text:
Monday, February 18, 2008
Truth Fish Eats Darwin Fish. Huh?
You know the Ichthus, the ancient symbol of the Christian faith that is a simple line drawing of a fish and that scores of very rude and bad drivers affix to their bumpers? Well, I always thought the Ichthus with legs and the word "Darwin" emblazoned inside it was a statement by those Christians who accept both the Christian faith and evolutionary creation. Since I have been such a person for quite a long time I just assumed that there were lots of us and some of us—those into bumper stickers—decided we'd announce it to the world just to let the world know that the two—Christian faith and evolutionary creation—are not at odds. I was wrong, of course. Apparently, as everyone but me knew, the Ichthus with legs and "Darwin" emblazoned inside it is supposed to signal the ridiculously false view that the Christian faith (a supposedly ridiculously silly and dangerously false view of the world) has been replaced by atheistic naturalism (a supremely enlightened and wonderfully liberating) view of the world.
That's pathetic, really. It is surpassed in its pathetic-ness only by the "Truth" fish (which I just became acquainted with yesterday) swallowing whole the "Darwin" fish (whose true meaning I just became acquainted with yesterday, too). The messages of both of these pathetic bumper stickers make the same mistake. (I know, I know—they're BUMPER STICKERS for cyrin' out loud. Don't take them so seriously. Right. But did you watch any of the coverage of the Republican Party National Convention during the last election? There are lots of bumper sticker-loving, bumper sticker-believing, bumper sticker personality types making really important decisions about our future and the future of our planet. It's scary!) Anyway, as I was saying, the messages of both these pathetic bumper stickers make the same mistake. They falsely imply that Christian theism and evolutionary creation are alternative and mutually exclusive explanations of the natural world. They're not. And it doesn't take a genius to see this.
In my kick off blog (when was that? Oh, yeah, just yesterday) I pointed out even if very briefly how we came to be. We develop from a small, hollow sphere through a natural process of cell-division and growth. Things begin with a single celled zygote and through a series of cleavages and divisions we get what biologists refer to as a morula, then a blastocyst, then there's the development of body form, and eventually a fetus. Then, after more development, we get you! Now who made you? Well, God, of course. But my description of your biological origins didn't mention God. Yet I bet not a single one (of the two or three of you) who read that description said to yourself, "Oh, did he just say I wasn't made by God?" Of course not. That's because the natural facts and biological processes causally responsible for your coming to be do not in any way exclude God from being the author of your being. They're perfectly compatible.
Alright. 'nuff said. I had to get that off my chest. My colleague Steve Matheson is a biologist. He's a much quicker learner than me, too. And he's got an amazing blog that deals with all these sort of issues. Every Christian whose undies get in a bunch when they read or hear about the facts of common descent and evolutionary creation should read his blog. Every dim-witted naturalistic atheist should read his blog, too. Both might then stop saying the same sorts of silly things. You can visit Steve's blog here: http://sfmatheson.blogspot.com/
Peace, Love and Good Sense to All,
[NB: The comment above about the Republican National Convention refers to the infamous slogan "Flip-Flop" raucously chanted by throngs of flip-flop carrying conventioneers during one of the speeches I saw. It is not meant as an indictment of Republicans as such. No doubt bumper-sticker-deep thinking is an equal opportunity employer and scores of rabid Demoncrats are also in its employ.]
28 comments:
- Jack said...
Here is the rub. The current model of evolution requires random mutation followed by natural selection. Both the terms random and natural imply no supernatural intervention, i.e. they take God out of the picture. I dont believe that of course, I am what one would call, for lack of a better term, a theistic evolutionist. This simiply means that I believe evolution happens just as the scientific model says that it did, but that somehow God is in control of this.
But this leads to the question of what does the word random actually mean, and where in a series of random events does God act?
- February 18, 2008 at 10:09 AM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
What you say here:
"I am what one would call, for lack of a better term, a theistic evolutionist. This simiply means that I believe evolution happens just as the scientific model says that it did, but that somehow God is in control of this"
contradicts what you say here:
"...the current model of evolution requires random mutation followed by natural selection. Both the terms random and natural imply no supernatural intervention, i.e. they take God out of the picture."
I'm worried about the little word "imply" here. If "random" and "natual" really do imply no supernatural intervention, then you shouldn't believe the evolutionary story.
I've spoken w/my friend Steve about this and I think the thing to say is something similar to what some say about the problem of evil and suffering. Some say that just b/c we cannot see what justifying reason God might have for allowing some horrific chunk of evil does not imply that there is no justifying reason God has. It's a sort of noseeum move that gets one from noseeum to no God--i.e., b/c I can see no justifying reason God has there is no justifying reason God has and so no God.
Well, maybe "random" functions in these discussions in just the same way. Granted a sort of epistemological blindness on our part--i.e., for all we know or maybe even could have known we could never have predicted things would go (evolutionarily) the way they have gone--we say that evolution is "random". This just means we can't see God's hand directing, we can't detect a pattern. It doesn't follow from any of this that there is no pattern, no supernatural direction.
I'm inclined to think that most people who employ the term "random" mean to imply that for all we know there is no predicting. The move from that claim to "God is therefore taken out of the picture" is a very large and bold move indeed. And it's one we needn't make.
BTW: On this understanding of "random" the incarnation is sheer random beauty! Who would have, could have, predicted that God's rescue would come wrapped in fragile human skin. Love it!!
- February 18, 2008 at 11:19 AM
- Jack said...
I am aware of the contradiction, that was the point of my post. There is a gap between what one as a theistic evolutionist would claim, and what a naturalist would claim. But, there is no possible scientific evidence that would bridge that gap. Science ends with the documentation of mutations, and there is no way to scientifically describe them as other than random. Your appeal to beauty, is akin to claiming that there is evidence for intelligent design in the universe. You can no more claim that these qualities prove the existence of an intelligent designer than an atheist can claim that the randomness of evolution proves that there isnt one.
But you brought up the other problem with evolution in a universe with an omnipotent creator. The vast majority of mutations are harmful. This brings up the issue that God's mechanim of creation, necessarily causes suffering, and death. And, I think the answer to this question is more complex than just claiming we dont understand God well enough.
- February 18, 2008 at 12:05 PM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
Two short things. First, I do not align myself w/the intelligent design movement. One might use "beauty" to go ID, but I wouldn't. As for mutations, evolution, sufering and death, those are genuine and genuinely difficult issues. Somewhere down the road maybe I'll blog about it. But, nothing wrong w/saying "You know, I don't know" if someone asks "How do God and deadly mutations fit together?". I'll tell you right now, though, I don't know; I don't have it figured out.
- February 18, 2008 at 12:30 PM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
A quick correction to something you said in your last comment, Jack. There should be no gap b/w what an evolutionary creation (EC) defender would say and what a naturalist would say, since a defender of EC is a naturalist! The conflict is b/w what an EC says and what an atheistic naturalist says. So there's a difference b/w a naturalist and an atheistic naturalist. (And who said analytic philosophers were useless?)
- February 18, 2008 at 12:43 PM
- Jack said...
I was using the term naturalist in the sense of metaphysical naturalism, which is nearly the same thing as atheistic naturalism. To be precise, I suppose I should have specified that I was not referring to methodological naturalism, which of course is what science and the study of evolution is. The point of this distinction is the same of your blog, which is that one can be a methodological naturalist without being a metaphysical naturalist. Or, believing in God, and believing in science (including evolution), are not mutually exclusive.
- February 18, 2008 at 1:28 PM
- Maria said...
I love your (rather optimistic) interpretation of the Christian Darwin fish! Makes me almost want to go get one (but then I'd be accountable for my rude driving).
One of my seminary profs had an interesting take on randomness and God's action. It was based on the fundamental uncertainty of everything at the quantum level, and her claim was that that uncertainty offered an opening for top-down (e.g., God's) causality in natural systems.
- February 18, 2008 at 11:28 PM
- Stephen said...
A word about bumper stickers:
First, allow me to set up my story. It four years ago. I was driving along the road in my red 1988 (or was it 87?) Chevy Comaro. This thing was hardly road worthy at the time and likely had never been. The wheels were as bald as the day I was born, because I was an undergraduate was unable to cough up the 300 dollars it would cost to replace them. My final point to set up is that I was living in Sioux Falls, SD at the time and it was February (there was snow and ice all around). Ok, the story...
I was driving very slowly down a relatively busy road in Sioux Falls, because of the aforementioned snow and ice covering the trees, sidewalks,and the road, was making driving difficult. It turns out that I have a somewhat irrational and pathological fear of car accidents. I say pathological, because I take care to avoid them every time I get into a vehicle. I say irrational, because apparently I am the only one (I was on this day, anyway) who has this fear; everyone else was driving quite fast, and (shockingly) ending up on the roadside, wide-eyed, shell shocked, cold and carless, to be so brave... I was taking extra precaution, because of the red 16-year-old, practically tractionless hearse I was commanding.
As I was driving, two people in two separate cars, both immediately behind me, decided that my speed was not sufficient. They also decided that simply passing me was not sufficient, either. Upon passing me the driver of the first car, a mustard yellow oldsmobile station wagon with the faux wood trim running along the side(I am pretty sure of the make, because my family owned one when I was a child, though ours was brown)looked me straight in the face, hers being red as a beet, raised her hand, extended a finger, which has a very specific meaning, and yelled something, which by my estimation was 'First use' or 'Frank Juice' or some such nonsense (I've never been a good lip reader). As her car passed in front of mine what really caught my attention was a bumper sticker attached to the bumper (appropriately enough), which said 'Abortion stops a beating heart.' I am not sure why I noticed the bumper sticker at all (typically I ignore them) but I think my knuckle-white-kung-fu-grip on the steering wheel provided for me a state of hyper perception.
After having only a second to take in the moment (the woman's compassion for the unborn juxtaposed with her complete lack of compassion for me) the second car, a purple dodge minivan, began to pass and as sure as I am typing this to you, the driver (this time a male) was in the process of raising a hand, extending a finger and yelling something, which I can only imagine were concerns about my car. Was I ok? Why was I driving so cautiously? As he came in front of me, I noticed a bumper sticker pasted on the back window of his minivan, which read 'If you can't trust me with a choice, how can you trust me with a child?'
Upon reading the second bumper sticker, I experienced a moment of Nirvana, ecstasy, a beatific vision of sorts. It was surreal. Here in front of me were two people who likely would not agree with much in this life reaching an accord, if only for a moment, in regards to how they ought to handle my driving. I was struck with the beauty of the moment. Nothing else mattered. As they drove away into the distance, I hoped that the one had the chance to pass the other so they both knew where the other stood on the issue of abortion,a n important enough issue to both that they felt the world needed to hear their views in bumper sticker form. I'd like to think that they became comrades at arms as they got to know each other in the ditch in which they both landed just a few miles up the road. I passed them only 10 minutes later. I don't think they noticed; they were probably trying to stay warm. Slow and steady wins the race.
My story does have a moral. How could it not? I cannot imagine that such a perfect scenario would unfold before me without the hand of the almighty Himself at work behind it. I'm not sure what it is, yet, but I've had 4 years to think it over and so I am getting close. Your story reminded me of it, and I don't think I've actually told it to many people. It is late and I am beginning to ramble so I'll leave with you the hope that some day the Jesus fish people and the Darwin fish people can come together in a snowy ditch and huddle towards each other for warmth. I'll happily take the finger pointing and slander to act as the catalyst, or maybe God has that in mind for you?
- February 19, 2008 at 3:20 AM
- Dan Brennan said...
I could do Darwin fish bumper sticker. I haven't the slightest clue how to integrate a supernatural God who intervenes in time and space and mutations from an evolutionary schema (oops schema probably shows my psychological language!). Loved your post and thoughts.
- February 19, 2008 at 9:09 AM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
