text:
Tag Archives: personal brand
Jan 26, 2012
Four Great January 2012 Blog Posts to Read
Playing the role of Internet DJ, here are four great blog posts worth reading.
1.) Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg says that social media is a bright spot in the challenged world economy. "This is about growth, jobs and empowering people." App makers, advertisers, small businesses and civic groups are all using Facebook to promote their work and connect with people. And Facebook is the number two driver of web traffic (guess who's #1).
2.) Author and friend John Morgan offers 10 reasons we won't support your business. So much of it seems like common sense, but alas, it is not. See numbers 2, 7 and 10.
3.) Mitch Joel is thinking smarter. He asks us to think about where our learning is taking place. The digital generation (which I just barely squeaked into!) is learning on their iPhones and iPads. As Joel writes, "Every day, new content comes online that can and will make you smarter." For example, if you want to know how to start a t-shirt company, you can ask me "How did you start your t-shirt company?" Or you can thoroughly research the subject via Google and ask me the very specific left-over questions you have. Technology has made it possible to "set your own curriculum," Joel says. Do that!
4.) Chris Brogan gives a fantastic list: 97 Ideas for Building a Valuable Platform. I read this from a personal branding perspective. Your personal brand is being more heavily weighted by employers every day. There will come a day (we're close) when CPA firms will hire junior auditors and consider their social graph when doing so. If I'm hiring, I want to know about your valuable platform and how you plan on using it to help me advance my business agenda. It's less about being a clock-watching cog in the wheel and more about being a team member. For me, this piece is another "Beethoven's 9th Symphony" post from Brogan. Read it twice.
May 20, 2011
Referral Key – Clogging The Arteries Of My Inbox With Spam
June 19, 2013 UPDATE: I just got off the phone with Chris Ott, one of the founders of Referral Key. I recognized his name on my caller ID and was bracing for a rough call. It is completely understandable that they are not fans of this post. He could not have been nicer. It's been over two years since this blog post went up, and he reached out to let me know that they've made many changes to Referral Key. He wanted me to know that much hard work has gone into improving the service. I told him that, full disclosure, I was not a user of the service and would not have time to give it a rigorous test drive in order to verify his representations. However, I agreed that, if he had an updated story to tell, I'd let him tell it here. I look forward to receiving some new information from him on the improvements they've made. Once I get the info, I'll be sure to post another update here.
Post from May 2011 begins here:
So when I started receiving (lots of) emails in my inbox from people asking me to join Referral Key, I thought it was the next big service that I was going to have to try. Turns out, it's not a new service. I found a Hubspot case study and accompanying video from February 2009, where Hubspot (a company I love) talks about how they helped ReferralKey.com increase their site traffic and leads. I suppose it feels new to me because this is the first I've heard of it, and I've received over 100 invitations to join in the past few days. That sort of groundswell usually accompanies a hot new product.
The first time I got an email with the subject line "Are you taking on new clients?" Holy crap, I was excited! You bet I'm taking clients! (what a hook). Ten seconds later, I felt the shame of spam, deflated, and just a little pissed. After receiving 100 of these emails? No one likes spam.
Here is what the typical email looks like:
Subject: Are you taking on new clients?
The message itself is almost identical every time. Subject line, body, signature…. all the same. This deluge of messages has been nothing short of annoying.
Now, in almost every public speaking appearance I make, I get on my soapbox for at least a minute or two and tell the audience that they need to be nice. The rules of online are not that much different than offline. Mom taught us that there are things we think that we don't say. You always have to be nice. When curating content online, it is vitally important to remember this.
So it is with a bit of trepidation that I report to you that I responded to 30 of these emails. I did so for research purposes. To each person, I asked only the following:
Maybe this wasn't nice. My intention was not to make the sender feel bad for having spammed me, or to sound like or be a dick. I wanted to see how many people would respond, and I wanted to read those responses. I wanted to learn something about social media and personal branding.
Out of 30 emails I sent, I received seven responses. Maybe I would have received more had I phrased my question differently. This isn't a scientific poll. Here is a sampling of the responses:
"When I signed up for referralkey via an invitation, the site went through my LinkedIn contacts, of which you are one of my first degree connections, and sent the invitation asking you to join. If you don't want to participate, please feel free to ignore the request."
"This is a new website, just starting up, where individuals and business can support each other in referrals and I thought 1st, it is a good idea and 2nd that you might like , at least, to be aware of it. If you are not interested, then no problem. Didn't mean to offend you or cause you any undo concerns. Thanks for your response."
"I didn't. Somebody hacked my account."
"Hi! Sorry, I thought it was a great service and wanted to extend the invitation to my linkedIN followers. It allows people to get in touch and has quite an amazing business model. Hope it helps you!"
"I thought you might like it. It's free. Maybe it's for you….maybe it's not. Never hurts to look."
"This is a new social media site that works with LinkedIn. I received a few invites this morning from my LinkedIn contacts so I did the same. I am still learning this new site but so far this morning I have found two great contacts that I will most likely be doing business with directly from this site. If you are interested in connecting with me there, please feel free to accept my invite. In no way did I mean to make you feel like you were getting spammed."
"Sorry for the intrusion. Seems there was an error when they imported EVERYONE on my LinkedIn network, and included you in it. My sincere apologies…as this usually happens with a huge list…"
So these are 1st degree LinkedIn connections asking me to join a new service. We have some people calling the email to me an error. We have some people blaming it on a hack. Some are saying they were just trying to be helpful. A few people really took the time to try and explain Referral Key to me.
The problem? Referral Key has no idea how bad this avalanche of emails is making them look (click on the picture at the top of this blog post! That's my email inbox). These messages, all identical, all with that hook of a subject line, are not good for their business. For better or worse, I now consider them to be a less-than-reputable company. But even worse, you, the Referral Key user, have no idea what joining a service like this is going to make you look like. In this case, it made these people look like the Spammy McSpammer MLM Sham Wow guy. I'll bet most of these people aren't actually like that, and the service is probably on the up and up, but that's the impression they are leaving. Perhaps it's Referral Key's fault, as their system is the one generating these cookie cutter emails in mass volume.
However, as a businessperson with a personal brand, you need to be aware of your every move and do your best to calculate benefits and risks before joining the next social media platform du jour. Do not join a service unless you have a plan and a goal in mind for your participation and time spent. Do not join a Twitter automation service that sends annoying tweets from your account like "The following users unfollowed me today: @User1, @User2, @User3. Try it at LoserTwitterService.com." Don't invite people to your mafia family on Facebook. Stop clicking on random links that people DM or Facebook message you – they are often virus traps and you're spreading spam. And stop joining services that blast out marketing messages Uzi-style as ReferralKey.com does. The bad taste you are leaving in people's mouths is not worth it.
5/25/11 POST ADDENDUM – per Chris Ott of Referral Key:
"The message is fully customizable and you can choose to uncheck anyone just like any other service. http://imageshack.us/m/109/8072/emailimportation.jpg "
I am not sure why some people have commented that they were unable to utilize this screen, but thank you Chris for bringing it to our attention.
Mar 19, 2011
How I Got My iPad 2 And The Lesson Learned
The Green Light.
