Democratic Protests in Israel and Mexico

TOPICS DISCUSSED

  • Democratic Fragility in Israel and Mexico

  • Successes and Failures in Our Approach to China

  • Outside of Politics: How Old Do You Feel?

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do it without you. To support the show, please subscribe to our Premium content on our Patreon page or Apple Podcasts Subscriptions, or share the word about our work in your circles. Sign up for our newsletter or follow us on Instagram to keep up with everything happening in the Pantsuit Politics world. You can find information and links for all our sponsors on our website.

EPISODE RESOURCES

TRANSCRIPT

Sarah [00:00:07] This is Sarah Stewart Holland.  

Beth [00:00:09] And this is Beth Silvers. 

Sarah [00:00:10] Thank you for joining us for Pantsuit Politics.  

[00:00:25] Thank you for joining us here at Pantsuit Politics, where we try to take a different approach to the news. Today, that looks like examining places around the world where democracy is being challenged, specifically in Israel and Mexico. We know you guys have all read the headlines just like we have about the protests there. We're also going to talk about what is going on in China and Russia. A little global check in on democracy and authoritarianism in under an hour. It'll be great. We're going to wrap up the show talking about what's on our minds Outside Politics, which is how old do you feel?  

Beth [00:00:54] We had such a wonderful time at East Tennessee State University earlier this week. We were speakers for the Festival of Ideas and met wonderful students and faculty and community members. It's always a pleasure to be out and about and we have several more chances for you to see us out and about. If you would like to do that, we'll be at Abilene Christian University on March 22nd. We'll be at East Dallas Christian Church on March 23rd. We'll be in Orlando, Florida for our live show on April 5th. And we'll be in Fort Wayne, Indiana, on April 26. We would love to see you at any or all of those locations. We can promise you that every one will be different. We never do the same thing twice. You can find all the information in our show notes.  

Sarah [00:01:34] And I just want to say that Abilene Christian University is a repeat. They invited us back. We have another company that has invited us back. The ultimate compliment when people invite us back to talk to their communities or organizations. And so, we're so excited about that. All right. Up next, we're going to talk about Israel and Mexico. We're going to start in Israel. On Wednesday, they had a day of disruption. Thousands and thousands of protesters marched along the central highway in Tel Aviv, and the police response was pretty violent. Lots of tear gas and stun grenades. I read that one protester lost his ear when the grenade hit him in the head-- the stun grenade. This is not the first protest. This is an escalation after two months of protest against the judicial overhaul being proposed by Netanyahu's new, very far right wing coalition. It was rushed through the Knesset by the country's new government. It will weaken the Supreme Court, remove legal protections from minority groups in Israel, and has obvious implication for the prime minister who is in the middle of an ongoing corruption trial. So, that is the state of things in Israel as we sit here to record.  

Beth [00:02:57] Just to put this in context, for people who don't think about Israel a lot, the Knesset is their legislative body. It is not bicameral. It's one chamber. That's a huge difference from American politics and something that I really spent a lot of time thinking about. So, this is a very, very powerful body to begin with. Netanyahu's functions very much like our president, but is a creature of that legislative body. This coalition of parties-- and again, not two parties, lots of parties in a parliamentary system. This coalition of hard right parties gets together and elevates Netanyahu after the Israeli people have been through many, many elections. And while Netanyahu for three years has been in the midst of this criminal prosecution, and you say, "Three years, how could it take so long?" Well, it takes so long because it's not a jury system. It's a panel of three judges. The way this trial is conducted, witnesses come in for hours and it unfolds so slowly because three judges will make the decision. So, that's another big concentration of power. You've got this huge concentration of power within the judiciary relative to a jury system and a huge concentration of power in the legislature, relative to our bicameral system. And then in the midst of that, Netanyahu, who is on trial and is already so controversial, moves against the body that is positioned to actually be a check on his power. So, I just think it's important to remember, this is not analogous to anything we have going on in the United States.  

