Is Angela Davis Symbolic of Occupy Wall Street?

Shepard Fairey has created an "invitation" for the Occupy Wall Street gang:

Seeing the poster, I was immediately reminded of someone. See what you think:

Was Fairey thinking of Angela Davis when he created the invitation? Davis, the Communist party member and candidate, former member of the FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list (for killing a judge, no less), hero of Cuba, and former Black Panther would be a perfect poster child for OWS. Ms. Davis has spent a lifetime disparaging, and calling for the destruction, of the country that gave her the opportunity to go from the little black girl living in "Dynamite Hill" to a Distinguished Professor in the Women's and Gender Studies Department at Syracuse University. The participants of OWS are members of the "Gimme Generation". They are throwbacks to the spoiled, privileged children of the Sixties.

I don't know if Fairey was thinking of Davis or not, but I certainly agree that Davis in symbolic of the selfishness embodied by the Occupy Wall Street protesters.

Will Uncle Omar be granted asylum like Aunt Zeituni?

Lo and behold, the President has what Don Surber aptly calls a "Crimmigrant" in the family.  From Gateway Pundit:

Barack Obama’s illegal alien Uncle Onyango Obama was arrested in Massachusetts this past week after he hit a cop car. He wanted to call the White House.

Kerry Picket at The Washington Times reported:

A number of media outlets have already reported that an illegal immigrant from Kenya by the name of Onyango Obama, 67, was arrested last week on Wednesday after he rammed his SUV into a police car in Framingham, Massachusetts.

He was later charged with DUI among other violations. I spoke to Framingham Public Information Officer Lieutenant Delaney who told me that when Onyango Obama was asked at booking if he wanted to make a telephone call to arrange for bail, the Kenyan immigrant replied: “I think I will call the White House.”

Being illegal must pay pretty well if Uncle Omar can afford to drive around in an SUV.  On the other hand, maybe he is the famous "Omar the Tent maker" we've heard so much about.  That certainly would explain this:

Let's play "Spot the Children"

I came across a link to this video in the comments at Don Surber's.  This video, posted at Hot Air, shows the rock bottom depths the public sector unions have crawled to in Wisconsin. 



Well, what can you expect from people who would interrupt a Special Olympics ceremony?

Progressive Prick of the Day: Jared Bernstein

"We will only find success when a majority of Americans agrees with us that government is something worth fighting for.” - Jared Bernstein

Is it just me or is there something very sinister about that sentence? My country is worth fighting for and certainly my lifestyle is, but my government? Meh.

I could be wrong, but I don’t think that Bernstein and I are on the same page. Consider this quote on the debt ceiling debate:

"This was an ugly debate where reckless ideologues got the better of the grown-ups in the room who were not willing to risk the economy to protect the government."

Bernstein believes that "government" is so important that it is worth wrecking the economy for. I wonder if he felt the same during the Bush administration.

I think that fealty to government depends on how one defines government. I like being able to get from point A to point B and prefer a paved, pothole free road to speed my way. I appreciate that if a group takes it upon themselves to fly planes into American buildings that we have force to deal with the group and their supporters appropriately. For these things government is necessary. Mr. Bernstein believes that government is necessary to ensure that we all have the appropriate light bulbs in our homes. I'm sorry but government is not my Momma and even she doesn't attempt (or want) to micromanage my life.

To Bernstein, we of the low sloping foreheads just need to shut up, eat our peas and let the grown ups lead us around by our noses. It is for our own good. As it turns out , that is pretty much what we’ve been doing for decades. Now we have decided that maybe government isn’t all it is cracked up to be. It still has its uses but in its present form we just aren’t getting enough bang for our buck.

Bottom line: congratulations Tea Party. You are the reason that we are having this conversation. You are the reason that politicians suddenly have discovered that they have constituents. And you are the reason that the Bernsteins of the world are losing their cookies. Good job.

Cross posted at Potluck

Blessings

Mom and Dad had a running joke that whoever went first would need to walk slow so the other one could catch up.  Throughout it all, and even in these last two weeks when everything was so bad, Dad never lost his sense of humor.  He and Mom were talking around four o'clock this morning when he started to have a seizure.  They were coming more and more frequently but this time Mom told him that there was no time for that now.  She told him that he had a long journey to take and that everything was ready for him.  He told Mom that he would walk slow.  They talked for a few more minutes and then Dad gave her a big smile and he left on his journey.

