text:
Ukraine may have to go nuclear, says Kiev lawmaker
KIEV, Ukraine — Ukraine may have to arm itself with nuclear weapons if the United States and other world powers refuse to enforce a security pact that obligates them to reverse the Moscow-backed takeover of Crimea, a member of the Ukraine parliament told USA TODAY.
The United States, Great Britain and Russia agreed in a pact "to assure Ukraine's territorial integrity" in return for Ukraine giving up a nuclear arsenal it inherited from the Soviet Union after declaring independence in 1991, said Pavlo Rizanenko, a member of the Ukrainian parliament.
"We gave up nuclear weapons because of this agreement," said Rizanenko, a member of the Udar Party headed by Vitali Klitschko, a candidate for president. "Now there's a strong sentiment in Ukraine that we made a big mistake."
His statements come as Russia raised the possibility it may send its troops beyond the Crimean peninsula on the Black Sea into the eastern half of Ukraine.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said lawlessness "now rules in eastern regions of Ukraine as a result of the actions of fighters of the so-called 'right sector' with the full connivance" of Ukraine's authorities.
Rizanenko and others in Ukraine say the pact it made with the United States under President Bill Clinton was supposed to prevent such Russian invasions.
The pact was made after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991 and became Russia, leaving the newly independent nation of Ukraine as the world's third largest nuclear weapons power.
The communist dictatorship that was the Soviet Union had based nuclear missiles in republics it held captive along its border with Europe, and Ukraine had thousands. World powers urged Ukraine to give up the arsenal but its leaders balked, expressing fear they needed the weapons to deter Russia from trying to reverse Ukraine's independence.
To reassure the Ukrainians, the United States and leaders of the United Kingdom and Russia signed in 1994 the "Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances" in which the signatories promised that none of them would threaten or use force to alter the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.
They specifically pledged not to militarily occupy Ukraine. Although the pact was made binding according to international law, it said nothing that requires a nation to act against another that invades Ukraine.
The memorandum requires only that the signatories would "consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments." Ukraine gave up thousands of nuclear warheads in return for the promise.
There is little doubt that Russia has in fact placed its military forces in Ukraine's province of Crimea. Russia's foreign minister has said its troops are there to protect Russian lives and interests.
And Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the commitments in the agreement are not relevant to Crimea because a "coup" in Kiev has created "a new state with which we have signed no binding agreements."
The U.S. and U.K. have said that the agreement remains binding and that they expect it to be treated "with utmost seriousness, and expect Russia to, as well."
President Obama has talked to Putin over the phone and said there is no danger to Russians in Ukraine and that they should agree to let international forces enter Crimea so differences can be resolved peacefully, according to the White House.
But Putin insisted to Obama that ethnic Russians in Crimea needed protection and reiterated that the government in Kiev is illegal because the parliament ousted pro-Moscow President Viktor Yanukovych.
"Everyone had this sentiment that for good or bad the United States would be the world police" and make sure that international order is maintained, Rizanenko said of the Budapest pact.
"Now that function is being abandoned by President Obama and because of that Russia invaded Crimea," he said.
"In the future, no matter how the situation is resolved in Crimea, we need a much stronger Ukraine," he said. "If you have nuclear weapons people don't invade you."
The White House and U.S. State Department did not respond to e-mails requesting comment.
Rizanenko spoke a day after returning from a visit to the Crimea, where armed Crimeans under orders from Russian commanders blocked him from visiting a Ukrainian border post, he said.
Russian military units have ringed Crimea's borders to block the Ukrainian military from exerting control on the territory, and Ukraine's army cannot defeat Russia's, he said.
Obama had warned Putin of "costs" should he persist in Crimea but the main action against Moscow so far has been a ban on travel to the United States of unnamed persons. Europe and the United States said they are considering economic sanctions against Russia but none have been imposed.
Meanwhile, "all the time Russia is moving more and more troops into Crimea," Rizanenko said. "Only force will influence (Putin's) decision."


text:
Please choose a language:
Webguide RUSSIA (PDF, 0.72 MB)
Webguide CHINA (PDF, 5.94 MB)
Dear User,
Your Internet browser version is not supported any more by Microsoft and no longer receives security updates. This also means that it cannot use the modern web technologies required for the Vienna Airport Internet page that you have consulted.
If you wish to display this page correctly and to use all the features on it you will need to change to a newer version of your Internet browser.
If you are using Internet Explorer 10 or higher and receive that message, please deactivate the compatibility mode for our site.
Yours sincerely,
Vienna International Airport

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Welcome to Mazur's Total Automotive, your home for exceptional auto care and the go-to destination for all of your Michigan auto repair needs! From oil change to brake repair to factory scheduled maintenance, you can trust our friendly team of automotive professionals to provide the Howell auto repair, RV repair and fleet services you deserve. We call it the "Total Difference."
What makes Mazur's Total Automotive different? It's our industry-leading 3 years / 36,000 miles warranty – the best warranty in Howell, Pinckney, and South Lyon MI. It's our dedication to providing Michigan auto repair that's convenient, reliable, and a cost-effective alternative to dealership services. It's our small town, family-owned and operated business ethics – one that guides us to deal fairly, to build relationships, and to look out for our customers' best interests. At Mazur's Total Automotive, we treat you like a neighbor – because you are!
At Mazur's Total Automotive, we specialize in helping people save money on the cost of vehicle ownership. In fact, we're passionate about keeping drivers in their cars for 250,000 miles or more. We work with our customers to break the car payment cycle – to help you stay in your current vehicle – by performing regular maintenance so that your vehicle can reliably make it to that 250,000 mile goal! Rely on us for complete auto repair and maintenance for vehicles of all makes and models. In addition to our quality auto repair and maintenance services, we also provide fleet services and RV repair – making us your true one-stop shop.
You can feel confident placing Total Trust in Mazur's Total Automotive – your premier destination for auto repair in Howell, Pinckney, and South Lyon, MI. We're an Authorized BG Service Center and an AAA Approved Auto Repair Facility. For oil changes, tire service, brake repair or factory scheduled maintenance, let Mazur's Total Automotive serve all of your Michigan auto repair needs. Give us a call or easily schedule an appointment online today.


text:
The City of Fridley HRA offers a great commercial/industrial loan, administered by the Central Minnesota Development Company (CMDC), which is authorized to provide Small Business Administration loans throughout Minnesota as well as other loan products.
These loans are designed to leverage other private financing.
Projects must be a for-profit business and located in a commercial or industrially zoned area. Loan proceeds can be used for fixed assets including land, building, machinery, and equipment (no working capital).
Minimum = $50,000Maximum = $150,000*Certain exceptions apply.
At least 55% of project financing must come from a private lender or private equity.
Determined by market conditions at loan closing.
Maximum of 10 years for machinery and equipment;Maximum of 15 years for real estate.


text:
Study is first to examine pollution sources between urban and rural air in the Midwest
With warmer weather, it's time to get outdoors. And now you can breathe easy about it: A new study from the University of Iowa reports Iowa's air quality falls within government guidelines for cleanliness.
The UI researchers analyzed air quality and pollution data compiled by state and county agencies over nearly three years at five sites spread statewide—urban areas Cedar Rapids, Davenport and Des Moines and rural locations in Montgomery county in southwest Iowa and Van Buren county in the southeast. The result: The air, as measured by a class of fine particulate pollutants at those locations and based on an annual average, fell within federal cleanliness guidelines.
The study also is the first to examine differences in air quality and pollution sources between urban and rural areas in the Midwest. This is an important distinction, because a higher percentage of the population in the Midwest lives in rural areas, when compared with other regions in the U.S., the researchers note. In Iowa, 44 percent of residents live in the country.
"In general, our air in Iowa is pretty good," says Betsy Stone, assistant professor in chemistry at the UI and lead author of the study, published in the Royal Society of Chemistry journal Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts.
The researchers analyzed data gathered from April 2009 to December 2012 from monitors run by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and the health departments in Linn and Polk counties. Using that information, the researchers found that fine particle levels during that time span at the urban and rural locations were below the newest yearly-average National Ambient Air Quality Standards, set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Stone and Shuvashish Kundu, a former post-doctoral researcher at the UI now at Hokkaido University in Japan and the paper's first author, looked at particulates with an airborne diameter of roughly 2.5 microns. These particles come from various sources, ranging from campfires and leaf burning, to vehicle exhaust and power-plant emissions. No matter the source, they pose a health threat to people, because they are small enough to bypass the respiratory system's natural defenses and get lodged in the deepest recesses of the lungs.
"Respirable particles are a danger to human health, and acute exposure have been linked to respiratory illness and even death," Stone notes.
The EPA regulates the particulates, known as PM2.5. The agency also regulates coarser particles, those with an airborne diameter of roughly 10 microns, which were not part of this study. In 2012, the EPA lowered the primary standard for the annual average concentration of PM2.5 particulates considered safe, as more information became known about their prevalence and danger to human health.
In general, the UI researchers found that the concentration of PM2.5 particulates was higher at the urban monitoring sites than the rural locations. This was true especially for particles associated with exhaust from gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles. Diesel combustion, in particular, was 230 percent higher in urban areas than rural, the study found.
The rural sites had slightly higher concentrations of secondary nitrates—which form by chemical reactions in the atmosphere and are most prevalent in wintertime—according to the data.
Another particulate, secondary sulfates (formed in the atmosphere from emissions, such as those from coal-fired power plants), had the highest concentration (between 30 and 44 percent) of all pollutants at urban and rural sites, with readings being mostly uniform across locations.
"In general, we see most (urban and rural monitoring) sites have comparable levels of sulfates," notes Stone, a native Iowan. "That suggests it's a regional phenomenon affecting all of Iowa."
Other pollution impacts, such as particulates from cars and diesel vehicles, were more local, which is what the researchers expected.
Of the monitoring sites, Davenport had the highest PM2.5 concentration—although within federal air-quality standards—with the highest iron, zinc, and lead concentrations, the data showed. The cause appears to be attributable mostly to localized industrial activity and could also be accentuated by vehicular exhaust and diesel-powered barge traffic on the Mississippi River, the researchers say.
While Iowa's air is generally clean, the state could use the study's findings to make it even healthier. "I would say this tells us quite a lot about the sources of air pollution," Stone says. "Yet, I don't want to send the message that we shouldn't be concerned about air quality in Iowa. Even low levels of pollutants can have negative health impacts."
Provided by University of Iowa


