. If you want to say that he doesn’t have enough experience, that’s an issue. But to focus on some idiot’s gaffe on television is a shallow, shallow way to go about it.
Posted by scott on February 21, 2008 at 1526 hrs
Well done Scott, good to know we can rely on you to be objective and honest. It’s really nice to know that just about anyone here can snap their fingers to have you foaming at the mouth at your desk. Idiot.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1630 hrs
Since some folks here don’t like the way I responded to you last time you called me an idiot, Jason, so let me try a different way this time.
What in my above statement constitutes “foaming at the mouth” or idiocy? Please explain to everyone.
Posted by scott on February 21, 2008 at 1634 hrs
The time you took to write what you have, and the fact that you are the most ardent liberal on what you have labeled as a very popular and well read political blog shows to me that you’re foaming at the mouth any time Owen posts something disparaging to any D candidate.
However, that you have the balls to call a Democratic State Senator from Texas an idiot, whom I sure you have no real understanding of, other than his now 15 seconds of fame, shows me that you’re the idiot. It’s also further proof of your “foaming at the mouth”. Do you head those fingers snapping?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1712 hrs
Ok, so asking a voter to list a candidates accomplishments, and the fact that this person or any other person’s can’t name any accomplishments ;doesn’t speak to someone’s record and/or fitness to hold office.
Scott, please explain. What exactly would speak to someones record or fitness?
I think Jason is just used to you being an idiot, so you’ll have to excuse him,
Prove us wrong. Say something profound
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1718 hrs
Scott - here is your big chance to prove everyone wrong. Perhaps you can enlighten us as to what some of Senator Obama’s accomplishments have been.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1732 hrs
So some Texas senator hasn’t done his homework and it reflects poorly on Obama? You’re serious?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1738 hrs
Hey, that’s my senator y’all are calling an idiot!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1741 hrs
So I’m “foaming” by virtue of the fact that I’m here. And I’m an idiot by virtue of the fact that I referred to a guy who got in front of a television camera and made a gaffe so big that it’s national news, a man who subsequently referred to himself as “chump,” an idiot.
No, I don’t hear any fingers a-snappin’, Jason. But I invite you hear this: stay away from the name-calling and personal attacks and i will do the same. How’s that sound to you?
Posted by scott on February 21, 2008 at 1745 hrs
Obama’s accomplishments - see hilzoy.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1803 hrs
Defending Scott (not that he needs it): Nothing he said in his original comment (#7) constituted foaming at the mouth or idiocy. He simply said that if person A supports person B for office, and person A got caught ill-prepared on a TV interview, doesn’t mean person B is unfit in any way, shape or form for public office. It simply means person A screwed up. And in this case, we’ve all seen the screw-up, laughed at it and appreciated the guy’s ability to laugh at himself.
That’s common ground, folks and not a reason to pop off on someone.
By the way, Scott even gave fuel to partisans eager to disparage the Illinois senator’s qualifications:
If you want to say that he doesn’t have enough experience, that’s an issue.
Ya’ll missed that chance.
Posted by Mike on February 21, 2008 at 1828 hrs
No Gordon,
The fact is that even if you gave the Senator 3 weeks to come up with an acomplishment, he couldn’t because he doesnt have any..
I will be very suprised if Hillary doesnt cut him down to size tonight, with facts.
Should be interesting.
Maybe he will list his accomplishments tonight, should take all of 1 minute.
One other thought. I thought it was very interesting that he was spouting off about CEO’s salaries, when the one who makes the most of all is standing right beside him.
Ophra.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 1907 hrs
Thanks, Mike.
Posted by scott on February 21, 2008 at 1956 hrs
The real story here is the fact Chris Matthews has been trashed by the Clinton machine for being too negative on Hillary…...so now Matthews decides to try and make things even. Sort of like that NFL referree commercial….“Hillary…..I’ve attacked you more than I should…..so later in the campaign…..after Obama is tearing it up…..I’ll slam one of Obama’s supporters and embarrass him…..for no apparent reason”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 2001 hrs
But I invite you hear this: stay away from the name-calling and personal attacks and i will do the same. How’s that sound to you?