I've been staying here since March so Mom and Dad would have some help.  Mom and I talked for a few minutes after Dad passed and then I called the kids.  After everyone had a chance to get here we called and reported Dad's passing. 

I've wondered for a long time what this moment was going to feel like and now that it is here what I feel is blessed.  I was raised by a good man who loved his family and loved his community and he was very generous of himself with both.  He had few rules but the ones he had were set were set in stone.  Respect was important to Dad and his children were taught to respect those around them and most importantly themselves.  Dad said that I couldn't expect to be treated any better by others than what I treated myself.  I guess that is a twist on the Golden Rule and I've always found that when I hold myself in high regard and in turn extended that courtesy to others that in most cases it worked out pretty well.  Dad also stressed faith, honesty and kindness.  Dad believed in helping others, and Lord knows he volunteered for everything, but he was adamant that you should only help those who would help themselves.  Dad believed in people and he believed with all his heart that failing to live up to one's potential was a sin against God.  He was the one that taught me that creating dependency was the opposite of compassion. 

Mom and Dad had sixty wonderful years together.  Last night when the three of us were talking him and Mom were joking around a bit and he gave Mom "The Look".  A smile creeped up on his face and his eyes got really blue like they always do when he and Mom are flirting and it just felt so good to sit there and watch them still so much in love.  Mom sent him on his journey with no regrets but with tons of love. 

I'm sure I'll have some weepy moments but mostly I'm just so grateful that Dad isn't sick anymore.  I know that I will see him again and until then my job is to keep being a person that he can be proud of.  Thank you to everyone who has checked in on me during this very difficult time.  My online community is very dear to me and I hope that I can get back to my old self very soon.  Good bless you all.

Just another day in the life of the most transparent regime ever

So was it just a rouge tweet or just another day in the life in the most transparent regime ever?

Well let's jump in to the Way Back Machine for a little context.  Who remembers August, 2009?  That is when this administration put out the word that citizens should report the "fishy" behavior of their friends, family and co-workers to the White House:

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.

After the public outcry at the Administration's Third Reich tactics they shut down the program.  Or maybe they just took it underground.  Your tax dollars at work, folks.

A girl can dream, can't she?

Between The Sperminator, The Commie Monkey and John "Sex Tape" Edwards the last few days have been one big skank festival.  I for one could use a little psyche cleansing and this is just the ticket:

While we're fantasizing, imagine the smart, articulate Ryan up against Obama in a debate. One would be armed with ad hominem attacks, distortions, and vague slogans, the other with a keen grasp of the nature of the crises we're facing, from the details to the big picture.

Of the Republicans who have announced  or who are likely to announce for 2012 only Herman Cain comes to being as satisfying as Paul Ryan.  Yeah, the Republican "elite" are pining for a Mitch Daniels type-conservative enough to garner the "anybody but Obama" vote and RINO enough to maintain the status quo.  It seems that the elite are having trouble grasping the concept of "who gives a flying fig what you want?"  Poor dears.  What do you get when you mate a RINO with a dinosaur?  Perhaps going forward we should refer to that wing of the party as RINOsaurs.  But back to the delightful Mr Ryan.  Pundette quotes Jennifer Rubin:

It is telling I think that Newt Gingrich blew up his presidential campaign criticizing Ryan. Republicans rallied to Ryan’s side and fired a barrage of criticism at Gingrich. This has as much to do with Gingrich’s intellectual instability as it does with Ryan’s new stature as the ideas man of the GOP. (Perhaps Gingrich’s blast can be explained as envy, for that is a role Gingrich once held.) That Republicans of all stripes understand that Ryan Republicanism — reform-minded, intellectually rigorous, pro-free markets and temperamentally cordial — is the wave of the future.

Ryan can make his decision this summer. But turning down a pointless Senate run is the first step toward that potential run.

Well, a girl can dream.

