It's been interesting over the last few weeks to watch the Obama camp begin to make appointments for its administration. I've been struck by three clear themes:
1) Every lecturn that Sen. Obama spoke behind while running for President had the word "CHANGE" on it in big bold letters. He constantly repeated that his opponent was "more of the same." Yet his appointments show a man who isn't the least bit interested in serious changes: he's largely reappointed the Clinton administration, except where he's keeping parts of the Bush administration.
2) In particular, the appointment of Sen. Clinton to Secretary of State combined with the primacy of Clinton loyalists in other posts is nothing short of an admission that she was really the better candidate in the Democratic primary. It is an admission that she was the only one of the two who was really a serious candidate.
It is to say, "OK, we won, we're in charge!... now, Mrs. Clinton, if you would kindly take over?"
3) Obama's appointments, in spite of this, have generally been solid choices. I say this in spite of my grave irritation at the outright, cynical manipulation shown in point #1 (and about which Jeffrey was absolutely right -- he often said I should simply ignore anything Sen. Obama said or did on the campaign trail). I say it in spite of something like astonishment about point #2: that a man so empty of qualification or loyalty would put himself forward for the office, or that Americans would consider him seriously.
Yet here we are, and I must confess that if he was reckless to put himself forward, he has not been reckless in at least these early critical choices. He has selected to put the Clinton team in charge even though it makes him look bad, because they were the best choices available from the Democratic side. He has chosen to retain the Bush appointments to Defense even though it completely undoes his mantle of 'change,' or his alleged superiority of judgment over those who ever supported the war or the Surge. Again, though, they are the best men for the job: and being better than anyone even in the Clinton team, he has kept them.
That's fairly impressive work, and I am glad to say so in spite of everything. Meanwhile, Syd mentioned a Spencer Ackerman piece; here is one by him that I thought was insightful. He rightly points out that the Undersecretary of Defese for Policy position is very powerful, and will apparently be retained by a Bush appointee and Gates loyalist.
SOLIC isn't as powerful as he suggests -- or nearly as powerful as I think it should be, having worked with them in the past -- but they do have authority that turns up in interesting places. Ackerman passes on speculation that LTCOL Nagl might be in the running for the SOLIC posting, which would be a strong appointment indeed. We'll see if that proves out.
And of course then there's Paul Volcker, an appointment that ties him to the Washington of Ronald Reagan. Reaganomics! Greenspan's predecessor! Again, a strong choice: but nothing like a change from the Washington of old. He is the Washington of old: of 1979-1987.
I begin to wonder if this Obama hasn't been just riding the whirlwind the last two years: running for President just to build his stature for a later run, he suddenly found a national mood willing to take anyone who was just new and different. Carried to office by that mood, he now wonders, "What on earth do I do now?" And so, he has chosen appointments who can bear the weight suddenly thrust upon his unready shoulders.
Obama himself seems to be saying that it's the other way: that he is the man who can take the Washington of old and change it. His remarks of the other night, that we have to 'remember where the vision of change is coming from,' support that concept: that he believes that he will work some alchemy on these structures and people, and change their nature from lead into gold.
All of his appointments have more experience than he does. Almost all of them are older than he is. Unlike him, they have established networks with deep roots: the Clinton network, which will now be based out of the Office of the Secretary of State instead of the White House, reinforced by all the other network members who will enjoy lesser postings; Gates' network, which is well established at the Pentagon and through the Combatant Commands; Volcker's networks through the financial community.
What he is doing here is planting trees, if you like. You can think of each of these powerful, older figures as a tree with roots represented by their network of supporters and allies. He has chosen the trees well. I'm glad of that, and I appreciate it from the new president-elect. Once the roots of these networks are spread throughout his government, though, he will find the trees difficult to move.
Appointments
Field Report
Greyhawk said he wanted to hear some reports. I've said below that the violence is a shadow of what it was a year ago. About this time last year, AQI cells south of Baghdad were attacking checkpoints with technicals (i.e., a civilian truck with a heavy weapon mounted on it, DSHK-type machineguns in this case). They crashed one and burned the town of Hawr Rajab, in retaliation for their loss in a 24-hour battle with the then-new Sons of Iraq movement in that area. Arab Jabour was Indian country. All that is gone.