text:
Federal authorities have asked an appeals court to reject Arizona's bid to overturn a ruling that bars enforcement of a minor section of the state's 2010 immigration law prohibiting the harboring of illegal immigrants.
The U.S. Justice Department told the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a Dec. 27 filing that Arizona's harboring ban is trumped by the federal government's broad immigration powers and that federal law already prohibits people from harboring illegal immigrants within the United States.
"It is the national government that has ultimate authority to regulate the treatment of aliens while on American soil because it is the nation as a whole, and not any single state, that must respond to the international consequences of such treatment," Justice Department lawyers said in a friend-of-the-court brief.
The federal government, which filed a lawsuit in 2010 challenging the law, filed the brief as part of a separate challenge mounted by a coalition of civil rights groups.
The harboring ban was in effect from late July 2010 until U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton blocked its enforcement on Sept. 5 as part of civil rights coalition's challenge. Two weeks before shelving the ban, Bolton said she knew of no arrests that were made under the provision.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the measure known as SB1070 into law and serves as the statute's chief defender, has asked the appeals court to reverse Bolton's ruling. Her office did not respond to requests for comment this week.
Brewer's lawyers have told the appeals court that the harboring ban was passed to confront crime in Arizona, doesn't conflict with federal policies and that the civil rights coalition hasn't shown it has legal standing to challenge the ban.
The harboring prohibition has been overshadowed by other parts of the law, including a requirement that went into effect on Sept. 18 that officers, while enforcing other laws, question the immigration status of those suspected of being in the country illegally.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the questioning requirement earlier this year but also struck down other sections of the law, such as a requirement that immigrants obtain or carry immigration registration papers. The nation's highest court didn't consider the harboring ban.


text:
Jean "Papa" Galmot was born in Monpazier, France in June 1879 and died in Cayenne, French Guiana, August 1928.
Galmot found here
He managed a gold mine owned by his stepfather in the forest of Guiana, making a fortune while striving to improve the lives of its workers and employees. He relieved their poverty by paying them decently, applying labor legislation and creating local scholarships for the poor.
rocket launch in French Guiana found here
Galmot was a pioneer in many areas; an idealist, poet and writer of value. But he was poisoned and died, aged just 49, while working against injustice and for the rights of the citizens of Guiana. He then became the object of a cult. Spontaneously, hearing of his death, the people rose up and a riot broke out in Cayenne.
people of French Guiana found here
Janet Flanner reported on the trial of these rioters
"Indeed, the prisoners' very names have enchanted the citizens of France. Buckaroos with gentle voices and criminal records are called Mith, Parnasse, Pilgrim, Avril, Mars and even Time. A woman who is said to have aided them in casting stones is a Mlle. Radical, possessor of four children and three professions, only one of which, prostitution, could be acknowledged. The giant Iquy, a deaf fisherman, was Galmot's mameluke.
image from Mameluke Training Manual found here
An octogenarian named Moustapha is accused of having beaten men to death with his umbrella on the big day. When at home he lives in an inn called The Thirty Knife Cuts. None of the prisoners speaks French grammatically, all refuse to have interpreters, all mix their genders, lie magnificently, are affectionate, polite, and as a means of showing their admiration, call the lawyers and the judge "Papa".
brass knuckle umbrella found here
Dying, some of them, from tuberculosis contracted in the cold prison where they have waited two years for trial, the accused, attired in evening clothes, green mittens and varnished boots, probably await either the guillotine or Devil's Island. The giant Iquy wears a sweater embroidered with his motto: "Life is Lovely."
man in embroidered clothing found here
If the evidence is long, the prisoners remove their boots. Those beheaded would remain in France. Those sentenced to hard labour for life would merely, ironically enough, go back home to Guiana. One can only regret that Conrad died too early to have written of their hearts of darkness."
image found here


text:
49 S.Ct. 383
73 L.Ed. 843
ALABAMA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION et al.
No. 568.
Argued April 24 and 25, 1929.
Decided May 20, 1929.
Mr. Forney Johnston, of Birmingham, Ala., for appellant.
Mr. J. Q. Smith, of Birmingham, Ala., for appellees.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS delivered the opinion of the Court.
Section 9713 of the Code of Alabama (1923) prohibits a railroad from abandoning 'any portion of its service to the public * * * unless and until there shall first have been obtained from the (Public Service) Commission a permit allowing such abandonment.' Very severe penalties, including punishment of officers, agents and employees, are prescribed in case the abandonment is willful. Sections 9730, 9731, 5350, 5399. Without obtaining such permission or applying therefor, the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway discontinued two interstate trains by means of which it had long furnished intrastate service between several cities and towns in Alabama. Then it brought, in the federal court for the middle district of that state, this suit against the commission, the Attorney General and other officials, to enjoin the commencement of proceedings to enforce the penalties prescribed. An application for an interlocutory injunction, heard before three judges under section 266, Judicial Code (28 USCA § 380), was denied (D. C.) 27 F.(2d) 893. A restraining order, issued upon the filing of the bill, was continued in force pending the determination of this appeal.
The bill alleges that the operation of the interstate trains by which the intrastate service had long been furnished had involved the carrier in losses; that the service still furnished by other trains is adequate to supply the reasonable needs of the communities; that, upon learning of the discontinuance of the service, the commission demanded that it be restored, without first hearing the carrier; that, if section 9713, Code Ala. 1923, is construed as requiring the carrier to obtain the commission's permission before discontinuing intrastate service rendered by means of an interstate train, or as prohibiting such discontinuance although an unreasonable burden is thereby imposed upon the carrier, the statute violates the Commerce Clause of the Federal Constitution (article 1, § 8, cl. 3); that, if construed as requiring, without a prior hearing, reinstatement of the service so discontinued, it violates also the due process clause; and that the matter in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional amount. The prayers are for an injunction against enforcing any penalty for discontinuance of the service or for failure to reinstate the same; and for a declaration that the statute, if construed as stated, is void under the Federal Constitution. The answer denies many of the allegations of the bill.
The railway contends that it had no way of testing the constitutionality of the statute, otherwise than by this suit. It urges that, if it had applied to the commission for permission to discontinue the service, it would have thereby recognized its jurisdiction; and that, since the commission did not before directing reinstatement of the service issue any order to the carrier to appear, there was no action by the commission which could form the basis for a review in courts of the state. We have no occasion to consider the issues of fact or to determine whether the Alabama statute if construed as suggested is obnoxious to the Federal Constitution. Upon facts admitted it is clear that the carrier should not have discontinued the intrastate service without first applying to the commission for permission. No constitutional right could have been prejudiced by so doing. No emergency existed requiring immediate action. And no serious financial loss would have been incurred by the slight delay involved. Western & Atlantic R. R. v. Georgia Public Service Commission, 267 U. S. 493, 496, 45 S. Ct. 409, 69 L. Ed. 753; Lawrence v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 274 U. S. 588, 595, 47 S. Ct. 720, 71 L. Ed. 1219.
The past failure of the railway to apply for leave to discontinue the service does not, however, justify exposing it, and its officers and employe s, to the severe penalties prescribed by the statute. It may be that, upon full presentation of the facts, the commission would find that to continue the service would subject the carrier to an unreasonable burden; or the carrier may suggest some satisfactory substitute for the specific service now demanded of it. The commission should give to the railway the opportunity of presenting the facts; and, if an application is made promptly, the matter should be determined by the commission without subjecting the railway to any prejudice because of its failure to ask leave before discontinuing the service. Compare Lawrence v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 278 U. S. 228, 49 S. Ct. 106, 73 L. Ed. —. To this end the decree will be vacated; and the restraining order will be continued. Compare Ohio Oil Co. v. Conway, 279 U. S. 813, 49 S. Ct. 256, 73 L. Ed. —. If after such hearing the commission insists that the service objected to be restored, further proceedings appropriate to the situation may be had in the cause in the District Court.
Decree vacated.


