Friday, 13 November 2009

Bad Coffee?

Who is this forlorn looking individual? Is the pained expression the result of a really bad cup of joe? Of course, if he was a Kiwi, he'd probably be lamenting the lack of sausage rolls on the table, but he's definitely American.

Clue 1: this fellow's name appeared frequently as a correspondent on AW - both the old version and the current blog. A voice of reason and moderation here that earned much respect.

Clue 2: he seems to have now channeled his energies into politics - this photo was taken in the election year of 2008.

Unrelated observation: it's interesting to note the political choices people make when they leave a marginal religious culture like WCG (and its clones.) Often it's to a similarly non-mainstream group. One of the original collaborators with John Trechak on Ambassador Report took on a leading role with the Libertarian Party, as I recollect it. But no, we're not talking about the Libertarians in association with the gentleman above.

Who will be the first non-anonymous reader to identify our man of mystery?

Postscript: Mike of Flavor Aid fame took it out at the first reply, even providing a link which includes a far more flattering photo. The source for this photograph is here.

45 comments:

Mike (Don't Drink the Flavor Aid) said...

Can I be first?

That would be Bill Lussenheide. I enjoyed his humorous comments when he posted here before.

Russell Miller said...

"Defend America's moral values; keep God in the pledge of allegiance and on our nations currency and coinage.

Fully protect the right to life of the innocent unborn"

Well, he'd never get my vote. Just another ex-wcg republican wannabe.

Gavin said...

Hey Mike, record time for a response! Well done.

Anonymous said...

Well that was unexpected.

Corky said...

No one probably noticed that America started going downhill when "In God We Trust" was printed on our dollars.

You see, the problem is - they printed it on the back.

What's wrong with that? Humans are printed on the front. That puts man ahead of God don't ya know, and you may remember how that always turned out in your old testament.

Anonymous said...

"Stop undeclared wars which are daily costing American lives and billions of tax dollars."

Not very Republican there, eh, Russ?



The Apostate Paul

Questeruk said...

I see principle 1 of the Constitution Party is

Life: For all human beings, from conception to natural death;

This sounds a noble principle.

However, while their policy is definitely pro-life in the sense of opposing abortion, it appears that their stance changes once the birth has taken place.

The party appears to be
- Against healthcare programs (medical care only for those that can pay for it, otherwise too bad, why should we help)
- Against enforced wearing of seat belts (which demonstrably cuts wholesale injury and death in road accidents).
- Against a ban on smoking in public places (non smokers must be prepared to breathe the smoke of smokers, and share their risk of cancer and other problems).

I can only suppose the ‘natural death’ they refer to includes death from lack of medical assistance, avoidable death from road accidents and death from cancers inflicted on others by smokers.

It’s a funny old world.

Russell Miller said...

Wow, corky, you're good at that. Do the pledge next. Please please please.

(may have tipped off the fence towards spirituality but still utterly abhor social conservatives - ignorance is unappealing.)

Bill Lussenheide said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bill Lussenheide said...

PART TWO...

I was never a deacon, or elder or any kind of church leader in the COG. I never attended Ambassador College, nor was I ever employed by the church. Although certain things were interesting to me as a young impressionable 17 year old, (when I first passed thru the doors, especially the news and political commentary of some of the church publications), it was obvious that the WCG was off, and that Herbert Armstrong and his church was a toxic religion.

Like the layers of an onion, as one became involved, more subtle and wrong teaching was taught, or expected to be followed. It was not a comfortable experience, and during this time, I did (privately) attend other churches, and completely ignored many of the teachings of the WCG and Armstrong in my own private life.

I viewed myself as an independent Christian, even back then, and not a member of a denomination. I regret ever passing thru the WCGs doors even once.

My own political thought process evolved as follows..there were years I did not vote in my youth. This wasnt because of anything taught at a church though. I was very interested in things political, but felt bitter over the Vietnam war, and having grown up in the ghetto of East Los Angeles, seeing an inordinate amount of the poor inner city young men, get drafted, killed and sent to Vietnam. A book by Gary Allen, "None Dare Call It Conspiracy" inspired me and greatly moved me, and turned me off of the Nixon Republicans and the Carter Democrats.

