How could I vote for such a vulgar disgusting man?

[billw55]

Not quite accurate. The folly of Iraq was that the intelligence agencies allowed the WH to influence the results to match their wishes.

I'm still puzzled about the Iraq and WMD thing. There are multiple documented cases in the 1980s of Hussein using chemical weapons, including Halabja. So it is beyond question that Iraq had them as late as 1988. Then we invaded in 2003 and ... didn't find them. So what really happened? Where did they go? Did Iraq simply run out, or sell them, or hide them? I wonder. OK, some were removed after the first gulf war. But all of them? Perhaps some ended up in Syria?

 

In any case, let's not pretend that the Hussein regime was innocent in regards to WMD. And not just threats, but actual use, on civilians.

[mike777]

I'm still puzzled about the Iraq and WMD thing. There are multiple documented cases in the 1980s of Hussein using chemical weapons, including Halabja. So it is beyond question that Iraq had them as late as 1988. Then we invaded in 2003 and ... didn't find them. So what really happened? Where did they go? Did Iraq simply run out, or sell them, or hide them? I wonder. OK, some were removed after the first gulf war. But all of them?

 

In any case, let's not pretend that the Hussein regime was innocent in regards to WMD. And not just threats, but actual use, on civilians.

 

I don't think it matters to those opposed to the war whether weapons were there or not. That is not the issue for those that oppose and hate Bush. In any event here is at least a partial answer to your questions.

 

 

"In 2015 it was learned that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction had not been fully accounted for by UN inspections.[13] Ten years after its inception, Operation Avarice was declassified and it was learned that there were stockpiles of warheads and rockets containing degraded chemical agents similar to those used in the Iran-Iraq War. From 2005 through 2006 military intelligence discovered that the weaponsmany in poor condition, some empty or containing nonlethal liquid, but others containing sarin with unexpectedly high puritywere in the possession of one Iraqi individual who remained anonymous. Operation Avarice, headed by army intelligence and the CIA, involved the discreet purchase of the weapons from the unidentified individual to keep them off the black market.[13]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

[Winstonm]

I'm still puzzled about the Iraq and WMD thing. There are multiple documented cases in the 1980s of Hussein using chemical weapons, including Halabja. So it is beyond question that Iraq had them as late as 1988. Then we invaded in 2003 and ... didn't find them. So what really happened? Where did they go? Did Iraq simply run out, or sell them, or hide them? I wonder. OK, some were removed after the first gulf war. But all of them? Perhaps some ended up in Syria?

 

In any case, let's not pretend that the Hussein regime was innocent in regards to WMD. And not just threats, but actual use, on civilians.

 

No one is claiming that. Rationalizing the removal of Hussein does not help solve the basic problem of the politicization of the intelligence communities during that time period.

 

After all, the CIA didn’t come to those faulty conclusions on its own, but rather were pushed there by the Bush administration, particularly Vice President Dick Cheney, who aggressively cherry-picked evidence to back his prior convictions. As the National Security Archive notes, “Vice President Richard Cheney questioned his CIA briefers aggressively, pressing them to the wall when he saw intelligence from other agencies that portrayed a more somber picture than that in CIA’s reporting.” Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was active in pushing the intelligence community to come up with findings to justify the push for war, creating the Office of Special Plans to challenge CIA skeptics and force them to toe the Bush administration line on Iraq.

[RedSpawn]

Not quite accurate. The folly of Iraq was that the intelligence agencies allowed the WH to influence the results to match their wishes.

Umm, Winston, please provide a source for this assertion.

 

This is too big to let it stand on the faith of your own word.

 

The CIA doesn't have a parent agency in the federal government hierarchy so it doesn't have to surrender to the President's whims though it must work with the President as a team on matters of national security and defense.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government

[RedSpawn]

No one is claiming that. Rationalizing the removal of Hussein does not help solve the basic problem of the politicization of the intelligence communities during that time period.

And the heavy price America paid in human lives and fiat currency for the politicization of the intelligence communities during that time period.

[Winstonm]

Umm, Winston, please provide a source for this assertion.

