text:
POLAND v. ARIZONA(1986)
Petitioners robbed a bank van of $281,000 in cash and killed the guards by dumping them into a lake in sacks weighted with rocks. Petitioners were convicted of first-degree murder in an Arizona state court. At a separate hearing, while finding that the statutory aggravating circumstance that the offense was committed for "pecuniary gain" was not present because it applied only to contract killings, the trial judge sentenced petitioners to death upon finding that the statutory aggravating circumstance that the offense was committed in "an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner" was present. The Arizona Supreme Court, while reversing and remanding for a retrial on other grounds, held that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding of the "especially heinous" circumstance, but that the trial judge erred in finding the "pecuniary gain" circumstance limited to contract killings, and that if petitioners were again convicted the judge might find this circumstance present. On remand, petitioners were again convicted of first-degree murder and the trial judge again sentenced them to death, finding that both the "pecuniary gain" and "especially heinous" circumstances were present. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed, rejecting petitioners' argument that the Double Jeopardy Clause barred reimposition of the death penalty. The court found the evidence still insufficient to support the "especially heinous" circumstance but sufficient to support the "pecuniary gain" circumstance.
Reimposing the death penalty on petitioners did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. Pp. 152-157.
WHITE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C. J., and POWELL, REHNQUIST, STEVENS, and O'CONNOR, JJ., joined. MARSHALL, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BRENNAN and BLACKMUN, JJ., joined, post, p. 157.
H. K. Wilhelmsen, by appointment of the Court, 474 U.S. 943 , argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Marc E. Hammond.
Gerald R. Grant, Assistant Attorney General of Arizona, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Robert K. Corbin, Attorney General.
[ Footnote * ] Together with No. 85-5024, Poland v. Arizona, also on certiorari to the same court.
JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
The question presented is whether the Double Jeopardy Clause bars a further capital sentencing proceeding when, on appeal from a sentence of death, the reviewing court finds the evidence insufficient to support the only aggravating factor on which the sentencing judge relied, but does not find the evidence insufficient to support the death penalty.
In 1977 petitioners Patrick and Michael Poland, disguised as police officers, stopped a Purolator van that was making cash deliveries to various banks in northern Arizona. After removing some $281,000 in cash from the van, petitioners took the two Purolator guards to a lake and dumped them into the water in sacks weighted with rocks. Autopsies indicated [476 U.S. 147, 149] that the most probable cause of the guards' death was drowning, although one may have died of a heart attack. It was not possible to determine if the guards were drugged, but there was no evidence of a struggle.
The jury disbelieved petitioners' alibi defense and convicted them of first-degree murder. Pursuant to former Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. 13-454(A) (Supp. 1973), the trial judge then sat as sentencer in a separate proceeding. At the hearing, the prosecution, relying on the evidence presented at trial, argued that two statutory aggravating circumstances were present: (1) that petitioners had "committed the offense as consideration for the receipt, or in expectation of the receipt, of [something] of pecuniary value," former Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. 13-454(E)(5) (Supp. 1973); and (2) that petitioners had "committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner," former Ariz. Rev. Stat. 13-454(E)(6) (Supp. 1973). The trial judge made the following finding with respect to the "pecuniary gain" aggravating circumstance:
On appeal, petitioners argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the judge's finding of the "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" aggravating circumstance. They [476 U.S. 147, 150] also argued that the jury's verdict was tainted by a juryroom discussion of evidence not admitted at trial. The Arizona Supreme Court agreed that the jury's verdict was tainted, necessitating reversal and retrial. State v. Poland, 132 Ariz. 269, 283-285, 645 P.2d 784, 798-800 (1982). The court next held that the evidence on which the State relied at the first sentencing hearing was insufficient to support a finding of the "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" aggravating circumstance. Id., at 285, 645 P.2d, at 800. Finally, the court stated that the trial court "mistook the law when it did not find that the defendants `committed the offense as consideration for the receipt, or in expectation of the receipt, of anything of pecuniary value.'" Ibid. The court explained that this aggravating circumstance is not limited to situations involving contract killings, see State v. Clark, 126 Ariz. 428, 616 P.2d 888 (1980), and added that "[u]pon retrial, if the defendants are again convicted of first degree murder, the court may find the existence of this aggravating circumstance." 132 Ariz., at 286, 645 P.2d, at 801.
On remand, petitioners were again convicted of first-degree murder. At the sentencing hearing, the prosecution, relying on the evidence presented at the second trial and also presenting additional evidence, argued that the "pecuniary gain" and "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" aggravating factors were present in each petitioner's case. The prosecution alleged a third aggravating circumstance in petitioner Patrick Poland's case: previous conviction of "a felony . . . involving the use or threat of violence on another person," Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. 13-454(E)(2) (Supp. 1973). 1 The trial judge found all of the aggravating circumstances alleged by the prosecution, and again sentenced both petitioners to death. [476 U.S. 147, 151]
Petitioners argued on appeal, as they had at their second sentencing hearing, that the Double Jeopardy Clause barred reimposition of the death penalty. Their theory was that the Arizona Supreme Court's decision on their first appeal that the evidence failed to support the "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" aggravating circumstance amounted to an "acquittal" of the death penalty. Cf. Bullington v. Missouri, 451 U.S. 430 (1981); Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U.S. 203 (1984). A majority of the Arizona Supreme Court rejected this argument, stating:
The court found the evidence still insufficient to support the "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" aggravating circumstance, but sufficient to support the "pecuniary gain" aggravating circumstance with respect to both defendants and the "prior conviction involving violence" circumstance with respect to Patrick Poland. State v. Poland (Patrick), supra, at 404-406, 698 P.2d, at 199-201; accord, State v. Poland (Michael), supra. After again reviewing and independently weighing the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, the court concluded that the death penalty was appropriate in each petitioner's case. We granted certiorari to consider whether reimposing the death penalties on petitioners violated the Double Jeopardy Clause. 474 U.S. 816 (1985). We hold that it did not. [476 U.S. 147, 152]
In Bullington v. Missouri, supra, this Court held that a defendant sentenced to life imprisonment by a capital sentencing jury is protected by the Double Jeopardy Clause against imposition of the death penalty in the event that he obtains reversal of his conviction and is retried and reconvicted. The Court recognized the usual rule to be that when a defendant obtains reversal of his conviction on appeal,
Recently, the Court held that the rationale of Bullington applies to the Arizona capital sentencing scheme at issue in this case. Arizona v. Rumsey, supra. 4 In Rumsey, the [476 U.S. 147, 154] trial judge erred in exactly the same way as the trial judge did at petitioners' first sentencing hearing in these cases, by construing the "pecuniary gain" aggravating circumstance as limited to "murder for hire" situations. Unlike the trial judge in this case, however, the trial judge in Rumsey found no aggravating circumstances, and entered a sentence of life imprisonment. This Court held that "[t]he double jeopardy principle relevant to [Rumsey's] case is the same as that invoked in Bullington: an acquittal on the merits by the sole decisionmaker in the proceeding is final and bars retrial on the same charge." Id., at 211.
Under Bullington and Rumsey, therefore, the relevant inquiry in the cases before us is whether the sentencing judge or the reviewing court has "decid[ed] that the prosecution has not proved its case" for the death penalty and hence has "acquitted" petitioners. Bullington, 451 U.S., at 443 .
At no point during petitioners' first capital sentencing hearing and appeal did either the sentencer or the reviewing court hold that the prosecution had "failed to prove its case" that petitioners deserved the death penalty. Plainly, the sentencing judge did not acquit, for he imposed the death penalty. While the Arizona Supreme Court held that the sentencing judge erred in relying on the "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" aggravating circumstance, it did not hold that the prosecution had failed to prove its case for the death penalty. Indeed, the court clearly indicated that there had been no such failure by remarking that "the trial court mistook the law when it did not find that the defendants `committed the offense as consideration for the receipt, or in expectation of the receipt, of anything of pecuniary value,'" and that [476 U.S. 147, 155] "[u]pon retrial, if the defendants are again convicted of first degree murder, the court may find the existence of this aggravating circumstance," 132 Ariz., at 286, 645 P.2d, at 800, 801.
Petitioners argue, however, that the Arizona Supreme Court "acquitted" them of the death penalty by finding the "evidence [insufficient] to support the sole aggravating circumstances found by the sentencer." Brief for Petitioners 16. Petitioners' implicit argument is, first, that the sentencing judge "acquitted" them of the "pecuniary gain" aggravating circumstance, and second, that the Double Jeopardy Clause rendered this "acquittal" final, so that the evidence relating to this circumstance was effectively removed from the case at the time of petitioners' first appeal. 5
We reject the fundamental premise of petitioners' argument, namely, that a capital sentencer's failure to find a particular aggravating circumstance alleged by the prosecution always constitutes an "acquittal" of that circumstance for double jeopardy purposes. Bullington indicates that the proper inquiry is whether the sentencer or reviewing court has "decided that the prosecution has not proved its case" that the death penalty is appropriate. 6 We are not prepared [476 U.S. 147, 156] to extend Bullington further and view the capital sentencing hearing as a set of minitrials on the existence of each aggravating circumstance. Such an approach would push the analogy on which Bullington is based past the breaking point.
Aggravating circumstances are not separate penalties or offenses, but are "standards to guide the making of [the] choice" between the alternative verdicts of death and life imprisonment. 451 U.S., at 438 . Thus, under Arizona's capital sentencing scheme, the judge's finding of any particular aggravating circumstance does not of itself "convict" a defendant (i. e., require the death penalty), and the failure to find any particular aggravating circumstance does not "acquit" a defendant (i. e., preclude the death penalty).
It is true that the sentencer must find some aggravating circumstance before the death penalty may be imposed, and that the sentencer's finding, albeit erroneous, that no aggravating circumstance is present is an "acquittal" barring a second death sentence proceeding. Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U.S. 203 (1984). This is because
The judgment of the Supreme Court of Arizona is
[ Footnote 2 ] Thus, a defendant charged with first-degree murder but only convicted of the lesser included offense of second-degree murder has been acquitted of the greater charge for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause. In the event his conviction is reversed on appeal, "a retrial on the first-degree murder charge [is] barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause, because the defendant `was forced to run the gantlet once on that charge and the jury refused to convict him.'" Bullington, 451 U.S., at 443 (quoting Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 190 (1957)).
Also, when a defendant's conviction is overturned on appeal on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to convict, the Double Jeopardy Clause forbids a retrial. "`Since we necessarily accord absolute finality to a jury's verdict of acquittal - no matter how erroneous its decision - it is difficult to conceive how society has any greater interest in retrying a defendant when, on review, it is decided as a matter of law that the jury could not properly have returned a verdict of guilty.'" Bullington, supra, at 442-443 (quoting Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1, 16 (1978)).
[ Footnote 3 ] The "case" to which the Court referred in Bullington was the prosecution's case that the defendant deserved the death penalty. The analogy drawn was between a death sentence and a verdict of guilty, a life sentence and a verdict of innocent. The Court emphasized that the sentencer was required to make a choice between "two alternative verdicts," 451 U.S., at 438 , a statement inconsistent with the view that for double jeopardy purposes the capital sentencer should be seen as rendering a series of mini-verdicts on each aggravating circumstance. See also Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U.S. 203, 209 -210 (1984) ("The sentencer - the trial judge in Arizona - is required to choose between two options: death, and life imprisonment without possibility of parole for 25 years").
[ Footnote 4 ] The Court explained the similarities between the Arizona and Missouri systems as follows:
[ Footnote 5 ] Petitioners have not made this argument with any clarity, but we can discern no other plausible basis for their contention that the Arizona Supreme Court "acquitted" them of the death penalty at the time of their first appeal. Any suggestion that the court intended to acquit them is negated by the language in Poland I and is rendered even more untenable by the court's statement at the time of the second appeal that "[o]ur holding in Poland I, however, was . . . not tantamount to a death penalty `acquittal.'" State v. Poland, 144 Ariz., at 404, 698 P.2d, at 199.
Petitioners seem to attach importance to the fact that the prosecution did not cross-appeal the trial judge's finding regarding the "pecuniary gain" aggravating circumstance. However, the Arizona Supreme Court did not accord any significance to the prosecution's failure to cross-appeal, and we certainly cannot say that as a matter of state law the court was precluded from considering the evidence regarding the "pecuniary gain" aggravating circumstance.
[ Footnote 6 ] See n. 3, supra.
JUSTICE MARSHALL, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN and JUSTICE BLACKMUN join, dissenting.
There is one difference between these cases and Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U.S. 203 (1984), in which seven Members of this Court interpreted the Double Jeopardy Clause to bar imposition of a death sentence after a life sentence has been reversed on appeal: the sentencing judge in petitioners' cases made two errors of state law, while Rumsey's judge made only one. According to the majority, that makes the difference between life and death.
In Rumsey, the defendant was convicted of murder and robbery; the trial judge sentenced him to life imprisonment [476 U.S. 147, 158] upon finding that none of the statutory aggravating circumstances provided by Arizona law applied to the defendant's case. One of those aggravating circumstances - murder committed as consideration for pecuniary gain - the court rejected in the belief that it applied only to murders for hire. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona held that murder for pecuniary gain could also include murder in the course of a robbery. Accordingly, it set aside Rumsey's life sentence and remanded for resentencing. This time, Rumsey was given a death sentence, supported by the aggravating circumstance of murder for pecuniary gain. On writ of certiorari, this Court concluded that the Arizona death-sentencing procedure is equivalent to a trial for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause, under the doctrine of Bullington v. Missouri, 451 U.S. 430 (1981). We then concluded that Rumsey's initial life sentence had constituted an "acquittal" on the merits of the central issue of the proceeding: whether death was the appropriate punishment for the offense. Under traditional double jeopardy principles, retrial of that issue was thereafter precluded, even though the "acquittal" was predicated upon a mistaken interpretation of state law. Rumsey, supra, at 211.
Petitioners, Patrick and Michael Poland, were convicted of the murders of two guards in the course of a robbery. Like the trial court in Rumsey, the sentencing court rejected the aggravating circumstance of murder for pecuniary gain, believing that it applied only to murders for hire. Unlike the Rumsey court, however, the trial judge did not then impose a life sentence. Instead, he concluded that another of the statutory aggravating circumstances was present: that the murders were "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved." Based on this sole aggravating circumstance, therefore, the court sentenced petitioners to death. On joint appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court reviewed the death sentences and concluded that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of state law to establish that the murders had been "especially heinous, [476 U.S. 147, 159] cruel, or depraved," because the State had not proved that the victims had suffered, as state law requires. App. 61. Before remanding, however, the court took the opportunity, sua sponte, to note that murder for pecuniary gain was not limited to murders for hire, and therefore was available as a possible alternative basis for a death sentence. On remand, the trial court once more sentenced petitioners to death, again concluding that the murders were "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved," and also that they were committed for pecuniary gain. * The Arizona Supreme Court again reversed the aggravating circumstance of "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved," but this time upheld the death sentences on the ground of pecuniary gain.
The Court makes much of the fact that, unlike Rumsey, petitioners never received sentences of life imprisonment. Yet the majority fails to recognize the teaching of Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (1978). In Burks, we held that an appellate reversal of a conviction, based on the legal conclusion that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, has the same effect under the Double Jeopardy Clause as an acquittal at trial. Id., at 16. "To hold otherwise," the Court concluded, "would create a purely arbitrary distinction between those in petitioner's position and others who would enjoy the benefit of a correct decision by the District Court." Id., at 11. That arbitrary distinction is precisely the one that the Court creates today. The initial death sentences that petitioners received were "convictions," see Rumsey, supra, and their reversal for insufficiency of the evidence to support the sole aggravating circumstance found by the sentencing judge must, under Burks, be accorded the same effect as an "acquittal" at trial - the same effect as Rumsey's life sentence. As much as Rumsey's life sentence constituted the all-important "acquittal on the merits," even [476 U.S. 147, 160] though predicated on an error of law, so, too, did the reversal of petitioners' death sentences.
The analogy, first drawn in Bullington v. Missouri, supra, between an acquittal at trial and an "acquittal" of death at sentencing, is not perfect, and the imperfections perhaps can explain the majority's mischaracterization of the issue in these cases. At trial, a defendant is charged with an offense containing certain specified elements; he is either convicted or acquitted of that offense, the trier of fact having concluded that the prosecution has or has not proved all the elements of the offense. The sentencing proceeding, however, is quite different. In Arizona, for example, a death sentence may be imposed if any one of seven statutory aggravating factors is proved. While it might be possible to treat each aggravating circumstance as a separate "offense," of which a defendant is either convicted or acquitted, this Court has taken a different approach. We have said that "on the merits" of a capital proceeding, the "central issue [is] whether death was the appropriate punishment for [the] offense." Rumsey, 467 U.S., at 211 . Thus, the "offense" for which the defendant receives his "conviction" or "acquittal" is that of the appropriateness of the death penalty, not the elements of any particular aggravating factor. Ante, at 153, n. 3.
In these cases, the trial judge found death to be the appropriate punishment because petitioners' offenses were "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved." On appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court held that the sole basis offered by the trial court to support its "conviction" of petitioners was insufficient as a matter of law.
The majority believes that, since other aggravating circumstances might have been found to support the "convictions," it was permissible to remand the cases for further factfinding on those alternative factors. But this overlooks what our cases have said a conviction is in the sentencing context - a determination that death is the appropriate penalty, not separate trials on the existence of all statutory aggravating [476 U.S. 147, 161] circumstances, conducted seriatim. In these cases, that determination was reversed because there was insufficient evidence to support the ground relied on by the trial judge in reaching it. Any remand for further factfinding on the question whether the death sentence should be imposed was thereafter prohibited. See Rumsey, supra, at 211-212. In no other circumstance would the Double Jeopardy Clause countenance the offer of a second chance to the State and the trial judge to find a better theory upon which to base a conviction. Nor should it do so here. I dissent.
[ Footnote * ] With respect to petitioner Patrick Poland, an additional aggravating factor was invoked to support the second death sentence, based on events subsequent to the first penalty proceeding. [476 U.S. 147, 162]


