Brothers Kicked Off HGTV Channel Over Anti-Gay Remarks.

[JoeB131]

Those who know this isn't a free speech issue would surely find a free speech issue if a show host announced that he was openly gay and got fired.

Well, no, they'd probably sue under non-discrimination clauses.

I've known people who were fired for being gay. I've known people who were fired for getting sick.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. 10 years from now could easily be a total BAN on homosexuality, nationwide.

No, not really.

You see, here's the thing. Unlike racial discrimination, where you are likely to be comfortable in your bigotry without ever encountering someone from another race, you are far more likely to get the stink-eye from a gay person at Thanksgiving Dinner for being a homophobic bigot.

The tide has turned against you guys. Sorry, you are just going to learn to deal.

 

[Pogo]

Oh shut the hell up, you f'n asshole. I've already refuted you 3 times. Yo'reu not saying a damn thing here, except blowing hot air around. Go home and play checkers. I'm not going to waste my time, continually refuting your ignorant and assinine posts.

Since HGTV based the cancellation on the brothers' SPEECH (didn't you know, genius ?), that makes it a free speech issue, and it isn't only govt that can be held liable for free speech denial as the Pruneyard case precedent established. Now I've refuted you on this twice. If you come back again with this same BS, it'll be strike 3, and I'm gonna put in a formal report on you for harassment.

You're gonna "report" him because he embarrassed you?

You're flat wrong. HGTV is not the government, and nobody, Benhams or otherwise, has a "right" to their own forum on a specific TV show that is a private enterprise and investment in the free market. It's their investment, so it's their call as to who plays in their sandbox. Period, end of story, waiter, check please.

The right in question isn't to a TV show, it is to speak freely, away from the HGTV domain, which was denied, by the TV show being cancelled.

Codswallop.

The "right" (read: privilege) in question absolutely IS a TV show. HGTV has no power whatsoever, nor should it, to influence what anyone says outside their own production. But within their own production it IS their own production, which they invest in and design, therefore they get to say what's on it and who's on it.

Suppose you want to see a show about plumbing. Do you have the "right" to demand they devote their production to plumbing?? Do you have the "right" to force them to hire Joe the Plumber for that show?

OK then. Sheeeeeesh.

1. Another pretender. YOU KNOW why I'd report him.

2. Period, end of story, until you read the previous post about the Pruneyard vs Robins, SCOTUS case mentioned earlier. Oh, you didn't read it ? And that's why you now don't know what your talking about ? Well, NOT MY PROBLEM.

Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. The speech that HGTV objected to, WAS NOT WITHIN THEIR OWN PRODUCTION. It was years earlier, in a different time & place.

4. SHEEEEESHH!!!

1. No, I have no idea

2. I already read it the first time you dragged it in there. Has it somehow taken on relevance since then?

3. Again, irrelevant. See "morals clause". Nor is there any evidence HGTV "objected to" anything.

4. Agreed.

 

[GISMYS]

Those that choose to live in the sick abomination of sexual perversion! BEWARE!!!===

◄ Isaiah 5:20 ►
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
The wages of sin is death and hell!

 

[Vigilante]

Oh Boy...POGO'S HERE!!!!!.... I Hear you owe someone a MILLION DOLLARS....PAY UP, SUCKA!!!!!

 

[Silhouette]

Those who know this isn't a free speech issue would surely find a free speech issue if a show host announced that he was openly gay and got fired.

Yes. And key to that observation is that people always forget that "LGBT" and "gay" is a description, an incomplete one, of deviant sexual behaviors acting "as-race". But properly, a cult is not a race, it's a religion. The trick of these folks in debate is to get you calling them "gay" as if that was an intrinsic state of being, "born that way" instead of a habit picked up along the way.

Let's all not make that mistake. And don't forget the poor polygamists and incest kinks that "LGBT" has strategically left off their menu for now..

 

[Pogo]

Those who know this isn't a free speech issue would surely find a free speech issue if a show host announced that he was openly gay and got fired.

Yes. And key to that observation is that people always forget that "LGBT" and "gay" is a description, an incomplete one, of deviant sexual behaviors acting "as-race". But properly, a cult is not a race, it's a religion. The trick of these folks in debate is to get you calling them "gay" as if that was an intrinsic state of being, "born that way" instead of a habit picked up along the way.

