That fact just popped into my mind. Really don’t like his content or perspective on dating and women.

he left a mark in the last couple of years. mark = terrible example of how to treat black women.

I guess someone else can make a RIP post for him. Too late to edit this one now.

seems like rumors.

The timestamp on this post says 7:03 pm. News of Kevin Samuels passing hit around 6 pm.... This was an intentional act.

.

And N words shedding tears or mad that some women are LOL'ing are telling on themselves.

Folk die every day. This one gets no tears shed.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

I had no issues with what he was doing. Didn't always agree but how anyone can sit here and say these women were being exploited or mistreated is all we need to know about modern society. It's ok for women to go to Oprah or Steve Harvey and be lied to but not ok for someone to tell them the truth if it's too "mean". You can waste your whole life living in delusion. We should all be so lucky for someone to be that "mean" if it means we might accept a real outlook for ourselves. There are alot of women with their noses up in the air at good men. Get mad if you want but these women were telling on themselves left and right on his show.

RIP to a real one.

Because men didn’t get in their feelings and make a whole scene when he told them the truth. Not all of his content was good but he was generally on point whenever I caught his stuff on YouTube

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

He gives men and women both a reality check, much of which is probably needed. He does it in a harsh way, hiding behind “just telling it like it is” rhetoric in the process, but even that’s not the problem.

He can’t handle being challenged and shuts down anything that presents a challenge to his points, up to and including psychological manipulation tactics.

He’ll say something to someone, and if they disagree, he’ll spit skme shit like “aee this is your problem, you don’t want to listen”- diverting the onus away from wheter or not he had a valid point, and laying fault squarely back on the other person, all with no real or sincere evaluation of the point that was questioned.

Its other shit too, he condones men cheating under the guise that they’re just exercising their options on one hand, while vilifying Black women for high divorce rates as he squashes any contextual discussion about *why* on the other.

And a fair amount of men listen and buy into those overarching tactics and philosophies.

So he’s not just the Simin Cowell of image consulting. There’s more to it.

It was “out of shape women need to lose weight” “women need to be realistic” “are you around the men you want to attract? No”
The criticism never really got as deep as you took it it was largely based in the feigned idea of him bashing black women when he was really just telling men and women alike to be realistic with yourselves. All that other stuff is what you make of it but that was not the genesis of the discourse around him

Ultimately he just wanted men and women to be better and be honest with themselves on where they stood in life. And only one side looked at that and said damn maybe he does have a point

>It was “out of shape women need to lose weight” “women
>need to be realistic”

That sounds exactly like this:

"He gives men and women both a reality check, much of which is
probably needed. He does it in a harsh way, hiding behind
“just telling it like it is” rhetoric in the process"

>“are you around the men you want to
>attract? No”

If anyone is mad about that, then you're either grossly oversimplifying this part or they're buggin. Proximity (up to and including being on the same apps if that's how you're doing it) is step one.

>The criticism never really got as deep as you took it

"as deep as I took it"

After the first two-three lines, I spoke about what I think makes him problematic, not picking apart specific criticisms other people have.

So where do I speak on criticism that wasn't as deep as I took it?

it was
>largely based in the feigned idea of him bashing black women
>when he was really just telling men and women alike to be
>realistic with yourselves.

Yeah, I know that's the chief critique of him- and I made an entire post about it lower in this thread, and I don't think that's where the criticism *should* lie. People are just looking at the surface level of what he does- and that's what you're doing.

Also, it's absolutely NOT feigned. I pointed out specific things he does that objectively demonstrate that he's absolutely bashing Black woman.


>All that other stuff is what you
>make of it

It's absolutely NOT "what you make of it". His emotional/psychological manipulation tactics are crystal clear.

buat was not the genesis of the discourse
>around him

I never said it was.

>Ultimately he just wanted men and women to be better and be
>honest with themselves on where they stood in life.

Yeah, no objective view of him comes anywhere close to that.

