Democrats Against Obama

I ask Democrats to pause a moment and think about what their support for Obama means for their party.  While everyone gets some partisan fever at this time in the election cycle, I think that Democrats have a lot to lose with Obama's re-election.  Here are a few key issues.

• ACA.  The Affordable Care Act will continue to be an albatross around the Democratic party's collective neck. Time will reveal all of the sops to big insurance and big pharma that went into the bill.  It will eat into the party's desired reputation as being against the excesses of big business.  When your party is seen as the party of both Big Business and Big Government you are toast.  Look at the 2006 Congressional elections and what happened to Republicans.  Opinion polls had shifted and found the GOP to be seen as the party of big government in polls and they got shellacked.
• ACA. Again, because you know in your heart that countless regulations embedded in the law will drive up the cost of health care and tarnish government with the same heartless image that is now enjoyed by the insurance companies.  Being tied to the eventual demise of quality health care is not in the Democratic party's best interest.  You would be better served by a repeal, after which you could propose a much simpler bill that prevented discrimination due to pre-existing conditions, guaranteed portability and subsidized insurance for those above the poverty line but still in lower income brackets.  Even though I don't agree with this platform, it is guaranteed to be more popular than the ACA.  
• Kill lists, drone hits, never ending involvement in overseas wars.  Obama has sucked all the oxygen out of your heartfelt desire to be anti-war.  But how can the Democrats do so when they have a President that is continuing huge portions of the Bush foreign policy.  In fact, the Obama National Security Strategy could almost have been written by Rumsfeld.  
• Immigration.  There is no way that Obama will get comprehensive immigration reform passed until he makes a full commitment to securing the borders. Democrats may not care much for doing so, or they might; but they should understand that comprehensive reform will get impassioned opposition until the border with Mexico is secured.  Electing Romney makes it far more likely that a deal can be cut. 
• National debt.  Obama cares nothing for solving the national debt crisis.  He has ignored the issue and failed to put forward a budget.  Four more years of failing to deal with the problem will inevitably result in a crisis for the country.  I don't know what exact form the crisis will take; but the world is too interdependent but with multiple flashpoints of instability for there not to be a crisis.  A debt crisis that puts the nation into an economic tailspin like the Great Depression will have the same effect on the Democratic party as the Crash of 1929 did for the Republicans.  In wasn't until the 1980s, that the Republican party really recovered fully from the blame it took for the Depression.  I don't think Democrats really want to look forward to that.
• National debt, again.  The national debt is also likely to wreck the cherished entitlement programs the Democrats hold sacrosanct.  The math is inexorable.  Four more years of neglect by Obama will only make the math harder.  If you want to save Social Security and Medicare, some real work on reform better start soon; and it isn't going to happen on Obama's watch.  Personally, I think these programs are outdated and out to fail, but if you care about them, better to have a President that understands the math of the budget deficit.

Democrats are playing with fire in ignoring these issues; better off regrouping after an Obama defeat than letting him ruin your party for a generation.

Mitt Romney's Best Moment

Romney is clearly the alpha male, here, and you can tell that Obama is annoyed and it seems like he turns to the moderator for a bailout.  That might be unfair, but the President is clearly highly annoyed, even though he is being quoted accurately.

Sunshine On His Face - Romney Wins the Debate

Years ago, before Chris Matthews lost his mind, he was a fairly decent political analyst.  I remember his analysis about why one candidate or another might be favored to win the Presidency.  It was simple, he said, which candidate do you imagine as the one with the sunshine on his face?  That candidate will win.  He was thinking of Ronald Reagan, of course, but the opposite also applied.  Gloomy Guses such as Dukakis, Mondale and Dole were doomed in this analysis.  I didn't watch all of tonight's debate because of work related matters; and some of what I watched, I could only hear the tone and watch the body language of the candidates.  Romney clearly won the sunshine contest and therefore the debate.  Obama's facial expressions appeared abnormal, he seemed a bit hunched over; Romney looked happy and confident, like the lucky and blessed man that he is.  Americans may love an underdog, but they don't love a hangdog.

Obama interrupted, appeared petulant and attacked Romney when serious answer was called for.  He seemed the challenger, and not equal to the task.  I haven't looked at any polls, but I am certain this debate will help Romney in the polls. He severely wrong-footed Obama again, this time with a smooth, non-combative performance that hit Obama in ways he didn't appear to expect.  The President, fighting the last debate, appeared combative and personal when the subject matter and the setting didn't call for it.