text:
You are here: Social Security Administration > Research, Statistics & Policy Analysis > Research & Analysis by Author > John C. Hambor
Research & Analysis by John C. Hambor
Economic Policy, Intergenerational Equity, and the Social Security Trust Fund Buildup
from Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 50, No. 10 (released October 1987)
Econometric Models and the Study of the Economic Effects of Social Security
from Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 47, No. 10 (released October 1984)
The Macroeconomic Effects of a Payroll Tax Rollback
ORES Working Paper No. 11 (released August 1979)
In late 1977, the U.S. Congress passed Social Security legislation that included a series of increases in the payroll tax. These increases, which began in 1979 and carry on into the 1980s, substantially raise the projected levels of the Social Security trust funds. Since the amendments were passed, there has been some discussion and several proposals to roll back part of the tax. It is highly likely that additional rollback proposals will be made in the near future. The purpose of this paper is to shed some light on some of the macroeconomic effects of a payroll tax rollback.
Social Security, Saving, and Capital Formation
from Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 38, No. 7 (released July 1975)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I didn't want to ask for help because it would be a confession of weakness. But my patient was dying, really dying, all of a sudden, out of nowhere, and I didn't know why, and I didn't seem able to do anything to stop him. I figured it would be even worse if he died because I didn't ask for help. So I did. I don't know what's worse, that I was weak enough to ask, or that the person I asked didn't really know any more than I did, and didn't do any more than what I was about to do anyway. The patient survived, mostly thanks to the nurses, and due to what they and I did before the help arrived. I guess it's good, in a way. I've proven to myself that I can get through anything (with the right nurses). I need to stop using the comfort blanket of asking senior residents for help. If I could just not get so worried by my patients dying, or trying to, that I can't seem to think straight. . . and why do they always do it at 3am, when I can't think straight anyway?
I've mentioned the ghosts before – memories of other times when things went wrong. They're starting to add up now, so whenever I have a really sick patient, there's usually an analogous memory, where things didn't turn out well. I don't know whether it's good, to have those to make me paranoid and anxious to check into every possible explanation or treatment option, or whether knowing the answer to those old puzzles sets me thinking down one track, unable to see what might be different about this time.