Fan boys who dig his toxic bullshit lap it up, and pretend that he just wants people to step their game up, but the way he consistently engages Black women in particular CLEARLY demonstrates that there's a lot more to it. He absolutely has to dominate those conversation, excercises minimal, if any compassion, presents consistently rigid views of what the power dynamics should be, always in a way that disproportionately favors the male in the relationship, and that's just for starters.

And only
>one side looked at that and said damn maybe he does have a
>point

No, only one side looked at *only* that, and conveniently ignored everything else.

https://twitter.com/SIX7TEENORTIZ/status/1522600314888617985

If this is allowed:

"Since this isn't an RIP post I can say f*ck that person"

Precedent is set, remember that.

Do you think the rule should be you can't talk shit about dead people?

Cause you are going to have skip the Clarence Thomas or Trump post when those blessed days come.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>Cause you are going to have skip the Clarence Thomas or Trump
>post when those blessed days come.
>

At no point have I ever supported Clarence Thomas or Trump.

You are going to have to skip the Obama, Billy Porter, the blm farce movement founders and remaining members of the congressional black caucus posts. Unlike this post only facts are discussed in those posts. Like I said, precedent is set if this post stands.

I am saying if you are bothered by a post clowning the death of Kevin Samuel, would you feel the same way about folks clowning the deaths of Trump or Clarence Thomas.

And if people try to clown Obama, I would dig them up because that's someone I think highly of. Is Kevin Samuels someone you think highly of?


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>I am saying if you are bothered by a post clowning the death
>of Kevin Samuel, would you feel the same way about folks
>clowning the deaths of Trump or Clarence Thomas.
>

Yes, I would feel the same way because they passed away and less than 2.5 hours later people are celebrating their deaths.

>And if people try to clown Obama, I would dig them up because
>that's someone I think highly of. Is Kevin Samuels someone
>you think highly of?

I respect the man for having the courage to stand on his opinion. The original poster along with everyone else celebrating Kevin Samuels' passing are human filth and in for the rudest of awakenings when someone they respected passes away.

You response isn't some stand on principal about respecting all dead folks.

You butt hurt because it's someone you respect.

And you don't respect because he had the courage to stand on his opinion.

There are tons of awful people who have the courage to stand on their opinions. You respect Clarence Thomas? Trump? Ann Coutler? Candace Owens?

No. You respect him because you agree with him. You enjoyed him treating people like shit. He got to say the things to women you wish you could say to them.

And if you think I am wrong, at least you got respect me for having the courage to stand on my opinion.

And you got to respect the folks celebrating his death for standing on their opinion.













>>I am saying if you are bothered by a post clowning the
>death
>>of Kevin Samuel, would you feel the same way about folks
>>clowning the deaths of Trump or Clarence Thomas.
>>
>
>Yes, I would feel the same way because they passed away and
>less than 2.5 hours later people are celebrating their
>deaths.
>
>>And if people try to clown Obama, I would dig them up
>because
>>that's someone I think highly of. Is Kevin Samuels someone
>>you think highly of?
>
>I respect the man for having the courage to stand on his
>opinion. The original poster along with everyone else
>celebrating Kevin Samuels' passing are human filth and in for
>the rudest of awakenings when someone they respected passes
>away.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

and of course someone will take offense if they were a fan of a person who just died.

why does this place always bring up right wing fools as an example?

no horse in this race but I was always fascinated by the amount of women who called up to get shitted on. Why even call into a show like that? It felt like they were in on the entertainment.

Kira's prior post talked about having the courage to stand on his opinion.

Reading Buddy's reply, he's simply playing on that theme. He said the same about Clarence Thomas, as well as himself. He didn't say that in a vacuum, he's just playing on the theme.

>why does this place always bring up right wing fools as an
>example?

Because they're an example of highly problematic and harmful thinking that many of us here agree on.

>no horse in this race but I was always fascinated by the
>amount of women who called up to get shitted on. Why even call
>into a show like that? It felt like they were in on the
>entertainment.

I'm ambivalent. I absolutely see your point there, and the simple "reality check" layer on the surface doesn't both me.