Riiiight, because it's a "choice", right? Like being lefthanded. Just swat that left hand and make 'em write northpaw, the fucking deviants.

"Well I'm in puberty now, I have a choice; I can go for the opposite sex and fit right in with 'approved' society, or I can go gay and be persecuted, ostracized and isolated into an underground... yeah I'll go with The Gay, what's to lose?"

 

[GISMYS]

Yes!!! Living in the sick minded abomination of sexual perversion is a CHOICE,a very poor choice with a very high price!

 

[Katzndogz]

Nonsense.

There is no ‘right in question,’ the issue of rights pertain only to the relationship between the government and those governed; the show being canceled or the brothers being dismissed in no way ‘violates’ their rights, as HGTV has no authority to seek to restrict the right to free speech – as it is not a government authorized to do so – and absent the program there are ample other avenues for the brothers to freely express their ignorance and hate concerning gay Americans.

Oh shut the hell up, you f'n asshole. I've already refuted you 3 times. Yo'reu not saying a damn thing here, except blowing hot air around. Go home and play checkers. I'm not going to waste my time, continually refuting your ignorant and assinine posts.

Since HGTV based the cancellation on the brothers' SPEECH (didn't you know, genius ?), that makes it a free speech issue, and it isn't only govt that can be held liable for free speech denial as the Pruneyard case precedent established. Now I've refuted you on this twice. If you come back again with this same BS, it'll be strike 3, and I'm gonna put in a formal report on you for harassment.

You're gonna "report" him because he embarrassed you?

You're flat wrong. HGTV is not the government, and nobody, Benhams or otherwise, has a "right" to their own forum on a specific TV show that is a private enterprise and investment in the free market. It's their investment, so it's their call as to who plays in their sandbox. Period, end of story, waiter, check please.

The right in question isn't to a TV show, it is to speak freely, away from the HGTV domain, which was denied, by the TV show being cancelled.

Codswallop.

The "right" (read: privilege) in question absolutely IS a TV show. HGTV has no power whatsoever, nor should it, to influence what anyone says outside their own production. But within their own production it IS their own production, which they invest in and design, therefore they get to say what's on it and who's on it.

Suppose you want to see a show about plumbing. Do you have the "right" to demand they devote their production to plumbing?? Do you have the "right" to force them to hire Joe the Plumber for that show?

OK then. Sheeeeeesh.

Following that line of logic, HGTV has an absolute right to control the content of their shows and prohibit any speech they disapprove of while appearing in any show on their network.

That's not what happened here. The network is punishing speech that occurred a year ago, not on any of their shows.

 

[Pogo]

Oh shut the hell up, you f'n asshole. I've already refuted you 3 times. Yo'reu not saying a damn thing here, except blowing hot air around. Go home and play checkers. I'm not going to waste my time, continually refuting your ignorant and assinine posts.

Since HGTV based the cancellation on the brothers' SPEECH (didn't you know, genius ?), that makes it a free speech issue, and it isn't only govt that can be held liable for free speech denial as the Pruneyard case precedent established. Now I've refuted you on this twice. If you come back again with this same BS, it'll be strike 3, and I'm gonna put in a formal report on you for harassment.

You're gonna "report" him because he embarrassed you?

You're flat wrong. HGTV is not the government, and nobody, Benhams or otherwise, has a "right" to their own forum on a specific TV show that is a private enterprise and investment in the free market. It's their investment, so it's their call as to who plays in their sandbox. Period, end of story, waiter, check please.

The right in question isn't to a TV show, it is to speak freely, away from the HGTV domain, which was denied, by the TV show being cancelled.

Codswallop.

The "right" (read: privilege) in question absolutely IS a TV show. HGTV has no power whatsoever, nor should it, to influence what anyone says outside their own production. But within their own production it IS their own production, which they invest in and design, therefore they get to say what's on it and who's on it.

Suppose you want to see a show about plumbing. Do you have the "right" to demand they devote their production to plumbing?? Do you have the "right" to force them to hire Joe the Plumber for that show?

OK then. Sheeeeeesh.

Following that line of logic, HGTV has an absolute right to control the content of their shows and prohibit any speech they disapprove of while appearing in any show on their network.

