text:
ADePT Health is a free-standing computer program that allows users to produce quickly - and with the minimal risk of errors - most tables that have become standard in applied health and equity analysis. ADePT produces summary statistics and charts that allow inequalities to be compared across countries and over time. This manual explains the methods ADePT uses, how to prepare data for it, how to navigate the ADePT interface to generate the desired tables and charts, and how to interpret them.
Click on book cover to read it on-line.
Or proceed to full-text download in PDF from the World Bank Documents & Reports site.
Alternatively full-text download in PDF is available from the Open Knowledge Repository
May 2011. SKU: 18459 (ISBN: 978-0-8213-8459-6)
The objective of the manual is to assist education analysts and policy practitioners in their assesmment of education sector performance, internal efficiency, finance, and equity. It is a technical and analytical resource that takes full advantage of ADePT Education, a software tool that allows for the calculation of education indicators from micro-level data. IT provides technical definitions of more than forty indicators and step-by-step instructions for the preparation and analysis of indicators of internal efficiency and inequality. It also assists users in the interpretation of results, the prioritization of policy issues, and in the generation of tables and graphs that can be used to bolster their own analysis
Or proceed to full-text download in PDF from the open knowledge repository.
July 2010. SKU: 18458 (ISBN: 978-0-8213-8458-9)
This manual targets researchers and analytical policy practitioners working in the areas of poverty and inequality. It is a comprehensive reference designed to facilitate the develoment of poverty reduction policies based on the rich set of analytical results produced by ADePT software. The book presents the main indicators for the analysis of poverty and inequaity in a unified framework; discusses tables and graphs generated by Poverty and Inequlity modules of ADePT; provides interpretation of analytical results and presents examples from different countries. It also explains the steps of data preparation and covers the main features of ADePT software.
December 2011. SKU: 18461 (ISBN: 978-0-8213-8461-9)
ADePT Social Protection examines how the beneficiaries and/or benefits of social protection programs and private transfers are distributed across quintiles, deciles or other population groups. The Users Manual starts with a brief theoretical framework; walks users through the steps needed to prepare, process and analyze survey data; provides guidance on the interpretation of the analytical results; and discusses how to use the software for more complex tasks, like sensitivity analysis, simulations, analysis of program compliance with its own rules, and for benchmarking.
December 2011. SKU: 18460 (ISBN: 978-0-8213-8460-2)


text:
NFPA 820: Standard for Fire Protection in Wastewater Treatment and Collection Facilities, 2012 Annotated PDF
Get the NFPA 820 Annotated PDF for only $40 when you buy the Book & PDF combo!
|Item # 82012A
|Member *
Annotated by: Nancy Pearce
Consult the 2012 NFPA 820 Annotated PDF for added expertise about fire and explosion protection in wastewater facilities.
Public safety, environmental safety, and business continuity depend on compliance with NFPA 820: Standard for Fire Protection in Wastewater Treatment and Collection Facilities. This Standard provides requirements for protection against fire and explosion hazards in wastewater treatment facilities and associated collection systems, including the hazard classification of specific areas and processes. NFPA®'s new Annotated PDF helps you implement provisions correctly with commentary and visuals direct from the Standard source.
The 2012 NFPA 820 Annotated PDF includes the full text of the Standard, new explanations, and full-color imagery.
- You'll gain electronic access to the complete 2012 NFPA 820 requirements including recently added mitigation steps for fire and explosion prevention control procedures, revised ventilation requirements, and other updates.
- Hyperlinked icons take you to annotations that answer questions and help you avoid oversights. Link directly to all-new commentary written by experts with in-depth knowledge of NFPA 820.
- Link to exclusive full-color images, tables, figures, and diagrams not in the Standard.
- Get the big picture with a dedicated Table of Contents for sections with annotations.
- Find new chapter introductions only in the Annotated PDF.
- Save time with instant searches and interactive PDF functionality.
Savings offer: Get the NFPA 820 Annotated PDF for only $40 when you buy the Book & PDF combo!
Work with expert knowledge about NFPA 820. Order today to make sure your knowledge is up-to-date and your facility is protected.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
(WDAY TV) -- It was this night, 100 years ago, the Titanic struck an iceberg in the north Atlantic. The disaster took the lives of more than 15-hundred people including a prominent bonanza farmer from Amenia. H.F. Chaffee's story lives on, now through his grandson.
Read the article: Story of Amenia Farmer Lives on after the Titanic Disaster


text:
"SNAKE EYES" HAND PAINTED DENIM
9 Feburary, 2013
EVISU CNY 2013 "Snake Eyes" jeans are exclusively available at our London stores and online.
EVISU London welcomes the Year of the Snake in its own inimitable way as tradition meets trendy this Chinese New Year! EVISU house artist CJ showcases his spectacular hand-painting skills live at the London's Newburgh Street Store on the eve of Chinese New Year celebrations. The striking "Snake Eyes" icon features on EVISU's expertly crafted, plain pocket jeans. The design embodies the playful meets cool you've come to expect from EVISU! Visit (online shop link) for more details now.
EVISU Boxpark:
Unit 9,2-4 Bethnal Green Road, London EI 6GY
EVISU Newburgh Street, off Carnaby Street
2 Newburgh Street, London W1F 7RD


text:
- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
Follow us for the latest news
- Find us on Facebook
Dorset Echo
Like us on Facebook
Update: Dorset being battered by strong winds and heavy rain (From Dorset Echo)
When news happens get involved. Send your pictures, views and video to us by text and email
News RSS Feed
Update: Dorset being battered by strong winds and heavy rain
5:00am Wednesday 1st January 2014 in News By Catherine Bolado, Senior Reporter
DORSET is experiencing a miserable start to the New Year as storms sweep in from the Atlantic.
The Environment Agency has issued flood alerts for Weymouth Harbour, along the River Wey, and at Preston for high tide this evening. Other flood alerts are in place for West Bay harbour and West Dorset rivers.
In Burton Bradstock residents reported that river levels were high and there was flood water on Burton Road by the sewage works this afternoon.
The Environment Agency is warning coastal communities across the region to remain vigilant as strong winds combine with high tides on Friday and continue into the weekend.
Long-term forecasts suggest Dorset could see rain and showers continuing for the first few weeks of January, bringing a wet and gloomy start to the New Year.
Last night partygoers were confronted with heavy rain showers, but it didn't seem to dampen the celebratory spirit.
The wild weather has brought down a tree on the A352 near Sherborne. The road was blocked earlier southbound between the Bradford Lane junction in Longburton and the Tiley Knap junction in Middlemarsh.
West Stafford bypass is also closed and there is flooding on the coast road at Abbotsbury.
Drivers heading up the A37 were warned the road was blocked earlier this evening just over the Somerset border near Stoford due to a broken down vehicle and flooding. It is now clear.
The traditional Lyme Regis duck race was cancelled today due to the weather.
But torrential rain and howling winds did not stopping plucky paddlers from Lyme Regis.
The annual New Year tradition, the Lyme Lunge, went ahead and dozens of people dashed into the sea in fancy dress.
Organised by the Lyme Regis Rotary Club, there will also be charity collections during the event.
The Met Office has issued a yellow weather warning for heavy rain until late this evening.
After last night's downpour the roads in Dorset have seen a lot of standing water this morning and there is a risk of flooding.
The AA has advised anyone planning on travelling to plan their route carefully and take extra care.
The Puddletown Bypass was flooded in the early hours of the morning and drivers are advised to take care.
There are flood alerts in place today for Weymouth's rivers, as well as West bay Harbour, the River Piddle and West Dorset rivers and streams.
The Met Office warned that today will see heavy rain, with some areas getting 30mm and a chance of gales up to 50-60mph.
Weymouth weatherman Bob Poots said: "It's been a very wet December and a very wet year."
He added that the rainfall this month was double what the area would normally get in December.
The AA has issued warnings to drivers who may be attempting to get home to return to work and the start of the new school term.
A spokesman urged motorists to plan all journeys carefully and check both the weather and travel bulletins before they set out.
Staff at South West Trains have been working around the clock since the first storms hit before Christmas to repair trains and tracks in time for commuters' return in the New Year.
Teams have cleared more than 140 trees that were blown down by gale-force winds.
Repairs were carried out to sites affected by landslips and flooding.
Engineers have also carried out repairs to trains that were damaged by falling trees.
A spokesman for the train company said: "The huge clear-up operation throughout the Christmas holiday means a full timetable will run on the majority of the network on January 2, with 93 percent of normal services running."
The wet weather misery looks set to remain throughout January, with rain forecast well into the month.
A spokesman for the Met Office said: "Current indications suggest the unsettled start to January is more likely than not to persist through the middle to latter part of the month.
"This would mean spells of dull, wet and windy weather alternating with brighter but colder and showery periods, including some wintry showers."
The Environment Agency's flood line is 0845 988 1188.
Dorset Police has issued the following advice to drivers if they are confronted with severe high winds and heavy rain.
- Not to travel unless you have to;
- Keep your distance from other vehicles;
- Keep your speed down – sudden gusts of wind can blow you off course;
- Leave extra time to get to your destination;
- Show consideration for other motorists, especially when you are confronted with delays and/or blocked roads;
- When visibility is reduced make sure you switch on your headlights.
Comments (3)
Please log in to enable comment sorting
12:34pm Wed 1 Jan 14
IDONTKNOWIFITISTRRUE says...
I wonder if the Puddletown Bypass was also flooded?
5:23pm Wed 1 Jan 14
osmington4 says...
IDONTKNOWIFITISTRRUE wrote:What a completely stupid comment.......
Echo says 'Puddeltown Bypass was flooded'
I wonder if the Puddletown Bypass was also flooded?
6:43pm Fri 3 Jan 14
YInsider says...
Comments are closed on this article.