Cry me a river, poopie pants

Talk about your big babies, thirty year old Stanley Thornton, Jr. collects SSI for his particular (peculiar?) “lifestyle choice”. Thornton likes to wear a diaper and drink from a baby bottle but most of all he likes pocketing free government money:

“You wanna test how damn serious I am about leaving this world, screw with my check that pays for this apartment and food. Try it. See how serious I am. I don’t care,” the California man said. “I have no problem killing myself. Take away the last thing keeping me here, and see what happens. Next time you see me on the news, it will be me in a body bag.”

Thornton exposed his own scam by appearing on a reality TV show and now he is learning about unintended consequences the hard way:

A key senator has asked the Social Security Administration to investigate how people who live their lives role-playing as “adult babies” are able to get taxpayer-funded disability payments — after one of them was featured on a recent reality TV episode wearing diapers, feeding from a bottle and using an adult-sized crib he built.

Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican and the Senate’s top waste-watcher, asked the agency’s inspector general to look into 30-year-old Stanley Thornton Jr. and his roommate, Sandra Dias, who acts as his “mother,” saying it’s not clear why they are collecting Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits instead of working.

“Given that Mr. Thornton is able to determine what is appropriate attire and actions in public, drive himself to complete errands, design and custom-make baby furniture to support a 350-pound adult and run an Internet support group, it is possible that he has been improperly collecting disability benefits for a period of time,” Mr. Coburn wrote in a letter Monday to Inspector General Patrick P. O'Carroll Jr.

Who knew “role playing” is a recognized disability?

I congratulate Mr. Thornton and Mommy Dias on the successful coupling. They really do prove the old adage that there is somebody for everybody. As consenting adults they have every right to make each other happy by whatever means they find fit but not on my dime. They are both more than capable of holding down a job and neither of them should expect taxpayers to foot the bill for their recreational activities.

Here we go:

Raise the debt ceiling, or Stanley Thornton will die!  Complete with a picture of the little tyke.

So, what you're really saying is that the cheese eating Commie monkey is too elite to have committed rape?

I decided to take a couple of deep breaths before reacting to Ben Stein’s post in The American Spectator titled Presumed Innocent, Anyone? It didn’t help so I decided to sleep on it. No, that didn’t work either. I’ve come to the conclusion that Stein should have titled his post Important Men Are Entitled To Have Sex With Whomever They Wish Whether The Woman Consents Or Not So Get Over It You Unimportant Little People With Your Obviously Proletariat Morals And Misplaced Values (Subtitled: Screw YOU, Literally).

Let’s review some of Stein’s finer points (emphasis added):

If he is such a womanizer and violent guy with women, why didn't he ever get charged until now? If he has a long history of sexual abuse, how can it have remained no more than gossip this long? France is a nation of vicious political rivalries. Why didn't his opponents get him years ago?

So DSK’s long history of sexual abuse has been the subject of rumors? Perhaps he’s never been charged because he picks women who are most vulnerable (immigrant maids, the daughters of people who work for him and fear losing their jobs) and least likely to report the crime. He certainly wouldn’t be the first Important Man/”Womanizer” who eluded justice based solely on his position (See: Clinton, William Jefferson). Further, I am surprised that Stein confuses the terms “womanizer” and “rapist”. There is a distinction.

In life, events tend to follow patterns. People who commit crimes tend to be criminals, for example. Can anyone tell me any economists who have been convicted of violent sex crimes? Can anyone tell me of any heads of nonprofit international economic entities who have ever been charged and convicted of violent sexual crimes? Is it likely that just by chance this hotel maid found the only one in this category? Maybe Mr. Strauss-Kahn is guilty but if so, he is one of a kind, and criminals are not usually one of a kind.

Soooooooooo, economists are economists and criminals are criminals therefore, economists cannot be criminals. Huh? Are economists, by virtue of their vocation exempt in all cases or just sex crimes (what is the profession of the "typical" rapist by the way?)? Well, after all, we’re not just talking about any old economist-this guy is the head of a nonprofit international economic entity! Men like him are NEVER convicted of sex crimes. It says so in the Kennedy family collaborated handbook The Rules for Avoiding Prosecution (Rule One: In a civil society Important Men can never be guilty of a crime against domestic servants, bar maids or other various lower class women whose purpose is to tend to our needs).