But once that convo gets deeper than that, he consistently shows himself to be someone who engages in bad faith.

and online entertainers on the same level.

no one had to watch this dude or engage in his antics. A Rush, Clarance Thomas or Trump actually impacts our lives with laws.

This dude just clowning women and dudes about dating.

>and online entertainers on the same level.

>no one had to watch this dude or engage in his antics.

Agreed- but a lot of people do.

Just because they don’t *have* to watch or engage, doesn’t mean that there’s no no impact.

And just because people don’t have to watch or engage, does not mean that people can’t criticize what he does.

After all, he didn’t have to do what he did and then out it out for public consumption, right?

So just as these people choose to engage him and allow him to critique who they are, everything he says and does is fair game.

A Rush,
>Clarance Thomas or Trump actually impacts our lives with laws.

You don’t think he impacts the way people think?

Because that’s not true at all. Hell, Rush didn’t have shit do with laws. But he, hannity, O’Reilly, Tucker, these people have a massive impact on the way people *think* and what they *believe*

The fact that KS isn’t in the same order of magnitude doesn’t mean he’s without consequence, or even significant consequence.

>This dude just clowning women and dudes about dating.

That’s reductionist to the point of ignorance.- and I think you know better. It’s nowhere near that simple.

..Why is this even being brought up?

This clearly isn't an RIP post. There is no precedent set here.

What is your problem?


*skatin' the rings of saturn*


..and miles to go before i sleep...

>..Why is this even being brought up?
>
>This clearly isn't an RIP post. There is no precedent set
>here.
>
>What is your problem?
>
>

Can I make a "not rip post" celebrating the passing of someone I didn't agree with and have it stand? That's all I want to know.

maybe that's the intent you're reading into the OP, but nobody's saying they're happy that he's outta here.

..We don't condone celebrating the passing/transition of anyone.

RIP threads (not the author/person/subject) are snark-free zones. This is a zero tolerance policy and it hasn't changed.

Your logic isn't logic at all.


*skatin' the rings of saturn*


..and miles to go before i sleep...

>If this is allowed:
>
>"Since this isn't an RIP post I can say f*ck that person"
>
>Precedent is set, remember that.

Lmao

This has been said rather explicitly
. It’s neither new, nor a secret

Mission accomplished.

for some reason

.

Though I have started to do a lot more pruning.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Lol I can see why people are celebrating his death.

>for some reason
>
>
>

well, today since this is my first time clicking on this post

he seems vaguely familiar, like maybe someone brought him up on here before but that's it

I was aware of who and what he is and had never seen him

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

https://www.theroot.com/kevin-samuels-controversial-youtuber-dies-at-56-1848891513


Immediately put shockvalue on a list lol



~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22are+modern+women+aware+of+how+bad+they%27ve+gotten%22

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22are+modern+women%22+kevin+samuels

for Modern Women. Thumbnails do make it clear who he is talking about.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

That might have been his one genuine talent, finding good images to trash women with. I wouldn't know where to look.

Some maturity in these kinds of discussions would be productive.

I'm truly interested in hearing/reading that.

Especially from men who are familiar with his content pre-viralization.

I've read that "he did the same to men but nobody cared". But I never actually see what those men learned or gleaned from those encounters or messages. I just see men and women both responding to his encounters with women.

The following is a broadcast by a guy who knew Samuels personally. He shares some personal stories about him, his mission, his impact, etc, then he takes callers from people who share the impact Samuels had on their lives. You'll want to start at 1:01:06
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpDIp42XMN4#t=1h1m6s

……the internet wins again. Even if the poster is being genuine

THE INTERNET WINS AGAIN

May the dead rest well
and may the living live well

And deserves Some dude who looks and earns like Omari Hardwick because she has a masters degree in social work, that she’s delusional and needs to either make changes or change her expectations accordingly. That’s just a reality check.

And as has been said, he does the same with men.

I have even less of an issue with this element, considering people continued to put themselves up for his brand of scrutiny.