Now I'll go check the spin.

Obama Store Going Out of Business Sale

How else can I interpet this?  I got an email today from the Obama campaign with the subject line:

★ Our biggest sale EVER ★

And the following graphic:

Looks bad to me.  (No I am not going to link to their web site.)

Giving Obama a Second Chance?

Jay McInerney, novelist, starts his argument for Obama's second term with this sentence.

Last week I was at a party in a Manhattan art gallery attended by the inevitable mix of artists, journalists and wealthy art collectors. 

I knew blogging gold was going to follow and he didn't disappoint.  He seeks to counter the arguments against Obama and really only makes matters worse.  He argues that the Wall Street types present should really be supporting Obama, because he hasn't rescinded the Bush tax cuts and Dodd-Frank was actually watered down and hasn't hurt business on the street.  He even admits that the financial industry had a hand in changing the legislation, but somehow this is a reason to re-elect Obama?  My take is that the whole thing is a government power grab, with the "too big to fail" status quo maintained. I think this is all intentional so that the government can intervene in any manner that the administration desires, when it wants to.  Rather than go for transparent and sensible reform, we get incomprehensible legislation like Dodd-Frank.  I have consistently called for increasing capital requirements based on size to reduce risk rather then non-transparent regulation like Dodd-Frank.  Romney is right to call for its repeal.  McInernry goes on in his praises of Obama:

What disappoints many of us outside of Wall Street is the feeling that Obama hasn't been nearly as effective in bailing out the lower and middle classes.

Not to put to fine a point on it, but the lower and middle classes need jobs; not an incomprehensible overhaul of health care or finance. Obama's mixed signals and increased regulations have killed jobs.

He goes on to the main argument that Romney will continue the failed policies of Bush, blah, blah, ad nauseum; when he just reminded us that Obama continued the Bush tax cuts.  Unbelievably, he has just argued that Obama's failure to veto their extension was a reason to vote for him.

He also claims that Obama's foreign policy is at least better than Bush's.  I had to laugh.  Dean has a very long list of ways in which Obama's foreign policy is exactly like Bush's.  Further, I have a detailed post about why his National Security Strategy could have easily been written by Donald Rumsfeld.

But best of all, in this supposedly post-racial era inaugurated by Obama himself, we must vote for Obama, because he is black, excuse me, African-American is the term used.  If the people outside the New York-DC media bubble really believed that, this country would be in big trouble.  Fortunately, their values are more rooted in the real world.

Obama Betting on Turning Out the Base

How else do you explain Biden's performance last night?  The smirking, the interrupting, the constant talk about the "middle class" in a not very persuasive tone are all indicators that Biden was there to fire up the base, not to persuade the undecided.  Courtesy of KT's tweet:

It sounds like Biden is playing to his base. The anger and the emotions aren't for the general public, but for the lefty donors and fanatics
— K T Cat (@ktcat) October 12, 2012

I saw Mitch McConnell in the spin room saying the same thing.  CNN's post debate survey points out that the debate was probably not very persuasive for either side overall, with a very slight edge to Ryan.

CNN Poll: Who did debate make you more likely to vote for? 28% Romney / 21% Obama.
— NRSC (@NRSC) October 12, 2012

I don't give a lot of credence to such polls, other than in broad brush; which is to say that the real intended effect for Biden isn't to persuade the undecideds.

I am starting to think the race is coming down to Ohio.  It seems highly unlikely that Romney would win in Ohio and lose Florida or Virginia.  The polls are starting to catch up with reality.  Further, the national polls seem good for Romney.  The Gallup poll start over-sampling non-whites by about 5% around the Democrat convention, which means their dead heat is probably Romney in the lead outside the margin of error.  Even with the oversampling, Romney has a 1% lead.

Who is the Adult in the Room?

Obama is complaining about Big Bird getting funding cut while the nation heads for a fiscal cliff, with no plans to take an offramp.  Meanwhile, the Obama campaign response to the Debacle in Denver is to trot out out a commercial featuring flightless yellow fowl.




The truth surrounding this issue is more prosaic, with Tickle me Elmo sales in the billions, Sesame Street denizens are among the 1%.