The prosecutors say that Mr. Strauss-Kahn "forced" the complainant to have oral and other sex with him. How? Did he have a gun? Did he have a knife? He's a short fat old man. They were in a hotel with people passing by the room constantly, if it's anything like the many hotels I am in. How did he intimidate her in that situation? And if he was so intimidating, why did she immediately feel un-intimidated enough to alert the authorities as to her story?

Now that is a real head slapper, isn’t it? She must have not fought hard enough and she couldn’t have been too upset anyway or she wouldn’t have reported the crime because crimes are only ever reported by the calm and un-intimidated. May I just quote Stephen Green here-“Dumb ass!” Everything in that paragraph screams, “lying, little trollop!” In fact the entire crux of Stein’s eight points in defense of Strauss-Kahn is that the accuser is a maid (though at one point he does say that he is sure that she is a “very fine woman” *sniff*) and that Strauss-Kahn is A VERY IMPORTANT MAN.

Yes, woman have falsely accused men of rape. It does happen. That doesn’t explain or excuse Stein’s obvious disgust that THAT woman has the nerve to accuse THIS man. Little Miss Attila has an explanation and sadly, she does seem to be on to something. We (the generic “we”) are appalled that in Islamic countries a woman and her word (particularly in a rape case) are worth less than that of a man but in some segments of our “modern” society is that not equally true? The maid in this case will not be stoned to death for the crime of allowing herself to be raped and then compounding her crime by reporting it but Stein sure is willing to piller her for the ultimate crime of not knowing her place.

And now for something entirely different, schlong.

Today's Instant Karma Moment is presented by Bob Belvedere at The Camp of the Saints

Oh, for pity sake!

What is it about Kennedy women?  Were they all born with a "kick me" sign on their backs and "kick me, again" tattooed on their foreheads?  Are they taught from infancy that maintaining their proper place in society means standing by worthless tomcats who wouldn't garner an ounce of consideration were it not for their last name?

Marie Shriver, true to the female Kennedy legacy, stood by as her husband, Arnold Schwarzenegger, as he was being accused of being a cheat by dozens of women.  Now we learn that he fathered a child with the household help.  What a manly man that Arnold is. 

Maria is said to be angry and Arnold contrite.  Bit late in the game for all.  Their four children, the only innocent victims in all this, have already learned well what the sanctity of marriage means in a Kennedy household.

The Kennedy name is synonymous with drunkenness, drug addiction, adultery, rape, manslaughter, and now most appropriately, illigetimacy.

Only one in five?

Here's your "well, golly gee, how can that be?" moment of the day-one in five people don't believe that bin Laden is dead.  Now what would cause people to question the White House's version of recent events?

Maybe someone should have explained to the White House that when you make a BIG ANNOUNCEMENT about a BIG EVENT that it is wise to have your story together.  Instead we were treated to ever changing stories that made it seem as if the Administration didn't know what the real story was and that they were making it up as they went along.  It certainly didn't help that they had no more than announced that Osama had been buried at sea "in keeping with Muslim tradition" that Muslims came out of the woodwork from every corner of the Earth to say that "the tradition" was news to them.  Combine that with a couple of faked pictures and it is a wonder that only one in five are questioning bin Laden's death.

Question:  if one in five believe that Osama is still alive, what is the number of people who believe that he was killed years ago?  Judging from the people I've talked to that number could easily be higher than one in five.

Great minds really do think alike

While reading Byron York's piece on Herman Cain I couldn't shake the feeling that York was putting way too much thought into the root causes of Cain's appeal.  Then right there on the Memeorandum thread is Stacy McCain's Don’t Overthink It, Byron:

Byron York has a wonderful interview with Herman Cain, keying off the South Carolina debate:

Republican pollster Frank Luntz conducted a focus group on Fox News and found near-unanimous agreement that Cain was the winner. “I’ve done maybe 35 or 40 of these debates for Fox, and I’ve never had this kind of reaction,” Luntz said. “Something very special happened this evening.”

Many political insiders viewed the debate mostly as an opportunity for former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty to move up into the first tier of GOP candidates. Instead, people left Greenville’s Peace Center talking about Herman Cain — a result that few participants, including Cain himself, could have predicted.