That's what I got from my wife after a somewhat lengthy discussion about the reasons I wanted to purchase an iPad 2. "Do you need this?" she asked. "Need?" I responded. "No, I don't need this. I would survive without it. It seems like something that someone in my profession should have, and I want it. But no, need is not the right word." To quote Jim Morrison, perhaps it was with that bit of honesty that I broke on through to the other side!
However, in the case of one of the most hyped and successful launches in the history of consumer products, the Green Light doesn't mean you get an iPad 2! As is the Apple norm, the lines outside Apple stores and electronics retailers were long and sustained. Apple sold everything they had on debut day. Reports had the first day numbers at anywhere from 500,000 to 1 million.
And it didn't end there. Lines started forming at stores on the second day. And the third day. And the fourth day. Supplies were limited, and any time an Apple store received a shipment, there was already a line of people waiting outside the store with line tickets in hand, ready to buy. Best Buy in Brentwood, MO was accepting reservations for iPad 2's. You tell Best Buy personnel which particular iPad 2 you want, put $100 down (which they provide you in the form of a Best Buy gift card), and then they call you when the iPad comes in. They are selling new shipments of iPads exclusively to people on the list. Walk-in traffic will not be able to buy iPads until all names on the list get theirs. I was at Best Buy the other night and almost threw my name on the list, but hesitated. I was already spending $230 on two portable DVD players, so I chickened out and left.
I went to Target. None. Micro Center. Nope. Apple stores? "We had 'em, but we're sold out." Honestly, I was OK with waiting. I didn't have the Apple Shakes. But my iPad 2 seemed so far away. How long would I have to wait?
Enter my friend Muljadi. Actually he's not my "friend." He's a Twitter friend. Actually, I'm not sure we've ever spoken on Twitter until a few days ago. And obviously we had never met in person. I can tell you this – he's my friend now!
After a few @RizzoTees tweets about how every place was sold out, here's Muljadi's first tweet to me:
@rizzotees I'm at the Apple store Galleria and they have Verizon 3G iPad 2s; I can pick one up for you if you'd like – tweet me back
His tweet came in around 8am Wednesday, so I asked him if the store was even open yet. His response:
@RizzoTees Store's open for training, won't open for sale until 10. Not trying to mark up, just remembered you're looking for one
So he's telling me he's not trying to profit from doing this for me. However, at this point I declined his offer. I wasn't sure if I wanted a 3G iPad or a wifi one. Muljadi must not have found the unit he wanted, because next day, he's back at it!
@rizzotees They have wifi iPads @ Galleria & West County – if you're quick you may be able to get a ticket.
I thought that was very nice of him to alert me to the stock they had at the West County store. I did not go to the store. Something told me I should probably go to Falk Harrison and work. Then, on Friday morning, Muljadi is on the hunt again, and repeats his offer to grab one for me:
@RizzoTees About 40+ people standing in line @ West County Apple store – want one?
I was about to have coffee with my bud Greg Bussmann, and gave it some quick thought. Damn, I wanted this thing. OK, why the hell not? I'm going to have a total stranger, my Good Samaritan, buy an iPad for me. I told him which one I preferred, gave him my cell phone number, and wished him luck.
By 9am, my mobile rings. Muljadi was in possession of my new iPad 2. Wonders never cease, and Twitter never ceases to amaze.
Why did Muljadi do this? He saw my tweet, asking if anyone knew of a store with iPad 2's in stock, and thought he could help me. Why did I do this? My reasons were two-fold: I really wanted that iPad, and I wanted to take part in yet another social media experiment. I can assure you, this was way more fun than standing in line with strangers for four hours. I got to meet a really cool dude. We met up at the St. Louis Bread Company on Ballas (Panera for the rest of the country) and chatted for maybe 30 minutes before we parted ways. I could have easily talked with him for another hour, but we both wanted to get home and play with our new iPads!
THANK YOU MULJADI! I'll see you online….
POSTSCRIPT: Muljadi was and is a really stand-up guy, and he assumed I was too. Nevertheless, I told him I didn't expect him to accept a personal check from me, and that I'd bring cash. He sent me this DM:
"cash will be fine with me; you're pretty well known, so I'm pretty sure you don't want to be harassed if your check bounced "
Guys, that is what social media is all about. Yes, you can have fun, you can learn, and you can sell stuff. But it all comes back to letting people get to know you – the Personal Brand. I tell any individual or company that will listen to me that this is exactly how you want friends, bosses, husbands, wives, customers and prospects to feel about you. There is no way whatsoever that I would or could do Muljadi wrong. All I have is a few case studies, my reputation, and my personal brand. I figuratively could not afford to screw Muljadi over, and he understood that. Therefore, he explicitly trusted me before we had ever met. CEO's and CMO's, that's how you want a prospect to feel when you are introducing them to your company! That's what this is all about. ROI? You tell me what the ROI is of making life easier for your salespeople.
POSTSCRIPT 2: Buying an iPad with cash… this might be the only time I've ever pulled $560 in cash out of an ATM at once. It just felt a little weird.
POSTSCRIPT 3: Assuming neither of us have ever been drug dealers, I'm not sure either of us have experienced such an exchange. I sit down at the table. He pushes a white iPad 2 box across the table. I tell him, "OK Mul, here comes the awkward part!" I whip out $560 in cash and hand it to him. The lady sitting next to us thought we were nuts!
May 17, 2010
Does Offering A Different Point Of View Dilute Your Personal Brand?
When you're tweeting out links to pertinent industry news or opinion pieces, should you 100% agree with everything contained in the article? Or is it OK to present information that might actually differ with the way you think? If you do tweet something like that out, are your followers apt to get confused, thinking that you believe one thing when you really believe another?
Listen to my mini-podcast here and let me know what you think. My take is that it's OK to tweet out interesting tidbits even if you don't 100% agree with the contents. You might even post a little endcap on the tweet that says "I don't completely agree with this, but what do you guys think?"
Leave a comment and give me your take!
I recorded this podcast in my local Panera Bread Company – forgive my daughter talking to herself in the background!
Apr 6, 2010
Write a Blog to Enhance Your Personal Brand
A blog is a wonderful tool to help enhance your personal brand. You may ask, "I have a job. (or 'I'm a CEO') Why would I ever care about my personal brand?" The reasons are all about the Benjamins.
1. If you are an employee of an organization, your personal brand is like your 21st Century Web 2.0 résumé. Frankly, if I were hiring someone today for Rizzo Tees, I'd check their Twitter feed, their Facebook profile, and their LinkedIn profile. And then I would check for a blog – through their writings, I might be able to see what makes them tick.
2. If you are the owner of an organization, your personal brand will gain you clients. It's as simple as that. You are your company, and your company is you. Customers want to know who they're working with and who they're buying from, and this is getting more and more important. They are more apt to buy from you if they have a sense of who you are.
Below is a redacted version of an email exchange I had with a friend who owns a business. He was considering writing a personal blog and separating it from his business. His goal was to enhance his personal brand. The blog would have contained his personal insights on the field of business he was in, but would not have been directly tied to his company's website. I argued that the two should be intertwined, because as an owner of a business, his personal brand and his business success are directly tied together.