text:
Results for April 2012
- Attracting Affluent Travelers: How The Top Destinations Do It
- Recently, Luxury Travel Magazine published a list of the top destinations for 2012. You'd expect Paris, Monte Carlo, and Dubai to top the list, but you'd be wrong. Instead, exotic destinations like Tasmania, Jordan and the Congo dominated. With so much competition from the likes of Vegas and other more obvious destinations, how did these spots become top-of-mind for affluent travelers?» 1 Comments
- Optimism Hits A One-Year High
- Half of Affluents are now optimistic about the U.S. economy, solidifying the significant increase observed in February 2012, and marking the highest level in a year, according to our March survey. The study was conducted online March 20-28, 2012 with 1,000 Affluent individuals, defined as adults living in households with at least $100,000 in annual household income.» 0 Comments
- Business Travel Frequency Increases 27% Vs. 2010
- As the travel industry prepares for an uncertain summer season (amid airfare price hikes, decreasing demand and the growth of "staycations"), many advertisers are setting their sights on reaping the rewards of a re-energized business travel segment. Thanks to job growth, improved productivity and recent economic gains, the frequency of travel among affluent ($100K+) business travelers is starting to heat up. As a result, it's paying dividends for some leading brands.» 0 Comments
- 8 Things To Know To Engage Affluent Chinese Tourists
- The U.S. (and France) is a shopper's paradise for the Chinese. The Chinese prefer to buy their merchandise "at the source" because they believe by doing so they 1) can save a lot of money and 2) have greater selection.» 1 Comments


text:
Some information is missing or invalid below.
Sale $13.99
Regular $17.99
Learn more.
Time for tea. You'll love the taste of this Keurig K-Cup Portion Pack Celestial Seasonings English breakfast tea.
Please note: fits Keurig K65, K45, K75, B76, and MINI Plus Personal brewers only.
- Delicately steeped blend of leaves ensure optimal flavor.
- K-Cup Portion Pack allows you to enjoy a single-serving of your favorite blend.
- Details:
- 18-pack
- Model no. 15510


text:
- Comments
Amazon has Fat Princess: Fistful of Cake (Sony PSP) for $5 with free shipping on $25+. This RTS revolving around protecting your husky princess while you try and rescue her and bring her back to your castle.
Welcome to Ben's Bargains. Please Register, Sign in or Sign in with Facebook
Already a member? Sign in below.
Registration takes seconds! Once registered you�ll have members only access to:


text:
EPA's Guidance for Nine Minimum Controls [PDF Format] describes the nine minimum controls, and EPA's expectations for their implementation, in more detail.
You will need Adobe Reader to view some of the files on this page. Files are best viewed in Internet Explorer and Adobe 8.0 or higher. See EPA's PDF page to learn more.
Office of Water |
Office of Wastewater Management |
Disclaimer |
Search EPA
EPA Home
| Privacy
and Security Notice |
Contact Us
Last updated on
September 12, 2002 6:12 PM


