The Supplicant to Kings and “Entrepreneurs”

Via email, joejoejoe highlighted a line from Bush’s speech to Saudi "entrepreneurs" that Holden had highlighted.

And one of my concerns was after September the 11th that our visa policy, particularly for Saudis, was tightened to the point where we missed opportunity to show young and old alike what our country is really about.

As joejoejoe points out, we tightened a very permissive visa policy with the Saudis because 15 Saudis used that permissive visa policy to enter the US and kill 3000 Americans. Letting Khalid al-Midhar into the country to see "what our country is really about" apparently did little to persuade him not to get into a plane and kill lots of Americans.

But that wasn’t the only supplication that Bush offered these Saudi businessmen. Here’s the whole statement.

I’m George W. Bush, President of the United States. (Laughter.) Thank you all for joining us. Ambassador, thanks for setting this up. It’s important for the President to hear thoughts, hopes, dreams, aspirations, concerns from folks that are out making a living. And I really appreciate you taking time out of your day to come and visit with me. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

One thing that’s for certain: The United States benefits when people come to my country. And one of my concerns was after September the 11th that our visa policy, particularly for Saudis, was tightened to the point where we missed opportunity to show young and old alike what our country is really about. I love the fact that some of you were educated in America. I think you’ll find you got a good education there, but more importantly, Americans get to see you, and you get to see them. And the best way to achieve better understanding in the world is for folks just to get together, and get to understand that we share the same God, and we share the same aspirations for children and for our futures.

And so this is an important visit for me. I’m thrilled to be in the Kingdom. I have — I’ve got very close relations with His Majesty. We had a good visit last night on a variety of subjects. We talked about Palestinian peace; we talked about the security issues of the region. I talked to the Ambassador, and will again talk to His Majesty tonight about the fact that oil prices are very high, which is tough on our economy, and that I would hope, as OPEC considers different production levels, that they understand that if their — one of their biggest consumers’ economy suffers, it will mean less purchases, less oil and gas sold.

And so we’ve got a lot of things to talk about, but I want to assure you it’s from the spirit of friendship. And the hospitality last night was warm, and the conversation was excellent — just like this one is going to be.

So I want to thank you for coming. I appreciate your time.

At a time when American business are desperately begging foreign investors–many of them government owned–to save our economy, our President is traipsing around the cash-heavy Middle East with his pop-psych understanding of people and a naive belief that these men "out making a living" aren’t interested in one thing, first and foremost, making a living. No matter how many times we let them come to the US so that "Americans get to see them and they get to see us," it’s not going to the change the fact that the US is bargaining begging from a very weak position and these "entrepreneurs" are in a position to make demands–with regards to things like visa policies and direct foreign investments–that cut to the heart of why Bush has done little to make this country more safe.

We’ll be in the position of begging for money (and for lower petroleum prices) for the foreseeable future. It’s a pity we’ve got someone who pretends to remain in a position of strength out there doing the begging.

52 replies
  1. JohnForde says:

    I laughed when I heard the phrase “Saudi Entrepreneurs”.

    In college the guy across the hall from me was from Riyadh. He told me how it works. True trickle down.

  2. wavpeac says:

    We must look like Royal fools to the Saudi’s who know damn well who is really in charge.

    Meantime Bushco keeps lining his pockets with oil money hoping that the Saudi’s will play nice because he’s such a nice guy.

    Our only real solution is to stop “needing” the Saudi’s to be “nice” in order for us to be okay. PERIOD.

    • bmaz says:

      Between Bush and the Saudi King, who plays Clevon Little and who plays Madeline Kahn around the line “Pardon me while I whip something out”?

  3. emptywheel says:

    Bush said something very similar to “Young Arab leaders” in Dubai:

    Thank you, sir. I’m proud to be with you. Your Highness, thank you very much. I appreciate you picking this particular location. It is a fantastic view of Dubai.

    First of all, just a couple of impressions. I’m most impressed with what I’ve seen here. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong. And equally importantly, the desire to make sure that all aspects of society have hope and encouragement — and I appreciate your leadership, Your Highness.

    And I want to thank you, sir, for having me. I’m looking forward to talking to the young leaders from around the region. I will answer your questions. And I also want you to understand something about America: that we respect you, we respect your religion and we want to work together for the sake of freedom and peace.

