If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
"Chris" wrote in message ... "Establishing paternity is the process of determining the legal father of a child. When parents are married, paternity is automatically established in most cases. If parents are unmarried, paternity establishment is not automatic and the process should be started by both parents as soon as possible for the benefit of the child." snip Something I noticed is that when someone makes a Will they state something like "I ___ Being of sound mind...". I would think the purpose of being of sound mind is that you knew what you were doing when you made the will. On the opposite side, when a man signs a paper establishing paternity, they don't make sure he is informed that if DNA tests prove the child isn't his that he will still have to pay support for the child that isn't his. So, by that definition, most of the time the man didn't sign the paper "being of sound mind" or at least he maybe didn't realize a signature was more important than scientific facts. It seems like, in my non-legal opinion, someone not knowing what they were doing by signing, by not realizing how crooked the law is, should be grounds to nullify their signature, for the purpose, they weren't of "sound mind". RogerN |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
Phil #3 wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Dusty" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Kenneth s." wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty" wrote: "Bob W" wrote in message m... "Chris" wrote in message ... [snip] [snip] The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group, get radical and vocal. That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central figure for men to rally around. I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep them turning in the right direction is what is required for the MRM to take flight. Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of media support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good deal of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by their constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter fools. After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public buys into it, hook, line and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow. Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas people went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep was heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he slighted as her would-be rapist! There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of getting into the ring with the girls. That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come about since the 1960's when women became intensively politically active. Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable. How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs, taking and active part of the process while the majority of men ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone who opposed his policies do so because of racism... and no one bats an eye. Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it. Phil #3 Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K. [By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?] Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted. Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what they can, while they are able. Phil #3 Wow, this really is a window into your denial. Boys emulate their fathers (or a father figure) close to 100% of the time. If they were indoctrinated, it was the example of victim hood, impotence and weakness from their male role model(s) that indoctrinated them into this sort of lifestyle. The whole "get into a union, volunteer for the first round of layoffs, collect benefits and live cheaply" lifestyle is fairly common and pretty rewarding for a guy with hobbies and no ambition. That's why fathers (father figures) are the key to this, boys enjoy ANYTHING as long as they are getting some positive reinforcement and instruction. City kids will love fishing and hunting if they are taught to do those things, redneck kids will love tennis if they are encouraged to do that. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
Chris wrote:
"Phil #3" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Dusty" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Kenneth s." wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty" wrote: "Bob W" wrote in message m... "Chris" wrote in message ... [snip] [snip] The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group, get radical and vocal. That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central figure for men to rally around. I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep them turning in the right direction is what is required for the MRM to take flight. Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of media support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good deal of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by their constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter fools. After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public buys into it, hook, line and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow. Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas people went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep was heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he slighted as her would-be rapist! There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of getting into the ring with the girls. That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come about since the 1960's when women became intensively politically active. Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable. How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs, taking and active part of the process while the majority of men ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone who opposed his policies do so because of racism... and no one bats an eye. Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it. Phil #3 Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K. [By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?] Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted. Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what they can, while they are able. Phil #3 Simple. Children are a product of their mother. How their mother raises them determines their general behavior as adults. Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that if I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100% wrong, boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their male role models, leaving a child without a male role model means he will have to find his own role models, in most cases that role model will be a coach, teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases the role model will be a person who preys on young men without role models. When you read about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how often is his mother in jail for dealing drugs or shooting someone? Almost never. The male role model is almost always the example. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course! But overall, they respond to their mother's example. Since many, if not most, children are taught by their mothers that men pay money and don't raise children, and women get free money and determine what to teach their children, it doesn't surprise me that the "child support" system perpetuates. Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and ridiculous. If you want to talk about these things forget about your beefs with child support learn a little about child psychology. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