Romney-Obama Debate Caption Contest

Quick caption contest for some post-debate fun.  Mrs. Daddy's contribution follows:

Obama: Did somebody fart? 

Romney: Yeah, that was you, buddy.

Closing Remarks in Presidential Debate

Obama seems rambling and incoherent, talking about stories about people that have little to do with his actual policies, in his closing remarks.

Romney concern about direction of America on two different paths, favors his side, because the results so far don't favor Obama and Obama has pushed the country farther to the left than it wanted to go.  

Romney seemed much more confident. 

I am very pleased, indeed. (For the record, I have not looked at any other punditry, except for a bit on Twitter.)

I also liked the civil tone of the debate and the way they shook hands with their families present afterwards.

Romney is Striking the Right Tone

I will not be able to blog much about tonight's debate. From what little I have seen, Mitt Romney is striking the right tone. He is on the attack in a fact-filled and respectful way that is still devastating. 50 years of oil depletion allowance burned down for green energy subsidies to the likes of Solyndra was my favorite fact.

Neither candidate seems especially animated; but I am liking the subject matter as favoring Romney. The contradictions of Obama's policies are coming home to roost.

Calling out Dodd-Frank as supporting too big to fail is a great point that is both conservative, correct and resonates with the middle class. I am so impressed with Romney's critique.

Presidential Debate Prep

The broad outlines of the upcoming Presidential debates are already known, at least on the Democrat side.  That's because they don't really ever change their appeal away from class warfare every four years.  The sameness of invoking "tax cuts for the rich" by Obama should leave Mitt Romney plenty of room to operate in tomorrow night's debate in Colorado.  He knows the President's line of attack and should easily be able to put the notoriously thin skinned Obama on the defensive.

I offer some easy pickings for the Romney campaign, free of charge.

1. Is it better to give businesses tax cuts or funnel those same federal taxes to your campaign donors through so called "green" energy programs.
2. If small businesses create jobs, and it is mostly small business owners that are "the rich," how are we going to create jobs without tax cuts for small businesses?
3. Is it better to use tax dollars to enrich union pensioners in the auto bailout at the expense of Indiana teachers pension fund?

Romney can easily defeat Obama with an aggressive campaign that highlights issues that the media has been complicit in not covering, to help Obama.  Fast and Furious and the debacle in Benghazi come to mind.  I don't know why it appears that Romney has been holding back, but it's time to play hardball; especially against a candidate that looks positively untruthful every time he is caught off guard.  (See Obama's poker tells for a long list of his disagreeable and feigned countenances.)

About that 47% - UPDATE

Mitt Romney is now facing trouble for saying that Obama support is at 47% and that somehow this is correlated to the percent of those who pay no federal income taxes. I watched the hastily arranged press conference where he sought to defend himself on the issue, and I was not that impressed. I want Romney to win the election, because Obama is a super black hole of incompetence; but his response isn't getting it done.

Here is the speech I wanted to hear.

The 47% of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes are suffering under this administration, nonetheless, and they pay other kinds of taxes, as well. Many of them are paying medicare taxes for a system that is going broke under the President's neglect. His tax cheating Treasury Secretary's response to Paul Ryan's plan to save Medicare, was to say exactly nothing, except to say we don't like yours. Mr. Obama's lack of leadership in this area is appalling. These folks often pay social security taxes as well. Again, the President's party has not a single idea to deal with the coming insolvency of this system. They portray our party as curmudgeons, when it is their stonewalling of reform that has these programs on the fast track to bankruptcy. These folks also pay tax on gasoline, and as the price of gas has skyrocketed so has the gasoline sales tax they pay. They are paying for the administrations hostility to drilling for oil and gas as well, denying them the good jobs a broad recovery would bring. They are paying more for food as the administration's policies, in conjunction with the Federal Reserve's, drive up the prices of the necessities of life.

Most importantly, many of those who aren't paying federal income taxes would love the chance to make enough money to be able to do so. But their opportunities to earn more money have been wrecked because this Obama economy has crushed the creation of millions of new jobs. I believe, and our party believes, that those Americans on food stamps, welfare and unemployment would gladly trade all that in for a decent job. It is the tragedy of this administration that they cannot. I hope to convince many of Obama's current supporters that we can do better, that we must do better if the nation is to restore its hope, its confidence and its place in the world. Thank you and God Bless America.