That is one HILARIOUS story. Thanks for sharing it!!!
- February 19, 2008 at 10:04 AM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which, if I'm remembering this right, has it that at the level of quanta a particle has neither a definite position nor a definite momentum, has been used (and misused) to make all sorts of claims in the philosophy of mind. And it is in the philosophy of mind that "top down causation" gets a lot of use. The idea being that mental events (my willing to raise my right arm, say) can have causal effects in the physical realm (my muscles being moved, contracted, etc. and my arm rising). Anyway, I'd never heard of top-down causation used in connection with creation, but I kinda like it. It clearly is playing on the same idea, namely, that there is no so-called "causal closure" of the physical domain.
Thanks for sharing!
- February 19, 2008 at 10:23 AM
- Maria said...
Yes, I think the context was philosophy of mind rather than biological evolution... my mind makes all sorts of uncalled for leaps like that, and it's been a good decade since I heard that lecture.
- February 19, 2008 at 11:50 AM
- Cindy said...
well apparently i also misunderstood the darwin fish. maybe there should be an explanatory bumper sticker to display beneath it!
- February 19, 2008 at 12:15 PM
- Jack said...
Kevin, the uncertainty principle is not about whether a particle has certain properties of position or momentum, (or spin, or charge etc.) The uncertainty principle is about limitations on what we can know. If we know one property we cant know the other. In fact if we know nothing about one property, then we can know everything about the other, or if we can know the location of a particle within a certain range, then we can know its momentum within a certain range also, but the precision of each is inversely proportional to the other. This is actually more profound than a "fuzzy" particle, because it is the act of observation that causes the particle to flip into one state or the other. The spooky action at a distance that Einstein spoke about, and illustrated famously by Schrodingers cat.
- February 19, 2008 at 2:40 PM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
Hey Jack,
Historically, I don't think the principle was introduced as a piece of epistemology (although its name would suggest as much). I thought it was introduced actually as a bit of physics (or even metaphysics). The idea being that out there in the world (not in our heads) there is "uncertainty", that it is physically impossible to measure both the properties of position and momentum of a particle any more precisely than quantum mechanics allow.
It seems to me that the principle is not about limitations on knowledge, therefore. Rather, it's about how the world putatively is and that has epistemological consequences, one might say.
(I know the principle is sometimes explained in term of something called "The Observer Effect", but I still thought it was about the world out there.)
But, I'm a lowly philosopher who is happy to defer to the scientists on this matter.
- February 19, 2008 at 3:08 PM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
Jack, et. al,
I called in the special artillery
to adjudicate the Heisenberg Principle disagreement b/w Jack and myself. The father of one of the students in my metaphysics seminar this semester is a physicist at Stanford. This is what he had to say, after reading our exchange:
"Quantum mechanics pretty quickly blurs the lines between physics and
metaphysics. If I properly understand the issue you and Jack are
discussing, I think you both actually have it correct. Insofar as physics describes the actual world, the uncertainty is intrinsic to the physical system and the ambiguity is only resolved when there is some
kind of 'observation.' As Jack says, this is a profound thing.
You are correct that it is an inherent limitation in the world, not in our heads. Heisenberg et al. derived the principle to quantitatively define
the limits of what is fundamentally knowable, so in that sense I suppose it is epistemological, but the motivation was at least initially driven
by empirical limitations.
For example, a particle has a location and momentum that is described in quantum mechanical terms as a probability density function. There are
experiments that show conclusively that it is NOT that a single particle'really' has a unique location and momentum, but that a physicist can, because of limited knowledge, only assign a probability reflecting where
it is likely to be. Rather, the individual particle truly is diffuse and really exists with all of the allowed locations and momenta according to
the probability density. It's only when the particle interacts, i.e. is observed, that location and momentum are resolved. Very strange."
There you have it, sports fans. Is it great to be part of an academic community or what?
- February 20, 2008 at 8:39 PM
- Don said...
From Kevin's original post:
"…do not in any way exclude God."
OK, but that does not provide a reason to include God with just a wave of your hand. In your example of fetal development, you can introduce God, but it strikes me as a non sequitur. Why are you introducing it? Does it advance the understanding of this particular subject? Nope. This is why there's a negative correlation between scientific training and religious belief. Science will make you at least indifferent to religion because it's such a useless concept in understanding our world.
Later on in a comment from Kevin:
"Some say that just b/c we cannot see what justifying reason God might have for allowing some horrific chunk of evil does not imply that there is no justifying reason God has."
But it surely makes sense if I can't think of a reason that would justify some particularly nasty piece of evil and no one else can, then the reasonable working assumption would be that there is no reason. This is not an argument from personal incredulity. This is being practical. Anything else is simply self-delusion.
- February 20, 2008 at 9:45 PM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
Well, Don, methinks from the feel of your comment that you're not much interested in a dialogue. So, I'll be brief. Re: the first part of your response, in the account of fetal development I don't introduce God anywhere in the story or explanation. Read it again and agree w/me. So, when you say that my introduction of God is a non-sequitor you're mistaken, given the fact that God isn't introduced at any point in the explanation by me. That was, in fact, my point. The biological explanation is a natural explanation. And, again, it's perfectly compatible with the claim that God made us. Who made us? God. How? Well, I say, read the little story I told about our biological development. That's how.
Now as to the uselessness of the concept of religion for understanding the world, well, that's just bald assertion, said w/a hint of religious zeal. I will say that religion doesn't seem to me methodologically very useful in the biology lab, for example. So if that's your point, we agree. But, it's a pretty big world and religion helps me understand parts and facets of it. Science helps me understand parts and facets too. Religion doesn't help me understand how proteins are made. Granted.
Anyway, as to the second part of your comment re: the noseeum line w/respect to a justifying reason God might have for some nasty bit of evil, you claim that from the fact that you and every other human being fails to see a reason it's reasonable to conclude that there isn't a reason. Well, I suppose if you start from a position of naturalistic atheism, I would have to agree. But, some of us don't start there. We start from a position of theism. So, for us that's not a reasonable conclusion to draw at all.
But if I understand you correctly, what I have just said will be dismissed by you as "simply self-delusion" on my part. And that, my friend, is nothing more (again)than bald assertion, with a heaping teaspoon of ad hominem tossed in to sweeten the drink. Sounds, in fact, very much like Richard Dawkins. And I have little tolerance for fundamentalist atheists like Dawkins and his ilk. To my mind, they're just inside-out religious zealots. And just as dangerous too.
- February 20, 2008 at 10:47 PM
- Don said...
Sorry for the tone. Didn't mean for the brevity to be interpreted as being strident or that the situation was binary...
What bugged me about the "fetal development to God" jump was that we were focused on the petri dish and suddenly this religious superstructure appeared overhead. You might not be introducing God as an explanation, but the connection is there. If this framework allows you to say that God made this fetus, it's reasonable for me to ask how. Were His hands in the goo? I don't think anyone will take this position today. Were there a few touch points? If so, where? We can play in safe and say some ineffable, mysterious something made us in some unknowable sense, but that concept doesn't have enough bite to be very interesting or useful.
I think the reasonable position for theist to take here is to raise above it. He or she has made the personal connection to God (and vice versa), end of story. I certainly agree the only god of interest is a personal god, the one who would know and care about me, as an individual person. The problem is that a personal god is rooted in the notion that we humans are special, in some cosmic sense. God made us as His special creation, gave us special abilities, filled us with a moral sense. This sense of being special has been around for thousands of years, but everything we've discovered in the last 400 years indicates this sense is not justified. The Earth is not the center of the universe. Our origins and makeup are as they are with all of life. If we're not special, then the notion of a special relationship with God or a special destiny seems implausible.
So I just take the facts as I understand them and draw the reasonable conclusion. If the facts leave me incomplete or unsatisfied, then that's my problem. Creating or pulling in some other superstructure to fill in the gaps is suspect to me because it can so easily be rooted in self-deception or group-think.
- February 24, 2008 at 11:10 AM
- Kevin Corcoran said...
Don, Your question assumes that there's some move FROM the biological details TO God. But, on my view, there is no such move. So when you ask HOW God made us I want to say "I've already told you—just read you biology text book; it tells you HOW God did it." And if you say, "But…but where is the place where God reaches in, as it were?", I want to say, you've misunderstood. It's like the visitor to the U.S. who wants to be shown Yale University. His host takes him around New Haven, pointing out the Sterling Memorial Library, the various colleges, Connecticut Hall, etc. and at the end of the tour the visitor, very disappointed, says "But…but you've just shown me a bunch of buildings. I want to see the University."
Now as to your second paragraph, here's how I see it. Human beings are certainly DIFFERENT in extremely interesting ways from other things in the natural world. Special? Well, I dunno. Depends on what you mean by special. If one means by 'special' that God cares only for US and for our SOULS of all things God created, well…then…I say no. No, we're not special. In fact, I completely agree with you, we are of a piece with the rest of the natural world. Hold on to your hat….I don't even believe we have immaterial souls. But in virtue of certain, defining features of ours I do believe we have SPECIAL God given responsibilities. Like, for example, taking care of this earth and each other.
Might I encourage you to go to the "Heaven is Not UP" post and click on the first "here" in that post, between the first set of parentheses. That will link you to a popular article I published called "A New Way to be Human". I think you will find the view I sketch there to be quite a bit different from other Christian views you're probably more familiar with. And if you're really interested in engaging with Christians who take science seriously, then visit my colleague and friend Steve Matheson's blog regularly: http://sfmatheson.blogspot.com/ Also, read my book (click the second "here" in Heaven is Not Up)--especially the section on various sorts of naturalisms: metaphysical, methodological and chastened-- and email me if you want to talk further.
- February 24, 2008 at 12:04 PM
- SFMatheson said...
What I liked about the "fetal development to God" jump was that there wasn't one.
Plenty of Christians make that mistake. Kevin's not one of them.
I can't even figure out how you got there. I hope you'll feel welcome to frequent this blog, and mine, but please read what we actually write.
- February 24, 2008 at 4:55 PM
- Don said...
"...please read what we actually write"
I'm trying. The position that you and Kevin take (being a theistic evolutionist) is so alien to my way of thinking that it's taking time.
- February 25, 2008 at 5:46 PM
- Auzziegob said...
a bumper sticker of a fuckin fish can cause you to literally spit chips.
you poor cunt,get a new hobby,ya silly fuckwit!
- December 26, 2008 at 8:48 AM
- UR_Mortal said...
Auzziegob your such a tough person.
- October 8, 2012 at 12:04 AM
- Eli Johnsrud said...
Billions of years don't fit in with Biblical teaching. So if you believe the Bible is God's divine infallible word and yet twist your beliefs to fit a flawed human theory, you're absolutely insane. You can't believe bits and pieces of the Bible and interpret them how you wish. God speaks of blinded eyes and false prophets. What better way to be a false prophet then to prove "scientifically" that God didn't exist or didn't create the world as it is.
- May 26, 2013 at 12:27 PM
I think the "true meanings" of the two fish are a bit simpler:
Darwin fish: Fish evolved.
Truth eating Darwin fish: Darwin lied.
I think when you identify the Darwin fish as signalling 'pathetic' and 'ridiculously false view', you are pushing a strawman. At the minimum, the Darwin Fish signals a rejection of the idea that evolution did not happen.
At the minimum, the Truth-Eating-Darwin Fish signals a rejection of Darwin.
- September 12, 2013 at 12:24 PM
Some of the greatest truths are in and of themselves both quite simple and astoundingly complex. A bumper sticker is a means of expression, the message is what is important or not or somewhere in between and one thing to you and another to me. If we have ears let us hear or in the case of the stickers if we have eyes let us see. The messages are out there, if we are wise we will not so easily discount them, they do have something to tell us...are we listening?
- November 16, 2013 at 12:53 PM
You sir are an idiot
- January 9, 2014 at 2:14 PM