text:
The 13th week of the college football season has no nickname.
After this it's rivalry weekend and then championship weekend. Both will be packed with packed with high stakes. This weekend has some good stuff, too, like the Big Ten's game of the year between No. 2 Ohio State and No. 9 Penn State and No. 24 Texas A&M's first trip to No. 4 Georgia since joining the Southeastern Conference.
It also has a few highly ranked teams such as No. 3 Clemson and No. 5 Alabama either taking off or tuning up with cupcakes.
Consider this a little bit of calm before a two-week storm leading up to the end of the regular season and College Football Playoff selection Sunday.
No. 9 Penn State (No. 8 CFP) at No. 2 Ohio State (No. 2 CFP)
The last three games between the Nittany Lions and Buckeyes have been decided by a total of five points, with Ohio State winning the last two by a point with four-quarter comebacks.
The Buckeyes roll into this game having beaten each of their first 10 opponents by at least 24 points. Ohio State is No. 1 in the nation in scoring (51.5 points per game) and points allowed (9.8 per game). They also get back star defensive end Chase Young, who sat out the last two games due to an NCAA rules violation.
The Nittany Lions lost to Minnesota two weeks ago, but bounced back with a victory against Indiana last week and can still win the Big Ten East by beating the Buckeyes in Columbus for the first time since 2011.
Tyler Huntley, QB, Utah
The school has started a late-season push to get their quarterback some attention from Heisman Trophy voters. The senior deserves it. Huntley doesn't throw it a lot in Utah's run heavy offense but he has been as efficient as the other star quarterbacks who have been getting all the hype this season. He is fifth in the nation in efficiency rating (190.07), second in completion percentage (74.2),
Huntley and the seventh-ranked Utes are at Arizona on Saturday night, a defense that he might be able to bulk up some of this other stats against.
23 — No. 12 Michigan's winning streak against Indiana. The Wolverines visit the Hoosiers, who are trying to reach eight victories for the first time since 1993.
43.5 — Points No. 1 LSU is favored by against Arkansas on Saturday.
75 — Carries for Boston College running back AJ Dillon in the last two games. The Eagles will likely have to lean heavily on Dillon, the third-leading rusher in the nation, when they face No. 15 Notre Dame.
Oregon State at Washington State
Both teams are 5-5, in need of one more victory to become bowl eligible, and have a tough games against an in-state rival next week. The Beavers have not been bowl eligible since 2013, which was also the last time they beat Washington State.
The Cougars have not missed out on the postseason since 2012.
Barry Odom, Missouri
The Tigers' season has skidded into a four-game losing streak after a promising start. Odom is 24-24 overall and 12-18 in the Southeastern Conference in four seasons since taking over for Gary Pinkel.
The Tigers host Tennessee, which has turned its season around and is on the cusp of bowl eligibility, on Saturday, and then face Arkansas next week. They should get to six wins, but that might not get them into a bowl. The school is still waiting to hear back on its appeal of the NCAA postseason ban.
The whole situation puts Odom in tight spot.
More AP college football: https://apnews.com/APTop25CollegeFootballPoll and https://apnews.com/Collegefootball and https://twitter.com/AP_Top25


text:
Survival of the fittest: retrospective cohort study of the longevity of Olympic medallists in the modern eraBMJ 2012; 345 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e8308 (Published 13 December 2012) Cite this as: BMJ 2012;345:e8308
- Philip M Clarke, professor1,
- Simon J Walter, research fellow1,
- Andrew Hayen, associate professor2,
- William J Mallon, orthopaedic surgeon3,
- Jeroen Heijmans, technical adviser4,
- David M Studdert, professor1
- 1Melbourne School of Population Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia
- 2School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
- 3Triangle Orthopaedic Associates, Durham, NC, USA
- 4Software Improvement Group (SIG), Amsterdam Bleekstraat 70c 3134 EB Vlaardingen, Netherlands
- Correspondence to: D M Studdert d.studdert{at}unimelb.edu.au
- Accepted 16 November 2012
Objective To determine whether Olympic medallists live longer than the general population.
Design Retrospective cohort study, with passive follow-up and conditional survival analysis to account for unidentified loss to follow-up.
Setting and participants 15 174 Olympic athletes from nine country groups (United States, Germany, Nordic countries, Russia, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, and Australia and New Zealand) who won medals in the Olympic Games held in 1896-2010. Medallists were compared with matched cohorts in the general population (by country, age, sex, and year of birth).
Main outcome measures Relative conditional survival.
Results More medallists than matched controls in the general population were alive 30 years after winning (relative conditional survival 1.08, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 1.10). Medallists lived an average of 2.8 years longer than controls. Medallists in eight of the nine country groups had a significant survival advantage compared with controls. Gold, silver, and bronze medallists each enjoyed similar sized survival advantages. Medallists in endurance sports and mixed sports had a larger survival advantage over controls at 30 years (1.13, 1.09 to 1.17; 1.11, 1.09 to 1.13) than that of medallists in power sports (1.05, 1.01 to 1.08).
Conclusions Olympic medallists live longer than the general population, irrespective of country, medal, or sport. This study was not designed to explain this effect, but possible explanations include genetic factors, physical activity, healthy lifestyle, and the wealth and status that come with international sporting glory.
We thank the OlyMADMen.
Contributors: PMC came up with the study idea; contributed to the study design, analyses, preparation, and design of exhibits; and cowrote the first draft of the manuscript with DMS. SJW and AH contributed to the study design, analyses, preparation of exhibits, and writing of methods and results. WJM and JH collected and assembled the study dataset, assisted in data interpretation, and contributed to the manuscript writing. DMS developed the study idea with PMC; contributed to the study design, data interpretation, and design of exhibits; conducted the literature review; and cowrote the first draft of the manuscript (with PMC).
Funding: None.
Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Data sharing: Data for Olympians used to construct the study sample are available from Bill Mallon of the OlyMADMen (email@example.com).
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £173 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£38 / $45 / €42 (excludes VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.


text:
Two weeks ago I came upon a wonderful idea at Pedagoo. Very simple, as many wonderful ideas usually are. I resolved to bring a specific teaching strategy to my classroom. I wrote about it here a little while back, In fact, it was my first post on this new Irish blog from Dungarvan, in County Waterford, Ireland. To summarise: rather than ask a question for pupils to answer, I turn the tables and provide the answer. The pupils' task is to research in order to find a suitable question for the particular answer.
I certainly am delighted with the results. Yesterday's answer was "Commander Chris Hadfield". Immediately, to my shock and amazement, one of my pupils stood up, stretched herself tall and raised her hand. When asked for her question she replied "Yes, who was the first Canadian to walk on the moon?" (This was news to me!) The following morning several of the girls had similar questions. Currently, Commander Hadfield is orbiting the earth on the International Space Station. I know this because I've tweeted him twice recently. He's got multi-thousand followers, so I really don't expect a reply. However, the power and the reach of blogging will likely mean that this blog post will arrive on his laptop screen pretty soon now…fingers crossed here in Stradbally. The world is a small place.
The answer, and several subsequent questions opened up a wonderful lesson and a very lively discussion, including speed of orbit, general onboard tasks, lots of "I wonder how do they ….?" type questions. But the one that really was the icing on the cake concerned a tweet about an annual overhaul of the urine hoses. "Space Plumber – annual overhaul of the urine hoses, valves and sensors. After I was done, it worked." Here's a link to the tweet. Shrieks of "O my God" and such like, further questions about the mechanics of body waste in space, and much smirking and inventive querying (I don't know all the ins-and-outs of the matter, pardon the pun) brought this unplanned lesson to a wonderful conclusion. Thank you Chris Hadfield.
It was a good, unplanned geography / science lesson, one that I will not forget in a hurry. Sometimes the best lessons are unplanned. Well, unplanned in the sense that I certainly had not anticipated the outcomes. I had planned the ANSWER. And I want to thank Pedagoo and the #PedagooResolutions Document for inspiring my new teaching strategy.
Time now methinks for my morning exercise. Walk to town, and my weekly opportunity to undo it with hot chocolate. My chance to read the weekend Irish Times. Who knows, there may be more answers?