Well, I may not be one of those “political insiders,” but having predicted Cain’s South Carolina debate victory in advance, I’m surprised that Byron York didn’t give me a call to say, “Stacy, how did you know? What is the secret of your insightful prescience?”

Never mind the un-asked questions, however. Byron then whips out the Rorshach inblot analysis:

A mostly unspoken but possibly consequential factor in Cain’s appeal to conservative voters is his race. Cain is a black Republican — a pretty rare thing in itself — seeking to challenge the nation’s first black president. .

[M]any Republicans have internalized the Democratic/liberal criticism that they oppose Obama because he is black and that whenever they attack the president on this or that issue, the real motivation behind it is race. Herman Cain, they believe, could take it to Obama without all that racial baggage.

Byron, you’re thinking too hard, man. Leave the psychobabble to the liberals, who specialize in that kind of stuff.

As Stacy points out, people just plain like Cain.  He is the anti-Obama.  One rightful criticism of Obama is that he has never done anything in his entire life.  Cain took the flailing Godfather's Pizza and turned it in to a national success.He is former deputy chairman and former chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.  He exudes honesty, integrity and forthrightness.  Seen those qualities in the White House lately?

Yep, Cain is black.  Successful blacks may be a novelty act as far as Democrats are concerned but Conservatives have long been acquainted with successful black men and women.  Plainly put, we just aren't as shallow as our brethren on the Left.

I haven't picked my candidate for 2012 yet, though I quickly scratched a few names off the contender list.  I'm waiting until all the announcements have been made before I get down to brass tacks but as it stands now Cain is at the top of my list.  Like Stacy says, I like him.

Whether he realizes it or not, Stephen Hawking is a man of great faith

Of course, there are all different varieties of faith.

When asked about a health scare in 2009, Stephen Hawking answers:

I have lived with the prospect of an early death for the last 49 years. I'm not afraid of death, but I'm in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first. I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.

Like most parents and grandparents I have told my share of fairy tales. My children liked the standard fare well enough-Jack and the Beanstalk, Hansel and Gretel, et al, but their favorites were the off the cuff stories about the fair Lady Nadia and the brave knight, Sir Jason. Every story had its gloom and doom and every story had its happy ending. They knew that the stories were nothing more than tales that Mommy made up for their amusement and I can assure you that they never took it upon faith that the stories were true.

I take it on absolute faith that the universe was created by God. Hawking takes it on faith that it wasn’t. There is no doubt that Hawking is brilliant but at the end of the day he can no more prove that God did not create the universe than I can prove that he did. If the universe was created by a big bang then I say that God caused the big bang. For all of Hawking’s knowledge can he prove otherwise? No, he and I are both working under the same principle but we are applying it through our own lens.

People often state quite confidently that faith in God is a symptom of a fear of death. I am not afraid of death. I certainly would prefer some means of dying over others but if death is nothing more than ceasing to be I can’t imagine what I should be afraid of. And certainly Hawking does not mean to suggest that people of faith are afraid of finding themselves in Heaven. I guess one could fear Hell, and I have known some who were “good” more out of a fear of Hell than a faith in God and Heaven, but that too has struck me as rather silly.

I doubt that I or anyone else could ever convince Hawking, or any other atheist, that ultimately he is acting out of faith. If it gives him comfort to think otherwise then so be it. But occasionally even the brilliant would benefit from a little reflection.

Refinement with a Common touch

Our First Lady is hostessing a poetry reading at the White House. Guests (will the Obama children be attending?) will be treated to the ever elegant Common:

Whatup BIT*H? I'm Petey Wheatstraw
And you don't stop, with the heidi heidi hoe
Hi hoe, or bye hoe, if you're lookin for a sucker
(What are you?) I'm just another mother**ker
Pucker your lips, do flips like Mary Lou
Just because I f**ked you doesn't mean that I'ma marry you
Bury you, I will do, after, I bill you
Kill you, hoe, cause your sh*t smells like mildew

Now to those of us less schooled in the rich heritage of rap music the above lyrics may appear crass, sexist, violent, and even downright dumb but beauty is in the ear of the beholder.