That's not what happened here. The network is punishing speech that occurred a year ago, not on any of their shows.

Are they really.

Where did they say that?

 

[emilynghiem]

What is sad is the families that will lose out on a new home because of political persecution of someone expressing their faith.

Dear Avatar: The brothers hold no ill will toward HGTV in keeping with Christian faith that God has a higher purpose and plan, and the point is to follow that, putting God first before Mammon.

I looked up the Benham Company website, and was impressed with their company ethics and philosophy of service to be a blessing to others.
http://benhambrothers.com/companies

So if this hadn't happened, maybe I would not have heard of them at a critical time.
Maybe we do need to re-prioritize as a Nation, separate the sheep from the goats,
and re-organize our resources around the companies and leaders who DO support
like values.

There is no conflict in separating out and organizing around the groups we align with.
If we all do this, we can get a lot more accomplished.
and QUIT wasting time, money and media resources fighting other groups.

Let's use this opportunity to organize resources and get good working solutions going that are sustainable.

Nobody can build in an unwelcome environment. But let's turn this situation around,
and start investing in building more communities based on these Brothers' commitment to serving others in a "sustainable way" that will break the cycle of poverty and end
the "victimhood" mentality that fuels bullying and creates dependence on govt.

Here is my letter below I sent by email last Friday, May 9.
I will send it to some pastoral leaders and ask them to issue a formal statement addressing other ministerial communities who have been silenced on this issue.

There was a whole coalition of African American Pastors http://caapus.org/ who stood up to Obama on the gay marriage issue, but where are they now? Why did the media never cover them?
http://www.whas11.com/news/local/Se...on-of-African-American-Pastors-258676201.html
This is an opportunity to unite in faith, and invest our own resources in growing sustainable communities, and quit fighting for resources we don't control. We can do plenty with the resources we do control!

===========================================

Dear David and Jason Benham:

I trust that it is God's plans that you are separating from HGTV at a time that our country and media are facing massive reform and restructuring.

In order to "teach more people how to fish" I would like to see your Real Estate outreach efforts replicated nationwide -- to serve as a model example for the country and the media, of rebuilding our nation and economy based on historic principles that make America great.

If you would like to head up a Christian campus and TV show to teach real estate, to help churches manage "sustainable revenue" to pay for charity outreach to help Vets and other families in recovery, please contact me or my team that is working to save a National Historic Church District as a community campus for sustainable development, real estate business mentoring, and job training in social services and government reform.

Freedmen's Town Historic Churches and Vet Housing

This website was going to be redesigned by local students. I was planning a national fundraiser to buy historic rowhouses for students to set up a school, when I read about your story online. I believe God has a greater plan.

Although Freedmen's Town is the only National Historic settlement of its kind left in the entire nation, built by Freed Slaves from the ground up (with only the help of Churches and God, since Government has never recognized the residents as equal citizens), the City of Houston has no plans to save these churches, and has even threatened to take land away from a widow after demolishing her church.

Time running out for historic Freedman's Town - Houston weather, traffic, news | FOX 26 | MyFoxHouston

Please help the local students, churches, and community of faith to save our national history as a model campus for others to follow.

My local Pastoral and Community leaders can be contacted as listed below.

If you feel a calling to lead this national campus project, please contact us. I am glad to help raise funds for the right team to restore this national district as a model campus, according to God's higher plans for rebuilding America.

Thank you and God Bless!

Yours truly,

Emily Nghiem 713-820-5130

National Freedmen's Town District

Freedmen's Town Historic Churches and Vet Housing

Church, Nonprofit and Business Community Leaders:
* Gladys House, 832-781-9724, CDC of Freedmen’s Town
Author of Vet Housing and Health Care Business Plan
* Catherine Roberts, Yates MuseumArchaeology and technological methods for preserving landmark Brick Streets
* Lenwood Johnson, 281-709-3001, Free Man’s Neighborhood Association, Co-Author, APV Community Campus Concepts under HOPE VI Federal Legislation
* Darrell Patterson, 713-269-2857, Fourth Ward Health and Educational Center for Youth, Fourth Ward Youth Plans for Economic Development, Youth Bank, and Preservation
* Sally Wickers, M.Ed, 281-932-3836, Coalition of Pastoral Leaders and educational development

FROM: Emily Nghiem, National Freedmen’s Town District, LLC, Fund for microloans toward restitution

Online Media Outreach, Ministry and Charter School Development:
Robert E. DuBose 512-703-7112

 

[Katzndogz]

It was an organized hit by an anti Christian group, through several anti Christian groups.