text:
The departure of Alberta's first female premier this week, in the face of mounting public and party pressure, has reignited a familiar question: Did sexism play a role in her demise?
The Canadian Press contacted more than a dozen past and present politicians across the country for their thoughts. Some didn't respond and others didn't want to wade into the debate.
Former Edmonton Liberal MP Anne McLellan said while it's a complex issue, she's sure Alison Redford was treated differently because of her sex.
The Progressive Conservative premier made mistakes, McLellan said, but her caucus and voters — both male and female — had unfair expectations of her as a female leader.
"There seems to be some standard that somehow it's OK for men in public life to act a certain way. But if women do that, that makes them not nice ladies," she said.
"Both men and women have to understand how significant a barrier that can be for participation of women in politics."
McLellan pointed to Calgary legislature member Len Webber, the first of two caucus members to leave the party in the days leading up to Redford's resignation. Webber told reporters he could no longer work under Redford because she was a bully and "not a nice lady."
McLellan, who served as Prime Minister Paul Martin's deputy, said during her time in Ottawa she wasn't always a nice lady, either.
"If people are suggesting that in my over 12 years in public life as a minister in the federal government that I never swore, that I never slammed a door, that I never spoke sternly to a staff member, that's crazy. You're in a very stressful, high-profile situation and then you respond to that stress and I think that's normal."
Martha Hall Findlay, a former Liberal MP who ran unsuccessfully for leadership of the party in 2006 and 2013, described Redford as a "ground-breaker."
She said Redford has helped confirm that women can and should be premier.
"I'm sorry that it didn't work out better," Hall Findlay wrote in an email. "The political challenges she has faced have nothing to do with gender, but are part of the overall challenges of politics."
Former Saskatchewan NDP premier Lorne Calvert said it may be telling that Redford isn't the only female premier to leave office recently.
Kathy Dunderdale, the Tory premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, resigned in January amid questions about her leadership and sliding approval ratings.
Nunavut's Eva Aariak also lost her seat late last year after saying she wouldn't seek another term as premier.
Before those departures, Canada made history by having six female provincial and territorial leaders. Three remain: Christy Clark in British Columbia, Kathleen Wynne in Ontario and Pauline Marois in Quebec.
Calvert would like to see more women in politics, but concedes they face more challenges on the job.
"I don't want to be sexist here, but in some ways the very nature of our legislative process — combative — has not been traditionally a role some women are comfortable in. And yet good governance will tell you that that's not all that effective anymore."
Alberta Liberal House Leader Laurie Blakeman agrees that female leaders are at a disadvantage, but says there is more behind Redford's resignation.
"Of course there's a gender issue," said Blakeman.
"Is that the only reason that things went off the rails here? No."
The Alberta Tories have forced out their last four leaders. Before Redford, they turfed Ed Stelmach and Ralph Klein.
"Gender is part of it," said Blakeman. "But so is character and management choices and political ideology and a really, really, really old party that's been here a long, long time."


text:
OK…there wasn't really a fight, per se.
But it's been a week and it's bugging the crap outta me, so instead of actually sitting the hubs down and TALKING about it, I'm gonna chuck it out to the interwebz for everyone to look at. Because I'm a mature grownup and all that shiz.
So anyway. I was trapped on a hella boring conference call and "multi-tasking" (read: paying ZERO attention, because social media is WAY more entertaining than the nuances of OSHA's Final Rule on accident reporting) when I saw this post from a cousin-in-law on Facebook:
OK. I know this relative pretty well. She's an absolute sweetheart. I like her a lot. And for the record, she hosts barbecues, swears, and drinks beer, and she's never shoved anything down anyone's throat regarding what they should or should not believe. In other words – she's pretty cool.
I'm not put off by this post, even though I generally don't do the whole "like if you agree" or "copy and paste or a unicorn dies" thing on social media. Of course, on occasion I'll make a sarcastic play on a Facebook fad just for funsies. Like the recent wave of "post ten concerts you've seen but one is a lie" – I really wanted to play, but the list of artists I've seen live is woefully underpopulated, save some middle-school band performances and cantatas we do at church. So:
Anyway. The point is, post whatever you want on YOUR page. In my cousin-in-law's case, she was sharing her views and NOT HURTING ANYONE. Social construct dictates that the appropriate response is to either click "Like", or shrug/roll your eyes and keep scrolling for videos of baby goats having a pajama party.
Well. Maybe not, as I saw this reply from the hubs….
Ugh. Ugh???
Really? Was that…necessary?
Some background: the hubs kind of grew up with this cousin and her brother. The hubs is about ten years older, but he was firmly locked in the "kid" role at family gatherings, so they spent a lot of time together at holidays and reunions and stuff. Essentially, he was the cousin she always looked up to – which probably means she took these three little letters to heart. Incidentally, she also has bouts of anxiety, and comments like this surely don't help.
As you probably recall, the hubs is militantly anti-religion, and likes to be absolutely certain everyone knows it by expressing these thoughts on his bumper stickers, his T-shirts, to strangers at the grocery store wearing religious garb…at which point I walk away and hide behind the produce, praying I don't knock it over.
To his credit, he's toned down significantly…at least around me. But now we have this not-so-subtle Facebook jab. I felt compelled to respond – partially because his Facebook profile pic is a photo of the TWO of us, and I don't want people to assume I'm on Team Teardown.
<mic drop>
OK, immature or not, that right there is freakin' hilarious, amiright? I was a little hesitant to come home from work that day <nervous chuckle> but sometimes, a good stinger is sooooooooooo worth it.
And what happened when I did arrive home?
Nada. Zip.
He didn't even mention it.
Which got me totally overthinking (because I'm female, and this is what we do, yo.) Is he waiting for me to bring it up? Is he plotting his revenge? Did he even SEE it yet? (Side note: The hubs has the impressive superpower of NOT being obsessed with social media; he doesn't automatically jump at the <ping> of a new notification. This makes texting him urgent messages a frustrating exercise in futility – if you need something at the store, for example, you have to reach out caveman-style and actually call him. He doesn't even read all his emails the same day he gets them. So it's entirely feasible that he hadn't even READ Facebook since he posted. Weird, huh?)
So I dutifully play the role of a socially-stunted preteen and also say nothing.
But, the next day, I noticed a response:
Okay, some thoughts.
First – I read too much into "Ugh"? Well, then, what the hell was it SUPPOSED to mean??! (As one of my dear friends put it: "It means exactly what you think it means.") Nice backpedal, honey.
Second – I suppose it's progress that he admits we have to put some work into loving him around his <cough> outspokenness. It's somewhat encouraging. Maybe some of our conversations have actually…gotten through to him?
Third – Aw, he loves me, even though I'm apparently misguided. (I must be really hot. HAHAHAHAHA)
Fourth – I've read some of that book, and…no. The reviews site helpful feedback such as "use of crude street language" and "meant to be a sarcastic rant" – tell me if this is something you'd hand to a conservative person to convince them of the error of their ways. I figured there HAD to be a more balanced tome out there, plus I find it amusing to throw kerosene on a blazing dumpster fire, so I responded one more time:
So how did the hubs react?
He didn't.
But this probably isn't because the hubs is as emotionally immature as I am, passively-aggressively ignoring the mental hippo poo in the middle of the living room. More likely, it could be because when I saw that he had written himself a reminder on a hot-pink Post-it note, which said "check FB post", I may or may not have given it the equivalent of cement shoes and a dirt nap in the recycling bin. YOU CAN PROVE NOTHING.
In the spirit of self-education, I did ask a pastor friend for some recommendations for books that might appeal better to all sides of this complex equation. Here were his suggestions:
There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind. Might be an interesting read, but I can tell the title will be off-putting. And honestly, I'm not interested in converting anyone – heck, I'm still traipsing along my spiritual journey and believe a lot of things both inside and out of the bounds of traditional Christianity.
Fool's Talk: Recovering the Art of Christian Persuasion. This might be OK for me to review, but again, not a label that the hubs will find compelling. So…maybe later.
The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. Ooh, it mentions science. This has potential. The reviews make it sound like it kind of morphs away from a literal Bible interpretation…but that might make it palatable for someone who wants to reconcile science with faith.
Anyway. The subject seems to be forgotten at the moment, so perhaps letting sleeping rabid wolfhounds lie is the best course of action at the moment. Still, one day I'm certain it will resurface, so I'll at least have some suggestions for ways he and I can learn together.
And, honestly, there's no rush. We've been getting along swimmingly as of late. Yes, we're avoiding some of the more tender spots, but we've had the opportunity to reconnect in areas where we DO fit together. Today we enjoyed a long hike (six miles, thankyouverymuch) through a local wildlife refuge, and the spring rains got all the flowers to yawn and stretch while the trees and mosses turned green.
There were violets in every shade of purple, alongside white and yellow:
And in celebration of diversity, some other flowers joined the festival:
It was a gathering of all things, great…
(It just barged in… <snort>)
…and small.
There was nothing about today that wasn't beautiful. It was a gift wrapped in sunshine and adorned with a violet bow, delivering a message directly on the path in front of us:
Not a bad goal.
I'm trying. And I hope he'll continue to try, too.