I spent those years exploring Libertarian economic ideas, (although I am not in the Libertarian Party) and the works of the "hard money" crowd, ie., Harry Browne, Doug Casey, the Von Mises group etc. Now in my mid-50s, I enjoy the activism of the Tea Parties, and the concept of Conservative Constitutional government. It has always been my desire, since early youth, to touch the world for good and to try to have a small personal impact to help a world hell bent on destruction, to be a better place.

I have no association with any COG group, and frankly am considered a personna non-grata pariah by most of the COGS. I have not been to a COG service pushing some 20 years. The COG never did believe in voting, or democratic process. I do, and have, and encourage community involvement and activism.

Where ever you find yourself, make the effort to enrich and touch others lives for good in love.

Your Friend,
Bill Lussenheide

Russell Miller said...

"Where ever you find yourself, make the effort to enrich and touch others lives for good in love."

Very nice platitude, and I appreciate it. Too bad your platform is about as unloving as you can get without an (R) next to your name. Too bad I don't live in your district so I could campaign for your opponent(s).

Gavin said...

Russell, Russell, Russell, play nice!

Though I'm interested in hearing from Bill how he justifies the Neanderthal policies on health care (having just come out of a fully funded and very uncomfortable "procedure" - euphemisms: gotta love 'em - yesterday, courtesy of an imperfect but nonetheless essential public health system in NZ), seat belts (you gotta be kidding!) and smoking in public places.

Russell Miller said...

Gavin, Gavin, Gavin, I WAS playing nice. I had two words all ready for him but I know you wouldn't let them through, so I took the high road. :-)

Anonymous said...

"Though I'm interested in hearing from Bill how he justifies the Neanderthal policies on health care..."

And I am equally interested in your explanation on how his health care policies aren't just inadequate, but are Neanderthal.

"Too bad your platform is about as unloving as you can get without an (R) next to your name."

What do you mean by "unloving?"

The Apostate Paul

Gavin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
PUBLIUS said...

Bill,

Mary Bono raised 1.5 million in contributions for her 2006 re-election campaign. More than a trifle.

As a social liberal and fiscal conservative, she won around 60% of the votes in her last repeat re-election, with Sonny long gone. Ah well, the Beat Goes On.

Even her Scientology hasn't hurt her one bit:

"California Congresswoman Mary Bono has long had ties with the Church of Scientology and is still linked with the organization, according to several sources. Bono has taken at least six courses in the religion, according to Celebrity, a Scientology publication that chronicles activities of prominent members. One course, which she took in 1990, was on family counseling.

The Congresswoman’s former husband, the late Sonny Bono, was deeply involved with the controversial church, according to a number of people who follow the organization, although he sometimes downplayed or denied any association with the group. He was introduced to Scientology by Mimi Rogers, Tom Cruise’s ex, and at one point became so involved in the church that he reportedly prepared a testimonial to the religion.

Several high-level members of the church, including the Rev. Heber Jentzsch, the president of Scientology, attended Sonny Bono’s funeral earlier this year. A spokeswoman for the church acknowledged that Scientology officials attended Sonny Bono’s funeral, but would not comment on Congresswoman Bono."

Just how do you plan to win the 45th when many of your positions line up with Bono's- hope and pray?

Gavin's unfortunate snap makes you look like Lyndon Johnson; that is, the morning after after Uncle Walter said on the evening news Nam wasn't going to be a winnable war.

May the voters in the 45th look past such a heavy heart and VOTE FOR LUSSENHEIDE!!!

Good luck.

Publius

Bamboo_bends said...

Well...at least he's not a Banana Republican off-shoring American jobs! And then they blame Obama for unemployment after 9 months in office?

My hat's off to Bill (regardless of his beliefs) for re-engaging with life and not being on the sidelines!

My hunch is his first $300,000 medical bill will change his mind on health care. That's only 30 days in ICU.

Anonymous said...

I agree w/ all points of Bill's platform - very sane. I've never worn seat belts in 40 years of driving - never will either. My state just made it mandatory thanks to Fed arm twisting over HWY funding but the cops don't enforce it (very decent of them). I've driven right past them in traffic talking on the Cell, no belt, and they ignore it like they should (very enlightened of them).

Ned Flanders said...

"I've driven right past them in traffic talking on the Cell, no belt"

Then you're an idiot.

Leonardo said...

A bit off-topic here, but regarding the whole seat-belt issue.