The text of my response:
The most important distinction here is that you are the founder and CEO of an awesome startup company. Therefore, your company is much more closely tied to you, and you to the company, than if you were just an employee somewhere, for instance. Employees have great reason to privately build and cultivate their own personal brands. An employee will need their personal brand to be strong (portfolio, blog posts, a good network of people) in order to score that next employment opportunity.
You, on the other hand, are different. You're not going to be leaving your startup company – you are no longer a nomad – you'll be at your company until its bought out – you're going to build up your company to be 100+ talented people, scoring ever larger clients, until you are sitting in your plush offices, smoking your Cohibas.
Let your company itself be your personal branding powerhouse. When potential clients are thinking of hiring you, don't make them traverse two different websites. Put your best thoughts right there on your company's site for potential clients to soak in. I do see the value in cross promotion (he was going to promote the biz from his blog). However, let others do that for you. That's what we're here for – your friends on Twitter and Facebook – you create a great message in the name of your business (and you), and let us carry it out to the masses.
Your personal brand is your business, because you founded it. I feel strongly that you should put 100% of your best marketing and social media nuggets on your company's site, making it the strongest, most natural sales pitch it can be.
What do you guys think? How important is personal branding? Should CEOs, employees, and entrepreneurs all address this issue differently?
Mar 19, 2010
50 Tips For Elevating Your Personal Brand
Cindy Yantis has posted an awesome collection of the top 50 tips for elevating your personal brand. It's a great read, and yes I'm biased – check out #20.
Have a great weekend everyone! Take a walk outside, if you can. It's time to GTFO of the house!


text:
Buffalo's Stevie Johnson won't be happy until Bills are relevant again
Stevie Johnson's season has gone much like the one-handed catch the Buffalo Bills receiver made last weekend.
It looked marvelous: Johnson leaping over the middle to snag the ball with one hand, bring it in and control it before he landed on the turf for a 25-yard gain. Trouble is, the drive stalled and Buffalo lost the game.
"It's a pretty cool catch," Johnson said Wednesday. "I mean, it's just a guy trying to make a big play. But it didn't really lead to too much. So, it's just a play. That's it."
The best receiver on a perennial loser is sick of the losing but hasn't been pouting or pointing fingers. On the verge of becoming the first Bills receiver to produce three consecutive 1,000-yard seasons, the fifth-year pro is instead thinking about the best way to produce a winning culture in Buffalo.
ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. — Bills coach Chan Gailey is not discussing job security, either his or that of starting quarterback Ryan Fitzpatrick for another week.
He's focused on preparing Buffalo for its season finale against the New York Jets this weekend rather than the uncertain off-season that lies ahead.
"I'm not into that right now," Gailey said Monday. "I'm into let's beat the Jets and finish this thing the way it needs to be finished."
At 5-10, Buffalo's season is essentially finished except for a game against the Jets (6-9) on Sunday.
Coming off a 24-10 loss at Miami, the Bills have dropped seven of nine, are guaranteed their fourth consecutive year with 10 or more losses, and will miss the playoffs for a 13th straight season. Gailey's record in Buffalo has dropped to 15-32 over a three-year stretch in which he's yet to win more than six games.
Gailey deflected questions regarding his job security, and declined to say whether he's received any assurances from the front office or Hall of Fame owner Ralph Wilson.
"I wouldn't tell you if they'd given me an indication or not," said Gailey, who has at least one year left on his contract.
And yet he's sticking with Fitzpatrick as his starter for at least one more week because, as Gailey put it: "He gives us the best chance to win."
Gailey, however, hedged as to whether Fitzpatrick's job is safe going into next season.
"We evaluate all that at the end of the season," he said. "I don't see anything that would change my mind there right now. Something may change my mind as time goes on. But right now, I don't see anything that changes my mind in that."
That's a bit of a switch from what Gailey had said late last month when discussing Fitzpatrick's status.
"As we continue to get better, I think he is going to be the guy," Gailey had said then.
The trouble is neither Fitzpatrick nor the Bills have shown many signs of progress.
After scoring 20 offensive touchdowns in their first seven games, the Bills have managed just 13 (five rushing and eight passing) in their past eight. Over that same stretch, Fitzpatrick has more turnovers (four lost fumbles and seven interceptions) than touchdowns passing (eight). John Bazemore
Injuries have also contributed to the drop in production.
Slot receiver David Nelson has been out since hurting his knee in the season opener. No. 2 receiver Donald Jones missed two of three games before being placed on injured reserve last week. And starting tight end Scott Chandler is out after tearing a ligament in his left knee against Miami.
Gailey said Chandler will require surgery, and the injury could have him miss the start of next season.
Questions about Fitzpatrick have been raised since general manager Buddy Nix said on several occasions this season that he's interested in drafting a quarterback next year.
Fitzpatrick's contract could also be an issue. In March, he's due to make a US$3 million bonus, which could be a steep price to pay for a team that could be in the market for a new starter.
Though Bills players were given the day off, Fitzpatrick acknowledged this has been a difficult season for him.
"I'd be lying if I said it didn't wear on me a little bit," Fitzpatrick said on his weekly show on Buffalo's WGR-Radio. "We haven't met [the expectations]. And I haven't met them. And so it's been disappointing. But that stuff doesn't affect the way that I play on Sunday."
Another issue has been the Bills defence, which hasn't played to its high-priced potential.
They're the NFL's eighth team to have allowed 45 or more points four times in one season. They've allowed 150 or more yards rushing seven times after giving up 182 to Miami. And the 426 points allowed is already the third-most given up in team history, and 28 short of matching the record set in 1984.
Gailey accepted the blame for the team's overall struggles this season, while insisting he sees signs of progress.
"The job is production and winning, and we haven't gotten there," Gailey said. "We're getting closer, but we're not over the hump."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Adventure District Preferred Hotel
Crowne Plaza Oklahoma City
2945 NW Expressway
Oklahoma City, OK 73112
405.848.4811 (e-mail: email@example.com)
Located in the hub of Oklahoma City's growing northwest business district, the Crowne Plaza Oklahoma City is conveniently located off the Northwest Expressway at North May Avenue.
The hotel impresses guests by anticipating their every need and preparing for each arrival.
The Crowne Plaza Oklahoma City is unique in the following ways:
• 218 spacious guestrooms and four luxurious suites with luxury bedding in every room
• 19 poolside cabanas featuring full amenities and vaulted ceilings
• Honeymoon Suite with private outdoor pool, whirlpool tub, separate dining area and more
• Classically elegant guestrooms with separate work area, two phones with data ports, voice mail, coffee maker and full sized ironing board with iron
• Outdoor heated swimming pool, whirlpool and onsite fitness center
• Complimentary shuttle service with 48 hours notice
• Complimentary high speed internet access
• Only 7 miles from OKC's Adventure District
Newly renovated bar lobby and restaurant: Enigma Grill, located on the main level, is open for breakfast, lunch and dinner. And the hot spot to enjoy a cocktail or unwind after a long day, the Enigma Lounge opens at 5:00pm daily
$89 nightly rate or you can upgrade to a rate of $99 with the breakfast buffet


text:
Community Board 8's Transportation Committee would like the city to place countdown timers on traffic signals or pedestrian crossing signs where red light cameras are located in its district because, members said, drivers seeking to avoid traffic tickets cause crashes.
"It's a device that would increase motorist safety and prevent accidents," said Committee Chairman Jesse Rosenbaum. "It's something to think about."