text:
The Federalist Society Online Debate Series
The Sotomayor Nomination, Part II
July 13, 2009
On May 26, President Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor to replace David Souter as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Sotomayor's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on her nomination began on July 13th. In this installment of Originally Speaking, Matthew J. Franck, Thomas C. Goldstein, Wendy Long, Scott Moss, Louis Michael Seidman, David Stras, and M. Edward Whelan III discuss issues that are arising during the confirmation hearing.
To read Part I of this debate, please click here.
To read Part III of this debate, please click here.
The Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings (July 2009)
Day 1, July 13, 2009
Day 2, July 14, 2009
Day 3, July 15, 2009
Day 4, July 16, 2009
Links to Relevant Background Material on Sonia Sotomayor
Nomination to the Supreme Court (2009)
Nomination to the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1997-1998)
Nomination to the District Court for the Southern District of New York (1991-1992)
Wendy Long
I am now up on Capitol Hill for the hearings. I'll try to keep up with debate via blackberry.
Mike, I don't think I have said anything about ethnic bias in the context of Ricci. I think the personal bias Sotomayor has spoken of manifests itself in a racial quota policy commitment. That policy preference she has to quotas overrode the law in this case. And it led her, as a procedural matter apart from substantive law, to engage in judicial malpractice by trying to bury claims with no legal analysis.
I think it is interesting, and heartening, that the Hispanic firefighters don't buy into the quota mentality. I think the cynical Obama calculation that Hispanics don't want colorblind and even-handed enforcement of the law, and employment decisions based on merit, is misplaced.
Thomas C. Goldstein
Hi everyone. Sorry to have missed a bunch of the party while out of town and during the morning of the hearings. I thought I might offer some thoughts on Wendy's take on Judge Sotomayor from closer to the political center.
The idea that there is a presumption that Judge Sotomayor cannot decide cases without personal bias runs head-long into every study of her decision-making. So some of this debate, when you dig down into her record, would involve cutting and pasting big chunks of those studies.
You certainly can't equate the Second Circuit's ruling in Ricci with bias, any more than you can the votes of the conservative and overwhelmingly white majority on the Supreme Court. And the debate over whether the Second Circuit should have issued a full opinion rather than issuing a summary affirmance agreeing with the district judge on the basis of the court of appeals' prior precedent is dancing on the head of a pin. With decades of decisions under her belt, the fact that opponents are reduced to drawing inferences from snippets in her speeches is really the best evidence that the critique lacks considerable force.
The claim that Sotomayor's defense has been "conclusory" is ironic. And the assertion that this nominee should be subjected to a higher standard in answering questions than were the Chief Justice and Justice Alito really is just terrifically convenient.
I just wonder if committed opponents are able to think back to how they believed people would react to Nan Aron's attacks on Roberts and Alito, and think that they sound any different. Someone who "know[s] from the outset that she's not even going to try and be impartial" comes across to me at least (and maybe me alone) as playing a role, rather than trying to objectively study the record.
Everyone participating in this debate, and every single person reading it, knows that parallel assaults would have been made on any nominee of President Obama, just as they were against Roberts and Alito.
Louis Michael Seidman
You certainly have to credit Wendy Long's energy. It would take a small amy to answer all the charges she keeps leveling at Judge Sotomayor. I'm not sure that I can keep up. Here's a response to two of her new claims:
1. Wendy chides Judge Sotomayor for expressing puzzlement as to why the abortion records of individual women, subpoenaed by the Bush administration, were relevant to the case before her. Here are the facts: At the time the case was decided, Supreme Court precedent, which Judge Sotomayor was bound to follow, provided that regulations of late term abortions were facially unconstitutional unless there was a exception permitting the abortion technique if it was necessary to preserve the health of the mother. It strains credulity to believe that individual medical records would have reaveled whether there was a health need for those particular abortions. But here is the crucial point: Even if every one of these individual records did show that the abortions were unnecessary, the government would still not have met its burden of proof. Under the law as it existed at that time, the government was required to show that the abortion technique was NEVER necessary, and showing that it was unnecessary in a few particular cases did nothing to meet this burden. Thus, Judge Sotomayor was absolutely right in thinking that the records were irrelevant. Incidentally, after several other courts rebuffed Bush efforts to subpoena records, and after a national uproar about the subpoenas, the Bush administration quietly dropped them.
2. Wendy accuses Judge Sotomayor of "personal bias" because she supported a "racial quota policy" in the New Haven Firefighters case. This statement is unfortunate in at least two respects. First, the Firefighters case did not involve racial quotas. No one, not even Judge Cabranes, who dissented in the Second Circuit, or the Supreme Court majority that overruled the Second Circuit has said anything to the contrary. Second, it is really too bad that Wendy is intent on elevating good faith disagreement to "personal bias." A majority of the Second Circuit and four Justices on the United States Supreme Court agreed with the result that Judge Sotomayor reached. Does Wendy think that all these jurists are guilty of "personal bias"? I think that the Supreme Court majority opinion in Ricci is deeply flawed, but I would never accuse the Justices in the majority of racism or bias. Doesn't Wendy owe Judge Sotomayor similar respect?
David Stras
I agree with Tom and respectfully disagree with Wendy that Judge Sotomayor has a greater obligation than other nominees to answer questions about her views on particular areas of law. As I said, I think that it was a mistake for President Obama to use the term "empathy" in describing his nominee and for her to make the "wise Latina" comment, but I do not think that requires her to be any more forthcoming than any other Supreme Court nominee.
But I again disagree with Tom that the Ricci line of inquiry is fruitless or is otherwise "dancing on the head of a pin." If the argument is characterized or explained as simply a decision as to whether to publish an opinion, then I think Tom is right that the objection will go nowhere. But if the objection is that Judge Sotomayor's consideration of cases is not nearly as careful or complete as her proponents claim, then I think the argument has merit (and it is a wonderful line of inquiry in that it targets exactly what judges are paid to do). All litigants that file lawsuits hope that the judges will give their claims careful and thorough consideration, particularly where the issues are difficult or controversial. I am absolutely convinced (as were six other circuit judges) that the issues in Ricci were extremely difficult and were not directly covered by Second Circuit precedent. I find it to be a very poor decision on the panel's part (including Judge Sotomayor) not to write a carefully reasoned opinion addressing the issues in that case. Is there a reasonable basis for disagreement on this question? Probably, but I do find it significant that nearly half of the judges in the circuit called out the panel in Ricci and that the Supreme Court dedicated over 90 pages to its disposition of the Ricci case. Although I am less familiar with Maloney and Didden, those cases also seem to me to warrant more analysis than the panels gave them. In particular, the question of incorporation of the Second Amendment against the states seems to me to be a difficult question, one that is by no means settled at this point. (Incidentally, the presiding judge does not control the disposition for the panel. My experience clerking in two different circuits is that, while it is true that the presiding judge leads the discussion on the disposition, any member of the panel may object to a summary disposition and push for a published opinion. I would be surprised if the Second Circuit were any different.)
None of this is disqualifying, of course, as I have said before. The best way to describe my view of the nomination is to say that I am agnostic at this point. Judge Sotomayor was about what I expected from President Obama given his sixty votes in the Senate, and elections do have consequences. I think President Obama could have done much better, but he also could have done worse (for instance, by nominating a politician with little to no legal experience). It really disappoints me, however, that there has not been more discussion of cases like Ricci, Didden, and Maloney. After all, I do think that an argument that Judge Sotomayor (or a panel in which she has participated) has not been careful in explaining her (their) reasoning in difficult cases would resonate with Senators and the American people (call it the "summary justice" argument). But that argument has not been made consistently or persuasively by opposition groups in my opinion, so we are unlikely to see a reasoned discussion of the issue, in part because the Democrats have probably successfully framed the debate by pervasively (but not persuasively in my opinion) claiming that Judge Sotomayor is a careful, thorough judge (arguing at times that she may even be too thorough).
Matthew J. Franck
The line between the Democrats and the Republicans on the first day of the hearings might be called the "umpathy" line. Republicans embraced the "umpire" model of judging advanced by Chief Justice Roberts in his own hearings four years ago, while most Democrats rejected that notion as simplistic or naïve. Democrats for their part embraced President Obama's "empathy" model of judging, holding that in the important cases the "heart" decides matters, while all the Republicans rejected this as an alarming guarantee of lawless judging.
Scott Moss
There's a key fact missing from the argument that it was improper for Ricci to be an unreported summary opinion rather than a reported decision: how common are unreported versus reported decisions? I was a lawyer in the Second Circuit for six years, mostly as an employment discrimination lawyer, and I had a vague recollection that summary orders were a fairly common way for the Second Circuit to dispose of a Title VII case. So I just looked it up: in 2008, there were 99 Second Circuit decisions other than Ricci that referenced Title VII or the other two major employment discrimination laws (the ADA and the ADEA). Before I tell you, take a mental guess as to how many were unreported decisions and how many were reported decisions. I can't say the stats bore out my vague recollection, because I was very surprised at just how many were unreported: only 28% (28 of 99) were reported decisions; 71% (71 of 99) were unreported.
So was it odd that Ricci was unreported? On the one hand, I agree with David that Ricci was a more complex case than the usual, which would make it the sort of decision typically more likely to be reported. But on the other hand, Ricci was a loss for a plaintiff claiming intentional discrimination, which I believe is the most likely sort of decision to be unreported; I admit I didn't break down the statistics to prove this last point, but I know that plaintiffs' win rates in employment discrimination appeals are so low (under 20%) that appellate decisions affirming discrimination plaintiffs' losses are a dime a dozen.
These statistics don't prove Ricci should have been unreported. But what they do show is this: the argument that Ricci should've been reported isn't (a) an argument that the panel did something unusual; it's (b) an argument that the panel failed to make Ricci one of the small minority of discrimination plaintiffs' losses to become a reported decision. In this light, the unreported nature of the Ricci decision wasn't quite "judicial malpractice," as Wendy argued it was.
Scott Moss
Really? Three reversals out of five cert grants out of 232 opinions is a "terrible record"? Let's even add Ricci (which came after that article's stats) to make it 4 reversals of 233+ opinions; is that bad? Do either of you have comparative stats for Judge Roberts or Judge Alito? Actually, I'm pretty sure I know the answer for Judge Roberts: one reversal (Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, one of the war on terror detention cases) out of I believe 43 opinions (I could have that number slightly wrong but not by a lot). That's actually a worse reversal rate for Roberts than for Sotomayor; was that a more "terrible" record? Of course not: as Ed conceded, we have to be "wary of relying on statistics alone"—especially where, as here, we're talking about very low numbers—one reversal in two years (Roberts) versus four reversals in (Sotomayor) versus whatever Alito had that I'm sure would be equally unilluminating.
The fact is that with such small numbers, there's no reason to think reversal rate is determined more by (a) "judging quality" than by (b) whether the Supreme Court shares your judicial philosophy (which would hurt Sotomayor's rate but would help Roberts's and Alito's), (c) whether you're (un)lucky enough to have fall into your lap a case like Ricci (Sotomayor) or Hamdan (Roberts), or (d) whether you tend to write more or fewer opinions in a hot field of law like Title VII (in one quick study I did, for example, Judge Diane Wood wrote over 50 employment discrimination opinions in the same time period when Judge Kim Wardlaw wrote zero).
Wendy Long
I'll try not to monopolize the debate. (I want to hit the ball back over the net, but maybe it's getting us off the Sotomayor subject.)
1. The partial birth abortion records were pertinent to the abortion providers' unsubstantiated assertion that partial birth abortion was the "safest" method of abortion, not to whether the abortions qualified under the expansive (and bogus, I might add) loophole-that-swallows-the-rule of a "woman's health" from Roe's companion case Doe v. Bolton. I am not the medical expert, but I think that a physician examining the records could not only offer an expert opinion that the method was not the "safest" in these cases but also that it is not "necessary." Anyway, I was trying to provide some questions, the answers to which, would illuminate Sotomayor's legal thinking—particularly interesting given her experience as a trial as well as appellate judge.
2. By "personal bias," I meant the Obama Standard that judges should apply their own personal "core concerns," "deepest values," "heart," and "empathy," and Judge Sotomayor's statements that that her "experiences will affect the facts that I choose to see as a judge" and that her "opinions, sympathies, and prejudices" are appropriate to use in deciding cases. Her statement today that her "judicial philosophy" is "fidelity to the law" answers nothing, and I think is actually misleading because it sounds like fidelity to the written law, and not the "law" in her heart. I don't doubt that she, and President Obama, for that matter, have a good-faith disagreement about the role of a judge, and what the proper sources of "law" are; part of what they endorse is the application of personal views, which I think is properly labeled "bias." But, as Senator Sessions said, you can call it empathy, sympathy, prejudice, or whatever you like, but we disagree (in good faith) over whether it is "law."
3. Judge Cabranes said that one of the questions raised in the case was whether "a municipal employer . . . discarding examination results on the ground that 'too many' applicants of one race received high scores and in the hope that a future test would yield more high-scoring applicants of other races . . . constitute[s] an unconstitutional racial quota or set-aside?" The Supreme Court in analyzing the case also referred to its precedents referring to "quotas." (I understand the Supreme Court did not reach the constitutional issue, but I thought that the term applied to the Title VII facts as well.)
New question: Do you agree with Senator Graham's statement today that it's fine for a Supreme Court Justice to have, as Judge Sotomayor does, a background as a far-left activist with the PRLDEF (which during her tenure filed briefs taking extreme positions on abortion, advanced quotas at the NYC police department, and attacked Mayor Dinkins for his criticism of Puerto Rican terrorists, for example)? If so, are you fine with lawyers who serve in leadership positions at organizations (far more mainstream than the PRLDEF) such as Americans United for Life and the National Rifle Association also becoming Supreme Court Justices, as Senator Graham said?
M. Edward Whelan III
Before you delve into the fog of statistics, I'd suggest that there are a few prior points worth addressing about the initial use by Judge Sotomayor and her panel colleagues of an unpublished summary order to deal with the claims of the New Haven firefighters in Ricci:
1. In his blistering dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc (available here, beginning on the ninth page), Judge José Cabranes—Sotomayor's longtime mentor and fellow Clinton appointee—says that the appeal "raises important questions of first impression in our Circuit—and indeed, in the nation—regarding the application of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and Title VII's prohibition on discriminatory employment practices." He finds remarkable that the district court's "path-breaking opinion" was "nevertheless unpublished" and complains that the Second Circuit panel initially "affirmed in a summary order containing a single substantive paragraph" and then converted its summary order into a per curiam opinion. As he puts it in killer understatement, "This perfunctory disposition rests uneasily with the weighty issues presented by this appeal."
(It's true, of course, that the Second Circuit divided 7-6 against en banc rehearing, with five judges joining Cabranes's dissent. But two judges were in the majority only because of the circuit's "tradition of general deference to panel adjudication—a tradition which holds whether or not the judges of the Court agree with the panel's disposition of the matter before it." Of the five others in the majority, three (including Sotomayor) were the panel members. In other words, of the ten judges not on the panel, only two expressed disagreement with Cabranes's criticisms.)
2. The panel itself abandoned its use of an unpublished summary order just three days before Cabranes filed his dissent (and obviously with the knowledge that Cabranes would be filing his dissent). Why would it do so if its initial use was proper?
3. Reporting by Adam Liptak of the New York Times and Stuart Taylor of National Journal indicates that the panel violated circuit rules on use of an unpublished summary order. (Taylor's post also explains how the panel's use of an unpublished summary order would ordinarily have ensured that the case escaped further scrutiny.)
4. I fully concur with David Stras's assessment that Second Circuit precedents did not clearly and directly cover the issues in Ricci.
5. Even the Obama Department of Justice said in its Supreme Court amicus brief that the district court and the Second Circuit panel were wrong to award summary judgment to the city (even as it defended their broader legal approach).
Sotomayor's entire handling of this case raises serious questions, questions that cannot just be brushed aside.
Wendy Long
Ed's points here are all correct.
And statistics about the percentage of cases on the Second Circuit disposed of by summary order are irrelevant if the case disposed of does not fit the run-of-the-mill Social Security appeal or the other great bulk of cases that are disposed of under Local Rule 32.1, where the decision of the panel must not only be unanimous, but "each judge of the panel believes that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by an opinion (i.e., a ruling having precedential effect)."
I clerked on the Second Circuit and I can tell you, there is no way this was a summary order case. There is a certain level of trust that exists among the judges that cases are being disposed of according to the Circuit rules, to prevent the great burden of every judge having to read every summary order (the quality of jurisprudence in more difficult cases thereby suffering).
That Judge Cabranes had to find out about this case by reading The New Haven Register should concern and shock anyone who cares about the integrity of our federal courts.
The Second Circuit precedents (and, as Judge Cabranes noted, even the Supreme Court precedents) simply did not address the issues raised in this case.
I stand by my characterization of Judge Sotomayor's behavior as judicial malpractice. As for her fellow members of the panel, yes, they did the same. I don't know their reasons—but whether it was carelessness, lack of attention, the desire to make a difficult and controversial case go away, a desire to implement race preferences without the scrutiny of a proper legal analysis, it was judicial malpractice.
But I do know that Sonia Sotomayor is the only panel member being proposed for the lifetime job promotion to the U.S. Supreme Court. Accordingly, it is her defense of this behavior that the American people should hear.
Louis Michael Seidman