 

This is too big to let it stand on the faith of your own word.

 

The CIA doesn't have a parent agency in the federal government hierarchy so it doesn't have to surrender to the President's whims though it must work with the President as a team on matters of national security and defense.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/colin-powell-u-n-speech-was-a-great-intelligence-failure/

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/23/cia.iraq/

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline/

https://news.vice.com/article/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion

[mike777]

I certainly think it is fair to say that Presidents to one degree or another politicize the intelligent agencies. That all presidents do.

 

It seems the issue is, the argument that Winston and others make is that Republicans do to such a great degree that it makes the intelligent agencies unreliable or worse. Which of course lays the foundational question of how reliable are they?

 

 

At the very least we see articles from intelligent officers claiming that Trump is the worst of all, even worse than GeorgeW.

[Winstonm]

I certainly think it is fair to say that Presidents to one degree or another politicize the intelligent agencies. That all presidents do.

 

It seems the issue is, the argument that Winston and others make is that Republicans do to such a great degree that it makes the intelligent agencies unreliable or worse. Which of course lays the foundational question of how reliable are they?

 

 

At the very least we see articles from intelligent officers claiming that Trump is the worst of all, even worse than GeorgeW.

 

Mike, my argument is specific to Dick Chaney concerning Iraq, not the Republican party or Republicans.

[mike777]

Mike, my argument is specific to Dick Chaney concerning Iraq, not the Republican party or Republicans.

 

ok so Dick made the entire intelligence agency unreliable....terrible...that is your point.my point is at the time was that that may be true......let us see the evidence....not really my point...my point remains Bob Novak

--------------------

 

As for today....at the very least glad ,very glad to hear that Trump challenges view point of Kabul...of our generals....and yes he may be wrong, very wrong....but I hate the ridicule I hear on nbc and cnn on this one point.

[RedSpawn]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/colin-powell-u-n-speech-was-a-great-intelligence-failure/

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/23/cia.iraq/

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline/

https://news.vice.com/article/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion

I have reviewed the 1st PBS article and it says the CIA approved Bush's speech giving the ultimatum to Saddam Hussein in 2003. It also says the CIA was one of the several advisers to the President on the Iraq WMD matter and war military strategy, but it doesn't suggest or intimate the tailoring of intelligence estimates to the President's whims. I will review the remaining links in a few moments.

 

Don't overlook the possibility of monetary hegemony and the American petrodollar imperialism as an underlying reason for the march towards the Iraq War. MrAce has a separate forum topic dedicated to this and it is quite provocative. See link below:

 

http://www.monetary.org/was-the-iraqi-shift-to-euro-currency-to-real-reason-for-war/2010/12

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_big_idea/2006/10/that_axis_of_evil.html

[mike777]

HMMM NO ONE AskED

 

so I will ...what the hell is monetary hegemony and more importantly why should I care?

 

 

if the very rich have more...than the very poor...I am shocked

[RedSpawn]

HMMM NO ONE AskED

 

so I will ...what the hell is monetary hegemony and more importantly why should I care?

 

 

if the very rich have more...than the very poor...I am shocked

Here you go.....start from the top....down.

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/76754-analyse-this/#

[mike777]

Here you go.....start from the top....down.

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/76754-analyse-this/#

 

'

zero

 

if that is your evidence or theory or whatever....zero

[RedSpawn]

'

zero

 

if that is your evidence or theory or whatever....zero

Oh really? You couldn't have read the entire chain on monetary hegemony that fast! And the timing of economic sanctions against Russia and Iran by the US Senate to some of the largest holders of proven oil & gas reserves in the world is very suspect and beyond coincidental.

 

It's not all about a global antiterrorism campaign. That is only part of the narrative the government and intelligence agencies share with the public. FOLLOW THE MONEY and proven oil and gas commodities and you will better understand the U.S. foreign policy and inadvertent Middle East destabilization effort.