Put aside your foolish crusade, the one you’ve admitted to being on, and I’ll think about it. That means that you don’t get to deride Owen at all for using HIS blog to post things that he feels like posting. It’s that whole goose / gander thing, you know?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 2017 hrs
No, Jason. Owen doesn’t get a free ride. He writes a political blog and invites comments. I make absolutely no apology for disagreeing with him often and vigorously.
There’s no conditions. You be civil and I will be civil back. Take it or leave it.
Posted by scott on February 21, 2008 at 2032 hrs
No, Jason. Owen doesn’t get a free ride. He writes a political blog and invites comments. I make absolutely no apology for disagreeing with him often and vigorously.
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that you telling him what he should and should not post on his own blog is unacceptable.
If you can’t see that, then there’s never going to be any civil discourse between you and dozens of other’s that are active here. Sorry.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 2045 hrs
“...The CEO who makes the most money: Oprah!” That is priceless. Somehow the GOP should find a way to point out,
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 2334 hrs
If you can’t see that, then there’s never going to be any civil discourse between you and dozens of other’s that are active here. Sorry.
Damn I was told that on another string yesterday or the day before:
It’s true of a few folks, I’m sure, but by and large the Right does not want to abolish public schools. Until you rid yourself of this false belief, I fail to see how it is possible to engage in a rational discussion of the status, goals, and performance of public education.
Why does public discourse here have to be function of ultimatums?
Posted by Mike on February 22, 2008 at 0038 hrs
[The fact is that even if you gave the Senator 3 weeks to come up with an acomplishment, he couldn’t because he doesnt have any../quote]
You mean the other stuff besides graduating suma cum laude from Harvard Law School, becoming president of the Harvard Law Review, or teaching Constitutional Law for 12 years at University of Chicago?
Let’s see there was those eight years he served as an Illinois State Senator during which time he sponsored over 820 bills: 233 regarding healthcare reform, 125 on poverty and public assistance, 112 crime fighting bills, 97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills, 21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control, 6 veterans affairs, etc. Hard to pick which one of his accomplishments during that time period is the most significant but I’d have to go with my personal favorite - busting up that cop torture squad in Chicago and passing the bill that mandated all police interrogations in the state of Illinois be videotaped.And then there was that first year in D.C. after he was elected a U.S. Senator, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. In all to date he has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096. These are some you’ve probably already heard of on the news.
The Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law)
The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act (became law)
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (passed the Senate)
The 2007 Government Ethics Bill (became law)
The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill (in committee)
The Global Poverty Act (in committee)Neat guy, very accomplished.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 0247 hrs
scott is just an a-hole who swears and accuses people of racism or what even deragtory comment he thinks of in an attempts to prove his point. He doesn’t debate, he just is a lowly troll.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 0427 hrs
Who’s surprised? That’s nothing new because, really, obama? He has no credentials strong enough to hold him through this elections. I wonder who’s voting for him.
Posted by Alicia on February 22, 2008 at 0723 hrs
I’m saying that you telling him what he should and should not post on his own blog is unacceptable.
Until the proprietors of this joint tell me I can’t, I’m going to disagree with them all I want. And when they post things that I believe are unworthy subjects of political discussion, I’ll say so. It really doesn’t bother me in the slightest that you think my doing this is “unacceptable.”
scott is just an a-hole who swears and accuses people of racism
And people wonder why I sometimes resort to telling some of you to go F yourselves! Besides, when did I accuse someone of racism? Did I? I’m not saying it’s impossible, but I can’t recall it. Help a guy out with a link.
He doesn’t debate, he just is a lowly troll.