I remain puzzled by the claim that "empathic" judging is somehow in tension with impartiality. Empathy is actually a necessary adjunct to impartiality. Here's an example: Wendy and I disagree about almost everything. But if I try to be empathetic toward Wendy, I say to myself something like this: "Obviously, Wendy is a smart and decent person. How did it come about that she believes the wacky things that she says? Could it possibly be that there's something to her position?" (I know, I haven't made much progress in empathizing with Wendy—I'm working on it!) In other words, empathy leads to open mindedness—a key virtue for a judge. That's why, when he testified in favor of his own nomination, Clarence Thomas went out of his way to tell the Senators that he empathized with the prisoners that he saw being herded into court every day. Does valuing empathy for the poor, powerless, and dispossessed demonstrate bias? Not at all. Most federal judges come from relatively privileged backgrounds. They have to work harder to be open minded toward those with backgrounds very different from their own. It's just this hard work that shields judges against the lazy dismissal of arguments that, at first, seem implausible. In other words, working hard to be empathetic helps to guarantee impartiality.
Scott Moss
Dittos to Louis, and I think one case is just devastating to the notion that Judge Sotomayor doesn't even believe in impartiality or try to be impartial, but instead rules based on bias for or against parties. (Full disclosure: some of the below paragraphs are from a blog post I just did on the below three cases.) In Pappas v Guiliani, Judge Sotomayor, alone among four judges (the district judge and three appellate judges), voted not to dismiss a fired police officer's First Amendment claim. Officer Pappas had been fired for responding to another police force's charitable solicitation with a tirade about how (among other racist views) the "Negro wolf" is "destroying American civilization with rape, robbery, and murder." Judge Sotomayor took the very clinical view that even hateful speech on public issues may be protected against retaliation. If Judge Sotomayor were so prone to ruling based on racial sympathies, she never would have gone out on a limb for someone like Pappas. Agree or disagree with her Pappas ruling, clearly Judge Sotomayor showed an excellent ability to issue a purely legal ruling divorced from her subjective view of the individual.
Two other Sotomayor cases show a key role in judging for life experience, empathy, and practicalities (things that Senator Sessions thinks "are not law"): Raniola v. Bratton (a 2001 decision cited by almost 200 other judicial opinions); and Cruz v. Coach Stores (a 2000 decision cited by almost 900 other opinions).
Cases like Cruz and Raniola are why I've never liked Chief Justice Roberts's "umpire" metaphor depicting a judge's job as merely calling balls and strikes. A ball/strike determination is whether a thrown baseball passed through a defined rectangle—an objective determination completely unlike the judgment whether Ms. Cruz's or Officer Raniola's years of harassment were abusive enough, or sufficiently sex-based, to be actionable as discrimination. There certainly are "ball/strike" calls judges make, like whether a defect is within the "strike zone" of a printed warranty; tens of thousands of such cases predominate in the nation's small claims courts but almost never reach the U.S. Supreme Court, which hears fewer than 100 cases a year that it chooses in order to resolve issues on which lower courts, or other branches of government, have reached inconsistent conclusions.
I think part of what's going on is that those fond of the "judge as umpire" metaphor have a distaste for the fact that judges regularly must undertake "reasonableness" and other subjective inquiries under various federal laws: harassment law (elements include (a) whether the harassment was "highly offensive" to a "reasonable person," and (b) whether it actually was perceived as "highly offensive" by this plaintiff herself); First Amendment retaliation law (retaliation is illegal if it's severe enough to deter a reasonable person from speaking freely); etc. With these legal inquiries forced on judges, you just can't draw the clean, bright line Senator Sessions and others would like to exist between "things that are law" (text and perhaps drafter's intent) and "things that are not law" (conclusions based on an empathetic understanding of a party, life experiences about what does and doesn't make a workplace hostile, etc.).
Matthew J. Franck
Does anyone think it significant that Sen. Kyl got Judge Sotomayor to explicitly disagree with Pres. Obama about the role of empathy or "the heart" in judicial decision-making? And does anyone seriously believe her contemporary reinterpretation of her notorious and repeated speeches on the role of gender and ethnicity in judging, in which she seemed to ordinary readers to be on the same page as Obama? My answers are yes, and no, respectively.
Louis Michael Seidman
Speaking only for myself (I guess that's obvious), I was completely disgusted by Judge Sotomayor's testimony today. If she was not perjuring herself, she is intellectually unqualified to be on the Supreme Court. If she was perjuring herself, she is morally unqualified. How could someone who has been on the bench for seventeen years possibly believe that judging in hard cases involves no more than applying the law to the facts? First year law students understand within a month that many areas of the law are open textured and indeterminate—that the legal material frequently (actually, I would say always) must be supplemented by contestable presuppositions, empirical assumptions, and moral judgments. To claim otherwise—to claim that fidelity to uncontested legal principles dictates results—is to claim that whenever Justices disagree among themselves, someone is either a fool or acting in bad faith. What does it say about our legal system that in order to get confirmed Judge Sotomayor must tell the lies that she told today? That judges and justices must live these lies throughout their professional carers?
Perhaps Justice Sotomayor should be excused because our official ideology about judging is so degraded that she would sacrifice a position on the Supreme Court if she told the truth. Legal academics who defend what she did today have no such excuse. They should be ashamed of themselves.
David Stras
We have dedicated an enormous amount of space debating the Ricci, Didden, and Maloney opinions, not to mention the "wise Latina" comment from which Judge Sotomayor has now distanced herself. In line with Matt's observation, I do find it incredibly interesting that Judge Sotomayor elected to distance herself so much from her prior statements. I thought she might advance an interpretation similar to Mike's, which we debated last week, or indicate that her speeches were meant to be aspirational rather than evaluative. She advanced a variation of the latter interpretation by stating that she was trying to inspire young Latina women to achieve success in the law, but she went further by stating that she did not believe that racial or ethnic background, standing alone, really makes a difference in the quality of a judge. I have not seen the transcript, but that is how I interpreted her remarks after seeing them live on television. So my apologies if I am misrepresenting her answers from today.
I do not want to dilute our lively discussion on these matters, but I do want to raise and discuss Judge Sotomayor's opinion in In Re Subpoena Issued to Dennis Friedman, 350 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 2003), which was highlighted in Senator Cornyn's second daily question for Judge Sotomayor. As a federal courts instructor who revised an entire chapter of a casebook on justiciability, I find her opinion in the case quite remarkable (and not in a good way). The Friedman case involved an appeal from an order of the district court quashing a deposition subpoena for Mr. Friedman, who was an attorney who had served previously as counsel to directors of a bankrupt corporation who were being sued in federal court. The plaintiffs in the case tried to depose Mr. Friedman, but the district court quashed the subpoena. Before the Second Circuit issued its opinion, Mr. Friedman agreed to the deposition and all three members of the panel (including Judge Sotomayor) agreed that the case was moot.
Nonetheless, Judge Sotomayor then dedicated more than half of the opinion to discussing the merits of the question before her: when and whether attorney depositions should be permitted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In doing so, she went to great lengths to conclude that, although attorney depositions are disfavored, the court would not adopt the reasoning of an Eighth Circuit opinion on which the district court relied and which her own circuit had cited approvingly in a 1991 case. In other words, the panel opinion arguably articulated new law in the Second Circuit, but Judge Sotomayor then admitted that her own opinion was dicta because the appeal was moot. Her justification for reaching the former merits was that two district judges had relied on the Eighth Circuit standard and that "a non-binding discussion of the merits will hopefully serve the useful purpose of cautioning about the limits of our prior rulings on a frequently litigated issue and perhaps avoid some needless appeals."
Wow. As a federal courts professor, I do not think I have ever read a similar case from a federal circuit court, at least not one from the past 20 or so years. The appropriate function of an appellate court faced with a moot appeal based on a voluntary settlement or an analogous situation is to dismiss the appeal and leave the lower court decision intact. See, e.g., Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership, 513 U.S. 18 (1994). Indeed, Judge Wesley wrote the following in his concurring opinion in Friedman:
This is only one opinion and it can be dangerous to make broad generalizations about a judge's jurisprudence based on a single opinion. But if all I had was this opinion from her record, I would say that this is not a judge that understands the role of the federal judiciary. A court without subject matter jurisdiction should not decide the merits of an appeal; it is the very definition of an advisory opinion. What I find ironic is that there are a number of difficult cases where the panel in which Judge Sotomayor participated did not write a reasoned opinion (Didden, Maloney, and especially Ricci), but she wrote a lengthy, reasoned opinion over an issue in which the court had no jurisdiction. Go figure.
Wendy Long
Well, we've gotten to the point where Mike can speak for me, too.
I was disgusted by Judge Sotomayor's testimony (and some of the questioning by Senators).
I agree that she either perjured herself or is intellectually unqualified to sit on the Court.
It has to be one or the other.
A Larry Tribe or a Mike Seidman would never have answered questions this way.
Our Court needs smart, honest Justices.
There can be no honest debate about the two schools of thought on the role of a judge and the role of the Court in our constitutional republic when this kind of dishonesty, or intellectual vacuity, is on one side of the debate.
And the American people are being deprived of the promised transparency on this issue so that they can decide what mode of judging they support.
Louis Michael Seidman
I want to elaborate on some of the (perhaps intemperate) comments I made last night. There's no denying that Republicans on the committee put Judge Sotomayor in a difficult moral position, and I need not elaborate on their own culpability for doing so. Either Judge Sotomayor had to misrepresent what she knows judges (all judges, conservative and liberal) do in hard cases, or she had to risk defeat. I'm willing to concede that this is not an easy choice, but I nonetheless think that she made a serious mistake. To his tremendous credit, President Obama has made an effort in his public statements to shift the official ideology of judging so that it has some contact with reality. Yesterday, Judge Sotomayor explicitly repudiated the President. Here are some of the consequences of this kind of unilateral disarmament:
1. It means that the only people who end up on the Supreme Court are either naïfs or cynics.
2. It means that every official act that a justice takes deepens the corrosive cognitive dissonance between what she pretends to do and what she actually does. This kind of deep hypocrisy imposes psychic costs that, at some point, are bound to have an effect on decision-making.
3. Anyone who knows anything about law knows that the official version is a lie, but many Americans don't know anything about law. To them, the official version sounds plausible. Reinforcing that version has a terrible effect on the possibility of serious public deliberation about constitutional law.
The pity is that all of this was probably unnecessary. The Democrats have sixty votes in the Senate. It would have taken some courage for Judge Sotomayor to have told the truth, but not much. She said yesterday that judges should never decide cases out of fear. Yesterday, she testified out of fear. We have a right to expect better of her.
Matthew J. Franck
For my part I find the president's account of the role of "empathy" in judging to be alarming, and I would welcome Judge Sotomayor's repudiation of his arguments—if I believed her. Frankly, I don't.
I think I know what you mean by the "official version" of what judges do. I agree with you that "applying law to facts" is too simplistic to capture the nuances of what Felix Frankfurter called "judicial judgment." But if it's not where I would stop, it's not a bad place to start. And if you mean to say that the political convictions of judges are either a) inevitably a part of their legal judgments or b) desirable elements of the same, then I disagree. Certainly their political convictions are not desirable elements in judicial judgment, and to the extent that they inevitably creep in, they should be minimized as close to the vanishing point as possible by every conscious effort a judge can muster.
Judge Sotomayor, in the speeches from which she now flees unconvincingly—sorry, I mean which she now assures us were misunderstood—takes the view that gender and ethnicity influence the convictions of the judge, which in turn influence legal outcomes. Like the president, she celebrated this rather than worrying about it. Now she sings a different tune.
Is she a cynic? Perhaps so. Bill Bennett said to me on his radio show this morning that at least we can take comfort from the fact that views like the president's and Judge Sotomayor's (before this week) are understood to be unacceptable to the American people when a bright light is shone upon them. I think that's right.
Scott Moss
I understand Mike's point but don't quite understand Wendy's agreement with it.
I thought Mike's key point was that Judge Sotomayor disingenuously purported to agree with the too-simplistic conservative sound bites on judging—the Roberts "a Justice is just an umpire making decisions as simple and objective as calling balls and strikes" metaphor, the Thomas "a Justice is a runner who discards all baggage of prior beliefs" metaphor, etc. That is, I understood Mike to have levied two related but distinct criticisms: (a) the runner/umpire view of a Justice's role is too simplistic; and (b) Judge Sotomayor was being disingenuous in purporting to agree with that view.
But if one agrees with those Roberts/Thomas views on a Justice's proper role, as Wendy does, then it's hard to see how she can agree with Mike's point "(a)". How can Wendy say Judge Sotomayor is "intellectually unqualified" or "vacuous" for agreeing with Wendy's view on the role of a Justice? I think Wendy's real criticism, one Senator Kyl (I believe) mirrored, is Mike's point "(b)": that Judge Sotomayor is being disingenuous in purporting to believe that judging is an objective task requiring only the application of law to facts, etc.
The bigger picture here, really, is this point that Mike noted:
Exactly, but this phenomenon—having to profess the opposite to get the job—is more a problem with our politics than with our ideology about judging in particular. Democratic political candidates have to portray themselves as "tough" (on crime, terrorism, etc.) to get elected; Republicans have to portray themselves as "compassionate" (on civil rights, education for the poor, etc.) to get elected. Identically, judicial nominees similarly have to pay homage to the other side's credos. Justice Thomas at his confirmation hearing had to profess empathy for prisoners—in order to get confirmed and become the Justice least likely to rule in favor of a prisoner (at least by my non-empirical recollection of the case law, including one dissent in which he took an extremely limited view of prisoners' Eighth Amendment rights). Similarly, Judge Sotomayor has to profess objectivity in her judging—even though she probably would, as a Justice, rule for civil rights plaintiffs, etc., more often than other Justices because she uses more than 1700s and 1800s original intent to interpret the Constitution.
David Stras
Senator Cornyn questioned Judge Sotomayor about the Ricci case this morning. Yesterday, Judge Sotomayor indicated that the order was unpublished because it was controlled by prior Second Circuit precedent, a point with which I disagree but it is an explanation for which I will give her credit. Today, she went further by indicating that there was no intent by any of the judges on the Ricci panel to hide or dodge the issues presented by the case. I will also take that comment at face value and give her credit for it. But then as evidence for that fact, Judge Sotomayor indicated that any losing litigant may bring a petition for rehearing en banc before the Second Circuit or a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court, so it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to "hide" the case from her colleagues. I think that her statement, while technically correct, was misleading.
While it is surely true that any losing litigant may bring a petition for rehearing en banc in any case before a circuit court, Judge Sotomayor had to know that her colleagues generally pay little or no attention to petitions filed in cases involving unpublished opinions, much less unpublished summary orders. The U.S. Courts of Appeals hear approximately 60,000 cases per year, a six-fold increase from the 1960s. Many of the cases coming before the Courts of Appeals are now disposed of by unpublished opinion because of the crushing caseload. Circuit judges generally pay very little attention to petitions for rehearing en banc in cases involving unpublished dispositions precisely because such dispositions have no binding effect on the law of the Circuit. That probably explains why Judge Cabranes discovered the Ricci opinion by reading the New Haven Register and not by reading the petition for rehearing en banc. Although I do not have the statistics in front of me, I cannot recall a case where a circuit took an unpublished opinion en banc. And there is an implicit trust among colleagues on a collegial court like the Second Circuit that judges will not decide important and pressing issues in unpublished dispositions, which was alluded to by both Ed and Wendy yesterday in their discussions of the Second Circuit rules for unpublished opinions. In addition, the Supreme Court rarely grants certiorari in cases involving unpublished opinions, much less summary dispositions. The number of unpublished opinions reviewed by the Court in a single Term is often just two or three, and that generally only occurs when there is a square circuit split on the issue. Thus, I find it very weak to claim that the presence of procedures for rehearing en banc and for petitions for certiorari are somehow evidence that the panel was not trying to "hide" the disposition of Ricci. If there was no intent to hide it, that's fine, but I find it disingenuous to hide behind the procedures for review by the whole circuit or the Supreme Court. Not only is it passing the buck, but it is somewhat misleading.
I am, to be sure, more sensitive to these issues because a good portion of my scholarship studies the dockets of the federal courts. I am co-authoring a book on the Supreme Court's docket with two political scientists, and presenting a speech in October on the Fourth Circuit's docket at a conference in South Carolina. But I do want to point out that I thought her response to Senator Cornyn on Ricci was at best weak, and at worst misleading.
Wendy Long
I had posted this earlier at National Review's Bench Memos blog, but because it pertains to something I raised earlier in this debate and because it pertains to David's post just now, I would like to add these thoughts to this debate.
I think Judge Sotomayor's responses this morning to Senator Cornyn on the procedural treatment of the Ricci case were very disturbing.
It goes to whether, as Mike has raised and David says as well, her testimony is honest and straightforward, or, shall we say, deceptive.
Here is what I said on NRO:
David Stras
As Ed, Wendy, and Jonathan Adler have pointed out to me, no petition for rehearing en banc was apparently filed in the Ricci case. I took Judge Sotomayor's word for it in response to her questioning by Senator Cornyn, and apparently she was mistaken. According to the transcript, she said the following in response to Senator Cornyn:
But my point still stands even if no petition for rehearing en banc was filed. It seems very disingenuous to defend the panel's decision not to publish the order on the basis that a losing party might file a petition for rehearing en banc or a petition for certiorari. I apologize for the error in my original post.
|To continue to Part III of the debate, click here.