Meet The Liberal Network That Orchestrated The Hit On The Benham Brothers | The Daily Caller

A number of news outlets credited Right Wing Watch with drawing attention to the Benham’s pro-life, pro-traditional marriage views. But what is Right Wing Watch and who is behind it?

The answer: The anti-Christian conservative effort in Hollywood.

Right Wing Watch is a project of the liberal advocacy group People for the American Way, which started with an assist from the left-wing Tides Foundation.

People for the American Way was founded with help from former television Norman Lear, a Hollywood executive producer credited with starting the anti-Christian-right movement in the 1980s.

It wasn't like HGTV decided on its own that this show would reflect badly on the HGTV network. They were bullied into it.

 

[emilynghiem]

Yes and no.
Yes, some LGBT are spiritually born that way.
Some are made by man, by sexual abuse which can be healed
and the sexual behavior along with it (whether homosexual or heterosexual)

The LEGAL issue is NOT someone's sexuality which is private and outside govt jurisdiction.

The ISSUE is imposing terms on marriage (which is religious) that not all people believe in.
Both sides are guilty of doing this, where they disagree, but are abusing govt and law
to impose a BIAS. Marriage is spiritual or religious and not to be dictated by govt.

If we separate the spiritual/religious beliefs about marriage, and keep that private.
Then the legal issues concerning "civil contracts, custody and estates" can be kept secular,
neutral and under state jurisdiction.

Both sides are crossing the line by imposing terms on marriage that others don't believe in.

As for people being born or made gay, or choosing to follow karma or to resolve issues and be healed -- THAT is a spiritual/religious issue of people's paths in life, and govt has no jurisdiction to dictate, regulate or punish people for their internal spiritual process.

Only if they commit a crime or abuse of civil rights of others is it state jurisdiction.
If people have not committed any crime or abuse, and have not undergone due process,
they have equal protection not to be deprived of liberty, rights or freedoms.

If people on BOTH sides keep imposing on each other, keep abusing political or govt/legal authority to threaten the equal protection of other people's beliefs; then THOSE PEOPLE are equally guilty. So where is the DUE PROCESS to hold THOSE people accountable?

And QUIT punishing everyone else by imposing biased laws or ruling that favor one side!

Those who know this isn't a free speech issue would surely find a free speech issue if a show host announced that he was openly gay and got fired.

Yes. And key to that observation is that people always forget that "LGBT" and "gay" is a description, an incomplete one, of deviant sexual behaviors acting "as-race". But properly, a cult is not a race, it's a religion. The trick of these folks in debate is to get you calling them "gay" as if that was an intrinsic state of being, "born that way" instead of a habit picked up along the way.

Let's all not make that mistake. And don't forget the poor polygamists and incest kinks that "LGBT" has strategically left off their menu for now..

I do agree there is a problem comparing LGBT/equal human rights with the Black movement for civil rights. The Civil Rights movement was successful in uniting people where it applied to ALL people, of different classes and denominations. The Black Power movements fail by pitting "Blacks against Whites" and creating division and opposition.

The LGBT movement for "equal rights" leaves out the beliefs of other people, so it is not universally inclusive as Dr. King led people to unite and not be separated by fear.

The successful version of this movement would probably be more along the lines of
EQUAL INCLUSION
or POLITICAL EQUALITY
which could be promoted to defend and protect ALL people of ALL views and beliefs.

That is what I would like to see come out of this campaign.
The same way Civil Rights was promoted by Dr. King to be INCLUSIVE NOT DIVISIVE,
the Equal Inclusion or Political Equality principle should be UNIVERSAL not one-sided.

 

[Papageorgio]

Those who know this isn't a free speech issue would surely find a free speech issue if a show host announced that he was openly gay and got fired.

Well, no, they'd probably sue under non-discrimination clauses.

I've known people who were fired for being gay. I've known people who were fired for getting sick.