I wouldn’t call this a positive, but it’s just not something that bothers me, and it seems to be the chief thing people cite when they go after him.

But the serious issue I see with this dude is the disingenuous approach. He shuts down most efforts to have a more robust discussion, using tactics like presenting raw data points as though they tell the story and then deflecting if someone has the audacity to challenge said data point.

He’s condones men cheating as “exercising their options”, and generally presents a toxic picture of relationship dynamics that women should just deal with- as long as said man makes x amount. He presents the idea that a woman’s “value” declines if she has children by another man, shit like that.

He’s presented a toxic model of relationship power dynamics that a lot of men have adopted. He’s far from the only one, but he IS revered as a significant figure in the “manosphere”, much of which consists of similar brands of toxic male sentiment.

There are a lot of men without fathers or strong/positive male role models, and guys like KS and his offspring- like the monumentally wack fresh & fit- make for an enticing voice for far too many lost young men. For those who aren’t lost or lacking male role models, they don’t much of an excuse. But the KS’ of the world are definitely feeding their worst ideologies.

>And deserves Some dude who looks and earns like Omari
>Hardwick because she has a masters degree in social work, that
>she’s delusional and needs to either make changes or change
>her expectations accordingly. That’s just a reality check.

she can think what she wants of herself and her potential. we've all seen people in relationships with folks that don't look like they match physically or otherwise. this isn't a straight line.

>
>And as has been said, he does the same with men.

sure, but not nearly at the same clip as women. men are not the target he went after.

>
>I have even less of an issue with this element, considering
>people continued to put themselves up for his brand of
>scrutiny.

I do agree that they subject themselves to it. it never makes sense for the women to appear on his show.
>
>I wouldn’t call this a positive, but it’s just not
>something that bothers me, and it seems to be the chief thing
>people cite when they go after him.
>
>But the serious issue I see with this dude is the disingenuous
>approach. He shuts down most efforts to have a more robust
>discussion, using tactics like presenting raw data points as
>though they tell the story and then deflecting if someone has
>the audacity to challenge said data point.

yup, he's about data points. who knows whether any of it is true or what his sources are. stats can paint any picture he wants.
>
>He’s condones men cheating as “exercising their
>options”, and generally presents a toxic picture of
>relationship dynamics that women should just deal with- as
>long as said man makes x amount. He presents the idea that a
>woman’s “value” declines if she has children by another
>man, shit like that.
>
>He’s presented a toxic model of relationship power dynamics
>that a lot of men have adopted. He’s far from the only one,
>but he IS revered as a significant figure in the
>“manosphere”, much of which consists of similar brands of
>toxic male sentiment.

this is also a problem. there may be truth in spots, but it mostly seems like vitriol aimed at women to further push the divide between and women.

for me, his approach is very much 'men do this and women do that'. it immediately pits the genders against each other, with the man generally having the advantage. it's a man who doesn't like women vibe. not looking for a partner, but a mom or servant instead.
>
>There are a lot of men without fathers or strong/positive male
>role models, and guys like KS and his offspring- like the
>monumentally wack fresh & fit- make for an enticing voice for
>far too many lost young men. For those who aren’t lost or
>lacking male role models, they don’t much of an excuse. But
>the KS’ of the world are definitely feeding their worst
>ideologies.
>
>

>she can think what she wants of herself and her potential.
>we've all seen people in relationships with folks that don't
>look like they match physically or otherwise. this isn't a
>straight line.

I agree. Anyone can think what they want in a vaccum, or in a safe space- but the second you open up for critique, or even put yourself out on that limb, then it's absolutely fair game to comment on it.

Also, we all want what we want, and most of us want something above our station, to some degree. But I'm talking about expectations, not mere desire. I think that's a distinction with a difference.

And for a lot of people, those outsized expectations can be harmful to themselves. Frankly, KS was NOT the guy to call if that was them.

But if you're going to present in a way that is dramatically off from what you're trying to get, AND you put that up for public consumption, I fail to see a reasonable issue with someone giving their two sense on it.