That’s not fair at all. I am always—always—ready to respond in kind to anyone who writes a thoughtful and well-considered argument. To the people who post “scott is an a-hole,” well, I sometimes respond in kind to them, too. And frankly, If someone were to undertake the job of pulling out the many thousands of words I have written in these comments over the past year, I think you’ll find many intelligent and insightful contributions that I have made. I’m no troll. I may have recently lost my ability to ignore the more abrasive elements here, but I also contribute a lot that’s pretty worthy.
by and large the Right does not want to abolish public schools.
Sorry I missed that discussion! I’d not have let that one go, because I do think it is a goal of the right that we undercut public education until it’s failing so bad they can publicly call for its abandonment. Kind of like the federal social safety net: bankrupt the government to the point where we can throw up our hands and say “whoa, we can’t afford these programs anymore.”
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 0816 hrs
Scott, Obama’s accomplishments???? Have any?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1000 hrs
Uh, see comment #26.
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1014 hrs
I was hoping you would offer up more than this list of bills that he attached his name to.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1020 hrs
Hey, if you don’t think he’s experienced enough for the job, just say so and be done with it. Some of us are impressed enough with his resume, but many of us are more taken with the man himself, his leadership style and his judgement.
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1031 hrs
but many of us are more taken with the man himself,
Yikes.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1156 hrs
Yeah, i definitely choose my candidates on the “hot or not” principle. Doesn’t everybody?
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1211 hrs
Mosts of Obama’s “accomplishments” look more like pushing the liberal agenda than actual accomplishments. Since when is liberalism an accomplishment? It has been proven time and time again, the socialist agenda just does not work. Read-up on LBJ’s Great Society, the economic impact of Carter’s (or for that mateer, Jim Doyle’s) tax and spend philosph. If that’s too deep for you, look at the USSR; liberalism/communism/socialism simply just does not work. How many times does it have to be proven before they get it?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1324 hrs
Well that’s kind of a conversation killer, isn’t it? If you rule out as accomplishments anything in the Democratic platform, there’s not much more to say. Thanks for nothing.
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1407 hrs
Mosts of Obama’s “accomplishments” look more like pushing the liberal agenda than actual accomplishments. Since when is liberalism an accomplishment?
Obama is a progressive, not a liberal. And his impressive accomplishments are why progressives and moderates from every party are supporting his campaign agenda and voting for him, including Republicans.
November is going to be a landslide victory for Obama and the American people.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1431 hrs
quiknsilverfox:
Can you please explain to me then what is the difference between a progressive and a liberal, in terms of the democratic party? I mean, a republican can be progressive.
Obama is touting the same old liberal speak, the rich do not pay their fair share, we need more and bigger government, we know better, etc.
I admit I do like some of his ideas, and I am a moderate republican, but I would never vote for him.
I am not sure that many of the people who are following him are doing so because of his policy stances, but because is a great speaker with energy. When the general election debates come around and he has to defend his positions in more detail, and people see the ramifications of them, he might lost some of his luster.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1645 hrs
Virtually as many people are supporting Clinton, but she’s not such an inspirational speaker. Why are those people supporting her, if you believe people are just not that into Democratic policy ideas?
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1658 hrs
[The fact is that even if you gave the Senator 3 weeks to come up with an acomplishment, he couldn’t because he doesnt have any../quote]
You mean the other stuff besides graduating suma cum laude from Harvard Law School, becoming president of the Harvard Law Review, or teaching Constitutional Law for 12 years at University of Chicago?Let’s see there was those eight years he served as an Illinois State Senator during which time he sponsored over 820 bills: 233 regarding healthcare reform, 125 on poverty and public assistance, 112 crime fighting bills, 97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills, 21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control, 6 veterans affairs, etc. Hard to pick which one of his accomplishments during that time period is the most significant but I’d have to go with my personal favorite - busting up that cop torture squad in Chicago and passing the bill that mandated all police interrogations in the state of Illinois be videotaped.And then there was that first year in D.C. after he was elected a U.S. Senator, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. In all to date he has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096. These are some you’ve probably already heard of on the news.
The Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law)
The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act (became law)
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (passed the Senate)
The 2007 Government Ethics Bill (became law)
The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill (in committee)
The Global Poverty Act (in committee)Neat guy, very accomplished.