text:
VIDEO: Watch a Live Stream of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire's LA Premiere
Whether it's her pixie cut or that backless dress, Jennifer Lawrence has been making bold fashion choices on an almost daily basis lately while promoting the highly anticipated sequel to The Hunger Games, Catching Fire.
Want to be the first to see what the girl on fire will wear to her white-hot American premiere? Now you can, thanks to Yahoo! The website will be live-streaming the Los Angeles premiere of Catching Fire starting at 9 p.m. ET/6 p.m. PT, and will include interviews with Lawrence, along with the equally fashionable Elizabeth Banks. Not to mention, the live stream will also turn the spotlight on The Hunger Games' leading men, Josh Hutcherson and Liam Hemsworth. Will either male star bring a lovely lady on their arm to Monday's festivities? You'll just have to check out the live stream to find out!
Watch the live stream from the premiere of Catching Fire, starting at 9 p.m. ET/6 p.m. PT, below:
Catching Fire hits theaters on Friday. Are you excited for the film?
View original VIDEO: Watch a Live Stream of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire's LA Premiere at TVGuide.com
Other Links From TVGuide.com


text:
March 24, 2012 -- At $1 trillion dollars, student loan debt has eclipsed credit card debt for the first time in American history. To make matters worse, come July 1 the interest rate on federally subsidized Stafford student loans will automatically double, from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent, unless Congressional action is taken to extend the lower rate before then. Depending on which side of the aisle you choose, extending the lower rate will cost between $3 billion and $7 billion per year (estimates from the center of the aisle hover around $5.5 billion).
The problem is not simply the interest rate. Loans for college are often taken out directly by parents, or guaranteed by them, and the debt can easily run into six figures. This could ultimately threaten their credit ratings, retirement funds, and even their homes. All of this boils down to a simple truth that just about anyone who is either actively paying for college or contemplating it already knows. When it comes to financing higher education in the United States, we've got a major problem. But if you're like me, intuition isn't enough. So allow me to paint you a thoroughly disturbing picture.
According to Finaid.org, parent debt relating to their children's education has more than doubled in the last 10 years. In 2010, for the first time ever, $100 billion in student loan debt was disbursed. That's about 10% of all outstanding student loan debt handed out in one year. It is not a problem associated with any particular tax bracket. The willingness of parents to cosign for tuition loans exists across all levels of income.
President Obama was recently criticized for his stance regarding the need for an education (I believe the exact word used was "snob"), but the desire for higher education has been part of the American persona for centuries. Around 1780, John Adams observed:
"I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study Mathematicks and Philosophy. My sons ought to study Mathematicks and Philosophy, Geography, natural History, Naval Architecture, navigation, Commerce and Agriculture, in order to give their Children a right to study Painting, Poetry, Musick, Architecture, Statuary, Tapestry and Porcelaine."
[Related Story: Alternative Card Options for Students: Debit or Prepaid?]
He also observed: "There are two types of education… One should teach us how to make a living, and the other how to live."
God love him, Adams was part, and a perfect harbinger, of the problem that we face today. The first part of that problem is that somewhere along the way it became politically incorrect to suggest that college might not be right for every young American. Although the student loan problem was created by loans for all kinds of post-secondary education, tuition for college programs represents the vast majority of the debt especially in cases where the amount owed is large. It became government policy to encourage kids to go to college, just like it became government policy to assist everyone in buying their own home. It's a laudable goal, and statistics indicating the lifelong value of higher education are compelling. The problem is, somebody's got to pay for it, and with the US getting relatively poorer–straddled with huge national debt, dependence on foreign oil, and high unemployment–the burden on American families is growing geometrically with no relief in sight (other than increasing government assistance).
The second part of the problem is that while a traditional liberal arts education may be able to teach a student how to live, it often doesn't do as well when it comes to teaching them how to make a living (unless there's a few million in a trust fund). A study recently released by Young Invincibles, a nonprofit advocacy group for young adults, found that almost two-thirds of U.S. student-loan borrowers did not understand at least some elements of their loans or the student-loan process. About 20 percent of the respondents, who had an average of $76,000 in student debt, reported that the size of their monthly payments was a surprise. Granted this is not about the nuances of how to live well—it's a question of how to get by, and it's fair to say that those folks weren't too well prepared for that.
They are also not too well prepared for making a living. A 2010 GAO report criticized the high-pressure sales tactics, lack of job placement, and student loan abuses found at many online and for-profit colleges. To qualify their students for federal loans and other benefits under Title IV (which is the provision of the Higher Education Act of 1965 under which most government-backed student loans are made), educational institutions must show that their programs offer "Preparation for Gainful Employment." The rules require measurement of criteria such as how many students from a given school are delinquent in loan repayments, job placement success, annual gross and discretionary income of the former students once they've entered the workforce, and so on. Bear in mind that some for-profit schools have literally hundreds of thousands of students, and derive as much as 90% of their gross tuition revenue from Title IV financing.
The underlying cause of this proliferation of big-box education is the rapidly accelerating cost of higher education in America. According to the College Board, average inflation-adjusted tuition at public four-year colleges rose by 29% in the last 10 years; the increase at private four-year colleges was 22% during the same period. In other words, the price of a college education is rising at more than double the rate of inflation.
That said, has the value of a college education increased commensurately?
And, as prices have risen, so have student loan defaults. According to the U.S. Department of Education, the default rate rose from 7 percent in fiscal year 2008 to 8.8 percent in fiscal year 2009. Defaults increased in all sectors — from 6 percent to 7.2 percent for public institutions, from 4 percent to 4.6 percent for private institutions and from 11.6 percent to 15 percent at for-profit schools.
So let's recap:
We start with an impulse that is part and parcel of the American dream. Well-meaning federal policy is then promulgated to encourage the pursuit of that dream, largely by means of government-guaranteed loans. The availability of that funding creates a sort of moral hazard. Enter well-meaning and not-so-well-meaning guys who encourage–fairly or fraudulently–lots of folks to take advantage of those loans so that the not so well-meaning guys can make a very large and very fast buck. Many (or most?) of the citizens who take that loan money really don't understand what they're getting into, and many of them (if we are honest about future potential earnings) shouldn't be dreaming that dream in the first place. The demand created by the availability of those loans drives up the price of the dream; and then defaults increase precipitously.
[Related Story: Defaulting on Private vs. Federal Student Loans]
It's a bit like the real estate bubble, no?
If the interest rate on student loans is doubled this summer, the camel's back will break and we will be facing yet another large-scale crisis like the one that crippled the economy in 2008. There are a lot of people who want a college education for themselves or their kids–as there are a lot of people who want to own their own home. In the glare of hindsight they couldn't afford it. But because they already paid for it with government-guaranteed largesse, one way or another it will become the taxpayers' burden, unless perhaps the government does something to regulate how much a college education can cost.
Adam Levin is chairman and cofounder of Credit.com and Identity Theft 911. His experience as former director of the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs gives him unique insight into consumer privacy, legislation and financial advocacy. He is a nationally recognized expert on identity theft and credit.


text:
Brockovich Takes On Sinkhole Case
Environmental activist Erin Brockovich says Assumption Parish residents whose homes are threatened by a huge sinkhole should sue the owners of a failed salt dome cavern believed to have caused the sinkhole.
The Advocate reports that Brockovich told Bayou Corne residents at a meeting in Pierre Part that legal action is their only chance of relief.
About 350 people have been evacuated since early August, when the sinkhole appeared. It has kept growing since then.
At least 50 homeowners have retained Thomas Girardi, who works with Brockovich and also spoke to the gathering.
Brockovich said afterward that Bayou Corne residents contacted her shortly after the sinkhole appeared, and recently invited her to speak to them in Louisiana.