A year ago, we were setting up new combat outposts in division-level operations, led by hardened US combat forces. Today, we're handing over those outposts to Iraqi units, who are not just 'in the lead' but doing the heavy lifting in many places.
Back in September, I talked with Colonel Caraccilo, commander of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne. His brigade had replaced 2/0 MTN when it came to Iraq. Later, 2/3 HBCT left, and 3/101 assumed their battlespace as well as what they held from 2/10. He told me that his brigade was leaving soon, and would be replaced only by a transition team of about 1,000 soldiers: a battalion-sized element, replacing what had been the territory of two brigades only a year before.
The Order of Battle is a little hard to discern from over there, but I can tell you that is just what happened. Now the real force in the area is the Iraqi Army, with the transition team advising and assisting. 3/101 AASLT did its RIP/TOA with the 17th Iraqi Army -- not a US unit.
My job over here is to coordinate between our Human Terrain Team and the civil-military operations and information operations teams. My focus is on helping the military to engage the tribes and tribal culture, a task made far, far easier by the extraordinary legacy left to me by the soldiers of the 2/10 and 3/101. They took the job seriously when they were here, which makes it easy for us today. The others here currently also take it seriously -- the Army understands it is the real work of the COIN effort, and has made arrangements. We have Arabists and translators, social scientists and historians to back up the soldiers and officers of the remaining American forces.
Is it worth it? The Dora district in Baghdad held an art festival this week.
A bare foot, visible only to the ankle, ascends into a black abyss as a bright yellow comet passes overhead.We've heard a lot of things about this war and what its legacy will be: but plainly, we haven't yet heard everything there is to hear.
The darkness in the painting represents the life that Saddam Hussein stole from Iraq and the comet the hope of peace that U.S. forces brought, says artist Farouk F. Rafeik.
Rafeik’s work is part of something unthinkable one year ago: an art show in Baghdad’s Dora neighborhood, once one of the most violent enclaves in Iraq.
Angel Food
Entirely by coincidence, I had a chance to eat some cookies from our friends at Soldiers' Angels. They weren't sent to me, of course, but to an NCO I work with out here. He gladly shared them out with everyone, so I started my Thanksgiving morning with some very good snickerdoodles.
Fuzzybear tells me that I have the 'Angel Bakers' to thank. So: thank you.
Thanksgiving
It's already Thanksgiving morning here in Iraq. Having been here for last Thanksgiving too, I can attest with some confidence that Uncle Sam will do his best to make sure his nephews and nieces have plenty to eat today. It may not be quite as good as Mama's turkey, but it won't be too bad, and there will be plenty of it. It's still a full day of work, of course, and some places are better than others in terms of what can be provided. Still, there is nothing that can reasonably be done that will be left undone.
We're all thankful, I think I can say with some confidence, that there is a safe place back home where our families can live and grow in peace. We're thankful that someday even the longest deployments end, and 'we go rolling home,' as the old song says.
Keep yourselves safe and happy today. Feast and be merry.
-commentor
Heh. Ooo-rah. Get some, you jar-heads.
(hat tip to Ace)
Some Dinosaur saw something like this once, but a lot bigger:
This was a meteor in Edmonton, Ontario. I hear they're looking for pieces of it now.
It's a really big universe out there. Full of all sorts of things. Sleep tight.
(hat tip to Ace.)
ONE SHOT, ONE KILL
Looks like the Leggett family will be eating well this year.
Percival Christopher Wren wrote a once-famous book about the French Foreign Legion, set in the period when all Europe was saddled with African colonies. The introduction will sound familiar to several of you.
And across all the Harmattan was blowing hard, that terrible wind that carries the Saharan dust a hundred miles to sea, not so much as a sand-storm, but as a mist or fog of dust as fine as flour, filling the eyes, the lungs, the pores of the skin, the nose and throat; getting into the locks of rifles, the works of watches and cameras, defiling water, food and everything else; rendering life a burden and a curse.
The fact, moreover, that thirty days' weary travel over burning desert, across oceans of loose wind-blown sand and prairies of burnt grass, through breast-high swamps, and across unbridged boatless rivers, lay between him and Kano, added nothing to his satisfaction. For, in spite of all, satisfaction there was, inasmuch as Kano was rail-head, and the beginning of the first stage of the journey Home. That but another month lay between him and "leave out of Africa," kept George Lawrence on his feet.