text:
Saturday, July 5, 2008
I don't know what Carol from here on out would want me to write or not write...so I will just say that some of the big issues this week became emergent and had to be dealt with today. Carol is doing well now, and plans are moving forward to move her to harborview for her remaining wound healing, skin grafts, and other surgeries early next week. Since surgery today, although in pain, Carol is looking the best I have seen her since we got here. Thanks everyone!
22 comments:
- marie bailey said...
Scott, I'm sorry this has happened and now she can heal and come home soon. We will pray for a fast and painless recovery. Please keep being strong. You're amazing with your strength and love. Constantly praying and have you all on my thoughts.
Love & big Hugs,
- July 5, 2008 at 9:13 PM
- erin said...
We love you Scott. She did look amazing tonight! I am so happy I got to see her and talk to her and see that she responded so quickly! We are continuing to pray for her, we love her so much!!!
- July 5, 2008 at 9:20 PM
- The Vastbinders said...
Big hugs to you and your family. I am glad she is turning the corner even under these circumstances.
- July 5, 2008 at 9:46 PM
- Stacie Rucker said...
This is Stacie, Safiya's nurse today. Hope you don't mind me reading your blog. I just wanted to let you and your family know that you are all in my thoughts and prayers throughout the day and night - I'm praying for miracles, and am so happy that Safiya is doing so great and Carol is improving - she sounds like she is an amazing woman!
- July 5, 2008 at 10:21 PM
- Linda Jenner said...
Scott, a few years ago my grandmother was run over by a car and ultimately transfered to Harborview. She received numerous skin grafts to her legs and thighs using pig skin. You could hardly tell where the grafts were and they took excellent care of her! Many thoughts & prayers from Jim & Judy's "family" in the Tri-Cities
- July 5, 2008 at 10:52 PM
- Carol said...
Please know that your need for prayer has been heard by many, including myself, whom have never met you or your beautiful wife. WE ARE PRAYING! May God give you strength and peace in these coming days.
- July 5, 2008 at 11:00 PM
- Candie said...
Hi Scott,
You don't know me but I've known Carol since 6th grade. Anywho, my family and I are going to be up there in Seattle for a post-op at Children's on Monday and was wondering if it would be ok to come and visit with Carol?
What a hard decision that was made today. I was praying for the best, but now she can start to heal.
My prayers continue to be with you!
Candie (Russert) Lansing
- July 5, 2008 at 11:10 PM
- warriortrnr said...
Scott & Carol 2 angel girls:
I don't know what else we can say that hasn't already been said to comfort and bless your weary souls. Know that we love you, and that as we prayed together this morning for you both, the Spirit of the Lord comforted us, reassuring us that there are no bad things, only some hard things for each of us. We will walk this hard road as a family together, just like we did when our house burned and my dad died; just like when G-ma Parsons died; and so on; with our eyes fixed on the resurrection and our hearts knit together in faith. We are a family that thrives through the difficult.
We love you,
Sven & Ticia
- July 5, 2008 at 11:52 PM
- Erica said...
Dearest Cyj,
I love you!
I love you for the person that you are~ for the caring and loving soul that makes you You!
Nothing can change that, Carol!
You are one of the most wonderful individuals I have ever known and I am completley lucky to have had you as a part of my life for such a long time now!
I can not express enough my gratitude in hearing that you are moving forward in your recovery and that you and I will share countless more wonderful moments in the years to come!
Impatiently counting down until I can sit face to face with you on Wednesday...
- July 6, 2008 at 12:40 AM
- Ally Van Leuvan said...
We are so happy that Carol is looking better, and responding well! That is the goal.
We feel like any words we offer you are so insignificant. If there was a way to lighten your burden....we would certainly do it.
Prayers & Love,
Ally & Pete
- July 6, 2008 at 4:52 AM
- Brandee Hogg said...
Dearest Scott,
I am so sorry to hear that you once again had to endure another difficult step. Carol is so very strong and even better a fighter!!! I am relieved that the burden of having to make today's decision's were taken out of your hands and know that this will be the moment when things will start to get better!!! I am so grateful that Carol is already looking much better and I know that in her heart she knows everyone around her and elsewhere love her and pray for her! You are ALL an amazing family! Your constantly in our prayers and thoughts. And thank you for showing our family what it is like to be the most steadfast, strong, resiliant loving people no matter what! It is such a great thing to witness!!
thinking of you all,
the Tricities "Vance" Family
The Hogg Family
- July 6, 2008 at 6:26 AM
- Willow said...
scott all i can say is WOW. Holli is my long time friend and texted me to google you and i was absolutely shocked! i am so very sorry for your situation and i am glad to hear from your lastest post that carol is looking good. on a lighter note, isn't a blog the most wonderful thing for this? when things are heavy it can be too much just to say the same words over. the fact that you have enough energy to even type shows your strength...
hope everything continues to look up for you and your family. btw all your girls are very cute! :)
- July 6, 2008 at 8:23 AM
- John said...
Dear Scott and Carol...Words are so hard to come by, but it is amazing to us the faith you put into your feelings...words to keep us informed. We pray for the Lord's wishes for Carol(your family) and know that he is with you and protecting you, guiding you, Our prayers are added to the many many that are pleaded in your behalf. God Bless your family. John and Marty McNab
- July 6, 2008 at 8:45 AM
- Amy Storch said...
When I read your blog last night I wasn't able to come up with words to express what an amazing rock you have been for the Decker family.
Although there is the issue of time it is clear that Carol will heal and continue to make memories with all her friends and family that love her sooooo much.
Carol has made it this far because of your persistence, strength, knowledge, and courage.
Keep on keeping on!!!
- July 6, 2008 at 9:34 AM
- mdemiter said...
Hi Scott, You don't know me but I've known Carol since elementary school. Carol has always been and continues to be such a strong, amazing person and because of her strength, despite the decisions that had to be made, she will prevail and continue to be the Carol we all know and love. Thank you for taking such great care of Carol and the girls (who are adorable by the way). Your love and devotion toward Carol is amazing! My thoughts and prayers are with all of you!
Hang in there!
Melissa (Wright) Demiter
- July 6, 2008 at 10:05 AM
- Candie said...
After I went to bed last night, I started thinking.....(that's when I think the best) God has blessed you in so many ways..... Carol, Chloe, and your new baby girl Safiya. How do things like this happen.....? Then I just kept telling myself, well the Good Lord, has a bigger and better plan for Carol. Not much words of comfort, but I can tell, when you write about Carol that you truly are an amazing husband and father! Carol is so lucky to have you in her life. You truly are a solid rock! I can't even begin to imagine your pain, but know this, with all the blog comments, Carol has truly touch a lot of peoples lives for the better from coast to coast.
Thank you for taking such good care of such a wonderful person!!!
Love and Prayers,
Candie (Russert) Lansing
- July 6, 2008 at 10:29 AM
- Stephanie said...
Scott and family,
You have all been an amazing support system for Carol. Your family has shown nothing but strength and love during this very difficult time. Carol will be so grateful that she has Scott, her girls and her extended family to help her in the days of recovery ahead.
Many thoughts and prayers,
Stephanie and family
- July 6, 2008 at 11:14 AM
- Langley said...
- This comment has been removed by the author.
- July 6, 2008 at 12:04 PM
- Langley said...
Hey Scott. Just wanted you to know that Jayson and I are thinking of you and your family every day! I am so sorry that you are having to go thru the difficult decisions of the last few weeks but you are an amazing inspiration and Carol and your girls are so lucky to have someone so strong on their side! I am happy to hear that your baby girl is doing so well and can come home! Whatever help you need with your girls, please know that I am still available for whatever you need. Just give me a call 360-761-9018, email me firstname.lastname@example.com or just post a reply comment on your blog and let me know what you need, once you have had time to think about what will help you the most.
-Keep the faith and we will keep praying for you and yours!!
-Langley Hoffman and Jayson Chang
- July 6, 2008 at 12:07 PM
- Melanie Heigaard said...
I was lying awake thinking of the road Carol has ahead of her, and it dawned on me that the girls will not remember this. The mother they will have when their memories have taken root will surely be the strongest most amazing woman they have ever seen. One who is strong and capable and healed, who is living with a handicap while raising a family. One who has an amazing husband and family and friends. A mother and a woman who has overcome, and you and those girls and her strength and her amazing circle of love will be the reason why. The road will be long and hard, but the future is a loving family. How lucky Chloe and Safiya are to have you as parents. You are in our prayers,
- July 6, 2008 at 12:19 PM
- Lori said...
I don't know what to say. Thinking of you often. Thanks for being so strong for Carol and your babies. Carol is such an amazing woman. What a fighter! Thanks for posting the new pictures. I'm hoping to visit sometime this week. I hope that's not a problem.
Lori Stafford
- July 6, 2008 at 5:43 PM
- Scott & Carol Decker said...
Thanks for everything everybody. You all make this so much easier. Lori, visit whenever you would like, I am sure Carol would love to see you. She will most likely be moved on Monday or Tuesday to Harborview. I will post details on that once I get them.
- July 6, 2008 at 8:47 PM