Sarah [00:04:41] Yeah. When I was listening to reporting on the situation, particularly with this trial, there are like 30 something witnesses into like 350. This is going to be going for a while. Yeah. And he's not a check on the Knesset because he's the leader of the coalition. And the posture is very much like, well, you voted for this. What, after like six different elections your posture is like this is a referendum? It's going over like lead balloon. Let me tell you. The protests are growing and growing. And to see violent crackdowns like this is very unique in Israeli society. Now, the other ever present reality is increased violence on the West Bank and with the Palestinians. Like the growing incidences of lone gunman-- very, very young lone gunman. You're talking about like 13-year-old Palestinian boys, 15-year-old Palestinian boys. And I thought, we're not getting into the politics over there, but the reporting that this didn't used to happen-- like there was tighter control for the Palestinian side of this sort of lone gunman-- that's growing. Then you have growing violence from settlers, like mobs of people violently evicting Palestinians, burning their homes to the ground. And really egged on by some of these security officials in this far right wing coalition. And it just feels like a powder keg.  

Beth [00:06:07] Yeah, we project so much on Israel because of the unique role it plays in American politics. But the layer below all of this, again, is that the people of Israel live in a country founded on the idea that Jewish people have a right to exist in the world when the world has so frequently persecuted Jewish people in such brutal ways. And that existence feels constantly precarious because of the situation with the region-- and situation is a terrible word for it. You cannot draw good lines in Western Asia that show you who is helper and who is foe because it varies by issue. The lines on the map don't tell you enough about the people there and what their interests are. I look at this situation and I just think, shame on him. In a country that needs a leader who does not bring his own personal interests and elevate his own personal interests above what the country needs, I just feel so bad for the people of Israel that he has foisted this situation on them because he wants to avoid accountability for his own actions.  

Sarah [00:07:24] I'm not sure he can distinguish between his personal motivations. Somebody like that I don't think there's any separation between what they think is best for Israel and what is best for themselves. That's the problem. And, look, there are far-right wing factions not just in the Knesset. In the population of the country, and they have a lot of power right now. And I think what makes Israel different, not from every country, but particularly in this part of the world is that we don't have to sit on the sidelines and sort of do the shrug emoji and say, "Oh, man, it's just hard when another country is going through this." Israel's alliance with the United States is incredibly important. And I think that the United States government should use whatever power and pressure we have at our disposal to say, enough. Do you want to continue a relationship with us? I believe that you do, because I feel like the dynamic has shifted, right? I feel like the pressure was always on us to support Israel. It was always known as the third rail of American politics. Well, the behavior and the policies and the actions of Netanyahu are changing that and have already changed that. It's not that I think we should abandon Israel. I don't. But if Israel, through the actions of this far right wing alliance, abandons the principles of democracy, well then we do have to re-examine our relationship with them.  

Beth [00:09:06] I think it's tough when you're talking about the principles of democracy. I was thinking a lot about this listening to podcasts about what's going on with the Knesset. Also, thinking about some of the discussion in the United States right now about checks and balances, I think the most prevalent example of checks and balances conversation we have going is the student loan relief program. The Supreme Court just held oral argument on President Biden's debt relief program. And all reporting, unsurprisingly, is that the justices are quite skeptical of this exercise of executive power. And there's a lot of conversation among people who are interested in political theory right now about whether we have too much friction built into the U.S. government. And I think most people, if you get down to it, believe that democracy is about electing the right people to do good things and freeing them up to do those good and popular things. And when I look at a story like this or even the student loan story, I think the way you preserve democracy, though-- because there will always be factions in a democratic society of people who don't really believe democracy works, right? That will be genuinely and legitimately represented in your populace. The way you preserve it is that friction, I think. It is that you could say, here is a good person trying to do a good thing, but we have built this friction into the system. We intentionally make it hard to even do good things because, one, not everyone agrees on what is a good thing and good things are never pure, and always have burdens attached to them somewhere. But also, because that friction prevents this kind of consolidation of power or this attempt at consolidation of power. And as I've thought about the student loan issue, I feel so much gratitude to President Biden for being very hands off with the Supreme Court when there was a lot of pressure on him to be very hands on with the Supreme Court. And I think that part of his intention of really upholding democracy in the world has been his respect for that friction, even with a court populated by justices that you know he probably has some doubts about.  