    I thank — I’m particularly pleased to know that you have set up interchanges with some of the young in my country. You’ll find them to be compassionate, decent people who share the same goals and dreams. So I want to thank you for coming.

    Your Highness, I’m so honored by your hospitality. Thank you, sir.

    This begging must be really tough for a narcissist like Bush.

  4. bmaz says:

    Gotta run for a bit (real work really does suck). Since we are briefly back in the dark comedy mode, I would like to point out that they are stealing my schticht over at Big Sister’s place.
    .

    ..combine the fraudulence of the “Gulf of Tonkin” and the bad taste of “The Jerky Boys…

    You heard the Jerky Boys reference first right here at the incomparable Emptywheel…..

  5. maryo2 says:

    Notice how much Hadley says “Nothing new here, move along.” It makes me think that there is something new, and that his mission is to baby-sit Bush.

    January 14, 2008 Press Gaggle Aboard Air Force One

    MR. HADLEY: Iran came up in very — what is now pretty standard terms. The President reassuring them about the NIE, that notwithstanding the NIE, he remains concerned about Iran. They’re clearly concerned. He emphasized he did, as well. But this is — there hasn’t been much new ground broken on policy here for the last 48 hours because the President — our policy is pretty clear. The region understands it. It is to try and solve this problem diplomatic — through international pressure.

    And so while Iran keeps coming up, it is an issue that is pretty well understood. And the President’s real objection was simply to dispel any concerns that might have been raised by the NIE that he doesn’t understand the seriousness of the problem. So it came up, pretty small part of the discussion. I think that’s really pretty much —

    Q Came up — in which discussions did Iran come up in?

    MR. HADLEY: I don’t know which one. I’m basically taking the two of them and putting them together, trying to give you a sense of what —

    Q — which forum? You’re sure which forum?

    MR. HADLEY: I don’t know which one it came up — it wasn’t — it didn’t dominate the discussion in either forum.

    Q But he didn’t talk about sort of asking them to cut off trade ties, or that kind of thing, with Iran?

    MR. HADLEY: No. What the President said — nothing new here — international effort to send a clear message to Iran; put pressure on Iran so that the Iranian people will see that there is a better choice available to them. I mean, the President has been talking in these terms now for weeks. So it’s standard fair, but it was important for them to hear it from him, and they did.


    Q What about the arms deal with Saudi Arabia? Where do things stand? Is there going to be a notification going to the Hill today?

    MR. HADLEY: There’s another notification coming to the Hill that will go probably sometime today. I talked a little bit about it the last time we got together. The package, as you know, was really announced here months ago. It’s the same package. But what the process is when you announce a package like this, then American representatives, Saudi representatives need to sit down and go through the specifics of the package — what are their requirements, how will we meet them specifically. And then once that is done, it gets notified to the Congress.

    So these are not new announcements. This is the implementation of the announcement that was made months ago. Pretty big package, a lot of pieces. As these pieces get readied and worked out between the two parties, they can then get notified on the Hill.

  6. al75 says:

    The entrepreneurial language is puzzling to be sure. I wonder about it in the context of the Saudi’s threats/plans to start pegging oil prices to the Euro, and Saudi anxiety about Bush’s neglect of the middle east and the Palestinian problem.

    King Abdullah put out a respectible Israel/Palestinian reconciliation plan five or so years ago (note to frothing Zionists: I am not Hitler, nor have I ever supported Hitler) and is doubtless applying leverage against Bush now. Whether he will be placated by the photo-op is far from clear.

    Certainly the Saudis are more concerned about the Shiite ascendancy in Iraq, and the related growing power of Iran. This raises the specter of a Shiite revolt in Saudi arabia.

    But why the “entreprenurial” code-word, and what’s it a code for? Is W. making the point that their dollars are invested in their 13% ownership of the United States, so they are going to lose if they play rough with us? Does he have some new delusional idea of reforming the Saudi economy?

    • brendanx says:

      “Entrepreneurial” was slapped on there for the tv cameras to make this spectacle of Bush begging a bunch of sheikhs for money marginally less mortifying.

      Apparently the Saudis have publicly “rebuffed” Bush’s supplications. Why would the administration put Bush out there to be so visibly humiliated?