 

http://www.uncommonthought.com/mtblog/archives/2015/04/06/oil-imperialism.php

 

Monetary hegemony is an economic and political concept in which a single state has decisive influence over the functions of the international monetary system. A monetary hegemony would need:

 

• 
   
  
• accessibility to international credits, ✓USA has
  
• foreign exchange markets ✓USA has courtesy of Wall Street and Federal Reserve Bank.
  
• the management of balance of payments problems in which the hegemony operates under no balance of payments constraint. ✓ USA has
  
• the direct (and absolute) power to enforce a unit of account in which economic calculations are made in the world economy. ✓ USA has petrodollars which is defined as "the U.S. dollar earned front the sale of oil, or they may be simply defined as oil revenues denominated in U.S. dollars"
  

Sometimes a picture is worth a 1000 words. This is what U.S. monetary hegemony looks like

 

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6JkzJ4qLw5E/U6G_t6KObEI/AAAAAAAAA3E/uoY0vt64TW8/s1600/85448_Dollar-Hegemony-by-Luojie-China-Daily-China.jpg

[mike777]

i follow to david freese.....then stop goodnight

 

 

you can follow onward

[RedSpawn]

i follow to david freese.....then stop goodnight

 

 

you can follow onward

Fine.

 

Let me break it down for you:

 

Almost all countries who buy their oil from OPEC must do so in US dollars. This is based on a bilateral agreement that the US made with Saudi Arabia, the world's largest holder of crude reserves, to provide them world-class military protection of their resource rich oil fields in exchange for requiring all OPEC purchases to be settled in US dollars. In addition, we asked Saudi Arabia to reinvest their oil profits from these sales by purchasing fiat US Treasury notes issued by the US Department of Treasury through a printing press at the Federal Reserve Bank.

 

The US has no problems providing military protection to Saudi Arabia as the sun never sets on the US empire of military bases. In addition, our military industry has the capacity, materiel, manpower, and budgetary approval to EASILY fulfill the terms and conditions of this bilateral agreement. In addition, our military will have first hand access to monitor and respond in this Middle East region should unusual activity occur that disturbs the public order and peace of the region or interferes with the economic prosperity we are afforded.

 

Saudi Arabia thought this agreement was a sweet deal from heaven because they would have the world's largest and most formidable military protecting their country's greatest asset AND MIDDLE EAST PORTS. All that was required in return was OPEC market manipulation demanding the US fiat currency for all oil purchases and that any surplus currency Saudi Arabia had was used to buy US Treasury notes.

 

Every nation needs oil to power their economy. Therefore, you have almost 200 countries clamoring to produce global exports for the US to get greenbacks in their international trade settlement accounts to purchase the oil they need from OPEC who requires all oil barrel purchases be denominated in US dollars. These countries need oil for manufacturing, heating, auto fuel, ship fuel, and jet fuel among a variety of other reasons.

 

This arrangement created an intense artificial global demand for the US dollar and the US dollar became the default world reserve currency through petrol oil. As long as the world needs oil for subsistence, manufacturing, and transportation and as long as OPEC has dominance over the supply and distribution of this precious commodity, the US will be the world's functional reserve currency and American ports will receive a cornucopia of goods from across the world on the cheap.

 

In addition, this arrangement generated a lot of U.S. financial business for the world foreign currency exchange market handled courtesy of Wall Street firms and the Federal Reserve Bank.

 

Ever wonder why our retail stores are chocked full of inventory from China and the Five Tigers of Asia? Monetary hegemony and petrodollar world dominance is why.

 

The only thing that can disturb this equilibrium is when countries try to break away from the petrodollar regime and find ways to buy their oil in other currencies. This type of "insubordination" undermines our petrodollar imperialism; thus, our government and State Department find ways to cast these countries as bad actors or axes of evil for geopolitical reasons rather than highlighting how their resistance to our petrodollar regime threatens our world dominance in the oil market. We call this sleight of hand ... "foreign policy spin" to change public sentiment to support a military intervention of the insubordinate country.