subset: commoncrawl


text:
No. 10 — Transgender assault case: Chrissy Polis
Before anyone knew the name Chrissy Polis, hundreds of thousands of people around the world had watched her being savagely kicked and beaten until she had a seizure at a Rosedale McDonald's as employees did little to intervene. The story quickly evolved from a simple shock video — a dime a dozen on the Internet — to one that illuminated the struggles of transgender individuals when Polis explained in an interview with The Sun how she had been attacked for using the female restroom. The suspect, 18-year-old Teonna Brown, was charged with a hate crime and sentenced to five years in prison. Some for advocates for gay, lesbian and transgender people found the sentence lenient, but also said use of hate crime statutes sent a message that such attacks would be taken seriously.
Baltimore Sun photo by Kevin Richardson
Copyright © 2019, The Baltimore Sun, a Baltimore Sun Media Group publication | Place an Ad


text:
U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission
Agency Charges Ellicott City Surveying Company Fired Longtime Employees for Diabetes and Other Medical Conditions
BALTIMORE -- An Ellicott City, Md., surveying company violated federal law when it fired two employees who had diabetes and hypertension because of their illnesses, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it announced today.
In its suit, the EEOC said that the Howard County firm of Fisher, Collins & Carter discriminated against Robert Gray and Wayne Seifert when it discharged them shortly after requesting that they and all other employees respond to a questionnaire regarding their health conditions, medical issues and medications. Gray had worked for the company for 15 years starting as a rodman and was a party chief at his termination. Seifert had been employed since 2000 as a rodman. The suit asserts that despite their successful performance throughout their careers, the company unlawfully fired them on January 21, 2009.
The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) makes it unlawful to discriminate against a qualified individual because of a disability. The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. Fisher, Collins & Carter, Case No. 10-cv-2453) in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Northern Division, after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement. The complaint seeks a permanent injunction enjoining the company from engaging in any future employment practice that discriminates on the basis of a disability; the implementation of written policies to provide equal employment opportunities for qualified individuals with disabilities; monetary and injunctive relief, including back wages, compensatory and punitive damages for both men; and changes in employment policies to provide equal employment opportunities for qualified individuals with disabilities.
"Diabetes is becoming more common in the United States, yet many employers still make employment decisions based on myths, fears or stereotypes about that condition," said EEOC Regional Attorney Debra M. Lawrence. "We brought this lawsuit because the underlying purpose of the ADA is to eliminate discrimination for people with disabilities who are qualified to do the job."
This case is one of three ADA suits announced by the agency today, all of which were brought under the broader and simplified definition of disability set forth in the ADA Amendments Act. The other two are EEOC v. Eckerd Corporation d/b/a Rite Aid, Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-2816-JEC, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, in which a long-term employee with severe degenerative arthritis was denied the use of a stool she had used as a reasonable accommodation for six years; and EEOC v. IPC Print Services (Case No. 10-cv-886 in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan), which involved the discharge of an employee with cancer who requested a temporary part-time schedule as an accommodation of his disability.
"These cases, among the first filed by the EEOC under the ADA Amendments Act, illustrate the continuing need for rigorous enforcement of the law, as well as further education about the ADA's requirements," said General Counsel David Lopez. "Congress has made the scope of the ADA clear and broad: Individuals with disabilities — including serious medical conditions such as cancer, diabetes, and severe arthritis — must be evaluated according to their qualifications, and not based on unfounded fears or stereotypes.
During fiscal year 2009, disability discrimination charges reached a record level of 21,451-- an increase of 10 percent from the prior fiscal year.
The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the Commission is available at its web site at www.eeoc.gov.


text:
Following up on my last post about "Brain Freeze", there is a type of mind that we should maintain -- a beginner's mind.
We should always have the attitude of a beginner. In this way, we will be open and receptive to new things and corrections. When we wear our rank in our minds, we tend to miss things.
When I met my Sensei in Okinawa during my recent visit, I began by privately saying something like this:
"Sensei, I am here to learn. Please teach me whatever you wish and please feel free to correct me in front of your students or other instructors. Please do not hold back. If I am doing something incorrectly it is only because I do not understand the correct way yet."I am serious. I always make it a point to ask my Sensei to teach and correct me. I am not visiting him to show him what I know (or think I know). I am visiting him to learn.
Over the years, I have seen many people miss great opportunities to learn because they lacked a begginer's mind or heart. Sometimes a senior instructor feels that he has to put on a certain face in front of his students or peers. He might feel embarrassed by corrections. Some instructors might actually be looking for praise or approval from their senior... or even for a promotion.
I can understand that. I have seen it happen enough that I think it must reflect an aspect of human nature.
But I am more greedy than that. My desire for learning exceeds my pride or want of approval. Every minute with my Sensei is precious and perhaps a once in a lifetime opportunity. I cannot let "myself" get in the way of that!
The funny thing is that the greatest sensei I have ever met all seem to have a "beginner's mind." They are always seeking to improve their techniques and themselves.
I will share a funny incident. One of Sensei's students is 20 years younger than me but is truly gifted. I am his senior in age and in number of years training (I think I have trained 4 times as long). When I was training, this student would sometimes observe my incorrect technique and mildly shake his head. He would then demonstrate the correct way of moving.
I would try again. Sometimes, when I got it right (or just a little better), he would point his finger and give a little nod.
I am almost 50, have 4 children (two already adults), run a law office, head a Karate museum, have a master's degree, wrote a real estate book, wrote about 50 Karate articles, blah, blah, blah. But in the dojo my spirit was lifted and I was tremendously encouraged by watching a student (who could be my own son in age) point and nod!
I was a beginner.
Standing in front of my own students in my dojo, I am also still a beginner. Writing these line, I am still a beginner.
Since there is no end to learning, we are always beginning. Once we cease to have a beginner's attitude, we begin to decline.
Charles C. Goodin