text:
Day 8 (373) – January 8, 2019
Gentle – Tuesday Photo / Pairs – Cee's Fun Foto / Stymie -FOWC / Crepitus – RDP / Starts with B – January Photo A Day
Is it me, or did WP change something. I am thinking highlight colors? The question is why? I really don't like the new colors. I didn't realize they were going to do that. And when they do something like that, I really wish we had an option.
I really couldn't think of a better pair to feature, for today's prompts, than these two. Not only the pair, but despite their size and Anastasia's intimidating stare they are just about as gentle as gentle comes. Except when it comes to playtime. Now that Gracie is pretty much totally blind, I really think Anastasia knows and takes care of her sister. I mean she could easily stymie all of her attempts to eat, play, sleep, etc., but she doesn't. This is a very rare site. They hardly ever lay on the same couch, it just makes me wonder even more. But Gracie is doing an amazing job adapting. She is able to navigate around obstacles, some how she manages to know exactly where you are, even if you aren't in the room. At bedtime, I think she can hear the crepitus of my bones as I head up the stairs, because without fail she is not far behind. It is still very easy to feel so bad for her. You just have to wonder what her mind is really thinking. But despite all the adversity she is dealing with, she maintains that happy, tail wagging, eager to please 5 year old puppy, and her sister is there, for the most part, in her corner watching over and serving as, well, as her seeing eye dog.
Look What I Found
I didn't even realize…


text:
Posted by Editoress on 11/11/05
As predicted, Thomas Frischknecht (Swisspower) won the first stage of La Ruta de los Conquistadores. Frischknecht crushed the competition by nearly 7 minutes, finishing ahead local challengers Deiber Esquivel and Marvin Campos, with Jeremiah Bishop coming in fifth after over extending himself on the longest climb of the day and dropping from second place. Roddi Lega was the top Canadian finisher in 11th place.
The first stage of La Ruta is the longest and, arguably, the most difficult, with 4526 metres (15,000 feet) of climbing in 110.1 kilometres (70 miles). The field of nearly 400 started at Punta Leona on the Pacific Ocean, and hit the first climb 10 kilometres into the race.
The extended hurricane season in the Caribbean has spilled over the Costa Rica, so the mud through checkpoints one (27.3 kilometres) and two (40.7 kilometres) forced long sections of hiking.
"We must hiked for 40 minutes" commented Bishop.
Bishop went out hard with the early leaders, while Frischknecht started more slowly. "At the beginning I found it a little hard to get going, after the first climb I was back in 20th. I think they went too hard at the start."
"Then I started to pick up guys, I was able to ride some sections that others couldn't. I think I made a good tire choice today (Ritchey C-Max). I caught the front guys (Bishop and Campos) between the first and second checkpoints."
Esquivel wasn't there, so Campos wasn't doing any work, leaving it to the gringos.
"Marvin didn't do any work" stated Frischknecht "in fact, he was trying to slow us down, slowing in the corners."
Frischknecht responded by taking the pace up a notch when the race hit the pavement at checkpoint three, as the riders were starting the major climb of the day - a 20 kilometre effort that maxed out at 1,158 metres. Neither Campos nor Bishop could respond initially, but Bishop managed to find the reserves to drop Campos further up the climb.
This backfired when, "the atomic bonk took everything out of me. I think I must of died out there twice today" said a shaky Bishop afterwards. I went out way too hard at the start, and I was in the lead for the toughest section. After Thomas caught us we rode together until he dropped us on the climb. I got a gap on Campos and Thomas waited, but he could see I was falling off the pace.
"I kept going, but the Ticos (Esquivel and Campos) caught me about a kilometre from the top of the climb. I took a drink and an energy bar over the top, and then caught them, got dropped, caught, got dropped . . . It must of happened about four times. I guess I'm in worse shape than I thought."
Maybe not - Frischknecht, the Marathon world champion and winner of multiple Marathon World Cups, said "this is the toughest marathon I ever did. The distance, the amount of climbing, with the muddy conditions . . . it was hard."
Race Notes
Lega is racing with only two weeks of training in his legs since July. "I started to use an altitude tent over the winter, but it didn't work for me. I didn't cut back on training (while using it), so I kept getting slower and slower all spring, and finally my coach (Houshang Amiri) told me to stop in July. So I came into this race completely out of shape. I am in such a world of hurt right now."
Ex-racer Andreas Brenes, a former team mate of Frischknecht's from the Ritchey days negated the Costa Rican advantage in feeding through the race by riding "shotgun" for Frischknecht on a motorbike. He was able to keep Frischknecht fed at each checkpoint. Some Costa Ricans protested, but it was pointed out that a following moto is legal (but not a four-wheeled vehicle, which is what many locals have used in the past).
One complaint was that riders received contradictory information on distances remaining in the race. Frischknecht pointed out "The last 20 K were especially hard when there are no signs, and you are being told it's 5 K but it's really 10, and that there are no more climbs, but there is one big one remaining..."
The mud was causing lots of gear problems for riders, with most stopping at every stream crossing to wash their bikes. "Everyone kept getting chainsuck." commented Roddi Lega (Norco). "I used an entire bottle of lube out there."
Frischknecht has become the second non-Costa Rican to don the leader's jersey in the 13 year history of the race. American Tinker Juarez took the lead after the second stage of the 2002 edition, but lost the jersey on the final day.
Day two covers 77.9 kilometres through the middle of Costa Rica, and takes the riders to the highest point of the race - 3010 metres. The riders "only" climb 2729 metres. The race bible advises: "Cloud forest and rain forest. Expect wind and rain. Be prepared for drastic climate changes."
Day 1 - Punta Leona to Santa Ana, 110.1 kilometres
1. Thomas Frischknecht (Sui) Swisspower, 5:53:20
2. Deiber Esquivel (CRC) IBP, at 6:25
3. Marvin Campos (CRC) IBP, 6:26
4. Jonathan Carballo (CRC) IBP, 8:29
5. Jeremiah Bishop (USA) Trek-VW, 13:17
6. Paolo Montoya (CRC) Santa Ana, 29:45
7. Gonzalo Bonilla (CRC) IBP, 37:20
8. Allan Cordero (CRC) IBP, 42:47
9. Jorge Coto (CRC) Santa Ana, 52:26
10. Ron Akerson Hendricks (CRC) Red Bull, 52:48
11. Roddi Lega (Can) Norco, 53:28
|Return to Canadian Cyclist homepage | Back to Top


text:
Portland's Premier Shoe Design School
While working as a lowly file clerk at LA Gear in the late '80s, 19-year-old D'Wayne Edwards sketched a new shoe design every day for six months, quietly slipping each one into the company chairman's suggestion box. One hundred eighty sketches later, the chairman rewarded Edwards's talent, imagination, and tenacity. He hired the teenager to create shoes for real, making him the youngest professional designer in the industry.
All the ambition in the world, though, wouldn't make up for experience, so Edwards turned to his colleagues for help. "I understood it was on me to be proactive. So I just asked what I didn't know ... and [my coworkers] answered," says Edwards, whose meteoric career trajectory took him from LA Gear to Skechers and eventually Nike, where he became one of only six creatives—ever—to design a Nike Air Jordan sneaker.
The value of that mentoring drove Edwards, now 43, to create the Pensole Footwear Design Academy in the heart of Shoelandia two years ago. Two hundred graduates later, Pensole has become the country's premier school for shoe design. Parsons The New School for Design in New York sends its students here. So does Georgia's Savannah College of Art and Design. Not that Edwards cares about applicants' pedigree: wherever potential students come from, they get one shot at getting in: a single black-and-white drawing. There's no long-winded essay, no GPA requirement. "If you're talented, it shows up," says Edwards, who left his position as design director of Jordan Brand to start the school. "If you have a passion, it shows up there. If you have a bad work ethic, it shows up in what you put on paper."
It seems to be an effective filter: Already, more than 40 Pensole grads have found jobs with companies like Nike, Adidas, Cole Haan, and New Balance. Online megaretailer Zappos plans to sell at least one design from a recent Pensole class.
Over the course of Pensole's three-week term, students spend 12 or more hours a day in the Old Town school's classrooms, pounding out project-based assignments such as designing comfortable and functional shoes for Portland's bridge workers. Meanwhile, Edwards uses his industry connections to bring in a steady stream of footwear professionals, such as Nike Emerging Markets designer Cheresse Thornhill and creative agency headhunters, to give students realistic insights into what makes a design sellable and what personality traits hiring managers look for.
"I didn't want to create another theory school," Edwards says. "Everything we do is as close as possible to having a real job."
In January, Pensole partnered with the Boston-based Two Ten Footwear Foundation, a nonprofit offering educational services to footwear industry professionals, to bring 10 students to Portland, tuition-free (tuition typically runs $3,000). Another 25–100 started Pensole's online courses the same month. The partnership increases Pensole's presence with East Coast industry giants like Steve Madden, Reebok, and Puma, and also provides students with a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity: All of the students' final projects will be on display this month at the fashion industry's massive Magic trade show in Las Vegas. There, more than 5,000 companies—among them big names like Aerosoles, Fossil, and Perry Ellis—will be on hand to inspect new designs. Or in the case of Pensole students, "design." Each student will show just one prototype, based on one sketch—a drawing that could be worth an entire career.
Fancy feet
NIKE'S JORDAN NU'RETRO 2, $115 The first Jordan basketball shoe Edwards designed proved lucky for Indian Pacer Fred Jones, a former Duck who won the 2003 NBA Slam Dunk Championship wearing a pair.
DIAMOND LIFESTYLE, $1,200 One of two Pensole designs selected for the 2012 summer Magic show, Chris Dixon's five-inch, cushioned platform was snagged by Zappos, which plans to sell the artful design through its website in the fall.
THE REBAR, $85 This design from Pensole student Jared Friorovich also went to Magic, but hasn't yet been picked up by a manufacturer. Too bad for skateboarders, who'd love the ankle-protecting high top and impact-cushioning silicone underlay.


text:
Cape May, New Jersey
Cape May, New Jersey
A Brief History on Cape May NJ
It was Henry Hudson, an English Sea Captain who first documented the peninsula that is now Cape May. It was 1609 and Captain Hudson was sailing his small yacht, the "Half Moon", when he came upon a small peninsula situated between the Atlantic Ocean and the Delaware Bay. It wasn't until 1620 that Dutch Captain Cornelius Jacobsen Mey came upon the same peninsula while exploring the Delaware River. Captain Mey named the area Cape Mey after himself; the spelling was later changed to Cape May.
Although Cape May catered to visitors since the 1600's when Native American tribes summered here, it wasn't until 1685 when a community formed. In 1688, Quakers formed the first government based on strict moral order and Quaker piety. At this time a large whaling industry was beginning and many families from New York and New England, as well as a few original Mayflower families, were migrating to the area.
When roads were laid in the late 1700's, the tourism industry of Cape May started to flourish. Two railroads, the Reading and West Jersey, provided service to Cape Island. In 1761 Cape May officially became the first seashore resort in America and was considered among the top vacation resorts in the country. Incidentally, it is said that in the 1800's the Reading & West Jersey weren't the only "railroads" in town. The Underground Railroad, used to transport slaves from Confederate Delaware to Union New Jersey, went through Cape May as well. Rumors in Cape May tell of many homes with long tunnels and secret rooms dating back to the Civil War.
By the 1800's several hundred beautiful Victorian mansions were built throughout the city, as well as numerous hotels to accommodate the masses.
Today Cape May is one of five cities in the United States that is officially designated as an Historic Landmark City. With the hundreds of Victorian homes converted to Bed and Breakfasts or year round residences, this designation requires that the city must retain all structures in their original form and must stay in the architectural guidelines of the Victorian Period.
Cape May's streets are lined with houses ornamented in gingerbread trim, painted in the Victorian style and with wide, airy porches. With an estimated 80,000 visitors per weekend in summer, Cape May NJ has remained a top New Jersey Shore Resort Town in the USA.