  7. Leen says:

    For some reason can’t get into comment about your NIE piece. Sorry that this is OT for this thread
    On the NIe
    Scott Ritter has said that there is no proof that there ever was an Iranian Program before 2003

    http://www.truthdig.com/interv…..with_iran/

    “Now we have a National Intelligence Estimate that is released that says, “Time out. There hasn’t been a nuclear weapons program in Iran since 2003.” Now I need to make a point here: I continue to say that there’s never been a nuclear weapons program in Iran. And the National Intelligence Estimate doesn’t provide any evidence to sustain its assertion that there was a nuclear program. But be that as it may, they’re saying that the concept of Iran today pursuing nuclear weapons is a fallacy. There’s no data to promote this.”

    More from Scott
    “Ritter: Not only does the Bush administration continue to say that Iran is a terrorist state, that it supports terrorists who were directly or indirectly involved in the events of Sept. 11, 2001. The United States Senate has passed a resolution that says the same thing and certifies the Iranian Revolutionary Guard command is a terrorist organization. So anybody who thinks for a second this National Intelligence Estimate somehow retards the ability of the Bush administration to engage in military action against Iran, you’re sadly mistaken. The Bush administration’s policy has been made. This estimate was not used to make that policy, and as you yourself have reflected, the president’s not going to let this estimate get in the way of his continuing to articulate Iran as a threat.”

  8. sailmaker says:

    I find it ironic that Bushco is encouraging student visas, when half the 12 million illegal immigrants came here legally and then over stayed their visas. Osama bin Laden graduated from USC, a fact that has been (in 2003) and will be used against policy changers. Perhaps this is just Bush saying nice stuff to an audience he can not afford to offend. Pegging oil to a basket of currencies instead of the dollar is a major sword over our heads.

  9. Leen says:

    Is there proof that they ever had a program?

    Lavrov: ‘No proof Iran had nuke program’
    By ASSOCIATED PRESS
    Russia’s foreign minister said Wednesday there was no proof that Iran has ever run a nuclear weapons program, and praised Teheran for its readiness to cooperate with the United Nations nuclear watchdog.
    [Russia’s Foreign Minister…]

    Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
    Photo: AP [file]

    “Data that we have seen don’t allow to say with certainty that Iran has ever had a nuclear weapons program,” Sergei Lavrov said when asked to comment on the US intelligence report saying that Iran suspended its efforts to develop nuclear weapons in 2003.

    He said he was referring to the intelligence data which Washington had provided to Moscow as part of a dialogue on Iran over the past few years.

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/S…..&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

  10. Redshift says:

    And one of my concerns was after September the 11th that our visa policy, particularly for Saudis, was tightened to the point where we missed opportunity to show young and old alike what our country is really about.

    As with any time he expresses a “concern” that actually has something to do with what rational people are thinking, it wasn’t enough of a concern for him to actually do anything about it. Visas are restricted, foreign student numbers are way down, and cultural contact would actually improve our standing in the world and make us safer. But the Bushies are more interested in continuing to capitalize on “be afraid of the furriners and brown people!”

    “Particularly for the Saudis” is, as you note, particularly galling.

  11. joejoejoe says:

    Thanks for elaborating EW. The idea that Bush is apologizing to the Saudis for THEIR visa restrictions IN Saudi Arabia while Americans have a much harder time getting passports in the U.S. drives me bananas.

  12. emptywheel says:

    Bush in a presser today:

    I would like to share a universal concern I’ve heard on this trip, and that is the United States will not welcome foreign capital, or does not welcome foreign capital. I heard it from entrepreneurs, I’ve heard it from government leaders. They are concerned about reinvestment of dollars back into the United States. There’s a genuine concern about protectionism. And there’s — our visa policy concerns the leaders, because they know full well that the best way — these are pro-American leaders, and they know the best way to defeat some perceptions that may exist on the street is for their people to go see America firsthand, like colleges and business travel. And our visa policy is getting better in some fronts, but we’ve still got some work to do.

    So I came away with the distinct impression about a concern by government and citizen alike that the United States says, “not welcome.” And that troubles me, because that’s not the way our country is.