Posted by quiknsilverfox on February 22, 2008 at 0247 hrs
Good grief is that a lot of legislation; indicates to me he likes him some government programs. The deeper thinker would see what programs are duplicitous and reform them (now that would be progressive).
233 bills on healthcare reform and Illinois has still failed to reform healthcare… you do recall their budget fiasco last year yes? Apparently 233 bill and counting have yet to dent the issue.
His record of accomplishment is astounding…
The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill (in committee)
The Global Poverty Act (in committee)Cute bills. Do they do anything or is it as silly as defining price gouging on gasonline as an “unconscionable” price?
Brilliant lawmaking. Sounds like Obama is more reactionary than progressive…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 23, 2008 at 0011 hrs
So he did a lot of stuff, you just don’t like the stuff he did. Fine. Can I rely on you now to drop the whole he doesn’t have a single accomplishment talking point?
Posted by scott on February 23, 2008 at 0744 hrs
Can I rely on you now to drop the whole he doesn’t have a single accomplishment talking point?
Not me. I don’t consider the fact that he voted for some legislation or that he drafted bills that never passed a mark of accomplishment. I’m looking for something where he stood out and led and actually accomplished a goal. For example, I think that it’s fair to say that Ted Kennedy has real accomplishments. There have been many fights over the years where he led the fight and won.
Where are Obama’s accomplishments? Where did he stand out and make a difference? As I look at his career, he seems to be the epitome of a back bencher. There’s nothing wrong with that, but I think it is relevant when considering whether or not the man should be the executive.
Posted by Owen on February 23, 2008 at 0923 hrs
Where are Obama’s accomplishments? Where did he stand out and make a difference? As I look at his career, he seems to be the epitome of a back bencher. There’s nothing wrong with that, but I think it is relevant when considering whether or not the man should be the executive.
And I think you have a psychological condition known as mental scotoma. Your mind sees only what it wants to see and blocks out everything you don’t want to see. The sociopolitical term for that condition is bigotry.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 23, 2008 at 1440 hrs
So now I’m a bigot for evaluating Obama based on his record?
Interesting.
Posted by Owen on February 23, 2008 at 1447 hrs
quiknsilverfox:
Can you please explain to me then what is the difference between a progressive and a liberal, in terms of the democratic party? I mean, a republican can be progressive.The same as the difference is in terms of the Republican party: to the right of the left and to the left of the right. Centrist would be a good definition. Progressives in either party tend toward social liberalism and fiscal conservatism which explains why Obama is attracting voters of that persuasion regardless of their party registration.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 23, 2008 at 1458 hrs
So now I’m a bigot for evaluating Obama based on his record?
I prefer the polite term of mental scotoma, but bigot works too.
For evaluating Obama based on his record?
Hardly. For refusing to evaluate Obama based on his record. For refusing to even acknowledge he has a record to evaluate.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 23, 2008 at 1518 hrs
Enlighten me…
I look at his record and declare him a typical back bencher. Can you argue otherwise?
And why does my opinion regarding his record make me a bigot? That’s a powerful word. Tell me how my opinion that his record does not show leadership or distinction makes me a bigot.
Posted by Owen on February 23, 2008 at 1546 hrs
I look at his record and declare him a typical back bencher. Can you argue otherwise?
No more than I could argue with a colorblind person telling me that a rainbow looks brown to him.
Yesterday’s “typical backbencher”, today’s leading presidential candidate, tomorrow’s U.S. President, leader of the free world, and head of the Democratic Party. Maybe you’ll figure it out one of these days or maybe you won’t.
Whatever.
,
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 23, 2008 at 1915 hrs
You didn’t answer the question. How does my opinion of his record make me a bigot? You made the charge. Back it up.
Posted by Owen on February 23, 2008 at 1918 hrs
The race/bigotry card is going to be a big factor in this race. Note the silence regarding this absurd charge from the other Obama supporters who comment on this blog. It speaks volumes.