text:
New World Salmon Florentine
This casserole uses chunks of fresh salmon with lots of healthy omega-3 fatty acids. It also has real cheese for flavor. Don't use low-fat Swiss—it won't melt properly.
2 cups flaked cooked salmon fillet (about 12 ounces)
2 cups fresh baby spinach leaves, washed and shredded
2 cups cooked tri-color chunky pasta
2 stalks celery, sliced thin
1-1/2 cups skim milk
1 teaspoon Dijon mustard
2 ounces shredded Gruyere cheese (about 3/4 cup), divided
1/4 cup sun-dried tomato pieces, chopped (not oil-packed)
1 teaspoon fennel seeds
Preheat oven to 375 degrees. Combine salmon, spinach, celery, and pasta in an ovenproof baking dish.
Heat milk in a small sauce pan; don't let it boil. Stir in mustard and half the Gruyere until it melts. Add sun-dried tomatoes to soften and fennel seeds. Pour sauce over salmon mixture. Top with remaining Gruyere. Cover and bake at 375 degrees for 30 minutes.
Serves four
Each serving contains about 400 calories, 31 g protein, 16.5 g fat (37 percent calories from fat), 68 mg cholesterol, 29.5 g carbohydrates, 3 g fiber, and 611 mg sodium.


text:
Model No: THT Speakers
Special Price $ 25.00
E-mail us for pricing on
larger volumes
A Magnificent Promotional THT Triaxial Three Way 6 by 9 inch
High Quality Hi-Fidelity Auto Stereo Speaker System that can be installed
in your car and allow you to hear your favorite music. This is a high quality THT
Triaxial System that includes a combined separate tweeter,
midrange, and woofer speaker to compliment your auto stereo and give you the best possible
high quality Stereo sound. This pair of speakers is brand new and
easy to install as all hardware and installation manuals are
included. BRAND NEW IN ITS ORIGINAL BOX!!
How to order:
Shipping & Handling charge on this item is $15.00 per unit in the continental US. Texas residents please add 8.25% Texas
Sales Tax. Send a money order or cashier's check to:
Jack Berg Sales Company
P.O. Box 96
El Paso, Texas 79941-0096
We can ship UPS COD immediately for an additional $9.50 surcharge. We do accept
personal checks, but there is a 7 day delay in shipping to allow for clearance. If
you have any questions or to place a telephone order please call (915) 532-4519
Main Page | Electronics |
Toys | Jewelry |
Health & Beauty Aids | Ceramics
| Writing Instruments |
Vintage Clothing | Misc. |
509 South Oregon Street, El Paso, TX 79901
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 96, El Paso, TX 79941-0096
(915) 532-4519 - Fax (915)532-4517 email@example.com
Site designed by DF Services, firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Parabolic Reflector
|Parabolic Reflector Dish
Parabolic Reflector Dish
- Solar Dishes such as the one shown use a parabolic shape to focus the incoming light into a single collector.
Basic Description
The geometry of a parabola makes this shape useful for solar dishes. If the dish is facing the sun, beams of light coming from the sun are essentially parallel to each other when they hit the dish. Upon hitting the surface of the dish, the beams are reflected directly towards the focus of the parabola, where a device to absorb the sun's energy would be located.
We can see why beams of light hitting the parabola-shaped dish will reflect towards the same point. A beam of light reflects 'over' the line perpendicular to the parabola at the point of contact. In other words, the angle the light beam makes with the perpendicular when it hits the parabola is equal to the angle it makes with same perpendicular after being reflected, as shown in Figure 2.
Near the bottom of the parabola the perpendicular line is nearly vertical, meaning an incoming beam is still nearly vertical after being reflected. Being nearly vertical allows it to reach the focus above the bottom part of the parabola. Further up the parabola the perpendicular becomes more horizontal, allowing a light beam to take on the more horizontal angles needed to reach the focus.
Parabolic reflectors are really parabolas rotated about their axis of symmetry (the y axis on this page's diagrams) to form a bowl-like shape known as a paraboloid. This shape is used in many modern application because of its ability to collect incoming information efficiently. For example, TV dishes reflect incoming television signals towards a receiver centered at the focus of the dish.
Parabolic reflectors can also work in reverse: if a light emitter is placed at the focus and shined inward towards the parabola, the light will be reflected straight out of the parabola, with the beams of light traveling parallel to each other. Headlights on cars often use this effect to shine light directly forward.
A More Mathematical Explanation
- Note: understanding of this explanation requires: *Elementary Trigonometry and Calculus.
The fact that a parabolic reflector can collect light in this way can be proven. We can show that an [...]
The fact that a parabolic reflector can collect light in this way can be proven. We can show that any beam of light coming straight down into a parabola will reflect at exactly the angle needed to hit the focus, as follows:
- Step 1
- We begin with the equation of a parabola with focus at (0,p).
- Step 2
- We take the derivative with respect to x, giving the slope of the tangent at any point on the parabola:
- The slope of this tangent line is relative to the x-axis: when the slope is zero, the tangent line is parallel to the x-axis. The line normal to the parabola makes the same angle with the y-axis as the line tangent to the parabola has relative to the x-axis, as shown in Figure 4.
- Step 3
- We use this slope to find the angle between the normal and the y-axis, which is the same as the angle between the normal and an incoming beam of light.
- The desired angle can be expressed as:
- (Equation 1)
- As mentioned previously, a beam of light is reflected 'over' the normal, as shown in Figure 2. This means that the angle the beam of light takes relative to a vertical line is equal to two times the angle the normal makes with the same vertical line.
- Step 4
- We now must show that the direction the light takes after being reflected is exactly the angle needed to hit the focus.
- Notice from Figure 3 that geometrically, the angle needed to hit the focus is equal to , and satisfies the relationship
- Step 5
- We use a trigonometric identity to rewrite the equation in Step 4:
- (Equation 2)
- Step 6
- We now manipulate Equation 1's expression for to show its equivalence to Equation 2 (that is, to show the angle in Equation 1 is the same as the angle in Equation 2).
- , and
- .
- Step 7
- We combine the two expressions in Step 6.
- Which is the same as the expression in Equation 2.
- Therefore, a beam of light will hit the parabola's focus after being reflected.
Teaching Materials
- There are currently no teaching materials for this page. Add teaching materials.
Leave a message on the discussion page by clicking the 'discussion' tab at the top of this image page.


text:
|American Oystercatcher, Fort Myers Beach, Florida. Canon 1D mk IV, Sigma 300/2.8.
For about a decade, my family spent the Christmas holidays in Fort Myers Beach, Florida. We were lured here by the warm weather, inexpensive wine, great seafood and the incredible bird photography on the beach. Fort Myers Beach is one of the best places on the continent to shoot shorebirds and waders. I'd lug my big lens and tripod up and down the beach every day at dawn and dusk to shoot birds along the beach or in the tidal lagoons. Many of my best bird photos were shot here.
It has been about 5 years since I've been to Fort Myers Beach, so when I arrived here this afternoon it was complete nostalgic bliss. I took a scouting walk down the beach tonight carrying only a 300 mm lens, with no expectation to actually shoot anything. To my great amazement, I found the most cooperative American Oystercatchers I've ever seen on the beach. I ended up shooting hundreds of photos of them at point plank range with a 300 mm lens (typically I use a 500mm-800mm lens).
I'm looking forward to much more shooting along the beach and capturing a ton of photo ideas that are brewing in my brain.


text:
Washington (CNN) – House Speaker John Boehner leveled tough words at fellow Republicans Wednesday, telling conservatives who are unhappy his bill doesn't go far enough to "Get your ass in line."
Boehner's admonishment came during a closed-door meeting, during which House GOP leaders sought to rally support for their debt bill, according to two Republican sources who attended the meeting.
The Ohio Republican told members he was working hard and didn't want to turn around and not see an army behind him.
House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia also said it was time to pull together and pass the House GOP debt bill, instead of feeding a storyline that pits Republican against Republican.
But the meeting turned into exactly that-a venting session with Republicans turning on each the other-and exposing an ugly split among the rank and file.
Several members were furious when they learned that staff members for the Republican Study Committee - a group of fiscally conservative lawmakers - sent emails to outside groups encouraging them put pressure on fellow Republicans to oppose Boehner's plan. Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan, who heads the group, apologized at the start of the meeting, indicating his staff sent the emails without his knowledge, according to GOP sources. After he spoke, several members shouted that Jordan's top aide, Paul Teller, should be fired.
House GOP sources told CNN that one of the emails, sent by a junior RSC staffer, included a target list of 30 RSC members and urged outside groups to lobby against those Republicans back in their districts. In addition, Teller emailed these groups after a GOP meeting Tuesday to alert them that the House GOP plan, which Jordan had already publicly opposed, was gaining support.
One RSC member on the target list, Indiana Republican freshman Rep. Todd Young, stood up at Wednesday's meeting and asked why he was paying dues to a group that was now attacking him.
Oregon Republican Rep. Greg Walden stood up and read Teller's email out loud and asked him to explain, but according to Republicans in the meeting, he declined.
Jordan told reporters he did not know the emails were sent.
Brian Straessle, spokesman for the RSC, apologized in a statement.
"Earlier this week, an RSC staffer sent an inappropriate email to outside groups that identified members of Congress he believed were undecided on the debt reduction proposal offered by the Speaker. This action was clearly inappropriate and was not authorized by the Chairman or any other members of the staff," Straessle said.
"This has never been – and never will be – the way we do business at the RSC. We apologize to everyone affected, and we have already taken steps to ensure that it never happens again – either by this staffer or any other RSC staffer."
While the blow up over the emails highlighted the division in the GOP ranks, there were also signs that Boehner and his leadership team were gaining support for their bill.
Ohio Republican Rep. Steve Chabot had said he was leaning against it, but with the deadline closing in, and facing a Democratic Senate and White House, he told CNN Wednesday he was now inclined to support it in order to avoid a default.
One conservative freshman Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas, who noted Jordan was probably counting on him to oppose the bill, said he was leaning yes, telling reporters, "Don't let the perfect get in the way of the doable."
Republican leadership aides were scrambling Wednesday to rewrite the bill to add more spending cuts. They pledged the bill would meet the speaker's test that the spending cuts in the measure exceed the amount of the debt ceiling increase.
A Congressional Budget Office report released late Tuesday stated the bill fell short of that, but House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin walked through the numbers at the Wednesday meeting and explained leaders were tweaking the bill to make it reach that target.
Leaders are still aiming for a vote on Thursday.
Youleft off the first part of his statement- "Screw America..."