Sarah [00:11:19] We, to our detriment, though, has focused so much on democracy as this electoral system, when there's so much more to it than just how we elect people, just if we are electing good people to do good things. And I think that's what you're seeing so much in these protests is that, wait, we watch these people consolidate power and they did a lot of things. They restricted journalism, they restricted protests, they restricted free speech. Samantha Powers has a great piece on Foreign Affairs, where she talks about there are aspects of this that we have neglected. We focus so much on the electoral system and we neglected to see what many people were pointing out, which is growing inequality is a threat to democracy just as much as change is to the process through which we elect people. The growing misinformation is a huge threat to democracy. If you want your mind blown, read about these firms in Israel that are for hire to disrupt elections. Oh, my Lord. I don't get freaked out a lot. I have a really steady baseline when it comes to the state of the world. But this freaked me all the way out, that they have basically an army of avatars for hire to go out and create unrest to undercut really not democracies here in America, but also fledgling democracies who need a lot of help. It's wild. I think this more complex understanding, and I think the way we focus on the complexity surrounding democracy in a more holistic way is to not do this. Well, democracy's eroding.  

[00:13:00] We're going to talk about Mexico now because there's been protesters in the streets in Mexico City, around the country in recent weeks and back in 2022, because President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has been consolidating power. He's attacking their National Electoral Institute, and people are furious. But that's not the only thing he's doing. And when people say, "Well, it's eroding in Mexico," I think that's the wrong metaphor. I think that's the wrong metaphor for every country. Democracy is not a promised land we reach on the mountaintop and then we're just falling back down the mountaintop. I think that's the wrong way to think about it. This is not a destination we reach. It's too complex. All these factors that feed in the electoral process, the checks and balances, a free press, free speech, the right to protest, equality, income equality, all of those things, this is like a garden we have to be tending all the time. And there are absolutely invasive pests that we have to watch out for. I think Mexico has one. I think Israel has won. But that's not a thing we're going to get to a place where we don't have to worry about that anymore. There will always be people who reach power and want to consolidate and keep it. You only get one term as the president of Mexico. I think the second he got in there as a progressive was, like, how am I going to keep this? How am I going to consolidate this power?  

Beth [00:14:17] Because people run for office believing they are good people who want to do good things. And they think I've got to clear every obstacle I can in the system. And that is my fundamental belief about this. That the obstacles in the system are part of the democracy, part of your willingness to leave a legacy that's bigger than you is not just what you accomplish, it's what you leave in place so that someone in the future who disagrees with you about what good things means or who believes themselves to be a good person but who is your polar opposite, can do a little but not too much. And it's really, I think, highlighted around the judiciary. There's a reason that we see Netanyahu going after the judiciary in addition to his own criminal problems and this attack on the National Electoral Institute in Mexico. Again, kind of an accountability body. A transparency body that that's where you go if you want to make sure that you're moving obstacles out of your way.  

Sarah [00:15:16] And this body is pretty consistently pointed to as indeed Mexico's one party rule. They had massive protests and uprisings in the early 2000s. They created this institute and saw the end of this party that had ruled for most of the 20th century, which was a conservative party. Then they had another party and then they had Obrador's party. And everybody was like, "Look, see, it works. He got it." And then it was like, of all people, he's going to be the one to go after the institute and try to sort of-- he ran on this idea of putting the military back in the barracks, but now he's empowering the military. I thought one of the most interesting things I heard about in all this research is that he's having the military build infrastructure in these areas, particularly southern Mexico, to not only empower them, but to create these attachments between the people and the military. And he's doing a lot of this on his personal popularity. He's a very, very, very good politician. And he is personally popular, but his policies are not. And I think that sort of populist makes it like somebody who just everybody likes, even if they don't always like what they're doing. I think we have to acknowledge that that's particularly dangerous in a democracy. We're going to take a quick break and then we're going to move to some parts of the world that are not democratic and what role we see them playing in these changes. Beth, you were very excited about the bipartisan hearing on the role of China and our relationship with them. And you watched it and you were very impressed. Tell us about it. 

Beth [00:16:58] I was very impressed. The Republican-led House of Representatives has impaneled the strategic competition with China Committee, led by Representative Mike Gallagher, Republican from Wisconsin. The co-chair of that committee is Representative Krishnamoorthi from Illinois. Democrat. And I have heard members of the committee, especially Democrats on the committee, saying, "I'm on this committee because I trust Mike Gallagher. I trust that he will lead this committee with integrity." And there is bipartisan consensus right now in Washington, D.C. that we have screwed up in our relationship with China. And what most impressed me about this hearing and what I think makes it worthy of discussion in an episode about democracy, is that this was a public airing of a way in which our legislature and our executive branch have failed. There was a public airing by some of the members who took these votes, that it was a mistake to admit China to the World Trade Organization. That the belief in Congress, especially from Republicans who were leading this committee and saying, we perpetuated this and we were wrong. I think that's amazing. I think we have to take a minute and say that's incredible for people who hold power to so publicly say we were wrong.  