text:
Venus in Furs
Leopold von Sacher-Masoch - Author
Joachim Neugroschel - Translator
Larry Wolff - Introduction by
ePub eBook | $12.99 | add to cart | view cart
ISBN 9781101640180 | 160 pages | 01 Jun 2000 | Penguin Classics | 18 - AND UP
Additional Formats:
- Paperback: $15.00 add to cart
Summary of Venus in Furs Summary of Venus in Furs Reviews for Venus in Furs An Excerpt from Venus in Furs
Venus in Furs describes the obsessions of Severin von Kusiemski, a European nobleman who desires to be enslaved to a woman. Severin finds his ideal of voluptuous cruelty in the merciless Wanda von Dunajew. This is a passionate and powerful portrayal of one man's struggle to enlighten and instruct himself and others in the realm of desire. Published in 1870, the novel gained notoriety and a degree of immortality for its author when the word "masochism"—derived from his name—entered the vocabulary of psychiatry. This remains a classic literary statement on sexual submission and control.
Sign Up


text:
Results 6 to 10 of 56
May 16th, 2013 11:35 AM #6
My dad wanted to name me all kinds of stupid things. Finally a co-worker suggested my name; my dad liked it, and my mom was just relieved it wasn't completely ridiculous. The same thing happened again with my sister's name (which was fairly unusual twenty years ago but is now in the Top 10). I wish there was some kind of story or even a little thought behind my name.
Matilda Sailor or Faye Matilda | Sylvie Wren or Simon Adler | Alice Violetta or Atlas Dov | Julian 'Jules' River or Juniper 'Joon' Lovelace | Roscoe Fox or Marlowe Fritz | Jane Lucinda or Lucien Wilde | Louisa Valor or Eloise March | Ivan Elliot or Iris Cordelia | August Jack or Jasper Hale | Dashiell Jude or Judah Reeve | Thea Marina or Marigold 'Maggie' Wynn | Finnegan Wallace or Felix Raphael
Just a grad student dreaming ahead...
May 16th, 2013 11:49 AM #8
The story changes slightly every time I ask, but basically this: As soon as my mom found out she was pregnant she knew that I was a girl. She and my dad never entertained any name other than Emily for me, because a) "it was just my name" and b) they loved that it was pretty, unusual (ha!), and a little old-fashioned. My middle name was more of a struggle. My dad wanted Felecia for some unknown reason and my mom hated it. Madison was a family name that my parents were considering in that off chance that I was a boy, and my mom suggested it for my middle name last minute and it stuck.
My sister was going to be Charlotte Mackenzie, but our great-grandfather Charlie died a few months before she was born. My parents didn't want our family thinking she was named after him and have to deal with any hurt feelings because I wasn't named after anyone. They named her Sarah instead. My mom and my sister really wish they'd stuck to Charlotte. Sarah would have been Joshua Hamilton had she been a boy.♂ | Samuel ◊ Edward ◊ George ◊ Arthur ◊ Ezra ◊ Dean ◊ Micah ◊ Gideon ◊ Tobias ◊ Jasper
♀ | Helen ◊ Cora ◊ Anne ◊ Jane ◊ Edith ◊ Georgia ◊ Gwen ◊ Catherine ◊ Lydia ◊ Phoebe
May 16th, 2013 12:28 PM #10
Bascially from what I've heard (though I think this was probably several conversations):
My mum - What about Catherine? (my great granny)
My dad - I don't really like Catherine, but it can be the middle. (It is.)
My dad - What about Elizabeth? (my mum's first name - she goes by her middle)
My mum - No. Awkward rhyme with common nickname and first syllable of first name.
My dad - What about Victoria?
My mum - No. they'll call her Vicky. I hate the name Vicky.
My aunt - Suggests Hannah cause she can't use it herself cause of her surname.
My mum - Loves it, suggests it to my dad.
My dad - Loves it. Biblical, great meaning, doesn't know any Hannahs (I'm guessing this means they thought it was uncommon!).
Hence my name.My furry darlings ~ Bodie the border terrier & Portia and Penny the guinea pigs
Amabel ~ Beryl ~ Bryony ~ Cecily ~ Charis ~ Clara ~ Dinah ~ Flora ~ Georgiana ~ Ophelia ~ Rosamund ~ Sylvie ~ Tabitha ~ Tamsin ~ Violet
Arthur ~ Barnaby ~ Basil ~ Bertie ~ Darcy ~ Elliot ~ Felix ~ Fraser ~ Frederick ~ Henry ~ Monty ~ Rowan ~ Rupert ~ Theodore ~ Tristan
May 16th, 2013 12:33 PM #12Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2013
- Posts
- 620
♥Mama to Amelie Clara (2008) & Daisy Madeline (2013).
Lucy, Ivy, Maya, Rosabel, Victoria, Alice, Molly, Juliet, Annabel, Sofia.
Charlie, Arthur, William, Isaac, Noah, Finn, Vincent, Alexander, Zachary, Oscar.
May 16th, 2013 07:22 PM #14
My mum originally wanted to name me Robin (which mainly is used as a boys name here in Denmark) because the European Robin is her favourite bird. My mémé absolutely despised the name though, and I think I have her to thank for not being named Robin right now. She then contemplated naming me Selma after her great-grandmother, but for some reason she decided against it (sadly, I absolutely adore that name). Finally she watched some film and in the credits she saw Zelia and apparently instantly knew that it was the name. Elvira, which is my middle name, is after my great-grandmother whose name was Laura Elvira.Zelia/Elja • Nineteen • Name and history nerd from an early age • I have a blog.Trying hard to export beautiful old Danish names, magical Danish nature names and exotic Greenlandic names.
Current favourite combinations: Henry Ásgeirr Edmund • Amaury Charles Fyodor • Alexander Adelin Lórien
Cosima Ingrid Zenobia • Matilda Ivalo Galadriel • Gaia Margaret Undómiel