text:
After the events of Seed of Chucky, Nica, a young woman forced to a wheelchair since birth, has to regroup her sister, Barb and her brother-in-law, Ian for a funeral after the death of her mother. While dealing with Barb, Ian, along with their 5-year-old daughter, Alice; Nica receives an odd package - a creepy doll. After people start showing up dead, the fearless Nica soon suspects that the creepy doll is much more than just a doll. —Shawn Martin
Downloaded 192029 times
Oct 31, 2015 at 10:41 PM


text:
And now for something really important 🙂
The new holders of the coveted Canadian squash doubles over-60 championships are Brian Murray and Stephen McIntyre of Toronto defeating John Brazilian and Malcolm Davidson of Boston in the final, held at the Atwater Club in Montreal.
In other events, Mike Pirnak and Willy Hosey won the men's open championship and Stephanie Edmison and Stephanie Hewett won the women's open.
Figure 1. Left to right: Michael Martin, Brian Murray, Stephen McIntyre, finalists John Brazilian and Malcolm Davidson, Dennis Bishop. Martin and Bishop were tournament conveners and gracious hosts.
The US squash doubles championships are in Chicago from March 25-27 and we'll be going. I played in the US over 60s last year and lost in the semis with Victor Harding to the eventual winners. I played with Brian in the Canadians last year and lost in the final (but defeated the US champions in the semi.) While our children were growing up, I played league squash in Toronto but didn't go in many tournaments, particularly if there was travel involved. I hadn't been to a tournament in Montreal since 1986 or so and, until last year, had never traveled to a US championship.
Hosts of squash doubles tournaments usually make a great effort to be hospitable and our hosts in Montreal, especially Mike Martin and Dennis Bishop, upheld this tradition.


text:
Nationwide Inmate Records Online Check
Jail records, court & arrest records, mugshots and even judicial reports
Somers City Jail Inmate Search and Prison Information
- State
- Connecticut
- Type
- City Jail
- Location
- 451 Main Street PO Box 308, Somers, CT, 06071
- County
- Tolland County
- City
- Somers
- Postal Code
- 6071
- Phone Number
- 860-749-4955
- Official Website
- http://www.somersct.gov/restrooper.cfm
Nationwide Inmate Records Online Check
Jail records, court & arrest records, mugshots and even judicial reports
About Somers City Jail
Somers City Jail inmate search: Who's in jail, Booking Date, Race, Degree, Bond, Arrest Records, Cell Location, Release Date, Probation Sentences, Warrants, Arrests, Eye Color, Sex, Status, Bookings, Eye Color, Charges, Jail Roster, Facility, State of Charge, Mugshots.
The Somers City Jail houses guilty parties carrying out a commonplace year punishment, anyway in some cases longer. It is utilized for lodging those carrying out short punishments, probation violators, individuals sitting tight for preliminary, and those guilty parties who couldn't post bond.
Somers City Jail is connected to Somers Police Department. Many the guilty parties are sitting tight for condemning, migration, and move.
Larger part of the prisoners serving their time in this jail are occupants of Somers City and different towns in Tolland County.
In any case out of to what extent a prisoner is staying, on the off chance that they are there during dinner time, they will be nourished. Dominant part of the detainees remains from not exactly a day to a couple of days.
Inmate Search
You can discover a prisoner as of now in authority at the Somers City Jail by heading off to the Tolland County Sherriff's site. You should know their first and last name or their detainee number.
Sending a Mail/Care Package
You can send letters to a detainee to the accompanying location:
Detainee's Name and Booking Number
Somers City Jail
451 Main Street PO Box 308, Somers, CT, 06071
Detainees can't get the accompanying things through the mail:
Photos (not photocopies of photographs)
Unused envelopes
Unused composing paper
Huge cards
Melodic cards
Cards with sparkle
Cash orders
Clerk's checks
Nonetheless, you can send cards without sparkle, music, or anything dangling. You can send letters. You can likewise send books and magazines, yet they should be sent from the distributer themselves.
Sending Money
Somers City Jail doesn't acknowledge any type of cash through the mail or their window. On the off chance that you need to send cash, it must be kept into a detainee's record either on the web or via mail.
Phone calls
For telephone calls, Somers City Jail utilizes Securus Technologies. Here is the place you can set up family and companion accounts. You can place cash into the telephone framework utilizing the Touch Pay data above.
Telephone calls are constrained to 30 minutes day by day.
On the off chance that you are visiting somebody at Somers City Jail, you should call and affirm that you are on their endorsed guests list. You can call and check at 860-749-4955.
Those people younger than 18 are not allowed to visit the jail except if they are with their legitimate watchmen. No special cases.
Everybody in your gathering must carry government distinguishing proof card with you or you won't be allowed in. You can't be a criminal either.
Just a single grown-up and two kids are allowed or two grown-ups and one kid.
Refer the map below to find the driving directions.
Nearby Jail / Prison
Other Types of Correctional Facilities in Connecticut
Nationwide Inmate Records Online Check
Jail records, court & arrest records, mugshots and even judicial reports


text:
March 26, 2013 -- Supreme Court justices seemed to struggle with the notion of extending marriage rights to same-sex couples as they grilled lawyers this morning in a potentially landmark case over California's ban on gay marriages.
As the politics change by the day, the court heard a case -- Proposition 8 -- that could drastically change how states and the federal government approach one of the touchiest social issues of the past decade.
The justices today challenged lawyers on both sides on common points of contention that arise whenever gay marriage is debated.
Read more: Live Updates: Gay Marriage at the Supreme Court
All eyes were on Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose vote could be essential in the case.
At one point he talked about the children of gay couples, noting that they wanted their parents' unions to be recognized. "The voice of these children is important," Kennedy said.
But later he told the lawyer for gay couples challenging the ban that the issue was in "unchartered waters."
Kennedy also questioned whether the court should be considering Prop 8 and whether gay-marriage opponents had the legal right to defend Prop 8, after California officials declined to appeal its overturning -- raising the possibility that the Supreme Court could punt on the merits of Prop 8, declining to set a federal precedent on gay marriage in this case and deferring to a lower court's ruling to overturn California's ban.
Read more about gay marriage from ABC News
Justice Elena Kagan, President Obama's second appointee to the court, asked the lawyer defending California's gay marriage ban what harm would be done to heterosexual marriage if gay and lesbian marriages were legally recognized. He answered that same-sex marriage would do harm that is difficult now to foresee.
Justice Antonin Scalia, widely recognized as one of the court's more conservative justices, engaged in intense debate with pro-gay-marriage lawyer Ted Olson.
"When did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexuals from marriage?" Scalia asked.
Some justices questioned the main argument against gay marriage, that the government has a societal interest in traditional marriage for "responsible procreation."
Kagan asked about marriage licenses issued to heterosexual couples who are older than 55. "Not a lot of children" come out of such marriages, she said.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked about heterosexual couples locked up in prison. "No possibility of procreation there," she pointed out.
Along with another case scheduled for Wednesday, in which the court will consider a challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) ban on gay marriage, the Prop 8 case likely will lead to at least one landmark decision to be cited by advocates and opponents of same-sex marriage for decades to come.
The Supreme Court is slated to issue rulings by the end of June.
Read more: Justice Roberts' Lesbian Cousin to Attend Gay Marriage Arguments
Read more: Dissecting President Obama's 'Evolution' on Gay Marriage
On behalf of a California couple, Prop 8 is being challenge by the unlikely bipartisan duo of Olson and David Boies, who argued before the court on opposite sides of the 2000 case over Florida's vote recount in the presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. Boies served as the top lawyer for Gore's campaign; Olson, for Bush's.
The pair was brought together by gay-rights advocates seeking to overturn California's ban, which took the gay activist community by surprise when it passed in 2008. Californians voted 52 percent to 48 percent in favor of banning gay marriage under their state constitution in 2008 on the same day they voted Barack Obama into the White House by a margin of 61 percent to 37 percent for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
Read more: 'Different Instead of Somebody Being Wrong': Gay Marriage Gains Support in ABC/Post Poll
Charles J. Cooper, representing a group called Protectmarriage.com, argued in favor of the ban.
Supporters of Prop 8 have contended that states should be able to ban gay marriage because society has an interest in heterosexual marriage as a means of procreation.
"The definition of marriage has always been understood to be the virtually exclusive province of the states, which, subject only to clear constitutional constraints, have absolute right to prescribe the conditions upon which the marriage relation between their citizens shall be created," Cooper has said.
Read more: On Gay Marriage, Public Leads Elected Leaders
Boies and Olson, meanwhile, contend that Prop 8 singles out gay couples unfairly.
"The unmistakable purpose and effect of Proposition 8," they have written, "is to stigmatize gay men and lesbians -- and them alone -- and enshrine in California's Constitution that they are unequal to everyone else, that their committed relationships are ineligible for the designation 'marriage' and that they are unworthy of that most important relation in life."
Tuesday morning, activists on both sides had gathered outside the court.
Sporting gloves and puffy jackets, pro-gay-marriage activists displayed signs saying, "Marriage is a human right not a heterosexual privilege" and "the nation is ready for marriage equality."
Joey Williamson had been outside the court for 49 hours and had at least another 24 to go, having traveled from New York City waiting to hear the arguments against the Defense of Marriage Act tomorrow.
"Obviously these are hugely historic cases," Williamson says. He saw the state Supreme Court case back home in New York so tomorrow will wrap off a long saga for him. "We thought if we could see this case all the way to the end it would be super interesting."
Michael Krzywols traveled from Rhode Island with the Faith Alliance to Preserve the Sanctity of Marriage because he thinks it's important to stand up for the values he grew up with. He said marriage is an issue that has folks riled up in his state.
"A lot of people that were for a man and a woman are changing their positions al l of a sudden and just as of yesterday a lot of the mayors are getting involved," Krzywols told ABC Tuesday.
The National Organization for Marriage organized a march outside the Supreme Court that evened out the crowd, as gay-marriage supporters had outnumbered opponents earlier Tuesday morning.
The arguments on Prop 8 came after a week and a half of snowballing support for gay marriage by public figures.
Earlier this month, Ohio Republican Sen. Rob Portman became only the second sitting GOP senator ever to endorse gay marriage, citing his gay son as a reason for his changed opinion.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton endorsed gay marriage last week. This week, Democratic Sens. Claire McCaskill, Mo., and Mark Warner, Va., publicly acknowledged their support for allowing gay couples to marry.
Obama later endorsed gay marriage in a 2012 interview with ABC News' Robin Roberts.
The Prop 8 and DOMA cases come before the court as popular opinion has swung in favor of allowing gay marriage.
A recent ABC News/Washington Post poll showed massive gains for gay marriage in the last decade. In the March 7-10 survey, 58 percent of respondents said they think gay marriage should be legal, while 36 percent opposed it - a near inversion of the widespread opposition to gay marriage shown in ABC/Post polling from 2003.