Common (real name: Lonnie Rashid Lynn, Jr.) isn’t some run of the mill street thug. Heck, he’s never even killed anybody. Little Lonnie is the son of educator Dr. Mahila Ann Hines and former ABA basketball player turned youth counselor Lonnie Lynn. Not exactly the hard knock life:

Yo, I didn't grow up up po po but once you get grown and out on your own
Bills apon bills apon bills is what you have
Before you get your check than you already spend half
See I make money, money doesn't make me
I'm a reflection of my section and section 8

No, Common didn’t grow up “po po” or uneducated but nothing screams AUTHENTIC BLACK MAN like faking ignorance to make a buck off of people who did grow up poor and uneducated.

Some pooh pooh (not to be confused with “po po”) the rapper’s White House invitation on grounds that he has written glowingly about cop killers and killing President George W. Bush. As we all know, fantasizing about killing President Bush is perfectly acceptable (disagreeing with President Obama is haraam) and we should give the White House credit for making it clear that the President does not support killing cops (his position on Bush killing is somewhat murkier).

All and all I am sure it will be a classy event.

Pinnochio is writing headlines at The American Prospect again

From The American Prospect comes today’s misleading headline of the day:

Republican Electoral Strategy: Don't Let the Democrats Vote

Seems that our brethren on the Progressive side of the planet, the very people who gave us ACORN and the New Black Panthers, are concerned by two bills passed in the Texas legislature yesterday (emphasis added):

The Texas Legislature passed two bills yesterday that on the surface look like good governance measures but are actually efforts to discourage the Democratic base from voting. The state Senate approved a bill requiring voters to present a photo ID before receiving their ballots on Election Day. Support for the measure fell strictly along party lines, with all 19 Republicans voting in favor while the 12 Democratic senators in the chamber opposed the bill. The law would give voters a host of acceptable forms including driver’s licenses, passports, or a concealed handgun license. Studies show that the Democratic-tilting groups of the poor, elderly, and minorities tend to have the lowest percentage of official photo identification.

The other measure is less overt but should have an equally powerful impact in blocking voters' participation. The state House approved an amendment that only allows Texas voters to register new voters in the state. Previously, anyone could collect voter-registration forms, but the new bill will restrict that activity to only people from the state of Texas. Someone registered to vote in a different state would no longer be able to work as a volunteer registrar, damaging Democrats far more than Republicans as the left is more reliant on the resources of national organizations to parachute organizers in from out of state.

What’s next? Are Progressives going to claim that those mean old Texas Republicans are trying to disenfranchise dead voters? Given Democrat’s penchant for voter fraud I don’t think requiring proper identification at the polls and placing some commonsense restrictions on voter registrations is too much to ask.

Alligators would be good but boiling acid would be better

I'm about nine/tenths kidding, of course.  In case you missed it, Barack Obama did some speechifying on the subject of illegal immigration and while on a roll decided to point out what a bunch of ingrates those of us who believe in protecting our borders are:

Maybe they’ll say we need a moat. Or alligators in the moat.
They’ll never be satisfied. And I understand that. That’s politics.

That Barry is quite the joker, isn't he?  I'm sure those in attendance laughed and laughed.  And why shouldn't they?  Its not as if we have terrorists streaming across the Mexico border or anything.  Barry went on to claim that the border fence is "almost complete".  He's absolutely right if five percent constitutes "almost". 

Oh well.  I say, "illegal immigrant" and Barry says, "constituents".  It is all a matter of perception.

Cutting through the BS

Jonah Goldberg:

Cut through all of the issues and it boils down to this: The SEALs had to kill Bin Laden to prevent him from falling into the hands of Eric Holder.

Try to imagine Osama Bin Laden in the pokey and Eric Holder holding the keys.  Earlier today I wrote this comment over at Don Surber's:

I wonder how many of those sixteen hours it took Obama to make his *choke* “gutsy call" *choke* were spent worrying about what would happen if the SEALs brought Bin Laden in alive? After all of Obama’s preachy speeches about waterboarding I’m betting that Barry figured that it was easier to deal with the fallout from putting a bullet in an unarmed man’s head than put up with the consequences of bringing him in alive.

Obama made the right call, but gutsy?  Not hardly.

Time for a trade-in

Courtesy of Carol at No Sheeples Here:

I'll be going with (2)!