text:
A federal appeals court has reversed an accountant's tax-evasion conviction because the government seized his computer data and held it for more than 2.5 years—a breach of the constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches.
The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that the government's tactics against the Connecticut accountant amounted to an "unreasonable seizure." The authorities seized the accountant's records while investigating alleged illegal activity of his clients. But they continued holding the data for years and later brought charges against the accountant, who was not the target of the original investigation.
"If the government could seize and retain non-responsive electronic records indefinitely, so it could search them whenever it later developed probable cause, every warrant to search for particular electronic data would become, in essence, a general warrant," Judge Denny Chin wrote for the appeals court.
At least one digital rights group said the decision may affect the National Security Agency's vast electronic snooping programs disclosed by whistleblower Edward Snowden.
"I would certainly argue that it calls into question the whole collect-it-all-and-sniff-through-it-later practice," Hanni Fakhoury, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Courthouse News Service.
The accountant's data was seized in 2003 pursuant to a valid warrant. But in 2006, the authorities began developing a case against the accountant. The feds examined more of the data, obtained a warrant, and then brought charges of alleged tax evasion. The man was convicted and sentenced to two years. His sentence was stayed pending appeal.
"The Fourth Amendment was intended to prevent the government from entering individuals' homes and indiscriminately seizing all their papers in the hopes of discovering evidence about previously unknown crimes," Chin wrote. "Yet this is exactly what the government claims it may do when it executes a warrant calling for the seizure of particular electronic data relevant to a different crime."


text:
During the yearlong break when he and Community agreed to see other people, Dan Harmon kept busy by developing Rick and Morty for Adult Swim. Co-created with Justin Roiland — best known for his cease-and-desisted web series House of Cosbys — the unhinged animated comedy takes a Doc Brown–Marty McFly–type relationship (making them a grandfather-and-grandson duo rather than intergenerational BFFs) and sends the titular Rick and Morty to outer space, other dimensions, and even the inside of the human body. We checked in with the show's creators before Monday's new episode, "Rick Potion #9."
The two of you met through Channel 101 (a monthly short-film competition/festival co-created by Harmon), where Justin launched House of Cosbys.
Harmon: We had been doing shows for about a year when Justin began submitting sick and twisted stuff that the audience didn't really get but we loved, so we kept bringing him back.
Roiland: Making something once a month and seeing what worked and what didn't was better for me than any film school.
Harmon: House of Cosbys was where Justin blossomed into a viable threat. A couple of years later, I had a short-lived VH1 show called Acceptable TV which was similar to Channel 101, with viewers voting and picking which segments would come back with new installments. The first thing Justin and I did together there was a cartoon called Mister Sprinkles, which the audience loved. We had to keep coming back with five-minute segments each week.
Roiland: After the pilot, I was so busy running the animation that I barely had any time to be involved in the writing. With today's hardware it would be a little easier, but back then, on a four-day turnaround? It was nuts.
Do you have more time on Rick and Morty?
Roiland: It's more traditional, more like a network show in terms of its schedule. We have time not to kill people. On Acceptable, the team was burning out by the end. All said and done, it's a year, but there are various episodes in the pipeline simultaneously.
How do you maintain consistency with so many moving parts?
Harmon: It's run the way I learned to do stuff at Community. Writers pool ideas and the things that make us laugh and jump up and down, we break those episodes down. Then someone gets the unpleasant task of taking the broken story to an outline. Then we do passes, go to drafts, and either Justin or I is the last one to go over the final draft.
Roiland: In one episode, we had a story plotted and it just stalled out in script. Dan's advice was "go fucking insane" — that there were no wrong ways to go — and be brave enough to keep the stupidest stuff in the world.
Harmon: With Justin in the voice-over booth, we had to acquire a disciplined lack of discipline to look at the script and throw it away. You can hear him stumble on words, which gives an organic, infectious feel to it.
Justin works overtime voicing both of the leads, but what about the vocal stylings of Dan Harmon?
Harmon: I'm one of those doughnut tires in the trunk.
Roiland: Dan actually does a bunch of voices on the show. And if there are lines that have to be temped, especially if it's a line that he wrote, I love having Dan's take to lean on. He also recorded the scratch track for Beth [ultimately voiced by Scrubs' Sarah Chalke] all through the season, and we almost forgot it was him until Sarah came in. It was kind of jarring.
As you got deeper into the season, did you rework earlier episodes to match the tone that developed?
Roiland: We definitely did some tinkering in terms of air order. "Rick Potion #9" was the second episode we wrote, but as things shook out it made more sense for mid-season. So in that case it isn't that we went back to change anything, we just had to tell the overseas studio to hold off on that one and do the other episodes first.
"Rick Potion" features Morty's latest, desperate attempts to get a girl. Given that he doesn't appear to have any moves whatsoever, he's done pretty well in some episodes, especially "Anatomy Park" [a Fantastic Voyage–meets–Jurassic Park hybrid]. What's his secret?
[Both laugh.]
Harmon: He does get pretty far in that one … puberty is a magical time. As a young nerd I would somehow still manage to stumble into sexual situations … where I would be terrible. [Laughs.]
Roiland: I was drawing XXX-rated comics, but in those pre-Internet days I didn't even know what a blow job looked like. I love that the network has allowed us to portray a young kid character so honestly.
Harmon: We often say that this show is inspired by more British-style storytelling. Not the sterile, rubber-lined room of American children's or family TV. The older world of storytelling — children's stories were the most brutal playground, written by sociopaths or psychopaths. They give children more credit.
You've mentioned The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and Doctor Who as influences on the show, but the lead characters have an obvious similarity to Back to the Future …
Harmon: The characters started out as Justin's punk-rock maligning of the Back to the Future relationships. When we were talking about doing something for Adult Swim, these guys came up and I said "yes" immediately because it's hard to find things with so much passion invested. People don't understand … they think TV is all about plot or the premise. You can put a cop in a wheelchair, but that doesn't tell you if Ironside will run four episodes or 40. Development and enthusiasm are incredibly important.
Coming back to Community for its fifth season must offer some major contrasts to working on Rick and Morty, which is more of a start-up, even if it has already outlasted the new Ironside.
Harmon: The tools are similar — the same kind of structure discussions, the same whiteboard as on Community. It's actually kind of eerie how much the same the rooms are. As for what's different, Community's been blessed to be on so long that in some ways it's like writing Star Trek. It's so easy to mess up the treatment of Britta in the eyes of feminists, or Jeff and Annie in the eyes of their "'shippers." Starting fresh with new characters, there's a lot fewer ways for me to screw things up.


text:
Can't find what you're looking for?Realtree Camo Guide
Camo Patterns
Can't find what you're looking for?Realtree Camo Guide
Some aspects of the spring tradition we love so much are in peril — but you can do something about it
You Might Also Like
Realtree turkey hunting editor Steve Hickoff has chased gobblers all over the United States and Mexico. He was born and raised in northcentral Pennsylvania, and now makes his home in Maine. Hickoff was named the NWTF Tom Kelly Communicator of the Year for 2019, a prestigious award reflecting his longtime work promoting hunting and conservation as a turkey hunting writer, editor and book author.
Realtree is committed to providing an inclusive and accessible experience to everyone, including those with disabilities.
©2023 Jordan Outdoor Enterprises, Ltd.
All rights reserved.
Site by Gray Loon.


text:
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected the government's plea to stay a January ruling allowing an Islamic charity that alleges it was subject to illicit warrantless wiretapping to proceed with its lawsuit. But Obama administration attorneys have signaled that they plan to continue fighting tooth and nail to avoid turning over further information.
The one-paragraph decision by the Ninth Circuit reads, in full:
We agree with the district court that the January 5, 2009 order is not appropriate for interlocutory appeal. The government's appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. The government's motion for a stay is DENIED as moot.
The Justice Department had sought to block an order by Judge Vaughn Walker, who is also presiding over the more widely-publicized EFF lawsuit targeting telecoms that participated in a secretive NSA eavesdropping program, requiring the government to turn over a "secret" document that purportedly shows that the al-Haramain Islamic Foundation was subject to warrantless wiretaps.
The document had been handed over to attorneys for the foundation, which the government has labeled as a "Specially Designated Terrorist Group," thanks to a government blunder. The government was able to retrieve the document by invoking the state secrets privilege, and a court agreed that the foundation could not use it to establish standing to sue under the redress provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Lawyers for al-Haramain, however, were able to establish standing to Judge Walker's satisfaction by citing evidence in the public domain—at which point Walker ordered the Justice Department to hand over the document and arrange for security clearances that would allow the foundation's attorneys to participate in the litigation.
The government sought to persuade Walker to stay his own ruling, which the judge declined to do. Normally, appeal to a higher court—such as the Ninth Circuit—must wait for the resolution of a case at the lower level, but in this case the Justice Department sought an "interlocutory" appeal, seeking the appellate court's intervention in an ongoing proceeding. As the ruling quoted above makes clear, they fared no better there: the Ninth Circuit's response means, in effect, "Walker's your judge; if he doesn't want to give you a stay, tough luck."
Game over, then? Not quite yet. Within hours of the Ninth Circuit's ruling, the Obama administration filed papers with the court requesting that it "refrain from further actions to provide plaintiffs with access to classified information," and suggesting that yet another appeal may be in the works.
In this latest filing, the government notes that they have complied with the order to expeditiously process (and approve) security clearances for two of al-Haramain's attorneys. But this, according to the new document, is "as far as the Government may go at this time." In addition to a clearance, access to the sensitive documents involved in the case requires a putatively unreviewable executive branch determination that the plaintiff's lawyers have a "need to know" the relevant information—a determination executive branch officials have declined to make. The filing also requests advance notice of the court's intention to make classified documents turned over for in camera review available to the plaintiff's lawyers—in which case the government claims the right to withdraw those documents. (Al-Haramain attorney Jon Eisenberg calls this a "not-so-thinly-veiled threat to send Executive Branch authorities (the FBI? the Army?) to Judge Walker's chambers to seize the classified material from his files!") The Justice Department's brief is accompanied by both public and classified declarations from officials at the National Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence certifying that the relevant documents are highly sensitive, and that harm to national security would accrue if they were disclosed. One such public declaration also notes that the new classified submissions correct an error in one of the government's previous filings.
The stage appears to be set for a separation of powers showdown between Judge Walker and Obama's Justice Department: Walker has suggested that he may now have discretion to permit the cleared attorneys to view submitted documents, while the government asserts that the court has no power to override the executive branch's conclusion that those attorney have no "need to know" what's in classified documents. The question now is whether Walker will blink.