text:
Contact Us
Maybe a Cupcake will help?
Smallcakes Evans
Use Discount Code DOZENPRICE when ordering 12 or more cupcakes
Order Now
About Us
— Lori Phillips, owner
Lori Phillips, a long time Cobb county resident, has wanted to open her own business for as long as she can remember. As the CFO of one of the Southeast's largest CPA firms, Lori had achieved success in her field and enjoyed her job but something was missing. Often Lori had considered the idea of opening a cupcakery, a bakery featuring delicious gourmet cupcakes. Baking with her mother and grandmother are dear memories of Lori's childhood and she longed to share those times with her community. Should she leave the security of a steady paycheck and a promising career in accounting? Trade the corporate world of suits and calculators for an apron and stand mixer? As Lori was researching and considering her options, she stumbled upon a cupcake franchise, Smallcakes™. Lori discovered that the wildly popular Smallcakes was founded by Jeff Martin in Kansas City and bakes and frosts 15 signature flavors every morning. Smallcakes also features seasonal and special flavors created personally by Jeff. After appearances on the Food Networks "Cupcake Wars" seasons one and two as well as on the hit daytime talk show "The View," Smallcakes became well known and now boasts 13 locations in eight states with more to come this year! Smallcakes believes in its slogan of "Maybe a Cupcake Will Help?" and regularly rewards customers through Facebook specials or giveaways. After much research and delicious taste testing, Lori then decided that she was done with accounting. After putting together a financial plan, finding a location and enlisting the help of friends and family, Smallcakes Cupcakery Marietta/West Cobb began to take shape. Lori left her job and has devoted her efforts full-time to making her dream come true. As she says, "I now feel like I have found my purpose in life. I can provide positive experiences every day for my guests, my employees and the West Cobb community. When you think of cupcakes, I want you to think of Smallcakes!" Lori grew up in Smyrna and now resides in West Cobb with her husband, Mitch, and two kids, Abby and Austin. When Lori is not behind the counter, you may see her out in the West Cobb community. She loves playing ALTA tennis, singing at Burnt Hickory Baptist Church, and cheering on her kids at Oregon Park and Lost Mountain Park. Lori invites everyone to come see for themselves why she says Smallcakes are "the best cupcakes I have ever tasted!" Lori's favorite cupcake is Smallcakes Red Velvet! Marietta/West Cobb features an ever changing menu of delicious gourmet cupcakes accompanied by satisfying Smallcakes branded coffee, cupcake milkshakes, hot chocolate, and other refreshing drink selections. The warm inviting cupcakery provides complimentary wifi and plenty of seating for guests to stay and visit with Lori and the staff. A children's area is also featured and cupcake birthday parties may be booked anytime! Consider these amazing cupcakes for your next office or school function too
Visit Us
Our address
4460 Washington Road Suite 16 Evans, GA 30809
Get directions
Open hours
Mon - Thur 10:00 AM — 8:00 PM Fri - Sat 10:00 AM - 9:00 PM Sun 12:00 PM - 5:00 PM
Contact info


text:
Please wait a moment…
Please provide your email address. We will send you an email with a link to create a new password. Follow the link to create a new password. If you have any problems or need help, please contact our Customer Service 020 692771.
Your email is incorrect. Did you already register?
If a customer account exists with the address you gave us, you will receive a link to change your password by email.


text:
Report: Bergdahl letters explain why he walked away
Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl wrote letters to his family while being held by a Taliban-aligned group in which he urged that no one judge him too quickly for his disappearance before his capture, The Daily Beastreported Thursday.
Bergdahl, who was taken prisoner in 2009 soon after he apparently walked away from his post in Afghanistan, is scheduled to returnto the U.S. overnight Thursday. He has been kept at an Army hospital in Germany since the deal that won his release May 31.
The Daily Beast says the letters were delivered to Bergdahl's family through the International Red Cross. The news and opinion website said it obtained copies of the letters from sources in contact with the Taliban — and that Western officials authenticated the letters.
"Leadership was lacking, if not non-existent" at the Afghanistan post where he was assigned, Bergdahl says in a letter dated March 23, 2013. "The conditions were bad and looked to be getting worse for the men that where actuly (sic) the ones risking thier (sic) lives from attack."
He urged his family and the U.S. government to wait for all the evidence before judging him.
"The cercomstance (sic) showed signs of going from bad into a nightmare for the men in the field," he wrote. "Unexeptable (sic) conditions for the men working and risking life every moment outside the wire."
The Daily Beast said it also obtained copies of letters Bergdahl's parents, Robert and Jani Bergdahl, sent to their son's captors through religious leaders in Pakistan. Sources told the website the Bergdahls were coached in how to communicate in the letters, with a premium put on showing respect for local customs.
"Of course, we worry about his health and well being," they wrote in a November 2012 letter. "It has been almost 4 years since we embraced him. Is it possible to see him once again on video?"
The family received another video from them at the end of 2013.
Bergdahl, 28, was held captive by the Taliban-aligned Haqqani network. Five Taliban leaders held at the Guantanamo Bay military prison were freed in the deal to release him, and the Obama administration has faced criticism for arranging the swap.
Reports from his fellow soldiers and others that Bergdahl had become disillusioned by the war and walked away from his post before his capture added to the controversy.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, have argued that the men who were released are terrorists and a threat to Americans. They added that the deal could set a bad precedent and encourage enemies of the U.S. to kidnap Americans.
The Obama administration has dismissed the criticism, saying there was concern for Bergdahl's declining health. And POW swaps are standard practice as wars wind down, Obama has said.


text:
Because of its geographical position, Greece was a crossroad of civilisations that had left their traces everywhere: the architecture of the museums and settlements, miniature art, daily life, nutritional customs and in all forms of popular art in the various regions of the country. The visitor can come into contact with this multihued and impressive mosaic through trips into historical, cultural, artistic and folkloric traditions.
Greece as a World Heritage site
According the UNESCO's official website:
"The monuments included on the World Heritage List are selected and approved on the basis of their value as the best examples of human creative genius. They exhibit an important interchange of human values and bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or has disappeared. They are directly linked to important stages in human history and for this reason they have outstanding universal significance and are a part of mankind's common heritage".
Greece is preferentially included on the list of World Heritage Monuments, satisfying all the institution's significant and strict criteria.
Seventeen 'precious stones'
The first monument in Greece to be included on UNESCO's list was the Temple of Apollo Epicurius in 1986. Since then number of entries on the list has dramatically increased. Today it includes seventeen monuments throughout the country. More specifically the monuments are as follows:
Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae (1986)
Acropolis archaeological site, Athens (1987)
Archaeological site of Delphi (1987)
Sanctuary of Asklepios, Epidaurus (1988)
Mount Athos (1988)
Medieval city of Rhodes (1988)
Meteora (1988)
Paleochristian and Byzantine monuments of Thessaloniki (1988)
Archaeological site of Mystras (1989)
Archaeological site of Olympia (1989)
Archaeological site of Delos (1990)
Monasteries of Daphni, Hosios Loukas and Nea Moni of Chios (1990)
Archaeological site of Heraion of Samos (1992)
Archaeological site of Aigai (Vergina) (1996)
Archaeological sites of Mycenae and Tiryns (1999)
Historic centre (Chora), Monastery of Saint John Theologos and the cave of the Apocalypse in Patmos (1999)
Old Town of Corfu (2007)
The inclusion of a monument on the list of World Heritage Monuments implies that the international community constantly takes care of their maintenance and promotion. Greece, a country that is a cradle of culture, makes sure of promoting this great wealth. Travellers can enjoy these splendid monuments and reflect on the unique human genius that was able to make such measures of progress.
For more information about the World Heritage Sites in Greece you may visit the Official Website of the Hellenic National Commission for UNESCO.