According to the committee, which met last Thursday, drivers who are familiar with where the cameras are located stop short when the light turns yellow to avoid getting nabbed and often cause other drivers to slam into them.
"I notice a red light camera on Queens Boulevard and Ascan. So if I see the walk- don't walk sign is flashing and I know the light is going to turn yellow, I'm going to stop," member Mark Lefkof said. "The guy behind me doesn't know and I get rear ended."
Lefkof asked Department of Transportation Borough Planner Feliz Okolo if the agency could do a safety study of corners with cameras in District 8 and he agreed to discuss the idea with other DOT officials.
"But the signal engineers would have to look into it because there are potential ramifications as to why it's not being done," Okolo said of installing timers. He also said if the board could highlight where accidents occur it would provide impetus for further examination. But the agency said no Wednesday.
Scott Gastel, a spokesman for the DOT, said it is not something that currently exists or that the agency is considering.
Lefkof and Rosenbaum said they believe the countdown clocks haven't already been installed because the red light cameras generate a lot of money in fines.
"You have the one on the westbound service road of the Long Island Expressway by Willets Point Boulevard ... some guy got a ticket and put four bullet holes into the back of it," Lefkof said.
Okolo noted that there are 100 cameras throughout the city, with locations where the devices are actively being rotated, a statement the committee found hard to believe.
"So sometimes you have an empty box there?" Lefkof asked. "I'm not talking about the dummy ones that they put up that you could tell it's a dummy. I'm talking about the one that are really fixed with the locks on the back of them."
Okolo asked if the committee could provide an example of a countdown clock location in the city and Lefkof noted one on a pedestrian crossing sign at the corner of Queens Boulevard and Continental / 71st Avenue.


text:
Latest News
First World Congress of Comparative Economics
EAEPE is one of the co-organizers of the First Word Congress of Comparative Economics along with other several Academic associations. We are glad to launch the call for papers for the First World Congress of Comparative Economics to be held in Rome at the Roma Tre University on 25-27 June 2015. Please visit the web site and download the Call for Papers!
1st Vienna Conference on Pluralism in Economics
EAEPE would like to share with you following Call for Papers for the 1st Vienna Conference on Pluralism in Economics to be held from 10-12 April 2015. Please take a look at the web site and download the Call for Papers!
EAEPE 2014 - William Kapp & Herbert Simon Awards
Hereby we would like to congratulate the 2014 prize winners for their outstanding submissions for the EAEPE 2014 William Kapp Award Peter Ho and the EAEPE 2014 Herbert Simon Young Scholar Award going to Federico Bassi as well as Kota Kitagawa.
EAEPE 2016 - Manchester, UK
We are happy to announce that the 28th Annual EAEPE Conference is already confirmed and will get held in Manchester, United Kingdom. The conference venue will be the Manchester Metropolitan University from 3-5 November 2016.
From Nicosia/Ayia Napa 2014 to Genoa 2015
Now that the conference in Cyprus ended, the council wants to thank you for your participation and energy. We hope to be able to welcome you all next year at our next conference in Genoa from 17.-19. September 2015.
Best wishes - the EAEPE Council!
Oeconomicus by Xenophon
We would like to thank the organizers and artists of the great theatrical performance at the Grecian Bay hotel on the dialog on "Oeconomicus" by Xenophon. The translated text can get downloaded here!
Programme Update & Bus Schedule
The Conference Programme has been updated and is available here. Additionally the Schedule for Bus Transfers from Larnaca Airport is available now!
In Memoriam of Fred Lee
It is with great sadness that we inform the EAEPE community that Fred Lee passed away the night between 23 and 24 October 2014. His contribution to EAEPE and to other pluralist and heterodox associations was huge, and his death is a terrible loss for the entire scientific community.
EAEPE 2014 Conference Programme
The preliminary conference programme for the 26th Annual EAEPE conference has been updated. Download pdf here – Key information is still given on our subsite!
EAEPE 2014 Herbert Simon Award
Deadline for Herbert Simon Award Submission extended till October 20. Submissions need to be papers accepted for the 26th Annual EAEPE Conference 2014. Please send a PDF copy of your paper to Jean-Christophe Graz: email@example.com
EDITORS' NOTE: Getting Your Articles Published in Economics Journals – Editors Offer Some Advice
15 editors give their advice on how to get your paper published in an economics journal!
EAEPE 2014 Preliminary Programme
The preliminary programme of the 26th Annual EAEPE Conference is available now! Please register for the Conference and the Social Dinner here!
EAEPE 2014 Plenary Roundtable TTIP
This Roundtable brings together a European Member of Parliament, a leading European activist and researchers to discuss the highly controversial Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and the US.
EAEPE Opening Address 2014
The opening address at the Annual EAEPE conference 2014 will get held by Prof. Kristis Hassapis, President of the Bank of Cyprus (from the Department of Economics, University of Cyprus).
EAEPE Conference Accommodation 2014
Information on accommodation for the 26th Annual EAEPE Conference is available now. Please have a look here for booking your hotel!
EAEPE Conference Registration 2014
The conference registration for the 26th Annual EAEPE Conference is open now. Please become a member or renew your membership here and register for the conference here afterwards! We are looking forward to meeting you in Nicosia, Cyprus.
EAEPE Summer School 2014
The EAEPE Summer School 2014 will start next week on Monday the 30th of June and will last till next Friday the 4th of July. The final programme is available now!
Special Session Karl Polanyi
Contours of the Next Great Transformation: Seventy years after the publication of Karl Polanyi's famous book 'The Great Transformation', and fifty years after his death this session will focus on two tasks. Download CfP here!
3 Special Sessions Young Scholar Network
The European Association for Evolutionary Political Economy (EAEPE) seeks to institutionalize the involvement of and exchange with Young Scholars (YS) and student initiatives at the association's Annual Conference. Download CfP here!
Special session on "Teaching and Learning Heterodox Economics and Economics in a Pluralistic Perspective"
The Council of the European Association for Evolutionary Political Economy (EAEPE) decided to launch a new series of special sessions at EAEPE's annual conferences. Download CfP here!
International Conference "The Enduring Legacy of Karl Polanyi
The year of 2014 marks the 70th anniversary of the publication of 'The Great Transformation' and 50 years since the death of Karl Polanyi in 1964. The Karl Polanyi Institute of Political Economy at Concordia University organizes an International Conference: The Enduring Legacy of Karl Polanyi.
Two Joint AFEE/EAEPE sessions at the 26th Annual EAEPE Conference
The Association for Evolutionary Economics (AFEE) and EAEPE will jointly host two sessions in agreement with the local organizer and Scientific Committee. The specific Call for Papers can get downloaded here.
Special session at the 26th Annual EAEPE Conference on "Fallacies of Efficiency and Secure Property Rights: Institutional Credibility and Function"
The proposed session will bring together leading, international scholars as well as young students of development and institutional change. The specific Call for Papers can get downloaded here.
New EAEPE Research Area [Z]
A new EAEPE Research [Z] was created on 'Co-Operative Economy and Collective Ownership'. This research area welcomes scholars interested in the co-operative sector, an important component of the economy in Europe, in the Americas and in the Asia Pacific, and of developing significance in Africa.