text:
PVC Panel Door Range
Brissac Range
This range of PVC panel doors includes the glazing options shown below as well as various woodgrain colour choices as an alternative to the standard white.
Select the icons above for further information on colour options and accessories including knockers and letter plates.
Use the code below when contacting Attwater Home Improvements for further information or when using the on-line quotation facility.
BACKING GLASS OptionsThe following backing glass options are available for the Glazed, Diamond Lead and Georgian Bar styles:
COLOUR OptionsThe following door colours are available:
DOOR KnockersThe knocker and door plate accessories are available in white, black, chrome and gold finishes except for the lionshead knocker which is only available in gold. All knockers except for lionshead are available with a central spyhole.
LETTER plates


text:
Remnant Data
Remnant Data is data that is unintentionally left behind on computer media. In forensic usage, remnant data is typically left behind after attempts have been made to delete the data, after the data has been forgotten, or after the media on which the data resides has been decomissioned.
Byers, Simon. Scalable Exploitation of, and Responses to Information Leakage Through Hidden Data in Published Documents, AT&T Research, April 2003
Chow, J., B. Pfaff, T. Garfinkel, K. Christopher, M. Rosenblum, Understanding Data Lifetime via Whole System Simulation, Proceedings of the 13th USENIX Security Symposium, 2004.
Garfinkel, S. and Shelat, A., "Remembrance of Data Passed: A Study of Disk Sanitization Practices," IEEE Security and Privacy, January/February 2003.
See Also
- [Sanitizing Tools]


text:
Our recent efforts to reduce our carbon footprint include the following:
Southeastern Program Service Center
The new Social Security Southeastern Program Service Center building in Birmingham, AL, celebrated its one-year anniversary in January. Our service center moved into the eight-story facility in March 2008. It also houses the Social Security Teleservice Center, the Birmingham Social Security office and other government offices. The facility has received several honors for "green" design. The building boasts:
- a green roof that reduces the building's carbon footprint through absorption of carbon dioxide by incorporating oxygen-producing plants and vegetables -- the largest green roof on any General Services Administration-leased building;
- a raised floor system that provides better ventilation for improved air quality;
- a "natural light harvesting" system designed to capture as much natural sunlight as possible; and
- public transit accessibility that reduces carbon emissions and energy demands by encouraging employees to use public transportation.
Renovation of the Annex Building in Baltimore, MD
The Social Security Administration worked with GSA to renovate its 477,000 sq. ft. Annex Building using sustainable design practices, resulting in an environmentally-sensitive, LEED-certified facility. Rather than construct a new building, the project team reused the existing structure, saving $25 million in construction costs. Over 75% of building and construction materials were salvaged, saving an additional $310,000. Natural day lighting, high efficiency lighting, thermal ice storage, economizers, high performance windows, reflective roofing, energy-efficient HVAC equipment, and low-maintenance landscaping reduce energy use by 13% over a conventional building.
Harold Washington Social Security Center in Chicago, Illinois
The Harold Washington Social Security Center in Chicago, Illinois installed numerous energy conservation measures using direct financing, utility energy services contracts (UESCs), and energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs). These measures include: a 110-kilowatt, rooftop solar electric system; energy efficient lighting fixtures and controls; retro-commissioning and energy management control system upgrades; chilled water system improvements; HVAC improvements; and low-flow fixtures and waterless urinals. These projects reduce annual energy consumption by more than 20 percent—a total of more than 4 million kWh—and save 2 million gallons of water each year.
Mid-Atlantic Social Security Center in Philadelphia, PA
The Mid-Atlantic Social Security Center in Philadelphia recently installed a solar hot water heating system that pre-heats domestic hot water before it reaches the boiler. The 576 square-foot system includes insulated, evacuated tube collectors arrayed into two roof panels that provide 124,000 Btu of heating for 1,100 gallons of water per day. The system will save $5,000 per year, for a 15-year payback, and a reduction equivalent to 42, 000 barrels of oil and 37,000 cubic feet of natural gas. The Center is the first federal building in the Philadelphia region to use solar energy for heating.
The Joseph P. Addabbo Federal Building in Jamaica, NY
The Joseph P. Addabbo Federal Building in Jamaica, NY, replaced the entire building's chiller plant and is currently completing the final phase of related upgrades to its building control system. The new energy management control system is fully digital with an open protocol system. The HVAC system itself takes advantage of free cooling, uses variable speed drives, and operates in a fully automatic mode. The new system is expected to provide a more constant interior environment and save nearly 1.5M kwh, or approximately 12 percent in annual energy usage.
Frank Hagel Federal Building in Richmond, CA
Constructed in 1974, the Frank Hagel Federal Building in Richmond, CA sits atop an underground spring. For years, the building sump pumps have been dumping this spring water directly into the wastewater system. A new SSA project now diverts 67% of this water — over 16 million gallons a year — from the storm drain system so it can be used for a building irrigation system, gray water for bathrooms, and make-up water for cooling towers. This recycling effort not only makes good use of a natural resource, it also saves $41,000 annually in water bills alone.
Supply Building Solar Parking Lot Lights in Baltimore, MD
Free electricity from the sun is stored in batteries during the day and used for light at night.
Additional Information and Resources
¿Habla español?
Aprenda consejos ambientales que usted puede tomar