text:
It's Hatched!
Whether you want to hold on to your new found treasure or give it away, there's no doubt that a silicone fashion watch is a worthy bargain at $12.95. Perfect for anyone who loves a touch of color and sparkle in their wardrobe, these watches are a regular $59.99 value featuring a sporty silicone band, and an elegant crystal-accented bezel. Choose from a rainbow of vibrant colors including white, pink, blue or purple-either way, that's a savings of 61%! In case you are feeling friendly, you can get two for $22.95, a $120 value! Just make sure to let your friends know you are ready to give one out.
$12.95 for 1 silicone fashion watch ($59.99 value)
$22.95 for 2 silicone fashion watches ($120.00 value)
Shonabella LLC
Calling All Shoppers...
Calling All Merchants...
Stay Connected!
© 2010-2014
DealChicken.com. All Rights Reserved. Users of this site agree to the
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy / Your California Privacy Rights
Ad Choices
Subscribe below and we'll send you a daily deal alert for Louisville.
MontgomeryPhoenixPhoenix - East Valley Phoenix - West ValleyScottsdale/Paradise ValleyTucsonLittle RockMountain HomePalm SpringsSacramentoSalinasVisaliaDenverNorthern ColoradoDelawareWashingtonFort Myers/Cape CoralFSUJacksonvillePensacolaSpace CoastTallahasseeTampa BayUCF / East Seminole CountyAtlantaAtlanta NorthAtlanta SouthMaconGuamChicagoEast Central Indiana / RichmondIndianapolisLafayetteMuncieDes MoinesIowa CityLouisvilleAcadianaCentral LouisianaMonroe/West MonroeOpelousasShreveportBangorPortlandMontgomery CountySalisbury/Ocean CityBattle Creek / KalamazooDetroitGrand RapidsLansingLivingston CountyPort HuronCentral MinnesotaTwin CitiesHattiesburgJacksonOzarksSt. LouisGreat FallsRenoCentral JerseyCumberland CountyMonmouth CountyNorth JerseyOcean CountySouth JerseyBinghamtonBuffaloElmiraIthacaPoughkeepsieRochesterRockland-GreaterWestchesterWestchester-Shore TownsAshevilleThe TriadCincinnatiClevelandCoshocton / Holmes CountyFairfield CountyGreater CincinnatiLicking CountyMarion CountyMuskingum ValleyNorth Central OhioNorth CoastScioto ValleySalemBucks/MontgomeryPittsburghColumbiaGreenvilleSioux FallsClarksvilleJacksonKnoxvilleMurfreesboroNashvilleSouthern UtahNorthern VermontNorthern VirginiaStauntonCentral WisconsinFond du Lac / OshkoshFox CitiesGreen BaySheboygan / Manitowoc
There's one last thing we need from you to create your account.