UPDATE

Anonymous adds the following spot on commentary.

Totally agree. Still, something is wrong. Nothing being done on the fiscal cliff, Sebelius is not in jail, we were attacked again on 9/11, employment is still 8+, Obama is partying in Vegas and on Letterman and it's Romney's campaign in trouble? What alternative universe am I in?

Obama's Speech

I only listened to a little bit of Obama's speech. It's a fine speech, if you hadn't lived through the last four years. He makes the case for doing things that he didn't do in his first term and takes credit for achievements his administration actively sought to prevent. For example, reduced dependence on foreign oil came about due to U.S. drilling on private lands and the use of fracking; all while his administration closed off new drilling on public lands and sought new regulation on fracking. The disconnect from reality is stark. He claims he will magically create new manufacturing jobs and raise fuel standards, by the mere stroke of his pen. At what cost to the rest of the economy and by what means is not his concern. His speech is filled with a firm belief that government can solve every problem, despite his protest that it cannot; when the size and scope of government are the actual problems. The regulation he champions has neither helped main street nor tamed Wall Street, but has left all of us with the tab for Too Big To Fail. And government itself, by becoming too big, will fail too, if Obama gets a second term.

He offers a vision of dependency on a government. I believe that we the people aren't interested in a life where government solves our every problem; because they are wise enough to know that isn't possible, courageous enough to take responsibility for their own success and ingenious enough to meet their own challenges. No one is proposing ending the safety net or eliminating all regulation as he suggests, we merely suggest that net has become too heavy to be of much use and that his regulators have been captured by the regulated.

So put aside the fantasy of his speech and ask yourself if he has made America better off with his time in office. Has he kept his promises to bring a new tone to Washington? Has he focused on growing the economy? Have his regulations and laws helped the insurers, hospitals, drug companies and Wall Street or have they helped the middle class? Was the auto bailout accomplished legally? Did he back his cronies with stimulus cash? Did Brian Terry die because of guns his AG let walk to Mexico? Are a greater percentage of Americans working? Judge Obama by his deeds, not by the lofty fantasy he delivered tonight.

US Labor Force Participation Rate data by YCharts

Obama - Not Making the Case

This election should be a landslide against the President, because he has failed to make the case for his own re-election. His argument for re-election boils down to this, the other guy is worser. What his surrogates say about the case is a weak argument indeed.

• Economy: Democrats: He saved the economy. The facts: Massive unemployment with record non-participation in the work force. I need not say more. But I will since the President gave himself a grade of incomplete on the economy. Reminds me of that happening to my son once. In the GPA calculation, it counted the same as an F.
• Health care: Democrats: Pre-existing conditions covered and everyone gets health care. The facts: Not everyone will be covered. 2000 pages of rules and regulations to destroy health care innovation was the necessary price to cover pre-existing conditions? I think not.
• Auto Bail out: Democrats: We saved Detroit. The facts: Bankruptcy laws flouted, Indiana teachers, and Delphi non-union pensioners get screwed. The auto industry would have survived a normal bankruptcy; a new bankruptcy by GM and Chrysler is now more likely.
• Wars: Democrats: Obama inherited two wars and has been a brilliant commander in chief. The facts: Afghanistan is not going well. We got involved in Libya without Congressional approval. We've decided to whack Americans overseas.
• The Budget: Democrats: Crickets. The facts: The Senate has not passed a budget since Obama took office. Obama's own budget was defeated unanimously, his only bipartisan accomplishment.
• Medicare: Democrats: We are saving medicare. The facts: Medicare is going broke and more quickly than you think. Without some plan like Paul Ryan's, Democrats will run medicare into the ground.

Obama has complained that Romney is not specific and has offered the same old plans of George Bush, which sounds sort of specific. To quote The Economist: "One question, Mr. President . . . just what would you do with another four years?" Still haven't heard a good answer.

National Debt Crossing $16 Trillion

Congratulations kiddos, the national debt clock to the right will likely cross the $16 trillion mark in the next few days. Happy trails. To quote the Joker in the Dark Knight, "It wasn't cheap. You oughta know, you bought it!" Yeah, we the people bought it by constantly re-electing feckless Republicans and Democrats who cared more for their own re-election than for the country. We were happy to vote for politicians who in turn voted for a never ending expansion of the federal government, when the means to pay for it was never going to materialize. Republicans have been guilty as well; but I know this: re-electing Democrats, including Obama, will make the problem larger and bigger and give us less time to deal with it.