 

Now, Iraq (Saddam Hussein) tried to break away from our petrodollar regime in late 2000 and wanted to buy oil in cheaper Eurodollars at the time. This strategy seems innocuous at first, but should it succeed, other countries might adopt it which would further compromise our world reserve currency status and eventually require that we beef up our U.S. exports to replace the lost business volume.

 

But this sounds like pure conjecture, right? See https://www.theguardian.com/business/2003/feb/16/iraq.theeuro

 

So, Iraq shows the world how to temporarily decouple from our monetary hegemony and petrodollar regime at a profit; and in less than 3 years the world also sees an Iraq War with no WMD found, a huge Western intelligence failure, a dead Saddam Hussein, and a decimated, destabilized Iraq left with no surviving government in the midst of all the death, destruction and chaos. And the world says, "Note to self: We will continue to get up in the morning, go to work for pennies on the dollar, make the doughnuts that America wants, support the petrodollar regime and buy our oil in US dollars from OPEC lest we want to end up like Saddam Hussein and Iraq."

 

Any questions?

 

Source:

http://themarketmogul.com/petrodollar-american-hegemony-part-1/

 

https://geopolitics.co/2016/06/06/mainstream-media-exposes-secrets-of-u-s-petrodollar/#comments

 

http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Political_skeptic/Nationalism/American_exceptionalism/Images/sittinontopoftheworld.jpg

 

In short, the Middle East has been subsidizing the meteoric rise of the Western economy at large and fattening the deep pockets of the owners of Dutch Petroleum(Shell), British Petroleum(BP/Amoco) and Standard Oil (Esso, Exxon, Mobil, and Chevron) simultaneously with the their allied military industrial complex, for decades.

 

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/6a/d1/58/6ad15872b7fbf435b51728b356406bd8.jpg

[Al_U_Card]

The only addition being that Fiat currency is debt-based so the interest-bearing nature of its creation by the Fed ensures debt-servitude for humanity and increasing profits for the banking sector. No need for Jubilees when you can get bail-ins and squeeze that particular lemon yet again.

[RedSpawn]

The only addition being that Fiat currency is debt-based so the interest-bearing nature of its creation by the Fed ensures debt-servitude for humanity and increasing profits for the banking sector. No need for Jubilees when you can get bail-ins and squeeze that particular lemon yet again.

Thanks for the feedback. And yet our dramedy-driven news networks rarely talk about this global humanitarian rights issue or how it practically enslaves the world through a fiat currency that is backed by nothing more than F.E.A.R. (Fake Economy Appearing Real). If "enslave" is too strong, I am willing to downgrade to "a form of indentured servitude". ;)

 

Look at page 1 of the Global Outlook Report for 2017 from JP Morgan. It shows global citizens attacking their government officials with pitchforks as a result of the trillions of dollars of issued bonds (cash) sitting at central banks. Very interesting outlook.

 

https://www.jpmorgan.com/jpmpdf/1320719576236.pdf

[Al_U_Card]

It is, after all, a confidence game. The banks get more and it ends up in the next (latest) asset bubble. Dot.coms to housing to .... wait for it... the stock market. The next crash will require those "bail-ins" that have been quietly added to most legislatures.

[RedSpawn]

It is, after all, a confidence game. The banks get more and it ends up in the next (latest) asset bubble. Dot.coms to housing to .... wait for it... the stock market. The next crash will require those "bail-ins" that have been quietly added to most legislatures.

The Federal Reserve Bank Balance Sheet has ballooned from a small US$900+ billion in 2008 to over US$4.5 TRILLION in 2017.

 

A quadrupling of assets on the balance sheet?

 

That is insane!

 

Source#1: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm

Source#2: http://www.businessinsider.com/federal-reserve-rate-hike-plan-to-unwind-45-trillion-balance-sheet-2017-6

 

Where's the journalists and collective outrage?

[RedSpawn]

It is, after all, a confidence game. The banks get more and it ends up in the next (latest) asset bubble. Dot.coms to housing to .... wait for it... the stock market. The next crash will require those "bail-ins" that have been quietly added to most legislatures.