text:
Claude Giroux suffered a head injury in Germany this weekend after taking a check to the head. He left the game too.
Thankfully, as of this writing this doesn't seem to be a big deal.
In messages exchanged late on Saturday night in Berlin time, Giroux told the Philadelphia Daily News that it was "just a little neck injury" and to "not read too much into it."
GM Paul Holmgren told CSNPhilly.com Saturday that the club doesn't believe the injury to be serious.
Giroux's agent, Pat Brisson, tells the Courier-Post it is a "very minor upper-body injury." According to a report, Giroux said it was his neck that was injured.
Three different sources? Well, yeah. It's Claude Freaking Giroux. He's kind of a big deal. Especially when we're talking about a head/neck injury for a legitimate superstar who has been sidelined with a concussion before.
Interesting perspective from The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on how Sidney Crosby is the face of the NHL, which puts him in a somewhat precarious position when it comes to speaking out on the lockout.
Marc-Andre Fleury describes it as an 'only-lose spot' for Sid, while No. 87 himself maintains he has 'really tried to understand everyone's position.'
"There is only one hockey player that everybody talks about, and that is Sidney," said Lynn Lashbrook, founder of Portland-based Sports Management World Wide.
"More than any athlete in North America he is the face of his league, his sport — and that is what makes his participation during this lockout, his articulation of how he sees things going, so very important. He'll be the guy who has to bring hockey back when this is over, so he should be having his say right now in this moment that has a lot of us scratching our heads."
It is incredibly easy to pile on the carcasses of Winnipeg Jets stars Evander Kane and Ondrej Pavelec after their basically-disastrous stints in Europe. The criticism seems to be warranted, frankly.
That said, The Winnipeg Free Press believes that a heaping serving of humble pie may serve those two well when the NHL resumes play. The adversity might 're-stoke the inner fires.'
For my fantasy money, if you're in a standard league and Kane's owner seems down on him I'd absolutely, unequivocally strike while the proverbial iron is hot. Say what you will about him off the ice. Say what you will about him on the ice. You'll likely fire off valid points in both instances. But in pools counting those peripheral categories like penalty minutes and shots, this kid will be a goldmine. Period. Argue against it, but time will show you wrong.
For what it's worth, I also believe it has quietly proven extremely beneficial for Kane to have Dustin Byfuglien as a teammate. The defenceman is a big target (you're thinking it but I'm not going to write it... stop it... don't go there) for the media and fans who still manages to push the scrutiny aside and who generally does not let it impact his on-ice performance; something to which Kane is becoming increasingly accustomed.
In terms of Pavelec's fantasy worth, I don't think his early-season travails will have one iota of negative impingement on what'll be left of the '12-13 NHL campaign when the lockout ends. He surely sits near the bottom of most starter rankings headed into the season anyway playing behind the fifth-worst team defence last year. He should be slotted as a No. 3 netminder in most 10-team league situations with potential to move up in value. The guy can play. He's not in the greatest of situations for a goalie though and his consistency between the pipes still needs work.
When looking at sleepers during the summer, it can be especially difficult to gauge how either a drafted prospect or free agent signee coming over from Europe to the NHL will fare. As such, assigning an accurate value to said player can truly be a crapshoot for fantasy owners.
One positive to the lockout has been we've all been tangibly able to see just how effective a duo Damien Brunner and Henrik Zetterberg may become in Motown.
This was in Friday's Hockey Hearsay, but Mike Babcock calls Brunner 'a real fit' and says, "I mean, if Z thinks you can play, and he wants to play with you, that's pretty good."
Ken Holland alluded to the fact that if and when the new CBA looks close to being signed, the Wings would like to bring Brunner to North America to play a few games in Grand Rapids to get used to the smaller ice surface.
Is all of this a guarantee of '12-13 NHL success for Brunner? Nope. But he's gone from being a roll of the dice to a guy who is beginning to stack the odds in his favour.
ESPN relays that Marian Gaborik is still rehabbing his shoulder and is working on getting it stronger. He's 'trying to take it day-by-day' and says it's tough to mark how close he is to being able to take part in full-contact drills.
He had the surgery in early June and the projected recovery timeline then was up to six months. Early this week will be around the five month and two week mark, so it looks like he'll be going the distance before he'll feels comfortable to play. At least there's no pressure on him to rush back with no season so far, which should serve the Rangers well down the line and into the playoffs. It will also make Gaborik a more relevant option if you decide to go in for a half-season draft.
Kris Versteeg tells The Sun-Sentinel he was cleared by the team doctor to play after a lengthy rehab on his surgically repaired hip.
Had the season actually started on time, it would have been interesting to see who would have been used in Versteeg's first line wing slot over the last month or so. Last season that trio with Stephen Weiss centring Tomas Fleischmann and Versteeg became money for poolies. Would Kevin Dineen have used newcomer Peter Mueller, who can play centre or the wing, in that opening? Maybe. That would have been the best fit, IMO.
The Gaborik and Versteeg injuries remind me of Jonathan Quick, who, as far as I know, is still doing a non-game rehab assignment with Manchester in the AHL.
When Quick had his back surgery in early August, it was described as 'minor' and it was believed that he'd need six weeks or so to recover. The Kings were still painting this as a situation where he'd be ready around when training camp opened though, so it didn't seem to be a huge deal. The six-week timeline would have put him good to go around mid-to-late September.
But here we sit in mid-November and although he may be really close to being game-ready now (there really hasn't been much info released at all), this would have still been at least six weeks of the regular season where the defending Stanley Cup champs would have been without their No. 1 and Conn Smythe-winning netminder.
For fantasy owners, this is also someone who was tabbed as one of the top goalie picks for any format. I still didn't have him ahead of Henrik Lundqvist in my rankings, but Quick was undisputedly set to remain one of the most value poolie commodities around thanks to his skills, determination and –perhaps most importantly for any stats-based endeavour – his locale.
That's pretty significant and it really hasn't received a whole lot of attention, stemming back to the initial under-reporting of Quick's surgery in August.
Had there NOT been a lockout, Jonathan Bernier would have likely received all or mostly every start for the Kings. This would have been a golden opportunity to raise his actual trade value to where the organization likely perceives it to be with his potential.
Teams looking to acquire a young goalie (it's a small market share among NHL teams right now, but it definitely does exist) would have been given a prime viewing chance and Bernier really would have been in a sink or swim scenario. He craves the chance to vie for No. 1 gig and this would have been a terrific chance, playing behind a Darryl Sutter defence, to show potential suitors what he could do.
Had Benier enjoyed a lot of success, he could have potentially earned that one-way plane ticket to a team which doesn't have a No. 1 goalie locked up with a 10-year extension. Dean Lombardi isn't about to give Bernier away just because Bernier said he wants out, but an enticing offer from an interested trading partner surely wouldn't be ignored. There are more than enough veteran options available via free agency to back up Quick.
Had Bernier struggled, it might have hampered his immediate trade value (from the Kings' perspective, which is the only one that counts at this point) but then at least he'd only be able to look at himself in the mirror and know he had a chance to win his freedom.
Next summer, incidentally, Bernier will become a restricted free agent.
The Dallas Morning News passes along that Sunday will be the one-year ownership mark for Tom Gaglardi with the Dallas Stars. Lockout aside, the pieces seem to be in place for the Stars to succeed financially.
Charlie Coyle certainly hasn't been what we'd classify as an 'off-the-radar' player in hockey circles or among most poolies, but what he has shown in the AHL this year has impressed even those who know him in-depth within the organization.
"I didn't think that Charlie would have the impact that he has on a daily basis," Jim Mill, the Aeros' general manager and an assistant to the general manager with the Wild, told The St. Paul Pioneer Press. "He's been consistently one of the top forwards on the team every single night. He's really impressive."
Mill classes Coyle as a prototypical power forward who is a smart, all-around player who should fit in well with the Wild when the lockout ends.
The man who will be Coyle's NHL coach likes what he sees too.
"You look at a guy that could potentially add some things that we could really use in our lineup," Wild bench boss Mike Yeo. "You talk about size, about net-front presence, about puck protection, these things are real important for the type of game we want to play, and he has demonstrated a lot of them."
As much as the signings of Zach Parise and Ryan Suter were breathtakingly-exciting for the fan base in July, the expected contributions of Coyle and the now-injured Mikael Granlund and Jonas Brodin in these coming years are equally anticipated by Wild faithful.
This is so clearly a team on the rise in the Western Conference and Coyle is using his time wisely in his first AHL campaign to ready himself for the next level.
Jared Cowen had his hip surgery Saturday to repair the torn labrum and everything went well. The projected recovery time is six-to-eight months.
We don't really know how the NHL season will play out given the lockout predicament, but regardless this will be a costly lost year of development for the 21-year-old with a still-bright future.
Sens GM Bryan Murray tells the Ottawa Citizen that sans Cowen, it'll be André Benoit, Mark Borowiecki, Patrick Wiercioch and Erik Gryba all being looked at closely for a spot in the NHL when the lockout ends.
"It certainly opens the door for another candidate," said Murray. "We think we have some good young players. Three or four are very close."
The Edmonton Journal raves about the 43-save performance of Yann Danis Friday night. The article points out that Danis had a 2.24 goals- against average last season. His GAA has been above 3.00 most of this season.
In case you're wondering what's up, head coach Todd Nelson said much of that can be attributed to an inconsistent defence.
"We were exchanging too many chances early in the year and were exposing both our goalies," Nelson said. "We need to play well in front of him. Sometimes Yann has to make a big save for us to win. That's what he did tonight."
The New York Times narrates the tale of Dave Dupuis, who is a hockey player whom you've probably never heard mentioned before. He's currently a third line left winger playing for the Division III Skidmore CollegeThoroughbreds and while his on-ice performance may not set him apart, the fact that he's among the first Inuit to play NCAA hockey – if not the first – makes for an inspirational read.
Of particular interest to you may be how a phone call from ex-NHLer Joe Juneau shifted the educational aspiration mindset of Dupuis for the better, which should have a positive lifelong impact on the youngster and those who will surely follow after him.
Speaking of educational precedents, Milan Doczy's saga is engaging for hockey onlookers. It seems as if The Toronto Star telling his story had a firm hand in the OHL changing its position on scholarship funding for European players.
Never before has a European received funding and schooling in general is so critical for these players; the vast majority of whom will not make the show.
"This will change my life."
Plymouth Whalers coach Mike Vellucci tells The Ottawa Sun he still remembers when he was coaching OHL draft-eligible prospects and saw Stefan Noesen.
"He hates to lose, and no matter what the score is he's always trying to win the hockey game. Guys like that are winners. When the game is on the line, he wants to be the guy who's delivering."
Velluci sees Noesen as a third or fourth line guy at the NHL level initially, but still as someone who can be a top-six guy once he's established himself because of good hockey sense and skills.
If you've attended an Everett Silvertips game recently, you've no doubt noticed that on the back of Ryan Murray's jersey it simply reads: "STUD"
Unfortunately, the sure-fire NHLer seems to have suffered a dislocated shoulder Friday night.
"It's not good news," Blue Jackets GM Scott Howson admitted to The Columbus Dispatch. "Right now his arm is in a sling, held tight to his body, and he's in a lot of pain He'll have an MRI early this week, and then we'll know more.
"You'll have to see how much damage he's done to the labrum. Does he have any broken bones from the thrust of the fall? Once it's come out, it tends to come out easier in the future. Our doctors will take a look at the tests and we'll decide the next step."
Twitter: @Nichols_NHLPool NHL news, analysis & fantasy takes with minimal inane babble.
Weekday Hockey Hearsay blogs on Sportsnet.ca, 12 months a year.
Fresh Ramblings each Sunday.
shingy said:
When you say it, usually a lot. Amazing ramblings. I'd like to point today's ramblings out to any fantasy hockey writers. There is always something interesting, relevant, and current to discuss if the desire to do so is there. I took 4 breaks while reading this.
Giroux - If this happened in North America it would be a very big story. IMO, it should be an even bigger story for him to get injured while playing overseas.
Marc-Andre Fleury - I think he's wrong with the 'only-lose spot'. When corporate and personal feelings collide, money talks. Sid is either suppressed or shy as hell cause he's just lost in the mix with his easy to anticipate opinions. He could show kids today what leaders do and lead. He's wasting a golden opportunity so he can basically stay on fringe.
Kane - Exactly. Roto stud. Off-ice matters don't effect everyone the same, some people just flat out play. He was only there on vacation, like so many others.
Peter Mueller - Is there anyone not pulling for this guy. Besides the people who may have gave up on him a smudge early. Dale Tallon is no slouch. http://therattrick.com/2012/07...r-mueller/
Can't wait to see how he progresses. Is Dale Tallon smarter than Ray Shero? It appears so.
The rest was a great read.
Question? Could some of these players have enrolled in school and dressed for a collegiate team while on strike? Sounds like the right environment for Kane. Both of them. At least they could actually afford their tuition.