[00:18:15] But the belief was that the Chinese people, if they experienced greater economic opportunity, greater connection to the world, greater participation in capitalism, would then demand a change in the ruling party. And, instead, the Chinese Communist Party cynically accepted our good faith and took advantage of it. And they have cheated through manipulating currency and theft of intellectual property, and the balloon is just an outward manifestation of the intense decades-long program of spying everywhere to gain an advantage in the world. And so, now we're saying, okay, we messed up. We allowed China to come closer to us, and that has been to our detriment. What are we going to do next? And they had witnesses in front of this committee ranging from national security expertise, to manufacturing and labor expertise, to a woman who had been imprisoned in China and lived in a detention camp and is now a democracy activist. It was just really refreshing to me to have this opportunity to say we must change our policy. We must explain to the American people how we got here and why our policy has to change. And now let's think about what that means for us.  

Sarah [00:19:43] The only thing I think I'd quibble with, is the idea that that was a massive failure. I don't really think we can say that definitively. Right now, did it work out how we thought it would? No. Am I willing to declare forever that this economic empowerment of the Chinese people was a failure? I am not because I'm not a fortuneteller. You know what I mean? We don't really know. Into the Samantha Powers' piece, she's arguing that authoritarianism is the one under attack. That's the one that's a problem right now. She says this great statistic that between mid-2020 and the end of 2022, populist leaders saw an average decline of 10 percentage points in their approval ratings in 27 countries. And I think we see that in China. I think we absolutely see that in Russia, not as much as we'd hope. Again, what's our goal? Is our goal that we give the one piece of information that people of other nation states goes, "We trust you. You're right. Never mind." No, it's a slow process. It's exactly what we advise people in political conversations. This is a long game. And so, I'm not really ready to say that was a failed experiment, but I do think that it's absolutely up for re-examination. I don't think anybody's debating that. I do think that, yes, it empowered the Chinese Communist Party. But I think to Samantha Powers' point and a point we've made multiple times on here, when you look at authoritarian governments like China, like Russia, they are brittle. They are brittle.  

[00:21:09] Russia's invasion of Ukraine exposed the emptiness. And she makes this great point about the corruption. There's always corruption. And that weakens the very parts of the government that need to be strong in order to empower an authoritarian government. He went in guns blazing when his military was rife with corruption and just eaten from the inside out. And it's obvious there was graft, there was all this stuff going on. And so, when there's none of that, the complexity of the democratic process that we were talking about before is the strength. It's creating a diversity. It's a diverse portfolio, right? There's just lots of input that creates stronger decision making. Is it perfect decision making? No, it isn't, because it's still humans making it. But it's much stronger, versatile, pliant than what you see in authoritarian when it's the brittleness of one person. And I would advise Netanyahu and Obrador to think about that. But they don't, right? They don't. They have yes men around them. That's the point. They just have everybody saying looks great, doing a great job, keep it up. And they're undercutting the institutions that are supposed to be that voice in their ear going, maybe everything isn't what you think it is.  

Beth [00:22:20] One of the most challenging aspects of the hearing for me in terms of what do we think about next and what's important, was the conversation around the White Paper Protest. So, remember when the Chinese people for a few days were holding up blank pieces of paper in protest of the Zero-covid policy? The witness from China-- who is an American citizen now and an activist for democracy and who was very clear in her understanding of these issues and took to task Bill Clinton, George W Bush, everyone-- she talked about the White Paper protesters as being even braver than the Tiananmen protesters, which I thought was a very bold statement. And she said that is because the technological surveillance and police state that the Communist Party has created in China makes the risk so much higher. And she said that protest lasted only a few days because the risk is so great now. And I really took from that hearing that privacy is the frontier now. To maintain a democratic society, privacy is the frontier. What is that council? Another piece of this hearing is TikTok. And they're talking about TikTok and the security risk posed by TikTok.  

Sarah [00:23:45] Shut it down. I'm full Klon Kitchen. I've come across. I've Crossed the Rubicon.  

Beth [00:23:49] Okay. Well, so what is more democratic, to try to persuade people to shut it down or to actually shut it down? When misinformation is the risk and speech is the hallmark, what do you do? These are really hard questions, and that's why I'm so grateful that this committee is trying to have a public airing of the questions and a public debate about it, because I don't have any sense of the answer to that question. Is it better to persuade people to stop using TikTok or is it such a threat that our government needs to say, we're going to make this decision for you? I think that is so challenging.  

Sarah [00:24:26] Again, back to the terrifying story about the Israeli firms and their army of avatars. And that's the point Samantha Powers leans on very hard at the end, is we are not prepared. We have not been honest with ourselves about this risk. If they have these army of avatars, talk about the risk with artificial intelligence. Yes, there are real people on TikTok. I'm not arguing that there aren't real people on TikTok or Facebook or Twitter, but I don't think any of us have really come to Jesus about how easy it is to create fake accounts. The journalist in this piece to test it, they went undercover to hire this firm. And to test it, they basically had the firm spread a rumor that Emanuel the Emu that everybody loves-- I don't actually love Emanuel. My loyalty lies with Karen, but that's not neither here nor there-- died. And it worked. They saw it trending on TikTok. This poor Emmanuel's owner woke up terrified and ran to the barn. With fake people. That is so scary.  

Beth [00:25:32] I think it is important to say when you talk about this army of avatars that we are moving from fake accounts to fake impersonations of humans. Like, deep fakes have become so good and so useful. And so, you believe that you're hearing from a human being with a soul-- and sometimes you are hearing from a human being with a soul who also is part of a massive, skillful propaganda operation.  

Sarah [00:25:59] Yeah, we're not talking about like you go to the Instagram account and there's no profile picture and three follows. Guys, this is not it. That's not it. This is different. It's like these are fake accounts that Facebook and Instagram and Twitter cannot find, spot, identify as fake accounts. Because, again, back to the intricacy of democracy and how important free speech, free press, the free exchange of ideas is to that, if we don't address-- to me, it's not about individual threats, power players trying to solidify their power in any individual government. That will always be true. And I'm not saying we shouldn't pay attention, but to me that's not the viral threat in the way we talk about democracy. To me, this is the issue. When we see trends across nations, that's when we need to be concerned. When we see players that can move the chess pieces in Nigeria, in Chad, and Venezuela, that's when we really need to start to be concerned.  

Beth [00:26:58] And that's what the Ukrainian struggle is about. That sense that we don't allow people to move the chessboard all over the world in such a direct way. Do we sometimes do it ourselves in an indirect way? We do. And probably more directly than any of us know or would want to acknowledge. And we need to continue to have conversations about that. Ukraine came up a lot in this hearing about China because we're looking at Taiwan and thinking through what happens if China were to act toward Taiwan the way that Russia is behaving toward Ukraine, if there was that direct invasion. I came away, though, less concerned about that. Not that it isn't a pressing concern, but less concerned about that and more concerned about that technological surveillance state and what China hopes to get from spying on everyone. What China hopes to get from using TikTok and WeChat and dancing cat videos to mine information and promote messages. China has just put out this 12 point plan for peace in Ukraine, which I just have a very how dare you reaction to. But I think that if you're Putin, you need to start asking yourself, what is China going to want in exchange for this support? Because China is not doing this out of the goodness of its heart. Russia is a resource-rich piece of geography. China is going to want a lot from Russia in exchange for the support and the desire of Xi Jinping to do on a global level what you're seeing hints of with Netanyahu and Obrador in Mexico seems pretty limitless to me right now.  

Sarah [00:28:47] Well, in the same way, democracy is not a destination we reach. We don't reach a conclusion to this conversation. The state of democracy and authoritarianism around the world is going to be an ongoing project, everybody, and we'll keep talking about it here. Beth, can I ask you a question? How old do you feel?  

Beth [00:29:13] I feel almost 42. I turn 42 on Saturday.  

Sarah [00:29:16] This is my answer. So, Jennifer Senior wrote this piece for The Atlantic's all about how old do you feel? And everybody was answering like 20 years older, especially if you're over 40. People seem to stall out in their late thirties. I don't feel that way. I feel 42. I kind of always feel the age I am. Am I weird?  