text:
Previously, we saw that unemployment rates in right-to-work states were MUCH lower than in states that force workers to join unions and pay union dues in order to work.
Curtis sent me this article from Investors Business Daily, which looks at whether wages are lower in states that have right-to-work laws.
The president says right-to-work laws mean "the right to work for less money." So how does he explain the fact that incomes are up in RTW states while forced unionism is a proven job killer?
Campaigning Monday in Michigan as it stood poised to become the nation's 24th right-to-work state, President Obama spoke the exact opposite of the truth to union workers at a Daimler Detroit Diesel plant in the birthplace of organized labor.
Is Obama telling the truth?
Let's see:
According to Michigan's Mackinac Center, using data taken from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics, private-sector, inflation-adjusted employee compensation in right-to-work states increased by 12% between 2001 and 2011 compared with just 3% over the same period in forced-unionization states.
These good wages came from good jobs. Employment in right-to-work states expanded 2.4% over the same stretch vs. a 3.4% decline in non-right-to-work states. Ironically, Obama is taking credit for jobs created in RTW states.
According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, right-to-work states (excluding Indiana, which passed a RTW law in early 2012) "were responsible for 72% of all net household job growth across the U.S. from June 2009 through September 2012."
This is why people vote with their feet and move to these states. RTW states experienced large population gains of 15.3% from 2000 to 2010, compared to 5.9% in non-RTW states.
Obama did get one thing right, though, when he said the bills that passed both houses of the Michigan legislature "don't have to do with economics. They have everything to do with politics."
The president who fought Boeing's expansion in RTW South Carolina knows it's all about his keeping union dues flowing into Democratic coffers and maintaining the plush lifestyles of the union leaders who support him.
The right thing for Republicans to do when they get elected is to cut off all sources of funding for the Democrat Party. Right-to-work laws and school choice promote freedom and diminish the amount of power that left-wing, pro-abortion, pro-gay-marriage labor unions can exert. They will have less money, and with less money, they will have less influence on elections. Let the people decide, not the powerful, corrupt labor unions.
Related posts
- Michigan governor Rick Snyder signs right-to-work bill into law
- Michigan approves right-to-work law for private sector unions
- Twinkies company liquidates due to demands of greedy labor union
- Indiana passes right-to-work law and is now open for business – and jobs
- Do right-to-work or forced union states create more high-paying jobs?
- What is a "right-to-work" law, and why do Democrats oppose them?
- Florida Republicans ban automatic deduction of union dues
- Republicans introduce national right-to-work legislation
- Ohio Republicans pass bill to cut bloated union salaries and benefits


text:
Washington (CNN) - Four months after becoming a flashpoint in the presidential campaign, Big Bird is back in the political spotlight.
The White House announced Thursday that the longtime character from public television's "Sesame Street" teamed up with First Lady Michelle Obama to film two public service announcements that encourage kids to eat healthy and get active. The White House said the PSAs will help mark the third anniversary of the first lady's push "to ensure that all our children grow up healthy and reach their full potential."
One of the PSAs shows Big Bird opting for a healthy snack as he and the first lady hang out in the White House kitchen.
The other one takes place in the East Room, with Big Bird exercising and dancing.
Flashback to October, when Big Bird was front and center on the campaign trail as President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney battled for the White House. It all started in Denver, Colorado on October 4, during the first presidential debate. Romney said he would cut the federal subsidy to the Public Broadcasting Service, which airs Sesame Street, in order to help reduce the country's deficit.
"I like PBS, I love Big Bird," Romney said before adding that "I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for."
Obama pounced on the remark at a campaign stop in Colorado a day later.
"Thank goodness somebody is finally getting tough on Big Bird. It's about time," Obama said. "We didn't know that Big Bird was driving the federal deficit, but that's what we heard last night. How about that?"
A few days later the president's re-election campaign put Big Bird in a TV ad, sarcastically casting him as a corporate fiend akin to Bernie Madoff and Kenneth Lay.
"Criminals. Gluttons of greed," a narrator in the spot said of the notorious white collar criminals. "And the evil genius who towered over them?"
A silhouette of the famous yellow bird appeared in a window, before the ad cut to clips of Romney saying "Big bird" on the stump.
"One man has the guts to say his name," the narrator said. "Big. Yellow. A menace to our economy. Mitt Romney knows it's not Wall Street you have to worry about, it's Sesame Street. Mitt Romney. Taking on our enemies, no matter where they nest."
Responding to the ad, Romney said at a campaign rally in Iowa that Obama's focus on the remark was puzzling given the serious issues facing the nation.
"These are tough times with real serious issues so you have to scratch your head when the president spends the last week talking about saving Big Bird," Romney said. "I actually think we need to have a president who talks about saving the American people and saving good jobs and saving our future."
Big Bird's appearance in the Obama campaign spot spurred the character's parents at Sesame Workshop to ask the president's team to take the ad down.
"Sesame Workshop is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization and we do not endorse candidates or participate in political campaigns," the group wrote. "We have approved no campaign ads, and as is our general practice, have requested that the ad be taken down."
Malory Archer wrote:
This is more about encouraging Americans to think about what they're consuming than depriving them of a bathtub size drink that they probably wouldn't buy if the price per ounce was the same for all sizes. .. ...
You should see the convincing TV ads that they are running. Two people are sitting at a table in what seems to be your typical fast food burger joint. One person is drinking soda from a 16oz bottle, wile the other is "drinking" 20 sugar packets with their burger and fries. The ad points out the equivalent sugar content and asks why would you drink twenty packets of sugar.
I'm all for Michelle's efforts. What I am not for is her husbands approach, ignore the need for jobs in this country and starve us all to death. Or at least gut us under government control.
@ Rudy NYC
Is she back from her multimillion dollar trip to Aspen that the taxpayers paid for. Where will she spend our money next. At least she didn't vow in one of the campaign speeches not to rest until the economy improves and then take 62 vacation days like the lying goofball she married. She does not even make a pretense of being frugal and concerned about those of us who have to work and pay taxes.
Non of my kids grow up watching Big bird, they couldn't stand it... Though I wasn't Ok with the politicians taking on Big bird, I am totally Ok now...
No, you have it all twisted. See my earlier post. When President Obama took office in 2009, our economy was losing 800,000 jobs a month. Then shortly after taking office, the President took to congress and put into motion the American Recovery Act which saved and created over 5 million American jobs. Then as our economy continue to struggle on the global stage and more Americans were being layed off, the President went to congress again and asked for passage of the 2010 Tax Relief/Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation bill which guaranteed an additional year of unemployment and health insurance benefits to millions of unemployed and struggling Americans so that they could keep food on the table and a roof over their families heads while they looked for work. But the republicans stepped in the way and accused the President of wasteful spending and of inflating the national debt. Let's face it, you cannot accused the President of not creating jobs and of not helping the American people and then turn around and blame him for creating jobs and helping the American people. Its either or. Please STOP the blatant hyopocrisy.
Doh, and here I thought mitt was back in the spot light somehow.
WiredWeirdinSF asked:
Is she back from her multimillion dollar trip to Aspen that the taxpayers paid for.. ... ..At least she didn't vow in one of the campaign speeches not to rest until the economy improves and then take 62 vacation days like the lying goofball she married.
Nope, becasue she never left on a multimillion dollar trip to Aspen that the taxpayers paid for. Furthermore, your right wing sources are making you do extra minutes in your hamster cage because the POTUS only took 62 vacation days during his entire term, not in a sngle year, which is nothing compared to the 180+ George W. Bush took during his first four years.
Remember how it was such an issue that Bush actually had to make a campaign promise during his re-election run to take less vacation time.
Then there was the 2011 American Jobs Act which House and Senate republicans fillibuster, arguing that it wouldn't work. However, both the CBO and several independent economists said the 2011 American Jobs Act would have created 1.9 million American jobs right away. Reminds me of the 2011 Debt Ceiling Compromise. After it was passed with bi-partisan support, Eric Cantor and House republicans got into a scuffle with Paul Ryan, arguing that republicans support for the debt ceiling may have gotten the President re-elected. So that has been the right wing's motto from the get-go, stall progress and hurt the American people to ensure that the President fails. Totall appalling and outrageous.
Welcome back, Big Bird! Knew Mittens could not get you down!
Big bird and its sesame street character friends are one big 1%er industrial complex. They may want to look non-proofit, but there is a l ot of money being made. The sesame Street industrial complex could probably support PBS on its own if its revenues went to PBS.
@Ancient Texan
Blah Blah-, This president has NEVER attempted to have bipartisan agreement on anything. Insulting the other party before saying let's compromise is not being bipartisan.
It wasn't the Democrats (or the President) who filibustered every action – including their own proposals! Democrats didn't start holding America hostage at every critical decision point related to our economic future. Democrats didn't start two un-funded wars, cut taxes AND spend wildly. It was a Republican who gave us the recession and Republicans who blocked all progress towards a recovery. As usual, you are completely delusional and incapable of manning-up to any responsibility for our problems. I'll bet you continue to vote for Rick Perry... and act that says it all...
@Ancient Texan
Blah Blah-, This president has NEVER attempted to have bipartisan agreement on anything. Insulting the other party before saying let's compromise is not being bipartisan.
I know what you mean when you mention "insulting the other party". The President makes absolutely no attempt to stop being African American – even when he knows how much that situation continues to infuriate the right-wingers! He's just not trying!
Sesame Street would be a good gig for Soledad O'Brien to step into now that she has been passed over at CNN. Just about her speed. Make her wear the Big Bird suit and don't let her speak.
Yep, I'm ashamed had to change my name after Mitt lost to post.
I love how Romney accused Obama of being obsessed by Big Bird, after Romney claimed Big Bird was a drain on our taxes. Romney really had his finger on the pulse of the brain-dead voter, and no one else.
It's a wonder the GOP is becoming even less relevant by the day.
Most Republicans don't let their children watch Sesame Street. Too liberal. After all, who the heck teaches their children to be kind to others, to learn in school, to help the world be a better place? Generally just communists. Good Republicans teach their children to be tough, go to church instead of watching football, and drink lots of beer.
I agree. They only allow their kiddies to watch Faux News Channel. Plus, they don't understand why Sesame street has to have so many different colors. Why not just choose pasty white with blonde hair? Now that's good TV.