The empirical evidence is both indisputable and overwhelming that seat-belts save lives and directly prevent many serious injuries.

One time when I had been working a little overtime in Pasadena, I was driving home at night and a gal driving directly in front of me (in the same direction I was headed in) slowly veered off the road going about 50 miles per hour and plowed straight into a telephone pole. Since it took place right in front of me I saw the whole thing.

I was the first one on the scene of the accident and rendered what aid I could to her. If you could have witnessed the ghastly scene that I saw that night, as she wasn't wearing her seat-belt, and consequently flew face-first right up into the windshield, perhaps that would have made a believer out of you as to the importance of seat-belt usage.

The good news is that I later found out (via her lawyer who called me up as I was the only direct witness to the accident) she did survive the crash, but I’m sure her dental and plastic surgery bills were astronomical.

Please, my fellow bloggers, wear your seat-belt, it’s such an incredibly simple and easy habit to get into. I’m sure that young woman who smashed into the pole that terrible night would agree with my plea.

Bill Lussenheide said...

Im not sure where the information about not wearing seat belts or public smoking comes from, but it is not part of the party platform, and I know of no one who does not support current laws for such.

However, creeping government personal intrusion continues in the USA, and even things like "Fat Taxes" and the like are now being considered to "protect us from ourselves". Not a good direction.

In the health arena, I am certainly for the concept of unlimited Health Savings Accounts,whereas an individual has ownership and control over his health dollar, and retains the right of choice on where they spend their health care . This allows competition and economy in the health sector, and makes a person think twice about abusing the system, ie, seeking medical help just for sniffles.

Health care represents over 14% of the economy, and to have this just simply "socialized" is just not how things are done in a free economy or society. Allowing "Big Brother" to control your medical delivery, or what type of service you receive, frankly scares me.

Hospitals, doctors, and other health care providers should be accountable to patients - not to politicians, insurance bureaucrats, or HMO Administrators.

If the supply of medical care is controlled by the federal government, then officers of that government will determine which demand is satisfied. The result will be the rationing of services, higher costs, poorer results - and the power of life and death transferred from caring physicians to unaccountable political overseers.

Be wise, wear your seatbelt, stop smoking, have in place (as I do) some very inexpensive, high deductible health insurance. There are reforms necessary in the Health insurance industry, however, having cradle to grave state socialism is not the answer. Socialism IS the scariest cult of all!

Bill Lussenheide said...

In response to Publius...

Many of my positions do not "line up" with Mary Bono.

I do not back "Cap and Trade" legislation, motivated by the bogus "global warming" hoax.

I also do not support the Unconstitutional "bailouts" which have resulted in virtually nothing for the working man, but has allowed for huge graft, and multi million dollar compensation for bankers, CEOs and others. It has become a giant corporate welfare slush fund. Cutting of EVERYONES taxes would have created an immediate stimulus effect, be much fairer and would have put dollars in the pockets of the working class immediately, where it was needed most.

I am for the audit, control, and removal of the Federal Reserve system.

Many more differences between us. How to win in the 45th?? Vote for Bill, and vote often! :-)

Anonymous said...

Bamboo Bends posted: "Well...at least he's not a Banana Republican off-shoring American jobs! And then they blame Obama for unemployment after 9 months in office?"

It was only a matter of time before the democrat or republican apologists chimed in with a defense of their party's fair haired politician.

First of all he has been in office for 10 months and the economy is still going the wrong direction.

The 'Stimulus' was a sop to party favorites and has resulted in numerous taxpayer boondoogles in my state alone.

I remember Bush being (correctly) vilified for a lack of clear strategy in Iraq, now 10 months into Obama's administration we still have *No* strategy in Afghanistan and the taliban runs most of the country. We are spending billions of dollars and hundreds of Allied lives defending what amounts to three cities.

The pace of jobs leaving the USA has actually increased in 2009 (Star Ledger).

'W': Greatly increases both the budget deficit and the national debt

Obama: Makes 'ol Georgie look like a penny-pincher by running even higher budget deficits and increasing the national debt in one act of congress by more than the sum of the all previous administrations.

'W': Got Americans and our allies involved in two wars without giving the effort both the legal and national support that is needed for a clear victory and stable future.

Obama: Due to his inability to heed his general's advice on strategy and troop levels, appears ready to leave Afghanistan and Pakistan to the dogs and doesn't appear to be losing any sleep that his inaction is costing allied lives while they play defense for a corrupt regime.