text:
With Election Day less than a week away, 56 percent of respondents to this week's RBJ Daily Report Snap Poll say they would vote for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
The results show a sharp divide by political affiliation. Among Democrats, 88 percent favor Democratic President Barack Obama. Among Republicans, 87 percent favor Romney.
Those who identified themselves as independent or affiliated with a third party favored Romney, 53 percent to 47 percent.
Readers' views were virtually unchanged from late April, when Snap Poll participants favored Romney, 55 percent to 45 percent. In late October 2008, Snap Poll respondents were split 50-50 between Obama and GOP nominee John McCain. A week later, Obama defeated McCain, winning 52.9 percent of the popular vote nationwide to 45.7 percent for McCain.
Roughly half of respondents in this week's poll identified the economy and jobs as the most important issue in deciding whom to vote for. Debt and deficits were a distant second, at 15 percent.
Some 1,420 readers participated in the poll, which was conducted Oct. 29 and 30.
If the 2012 presidential election were held today, whom would you vote for?
Mitt Romney: 56%
Barack Obama: 44%
Republicans only:
Mitt Romney: 87%
Barack Obama: 13%
Democrats only:
Barack Obama: 88%
Mitt Romney: 12%
Non-affiliated and third-party only:
Mitt Romney: 53%
Barack Obama: 47%
In deciding which presidential candidate to vote for in this year's election, which single issue is most important to you?
Economy and jobs: 49%
Debt and deficits: 15%
Personal character of candidates: 9%
Health care: 4%
Social issues such as abortion, gay marriage: 4%
Experience of candidates: 3%
Ethics in government: 3%
Taxes: 2%
Income inequality: 2%
Foreign policy: 2%
Education: 1%
Social Security and Medicare: 1%
Global warming and other environmental issues: 1%
Financial system reform: 1%
Other: 3%
What is your political affiliation?
Democrat: 24%
Republican: 38%
Non-affiliated: 34%
Other: 3%
Investment in human and physical capital is what we need long-term. Investing in infrastructure rebuilding, education, research and alternative fuels will lead to long-term stability. President Obama's plan will take us in this direction.
—John Mitchell
It is almost unbelievable that one man (and his administration) could do so much economic damage in four years. We got "Change" all right, but were left without "Hope."
—Bob Worden, Penn Yan
For those of you voting for Romney, I wonder which candidate you are voting for, the candidate who lied to the conservative base to get the Tea Party vote or the candidate who more recently lied to the moderate base to secure their endorsement? You can't have it both ways.
—Greg Reynolds, East Rochester
The choice is simple—capitalism or communism.
—Harry Caruso
Recovery from financial crises has historically been slow. I'm concerned that income inequality is depressing demand and that a too-rapid attempt to cut federal spending at a time when households are still holding down spending to cut their debt could plunge us back into recession.
—Bill Murphy
Obama predicted four years ago that his would be a one-term presidency if he didn't cut the deficit and restore the economy to health. I hope his prediction comes true!
—George Thomas, Ogden
Romney can't be trusted as he changes his position depending whom he is talking to and whom he wants support from. He has no position because he keeps changing it. I feel he will support rich people and special interest groups like lobbyists. He has been radically conservative like Paul Ryan and now has come to the middle to get elected. I basically can't trust him to do things that will help the country or me.
—Bob Stein
If I were in a swing state, I would vote for Obama again. Since I'm not, I feel privileged to vote for Jill Stein (Green Party) or Gary Johnson (Libertarian) before either of them.
—Ken Maher
What do you suppose is in Gov. Romney's income tax returns that makes him so resistant to releasing them, even after being urged by other Republicans to do so?
—Tom Gillett, NYSUT
How about this for a platform? Let's take what Obama has done and run with it rather than destroy what has already been accomplished. We spend too much time trying to undo what has been done rather than building on it.
—David DeMallie
I'd like to help Barack Obama be a one-term president.
—Mike Gooding, Good Vibrations
The presidency of the United States is the most demanding executive position in the world. Four years ago we elected someone with no executive experience and no political leadership experience. We got the kind of results any executive recruiter would have expected. When an executive fails, he must be replaced. That's what happens in business and should happen in politics, as well.
—Arnold L. Gray, CPA, Gray Certified Public Accounting P.C.
You know there are other candidates running besides Romney and Obama, right?
—Matthew D. Wilson
Debt and deficits, highs and lows in the economy, etc., will come and go, but Supreme Court decisions are with us for generations; witness the Dred Scott, "separate but equal" and Citizens United cases. The next president is likely to get at least two appointments, which have the potential to tilt the court for a long time to come.
—Mike Haugh
If we don't put our house in order on every economic front starting with the election and immediately to job creation and then deficit and debt reduction, then widespread loss of wealth in this country will be devastating to all classes.
—John Nolan, Rochester
I have found over time that even the most personally fiscal responsible people do not feel the government should do the same. We can't borrow 60 percent of what they spend. I know I couldn't do that as a business owner! But that is what our government does every day. It seems they have one social issue that may be very near and dear to their heart. Which is the way they vote? The socially liberal thinking is what has gotten us even deeper into dept. The problem with this election, different from others, is that we as a country are on a fiscal cliff and ready to fall off. If we do, we will not be able to recover. This administration has no clue what they are doing as far as getting our spending and debt under control. Printing money and give out entitlements is not the answer. Taxing just the rich will not do anything but cut job opportunities. The money that they are taxed will go to the government, who hasn't got a clue, and not into business growth and job opportunities that the rich create. So my question, do you want a lawyer with no business experience given four more years to do what he has been doing, printing money and driving up the debt? Or a businessman with the ability to produce jobs and manage money? It is not a sin in this country to have money, especially if you have earned it. As a president, I like the idea that Gov. Romney has made millions. He is exactly what this country needs before it is too late.
—Dan Morgan, Aaron Tool & Mold Inc.
An end to the socialist agenda into the governance of our great country is in order. This administration has been a cancer on many levels to our society. The first steps backward on race relations since the '60s, the most people depending on a government handout than ever before and no vision "forward." Review the facts, not the rhetoric. Benghazi-American ambassador assassinated: lies, lies and more lies from Obama, Clinton, Rice, Panetta and Holder. Fast and Furious: lies, lies and more lies. Americans killed in the service of this country while Obama watches. This is your government. Distorting the truth and outright lies. This is sixth-grade mentality of "if I keep telling the same story, I'll will it to be true." This is the president of the United States of America, for God's sake! Vet his history, vet his colleagues, vet his wife who is disbarred from practicing law in Chicago. David Axelrod, Jarret, Hillary's aide, all socialists and Islamism sympathizers. Time to drain the swamp of scum! If there wasn't a three-way between the media, unions and Obama, you might have a chance to learn the truth. Give this country back to the working, taxpaying citizens and take it away from the undeserving freeloaders, illegals, and overreaching government programs. Take away Obama's medication and see the effects in the first debate. Classic Prozac syndrome. Here's a scary thought, we're one bout of depression from Biden being president! What if this was Bush's administration? Clearly Obama wasn't prepared for the "mess he inherited." I'm confident Romney and Ryan are ready for the mess they're going to inherit. Obama wasn't ready before, it's worse now, and he's not ready now, never was. Don't wait for the media to give up the facts, use theIinternet and amaze yourself on what these clowns are getting away with.
—Lou Romano
During Romney's tenure as governor of Massachusetts, the state was 47th of the 50 states in jobs creation. Additionally, according to the Baltimore Sun, his boast of the declining unemployment rate in the state was true but only because 200,000 residents left the state to seek work elsewhere. Romney had an approval rating of only 35 percent as governor—not exactly a ringing endorsement. He may talk about being able to stimulate the economy, but he has no record to provide evidence that he knows how.
—Joanne Greene-Blose
Barack Obama saved GM and Chrysler; made our foreign policy more multilateral; took on health care (though that needs tweaks of various kinds); and will likely have the opportunity to nominate a new U.S. Supreme Court judge or two who will be moderate, rather than conservative. Does the president need to do a better job relating to business and regulation? Sure. Does he need to agree to a grand bargain on the debt and deficit? Sure. Maybe we will also have a Congress that wants to practice the art of statecraft and get important work done by working through issues. One can hope.
—Carolyn Phinney Rankin, president, Phinney Rankin Inc.
No matter who is elected, they will benefit from the economic foundation laid out by President Obama. Just as Obama had to deal with the multitude of serious economic issues that George W. Bush laid at his doorstep, the president over the next four years will be the beneficiary of sound and permanent economic policy which has guided Obama. This will free the president to work on the issues of federal debt, tax reform and Medicare/Medicaid. I will be in Ohio next week trying to make certain that Obama, not Romney, will be able to take credit for the economic upturn which will occur in the next four years.
—Michael L. Harf
A good leader knows his strengths and limitations. He then will be able to compensate for those attributes to take care of the job at hand. The current administration just looks to blame others for their failures.
—Dom Pullano
For some reason I find it repugnant to vote for any candidate supported by one of the architects of the Bush presidency, Karl Rove, (Crossroads) and funded by many of the same people that outsourced jobs, deny health care as a right, destroy unions, destroyed our economy, let our infrastructure crumble, and take most of the wealth created by workers for themselves.
—Jim Bertolone, Rochester AFL-CIO
My single most important issue is bipartisanship within Congress because none of these very important issues are going to be settled without it. President Obama promised to reconcile partisan politics in Washington. He did not and I believe that he did not even try. If anything Congress is worse now than it was four years ago. If a working Congress is going to happen there is no reason to think it will happen on an Obama watch.
—Jay Birnbaum
Need a change. Mitt is the better of the two choices. Where is Ross Perot when you need him?
—Dave Strasenburgh
Simply stated, President Obama has FAILED to perform on every issue listed in this poll, most important economy/job growth. He has failed to answer the question that left four Americans dead and has further failed to answer any questions relating to our two border guards killed due to "Fast & Furious." He has sold out this country with what I believe is not just redistribution on a class level but I believe on a world level as evidenced by his lack of policy on the debt. Time for him to go based on his lack of leadership, the economy, healthcare, lack of support for small businesses, his arrogance, military cuts, too many cover-ups and enough lies. GO ROMNEY!
—David Topian, Westminster Real Estate Advisors
Uncontrolled and unnecessary immigration, both illegal and legal, is the biggest long-term issue to me. However, I realize both candidates are pandering, and thus are unreliable and weak on that issue. That being said, the economy and our nation's diminishing status in the world are matters that need attention, and Obama has not proven up to the task. Romney cannot be worse.
—Charles Genese
Is Romney ideal? Well, my candidate didn't make the ballot, but he's a FAR better option at this juncture. It surprises me that President Obama is considered a viable option. His spending is unprecedented and with levels of spending like this we ought to demand a much higher return on the investment (like sub 4 percent unemployment). We cannot sustain his spendthrift ways—I shudder to imagine the repercussions of allowing another four years of this level of spending.
—Josh Pies, executive producer, C47 Film Associates
We have to remember where George Bush took the country in 2008, and how far we've come since then. Plus, as someone with a pre-existing condition, Obamacare is of the utmost importance to me personally, and to millions of others. So when it comes to Obama vs. Romney, I'll take more of the same, thank you—versus flip-flopper, tax-evading, non-transparent job-offshoring Romney and his blatant liar cohort Ryan.
—Richard Stevenson, co-founder and CEO, CobbleSoft International
My hope as a citizen, husband, father, and a business owner is that I'm in the majority when it comes to choosing Mitt Romney as the next president. Barack Obama has grown the size of government beyond comprehension and with a second term would do whatever he could to continue his "transformation" (i.e.; destruction).
—Todd Black, Black's Hardware
I believe that our country (and state) would be much better off with a smaller government, less regulation and a simpler tax code. Though not the perfect candidate, Mitt Romney seems way more interested in moving us more toward a smaller government, less regulation and a simpler tax code than does the incumbent.
—Doug Lyon, Lyon Capital Management
Obama has been a failure in helping the economy (11+ percent unemployment if we look at the number of people in the workforce when Obama took office). Romney has the experience and ideology to get us out of this. If Obama wins, you can expect nothing to get any better. Now, with this latest Benghazi debacle, I think the American people are starting to see that Obama has no idea of what he is doing because of his total lack of any credible management experience in life. If Obama and his whole administration can lie about this massacre of four Americans in Libya, then he is not trustworthy to lead this country. The world is less safe today than when Obama was sworn in. We need competent leadership in Washington and our country is starving for real leaders.
—Peter Caines, Penfield
I can't comprehend why so many poor and middle-class people vote against their own self-interest. Why do they fall for the right's carefully crafted messages that Republicans care about them? They don't. Sure, taxes are unpopular for everyone and deficit expansion is a challenge, but it has always been with us. The economy is slowly improving, and it took us more than 10 years of failed domestic and foreign policy blunders by the extreme right to get us to where we are. The president has done better than expected to turn things around, in spite of Republican obstructionism. The president has built up some momentum, so I believe allowing him to continue moving forward is the best strategic decision. Even the most wealthy people become ill or injured at some point and health care reform is the only way to ensure that all Americans get quality and timely medical treatment. There was a time when Republicans and Democrats worked together on behalf of all citizens. I want to see that sort of bipartisan cooperation again.
—Frank Orienter, Rochester
I don't like the Republican stance in regard to women's issues.
—Priscilla Minster
Despite the disgusting obstruction of congressional Republicans President Obama has consistently worked to strengthen the economy and improve conditions and opportunities for all Americans. He has demonstrated tremendous knowledge, strength and wisdom in foreign affairs. Although we are not yet where we need to be, his efforts have brought the U.S. back from the brink of economic disaster. He deserves another term, hopefully with a more supportive Congress.
—Cindy DeFaco
It would be a different and much more economically viable country today if we had the 50 million consumers who were aborted. Why such hush on the obvious?
—Diane Harris, president, Hypotenuse Enterprises, Inc.
I'm 68 years old. So I can clearly remember President Eisenhower and every president since. Obama is the worst president in my lifetime. He is bad for the economy. He is bad for the military and foreign affairs. He is bad in every category on your list. The only thing he is good at is running an election campaign. This is because of his charisma and popularity with the media. But his solutions for the country's problems are based on outdated socialist theories that are proven not to work anywhere. Romney won't be a great president, but he'll be a lot better than Obama. If we want to avoid following Greece and the rest of Europe into a punishing austerity, we need to get rid of the big spenders now. This also means getting rid of Louise Slaughter and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.
—Dennis Ditch, Delta Square Inc.
Cutting through all the rhetoric and extreme-partisan-bull, here are the two core issues: Romney advocates an economic approach that is not relevant or workable in our modern, inter-connected world. It's been tried, it failed, and in fact, it CREATED the economic mess we're in right now. Remember that? It was in all the papers. It's a vision foisted on believers by a powerful, hidden, insidious group who are able to write self-enriching rules. Ironically, they have a lot of non-members advocating on their behalf. Further, even if he articulated a detailed plan for achieving some miraculous turn-around that somehow restored America to a nostalgic greatness in this rapidly-changing reality, I could never vote for him because he wants to take us back to a medieval social environment. The economy is important—clearly—but the political discourse allows neither candidate to describe a realistic vision for how America will thrive as the world changes around us. In a liquid global capital market, there is obviously no guarantee that tax breaks to the uber-rich will be invested in creating American jobs—it's simply not happening when they can get huge returns in other markets. It's time for something different; something more reflective of the challenges emerging in a decentralizing economic world. And while it's easy to bamboozle voters into thinking Obama hasn't done enough for the economy, my education and research tell me a different story. Once again, look past the rhetoric and remember what he inherited. Then analyze the data and see the results. The economy IS recovering. So even if you still give the economic edge to Romney, which I don't, then the religion-infused social agenda he advocates is a non-starter. Even the majority of my vocal conservative friends don't support that facet of his candidacy. But maybe there are many who would turn a blind eye to that facet to support a false promise of prosperity. Not me. Romney likes to say his position offers a clear choice—well, I DO agree with that!
—Andy Vaughan
Without a doubt, I would for Gov. Romney today, tomorrow or next Tuesday. To paraphrase Mr. Eastwood during the Republican National Convention, "I'm sorry Mr. Obama we're going to have to let you go."
—John Malvaso
I demand a president who respects the nation he leads whomever he or she may be.
—Daniel Mossien, architect
Romney says what he thinks the person to whom he is speaking wants to hear. Thus, his answers keep changing and it is not possible to determine exactly what he thinks—except that he wants to be president.
—Donald A. Dinero, TWI Learning Partnership
President Obama was not competent to hold the nation's highest office when he was elected on a program of hope and change four years ago. The hope he brought to office has failed to yield positive results and the change he promised has turned out to be change for the worst. But, the most disappointing fact is that he has not grown in office to deserve to be reelected. He remains as incompetent today as he was four years ago.
—Robert Zinnecker, Penfield
Obama will go down in history as the worst president of the United States of America ever to hold office (even worse than Jimmy Carter if you can believe that). He wasted his political capital in his first two years of office getting Obamacare passed—the most expensive partisan piece of legislation ever to pass Congress. Meanwhile the economy was in a tailspin. Obama lacks judgment. Romney is a businessperson who truly does understand how the economy works and how jobs can grow. I also believe because of his turnaround experience that he will make progress in reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy.
—Mike Kaser, Penfield
We shouldn't be electing a president every four years. We should be electing one every eight years and that's it. It's time for a new one.
—Hal Gaffin, Fairport
Mitt Romney is the clear choice for small business. President Obama has been a disaster. It's amazing that according to the polls, it's still a close race. It should be no surprise since a vast majority of all media outlets are in President Obama's back pocket. The bias media should be calling out the president's disastrous economic policies, which have produced 23 million unemployed and underemployed individuals in spite of adding almost $6 trillion of national debt. Gas prices have more than doubled since he's taken office partly because of his energy policies and reduced drilling on federal lands. He has bragged about bankrupting coal-fired power plants because of stringent EPA restrictions and mandatory carbon credit purchases. His bungling of foreign policy in regards to the cover-up of the Benghazi incident where Ambassador Stevens was murdered, his disrespect of Israel, his silent agreement with President Medvedev of Russia and his international apology tour is disturbing. Obamacare will be taking more than $700 billion from Medicare and add taxes to many parts of this bill. It will also create extreme rationing. And why was the confiscation of the student loan business from the private sector put in the Obamacare law. The bill was passed without any Republican votes, which shows a lack of bipartisanship. What is worse is the bill was passed without knowing what was in it according to Nancy Pelosi. He also has appointed a number of radicals as czars and other positions. In fact, earlier this year he appointed a number of individuals to National Labor Relations Board, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other agencies in violation of the Constitution, while Congress was still technically in session. He circumvented Congress to grant amnesty to a certain segment of illegal aliens and has not punished sanctuary cities for violations of United States immigration laws. This is only part of President Obama's disastrous reign. Please vote for Mitt Romney!
—John Rynne, president, Rynne, Murphy & Associates, Inc.
11/2/12 (c) 2012 Rochester Business Journal. To obtain permission to reprint this article, call 585-546-8303 or email firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
The purity of gold is measured in karats. The higher the karat amount, the more pure the gold is. If gold is 100% pure, then it is 24 karat gold (24K). In its pure form, gold is soft and malleable, but scratches easily and is unsuited for jewelry wear. Consequently, it must be alloyed with other metals to give it strength. Some of the most common forms of gold alloy include:
- 18K Gold - 18 parts gold, 6 parts other metals by weight (75% pure)
- 14K Gold - 14 parts gold, 10 parts other metals by weight (58.3% pure)
- 10K Gold - 10 parts gold, 14 parts other metals by weight (41.7% pure)
Yellow Gold
The shade of yellow gold can vary based on the alloy. As the amount of gold increases, so does the brightness of the yellow color. The most historically popular of all three metal shades, yellow gold is easy to maintain for a lifetime of wear.
White Gold
While not a true metal, white gold looks similar to platinum, and is made from yellow gold and various alloys, including nickel and zinc. It is often plated with Rhodium, a white and reflective metal that provides an excellent protective coating. However, the protective layer of Rhodium will gradually wear off and require re-plating.
Rose Gold
Consisting of the entire red, blush, and pink gold shades, rose gold is formed by alloying pure gold with copper. The more copper used, the redder the hue of the gold. Considered to be the most romantic color of metal, rose gold is stronger than both yellow and white gold because of the strength of the copper used.
Gold Care
Some chemicals, including chlorine, can be damaging to gold alloys. To ensure that your gold stays in top-shape, bring it to your local Helzberg Diamonds store any time for a complimentary cleaning and inspection. You can also clean your gold jewelry at home by using a solution of warm water and detergent-free soap with a soft bristled toothbrush.