    They’re pretty anxious to ease Middle Eastern concerns about easingn investment, huh? I guess desperation for cash does that…

    • TheraP says:

      As I see it, and I thank you for this post, it’s beginning to look like even bush can see the downside of making things so hard for foreign nationals that they simply want to avoid visiting – and by extension – doing business in the US. Sounds like he’s hoping the economic woes of the US won’t discourage investment. So he appears to be beating the bushes (not sure how that would be a pun here) in an effort to scare up something… anything… to undo all the damage his administration has wrecked on the national and international economic picture. The economy is tanking. Very hard times ahead. And lack of regulation allowed this bond debacle that is affecting the whole world.

      This man imagines he can “sell” the Saudis, etc. on his business venture in the Titanic… as it goes down along with him!

      • nomolos says:

        This man imagines he can “sell” the Saudis, etc. on his business venture in the Titanic… as it goes down along with him!

        I do not believe that the Saudi’s, or any other monied country at the moment, will prop up the US as long as there is the danger that Israel will attack Iran. An attack by Israel, or by it’s client US, would surely bankrupt the US.

  13. JohnJ says:

    My understanding of the Saudis from friends who worked over there in the 80s and 90s is that the “Saudi Entrepreneurs” are very much like Chimpy himself. They were basically given the money to go out and play with. Just like Jeb being a “developer”. Basically, rich kids pretending to work so daddy doesn’t cut them off from the bigger unearned money.

    Of course his has affinity for these people. None of them earned a cent, just like him.

    • Leen says:

      In Ron Susskind’s book “The Price of Loyalty” about the Former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O Neil in 43’s first administration. O’Neil basically says he was nudged..persuaded..pushed…bumped off the job after he started investigating the “alleged” Saudi investment connections into some of the 9/11 bombers…Follow the $$$$$..

      Price of Loyalty is a great read

  14. radiofreewill says:

    Bush is overwhelmed, again, and when he is, his thinking and ability to express himself tend to regress towards simplistic, repetitive Tripe.

    My guess is that he’s anticipating getting Publicly Tagged with Systematic Torture by Rodriguez.

    He’s not actually doing any productive work on his Mid-East Trip – he’s simply running away in Fear of being held Accountable for a Monsterous Policy of Torturing other Human Beings.

    Bullying while he has the Power. Running Away when he Doesn’t.

    That’s Bush in a Nutshell.

  15. Neil says:

    the Saudi oil minister said the kingdom, responsible for almost one-third of the cartel’s total output, would raise oil production when the market justified it.

    When consumers have less purchasing power, it could cause the economy to slow down,” Bush said. “I hope OPEC nations put more supply on the market,” he added. “It would be helpful.

    NPR

  16. Tross says:

    I wonder if the Republican base will be thrilled that Bush is calling for more open borders for Saudis? Sure sounds like the opposite of the current Republican immigration talking points.

  17. maryo2 says:

    From the press briefing on January 14, 2008 with Perino and Counselor to the President Ed Gillespie, notice the Saudis pointed out that the US is not the only potential market for their oil and notice that for some unknown reason Bush said “nuclear energy.” What is he talking about – nuclear energy for who? The US? Where? When?

    MR. GILLESPIE: Yes, they talked about oil. The President made the point about the — part of his agenda is alternative fuels and alternative sources of fuel. They talked about the nature of the market and the vast demand that’s on the world market today for oil. That was a point that was obviously made in the course of these conversations by our friends , and that’s a legitimate and accurate point. So there has been discussion of oil and energy, along with other issues that have come up in these talks.

    MS. PERINO: bark bark yap yap

    MR. GILLESPIE: I’m going to make another point, Jim. I failed to mention, in his discussions of alternative energy, the President also mentioned nuclear energy as an important source of energy in the future.

  18. ProfessorFoland says:

    About that concern about not inviting foreign capital investment in the US:

    Citigroup, the biggest U.S. bank, is getting $14.5 billion from investors including the governments of Singapore and Kuwait, former Chairman Sanford Weill and Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the New York-based company said today in a statement. Merrill, the largest brokerage, will receive $6.6 billion from a group led by Tokyo-based Mizuho Financial Group Inc., the Kuwait Investment Authority and the Korean Investment Corp.