'W': Other than getting us involved in wars, the NCLB act, patriot act, more burdensome debt, and letting wall street money men bankrupt the financial system, 'W' didn't accomplish much.

Obama: Other than further burying the nation in debt, getting more servicemen and women killed, and attempting to pass health care reform crafted by hand wringers and namby pambies, hasn't done much either.


If you were a fan of "W" then you should really love Obama. He is outdoing Bush on all fronts.

Throw the bums out.

Note to Luss: In this day and age, don't you really think that health care is a basic human right? Health care costs my wife and me for my family of six, a few thousand dollars each year and we HAVE insurance (Not counting my monthly premiums which is approx $5k p/y). Imagine what a simple Dr. visit does to those without means.

Anonymous said...

"The good news is that ... she did survive the crash, but I’m sure her dental and plastic surgery bills were astronomical."

Dental and plastic surgery bills aren't the worst of it. Odds are very high she's brain-damaged for life, possibly profoundly, but at a minimum partially.

Honestly, what's with this American attitude of "nobody'd better tell ME what to do". We've got motorcylcists fighting against helmet laws, drivers who don't want to wear seat belts, gun owners who think the the have the right to own Uzi's, etc. The list goes on and on.

The flip side of ""nobody'd better tell ME what to do" is "nobody has the right to force me to pay for my neighbor's ________" (fill in the blank - health care is the current #1 answer).

Come on, Americans, this isn't the cowboy days of the wild west. This is the 21st century. Let's act like it.

The Skeptic

Russell Miller said...

INterestingly enough, he's in riverside county. just s hort trip from here. I *could* campaign against him. Have to see what's going on...

Corky said...

Russell Miller said...
Wow, corky, you're good at that. Do the pledge next. Please please please.

You know, I can see why a pledge would be a good thing for immigrants to the US to recite.

Once!

I see no reason to have to recite it again tomorrow and all next week, month, year etc.

Elementary school children who recite the pledge daily must do a lot of traitorous things during the day before in order to have to repeat the pledge the following day. Besides, if they're born citizens, alliegence to the flag is expected and goes without saying.

But, the "under God" part - that's a different story. Why force a non-christian or atheist immigrant to recite a pledge of allegience to the flag with God in it to become a citizen of the US?

Besides that, it's bogus anyway. "Under God" simply means, "obedient to God" and we all know that America is far from being obedient to God. Neither is the US operating under authority from God. You know, just in case someone thinks "under God" means "under God's authority".

In any case, a pledge should only have to be done one time and that's the way it is done in any other club or organization.

Sue said...

Have to agree about wearing seatbelts...wearing mine saved my life in 1990. I slid on an ice patch...car hit a bridge abuttment, flipped over on roof, and then ended back on tires. In the process...the roof was crushed in and I had a broken neck. BUT, the firemen and paramedics told me that the windshield was UNDER the car and that is where I would have been if I had not been wearing my seatbelt. I know of a couple of others who have had roll overs also who probably wouldn't be here if they had not been wearing their seatbelts. But I doubt if I will convince anyone with the facts that have already been offered showing that seatbelts do save lives. It's your choice.
Sue

Leonardo said...

Al Gore, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama go to heaven...

God addresses Al first.. ''Al, what do you believe in?''

Al replies: "Well, I believe that I won that election, but that it was your will that I did not serve..And I've come to understand that now.''

God thinks for a second and says:

"Very good. Come and sit at my left.''

God then addresses Bill. "Bill, what do you believe in?''

Bill replies: "I believe in forgiveness. I've sinned, but I've never held a grudge against my fellow man, and I hope no grudges are held against me.''

God thinks for a second and says:

"You are forgiven, my son. Come and sit at my right.''

Then God addresses Obama. "Barack, what do you believe in?''

Obama replies: "I believe you're sitting in my chair."

Anonymous said...

"If you were a fan of "W" then you should really love Obama. He is outdoing Bush on all fronts.

Throw the bums out"

Hear, Hear!

It won't happen of course- most voters, come election time, brainlessly pull that lever along Party Lines, voting to keep the Other Guy out of office.

The Apostate Paul

dewdrop said...

Bacon & Eggs! I certainly can't vote for him!!!