text:
The Daily Telegraph has revealed how the Australian government has attempted to suppress its own report on peak oil. The response from the New Zealand government had been equally secretive and obfuscating.
The 470 page report concludes that world oil production will peak in approximately 2016 and then begin to decline for the rest of the century and beyond.
"Given the growth in deep and non-conventional oil balancing the shallow decline in conventional production, it is predicted that we have entered about 2006 onto a slightly upward slanting plateau in potential oil production that will last only to about 2016-eight years from now (2008).
After that, the modelling is forecasting what can be termed 'the 2017 drop-off'. The outlook under a base case scenario is for a long decline in oil production to begin in 2017, which will stretch to the end of the century and beyond. Projected increases in deep water and non-conventional oil, which are 'rate-constrained' in ways that conventional oil is not, will not change this pattern."
The report has never been published on an Australian Government website (unlike all other BITRE reports), but has now mysteriously appeared on a French website (leaked?) and from there has now gone mainstream.
The New Zealand government approach to peak oil has been equally secretive but much more cunning.
Although the National government received very strong advice from officials in 2009 confirming New Zealand's high vulnerability to oil shocks, it has decided that the peak oil issue is altogether too sensitive to risk obtaining further advice on. NZ Report here
Better not to ask any questions when you don't have any answers.
This ostrich approach was confirmed from my official information request in late 2011. The response I received was that no specific advice on the risks and impacts to New Zealand of a potential decline in world oil production had been requested or received since 2008.
What I would now like to know now is, given the high degree of co-operation between officials trans-Tasman, whether New Zealand officials or Ministers received copies of the BITRE report, and if so what was their response to it?