New EAEPE Research Area [R]
A new EAEPE Research [R] was created on 'Classical Theory and Policy Analysis'. This research area aims to reconstruct economic theory and policy analysis along the lines of the classical or surplus approach brought to light again and revived by Piero Sraffa.
Valedictory Lecture Prof. John Groenewegen
We are pleased to announce the invitation to the valedictory lecture by Prof. John Groenewegen at TU Delft, during the 17th International Conference 'Economcis of Infrastructure': Understanding and Designing Next Generation Infrastructures; on Mono-, Multi- and Interdisciplinarity. Prof. Groenewegen has been General Secretary of EAEPE for 10 years and has done outstanding work for the association.
26th Annual EAEPE Conference 2014
We are pleased to announce the 1st call for papers for the 26th Annual EAEPE Conference 2014 on 'Unemployment and Austerity in Mediterranean European Countries' to be held at University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus from 6-8 November 2014.
EAEPE 2012 Conference (Krakow) book now published
Selected contributions, edited by Łukasz Mamica and Pasquale Tridico, of the Annual Conference 2012 in Krakow have now been published in the Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy series as Economic Policy and the Financial Crisis (London: Routledge)
Journal of Institutional Economics (JOIE) online
The Journal of Institutional Economics (JOIE) celebrates its 10-year anniversay in 2014. Online access to the entire full text archive is now available at no extra charge to all EAEPE members! Log into your account to read the latest articles.
New EAEPE Council elected
Constitutional Amendments adopted
26th Annual EAEPE Conference 2014
The 26th Annual EAEPE Conference will be held at the University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus, from 6 to 8 November 2014.
EAEPE Awards 2013
Recipients of the 2013 EAEPE-Kapp, EAEPE-Myrdal and EAEPE-Simon Prizes have been announced.
EAEPE Conference 2013 programme
Browse the programme by session to download abstracts and full papers.
Summer School 2011 and 2012 books now published
The lectures given at the 2011 and 2012 editions of the EAEPE Summer School have been published in the Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy series as Financial Crises, Labour Markets and Institutions (London: Routledge) and Institutions and Development after the Financial Crisis (London: Routledge).
Journal of Institutional Economics (JOIE)
EAEPE sponsors the Journal of Institutional Economics (JOIE), a journal devoted to the study of the nature, role and evolution of institutions in the economy. JOIE is delivered free of charge to all EAEPE members at least until 2015.
Upcoming EAEPE Events
Genoa, Italy: 17-19 September 2015
The 27th Annual EAEPE Conference
Manchester, UK: 3-5 November 2016
The 28th Annual EAEPE Conference
Recent EAEPE Events
The 26th Annual EAEPE Conference
Nicosia, Cyprus: 6-8 November
The 26th Annual EAEPE Conference 2014
Early Registration Deadline
The 8th EAEPE Summer School 2014
Rome: 30 June - 4 July
The 26th Annual EAEPE Conference 2014
Notification of acceptance
26th Annual EAEPE Conference 2014
Deadline for abstract submissionsSubmit here
8th EAEPE Summer School
Deadline for applications, write to firstname.lastname@example.com
EAEPE-Kapp Prize
Deadline for submissions to this year's competition
25th Annual EAEPE Conference
Beyond Deindustrialisation: The Future of Industries
25th EAEPE Membership Meeting
Annual Membership Meeting held at EAEPE Conference


text:
The Daily Bell has a great libertarian point of view, and excellent economic analysis. Add it to your daily reading.
Peter Schiff
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Euro Pacific Capital
I consider The Daily Bell essential reading for anyone desirous of understanding the way the world really works.
Lord William Rees-Mogg
Author, Former Deputy Editor, Financial Times
The Daily Bell has come out of nowhere to introduce to the Internet community some of the most intriguing and proactive interviews there are out there. Let's hear it for creativity and being ahead of the curve.
Bill Murphy
Chairman of Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee
The Daily Bell does a remarkable job of exposing how money power uses central banking to crush people into submission via global government with economic and political slavery being the desired end result.
John Browne
Former Secretary of the Conservative Defense and Finance Committees, UK Parliament
Rarely does a publication have the guts and objectivity to tell it like it is, yet the eloquence and wisdom to listen carefully to the 'other side.' This is The Daily Bell accomplishing its daily mission.
James Jaeger
Telly Award-winning Filmmaker
The Daily Bell affords an excellent alternative perspective on some of the noise and nonsense of mainstream media. In particular, I enjoy reading Anthony Wile's 'free-market analysis' on current subjects and articles. Very insightful.
Frank R. Suess
Chairman & CEO of BFI Capital Group Inc.
I can say that, unlike the mainstream press, The Daily Bell knows the questions to ask and has the chutzpah to ask them. They realize that socialism and Keynesianism are wrecking the world and they are helping to save what is left of liberty and free markets.
Richard J. Maybury
Author, Editor of U.S. & World Early Warning Report
For alternative views on contemporary politics, culture and science, from a libertarian point of view, check out The Daily Bell.
Michael A. Cremo
Author, Vedic Archeologist
The Daily Bell is one of the most innovative and in-depth websites on the Internet. The breadth of the content is awe inspiring and the amount of knowledge imparted is almost impossible to quantify. For me, as a liberty minded seeker of knowledge, it is a must read.
Jeff Berwick
Founder of DollarVigilante.com
The Daily Bell provides unique insights on contemporary political, economic and social problems that can be found in such a concentrated form nowhere else. Whether one agrees or disagrees with it, one cannot afford to ignore it.
Dr. Edwin Vieira
Author and Constitutional Expert
The Daily Bell is a true beacon to lead in helping the reader to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Dr. Antal Fekete
Author, Educator and Monetary Scientist
I love the Daily Bell. Every issue is principled and informative.
Lew Rockwell
Founder of the Mises Institute
There is no other publication in print or on the Internet like The Daily Bell. They have the courage to report the truth and analyze current foreign policy, politics and economic events in the context of a formerly hidden history of financial elites.
Ron Holland
Author & Monetary Analyst
Get outside the box with The Daily Bell and experience independent views.
Paul Craig Roberts
Author, Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration
I read it every day!
Jim Rogers
Bestselling Author, Co-founder of the Quantum Fund
The Daily Bell website is one of the authentic voices cutting through the clouds of vapid opinion, the morass of mediocre media and the confusion of Orwellian doublespeak. The Bell website lives up to its name, ringing unheard messages of truth in our ears.
Jeffrey Armstrong
Award-winning Author, Vedic Philosopher
I have thoroughly enjoyed the analysis and interviews at The Daily Bell, which has so often been a voice of reason during these perilous times
Dr. Thomas Woods Jr.
NY Times Bestselling Author & Senior Fellow, Mises Institute
The future is created by the people who build it, not the people who predict it will not exist. You can meet lots of important builders by reading The Daily Bell.
Catherine Austin Fitts
Former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Federal Housing Commissioner
The Daily Bell features consistently solid analysis of and thoughtful challenges to contemporary statism. I am proud to be on the team.
Dr. Tibor Machan
Author and Philosopher
I really enjoy reading The Daily Bell for the excellent research and content provided on a wide variety of issues vital to the Freedom Movement.