Questeruk said...

"Bill Lussenheide said...
Im not sure where the information about not wearing seat belts or public smoking comes from, but it is not part of the party platform, and I know of no one who does not support current laws for such."

Hi Bill,

I think it was me that introduced those two points.

I clicked on to the Constitution Party website, and saw an article ‘Congress, Catholics and Canadians’ by Mary Starrett.

She is billed as the Communications Director for the Constitution Party, so I took it that what she is writing is going to be basically the party line.

I found the article had come from the following web address http://newswithviews.com/Mary/starrett211.htm

At this website is the same article, together with the Constitution Party banner above it. In the sidebar are listed other Starrett articles. Third on the list is ‘Seat Belts, Cigarette and Stout.’

My reading of the article is that Starrett is very much against enforced seat belt wearing, and against public smoking bans.

Maybe I shouldn’t assume that the views of the Communications Director for the Constitution Party are also the views of the Constitution Party itself.

I found all this with a ten minute look to find out about the Constitution Party.

If I have got this wrong then I apologise. I have no axe to grind, I have never heard of the Constitution Party before, and I do not live in the US.

However this is a sensitive issue to me, as years ago, before seat belts were compulsory in the UK, I went head first through the windscreen of a car following an accident.

This incident hardened my views about the necessity for seat belts. Had the car had seat belts, I would most likely have been completely uninjured.

I was also extremely grateful that the hospital treatment was available free of charge, and that I did not have to bear years of debt, paying for the emergency treatment following the accident.

Anonymous said...

Sue said...
"seatbelts... saved my life in 1990. I slid on an ice patch...car hit a bridge abuttment, flipped over on roof, and then ended back on tires"

Hello again, I'm the guy who doesn't wear seatbelts. Sue was driving too fast for the conditions. I don't speed over icy bridges (bridges ice first because of cold air under bridge). Other incentives for safe driving are driving without collision, liability and health insurance which I do (sans all three). Bill L. will understand the free market incentives for safe driving when health, liability & collision insurance are not compulsory. All that insurance would cost $15k-$18k per year which I'm boycotting - too expensive to support "Big Insurance", "Big Phama", millionaire AMA doctors...

Sue said...

"Hello again, I'm the guy who doesn't wear seatbelts. Sue was driving too fast for the conditions. I don't speed over icy bridges (bridges ice first because of cold air under bridge). Other incentives for safe driving are driving without collision, liability and health insurance which I do (sans all three)."

Well, well, well, you certainly have jumped to conclusions here my friend. I was NOT cited for driving too fast for conditions, because that was NOT the case. The weather was clear that day, NO ice or snow on roads. I was rounding a bend (not over the speed limit) when I hit a patch of black ice...NOT ON THE BRIDGE...the bridge was yet ahead of me. (There were witnesses to the accident). Why was there ice on the road then? Because PENNDOT had ignored many warnings and accidents in that same area...including 3 more that winter. There were springs under the road (I had no idea of that) that seeped up thru the pavement and froze. That is where I slid...and onto the bridge.
The officer stated he was NOT citing me for driving too fast for conditions because it simply was not the case. The next year a multimillion dollar project was done on the section of road to end the seepage. Neighbors who witnessed the accident told me later that they had been complaining about the condition for years. I am not an idiot...I know about cold air under bridges. And outside of that winter...I have never had an accident and I have been driving for 40 years. I have never had any type of traffic citation nor have I ever been stopped by a cop. So you really should know facts before you state things that are not true.
Sue

Mike (Don't Drink the Flavor Aid) said...

To Anon 07:19

Just to be clear -- if you were involved in an accident and badly mangled as a result, then the emergency responders on finding that there is no health insurance card in your wallet should just shove your twisted body into the ditch and not take it to the nearest emergency room since that could be a burden on the taxpayers? Could you put a notarized statement to this effect in your wallet so that, just in case, I as a taxpayer would not risk in any way being burdened with the cost of your care whether due to a momentary lapse in judgment on your part or that of a third party?

Anonymous said...

It appears that the article written by Mary Starrett is against the massive "Click It or Ticket" campaigns to FORCE seat belt use, and the banning of smoking from such places as pool halls etc.

Here is what one has to consider...how far can government go to enforce laws for "the sake of your own good".

Should government tell you that...

*how many children you can have?