text:
(This question is motivated by the reading of the article Large numbers and unprovable theorems by Joel Spencer, which can be found at http://mathdl.maa.org/images/upload_library/22/Ford/Spencer669-675.pdf and that I recommend).
We all know of the game where a card of a predefined size, say 3x5 cm, is given to every contender, and whoever writes the biggest (positive) integer on his, wins. Naive answers are easily defeated by iteration of fast-growing functions; those are defeated by induction, and these by transfinite induction. However, if a system of axioms is prefixed, then we cannot pursue this strategy forever: for example, if we are only willing to accept Peano's Axioms (PA), then $f_{\alpha}(n)$ (where $\alpha$ is an ordinal number and $f$ is defined à la Ackermann) is computable (in the sense that the axioms ensure that a program to compute it exists and will terminate in finite time) when $\alpha < \epsilon_0$, but not if $\alpha = \epsilon_0$.
This problem suggests two related questions to me:
It is known that the Ackermann function is well-defined inside AP, and that other functions which grow much faster, like the one in the strong version of the finite Ramsey Theorem of Paris-Harrington, or Goodstein's function whenever it grows fast (I think), or $f_{\epsilon_0}(9)$, cannot be defined everywhere just by application of AP, because they "grow too fast for AP". Is there a rigorous definition of what it means for a function to grow too fast for AP (or any other arithmetical axiom system)? Can we establish in any sense a "limit" for this process? For example, can we find a "threshold function" F, depending on the axioms, such that if f dominates F then f is not computable and if F dominates f then it will be? (I'm thinking about something among the lines of the convergence of the p-series for p>0 whenever p>1 and its divergence whenever p<=1).
Building in the exposition above Spencer observes that, between experts, this game is not funny and reduces to claims of legitimacy (over the validity of the axioms they are supposed to use), since if we allow just a fixed amount of characters for describing our number, and our axioms system is prefixed also, then THERE in fact IS a largest number computable on that system (and thus competitors would come to a draw). However, what happens if we consider the following metagame? Instead of fixing the axiom system beforehand, we allow every contender to (secretly) choose his own system of axioms for arithmetic, in the hope that his will allow faster-growing computable functions than those of the others. Doing this, the contender takes the risk, while trying to get more and more power from the axioms, of actually getting an inconsistent system! Whoever gets the biggest (computable) number in a consistent axiom system wins. Is this game interesting, or is it "flawed" too? In adittion, inconsistency may be proved within the axiom system, but its consistency would have to be proven in a more powerful framework. Which one would you select and why? What about the metametagame of letting those frameworks to the election of the players? Is that still interesting?


text:
I don't like coerced redistribution. When the government uses the threat of force to take from Person A to give to Person B, it simultaneously reduces Person A's incentives to produce while also luring Person B into dependency.
But not all coerced redistribution and government intervention is created equal.
I don't like welfare programs, for instance, in part because taxpayers are writing huge checks to support a plethora of programs, but also because there is very strong evidence that the modern welfare state has caused more poverty.
Nonetheless, I understand that there are well-meaning people who support these programs. Their motives are pure in that they simply want to alleviate perceived suffering. And since they've never learned about the adverse indirect effects of government intervention and presumably haven't given any thought to the ethics of government coercion, I don't think of these people as being bad or immoral. Just uninformed.
But there are some forms of redistribution and intervention that are so self-evidently odious and corrupt that you can't give supporters the benefit of the doubt. Simply stated, there's no justifiable argument for using government coercion to hurt poor people in order to benefit rich people.
Let's look at two examples.
First, the Export-Import Bank is a quintessential example of corporate welfare. The program forces taxpayers to guarantee the contracts of big corporations and foreign buyers, and there's now a fight over whether it should be extended.
Needless to say, ordinary voters don't want their money being used enrich big companies.
So if you were one of the beltway insiders who benefited from this corrupt institution, how would you try to get the program extended? Would you be upfront and argue that big companies like Boeing deserve tax dollars? Would you argue that politicians are really smart and wise and that they should interfere with the free market?
That would be the honest way of supporting the Ex-Im Bank. But you won't be surprised to learn that advocates instead have resorted to lies. Here are some excerpts from a Reuters story.
The U.S. Export-Import Bank has mischaracterized potentially hundreds of large companies and units of multinational conglomerates as small businesses, a flaw in its record keeping that could undermine the export lender's survival strategy. …A comparison of some 6,000 businesses characterized by Ex-Im as "small" with information supplied by corporate data collector Dun & Bradstreet, which Ex-Im also uses to vet applicants, and other sources turns up some 200 companies that appear to be mislabeled and many more whose classification is uncertain.
Um… I would say they lied rather than characterize it as a "flaw in its record keeping." But let's set that aside and look at some of the "small businesses" that had their snouts in the Ex-Im trough.
…analysis showed companies owned by billionaires such as Warren Buffet and Mexico's Carlos Slim, as well by Japanese and European conglomerates, were listed as small businesses and Ex-Im acknowledged errors in its data in response to those findings. …A division of Austria's Swarovski jewelers shows up, as does North Carolina's Global Nuclear Fuels, which is owned by General Electric and Japan's Toshiba and Hitachi. …The list of small businesses in Texas, for example, includes engineering and construction company Bechtel, which has 53,000 employees.
Gee, Warren Buffet and foreign conglomerates don't exactly sound like my idea of small businesses.
Hopefully this will provide more ammunition of those fighting to wean big companies from the public teat.
Bank officials and supporters have used the Ex-Im's support for American small business as a first line of defense against a campaign by conservatives to shut it down as an exponent of "crony capitalism." …"Rarely does Ex-Im miss a (public relations) opportunity to claim that it primarily helps small business, but Ex-Im is again playing fast and loose with the facts," said Representative Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican who chairs the House Financial Services Committee. "The bulk of Ex-Im's help indisputably goes to large corporations that can finance their own operations without putting it on the taxpayer balance sheet."
For our second example, we have the absolutely horrifying spectacle of the Obama Administration trying to shut down Wisconsin's school choice system.
Why? Well, because currying favor with union bosses is more important than improving educational opportunities for students from disadvantaged communities.
George Will explains what's happening in his Washington Post column.
It is as remarkable as it is repulsive… Eager to sacrifice low-income children to please teachers unions, the Justice Department wants to destroy Wisconsin's school choice program. Feigning concern about access for disabled children, the department aims to handicap all disadvantaged children by denying their parents access to school choices of the sort affluent government lawyers enjoy. …Wisconsin's school choice program was pioneered by an American hero, Mississippi-born Annette Polly Williams, who died Nov. 9 at age 77. During her three decades in Wisconsin's legislature, she overcame the opposition of fellow Democrats to offering education choices to low-income parents. At the end of her life, however, she saw an African American attorney general, serving an African American president, employing tortured legal reasoning in an attempt to bankrupt private schools that enlarge the education options of disadvantaged children. …Closing the voucher program is the obvious objective of the teachers unions and hence of the Obama administration. Herding children from the choice schools back into government schools would swell the ranks of unionized teachers, whose union dues fund the Democratic Party as it professes devotion to "diversity" and the downtrodden.
By the way, you probably won't be surprised (given the White House's cavalier approach to the rule of law) to learn that the Obama Administration is using is utterly nonsensical legal theory.
…federal lawyers argue that because public funds, in the form of tuition vouchers empowering parents to make choices, flow to private schools, the schools become "public entities." …this is like arguing that when food stamps are used for purchases at Wal-Mart, America's largest private employer ceases to be private — it becomes an extension of the government. Inconveniently for the Justice Department, the U.S. Supreme Court has said the fact that a "private entity performs a function which serves the public does not make its acts state action."
The preposterous legal reasoning is a farce, but that doesn't get me overly upset.
What does bother me is the way the White House is acting like the modern-day equivalent of George Wallace, standing in the schoolhouse door to prevent low-income (and largely minority) students from getting an opportunity for better education.
I guess that a black President (who sends his own kids to private school) consigning black children to the back of the proverbial bus shouldn't surprise me too much. After all, some divisions of the NAACP also have decided that being politically allied with union bosses is more important that educational opportunity for minority kids.
But that doesn't make it morally acceptable. Put yourself in the shoes of a low-income parent. Wisconsin's school choice programs gives you some hope that your kids can break free of poverty. Imagine what it feels like, then, when some of the politicians who claim to be on your side then decide that your children are expendable pawns. How disgusting.
Since we're talking about things that are disgusting, let's shift back to the Ex-Im Bank. I've actually had some Republican types tell me that corporate welfare is okay because it "helps to offset" some of the redistribution from rich to poor.
I confess that I'm dumbstruck by such arguments. It's sort of like hearing someone say it's okay to murder, rape, and steal because other people are doing it.
This is why it's not easy being a libertarian. Yes, we believe in small government for utilitarian reasons such as faster growth, higher living standards, and more jobs. But we're also motivated by morality, by the belief that there's right and wrong and that good people should strive to uphold the former and fight the latter.
That's not a popular view in Washington, which is best characterized as an incestuous racket for the benefit of interest groups, politicians, cronyists, lobbyists, bureaucrats, contractors, and other insiders.
P.S. On a completely separate (and non-political) issue, I can't resist seeking some sympathy after what happened to me this morning. I took two of my cats to the vet for their spay and neuter appointments. Some of you pet owners already know that most cats don't like car rides, so you might have some inkling of what I'm about to report.
About five minutes into the drive, one of the cats vomits in the little cat carrier. That obviously wasn't a happy development, particularly since it left me with an unpleasant choice of enduring a very unpleasant smell or having the window open and enduring a very bitter chill. But then, a few minutes later, the other cat…um, how should I phrase this…loses control of her bowels.
Which means that the next 20 minutes was almost as unbearable as watching a state-of-the-union address. I was running late for the appointment, so I couldn't stop someplace and try to deal with the mess. And the two cats kept moving around in their carrier, making things worse. Trying to breathe through my mouth, even with the window down, was at best a pitiful attempt to mitigate my suffering.
An utterly miserable situation. Almost 1/10th as bad as an IRS audit.