text:
From levifaur
The Single European Regulatory Space
Rationale: Politics – in capital P - is the art of institutional design and of the molding of political spaces. The European Union is now where spaces are now being mold and remold to create the most ambitious transnational organization in the world. It is the European Union which shapes, and will continue to shape, the future directions of regulation and regulatory reforms well beyond Europe. The emerging regulatory space that is under study here is part of the administrative, constitutional, electoral, cultural and parliamentary spaces that are emerging in tandem – both shaping and being shaped – by the regulatory space. This project focuses on the interaction between regulatory networks and regulatory agencies in shaping the European regulatory space.
Aims: The European regulatory space has been expanding rapidly since the 1990s, and the idea of the single market is increasingly assessed against the idea and emergence of a Single European Regulatory Space (SERS). The single European market and the single European regulatory space are a moving target. Both markets and regulatory regimes in Europe are split and divided across nations and regions; but the double movement toward a single market and a single European regulatory space is evident almost everywhere. In order to shed some light on the characteristics and the driving forces of regulatory governance in the EU, this research project raise the following four questions:
First, what are the characteristics of the EU's regulatory space and in particular the characteristics of European regulatory Agencies and Networks ?
Second, how do the characteristic of Agencies and Networks evolve and change in time ?
Third, what are the reasonable outcomes that can be expected from the expansion of the European Regulatory State?
Fourth, what actors and forces have been encouraging or inhibiting the rise of particular forms - mainly agencies and networks - of the European Regulatory Space ?
Download, Review and Send me your Feedback
EU Agencies Data:
Data on EU Agencies in Excel Format (For Peer Review and Comments; Updated November 11th,2010)
A video on the growth of the EU Agencies (Download, or double click; Horizontal Format; All Agencies; Based on data set from October 30th, 2010)
European Networks Data:
Data on European Networks in Excel Format and in word format (For Peer Review and Comments; Updated November 15th,2010)
Note on the Regimes that were covered:
This section presents a survey of regulatory networks and agencies across 36 regulatory regimes. The starting point of the survey is a data set of Jordana, Levi-Faur and Fernandez (2011) on national regulatory authorities, which identifies 16 regulatory regimes for data collection: central banking, competition, electricity, environment, financial services, food safety, gas, health services, insurance, pensions, pharmaceuticals, postal services, security and exchange, telecommunications, water and work safety. Twenty more regimes were surveyed for the purpose of the paper bring the total number to 36: shipping, railways, aviation, gender, privacy, human rights, policing, drugs, justice, chemicals control, fisheries, fraud, administrative integrity, working conditions, broadcasting, network communications, intellectual property rights and trademarks, product safety and consumer protection.
Source: A paper from the Workshop on 'Agency Governance in the EU and its Consequences' (RECON/MZES), University of Mannheim, Mannheim Centre for European Social Research (MZES), 16–17 September 2010;. The paper was revised and is now available as paper no. 30 in the working paper series: [David Levi-Faur, Regulatory Networks & Regulatory Agencification: Towards a Single European Regulatory Space?. JPRG Paper No. 30, December 2010. Jerusalem Papers in Regulation & Governance. A short, revised and updated version of the paper was published in a special issue of the Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 18(6), Fall, 2011, pp. 810-829.


text:
Steve Helber / AP
Republican presidential candidate former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and his running mate Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., wave to supporters during a rally in Fishersville, Va., Oct. 4.
FISHERSVILLE, Va. – Capitalizing on momentum from Wednesday night's debate, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan whipped up their base here in rural Virginia with a raucous rally complete with fireworks, live music and pointed new attack lines aimed at their Democratic opponents.
"I got the chance to ask the president questions that people across the country have wanted to ask him, such as why is it that he pushed Obamacare at a time when we had 23 million people out of work? I asked why is it that the middle class is still buried in this country – why is it we have 23 million people out of work?" Romney said, ticking off several more debate topics. "I asked him those questions and you – you heard his answers."
Romney wove highlights from the debate into his traditional stump speech, revisiting the showdown that was watched by 62 million Americans.
"What you didn't hear last night from the president is why it is the next four years are possibly going to be better than the last four years. He doesn't have a way to explain that, because he has the same policies for the next four years as he had for the last four years," Romney said. "He said go forward. I call it forewarned, all right?"
Ryan also weighed in on the debate for the first time, predictably praising the man at the top of the GOP ticket.
"Every now and then, we see a glimpse into the future. Last night, we saw a clear picture. We saw a clear choice," Ryan said. "Last night, America got to see the man I know: a leader, a decisive man, an optimistic man, a man with a plan to get people back to work and to protect our freedoms."
Thursday's event showed a tilt back toward the Republican base. Country music star Trace Adkins warmed up the crowd with a 30-minute set, and the National Rifle Association officially bestowed its endorsement of the Romney/Ryan ticket.
"We stand on the edge of an Obama cliff with our freedom. If President Obama gets re-elected, he's going to have one to three Supreme Court appointments," warned Wayne LaPierre, the NRA's executive vice president. "And I guarantee you this: If that happens – one to three more Sotomayors and Kagan – we can kiss our constitutional right to own a firearm in the United States goodbye along with a lot of the rest of our freedoms. And we can't let that happen."
Reuters, Getty Images
In the final push in the 2012 presidential election, candidates Mitt Romney and Barack Obama make their last appeals to voters.
With the first presidential debate out of the way, the focus turns to the vice presidential debate next Tuesday in Kentucky.
On Thursday, Romney and Ryan pounced on the vice president's statement earlier in the day that Democrats aimed to repeal the so-called Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
"Last night President Obama made it very clear he's going to raise taxes. Today, Vice President Joe Biden made it even more clear," Ryan said. "In Iowa … he asked if he and President Obama wanted a trillion dollar tax hike and his response to himself was, 'Yes we do.' That's a direct quote, friends. Well, Virginia – no, we don't!"
Romney piled onto his running mate's remarks: "The vice president blurted out the truth today. They plan on raising taxes on the American people, and that will kill jobs. We will not let that happen. We want to create jobs, not kill jobs in this country."
Democrats cried foul at that and other comments by Romney touting his own tax plan and accusing the President of trying to raise taxes on middle class Americans.
"Clearly, Mitt Romney thinks facts don't matter – but the hard-working Americans who he'd punish with his policies do," said Obama campaign spokesperson Lis Smith, who accused Romney of a "streak of dishonesty."
As the weekend approaches, Romney continues to campaign in Virginia before heading to the battleground state of Florida, while Ryan continues to prep for the debate and raise money for the GOP ticket.


text:
Austrian news magazine Profil is running a flattering 2-page story about me in their Feb 22, 2010 issue. Even if the article is only available in German, I've scanned it for your viewing pleasure, in the sincere hope that this qualifies as "fair use".
You can click the images for a higher-res version, which should be large enough to read conveniently. Sorry for the less-than-stellar scan quality — this must be related to the biblical age of my scanner hardware.
PS: Please note the partly occluded, but clearly visible "LOL" on the blackboard behind me. Thanks.


text:
With everything from crashes by de facto illegal bus companies to commercial driver fatigue putting commercial vehicle safety in the headlines of late, it is perhaps no surprise that two key trucking advocacy groups have stepped up to the plate and are pitching for the National Highway Traffic Safety Admin, (NHTSA) to begin researching standards for the crashworthiness of heavy trucks.
Pointing out having such standards "could benefit America's professional truck drivers," the American Trucking Assns (ATA) and the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Assn. (OOIDA) have teamed up to push this highway-safety agenda item.
"NHTSA has continuously developed crashworthiness standards for automobiles and light trucks, but to date has generally not applied crashworthiness standards to commercial trucks," the two groups wrote in a June 6 letter to David Strickland, NHTSA Administrator. "We believe there may be opportunities to enhance the survivability of professional truck drivers if appropriate, research-based, uniform standards are developed."
The letter specifically states that crashworthiness standards should be considered for the "tractor/truck cabs of commercial motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 26,001 lbs or more." That would cover all Class 7 and 8 trucks.
Also, the letter points out that ATA and OOIDA are "aware of industry standards that original truck equipment manufacturers follow, and NHTSA's research should also consider the merits of existing industry-driven standards and testing."
Specifically, ATA and OOIDA said in the letter they "highlighted the need for improving cab structure and occupant restraints such as safety belts and airbags, strengthening windshields and doors to prevent occupant ejections, and installing more forgiving interior surfaces."
"Our organizations believe that improvements in truck occupant safety can be achieved," the letter concluded. "We look forward to working with NHTSA on this and other important highway safety efforts."
"Making our highways safer, especially for our drivers, is one of ATA's highest priorities," ATA president & CEO Gov. Bill Graves noted. "ATA has made setting crashworthiness standards a part of our progressive safety agenda and we're proud to stand with OOIDA in calling on the federal government to take these important first steps that will reduce injuries and fatalities among America's professional truck drivers."
Todd Spencer, OOIDA executive vp. "We are more than glad to join ATA in making this request to hold the safety of professional truck drivers to as high a standard as all other motor vehicle users," said Todd Spencer, OOIDA executive vp. "The most valuable, even most precious, cargo truckers haul is themselves and it's time that our standards reflect that value."
To read the full text of ATA and OOIDA's letter, click here.


text:
0 product in your basket.
Items total (excl delivery):£0.00
Safe & Secure Our checkout is secure, so you can shop with confidence.
More Than Words
In Stock.Ready for dispatch.
Free Delivery
Available on this item to mainland UK addresses.
Fast Dispatch
Usually within one business day.
Safe & Secure
Secure website and checkout.
What can be more loyal to one another than a loving couple and their loyal companion.
This beautifully sculpted figurine of two people, a man and a woman with their faithful dog.
The man is finished in neutral colours while the woman has a lovely pink dress on.
The ornament shows the man in a sitting position with his partner standing behind him looking over his shoulder with arms around him, and their dog sitting on the floor between them.
|Product Code:
|More Than Words
|Family & Friends
98%Recommend Us
4.88 Average 1995 Reviews
Independently collected from verified customers by Reviews.co.uk.
Fast delivery , nice products , great for gifts
1 week agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
Very pleased with crusader, very quick service,, would defo use the company again and would also recommend them to anyone
4 weeks agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
Picture perfect thank you delivery first class
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
As this come through royal mail, the request wasnt adhered too. So just so lucky I was at home.... The gift itself was lovely, and my wi...
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
My package arrived on time, very well packaged ! My only disappointment was that the Snoopy figurine was broken from the base. I phoned C...
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
Swift efficient deliver. Thank you.
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
I thought it was going to be a little bit bigger but my husband loved it also I would have liked to have a catalogue of other items you do
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
Easy to use website and quick delivery. Would use again.
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
Thrilled with the item as was my sister who received it as a gift, faultless service too. Would definitely use crusader again
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk
Item received was exactly as pictured, arrived very quickly and was very well protected in its packaging. Absolutely delighted with ornam...
1 month agoReviews.co.ukwww.reviews.co.uk