From that wonderful and romantic Red City, Kano, sister of Timbuktu, the train would take him, after a three days' dusty journey, to the rubbish-heap called Lagos, on the Bight of Benin of the wicked West African Coast. There he would embark on the good ship Appam, greet her commander, Captain Harrison, and sink into a deck-chair with that glorious sigh of relief, known in its perfection only to those weary ones who turn their backs upon the Outposts and set their faces towards Home.
The story begins on that trip home, when two of these men of the Outposts meet and begin a long railway journey together, the Frenchman telling the Englishman a tale to pass the time until they sigh that 'glorious sigh of relief.' For those of you also passing time until you sigh that sigh yourself, you might find it a worth and interesting tale.
- Grim
Killing is what happens on farms. Seriously. I'm saying this as a farmer.
City people think that farms are "where life happens." Nonsense. Farming is about killing stuff. I don't even raise livestock or poultry and I have to kill stuff.
I can get crops to grow by simply putting seed in the ground. The rest of my job is to kill, kill, kill. Kill weeds. Kill insect pests. Kill vertebrate pests. Whether by herbicide, pesticides, shooting, trapping, stomping, you name it — I spend far more time killing than I do making something grow. Mother nature takes care of the growing. I have to remove the competition. There have been days when I've trapped 50+ pocket gophers and shot 100 ground squirrels - before lunch. They needed killing, and the next day, more of them were killed because they needed killing. At other times, I've shot dozens of jackrabbits at night and flung them out into the sagebrush for coyotes to eat.
And none of that starts in with helping neighbors slaughter steers, lambs, chickens, etc.
That's farming: killing. Lots of it.
- Grim
I saw today that the new movie Australia is going to have a large number of hats of the old Aussie type. These were made by Australia's version of the John B. Stetson hat company, "Akubra."
"An iconic Australian company had to research its own history for Baz Luhrmann's epic drama "Australia" starring Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman. Sydney-based milliner Rosie Boylan contacted Akubra over two years ago, wanting hats the company hadn't made for some time. Over 20 different styles, ranging from military to period hats of the era, were made especially for the film."
I mostly wear Stetsons, but I do own an Akubra hat, and the wife has worn one as her primary hat for nearly a decade. They're rabbit fur felt (Aussies are always looking for another excuse to slaughter rabbits), and so not very waterproof -- but lightweight, and good desert hats. I may order one of their old military style hats for this deployment, in fact, once the (wet) winter months pass, and the heat starts kicking up. Beaver felt is better for the cold and rainy months, but heavy for the desert summer.
If you're inspired by the movie to want one of these things, the only American company to sell Akubra hats is David Morgan's company on the West coast. Don't buy from him. He charges way too much. Thanks to the miracle of the internet (and easy currency conversion via MasterCard and Visa) you can order directly from The Strand Hatters in Sydney.
If you like Fedora (or Indiana Jones) style hats, they have quite a few of these; as well as some American Western designs, and of course the classic Aussie hats. As long as the rabbit fur felt is adequate for your needs, they're sturdy, fairly cheap, and long-lasting.
- Grim
I've been on the ground for about a week. When I look at how much this place has changed from a year ago, I don't recognize it. I'll be primarily working alongside the Human Terrain Team, working with and mapping the tribes and ISF.
AQI is not even a shadow of what it was a year ago. They have no safe havens in this area, only a few bed-down areas they have to run through. The various Shi'a extremists are disaggregated badly. There are still some EFP networks and IED networks that manage to operate, but on a greatly reduced scale. IDF here was daily a year ago; I haven't encountered any, and talking to folks, it sounds like there's little anywhere.
There are still dangers, but what has been done here is amazing. I'll keep you informed as things come into the open sources, and are free to discuss.
- Grim
Hillary Rodham Clinton has decided to give up her Senate seat and accept the position of secretary of state, making her the public face around the world for the administration of the man who beat her for the Democratic presidential nomination, two confidants said Friday.
The apparent accord between perhaps the two leading figures in the Democratic Party climaxed a week-long drama that riveted the nation’s capital.
Mrs. Clinton came to her decision after additional discussion with President-elect Barack Obama about the nature of her role and his plans for foreign policy, said one of the confidants, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the situation.