Dr. Mark Skousen
Author & Founder of FreedomFest
The Daily Bell should be on everyone's shortlist of news sources you can trust. It's on mine, and we often refer to it in our own weekly news service at The Reality Zone.
G. Edward Griffin
Author, Founder of Freedom Force International
At a time when growing majorities worldwide are tuning out mainstream news, people are seeking the cutting edge, insightful and thought provoking analysis that The Daily Bell consistently provides.
Gerald Celente
Bestselling Author, Founder of the Trends Research Institute
I enjoy reading The Daily Bell because it often has refreshing and novel ways of looking at things.
Bill Bonner
Bestselling Author, Founder of Agora Publishing
Sit down to read from The Daily Bell and experience a jolt of intellectual energy.
Dr. Nathaniel Branden
Psychotherapist, Bestselling Author
The Daily Bell has revived that great old institution of the personal interview, extracting information from today's great thinkers you can't get anywhere else. Outstanding!
Jeffrey Tucker
Author, Executive Editor of Laissez Faire Books
There are very few publications out there that have the smarts and guts to tell the truth about the dictatorial forces at work destroying our civilization. Thankfully The Daily Bell is one of them, and it appears in the mailbox every day.
Nelson Hultberg
Author, Director of Americans for a Free Republic
Liberty is under assault by Big Government. The Daily Bell is an essential tool for information for those who want to fight for freedom.
Steve Forbes
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Forbes Media
I love reading The Daily Bell! Interesting investment information, a political and social viewpoint that lets me know I'm not alone in the world and "annotated" with analysis. I highly recommend it to all interested readers.
Rick Rule
Founder of Global Resource Investments Inc.
I read The Daily Bell every day and I find it very informative.
Marc Faber
Dr. Marc Faber, Author, Publisher of The Gloom Boom & Doom Report
The Daily Bell leads us out of the dark tunnel of manipulated press into the light of free press.
John Perkins
Bestselling Author
Every day, I rely on the Daily Bell for a different perspective you'll never find in the regular media. It's an analysis and timely insight that is profound and provocative.
Craig Huey
Author, Small Business Owner
The Daily Bell is a fantastic source of challenging thought from a wide range of freedom loving people.
Dr. Joel Wade
Author, Psychotherapist and Life Coach
The Daily Bell is an informative source of information and commentary from leading figures in the liberty movement. It's a pleasure to be interviewed alongside far more notable individuals.
Alexander McCobin
Executive Director of Students for Liberty
The Daily Bell is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand the effects of the state on our economic future.
Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo
Professor of Economics, Loyola University Maryland
Because the world is changing so rapidly, it is difficult to keep up, which means The Daily Bell is a must read. I consider the information critically important reading.
Dave Morgan
Author, Editor of Silver-Investor.com
The Daily Bell rings out for liberty every day. It is the premier online source for insightful and hard-hitting free-market analysis and interpretation of economic, political and business events.
Dr. Richard Ebeling
Author, Professor of Economics at Northwood University
The good and the bad, the big dogs and the small, the thinkers and the doers among libertarians and on the "Right" – you can encounter them all in The Daily Bell's exclusive weekly interviews. Indispensable.
Dr. Hans Herman-Hoppe
Author, Economist and Libertarian Philosopher
The Daily Bell is an indispensable source of news and information for those seeking to curtail the power of the welfare-warfare state.
Dr. Grant Havers
Chair, Department of Philosophy, Trinity Western University
I always read the Bell. The news items are thoughtfully selected, and the interviews are unavailable elsewhere.
Doug Casey
Bestselling Author and Founder of Casey Research Group
A defender of free markets, The Daily Bell takes a libertarian approach to expose and unravel global misinformation. Read The Daily Bell – every day!
Charles Payne
FOX Business Analyst
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
Down With the Presidency
February 20, 2012
Editorial By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
The modern institution of the presidency is the primary political evil Americans face, and the cause of nearly all our woes. It squanders the national wealth and starts unjust wars against foreign peoples that have never done us any harm. It wrecks our families, tramples on our rights, invades our communities, and spies on our bank accounts. It skews the culture toward decadence and trash. It tells lie after lie. Teachers used to tell school kids that anyone can be president. This is like saying anyone can go to Hell. It's not an inspiration; it's a threat.
The presidency – by which I mean the executive State – is the sum total of American tyranny. The other branches of government, including the presidentially appointed Supreme Court, are mere adjuncts. The presidency insists on complete devotion and humble submission to its dictates, even while it steals the products of our labor and drives us into economic ruin. It centralizes all power unto itself, and crowds out all competing centers of power in society, including the church, the family, business, charity, and the community.
I'll go further. The US presidency is the world's leading evil. It is the chief mischief-maker in every part of the globe, the leading wrecker of nations, the usurer behind Third-World debt, the bailer-out of corrupt governments, the hand in many dictatorial gloves, the sponsor and sustainer of the New World Order, of wars, interstate and civil, of famine and disease. To see the evils caused by the presidency, look no further than Iraq or Serbia, where the lives of innocents were snuffed out in pointless wars, where bombing was designed to destroy civilian infrastructure and cause disease, and where women, children, and the aged have been denied essential food and medicine because of a cruel embargo. Look at the human toll taken by the presidency, from Dresden and Hiroshima to Waco and Ruby Ridge, and you see a prime practitioner of murder by government.
Today, the president is called the leader of the world's only superpower, the "world's indispensable nation," which is reason enough to have him deposed. A world with any superpower at all is a world where no freedoms are safe. But by invoking this title, the presidency attempts to keep our attention focused on foreign affairs. It is a diversionary tactic designed to keep us from noticing the oppressive rule it imposes right here in the United States.
As the presidency assumes ever more power unto itself, it becomes less and less accountable and more and more tyrannical. These days, when we say the federal government, what we really mean is the presidency. When we say, national priorities, we really mean what the presidency wants. When we say national culture, we mean what the presidency funds and imposes.
The presidency is presumed to be the embodiment of Rousseau's general will, with far more power than any monarch or head of state in pre-modern societies. The US presidency is the apex of the world's biggest and most powerful government and of the most expansive empire in world history. As such, the presidency represents the opposite of freedom. It is what stands between us and our goal of restoring our ancient rights.
And let me be clear: I'm not talking about any particular inhabitant of the White House. I'm talking about the institution itself, and the millions of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who are its acolytes. Look through the US government manual, which breaks down the federal establishment into its three branches. What you actually see is the presidential trunk, its Supreme Court stick, and its Congressional twig. Practically everything we think of as federal – save the Library of Congress – operates under the aegis of the executive.
This is why the governing elites – and especially the foreign policy elites – are so intent on maintaining public respect for the office, and why they seek to give it the aura of holiness. For example, after Watergate, they briefly panicked and worried that they had gone too far. They might have discredited the democratic autocracy. And to some extent they did. But the elites were not stupid; they were careful to insist that the Watergate controversy was not about the presidency as such, but only about Nixon the man. That's why it became necessary to separate the two. How? By keeping the focus on Nixon, making a devil out of him, and reveling in the details of his personal life, his difficulties with his mother, his supposed pathologies, etc.