And, if we're being realistic, that #10 looking couple is the exception, not the rule. For a loose analogy, I say this as the 0 in that number, it would be entirely unrealistic to think I should be able to get that 1 while remaining that 0. I think I have shit to work on and improve if I want a *realistic* shot at that 1, much less that I deserve it.

>>And as has been said, he does the same with men.
>
>sure, but not nearly at the same clip as women. men are not
>the target he went after.

I agree completely, and certainly didn't mean to imply that this was done in equal amount. But I do know that he did that for some time before his interactions with women started making the rounds.

>I do agree that they subject themselves to it. it never makes
>sense for the women to appear on his show.

>yup, he's about data points. who knows whether any of it is
>true or what his sources are. stats can paint any picture he
>wants.

Yep, and worse, that's an easy "win" for anyone. I show up prepped with certain info, and the average person isn't going to be able to refute it.

>this is also a problem. there may be truth in spots, but it
>mostly seems like vitriol aimed at women to further push the
>divide between and women.

>for me, his approach is very much 'men do this and women do
>that'. it immediately pits the genders against each other,
>with the man generally having the advantage. it's a man who
>doesn't like women vibe. not looking for a partner, but a mom
>or servant instead.

Yep.

And to be clear, while I don't see that surface "reality check/hard truth" piece to be *that* big of a deal on it's own, my main goal was to show that there are far more insidious elements of what KS does, that warrant far greater scrutiny. I feel like that part is just the gateway so he can do all the other shit.

Most of which I disagreed with.

But I saw this video this morning where he was trying to tell a single mom that he had to "bring value" with her kids to a relationship, and the pedo ass example he used for it.... that was the first time I had to eject. That shit was wild and indefensible. I dare any of you to do it.

Am I partying on his grave? nah. But I aint cryin either

https://twitter.com/naur_chile/status/1522355780598513665?s=21&t=-I2hng1YIUNTG1Fqh1oNxg

He cant walk this back for me unless he had explicitly apologized for it (which knowing his style - I doubt he did). This is the hottest take ever.

Not telling people their expectations/demands/standards are out of wack

That whole convo was like, “what would a cold, selfish, manipulative piece of shit say right now?”

so for the content to be so much worse than the it being wrapped in an annoying reaction video is really something

who the fuck would come up with a hypothetical like that lol.

What the hell type of example is THAT and why put YOURself in that type of hypothetical situation?

I'm not going to celebrate homie dying, but I have NO idea why anybody ever went on this fool's show

https://community.babycenter.com/post/a42758002/ot-my_friends_daughter_lied_about_molestation_by_step-father...

>https://community.babycenter.com/post/a42758002/ot-my_friends_daughter_lied_about_molestation_by_step-father...

Here's the problem, and it's highly indicative of his general tact:

He picks a serious, extreme situation as his hypothetical.

In this case, it's one that any sane, reasonable, loving parent would look at, and side with their child.

Then, he follows up with the notion that SHE- the mother- is the one responsible for breaking up the family, because in this hypothetical, she would have serious questions for him, painting her as the at fault party for not placing her man above her child- because he believes the man should be above her child.

Never mind all the context in between, this is just another Black woman who destroyed her family.

Note that he doesn't frame it as, whoa, honest accident here, I had my headphones in, didn't realize she was in the shower, i shut the door right away, I feel bad that your daughter feels unsafe/uncomfortable, etc.

NONE of that exists in this clip.

Instead, he sets it up as a scenario where they have two mutual children, and now she- the mother- is the one breaking up their family because she doesn't support her man.

So yeah, if you can look at all that shit and just be like, "yeah but false allegations exist!", I don't know. I don't want to assume you're a KS fan boy or what have you, but you have to skip over a LOT of context to get to that point.

False allegations exist, it sucks that good, well meaning men can wind up fucked over in the process, but it's precisely because so many real assaults, not mere allegations, actually happen, that it's even possible for false allegations to hold that sort of weight.