Mr. Obama’s office told reporters on Thursday that the nomination is “on track” but this is the first word from the Clinton camp that she has decided.
“She’s ready,” the confidant said, adding that Mrs. Clinton was reassured after talking again with Mr. Obama because their first meeting in Chicago last week “was so general.” The purpose of the follow-up talk, he noted, was not to extract particular concessions but “just getting comfortable” with the idea of working together.
A second Clinton associate confirmed that her camp believes they have a done deal. Senior Obama advisers said Friday morning that the offer had not been formally accepted and no announcement would be made until after Thanksgiving. But they said they were convinced that the nascent alliance was ready to be sealed.
Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton fought the most competitive Democratic nomination battle in modern times, one that polarized their party for months and left bitterness in both camps. But in asking Mrs. Clinton to join his Cabinet, Mr. Obama signaled that he wants to turn a rival into a partner, and she concluded that she could have the most influence by accepting the offer.
The decision followed days of intense vetting and negotiations intended to clear any potential obstacles to her taking the job due to her husband’s global business and philanthropic activities. Lawyers for Mr. Obama and former President Bill Clinton combed through his finances and drew up a set of guidelines for his future activities intended to avoid any appearances of conflict of interest should she take the job.
People close to the vetting said Mr. Clinton turned over the names of 208,000 donors to his foundation and library and agreed to all of the conditions requested by Mr. Obama’s transition team, including restrictions on his future paid speeches and role at his international foundation.
As secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton will have had a powerful platform to travel the world and help repair relations with other countries strained after eight years of President Bush’s policies. But at the same time, she will now have to subordinate her own agenda and ambitions to Mr. Obama’s and sacrifice the independence that comes with a Senate seat and the 18 million votes she collected during their arduous primary battle.
No wonder children don't believe rules matter anymore:
Texas A&M International University in Laredo fired a professor for publishing the names of students accused of plagiarism.
In his syllabus, professor Loye Young wrote that he would “promptly and publicly fail and humiliate anyone caught lying, cheating or stealing.” After he discovered six students had plagiarized on an essay, Young posted their names on his blog, resulting in his firing last week.
“It’s really the only way to teach the students that it’s inappropriate,” he said.
Young, a former adjunct professor of management information systems, said he believes he made the right move. He said trials are public for a reason, and plagiarism should be treated the same way. He added that exposing cheaters is an effective deterrent.
“They were told the consequences in the syllabus,” he said. “They didn’t believe it.”
The six students received F’s and were reported to the school, but their grades may not stand because of Young’s blog post, according to insidehighered.com.
It appears the students were right to doubt that there were consequences for cheating. In this case, the only consequences were for attempting to hold cheaters publicly accountable for their actions:
Young, who also operates a computer business in Laredo, was terminated for violating the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, a federal law that prohibits the release of students’ educational records without consent. But he said he does not believe he infringed on anyone’s privacy.
“You have to hold them accountable,” he said. “If you don’t, you hold a grave danger of having an illiterate society.”
Renita Coleman, a UT assistant professor who taught a journalism course on ethics in the spring, said there are better ways to handle plagiarism.
“I don’t think that it serves anybody well to publicly humiliate them,” she said. “It doesn’t teach anybody that it’s wrong.”
Coleman said each university has specific guidelines for dealing with cheating, and situational factors should be taken into account. She said she has dealt with repentant plagiarists who weren’t punished severely since they said they learned a lesson.
“Admitting your mistake and making an effort to fix it goes a long way,” she said. “Motivations matter.”
Coleman added that privacy should be considered in the instance of plagiarism.
“It’s not the same violation as, say, robbing a house,” she said. “It’s not something that’s an illegal act.”
Without having read the act in question, it's hard to comment on the letter versus the spirit of the statute. I do, however, recall one or two of my professors announcing that anyone caught cheating would be issued a failing grade immediately and that they would also be actively persecuted to the Gates of Hell. I, for one, took that warning quite seriously (not that I was ever inclined to cheat).
This could have been what teachers love to call a "teachable moment". In point of fact, it became one.
I'm not sure the lesson was a positive one.