    Wall Street banks have now raised $59 billion, mostly from investors in the Middle East and Asia, to shore up balance sheets battered by more than $100 billion of writedowns from the declining values of mortgage-related assets. Citigroup was propped up in November by a $7.5 billion investment from the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. New York-based Merrill was helped by a $5.6 billion cash infusion last month from Singapore’s Temasek Holdings Pte. and U.S. fund manager Davis Selected Advisors LP.

    I believe all but the Mizuho group are not only foreign investors, but foreign government investors.

    All your banks are belong to us.

    • prostratedragon says:

      Once again the Chinese come off as comparatively astute by declining to get in on this one; there’s a lot of buzz that this is just the first of many rounds for Citigroup.

      Or maybe it just reinforces Hugh’s point about who really cracks the whip in the U.S.-Saudi relationship.

    • masaccio says:

      The really bad news about Citigroup is this:

      China Development Bank’s plan to inject US$2 billion into troubled US giant Cititbank has been rejected by the State Council, the cabinet of Chinese government.

      CDB recently received US$20 billion from Central Huijin Investment Company (CHI), a subsidiary of China Investment Corporation (CIC), China’s sovereign wealth fund, to strengthen its capital base. Analysts said that then extending the US$2 billion bloodline to Citibank would be foolhardy since it might well be interpreted by western markets as channeling sovereign wealth funds to investment under the pretext of commercial banking.

      Link. The Chinese are concerned that they not be seen to be using their sovereign wealth fund as a policy instrument, something that doesn’t seem to bother the other countries that are busy buying up our financial institutions. What the heck else are they going to buy? Our land? What’s left of our manufacturing base?

  19. JamesJoyce says:

    Our corporate and politcal leadership have done a wonderful job of protecting America’s rear end over a 35 year period??? The reduction in per capita energy cost would benefit America. However, “Executive Oil” is there for the protection of the energy delivery system, not the people to whom they sell energy!

  20. TheraP says:

    I’m George W. Bush, President of the United States. (Laughter.)

    I’m fascinated with the “laughter” part. Remember, this is the guy who’s hoping that when he leaves office he can run around and make speeches and “fill the old coffers.”

    I wonder if laughter is following him wherever he goes. In addition to approbation. A supplicant who’s universally mocked!

  21. Hugh says:

    The US Saudi relationship is based on mutual loathing and mutual need. That said, somebody must have told Bush the economy is headed south. So he has the tincup out.

    First, that the Saudis and the Gulf Arabs can just turn on the spigot and a huge new supply of crude will be dumped on world markets is a myth. Maybe 5 or 10 years ago they could do this but not now. Production has peaked or begun to decline in some of their big oil fields. New fields are smaller and more expensive to produce. With the increase in world demand, they no longer have the excess capacity to drive oil prices down. Besides most of the current increase in oil prices is not due to supply demand issues but speculation. The money that drives this speculation is a byproduct of the subprime meltdown. With the housing market in the crapper, hedge funds have moved into commodities, and this includes crude.

    Another aspect of this is that a lot of Saudi and Arab oil investments in the West are denominated in dollars. So a wholesale move away from the dollar in crude oil pricing is unlikely (incremental changes, yes). They kill the dollar and they kill their investments. Those investments are much bigger than a transient change in the currency that crude is sold in.

    Finally, while Bush may be going hat in hand. Both we and the Saudis know that we not they ultimately hold the whip hand. The KSA is weak, corrupt, and fundamentally unstable. We know it. They know it. The monarchy’s job Number One is its survival. They don’t like us but they can’t live without us. So they aren’t going to dump us. Just as, despite their being along with Pakistan the biggest source of terrorism and terrorist funding in the world, we still do as much as we can to prop their tottering regime up. When it comes to visas, the choice is between money and security. This was a choice that was already made years ago.

    • skdadl says:

      That last paragraph of Hugh’s is so important. While I agree with everyone else’s economic analyses, I think it’s important to remember that the Bush/Cheney regime is intertwined with the Saudis in more ways than one. Maybe for the time being that would be true of any other U.S. admin as well, but it is especially true of this bunch.

      I know I shouldn’t be shocked at this late date by Bush’s public statements, but wow, these are world-historically embarrassing.

    • Stephen Parrish says:

      Hugh –

      Besides most of the current increase in oil prices is not due to supply demand issues but speculation. The money that drives this speculation is a byproduct of the subprime meltdown. With the housing market in the crapper, hedge funds have moved into commodities, and this includes crude.