Agreed. You are killing me though. I needed smelling salts today. :blink:

 

The next asset bubble will either be: http://www.visualcapitalist.com/subprime-auto-loans/

 

http://subprime.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Credit-Bureaus-Burst-Subprime-Auto-Bubble-Concerns-b.jpg

 

or

 

Source: https://www.ft.com/content/a272ee4c-1b83-11e7-bcac-6d03d067f81f

Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SLOAS?utm_source=series_page&utm_medium=related_content&utm_term=related_resources&utm_campaign=categories

http://prn.fm/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/student-loans.jpg

 

President Trump better have his talking points ready for the next market panic. He's riding high on Dow 22,000 but it is possibly an asset bubble created by our central bank monetary policies.

 

See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/03/us/politics/trump-praises-the-stock-market-he-once-said-was-a-bubble.html

 

The problem is the asset bubbles rose because we transitioned from a nation of financial innovation to a nation of financial engineering.

 

Derivatives were originally created to solve a business problem for legitimate, yet sophisticated buyers and sellers who actually HELD, NEEDED, OR PRODUCED the underlying asset on which the derivative was based. See Powerpoint slide below. However, Wall Street hired consultants to mastermind this market to allow participants who don't constructively own or have access to the underlying asset to speculate in the marketplace without having sufficient "skin" in the game. Therefore, these gamblers aren't concerned about a successful, mutually beneficial outcome for both parties.

 

This is very important because the underlying economic assumption is that each party deals with his counter-party at an arms-length; each party wants an outcome that will benefit both parties. However, thanks to the Wall Street masterminds, you now have institutional gamblers who can become parties in the market who actually don't own any of the assets these derivatives are based on and these parties are moving the market prices in an attempt to make quick profits on the short-term price fluctuations of these contracts. This increase in the volume of transactions in the marketplace may be good for Wall Street's transaction fee revenue, but it causes horrible, amplified price and market equilibrium distortions. The derivatives market is glutted with bad actors; thus, one can practically throw the market fundamentals out the window. We are in Wall Street casino-land now. Ain't nothing free in a financial marketplace, there's always a price/penalty to be paid!

 

 

So, how do the top 25 retail bank holding companies in America own derivative contracts with a notional value totaling $222 TRILLION. There is no safe place in this world for ugly mathematics. $222 million million = $222,000,000 X $1,000,000 = $222,000,000,000,000. See below:

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2017/05/14/20170516_derivs1.jpg

[RedSpawn]

Or, maybe there's a better explanation: The Saudi Obama Snub: A Positive Sign

 

Could it be that with a weak president like Trump, one very susceptible to flattery and with no concept of reality, the Saudis are thrilled to know that they are free to misbehave? I don't look forward another Saudi planned, financed, and executed 9/11 attack on the US. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

I think Trump met with the King of Saudi Arabia in May, in part, to get reassurances that the King was not pivoting away from the United States over our long-term monetary hegemony over the petrodollar.

 

BEIJING - Saudi Arabia’s King Salman met with China’s premier on Friday, 03/17/17, a day after the two nations signed a memorandum of understanding on investment cooperation valued at $65 billion.

 

The landmark agreement aims to boost joint efforts in fields including energy, investment, finance, culture and aerospace, part of Saudi Arabia’s drive to develop a growth strategy less dependent on oil.

 

Beijing meanwhile is rolling out a massive trade and investment initiative across Central Asia and the Middle East called “One Belt, One Road” that sees the desert kingdom as a regional linchpin.

 

Despite the eye-catching sum noted in the memo, the actual value of such commitments is usually much smaller once projects begin.

 

Saudi Arabia is China’s biggest supplier of crude oil and the kingdom’s state-owned oil producer, Aramco, is a partner with state-owned China Petroleum & Chemical Corp. The two operate a refinery in Fujian province along with other Chinese projects.

Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/03/17/china-saudi-arabia-sign-65-billion-cooperation-deals/99295228/

 

ALWAYS FOLLOW THE MONEY AND MONETARY HEGEMONY.