Continuing our bizarre series of posts on the prospective First Lady, Salon.com ponies up with a full length homage to Mrs. Obama's booty. Color us unsurprised:
Free at last. I never thought that I -- a black girl who came of age in the utterly anticlimactic aftermath of the civil rights movement -- would say the phrase with any real sincerity in my lifetime. But ever since Nov. 4, I've been shouting it from every rooftop. I'm not excited for the most obvious reason. Yes, Obama's win was an extraordinary breakthrough and a huge relief, but I don't subscribe to the notion that his capturing the White House represents the end of American racial history. Far from it. There is a certain freedom in the moment -- as in, we are all now free from wondering when or if we'll ever get a black president. Congratulations to all of us for being around to settle the question.
But what really thrills me, what really feels liberating in a very personal way, is the official new prominence of Michelle Obama. Barack's better half not only has stature but is statuesque. She has coruscating intelligence, beauty, style and -- drumroll, please -- a butt. (Yes, you read that right: I'm going to talk about the first lady's butt.)
If the vast legion of pundits infesting the airwaves and pages of our newspapers are to be believed, this election addressed many nagging issues that have long plagued the American electorate. If today's salvo from Salon is to be believed, November 4th was a day that will live in... well, let's just say it will continue to ripple through the American psyche for some time to come.
We believe we'll leave you to read the whole thing, as the saying goes. We couldn't possibly do it justice.
Meeee-ouch, Girlfriend!!!
Oh yeah. While Grim's away, the mice will play...
If Michelle Obama's such a great dresser, what was she doing in this red butcher's apron?
At no time would what she wore be more significant than on the night of November 4 2008, when, win or lose, the eyes of the world would be upon the Obama family as the four of them processed on to the stage in Grant Park, Chicago. If Michelle had dressed herself and her daughters for defeat, she could hardly have chosen anything more saturnine. Seven-year-old Sasha was dressed from head to foot in black: black dress, black hose, black shoes. Ten-year-old Malia was just as black about the legs, but her dress was blood-red. Any colour is better than pink, but these robust choices hardly strike one as girly. The girls' odd outfits were clearly chosen as foils to their mother's dress, which was all black with an eye-burning red panel that splattered itself down the front like a geometrical haemorrhage, held in by a criss-cross sash of black.
The red extended upwards almost to the neckline, and downwards to mid-thigh,
petering out top and bottom in a sort of cast-off splatter. The effect of the strong contrast was to turn a mere frock into a poster in the most disturbing colours known to man, the colours of chaos. The juxtaposition of a rectangle of red on a black field is what we might expect to find on a flag or a shield. Coral snakes and venomous spiders signal their destructive potential by the display of similarly violent contrasts.
For several years, Michelle has been listed among the world's best-dressed people. In the 69th poll run by Vanity Fair to establish the International Best Dressed list for this year, she came top of the women. There is no possibility that her choice of election-night dress reflected mere inadvertence - because in a presidential campaign, nothing is left to chance. Even her decision to wear dresses - as distinct from suits, whether with pants or skirts - was calculated to foreground her femininity. Her kitten heels make sure that her bigger head never out-tops her husband's. Curiously, at the same time as the fashion press is lauding her relationships with designers, Michelle has been at pains to emphasise that she shops downmarket. In June, when she was invited to guest-host an NBC talk show, she chose a Donna Ricco black and white "tank leaf print dress" in stretch cotton sateen, which sold off the peg in selected boutiques for $148 and online for a mere $99. Within a day, the dress had sold out and women were queueing up to place orders for the reissue. In October, Michelle told Jay Leno that the three-piece yellow ensemble she was wearing on his show was from J Crew (total cost about $450).
Historically, Michelle was much less likely to be seen wearing Donna Ricco or J Crew. The purple silk sheath dress that she teamed with a black Azzedine Alaïa belt for her appearance at her husband's side when he won the Democratic nomination was by Chicago-based Maria Pinto. That dress earned universal praise for its elegance, boldness and simplicity, though some jibbed at its sleevelessness.
For election night, Michelle went further upmarket. Her sensational dress was designed by Narciso Rodriguez for his next spring/summer collection. The original is at least eight inches shorter than the Obama version, and the neckline a good six inches lower. The splash of red, rather than pouring halfway down the thigh, ends above the crotch and extends from hip to hip, with a small flare on each breast, avoiding entirely the butcher's apron effect. The Grant Park version of this cute and sexy dress was a travesty.