      Without speculation, what do you think the current price of crude oil would be?

      • Hugh says:

        Oddly enough I was doing some calculating on this last night. Basically, I took the generally accepted base price of oil at the beginning of 2007 of $40-45/bbl. I added on to this an instability premium of $10-15/bbl. Most of the world’s oil is produced in unstable areas and the instability premium reflects this even when no particular political, military, or weather event is happening. This gives a price of $50-60/bbl. Next I looked at changes in the dollar from 2001 to 2008. The change relative to the euro is 37%, the Canadian dollar around 33%. The change with regard to the yen and yuan have been less. I decided somewhat arbitrarily to assign a currency adjustment of 35%. This gave a range of $67.50 to $81/bbl. This is a good ballpark range. I think we can safely ascribe anything above $81/bbl to this new kind of speculation that can move a market and sustain prices.

        While peak oil and supply and demand concerns have sometimes been put forward to account for the differential between my $81/bbl price and the current price, I don’t think this is the case. For one thing, the way prices change indicates to me that there is a lot of singularly uninformed money in the oil markets. One day the price may change according to a supply report but the next day the market may well react to something else although the underlying fundamental of supply from the previous day remains unchanged. This chasing rumors instead of paying attention to fundamentals has turned the oil market into a vast crap shoot. You have a lot of big money playing the market without really understanding it.

    • masaccio says:

      I agree with this. Too much concentration of wealth leads to speculation. Since the rich have their hands on the levers of government, the losses are often shifted to taxpayers. If the Fed lowers interest rates, look what that will do to people who save in banks and money market funds and treasuries. It will mean they get less for their money, while the interests of stock investors and wall street greedheads are protected.

  22. FrankProbst says:

    Thought experiment: Can you imagine Hillary Clinton (or any other Dem, for that matter) running around the middle east waving a saber and yukking it up with a bunch of Saudi kings and princes? (”Remember that time when fifteen of your repressed subjects hijacked and crashed a bunch of our planes and killed a bunch of our people? THAT really sucked. How does this sword-thingie work?”)

    What happened to spreading democracy? It’s an oppressive monarchy, for crying out loud. It’s the kind of government that this country was born to overthrow. At best, Bush looks like a big doofus and a hypocrite. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think that even ardent Bush lovers are going to appreciate this. And no one’s going to accept the but-we-really-need-the-money defense, either. If that line doesn’t work for prostitutes and drug dealers, it sure as hell shouldn’t work for the President of the United States.

    • Neil says:

      Remember that time when fifteen of your repressed subjects hijacked and crashed a bunch of our planes and killed a bunch of our people? THAT really sucked. How does this sword-thingie work?

      Yea, that was awesome.

  23. merkwurdiglieber says:

    I just hope Junya keeps talking off the cuff, he is really a mess to
    watch these days… not to worry about him leaving the US after his
    term, hell, he probably won’t even leave Texas. Too bad, there is a
    fine old court house in Nuremberg he should be a guest in.

  24. kspena says:

    All of this must be particularly galling to dick. If his main goal is, as Greg Palast and others have written, to break the grip of OPEC so he (cheney/USA) is positioned to ‘control’ the production, pricing and distribution of oil, he must be steaming at this epic moment…

  25. prostratedragon says:

    Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!

    Either the Japanese market is taking a long lunch, or it’s hit a circuit-breaker; hasn’t moved down any further in over an hour. But anyone out there, look at that Hang Seng (Hong Kong) index plummet!

    In an article about the sovereign wealth funds, Andrew Leonard sizes up Brush’s economic legacy, quite accurately imo:

    The magnitude of the disaster, from a free market apologist point of view, can hardly be overestimated. By abjectly failing to compensate or cushion the “losers” from globalization — whether by boosting safety nets, improving healthcare, or investing significant resources in education and training — the Bush administration guaranteed a growing groundswell of political opposition to global trade. And by failing to properly oversee financial markets, it provided an opportunity for foreign governments that may not share “American” values to become significant players in the heart of the global financial system. Talk about your legacies! The Bush administration not only may have crippled the Republican Party for a generation, but it also might have broken the free market! Whoops!

Comments are closed.