Of course, this didn't entirely work. Americans took from Watergate the lesson that presidents will lie to you. This should be the first lesson of any civics course, of course, and the first rule of thumb in understanding the affairs of government. But notice that after Nixon died, he too was elevated to godlike status. None other than Bill Clinton served as high priest of the cult of president-worship on that occasion. He did everything but sacrifice a white bull at the temple of the White House.
The presidency recovered most of its sacramental character during the Reagan years. How wonderful, for the sake of our liberties, that Clinton has revived the great American tradition of scorning tyrants. In some ways, he is the best president a freedom lover can hope for. Of course, someday, Clinton too will ascend to the clouds, and enter the pantheon of the great leaders of the free world.
The libraries are filled with shelf after shelf of treatises on the American presidency. Save yourself some time, and don't bother with them. Virtually all tell the same hagiographic story. Whether written by liberals or conservatives, they serve up the identical Whiggish pap: the history of the presidency is the story of a great and glorious institution. It was opposed early on, and viciously so, by the anti-federalists, and later, even more viciously, by Southern Confederates. But it has been heroically championed by every respectable person since the beginning of the republic.
The office of the presidency, the conventional wisdom continues, has changed not at all in substance, but has grown in stature, responsibility, and importance, to fulfill its unique mission on earth. As the duties of the office have grown, so has the greatness of the men who inhabit it. Each stands on the shoulders of his forerunners, and, inspired by their vision and decisiveness, goes on to make his own contribution to the ever-expanding magisterium of presidential laws, executive orders, and national security findings.
When there is a low ebb in the accumulation of power, it is seen as the fault of the individual and not the office. Thus the so-called postage-stamp presidents between Lincoln and Wilson are to be faulted for not following the glorious example set by Abe. They had a vast reservoir of power, but were mysteriously reluctant to use it. Fortunately that situation was resolved, by Wilson especially, and we moved onward and upward into the light of the present day. And every one of these books ends with the same conclusion: the US presidency has served us well.
The hagiographers do admit one failing of the American presidency. It is almost too big an office for one man, and too much a burden to bear. The American people have come to expect too much from the president. We are unrealistic to think that one man can do it all. But that's all the more reason to respect and worship the man who agrees to take it on, and why all enlightened people must cut him some slack.
The analogy that comes to mind is the official history of the popes. In its infancy, the papacy was less formal, but its power and position were never in question. As the years went on and doctrine developed, so too did the burdens of office. Each pope inherited the wisdom of his forbears, and led the Church into fulfilling its mission more effectively.
But let's be clear about this. The church has never claimed that the papacy was the product of human effort; its spiritual character is a consequence of a divine, not human, act. And even the official history admits the struggles with anti-popes and Borgia popes. Catholics believe the institution was founded by Christ, and is guided by the Holy Spirit, but the pope can only invoke that guidance in the most narrow and rare circumstances. Otherwise, he is all too fallible. And that is why, although allegedly an absolute monarch, he is actually bound by the rule of law.
The presidency is seemingly bound by law, but in practice it can do just about anything it pleases. It can order up troops anywhere in the world, just as Clinton bragged in his acceptance speech at the Democratic convention. It can plow up a religious community in Texas and bury its members because they got on somebody's nerves at the Justice Department. It can tap our phones, read our mail, watch our bank accounts, and tell us what we can and cannot eat, drink, and smoke.
The presidency can break up businesses, shut down airlines, void drilling leases, bribe foreign heads of state or arrest them and try them in kangaroo courts, nationalize land, engage in germ warfare, firebomb crops in Colombia, overthrow any government anywhere, erect tariffs, round up and discredit any public or private assembly it chooses, grab our guns, tax our incomes and our inheritances, steal our land, centrally plan the national and world economy, and impose embargoes on anything anytime. No prince or pope ever had this ability.
But leave all that aside and consider this nightmare. The presidency has the power to bring about a nuclear holocaust with the push of a button. On his own initiative, the president can destroy the human race. One man can wipe out life on earth. Talk about playing God. This is a grotesque evil. And the White House claims it is not a tyranny? If the power to destroy the entire world isn't tyrannical, I don't know what is. Why do we put up with this? Why do we allow it? Why isn't this power immediately stripped from him?
What prevents fundamental challenge to this monstrous power is precisely the quasi-religious trappings of the presidency, which we again had to suffer through last January. One man who saw the religious significance of the presidency, and denounced it in 1973, was – surprisingly enough – Michael Novak. His study, Choosing Our King: Powerful Symbols in Presidential Politics, is one of the few dissenting books on the subject. It was reissued last year as – not surprisingly – Choosing Our Presidents: Symbols of Political Leadership, with a new introduction repudiating the best parts of the book.
Of course, none of the conventional bilge accords with reality. The US president is the worst outgrowth of a badly flawed Constitution, imposed in a sort of coup against the Articles of Confederation. Even from the beginning, the presidency was accorded too much power. Indeed, an honest history would have to admit that the presidency has always been an instrument of oppression, from the Whisky Rebellion to the War on Tobacco.
The presidency has systematically stolen the liberty won through the secession from Britain. From Jackson and Lincoln to McKinley and Roosevelt Junior, from Wilson and FDR to Truman and Kennedy, from Nixon and Reagan to Bush and Clinton, it has been the means by which our rights to liberty, property, and self-government have been suppressed.
I can count on one hand the actions of presidents that actually favored the true American cause, meaning liberty. The overwhelming history of the presidency is a tale of overthrown rights and liberties, and the erection of despotism in their stead.
Each president has tended to be worse than the last, especially in this century. Lately, in terms of the powers they assumed and the dictates they imposed, Kennedy was worse than Eisenhower, Johnson was worse than Kennedy, Nixon was worse than Johnson, Carter was worse than Nixon, and Reagan – who doubled the national budget and permanently entrenched the warfare State – was worse than Carter. The same is true of Bush and Clinton. Every budget is bigger and the powers exercised more egregious. Each new brutal action breaks another taboo and establishes a new precedent that gives the next occupant of the White House more leeway.
Looking back through American history, we can see the few exceptions to this rule. Washington wrote an eloquent farewell address, laying out the proper American trade and foreign policy. Jefferson's revolution of 1800 was a great thing. But was it really a freer country after his term than before? That's a tough case to make. Andrew Jackson abolished the central bank, but his real legacy was democratic centralism and weakened states' rights.
Andrew Johnson loosened the military dictatorship fastened on the South after it was conquered. But it is not hard to make the country freer when it had become totalitarian under the previous president's rule. Of course, Lincoln's bloody autocracy survives as the model of presidential leadership.
James Buchanan made a great statement on behalf of the right of revolution. Grant restored the gold standard. Harding denounced US imperialism in Haiti. But overall, my favorite president is William Henry Harrison. He keeled over shortly after his inauguration.
There have been four huge surveys taken of historians' views on the presidents: in 1948, in 1962, in 1970, and in 1983. Historians were asked to rank presidents as Great, Near Great, Average, Below Average, and Failure. In every case, number one is Lincoln, the mass murderer and military dictator who is the real father of the present nation. His term was a model of every despot's dream: spending money without Congressional approval, declaring martial law, arbitrarily arresting thousands and holding them without trial, suppressing free speech and the free press, handing out lucrative war contracts to his cronies, raising taxes, inflating the currency, and killing hundreds of thousands for the crime of desiring self-government. These are just the sort of actions historians love.