*You have to wear condoms?

*You cant eat too much?

*That you should wear a helmet while you drive a car? (it would cut down deaths)

*You have to have forced flu shots?

*You cant homeschool?

etc.

A Governments job, under the US Constituion, is NOT to be or provide a nanny state. Unlike England or other British Commonwealth nations, we rebelled against such a system, are not subjects of the King, and are "Born Free".

Under the Constitution, there are no provisos to "protect you from yourself". Freedom also means the right to make mistakes. I dont need Big Brother being my monitor or mommy.

James said...

Bill,

Would you like to submit your views on the health care issue?

Anonymous said...

The Constitution Party is popular with x-cogers: one of witless Weinlands elders campaigned for them.

Questeruk said...

Anonymous (Nov 15, 04:19:00 AM) said...

“A Governments job, under the US Constituion, is NOT to be or provide a nanny state. Unlike England or other British Commonwealth nations, we rebelled against such a system, are not subjects of the King, and are "Born Free".”

Hey, you know I never realised that the rebellion of 1776 was because Britain was a ‘nanny state’. You live and learn.

I do know it took nearly another 200 years for Britain to bring in seat belt legislation.

Questeruk said...

“the guy who doesn't wear seatbelts” also said:-

“Other incentives for safe driving are driving without collision, liability and health insurance which I do (sans all three)…… All that insurance would cost $15k-$18k per year which I'm boycotting”

Driving without seatbelts is just your own stupidity – driving without collision insurance is effectively criminal.

So what happens if you seriously injure someone, cripple them for life?

Are you in a position to support them, not only for the rest of your life, but for the rest of their lives?

Anonymous said...

We have an anonymous who is an idiot (as Ned Flanders pointed out) for not wearing seat belts. He (or maybe she) is a double idiot for driving while "talking on the Cell". And he is a triple idiot for thinking that not wearing seat belts and not having insurance makes him a safe driver. Anyone who drives while "talking on the Cell" is not a safe driver.

If he is in an accident, whether caused by himself or by another party, he will be a burden on the taxpayers. If he is at fault, he will most likely be unable to compensate the other parties. In this case, don't expect remorse because this type always finds a way to blame someone else.

His contribution to society is to serve as an example of why we need government legislation to enforce common sense and concern for others.

Anonymous said...

dewdrop said...

'Bacon & Eggs! I certainly can't vote for him!!!'

You can't vote anyway!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said: "All that insurance would cost $15k-$18k per year which I'm boycotting - too expensive to support "Big Insurance", "Big Phama", millionaire AMA doctors..."

Just how bad is your driving record that comp, collision, and liability insurance on an automobile would cost you between $15-18k a year?! Do you even have a valid driver's license?

Gavin, please pardon the ad hominem here but the above qutoted statement coupled with the rest of his statements on this thread add up to a four star horse's ass.

Corky said...

Some people have to learn the hard way about having no insurance.

It's one hell of a way to learn sometimes. A person can spend all the money they have and all they ever will have in one single accident.

It works that way with not having health insurance too. That's one of the most common ways that people end up homeless and out on the street.

Imagine sleeping under a bridge on a cold, windy night just because you didn't have liability insurance or the means to pay a half million dollar hospital bill.

Trust me, no one cares either, otherwise you wouldn't see thousands and thousands of homeless people on the streets in the USA.

At Thanksgiving or Christmas there is a community effort to feed these folks a good meal - like that's going to last all year.

People imagine there are programs to help these people - to qualify, they have to have a permanent residence --- oops, that's the one thing they don't have. Well, besides insurance, that is.

Anonymous said...

Sue,

Accidents happen, of course. Often they're not our fault, and sometimes they're not anybody's fault. That's why the bell curve has tails. And that's why we have things like seatbelts and insurance.

That anonymous idiot was just being an ignorant, know-it-all, pompous ass. Just like lots of folks we knew back in our WCG days. The church was a virtual magnet for those types.

You were under no obligation to answer that guy. The rest of us understood your position, and sized him up pretty quickly as well.

The Skeptic

Anonymous said...

Wait, lets see Bill lussenheide states that vietnam war turned him off on voting...he was how old in 1972? 15 16? And having met Bill in our former cog his area he grew up in was far from Ghetto. Looks like he is looking for some type of sympathy for his apathy! Not buying it...