Were you in on why they were let go or is this employee speculation?

 

[Papageorgio]

Oh shut the hell up, you f'n asshole. I've already refuted you 3 times. Yo'reu not saying a damn thing here, except blowing hot air around. Go home and play checkers. I'm not going to waste my time, continually refuting your ignorant and assinine posts.

Since HGTV based the cancellation on the brothers' SPEECH (didn't you know, genius ?), that makes it a free speech issue, and it isn't only govt that can be held liable for free speech denial as the Pruneyard case precedent established. Now I've refuted you on this twice. If you come back again with this same BS, it'll be strike 3, and I'm gonna put in a formal report on you for harassment.

You're gonna "report" him because he embarrassed you?

You're flat wrong. HGTV is not the government, and nobody, Benhams or otherwise, has a "right" to their own forum on a specific TV show that is a private enterprise and investment in the free market. It's their investment, so it's their call as to who plays in their sandbox. Period, end of story, waiter, check please.

The right in question isn't to a TV show, it is to speak freely, away from the HGTV domain, which was denied, by the TV show being cancelled.

Codswallop.

The "right" (read: privilege) in question absolutely IS a TV show. HGTV has no power whatsoever, nor should it, to influence what anyone says outside their own production. But within their own production it IS their own production, which they invest in and design, therefore they get to say what's on it and who's on it.

Suppose you want to see a show about plumbing. Do you have the "right" to demand they devote their production to plumbing?? Do you have the "right" to force them to hire Joe the Plumber for that show?

OK then. Sheeeeeesh.

Following that line of logic, HGTV has an absolute right to control the content of their shows and prohibit any speech they disapprove of while appearing in any show on their network.

That's not what happened here. The network is punishing speech that occurred a year ago, not on any of their shows.

It is well within the right of a network to hire and fire whoever they want.

The network is being intolerant however it is their right as a private entity. They have a right to do what they feel is in the best interest of their network. Bill Maher was fired for what he said on ABC, ABC had every right to fire Maher.

 

[protectionist]

It was an organized hit by an anti Christian group, through several anti Christian groups.

Meet The Liberal Network That Orchestrated The Hit On The Benham Brothers | The Daily Caller

A number of news outlets credited Right Wing Watch with drawing attention to the Benham’s pro-life, pro-traditional marriage views. But what is Right Wing Watch and who is behind it?

The answer: The anti-Christian conservative effort in Hollywood.

Right Wing Watch is a project of the liberal advocacy group People for the American Way, which started with an assist from the left-wing Tides Foundation.

People for the American Way was founded with help from former television Norman Lear, a Hollywood executive producer credited with starting the anti-Christian-right movement in the 1980s.

It wasn't like HGTV decided on its own that this show would reflect badly on the HGTV network. They were bullied into it.

This is not the slightest bit surprising. Nowadays, queers (along with Islamists) are the 2 most fascist, intolerant groups in America, who absolutely demand to have THEIR way, no matter what.

 

[protectionist]

You're gonna "report" him because he embarrassed you?

You're flat wrong. HGTV is not the government, and nobody, Benhams or otherwise, has a "right" to their own forum on a specific TV show that is a private enterprise and investment in the free market. It's their investment, so it's their call as to who plays in their sandbox. Period, end of story, waiter, check please.




Codswallop.

The "right" (read: privilege) in question absolutely IS a TV show. HGTV has no power whatsoever, nor should it, to influence what anyone says outside their own production. But within their own production it IS their own production, which they invest in and design, therefore they get to say what's on it and who's on it.

Suppose you want to see a show about plumbing. Do you have the "right" to demand they devote their production to plumbing?? Do you have the "right" to force them to hire Joe the Plumber for that show?

OK then. Sheeeeeesh.

1. Another pretender. YOU KNOW why I'd report him.

2. Period, end of story, until you read the previous post about the Pruneyard vs Robins, SCOTUS case mentioned earlier. Oh, you didn't read it ? And that's why you now don't know what your talking about ? Well, NOT MY PROBLEM.

Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. The speech that HGTV objected to, WAS NOT WITHIN THEIR OWN PRODUCTION. It was years earlier, in a different time & place.