text:
Son Dam Bi is a solo female artist who debuted in 2007 on the Pledis Entertainment label. That same year, FT ISLAND, Wonder Girls, and Girl's Generation also debuted, making Son Dam Bi's introduction as a solo artist even more unique. In addition to her singing and dancing skills, which she has won several awards for, Son Dam Bi has also dabbled in acting by appearing on Korean television shows (We Got Married) and a Korean drama (Light and Shadow).
To see the enhanced profile, including discographies and videographies, click the image to go to KPOPIANA, KPK's multimedia database on Korean popular music of the Hallyu era!


text:
This item is temporarily out of stock. However, we can notify you as soon as this product becomes available.
Thank you
We have received your request and you will be notified as soon as this product becomes available.
In order to keep our prices as low as possible, all CreateForLess order subtotals must be at least $10. This helps us save on labor costs when packing your order so we can extend the savings to you!
Shop all Tsukineko VersaCraft Large Stamp Pads
1Orders placed must have a minimum subtotal of $10. More info
Tsukineko VersaCraft Craft Ink Stamp Pads give you the perfect way to change all those plain, undecorated craft surfaces into something really spectacular. These inks work wonderfully on fabric, paper, wood, leather, unglazed ceramic, paper mache and shrink plastic. They are great for archival scrapbooking projects due to its opacity and permanence. Heat setting in required on fabrics and is recommended on other projects for added permanence. Acid-free. Approximately 3 3/4 x 2 1/2 inch. Real Black.


text:
Happy Pub Day to this stellar story!
Excited to share with you today my review for this book I read in December but still sticks with me today! This was a group read and we all absolutely loved it!💕
My Thoughts
Sally Hepworth completely sucked me in with this compulsive engaging addictive story! This book took a hold of me and did not let go until the last page was turned!
This was an intense twisty story full of complex characters and complicated relationships. I absolutely love books that dig deeply into the psychology of the characters, and oh boy did this book do that! Perhaps there is no relationship more tenuous than that of mother-in-law and daughter-in-law. My own mother in law unfortunately passed away a year ago, and I will be forever grateful that she really stayed out of our business, LOL! Someday I will have my own daughter in law, a relationship I am looking forward to because I trust my son's taste in a significant other. Although I am imagining it will be a tricky relationship I am up for the challenge! What is that saying;"adaughter is a daughter for all of her life, but a son is a son until he takes a wife."
This story is told from duel points of view, mother-in-law Diana and daughter-in-law Lucy. I felt this was a extremely impactful way to tell the story, you could really see how much misunderstanding there was between these two women. They both truly sought the approval of the other, and neither really knew how to go about it. Most interesting indeed!
The book starts out with the apparent suicide of Diana. As the book progresses we get a look at events leading up to the tragedy. As well as the present day investigation. As things begin to unfold and secrets begin to be revealed we really find out how truly complicated it all was. As the past is revealed Diana becomes a more and more sympathetic character. You truly do need to understand where someone's coming from to fully appreciate their current actions. I liked Lucy from the very beginning and I enjoyed delving deep into her immediate family dynamics. Her relationship with Oliver and the kids was so relatable. Tom, Diana's husband and the father in law was a jovial likable character, who sometimes should've perhaps had Diana's back a little more! Always much easier to be good cop then bad cop!
This book will feed your appetite for domestic Drama with a glimpse into this family's conflict. I just think there is something so alluring about a domestic thriller, it just is always so intriguing to read a story about family dynamics.. What is so brilliant about this story, is this family could be any of ours! It is so familiar and there is something comforting about that, making the story just that much more!
Strongly recommended to anybody who enjoys a story with complicated characters, complex relationships, twists, turns, and a well structured compelling plot!
*** many thanks to St. Martin's Press for my copy of this book ***
About the Book
From the moment Lucy met her husband's mother, she knew she wasn't the wife Diana had envisioned for her perfect son. Exquisitely polite, friendly, and always generous, Diana nonetheless kept Lucy at arm's length despite her desperate attempts to win her over. And as a pillar in the community, an advocate for female refugees, and a woman happily married for decades, no one had a bad word to say about Diana…except Lucy.
That was five years ago.
Now, Diana is dead, a suicide note found near her body claiming that she no longer wanted to live because of the cancer wreaking havoc inside her body.
But the autopsy finds no cancer. It does find traces of poison, and evidence of suffocation.
Who could possibly want Diana dead?
Why was her will changed at the 11th hour to disinherit both of her children and their spouses? And what does it mean that Lucy isn't exactly sad she's gone?
Fractured relationships and deep family secrets grow more compelling with every chapter in this twisty, captivating new audiobook from Sally Hepworth.
The Besties
Kendall @ Sunflower Book Lover
💕💕 Be sure to check out all the Besties' reviews!


text:
Affiliation: University of Rhode Island
Dr. Bridget Buxton is an Associate Professor in the Department of History at the University of Rhode Island. She holds degrees from Victoria University in Wellington (M.A. with distinction) and a Ph.D from the Graduate Group in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology at the University of California, Berkeley. Her areas of specialization are underwater archaeology, and Hellenistic and Roman history and archaeology, especially the Age of Augustus. Bridget has conducted fieldwork and led expeditions all around the Mediterranean, most recently in Israel with the IAA Maritime Unit at Akko and Caesarea. She collaborates with Croatian and other European and American colleagues to apply new robotic technologies in underwater archaeology, and is an archaeological advisor for Oceangate Foundation.
See Bridget Buxton's work in the American Journal of Archaeology.