Romney's Speech

Romney made the grade tonight, but I am not the type of voter he was trying to impress. I think his speech was tuned to the undecided women voters. CNN had a focus group that seemed to confirm this hypothesis. I was looking for more red meat and more policy specifics, I thought Ryan's speech was actually better. But I sense that Romney has singular focus on winning. He knows what he needs to do to win; he effectively made the case to the voters who can still be persuaded while effectively criticizing the President.

Best line of the night:

President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. MY promise...is to help you and your family.

Not soaring rhetoric, but effectively punctures Obama's pretentiousness and grandiosity. (So did Clint Eastwood, even if he was slightly embarrassing at times.)

By the way, the meme that Paul Ryan's speech needed fact checking has been effectively debunked.

The Hour is Late - Nervousness about Romney

I once quoted Peggy Noonan as saying that the tea party knew what time it is, and it was later than most people think:

The second thing is the clock. Here is a great virtue of the tea party: They know what time it is. It's getting late. If we don't get the size and cost of government in line now, we won't be able to. We're teetering on the brink of some vast, dark new world—states and cities on the brink of bankruptcy, the federal government too. The issue isn't "big spending" anymore. It's ruinous spending that they fear will end America as we know it, as they promised it to their children.

Which brings me to the Republican nominee. There is no mistaking him for the tea party candidate, even if many in the tea party support him out of antipathy for Obama. But to date, he has done a poor job of defining who he is, and the Obama campaign has had some modest success defining him in a negative way. I have chaffed at his campaign for not immediately making the case for his candidacy and for not building the narrative of his life as soon as he clinched the nomination.

The good news is that the mountain of negativity has not made much of a dent. People are more sophisticated than to believe Harry Reid's McCarthyesque lies and Romney has been good at counterattacking. The selection of Paul Ryan was helpful as well. But Romney still hasn't made the case. In an environment where his opponent is trying to scare the public, he needs to do so. The hour is late.

Perhaps he has been waiting for the convention, but I am nervous. In 2008, Romney's ultimate failing was the failure to put together a credible narrative and companion policy prescriptions to set himself apart from the other candidates. I worry that he will try to do so now, as well; perhaps thinking that the public is fed up with the economy enough to dump Obama. I am here to say that they won't vote for someone who won't explain himself. They tried that it in 2008 and it didn't go well. Unfairly perhaps, the Republican candidate this year won't get away with some version of hope and change.

I will be looking anxiously to how Romney handles the convention to see where this is going. Right now, its not looking that great. Intrade has Obama at 55.6% to win. That he isn't higher is an indication of the President's weakness. That he is that high in the first place is an indication that Romney isn't making the case.

Obama San Diego Office Opening - If You Work, You're Not Invited

The Obama campaign is opening up a new office on El Cajon Blvd. They sent me this email, here is a portion.

B --

Anyone who's ever volunteered on a grassroots campaign like ours will tell you: By Election Day, your local field office will feel like home.

And when you move into a new home, it's pretty standard to celebrate with food and friends.

So let's get together for a "housewarming" party at our new office in San Diego. No need to pick up a present, just bring yourself and a friend or two to the party.

Can you make it? Here are the details:

What: Office opening party in San Diego

Where: OFA-CA office in San Diego
4660 El Cajon Blvd., Suite 206
San Diego, CA 92115

When: Thursday, August 23rd
2:00 p.m.

Mid-week and mid-afternoon? Most people with jobs and businesses to run won't be able to make it. I guess those folks aren't part of Obama's core support.

What If We Win? What If We Lose?

The President arouse a great deal of antipathy in his opponents because they believe his administration is subversive to their cherished ideals that trace their roots to the nation's founding. Beliefs in the fundamental supremacy of the rights enshrined in the constitution, the rule of law not Executive Order, in limited government and a respect for the rights of the people to not have their hard earned keep confiscated by unchecked government animate our opposition. Because our bedrock beliefs seem to be under such fierce assault by Obama, we are deeply passionate about his defeat. As a result we are so emotionally invested that we may not be thinking about what happens next.