To say nothing of real reports of real assaults that fall on deaf ears. And now, we're off in the weeds on another subject, which, to be honest, feels like the point.

The fact is, he picked not just an odd choice of scenario, he also picked one any reasonable mother would absolutely make the choice that's in the best interest of the safety and security of their child.

Is your instinct really "she lying" the first thing that comes to mind when a child says a step parent did something inappropriate?



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

outside of him knowingly knowing she has a daughter who has falsely accused someone of something like this in the past.. (even then, it would be super weird to bring up)

but or course this isn't that. it's lets say she's 5 now and in in 10 years from now...

that shit is mad weird, man

I think it’s that he had some pedo tendency, and more that it was a no brainer that she’d believe her daughter- which is the setup he needed for his next imaginary point.

while having sex....

I'll assume the woman was high value until I see evidence to the contrary.

Peace queens

someone posted a clip on him a year or 2 ago and i watched a couple of his videos

he came off as pretty much a black version of tom leykis who used to be a radio personality a couple decades back... i don't know how widespread or known Leykis was, and definitely didn't invent this type of thing, but it's the closest thing he reminded me of. kind of the same kind of reality check steez, 'training' men, and lecturing people on what level they could pull. Women always calling in in believing they're the exception to the rule only to seemingly voluntarily get torn down.. if someone made a decent counterpoint Leykis would just hang up hoping no one noticed lol.
it's gimmicky but there's def an audience for it.

you didn't have to kill him, shockvalue. damn

>tom leykis

I didn't do a deep dive but from the couple videos i saw

Leykis was more geared towards 'training' men i guess... what to spend on a date and how long to wait if she wont fuck.. shit like that... but women would call in to challenge him and get berated on what level man they were worthy of based on age and looks... which was always funnier once people saw what Leykis looked like

i hadn't heard anything about him in forever so i just looked up his twitter. he seems the same, im kinda shocked he's not a trumper

RIP to cuz, but…nigga, hush.

but I wouldn't expect less from this messageboard

pretty eerie

Whether she was "high value"?


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

If someone wants to get on his show and put themselves out for public critique and consumption, it is what it is. They open that door.

But if someone fucks with him privately, IMO there's really no reason to subject that person to that scrutiny.

Not that I don't get the sentiment. But I don't really expect consistency from a person like that, because human relationships are much more complex than the rigid standards he tries to impose to make a buck.

Chances are, that nuance and complexity bled into his life too.

But whether or not she measures up to the gimmick he uses to get paid, it doesn't reflect on him nearly as much as it would subject her to the toxicity he put out there.

what is weird is she is a nurse..

so some people think she lying

but she looked like the typical IG model..

>what is weird is she is a nurse..
>
>so some people think she lying
>
>but she looked like the typical IG model..

All that tracks, actually. Nothing weird at all.

If she's a dime, he's fine pulling right from the welfare line.

His whole gimmick is, "high value men" don't give a fuck what you make, what your degree is in, etc. They just care if you look good, can cook, etc.

It's not like she's got magic healing powers
Latina pussy is bomb, but it doesn't clear up clogged arteries
That whole "spicy" thing is just a metaphor

if so, i was only pointing that people say he was into latina women so it's not surprising he was with one.

I'm just having fun with the premise, either way

legs says its wierd that he died on top of a nurse

that just doesn't compute to me, so i'm having a lil fun at his expense is all.

of all the people and professions.. you died on top of a nurse.

or so people claim.

A nurse, in the middle of fucking, is just you, know, a person.

What's a nurse, while getting fucked, supposed to do to save the life of the social media influencer who collapses on top of her?

There's nothing remotely weird about dying on top of a nurse.

In fact, a nurse is probably much more likely to be around dying people than the average person on the street.

which is initially like damn that's fucked up. i mean, he's older than her but not like, "she must be your nurse" old.

but he did drop dead. with a nurse :/

seriously doubt they would call her secretary Betty or waitress Betty if she had a different profession

that they will drop dead on them in the act.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"