text:
It's not every day you get access to a plant in China that makes something inside your computer or game console or car. A few weeks back we visited Seagate's Wuxi plant which makes more than a million hard drives every week. Employs more than 10,000 people.
Seagate has been my partner for several years now and sponsors my show, which is why I was the first American blogger to get access to this plant. Obviously I appreciate everything Seagate does for me and social media (they are playing around with FriendFeed and Facebook, their FriendFeed room is here).
This is also my 100th video. Thanks to Rocky Barbanica for his role in producing and editing these videos. Greatly appreciate that too.
Seagate is a dream client. They rarely ask me to do anything. They've never forced me to put interruptive advertising up or asked for anything that was anti community or viewer. That's HUGE in this world and I hope that they continue to drive down the price of storage the way they have for about 30 years.
Thanks and hope you enjoy getting this look inside the factory in Wuxi, China.


text:
In the Android Developer Fundamentals course, you learn basic Android programming concepts and build a variety of apps, using the Java programming language. You start with Hello World and work your way up to apps that schedule jobs, update settings, and use Android Architecture Components.
About the course
The Android Developer Fundamentals course was created by the Google Developers Training team. To take the course, you must have experience with the Java programming language.
The course materials include:
- Codelabs with suggested homework assignments: Codelabs for Android Developer Fundamentals
- Concept reference chapters: Android Developer Fundamentals — Concepts
- Slide decks
- Source code in GitHub for starter apps and solution code for apps that you create in the codelabs
Each lesson contains a slide deck, a concepts chapter, and in most cases, one or more codelabs. As you work through the codelabs, you create apps as a way to practice and perfect the skills you're learning. Some lessons are purely conceptual and don't have codelabs.
The materials are freely available online for use by instructors, or for self-study by anyone who knows the Java programming language.
What does the course cover?
The course includes four teaching units, each of which includes several lessons:
- Unit 1: Get started
- Unit 2: User experience
- Unit 3: Working in the background
- Unit 4: Saving user data
Unit 1: Get started
This unit covers installing Android Studio, understanding project structure, building your first app, creating activities, testing your apps, and using the Android Support Library.
First, you deploy a simple Hello World app. You go on to create an app with a simple activity, and then you create a multi-screen app that passes data between activities. You also learn how to use the Android Support Library to provide backward-compatibility with earlier versions of the Android system for your app.
Unit 2: User experience
This unit covers how to get input from the user, implement navigation strategies, use themes and styles, test your user interface, and follow Material Design principles.
You create apps that use menus and tabs for navigation, and input controls such as spinners and picker dialogs to get information from the user. You learn how to extract resources to create a style from an instance of a user interface element. You write an app that displays a word list in a recycler view (and you learn why it's better to use a recycler view than a plain scrolling list).
You also build a score-keeping app to explore Material Design guidelines.
Unit 3: Working in the background
This unit covers how to do background work, how to schedule tasks, and how to trigger events. It covers the performance implications of executing work in the background, as well as best practices for reducing battery drain. You learn how Android determines which apps to keep running and which to stop when resources run low.
You write an app that connects to the Internet in a background thread to find the author of any book. You also build apps that send notifications and schedule tasks, and you learn how to implement scheduling functionality for apps that run on earlier versions of Android.
Unit 4: Saving user data
This unit discusses how to store user data. You learn how to use shared preferences to save simple key value pairs, then you learn how to use the Room database to save, retrieve, and update user data. This unit also introduces you to the Android Architecture Components, which represent best practices for structuring your app.
Latest news
Version 2 of Android Developer Fundamentals course available
The Android Developer Fundamentals course was updated in September 2018. For details, see the release notes.
Phone and SMS course available
Android Apps – Phone Calls and SMS, an optional add-on to the Android Developer Fundamentals course, is available as of March 2017.
Videos for Android Developer Fundamentals
Videos of lectures are available on YouTube as of January 2017.


text:
With the current age of technological advancement, many people both young and old find themselves looking for the best health and wellness products available online.
However, due to lack of first hand information, a large percentage of them will depend on existing health and wellness product reviews to choose which product to choose.
The importance of health and wellness is reflected by the fact that diets, weight loss programs, exercise programs and equipment, fitness facilities, spas, nutritional supplements and activity/leisure groups of all sorts are now commonplace in our everyday lives.
There are quite a number of benefits why our product reviews will help you to:
• Choose the most appropriate health and wellness product to use
Due to individual differences both physically and biologically, finding a universal product that serves all people with the same effectiveness can be very hard. It is therefore very important for the youths that we have product reviews to help them know which product is the most appropriate for them. It will also help them to know which product will serve the intended purpose. Without such reviews, they would literally find themselves using the wrong products.
• Make sound financial plans
Health and wellness supplement reviews also helps you to plan financially on how to acquire these beneficial products. It is important because they can be able to project the amount of expenditure they will spend to acquire these products.
• Know where to get the product
These reviews usually talk about places where these products are sold or even talking about the manufacturers where you can be able to get the products. With this kind of information, one can easily access whenever he/she requires it instead of going on a window-shopping looking for that one particular product.
• Know how the product is used
Usage and dosage of a product are very vital. It is inevitable for whoever uses any health and wellness product to fail to know how the product they are using is supposed to be used, dosage prescriptions as well as time of the time of the day to take the medication. Failure to identify such vital information can be very detrimental in the end.
• Know which product is the best in the market
Health and wellness product reviews will also enable the young adults to identify which products are the best in the market. Many products that serve the same purpose exist but their efficiency differs. Some are more efficient than the others are. As a result, the availability of health product reviews is of great significance to them.
Read our Soursop review
Learn more about Graviola


text:
Apple iOS users do not need to envy their Android 4.1/4.2 Jelly Bean counterparts anymore as Google Now is available on the iPad and iPhone. All you need to do is to head to App Store and update the Google Search app.
Instead of swiping up or long-pressing a button on Android devices, Google Now can be accessed on the iOS device by opening the Google Search app and swiping up to reveal the cards. As expected, the types of Google Now cards available on iOS are lesser than Android. 22 of the 29 cards available on Android will be making their way to iOS, some of which are:
- Weather
- Traffic
- Public Transport
- Flight Status
- Sports
- Calendar
- Translate
- Currency Conversion
- Time at Home
Another limitation of Google Now on iOS is its inability to do the extent of background sync that it can do on Android. It will support iOS background location feature so that the time taken to pin-point your location upon opening the Search app will be minimized. High priority Google Now alerts will not be integrated with iOS's notification system.


text:
1. Fear of Kissing
Look, I know you're trying to keep it casual and everything, but unless money changed hands, kissing is part of sex.
Hey! Congratulations on being a porn star, but don't be afraid of doing it regular, either. Jumping right into a weird position makes it seem like you could be having sex with just anybody. You've got to actually look at the person you're schtupping sometimes and figure out what the hell you're doing before you get into acrobatics.
3. Fear of Other Positions
On the other hand, if the way grandma and grandpa used to do it is your entire repertoire, it's going to get old fast.
4. Saying the Wrong Name
This actually, really does happen. If you're not 100% sure, DON'T SAY ANYTHING.
5. No "O" Regard
Unless one of you explicitly waives the right, it should be assumed that the sex isn't over until both of you have achieved orgasm. If one of you has to do it yourself in order to make it happen, that's fine, but the other person should at the very least stay awake until "the big moment."
6. Not Going Down
In this day and age? Seriously? You don't have to do it all the time, they don't have to orgasm from oral alone, but you've at least got to put a little time in down there. It's only polite.
7. Avoiding the Facts
Look, if you're going through a patch of lousy sex with someone, you need to fix it. It's a sensitive topic and you always want to be careful not to blame your partner, but you need to talk about it and figure out what to do differently if you can't figure it out in the sack. Extended periods of unaddressed terrible sex breed bitterness.
8. Being a Jackrabbit
This one's mostly just for the dudes: Take it easy, bro. Building up to some fast, hard, world-rocking sex is great, but if that's all you got? You really need to change up your rhythm every once in awhile, so you can figure out what the other person in bed with you likes.
9. Just Lying There
And to the ladies: My god! Move your hips, touch their butt, grab their face between your hands, whisper dirty things in their ear, do something.
10. Pulling Some Kinky, Taboo Sh*t Without Talking About It First
Even the most open-minded lover appreciates some kind of a heads up. Seriously, though, going to a dark place, mid sex, when you don't know for sure that your partner's into that? Really uncool.
11. Not Listening
It's a given that, if someone actually tells you they don't like something, you stop doing that thing. It's also important to pay attention to other signals, too, though. No everyone is great at just telling you what's okay and what's not okay. I'm not suggesting that you stop and ask someone "What's wrong?" every 30 seconds, but if you notice that they have a faraway look in their eye, yeah, stop and ask.
*--Written by Scott Alden for HowAboutWe.com
*Ladies, what's the worst thing a man can do in bed?
More from HowAboutWe:
The 10 Types of Non-Casual Sex
The 5 Things To Keep In Mind When Having Sex With Someone New
The Top 10 Traits That Attract Men
More Ways to Get Glamour:
NEW! Now You Can Read Glamour on Flipboard!
Visit ShopGlamour.com for cute stuff starting at just $10!
Download Glamour Magazine for your iPad--print subscribers, it's now part of your subscription plan!
Enter the latest Glamour sweepstakes!