" wrote in message ... Chris wrote: "Phil #3" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Dusty" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Kenneth s." wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty" wrote: "Bob W" wrote in message m... "Chris" wrote in message ... [snip] [snip] The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group, get radical and vocal. That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central figure for men to rally around. I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep them turning in the right direction is what is required for the MRM to take flight. Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of media support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good deal of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by their constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter fools. After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public buys into it, hook, line and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow. Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas people went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep was heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he slighted as her would-be rapist! There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of getting into the ring with the girls. That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come about since the 1960's when women became intensively politically active. Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable. How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs, taking and active part of the process while the majority of men ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone who opposed his policies do so because of racism... and no one bats an eye. Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it. Phil #3 Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K. [By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?] Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted. Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what they can, while they are able. Phil #3 Simple. Children are a product of their mother. How their mother raises them determines their general behavior as adults. Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that if I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100% wrong, boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their male role models, leaving a child without a male role model means he will have to find his own role models, in most cases that role model will be a coach, teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases the role model will be a person who preys on young men without role models. When you read about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how often is his mother in jail for dealing drugs or shooting someone? Almost never. The male role model is almost always the example. I was making reference to principles, NOT role models. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course! But overall, they respond to their mother's example. Since many, if not most, children are taught by their mothers that men pay money and don't raise children, and women get free money and determine what to teach their children, it doesn't surprise me that the "child support" system perpetuates. Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and ridiculous. Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on. If you want to talk about these things forget about your beefs with child support learn a little about child psychology. Welcome back! |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
" wrote in message ... Phil #3 wrote: "Chris" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Dusty" wrote in message ... "Phil #3" wrote in message m... "Kenneth s." wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:04:16 +0200, "Dusty" wrote: "Bob W" wrote in message m... "Chris" wrote in message ... [snip] [snip] The whole thing is too little, too late. The FIRST necessity is to consider and treat BOTH parents as equals, which would solve the whole problem but that isn't gonna happen until men, as a group, get radical and vocal. That's all well and good Phil, but there's a major flaw in that idea.. (1) men are being picked off one-by-one wither they are vocal about it or not and (2) try as we might, there is no central figure for men to rally around. I hate to say it, but most people are sheep and will only follow those in front of them, even if it's over a cliff. The lack of a central, organized hub, if you will, to grease the wheels and keep them turning in the right direction is what is required for the MRM to take flight. Part of the problem is that there are many, many splinter groups that, much like the Red Queen, are after someone's head. This in turn is what feeds the media to portray everyone in the MRM as a nut-job. Which leads us to another part of the problem, lack of media support or good, pro-father stories in the media. A good deal of that can be laid at the feet of the Hollywood elite by their constant portrayals of men as complete dopes and utter fools. After being fed a steady diet of "Dad is a Buffoon" for nearly 30 years the public buys into it, hook, line and sinker without ever raising an eyebrow. Reverse this and people will demand heads on platters. An unlikely example of this is David Letterman and his so-called joke about former Governor Palin's daughter. People who heard it wanted Letterman's head in a pike for insulting a young girl and insinuating that rape would be good for her. But whereas people went into an uproar over this happening to a female, not a peep was heard about a demand for Letterman to apologize to the MAN he slighted as her would-be rapist! There's a lot of work yet to be done before we can even think of getting into the ring with the girls. That was the "radical" part I mentioned: getting politically active and unified, which would be a radical change in the way men act and react. This whole anti-male mindset of which you speak has come about since the 1960's when women became intensively politically active. Of course men, who have historically been forced to work to support women, are at a disadvantage but it is not insurmountable. How exactly did we wind up with three liberals at the head positions of governement (Obama, Reid, Pelosi)? By a majority of women and minorities who are most likely to benefit from liberal politcs, taking and active part of the process while the majority of men ignored it at their own peril. Approximately 63% of voters were from urban areas and 66% under the age of 30 voted for Obama. Nearly 100% of black voters cast ballots for Obama then flatly state that anyone who opposed his policies do so because of racism... and no one bats an eye. Nearly every commerical is based in a stupid, childish, lazy and/or incompetent father/husband with a wise, competent, hard-working and mature mother/wife as are many of the TV shows (Roseanne, Home Improvement, etc.), and for many this becomes real-life; almost a documentary. And men ignore it, even buy into it. Phil #3 Well stated. I personally know a handful of middle-aged white men who have applied for (and received, believe it or not) government welfare. They figure if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. Slowly, but surely, the U.S. is becomong the U.K. [By the way, food stamps come in the form of a credit card, better known as a "dignity" card. WHY? Are the government people saying that collecting welfare is a shameful act to be concealed?] Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted. Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what they can, while they are able. Phil #3 Wow, this really is a window into your denial. Boys emulate their fathers (or a father figure) close to 100% of the time. If they were indoctrinated, it was the example of victim hood, impotence and weakness from their male role model(s) that indoctrinated them into this sort of lifestyle. And you know they had a male role model how? The whole "get into a union, volunteer for the first round of layoffs, collect benefits and live cheaply" lifestyle is fairly common and pretty rewarding for a guy with hobbies and no ambition. That's why fathers (father figures) are the key to this, boys enjoy ANYTHING as long as they are getting some positive reinforcement and instruction. With all due respect, whatever are you talking about? City kids will love fishing and hunting if they are taught to do those things, redneck kids will love tennis if they are encouraged to do that. Some perhaps, but not necessarily all. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
Chris wrote:
Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that if I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100% wrong, boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their male role models, leaving a child without a male role model means he will have to find his own role models, in most cases that role model will be a coach, teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases the role model will be a person who preys on young men without role models. When you read about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how often is his mother in jail for dealing drugs or shooting someone? Almost never. The male role model is almost always the example. I was making reference to principles, NOT role models. Principles come from role models. Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and ridiculous. Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on. I already did, if you leave your son without a role model he will find his own male role model and you will have no say in the matter. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
Chris wrote:
Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted. Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what they can, while they are able. Phil #3 Wow, this really is a window into your denial. Boys emulate their fathers (or a father figure) close to 100% of the time. If they were indoctrinated, it was the example of victim hood, impotence and weakness from their male role model(s) that indoctrinated them into this sort of lifestyle. And you know they had a male role model how? Phil told us, do you purposely miss everything that doesn't support your rant? And being a cop is not much different than the lifestyle he describes so you can see the connection. The whole "get into a union, volunteer for the first round of layoffs, collect benefits and live cheaply" lifestyle is fairly common and pretty rewarding for a guy with hobbies and no ambition. That's why fathers (father figures) are the key to this, boys enjoy ANYTHING as long as they are getting some positive reinforcement and instruction. With all due respect, whatever are you talking about? Exactly the same thing you are, except you are 100% wrong so you might not get the point here. City kids will love fishing and hunting if they are taught to do those things, redneck kids will love tennis if they are encouraged to do that. Some perhaps, but not necessarily all. If they are taught by their dads the odds are pretty good that they will. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
" wrote in message
... [snip] Oh bloody hell. Who let you out of your cage again? |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
Dusty wrote:
" wrote in message ... [snip] Oh bloody hell. Who let you out of your cage again? You keep posting the ridiculous bull**** and I'll stop in from time to time and make fun of you. I know how much you hate to hear the truth when it contradicts your whining, but someone has to do it. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Schwarzenegger's propaganda
" wrote in message ... Chris wrote: Two of my sons (raised by their mother who restriced my involvement) currently get food stamps and have for several years. They are both healthy and capable but lazy, a lifestyle they didn't get from me. Neither hold a job longer than it takes for unemployment benefits to kick in then they stay unemployed until benefits end only to repeat the cycle with a low-paying job that won't end their eligibility. I've voiced my displeasure with their actions but decades of indoctrination is firmly planted. Yet they both recognize the anti-male actions of government yet enlist voluntarily. I just don't get it. Perhaps they are just getting what they can, while they are able. Phil #3 Wow, this really is a window into your denial. Boys emulate their fathers (or a father figure) close to 100% of the time. If they were indoctrinated, it was the example of victim hood, impotence and weakness from their male role model(s) that indoctrinated them into this sort of lifestyle. And you know they had a male role model how? Phil told us, Apparently, I must have overlooked where he claimed that his children had a male role model. Perhaps you might quote just what he said that leads you to believe so. do you purposely miss everything that doesn't support your rant? And being a cop is not much different than the lifestyle he describes so you can see the connection. The whole "get into a union, volunteer for the first round of layoffs, collect benefits and live cheaply" lifestyle is fairly common and pretty rewarding for a guy with hobbies and no ambition. That's why fathers (father figures) are the key to this, boys enjoy ANYTHING as long as they are getting some positive reinforcement and instruction. With all due respect, whatever are you talking about? Exactly the same thing you are, A CAREFUL review of my statements and yours will reveal that there is absolutely NO relationship between the two. except you are 100% wrong so you might not get the point here. A claim based upon a false premise. City kids will love fishing and hunting if they are taught to do those things, redneck kids will love tennis if they are encouraged to do that. Some perhaps, but not necessarily all. If they are taught by their dads the odds are pretty good that they will. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CA - Schwarzenegger's Miscreant Moms (aka - Daddy, git your shovel) | Dusty | Child Support | 0 | August 26th 06 08:02 AM |
Governor Schwarzenegger's State of the State Address 01/05/2005 | [email protected] | Solutions | 0 | January 6th 05 06:10 AM |
ABC propaganda on aspartame | john | Kids Health | 17 | September 18th 04 08:17 PM |
Debate v Propaganda | Kane | Spanking | 2 | September 14th 04 07:00 PM |
Governor Schwarzenegger's Remarks at the Republican National Convention | Big Brother | Solutions | 0 | September 2nd 04 04:37 AM |