text:
Right just got myself an Acer Revo 3610, it has the following specs:
- nVidia ION Chipset
- Intel Atom 330 Dual Core CPU
- nVidia 9400M Integrated Graphics
- Realtek ALC662 Audio
- HDMI Port
- Atheros AR5007EG B/G Wireless Adapter (mini PCI-E)
- nVidia Network Controller
After doing allot of research I have found everything will work apart from the Audio over HDMI and the Wireless Card. This is fine as I can just purchase a new wireless card.
Next questions are relating to Installing Snow Leopard:
Question One:
Can I install using a genuine untouched Snow Leopard DVD? If not what steps do I have to take to install Snow Leopard? I am currently running Windows 7.
Question Two:
I only have an external dvd drive for the acer (there is no internal optical drive) Is it possible to copy the content of the Snow Leopard DVD to a USB Pen (16gb) in Windows 7 and boot from that?
Any info on the above questions would be great


text:
List of Street NamesTalk4
9,365pages on
this wiki
this wiki
Redirected from South Parkway
In the 3D Universe, streets were rarely assigned a name. In the HD Universe, due to the increased level of detail, every street has a name, which is useful for establishing locations.
Liberty City (3D Universe)
- East Monroe Avenue, Staunton Island
- Jefferson Street, Staunton Island (Jefferson St. Credit Union building)
- Fairbanks Avenue, Shoreside Vale
- Portland Boulevard, Portland Island
- West Front Street, Portland Island
- Allen Street, Portland Island
Vice City (3D Universe)
San Andreas (3D Universe)
- 6th Street, Los Santos (Beauty on 6th, Industries Company)
- Auto Circle, San Fierro (BF Motors)
- Broadway, Los Santos
- Dix Road, Los Santos (BF Motors)
- Fifth Ave, Los Santos
- Grove Street, Los Santos
- Harry Gold Parkway, Las Venturas
- Hasselhoff Street, San Fierro (Big Pointy Building)
- Interstate 45, Los Santos
- Julius Thruway, Las Venturas
- Las Venturas Boulevard (The Strip), Las Venturas
- Main St, Fort Carson
- Market Boulevard, Los Santos
- Mulholland Drive, Los Santos
- Old Venturas Strip, Las Venturas
- Rodeo Drive, Los Santos
- Saints Boulevard, Los Santos
- San Fierro Scenic Rd, Flint County
- Santa Maria Drive, Los Santos
- San Peeso St, Los Santos
- San Peeso St (San Pedro St on Xbox version), Las Venturas
- Sunset St, Los Santos
- Temple Dr, Los Santos
- Vanderblit Road, Las Venturas
- Verbatim Road, Las Venturas (BF Motors)
- Vinewood Boulevard, Los Santos
- Windy Windy Windy Windy Street, San Fierro
Liberty City (HD Universe)
Some street names in GTA IV have certain themes associated to them: for example, each of the main horizontal streets in Algonquin is named after a mineral.
San Andreas (HD Universe)
|Los Santos County
|Blaine County
|Numbered Highways in San Andreas


text:
Moderators: Clan Directors, Global Moderators
betiko wrote:wow we're even getting the support for the crowd!! huge pressure on tofu!!!
I took revenge on berlin and hopefully on das schloss after september's spanking in the cl4 cup! not done on das schloss et's see what you guys do with your 2 trades... my last game and after I will only be a cheerleader.
betiko wrote:my last game and after I will only be a cheerleader.
TYPonyGal wrote:go pack!! I hope you guys pull it out
betiko wrote:current score is 23-17 with new world and berlin not updated yet.
Emmdizzle wrote:Postby Denise on Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:14 pm
Good luck to both clans. TSM 37-24.
Hope we see you in the finals
Finsfleet wrote:Wow, this one`s still open.
Emmdizzle wrote:Just checked all of the undecided games...the PACK could still easily win this. I only see tofu clearly ahead in Oasis with the pack winning or slightly aheadly in most of them...I definitely need some popcorn and my 3D glasses for this finish!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


text:
Guest post by Eleanor Athens
The science of taste is complex and amazing, as anyone who has ever bitten into a sun-warmed tomato in a summer garden can tell you. Much of the enjoyment we get from eating is actually caused by volatile aroma chemicals; we smell our food as we taste it. We can detect over 10,000 odors, versus only five taste classifications. That's why eating's just not as much fun with a stuffy nose.
But why?
Why do fruits and herbs smell this way? Is it for our enjoyment? Well, maybe, but for them it's also a matter of survival of the species. Have you ever wondered why you're in the garden admiring untouched fruit that needs just one more day to be perfectly ripe, and the next day you go out and someone (beast or bug) has gotten there first? Fruits want to be eaten. They broadcast themselves across your garden. We may have to hold a strawberry up to our human noses in order to smell it, but to animals, it's crying out with a chemical signal: "Come and get it!" In the desire to propagate the species, plants offer up their fruit as delicious little sacrifices, so the seed can spread far and wide.
Unlike fruit, herbs aren't begging to be eaten; far from it. The fragrance of herbs is in their essential oils, the aromatic essence of the plant. The essential oils often contain chemicals that are distasteful to insects and other animals (though not to us). This is one of the theories behind companion planting. The tasty fragrance of herbs is partly a result of the complex chemical warfare plants wage to survive. For example, borage and basil planted with your tomatoes deter hornworms, and the menthol content in mints and the citronella in lemon balm and lemongrass repels many insects.
Getting the most from your fragrant foods
Fruit, like cheese, releases its fragrance best at room temperature. Think of the sun-warmed tomato, all its yummy aroma chemicals floating free — as opposed to one straight from the icebox, scent deadened by the cold. If you're serving a cheese plate for dessert, it's a good idea to take the fruit and cheese out of the refrigerator just before dinner.
Prolonged heat can denature fragile aroma chemicals, which is why it's preferable to add tender herbs such as parsley and cilantro at the end of cooking. Woody herbs such as rosemary and thyme stand up much better to extended cooking times.
Don't be afraid to play with your food. Handling releases the volatile chemicals. Crush herbs in your fingers or rub your thumb over a peach, and inhale. Remember, without fragrance there's no flavor.
- – -
Eleanor Athens is the founder of Athens Atelier, an organic perfumery. Athens Atelier fragrances are made from pure essential oils and absolutes following the tradition of aromatherapy and the modern science of aromachology; that scents have the power to make us feel good.
Teja Ream is an art grad student living in California in a studio apartment covered in mandevilla. When 9 years old she was convinced she had a special talent for growing things and decided to let the world know by painting her thumb green. Later when she washed off the paint, there was a perceptible green stain that had managed to seep into her skin, which she took as a sign from a higher being that she was destined for botanical greatness…still working on that, need help with orchids.


text:
Third Annual Western Conference - "Federal Sovereignty, State Sovereignty, and the Sovereignty of 562 Native American Tribes: A Match Made In Heaven or Somewhere Less Pleasant?"
10:15 a.m. - 12:00 noon
Roundtable Discussion: How Comfortably Does Tribal Sovereignty Fit With American Democratic Ideals?
- Prof. Carole Goldberg, UCLA School of Law
- Dan Kolkey, Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher LLP
- Joe Matel, Legislative Counsel, Senate Judiciary Committee
- Hon. Tom Sansonetti, Holland & Hart LLP
- Prof. Alexander Tallchief Skibine, University of Utah College of Law
- Moderator: Hon. Diarmuid O'Scannlain, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
12:00 noon – 1:45 p.m.
Luncheon Address
- Hon. Kenneth W. Starr, Dean, Pepperdine University Law School
- Introduction: John Fund, Wall Street Journal
2:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m.
Panel Discussion: International Law and Indian Law
- Walter Olson, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
- Prof. Maimon Schwarzschild, University of San Diego School of Law
- Moderator: Hon. Carlos Bea, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
3:45 p.m. - 4:45 p.m.
Debate: The Apology Resolutions and the Akaka Bill
- Prof. Gail Heriot, University of San Diego School of Law
- Dr. Davianna McGregor, University of Hawaii at Manoa
- Moderator: Eugene B. Meyer, President, The Federalist Society
The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Simi Valley, CA
Views and opinions expressed by the Federalist Society are not necessarily shared by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.


text:
April is the crazy month at work, hence the silence on the blog. But, fear not, I have a huge update and lots of good things to share. So grab a cuppa something nice and sit back. First, let's get the obligatory Henry photo out of the way. Here he is sunbathing in the Spring sunshine at the end of March. Such a cutie! Chico's cage is in the background and I have since moved it to the other side of the room so he doesn't get the morning and afternoon sun as directly. Next up to the plate is Continue Reading »
Find Me
Powered by Ravelry
My Flickrwww.flickr.com


text:
Top News
Customer Raves
This is a gasket overhaul complete set that fits 235 cubic inch.
This part fits most Chevrolet 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 Cars and Trucks.; exceptions may apply. Please read the complete description to see if this part fits your specific vehicle and application.
The World's Most Complete Supplier of 1937 - 1954 Chevrolet Car and Truck Parts
Copyright 2004-2014 by Chevs of the 40's
Web Development and Hosting


text:
Published on Saturday, April 12 2014 11:10
Denver's landmark restaurant, The Fort, will offer a very special lecture dinner event on Saturday, April 26, presented by Dr. Loren Cordain, Ph.D., the Godfather behind The Paleo Diet.
The lecture, "Origins and Evolution of the Western Diet: Health Implications for the 21st Century", will be held at The Fort (19192 Colorado 8, Morrison, CO 80465) from 6 – 7 p.m. Dr. Cordain will discuss the
Login to read more: Dr. Loren Cordain, Ph.D., The Godfather behind The Paleo Diet Speaks at The Fort
Purchase A Subscription: Dr. Loren Cordain, Ph.D., The Godfather behind The Paleo Diet Speaks at The Fort
Published on Friday, April 11 2014 10:27
media release
Colorado Department of Agriculture
Each month, the Colorado Department of Agriculture features a different commodity to highlight the variety and quality of products grown, raised or processed in the state. This month, Colorado herbs are
Login to read more: Spring Abounds with Colorado Herbs
Published on Thursday, April 10 2014 10:04
Getting Your Garden Started ~ April 6
Fermentation Class ~ April 15
Skin Care Class ~ April 19
Impromptu Harvest to Table Class ~ May 4
Wool Day ~ Spinning/Knitting + a Farm Dinner ~ June 5
Garden Maintenance ~ July 22
Soul Craft Garden Mixology ~ July 29, August 16, September 21
Visit website for more classes and Farm Dinner Schedules.
Login to read more: Lyons Farmette Spring Classes
Published on Thursday, April 10 2014 12:57
With mountain snowpack high, and rainy months on the way, now is the time to buy flood insurance, say state and federal emergency management officials.
In most circumstances, there is a thirty-day waiting period from the time the policy is written and the premium is paid until the policy goes into effect. That means a policy purchased today, in April, would not go into effect until the same date in May. It also means that a policy
Login to read more: Now Is The Time To Buy Flood Insurance
Purchase A Subscription: Now Is The Time To Buy Flood Insurance
Published on Thursday, March 20 2014 14:55
By Ron Gosnell
The organizational meeting for the Lyons Lions Club's "Adopt a Tree" flood recovery project (the tree planting will take place April 26) is off and running to a great start, thanks to enthusiastic and caring Lyons citizens.
Login to read more: Adopt a Tree Project News Update