Rodriguez is saying nothing. We may never know if he agreed to wreck his design by customising it for Michelle - or how he felt when he saw that she was wearing it with a black cardigan. The Obama organisation used to be proud to tell us that Michelle doesn't have a stylist. I bet she does now.
This is just bizarre. Right after the election I thought - for about a second - of commenting on the future First Lady's choice of dress. When I first saw it I was a bit surprised because it evoked the image of a black widow spider so strongly that I was momentarily shocked.
When I saw the original design on Wonkette, however, all I could think was, "Haven't we seen enough ugliness in this campaign?"
I thought the Obama girls looked just lovely. Although I'm not sure I would have chosen those colors, the stores are full of little girls' dresses in black and red these days. Times have changed and it seems odd to expect the Obamas to act differently from the rest of America. This is the culture most people embrace. As everyone keeps reminding us, "This isn't a conservative country anymore." OK. Got it. So why all the criticism from the left and from feminists? Too "edgy"? It's not as though the girls were dressed like Britney Spears - they looked very demure and ladylike. Reading all sorts of dire omens into her choices seems a bit much, and taking snide potshots at two little girls just seems beyond the pale.
I happen to like clothes, rather a lot. I pay attention to fashion on other people, but I was always taught that it was the height of bad manners to make snide comments about the way other people look or dress. Consequently, I can't imagine what makes people think it's acceptable to take swipes at the future first family. Words can still wound, and people don't stop being human beings when they step into public life.
I don't understand where this idea that being trashed goes with the territory came from? I didn't like this sort of thing when it was done to Chief Justice Roberts, and I took exception to it. I didn't like when it was done to the Bushes. I find that despite my political opposition to Senator Obama, I don't much care for people who want to go picnicking on his family.
But maybe that's just me.
PVIT
Today was the worst day of CRC, so I haven't had much time.
I do want to do my part, though.
Dude
Today's headline: "US military to abandon Iraqi cities."
Dude.
OK, let's review the Surge strategy:
1) Address raging violence in Iraq by getting off the FOBs, and out into combat outposts where you can secure the population.
2) Engage the population in providing its own security through militia ("Sons of Iraq") checkpoints and other solutions that the US will pay for.
3) Train formal, Iraqi government-run police and soldiers as the long-term solution to Iraq's stability.
4) Get Iraq to take over paying the militia forces, so that the GoI is in full control of its internal security.
5) Pull back onto the FOBs into overwatch to give the GoI a little buffer to ensure that it is able to maintain security without an active Coalition presence.
6) Go home, leaving behind a free and secure Iraq.
So really, the proper headline is "US military one step closer to triumphant homecoming." Or, "Surge strategy advances toward victory."
VALOUR-IT
You've probably noticed that the annual Project VALOUR-IT fundraiser is on. Doc Russia tapped us for the Marine Corps team. If you want to donate, and mark it USMC, we'd appreciate it.
Why should you? Read this, by the autor of Joe's favorite online comic, "Schlock Mercenary."
When I consider the sacrifices of the men and women who serve or have served in the United States Armed Forces I question my worthiness. It is to them I speak right now.Project VALOUR-IT is for the ones that have paid some of the highest prices. The only ones who have paid more are beyond earthly help.
You fought for me long before I was born. You fight today, that I might not have to. You disciplined yourselves, obeyed orders, and faced your worst fears that I might be an undisciplined, disobedient coward.
I hide in my basement and write comic strips. You walk down the middle of the street in clothing that screams “target.” I pay for my mistakes by getting occasional hate-mail. You pay for everybody’s mistakes with your blood. In a world where it is increasingly unpopular to be an American you wear a flag on your shoulder when you go abroad, while I lounge comfortably behind the borders you and your brothers across the generations have secured.
I am humbled to find servicemen and women reading and enjoying Schlock Mercenary. Sometimes I am asked whether I have ever served in the military. I never have. I considered it briefly, but I was afraid. You, however, were not afraid. Or if you were, you were also wise enough to know that fear is a thing to be faced, and it is the one thing that MUST be faced before you can face anything else.
It has taken me twenty years to learn that lesson. You bought those twenty years for me, affording me the opportunity to learn about courage while comfortable.
When I consider your many sacrifices I find myself unworthy of them. But I accept them with gratitude, and applaud you with a sense of awe. Thank you for doing what I cannot.
You amaze me.