If we win. We will rejoice exceedingly, and we should. But we will have elected a somewhat conservative Republican from Massachusetts with a checkered track record on our issues. Republicans are likely to retain a majority in the House, but control of the Senate will be dependent on undependable allies such as Olympia Snowe if there is control at all. Under such circumstances vigilance against backsliding with respect to solving our nation's ills will be the order of the day. The Republicans have shown that they are interested in nothing so much as their own re-election and have given us "No Child Left Behind," Medicare Part D and a leaky border the last time they were in charge. I don't trust them. A failure to repeal the ACA, especially through the mechanism of defunding if outright repeal is prevented in the Senate will be an egregious slap in the face of their tea party supporters. Continuing to run primary opponents against the worst offenders may be required.

If we lose. We will wail and gnash our teeth, as well we might, because the damage of a second Obama term may take two decades to unwind. But we will have to accept that educating the public will be the order of the day. When Obama's policies inevitably fail, and the math is looking bad, we will need to have built up the policy arguments and the bench to take the field in the next cycle. The American people will inevitably wake up. Having policies at the ready, along with a communications plan will serve us well. Further, we will need to hold the House Republican leadership accountable, because it will form the last line of defense to preventing the worst of the damage. I don't imagine that the Republicans will gain control of the Senate if Obama wins, but it is certainly possible. Preventing further damage and getting ready for the 2014 cycle will be necessary to save the country.

If its a tie? Don't give me a headache, but it goes to the House of Representatives who vote by state, which should easily result in a Republican win. A tie is as good as a win, in the electoral college math.

Bottom line: Regardless of the outcome, there will still be a lot of work to do.

Air Of Confidence - The Ryan Pick

Romney's pick of Paul Ryan as his VP, ending months of speculation, has me both nervous and delighted. Nervous, because I am by nature conservative about risk and would have gone with Portman or McDonnell from a pure electoral math perspective. It's probably a good thing I am not a candidate for office. I am delighted because this has the potential to be a game changer in a different way that Palin was a game changer (which I still believe was a great pick at the time.) First, this shows Romney's self confidence, which we need. The polls have made me nervous of late. Second, this will bait the Democrats into an all out class warfare and mediscare attack. But the people, even the elderly, are too smart for that too work. They know that the debt bomb is ticking. A debt ceiling limit might hit before the election, creating a crisis. Romney has positioned himself to be the man with foresight when that hits. I have discussed at length how McCain lost the 2008 election because he came across as erratic on the capital market crisis and ended up agreeing with Obama and Bush on the issue. There will be another crisis between now and November; Romney is positioning himself for the win when it happens.

Ryan is also the voice of the next generation. Brother blogger Dean has voiced his belief that a new battle has been joined in which his generation will have to fight for the future of America. Paul Ryan is a member of that generation and young enough to know that without true reform, the federal deficit will wreck his generation's ability to have any semblance of a retirement. Picking Ryan signals that Romney is ready to take on the serious issues of governing that will face this nation in the next four years.

John Fund has an excellent article on his "The Corner" blog at NRO, that discusses some of Ryan's excellent qualities. Leadership is key. One paragraph from Fund:

Third, Ryan’s ideas aren’t that novel or scary. The idea of “premium support” for Medicare, which would change the program’s one-size-fits-all policy to a private-insurance model with public options, was endorsed by a bipartisan commission appointed by Bill Clinton back in the 1990s. Late last year, Ryan announced a new version of his proposal with a new partner signing on: Democratic senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, who first achieved political prominence as an advocate for seniors.

In the video of Ryan's speech after Romney's announcement, Rya hits it out of the park. At the 8:48 mark, he talks to the generational issue that Dean references when he says this:

President Obama and too many like him in Washington have refused to make difficult decisions because they are more worried about their next election than they are about the next generation.

And there is this gem at 14:16. America is more than just a place, though.

America is an idea. It's the only country founded on an idea. Our rights come from Nature and God, not from government. . . . We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.

He states that this idea is under assault, by implication, from Obama. He later states:

We won't duck the tough issues, we will lead.

We won't blame others, we will take responsbility.

We won't replace our founding principles, we will reapply them.

If you ladies would like to show your support you can purchase some apparel like this: