Herman Cain is retarded
I swear to god this guy is a troll candidate or something. What's more pathetic is that he is actually leading in the polls right now. Absolute joke.
Trending Content
| +3,930 | Bank of America - Juniors Strike to start Monday May 6th | 413 | 1h | |
| +839 | BOFA ALREADY TRYING TO COVER UP THEIR TRACKS | 79 | 15h | |
| +571 | This is a dark day for Wall Street. | 46 | 4h | |
| +382 | BofA Associate Death - WSJ, FT, CNBC, Bloomberg | 40 | 2h | |
| +187 | How to strike without being fired. | 21 | 8h | |
| +182 | Analyst at Bofa FIG-Thoughts | 28 | 14h | |
| +169 | Big Layoff at Barclays - 5/1/24 | 88 | 1d | |
| +158 | Hey WSJ, BBG, CNBC, FT, it's been more than 72 hours that this BofA IBD Associate was reported dead | 23 | 3h | |
| +147 | BofA List | 37 | 2h | |
| +127 | Shame on you, BofA. But also, the industry needs to change. | 17 | 12h |
Career Resources
Cain isn't leading anymore... Not as of today.
He's done. Next.
That is such a mean thing to say. Everyone is so hurtful on this site.
Not true. I only hated him because he was black
lol. That's a legit reason for a large part of the 'conservative' base.
Cain was never a serious contender... He was just another neoconservative flavor-of-the-week.
Flavour isnt seeming to run out though. I can't believe people actually booed the moderator of the debate when she asked Cain about the allegations.
He is not a neoconservative. In fact, he was asked point blank about it, and he had no idea what a neocon was...pathetic.
Fact. I seriously cannot comprehend how someone so stupid, ill-prepared and nonsensical is actually in the running to become the president, nevermind that people actually consider voting for him.
There really needs to be an overhaul on how someone is eligible to place his/her name into the race for becoming president/prime minister. I went to Oxford and I have to take stupid standardised tests to determine my eligibility for grad school, so thats the fucking least they can do.
And he advocates waterboarding. It would be great if someone finally explains that he is in fact a joke candidate. Please.
I would move if he got elected.
I vomited a little in my mouth after watching that clip. I refuse to believe he is serious.
trolling for a few more book deals. FTW
Why is everyone in this thread racist?
LOL this is almost as bad as Perry
Worse.
I think it's funny just how much the GOP sucks at imitating the Democrats. Hillary Clinton becomes a candidate, Sarah Palin is randomly named the VP candidate. Barack Obama becomes President, Herman Cain becomes a candidate.
WTF. Stop finding retarded versions of democratic minorities. Surely there are smarter female or black republicans than Sarah Palin and Herman Cain.
God help us all.
Not as bad as Perry and Bachmann, but had much less political savvy.
Did anyone actually believe in the 9-9-9 plan? Much more regressive than even a flat income tax...
How can anyone else believe the plan when he couldnt explain it in the debates?
Best bit at 1.37.
Awful pizza too.
Bunch of haters around these parts.
It's not like the dems were perfect in the media when they were vying for the nomination in 2008 -- not to mention the little scrutiny from press they received. And no, Faux News doesn't count as scrutiny.
They could provide a coherent answer to a question though. They had the wherewithal to anticipate that running for president perhaps could mean being asked questions on various topics, and adequately prepare for them.
There are thousands of these around the web, some that go on for 5 or 10 minutes. You can find these for any candidate, really.
I love how the far right always uses this "defense". The "well, they did something bad, too!" defense. You do realize that:
a.) Other people saying something wrong or doing something wrong doesn't excuse HIS actions
b.) This is a monumental example of how fucking worthless and woefully unprepared Cain is as a candidate
Of course it doesn't excuse his actions. But, I love how the far left always uses this kind of attack: one candidate is singled out for something all of them -- right and left -- do. It's usually something to do with what you perceive as a lack of intelligence, too. "Herman Cain is Retarded." Classy topic choice.
Again, I can pick and choose hundreds of times when this happened with democratic candidates -- how come we don't have a topic criticizing their mistakes and blunders?
He's not even the choice for most Republicans now. Why pick him out of the bunch?
Nobody is saying that we accept the gaffes or that they are excusable because someone else made the same mistake...just that they aren't a big deal because, after all, they weren't when Obama was running. So what has changed?
A great example is Cain's recent gaffe about asking someone how you say a particular word in 'Cuban'. Now there is no Cuban language so Cain should receive criticism about the mistake...but where was the criticism when Obama gaffed about how to say a phrase in 'Austrian'.
So what's the difference? Well, one guy is merely a candidate for the Republican nomination to run for POTUS speaking to some Cuban Americans in a freaking restaurant while the other is the actual POTUS speaking at a televised NATO news conference.
Just run a quick experiment. Type in the phrase "Cain Cuban" into Google and see how many legitimate news organizations (whether right or left) come up just on the first page. Then do the same for "Obama Austrian" and compare the difference. You will find that many of the result for the second query are actually results stemming from the responses to/from the comments sections of the particular web sites...not from the actual articles.
Also feel free to find me a clip of Al Sharpton criticizing Obama about the gaffe mentioned above. If what Sharpton says is true and applies to Cain...shouldn't America have elected an intelligent liberal, instead of Obama, since I know a few exist, thus we wouldn't be making a mockery of the highest office in the land?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2011/11/16/sharpton-slams…-
Regards
Yea, that was not even remotely as bad as Perry's debacle. Cain isn't an idiot, he is just in the wrong arena; he should be selling books and giving speeches, not running for president.
bill clinton = the white herman cain
Speaking of Bill Clinton...
and here's Herman unknowingly (knowingly?) quoting the Pokemon movie.
He's the gift that keeps on giving:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/herman-cains-anti-m…
i find it hilarious that herman cain actually thinks he is going to be president by pandering to redneck racism against muslims. sorry herman but they aren't a big fan of the melanin-dense either. you're better off tuning your message to the sane 90% of america.
Exactly. I'm not sure the guy even knows what he stands for. He's pushing some bullshit GOP agenda, all the while being the figurehead black guy they need to claim 'hey, we're not racist'. Its embarrassing and he's playing the stereotype many people had of black men pre-Obama. I'm not sure whether it's to maintain that Obama is incompetent because he is black and we can't reelect him or what his deal is, because I simply refuse to believe Cain is for real. I just can't.
as chris rock pointed out oh so correctly: the most racist demographic group, as a rule, are old black men.
HC has surely had to deal with so much cracker bullshit in his life. but instead of having a healthy and natural response to it he sublimates it into racism against other groups. it's a well understood psychological phenomenon. poles and ukrainians, regarded as untermenschen by their german masters, were far more cruel as camp guards to the jews and gypsies; ditto with koreans working under the japanese army, who were feared much more by allied POWs than ethnic japanese.
Too colorful for me
edit - can people with a low banana count not post images?
FFS, I would rather have Cain then Newt. I fucking HATE Newt. Newt is a disgrace to everything conservative, but he is now leading in some polls. Really? FUCKKKKKKKKKKKk, Obama is going to win this crap.
Why is Newt so bad? He's by far my top choice...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
He's unfit to be a public school assistant principal, much less the highest office in the land.
Because he says stuff like this:
http://blog.chron.com/rickperry/2011/11/newt-gingrich-spanish-is-the-la…
I really don't give a fuck that Cain implied that Cuban is a language or that Obama said Austrian is a language. Stupid mistakes that are fairly meaningless.
I do, however, have a problem with Cain not having an opinion on Libya, a major foreign policy issue, other than to say "uhh, well, waht did Obama do? I would've done something different, I don't know what Obama did offhand, but I disagree with it."
Saying some dumb shit like "the 57 states" is retarded, but it's a very minor verbal gaffe on the same level as Cain calling Cuban a language. I can let that kind of shit slide because these guys campaign non-stop. But, a complete lack of knowledge or understanding on MAJOR foreign policy issues is disturbing and shows a lack of qualification. The whole "well, Obama did something dumb, too" bullshit just comes off as petty.
I couldn't agree more with this post.
Same here. These other videos showing teleprompter malfunctions, Obama's storytelling skills and other language based gaffes are irrelevant to this discussion. None of them are comparable with a presidential candidate not having a clue what he's talking about for a prominent and current world issue. Pretty surprised these comparisons were even attempted to be drawn actually...so obviously apples and oranges!
Not to mention, Cain completely disqualified himself when he said that Alan Greenspan was his model Fed chairman. Get the fuck out of here.
I woulda said fuck Libya. Let those bitches work out their own shit. But, that's just me.
This is 1,000,000x better than what Cain said. Cain essentially said "what exactly did Obama do? Whatever it is, I'm against it." Great.
Also, I love the monkey shit thrown my way. "durrr, 9-9-9, durrr" throws monkey shit
Same with me.
I'm pretty sure Obama said there were 57 U.S. states and pronounced the "p" in corpsman.
Right, both of which are retarded, but not nearly on the same level of reality as not having a fucking clue when it comes to major foreign policy issues, particularly those revolving around US military actions in the Islamic world. They're just not even close to on the same plane.
I don't understand the blind support for people like Cain after this sort of shit. It's one thing to defend him for a verbal gaffe, but defending this sort of shit is just retarded and makes anyone who does it look like a moron.
I am not at all an Obama defender, but this is simply not comparable to what Cain did. Obama's 57 state comment, if I'm not mistaken, happened during the height of the 2008 campaign, and even the smartest people can make a mental blunder when they are under enormous pressure; this inevitably can result in one misusing a word or some other sort of a verbal gaffe. With Cain, however, he displayed a complete lack of understanding of basic foreign policy, which is downright scary. It is clear from the unedited video that Cain was very uncomfortable discussing foreign policy. His answer, after a painful brain freeze, was completely trite, lacking in any sort of substance.
Huntsman and Romney are the only republicans who can beat Obama and govern competently. This republican field is downright embarrassing, an assortment of buffoons worthy of a barnum&bailey circus show.
Herman Cain is a good person. I don't think he's retarded.
Thank you for your contribution.
Reality is that when nearly everything you say every single day for months is taped, recorded, and broadcasted around the country, people are going to catch you saying some very dumb things. Not defending him, but thats just reality.
This thread's a great example of our own stupidity, far greater than anything Herman Cain has exhibited.
As to why people, including myself, like Herman Cain, I will paint a few broad strokes:
Cain was born into a dirt poor family. His mom was a cleaning lady and his dad was a janitor. His rise to wealth, power and fame would be the textbook definition of The American Dream if one existed.
Cain's education consists of a BS in Math and an MS in Comp Sci. Subjects which, even by today's haphazard academic standards, are extremely rigorous and disqualify any debate about his intellectual abilities.
Cain served his country, a factor which for the majority of human historical evolution was the prerequisite for leadership. We can see from our misguided foreign policy over the last two decades that every POTUS without military experience has promoted an ineffective foreign policy with serious backfiring tendencies.
Though Cain was never on a battlefield, his work on ballistics technology is directly linked to the high tech military we have today. The sort of military which allows whiny little bitches who would shit themselves at the first sound of rapid fire, to stay home and engage in pseudo intellectual polemics on the pro's/con's of interventionism.
Cain was the driver behind Burger King's rise as a serious competitor to McDonald's in the late 80's, and made the sort of hard, cost cutting decisions in his revitalization of Godfather's Pizza that modern fiscal conservatives look for in a candidate.
Cain also served on the Federal Reserve and in spite of his comments on Greenspan and the arrogance of little children on this forum who think two semesters of EMH makes them Adam Fucking Smith...he is well versed in this, yet another crucial aspect of governance and our political system.
What really warms conservatives to Cain, however, is his dealings with the liberal community...
And THIS ABOVE ALL ELSE is why he has been and will be shitted upon in the press.
As a lifelong member and minister at Atlanta's Antioch Baptist Church (a hugely influential body with respect to black liberal voters nationwide), Cain has proven (over the span of a lifetime, not some guest appearance) that he has the statesmanship to separate his politics from his faith. This example, better than any illustrates Cain's potential to build a bridge between the two major parties.
Cain was also instrumental in defeating Clinton's universal healthcare care, something which also greatly endears him to conservative voters.
Cain defeated Stage IV Cancer in his colon, which had metastasized to his liver. He only had a 30% chance of survival. As someone who has lost loved ones to cancer I can tell you that once it gets to the liver, you are finished. The fact that the man is even alive adds that decidedly human element to his story which no candidate since Ronald Reagan has had.
I could go on, but there's no need.
Liberal idiots are not interested, because some cum dumpster said some shit and because they are certain that they know a man because of a few news blips. All the while not realizing what life is like with the spotlight on you and 200,000,000+ hanging on your every word.
It's cool. You guys know everything.
All I know is that Herman Cain is a remarkable human being. He is the only mainstream politician to come along in more than a generation who can actually point to his achievements and let them do the talking.
If any of you actually gave a shit about your country and it's future, you would consider these very sparse and basic points I have outlined. Not so that you will become fans of Cain, but so that you will begin to see what actually QUALIFIES a person to serve his country at the highest level.
I completely understand why Herman Cain is so scary for Democrats...and many Republicans, alike.
...and he still knows jack shit about foreign policy.
Yes, his rags-to-riches story is quite impressive. But biography alone is not sufficient for the presidency. His central economic program, 999, is a total joke. And his knowledge of foreign policy is virtually non-existent. I think based on his past accomplishments, Cain is of above average intelligence. But in my opinion, his stunning lack of knowledge and policy depth disqualifies him for the presidency.
Regarding his education, computer science back then was nowhere as rigorous as it is now. Just because someone managed to get degrees in math and cs does not mean they are highly intelligent. If Cain really is that smart, I certainly have seen no sign of that from watching the numerous debates, interviews, and speeches. He comes across as a good charismatic salesman but not as a man who can occupy the oval office and confront the many challenges that this country faces.
Take your blinders off man this guy is a joke.
Midas, no one is denying his impressive life story and successes. But, it doesn't excuse his lack of foreign policy knowledge and seeming disdain for it.
If anything, shouldn't you support Ron Paul? He's as consistent a mainstream politician as there has ever been and his policies are more conservative than anyone and everyone out there.
Ron Paul is a remarkable gentleman.
His honesty, integrity and consistency - he's been fighting for his cause for decades now, and never changed what he believed in to try and score points.
Nothing but respect for the man.
He has definitely demonstrated that he has the conviction and brains to lead the country.
Minus, of course, that little part about allowing one of the world's largest state sponsors of terror to obtain nuclear weapons capabilities.
Regards
No doubt foreign policy will always be a contentious issue.
I don't claim to be an expert in that area - in fact I concede straight out that I know very little on politics and the like in the middle east.
However, what Ron has been saying does deserve some merit.
The soviets have 30,000 nukes, pakistan, china, india etc...
Whats the deal with Iran?
All the tension, hate and animosity that is building up is undoubtedly partly because of America trying to be the world police.
Stay out of other people's internal affairs and maybe tensions will die down?
What's the deal with Iran? Well, the Middle East is not a monolithic region, so a lot of countries are vying for power there. If Iran - predominantly Shia - gets nuclear weapons, you can be assured that Sunni dominant countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia will do whatever they can to arm themselves to the teeth. I prefer this not to happen - Pakistan is already a foreign policy migraine for the US.
No doubt these are very complex issues, but this particular topic is a great example of why pure libertarianism doesn't work. When there is a room full of responsible people then sure, you can be completely hands off, but when you have bad apples in the crowd there has to be rules...especially when people's lives are potentially at stake. So it is hard to justify staying out of other people's "internal affairs" when there are very serious external implications.
And there is a huge difference between 'allowing' a country to keep nukes and preventing another from getting them. The fact is, Iran not having nukes is something that keeps them in check. We are at a point in time when legitimate countries don't invade and conquer other countries to stake claim to the land. China and Russia and Pakistan aren't going to invade Iran, so how does Iran having nukes provide them with anymore power?
As far as being world police, I agree we should be much less aggressive about spreading democracy, but the fact remains that terrorism is a world wide problem and it is something that must be monitored closely and that, in some ways, forces us to police everybody else.
Regards
Again, pardon my ignorance - but I think its the 'external implications' that I don't recognise at the moment.
I do not doubt for a second that there will be implications - but as to what they are, and how they would affect America - and other western civilisations is what I have not been able to identify yet.
Simply put, it is Iran's willingness to sponsor terror networks that want to hurt and kill Americans and Israelis/Jews. At least that is what the POTUS should care about the most...secondarily it would be what was mentioned above about tipping off an arms race in the Middle East...which could make the first situation that much worse.
Now this doesn't mean they have no 'right' to acquire them, or try, but it is the reason that America has, or at least some Americans have, a vested interested in making sure they don't gain access to them. Additionally, it creates a potentially huge and nasty mess similar to what we see in Pakistan...a place that has been alleged to have knowingly hid bin Laden and also funding terrorism...but America has to walk on eggshells with them because if the government is weakened and one of the terrorist organizations within the country manage to seize control, they could potentially have access to nukes...and although I don't know how sophisticated their missiles and guidance systems are, they could cause some serious problems.
At any rate, if someone with Ron Paul's views were to be elected and Iran was anywhere close to achieving a nuke you could bet your bottom dollar that Israel would wipe them off the face of the map because in many ways, America's continued support is probably the last thing that would keep them from doing that...but, if we were minding our own business, we would...or should...have no say in what Israel wants to do
Regards
Also, Midas, your whole "little children on this forum are dumb" act is tired.
You wear a mask and throw out a bunch of far right talking points a few times a week. We don't even know a single thing about your background and experience...or even how old you are. Why on Earth should anyone listen to you or take your barbs seriously when we don't know a single thing about you?
I wish I could SB this...
And let's be clear...there are plenty of idiots and know-it-alls on here, and it's fine to shut them down with facts and logical reasoning. But, to throw ad hominems about users in general when you're just a right wing talking point wearing a mask, get the fuck out of here.
Yeah...and here's the gold standard we should be striving for...
Regards
+1 TheKing
MMM that you throwing all that shit?
Ok, so, what elected president has known jack about foreign policy since George H.W. Bush in 1988? Let's go down the list:
Barack Obama was not only inexperienced with foreign policy, but he has virtually no life accomplishments to points to at all other than admission into college.
George W. Bush was a country bumpkin and governor of a state with a very weak governor. Foreign policy experience? Probably getting drunk with some Saudi princes.
Bill Clinton was a complete redneck from Arkansas. More than likely his only foreign policy experience was protesting soldiers during the Vietnam War.
H.W. Bush and Reagan were very experienced or knowledgeable in foreign policy.
Jimmy Carter? Another country bumpkin jackass loser with all of no foreign policy experience.
Prior to that most presidents had serious foreign policy knowledge or experience.
This charge that Cain is intellectually deficient because of his lack of foreign policy knowledge is really a shallow argument, a transparent argument. His poor answers reflect lack of preparation, not lack of intellect. The guy has accomplished more in a few years than Obama has in his entire life.
I'm not sure about you, but personally I don't think 'lack of preparation' is a good excuse for someone who is running for president...
He wouldn't even make it past first round interviews at any half decent firm... (admittedly we're comparing apples and oranges here)
Not having direct foreign policy experience is fine, but the candidate should be knowledgeable about the world around them and possess a coherent opinion on the issues as well as policies to address them. Go back and watch the 1992 presidential debates. Clinton may have been the governor of a small crappy state, but it was clear that the guy was smart and knew what he was talking about. Even though the economy was the dominant concern of that year's election, Clinton still managed to pass the commander-in-chief threshold by assuring voters that he at least knew what was going on in the realm of foreign policy and international affairs.
No one here is asking that a future president be a rocket scientist. But we are talking about the most powerful office in the world. There is a certain standard that a plausible candidate needs to clear, and thus far, Cain has come nowhere close to clearing that bar.
Kind of perplexed to see people defending Herman Cain on this one. Nothing wrong with supporting his policies but why support someone leading this country that has a track record of being unprepared for basic, obvious questions? Personally I want to vote for someone that impresses/wows me, not someone I have to make excuses for. And to compare this video to some minor Obama gaffe that wasn't even a gaffe is pitiful.
Out of curiousity, who "impresses/wows" you?
Ron Paul and no one else
That's how Obama got into office
I hate this crap about not knowing anything about Foreign Policy. It was in the fucking news!! Its current, everyone with an inkling knows about the situation there at this moment. He wasnt asked about what happened 10-15 years ago, it was what happened 10-15 days ago.
Its baffling people are trying to defend him for a pretty horrendous error.
And a lack of preparation? What does that suggest about his intellect? He's in the running to become the most powerful man in this world, and his excuse was that he didnt prepare himself?
Cain pretty much just admitted that he had no knowledge of the latest war his country just got involved in...
Not a big issue you know... for the next commander in chief wannabe..
Would definitely not stress too much about it at all
Ok, for the first 20 post of this thread people were referring to Herman Cain as "retarded" and suggesting that he is intellectually deficient, which is an absolutely moronic position.
I'm a Mitt Romney supporter, NOT a Cain supporter. Mitt Romney is the master at preparation--the guy has an answer for everything. This doesn't mean he understands the nuances of the situation--this means his campaign staff has prepped him well and he's good at memorizing.
Herman Cain's campaign staff is widely considered to suck, largely because Cain, until recently, had little money and little organization. It's just not correct to attribute one's poor preparation to low intellect, particularly when we have nearly 7 decades of record that would suggest otherwise. Cain is a poor candidate, however. No doubt about that.
In other words, you support a puppet?
Um, ok. So at best, he did not prepare himself for a presidential run. And at worst, he is woefully ignorant of a major international event that occurred just this year.
I said in my first post that Cain is probably of above average intelligence. I certainly don't think he's functionally retarded (now with perry, it's debatable). But I have seen very little from him that impresses me in any way. Just a reasonably likable guy who wants to sell books and get his name out there.
Ron paul is doing well in the iowa polls. He wows me quite a bit!
out of curiosity, how many of you come from military families?
i'll start:
yes
Iran is one of the world's most important oil producers that is run by Shia Muslims, who are apocalytpic in their worldview. The Ayatollahs don't have sole power, but they are highly influential and believe that a global war will usher in the return of their Messiah, the 12th Imam. So many in Iran want to see a global war and are offended to their very core that Jews are in the so-called Islamic lands in Israel.
There are a lot of external implications for a nation of Shia Muslims armed with nuclear weapons and a mission from God.
Indeed, if that is the case, that could prove disastrous. However, it hasn't reached that stage yet... in fact, it seems far from it. And even if it does, surely with all the firepower the US military/NATO has, it won't be hard to take some kind of decisive defensive/offensive action?
Also, is there no other way around the issue? Meeting aggression with aggression never solves a problem.. diplomacy?
Admittedly, I'm way out of my depth here so I might just reserve the rest of my views.
I'm from a military family, but it's irrelevant. Our nation is run by a civilian commander-in-chief, as the founders desired.
^ i am curious to see whether or not military family status has any correlation with hawkishness/dovishness
in my experience, MFs are less hawkish than the average jody clan
We have been at war for a decade. Everyone is the military is tired of it, you have guys on their 4th and 5th deployments having missed enormous chunks of their kids and SO's lives. Guys getting blown up and losing limbs, etc. People in general are sick of wars but no one more so than those that actually bear the costs.
^ wish i had some SBs to give you.
That's a valid question. I think there are several lines of thought. Some people think it's no problem to see a nuclear armed Iran. Some people thing we need to attack them yesterday to ensure they won't get nuclear arms. The third way is what we've been attempting for the better part of a decade--diplomacy via the UN. Since Russia has veto power at the UN and since China is highly influential, getting meaningful sanctions past against Iran has been difficult. The Germans don't help either.
As a result, we've seen a sophisticated computer virus attack on Iran's plants. Kind of the compromise between diplomacy and war. It seems to have temporarily slowed the process.
Sadly, there really is no correct answer it would seem.
Natus non corrupti magnam tempore quaerat aut vitae. Assumenda deserunt quisquam commodi est nam. Molestiae quidem nulla dolor fuga nostrum. Odit qui et praesentium nam. Distinctio dignissimos voluptas ducimus eum exercitationem porro veritatis.
Expedita qui expedita ut dolores rem est. Consequuntur laboriosam eum expedita omnis eum. Eaque dolor et temporibus odio nemo omnis. Quia ea sapiente voluptatem molestiae hic et eos. Rerum quisquam nisi quas quasi at asperiores sed voluptas.
Minima aspernatur voluptate iusto culpa recusandae accusantium illo. Expedita voluptatem eaque alias quia quis. Eum architecto qui nostrum quas rerum nemo.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Repellat quidem vitae iusto reprehenderit. Nihil sint rerum ut ex facilis odit qui. Voluptatum architecto illo rerum sequi et qui. Nam tenetur amet sit ut eveniet. Et iure suscipit assumenda tenetur. Culpa nulla harum illo numquam soluta recusandae. Atque cupiditate ad dolor quo similique.
Minus magni necessitatibus deleniti in quae. Et fugit qui dolorem autem. Eum doloribus vitae neque blanditiis reiciendis. Omnis numquam recusandae culpa. Laboriosam provident ut sapiente quis.
Hic omnis magnam ea eum expedita qui aut aliquid. Nesciunt magni ipsam porro aut aut quis. Ea rerum quod rerum.
Qui nemo dolorem ratione velit est soluta. Deleniti ad voluptatum ipsam.
Harum excepturi quia veniam et sed saepe labore assumenda. Animi neque mollitia repellendus debitis enim ullam id. Facere corporis cupiditate voluptatem minus.
Hic molestiae excepturi aliquid minima rerum. Tempore et iste numquam corrupti aspernatur tempore. Et eos magni sed illum id. Fugit velit voluptas laboriosam molestiae quis.
Quae eos et necessitatibus quia. Iste suscipit aut odit aut impedit illo. Maiores qui consequuntur est.
Voluptas occaecati delectus saepe occaecati quia. Quae officia similique voluptatem quis consequatur doloremque qui. Reprehenderit pariatur quis quis non blanditiis expedita.
Aut ipsa in eos et architecto. Nemo cum nisi repudiandae quos delectus voluptas. Error voluptatem sed sed et.
Autem ea provident vero. Nulla officiis qui id qui animi sint. Cum id ad delectus dolorem enim culpa et.
Illo quis veniam animi ipsum. Ullam quae eaque ipsa consequuntur quaerat porro similique.
Et rerum et adipisci exercitationem neque deserunt dicta. Vitae et harum magni neque eos quis commodi. Ipsam aperiam incidunt in eum doloremque consectetur.