4. SHEEEEESHH!!!

1. No, I have no idea

2. I already read it the first time you dragged it in there. Has it somehow taken on relevance since then?

3. Again, irrelevant. See "morals clause". Nor is there any evidence HGTV "objected to" anything.

4. Agreed.

1. YOU KNOW.

2. Then you're either lying, or incredibly stupid.

3. Not irrelevant. You said the objected-to speech was within their own production. It wasn't. And of course HGTV objected to it. Or at least that's what they said.

4. Sheeeesh!!

 

[protectionist]

[

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. 10 years from now could easily be a total BAN on homosexuality, nationwide.

No, not really.

You see, here's the thing. Unlike racial discrimination, where you are likely to be comfortable in your bigotry without ever encountering someone from another race, you are far more likely to get the stink-eye from a gay person at Thanksgiving Dinner for being a homophobic bigot.

The tide has turned against you guys. Sorry, you are just going to learn to deal.

NONSENSE! Future SCOTUS's can simply overrule the past judgement of last year. And if elections go the way they seem to be headed, that's exactly what will happen.
Today's "tide" could easily be just a temporary glitch along the way.

 

[Pogo]

1. Another pretender. YOU KNOW why I'd report him.

2. Period, end of story, until you read the previous post about the Pruneyard vs Robins, SCOTUS case mentioned earlier. Oh, you didn't read it ? And that's why you now don't know what your talking about ? Well, NOT MY PROBLEM.

Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. The speech that HGTV objected to, WAS NOT WITHIN THEIR OWN PRODUCTION. It was years earlier, in a different time & place.

4. SHEEEEESHH!!!

1. No, I have no idea

2. I already read it the first time you dragged it in there. Has it somehow taken on relevance since then?

3. Again, irrelevant. See "morals clause". Nor is there any evidence HGTV "objected to" anything.

4. Agreed.

1. YOU KNOW.

2. Then you're either lying, or incredibly stupid.

3. Not irrelevant. You said the objected-to speech was within their own production. It wasn't. And of course HGTV objected to it. Or at least that's what they said.

4. Sheeeesh!!

Absolute BULLSHIT. I posted no such thing. Let's see it.

On the contrary, I just called out the statement that "the network is punishing speech that occurred a year ago, not on any of their shows". Because that's not what they said at all, nor did the Benhams say that. You'll notice that callout got no response. Because there isn't any.

Indeed the third post I made in this thread quoted the brothers -- from the OP video itself --- explicitly saying they were NOT let go for reasons of their faith. "They never said that" was their phrase. So how do you get "within their own production"?

So you want to put words in my mouth that are the direct opposite of what I posted, and then talk "lying" huh? So no, HGTV did not say that, the Benhams did not say that, and I did not say that. YOU said that.

And furthermore, direct contradiction is right there in the post you quoted. I bolded it into red so that even your sorry ass could read it.

What the fuck is it with you losers who think you can just make shit up and get away with it?

 

[protectionist]

[

1. Another pretender. YOU KNOW why I'd report him.

2. Period, end of story, until you read the previous post about the Pruneyard vs Robins, SCOTUS case mentioned earlier. Oh, you didn't read it ? And that's why you now don't know what your talking about ? Well, NOT MY PROBLEM.

Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. The speech that HGTV objected to, WAS NOT WITHIN THEIR OWN PRODUCTION. It was years earlier, in a different time & place.

4. SHEEEEESHH!!!

1. You'd report him because you're butthurt?

2. Pruneyard isn't comparable to HGTV. HGTV would be required to lay out millions of dollars to air the Bigot Brothers show if they went forward. They probably did have to pay them out something to not go forward, which is why the two Bigots aren't whining about HGTV but about the activists who griped.

3. The Speech that HGTV objected to would have had negative impact on their business. This is why the Food Network fired Paula Deen and why A&E wanted to fire Phil Robertson.

4. Sheesh is right.

1. The report would have been for REPEATED harassment (regardless of any effect on me)

2. Pruneyard is comparable. In both cases a private company took action against people by virtue of their speech, and the SCOTUS ruled their state law prohibited them from doing that.

3. Got a shred of evidence that "the Speech that HGTV objected to, would have had negative impact on their business." ? If so, let's hear it.

4. Sheeeesh!!