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdmegaxxlarge/mritems/Images/2017/5/20/fa78e7b035af49bcbaa8b75749742be5_9.JPG

[RedSpawn]

I don't understand this hostility to immigrants. Virtually all Americans have ancestors who were immigrants. Most of these immigrants were not well educated, were from ethnic groups which people discriminated against at the time they came over, were accused of being criminals or taking jobs from "real Americans" -- and nonetheless they turned out okay. Many of our greatest citizens (in all fields of accomplishment) were immigrants or the children of immigrants. The words on the statue of liberty are "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" -- not "give me your best and brightest, all others need not apply."

 

The vast majority of people crossing the US border are here to make a better life for themselves or their families. They come because there's work here, or because they have relatives here, or because they are oppressed or mistreated in their home country. This is the reason my great grandparents came, and the reason most Americans' ancestors came.

Recently illegal immigration has been net zero for a number of years. Nonetheless we have cases where parents of American-born children are deported -- having a US citizen baby does not prevent deportation, and one of my wife's (US citizen) students recently had her mom threatened with deportation.

 

The unemployment rate has been falling for a long time now, and Americans don't want jobs picking vegetables in the fields for minimum wage anyway. Immigrants do the awful jobs that need to be done to maintain standard of living for the rest of us, and they do them because it's better than what they had in their home country, and because they want a better life for their children. For the most part they are hard-working people that we should respect and help out where we can. Yes, there are a few criminals in every group, but we catch them and punish them... and some of the petty crime would be reduced if we let these folks out of the shadows to make a living legitimately.

 

Further, "welfare" has not existed in this country since the nineties. We have one of the stingiest welfare states of any major nation on earth. If people wanted to immigrate so they could "live on welfare" they would go to Canada (or Europe, or heck, Cuba... virtually every major country has a stronger welfare state than us). Sure, we have SNAP benefits but do we really want to be in the business of starving children to death? Even if they are children with Mexican parents? Seriously? The other major "welfare" program is the earned income tax credit, which of course undocumented people are ineligible for (because they lack a taxpayer ID).

 

As for world population, this has not been a real issue for a long time, since the population growth rate has gone down and our ability to grow crops efficiently has gone up. China has near-zero growth, the US is slightly positive, Europe and Japan are negative. The best way to reduce population growth is to improve education (especially for women) and availability of birth control -- the lack of such things is why population in India and Africa is still increasing rapidly. Guess which politician's party is opposed to planned parenthood?

 

Our country faces many problems. We need to do something about climate change. We need to make education more affordable. We need to make it easier to start a business, and stop writing different rules for big companies than apply to small startups. We need to make sure the benefits of increased automation and international trade are shared by all, instead of just a few at the top. We need to make sure there isn't another big economic crash. We need to do something about police forces that shoot unarmed African Americans while letting the bankers who almost crashed the world economy walk free. We need to cut trillions in military spending that the armed forces don't want, for weapons systems that won't work in a modern war... while making sure not to crater the economy in small towns built around a military base or plant. We need to do something about our infrastructure. Immigration is pretty far down the list, and if we do want to address it, why not create more legal visas so people with jobs and relatives waiting for them in the US can walk over instead of sneaking over a wall that the Mexican government isn't really going to pay for?

If you compare the minimum wage in Mexico to the minimum wage in the United States you can see ONE of the main reasons why immigrants were running to the border, securing fake IDs, illegally working in the U.S. and wiring money back home to family in Mexico. Unskilled labor can get almost 12X wage increase by migrating to the United States and working illegally in similar occupations. Follow the money and the arithmetic.

 

President Trump should have tried this angle when he was trying to explain why we have the immigration problem in the 1st place. He race baited instead and catered to our base instincts and fears.

 

http://franklycurious.com/media/1/20130819-worldminimummages.jpg

[blackshoe]

One comment, and one only, in response to an early post in this thread: no one is qualified for the job of President of the United States.

[barmar]

One comment, and one only, in response to an early post in this thread: no one is qualified for the job of President of the United States.

Perhaps, but some are less unqualified than others.

 

Most people probably aren't qualified to be parents, either, but that doesn't stop them.