Posted by Tony Turner on February 23, 2008 at 2032 hrs
I’ve already put it in front of your face and you still can’t see it!
You said:
I’m looking for something where he stood out and led and actually accomplished a goal.
I’ll put it in bold type for you this time:
Yesterday’s “typical backbencher”, today’s leading presidential candidate, tomorrow’s U.S. President, leader of the free world, and head of the Democratic Party.
Your mind only sees what it wants to see.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 23, 2008 at 2242 hrs
Again… why am I a bigot for my opinion? Third time’s the charm?
Posted by Owen on February 23, 2008 at 2305 hrs
Furthermore, of the things you listed, only two of them are true. He’s a back bencher and he’s arguably the leading presidential candidate. The other things you list have not come to pass so they can’t be called accomplishments. Apparently, I’m not the only one whose mind only sees what it wants to see.
Posted by Owen on February 23, 2008 at 2318 hrs
I have no idea why you are a bigot? Do you?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 24, 2008 at 0000 hrs
Don’t know. You said it. Let me refresh your memory:
I think you have a psychological condition known as mental scotoma. Your mind sees only what it wants to see and blocks out everything you don’t want to see. The sociopolitical term for that condition is bigotry.
Were you not calling me a bigot?
Posted by Owen on February 24, 2008 at 0015 hrs
You used the word bigot to describe yourself, not I.
Freudian slip?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 24, 2008 at 0046 hrs
Furthermore, of the things you listed, only two of them are true. He’s a back bencher and he’s arguably the leading presidential candidate. The other things you list have not come to pass so they can’t be called accomplishments. Apparently, I’m not the only one whose mind only sees what it wants to see.
Horse races, political races…not much difference. I’m handicapping this one as a three horse race between a seasoned young steeplechaser, an old war horse, and an old gray mare. No contest.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 24, 2008 at 0118 hrs
I don’t see anything that I’d call bigotry here. Just FYI. Not a bit.
And I don’t agree that race is going to be a big issue—except insofar as Obama’s campaign may bring out a lot of black voter who wouldn’t ordinarily vote.
Posted by scott on February 24, 2008 at 1026 hrs
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/
SOULJAH JIHAD—OBAMA CAMPAIGN CRISISThe Republicans’ disengagement (media bias), if not disillusionment, with the economic campaign issues is borne out by the fact that many more Republicans are able to explain, extinguish, and excoriate the name Barrack Obama with the term (JIHAD), than can name Bush/Dick Cheney and McCain—as the Big Oil—BIG HALLIBURTAN politicians expanding GOP IRAQ WAR ideology, and Republican White House Party Elders’ GI Bill of Rights for the 21st century IRAQ WAR ECONOMY. Even among Republicans, Clinton is much more visible than GOP presumptive candidate John McCain towards affecting positively the important economic issues facing America’s middle class economy.
When asked who they would vote for in the general election for president of the United States, the natural pendulum swing in America is 79% of Republicans named Hillary Clinton as their choice. Reasons for Obama’s Campaign Crisis “GLORK” Campaign Crisis include:
“Obama has more holes in him than Swiss-Cheese.” (CNN’s “Politics.com,” 4/01/08)
Obama’s presidential campaign has received $2,812,336 from firms that employ registered federal lobbyists. [fec.gov]
Obama has taken $405,747 from the Pharmaceutical industry. [opensecrets.org]
Obama has received $1,185,937 from the Commercial Banking industry. [opensecrets.org]
Obama has received over six million dollars from the Securities & Investment industry. [opensecrets.org]
Obama has taken $608,822 from the Insurance industry. [opensecrets.org]
Obam has taken $168,584 from the Mortgage Banking industry. [opensecrets.org]
“GLORK” SOULJAH JIHAD—CAMPAIGN CRISIS
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3369102968312745410&q;=Fitna&total;=1413&start;=0#=10&so;=0&type;=search&plindex;=5Posted by Janet Reno on April 02, 2008 at 2033 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 102
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 06:11 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).