Beth [00:29:33] I think you and I have a unique opportunity to assess our age relative to other populations because of what we do. So, we spend time in rooms filled with people who are at the end of their careers. Sometimes we're doing civic kind of engagement work. We spend time in rooms full of people our age. We engage with listeners who are on a broad spectrum of age. And we go to colleges. And I think especially when we're at a college campus, I feel very 42. I realize I no longer identify most closely with the students. I identify more closely with the faculty-- not quite parent yet. I think we have so much exposure to so many generations of people around big topics that really reflect how you're processing the world, that I think it checks us on our age pretty effectively.  

Sarah [00:30:25] But I've never felt that way. Way before we did this work, I never felt way out of touch with the age I am. I will say this, it feels like a stair step to me. And so, sometimes it takes me a while to realize like, oh, I went up a step. I still feel the previous phase. So, I had trouble over COVID because I turned 40 and my youngest child went to kindergarten, so I clearly fully entered a new phase. I do not have littles anymore, but I wasn't getting all those clues in like being out socially. It sorts of slap me in the face and I was like, oh, right, I am not a person with little kids anymore. I don't have babies and toddlers. I've left that part of my life before. It took me a while when we moved to Paducah to fully embody I'm not a young professional in a big city anymore. I live in a small town. I have little kids. The hardest one was leaving college. I missed college. I had probably a little sprinkle of depression. I was so sad to leave it and be in this new phase of life. So, I feel that sort of psychic pull in my head to be like, oh, you're in a new spot now. I always still feel like once I've kind of leveled up, like, okay, I see this now. I'm in a new phase. I don't ever feel the other age. I always feel my age.  

Beth [00:31:43] I think this is really the first chapter of my life where I have felt my age. I think most of my youth, I felt a lot older. So, I was always in a leadership position. I always had a responsibility, a job, people were supposed to look up to me. I've had at least big sister, if not grandma energy, for most of my life. And then when I started working at the firm-- so I went straight through college in law school. So, I'm 24 and I start my corporate law firm job. That is where I felt young. I felt like I was cosplaying an adult every day. What am I doing here? I am a fraud. Someone's going to find out what a fraud I am any minute. And then you're in a professional environment like that as a young woman with curly hair and this soft voice that I have, and so people are constantly saying, "Oh, you remind me of my daughter, my granddaughter," whomever. And so, you feel even younger. It just kind of keeps pushing you down. And so, I think it has taken me a while to calibrate to the actual age I am. To not be wise beyond my years kind of positioning and to not feel like a phony in a suit.  

Sarah [00:32:53] Well, we have a very broad demographic in our audience, and I'm excited to hear from them. Do they feel as old as they are? Are we weird? I think we might be weird. I'm just warning you right now. The answer might be y'all are weird. Well, thanks for listening today to us weirdos, guys. We always appreciate it. And don't forget to head to our show notes to learn more about our upcoming trips to Texas and Florida and Indiana. We can't wait to see all of you there. We will have a special episode for you on Tuesday with Chelsea Dumont[sp], and we can't wait for you to listen to. Until then, keep it nuanced, y'all. 

Beth [00:33:45] Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production. Alise Napp is our managing director.  

Sarah [00:33:50] Maggie Penton is our community engagement manager. Dante Lima is the composer and performer of our theme music.  

Beth [00:33:56] Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers.  

Executive Producers Martha Bronitsky. Ali Edwards. Janice Elliott. Sarah Greenup. Julie Haller. Helen Handley. Tiffany Hasler. Emily Holladay. Katie Johnson. Katina Zuganelis Kasling. Barry Kaufman. Molly Kohrs. Katherine Vollmer. Laurie LaDow. Lily McClure. Linda Daniel. Emily Neesley. Tawni Peterson. Tracey Puthoff. Sarah Ralph. Jeremy Sequoia. Katie Stigers. Karin True. Onica Ulveling. Nick and Alysa Villeli. Amy Whited. Emily Helen Olson. Lee Chaix McDonough. Morgan McHugh.   

Beth Jeff Davis. Melinda Johnston. Michelle Wood. Joshua Allen. Nichole Berklas. Paula Bremer and Tim Miller. 

Alise NappComment