The number-two winner in these competitions is FDR. Moreover, Wilson and Jackson are always in the top five. The bottom two in every case are Grant and Harding. None bothered to rate William Henry Harrison.
What does greatness in the presidency mean? It means waging war, crushing liberties, imposing socialism, issuing dictates, browbeating and ignoring Congress, appointing despotic judges, expanding the domestic and global empire, and generally trying his best to be an all-round enemy of freedom. It means saying with Lincoln, "I have a right to take any measure which may best subdue the enemy."
The key to winning the respect of historians is to do these things. All aspirants to this vile office know this. It's what they seek. They long for crisis and power, to be bullies in the pulpit, to be the dictators they are in their hearts. They want, at all costs, to avoid the fate of being another "postage-stamp president." Madison said no man with power deserves to be trusted. Neither should we trust any man who seeks the power that the presidency offers.
Accordingly, it is all well and good that conservatives have worked to discredit the current occupant of the White House. Call him a cheat and a double-dealer if you want. Call him a tyrant too. But we must go further. The answer to restoring republican freedom has nothing to do with replacing Clinton with Lott or Kemp or Forbes or Buchanan. The structure of the presidency, and the religious aura that surrounds it, must be destroyed. The man is merely a passing occupant of the Holy Chair of St. Abraham. It is the chair itself that must be reduced to kindling.
It was never the intention of the majority of framers to create the mess we have, of course. After the war for independence, the Articles of Confederation had no chief executive. Its decisions were made by a five-member Confederation. The Confederation had no power to tax. All its decisions required the agreement of 9 of the 13 states. That is the way it should be.
Most of the delegates to the unfortunate Philadelphia convention hated executive power. They had severely restricted the governors of their states after their bitter experience with the colonial governors. The new governors had no veto, and no power over the legislatures. Forrest McDonald reports that one-quarter of the delegates to the convention wanted a plural executive, based loosely on the Articles model. But those who planned the convention – including Morris, Washington, and Hamilton – wanted a single, strong executive, and they out-maneuvered the various strains of anti-federalists.
But listen to how they did it. The people of the several states and their representatives were suspicious that Hamilton wanted to create a monarchy. Now, there's much mythology surrounding this point. It's not that the anti-federalists and the popular will opposed some guy strutting around in a crown. It was not monarchy as such they opposed, but the power the king exercised.
When they said they didn't want a monarch, they meant they didn't want a King George, they didn't want a tyrant, a despot, an autocrat, an executive. It was the despotic end they feared, and not the royal means.
Indeed, formally, the Constitution gives few powers to the president, and few duties, most of them subject to approval by the legislature. The most important provision regarding the presidency is that the holder of the office can be impeached. It was to be a threat constantly hanging over his head. It was, most framers thought, to be threatened often and used against any president who dared gather more power unto himself than the Constitution prescribed.
In one famous outburst, Hamilton was forced to defend himself against the charge that the new office of the presidency was a monarchy in disguise. He explained the difference between a monarch and a president. But as you listen to this, think about the present executive. Ask yourself whether he resembles the thing Hamilton claimed to have created in the office of the presidency, or whether we have the tyrant he claimed to be repudiating.
Among other points, Hamilton said in "Federalist 69":
The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction . . . removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. The person of the king of Great Britain is sacred and inviolable; there is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable; no punishment to which he can be subjected. . . .
The President will have only the occasional command of such part of the militia of the nation as by legislative provision may be called into the actual service of the Union. . . .
[The power] of the British king extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies – all which, by the Constitution under consideration, would appertain to the legislature. . . .
The President is to have power, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the senators present concur. The king of Great Britain is the sole and absolute representative of the nation in all foreign transactions. He can of his own accord make treaties of peace, commerce, alliance, and of every other description. . . .
The President is to nominate and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint ambassadors and other public ministers. . . . The king of Great Britain is emphatically and truly styled the fountain of honor. He not only appoints to all offices, but can create offices. He can confer titles of nobility at pleasure . . . and . . . [even] make denizens of aliens. . . .
[The President] can prescribe no rules concerning the commerce or currency of the nation; [the king] is in several respects the arbiter of commerce, and in this capacity can establish markets and fairs, can regulate weights and measures, can lay embargoes for a limited time, can coin money. . . .
What answer shall we give to those who would persuade us that things so unlike resemble each other?
Well, we can debate all day whether Hamilton was naïve about the imperial office he was in fact creating, or whether he was a despicable liar. But the fact remains that in his writings, despite his reputation as a backer of the exalted presidency, he is by today's standards a Congressional supremacist.
For that matter, and in comparison with today's presidency, so was the British king.
Most historians agree that there would have been no presidency apart from George Washington, who was trusted by the people as a true gentleman, and was presumed to understand what the American revolution was all about. But he got off track by attempting to suppress the Whisky Rebellion, although he at least acknowledged that his actions went beyond the strict letter of the Constitution. But though the presidency quickly spun out of control, at its antebellum worst it had nothing in common with today's executive State.
In those days, you could live your life and never even notice that the presidency existed. You had no contact with it. Most people couldn't vote anyway, thank goodness, and you didn't have to, but certain rights and freedoms were guaranteed regardless of whoever took hold of this – by today's standards – largely ceremonial position. The presidency couldn't tax you, draft you, or regulate your trade. It couldn't inflate your money, steal your kids, or impose itself on your community. From the standpoint of the average American, the presidency was almost invisible.
Listen to what de Tocqueville observed in 1831:
The President is . . . the executor of the laws; but he does not really cooperate in making them, since the refusal of his assent does not prevent their passage. He is not, therefore, a part of the sovereign power, but only its agent. . . . The president is placed beside the legislature like an inferior and dependent power. . . .
The office of president of the United States is temporary, limited, and subordinate. . . . [W]hen he is at the head of government, he has but little power, little wealth, and little glory to share among his friends; and his influence in the state is too small for the success or the ruin of a faction to depend upon his elevation to power. . . . The influence which the President exercises on public business is no doubt feeble and indirect.
Thirty years later, all this would be destroyed by Lincoln, who fundamentally changed the nature of the government, as even his apologists admit. He became a Caesar, in complete contradiction to most of the framers' intentions. As Acton said, he abolished the primary contribution that America had made to the world, the principle of federalism. But that is an old story.
Less well known is how Wilson revived Lincoln's dictatorial predilections, and added to them an even more millennial cast. Moreover, this was his intention before he was elected. In 1908, while still president of Princeton, he wrote a small book entitled the President of the United States. It was a paean to the imperial presidency, and might as well have been the bible of every president who followed him. He went beyond Lincoln, who praised the exercise of power. Wilson longed for a Presidential Messiah to deliver the human race.
There can be no successful government, without leadership or without the intimate, almost instinctive, coordination of the organs of life and action. . . . We have grown more and more from generation to generation to look to the President as the unifying force in our complex system. . . . To do so is not inconsistent with the actual provisions of the Constitution; it is only inconsistent with a very mechanical theory of its meaning and intention.
The president must be a man who understands his own day and the needs of the country, and who has the personality and the initiative to enforce his views both upon the people and upon Congress.
. . . He is not so much part of its organization as its vital link of connection with the thinking nation . . . he is also the political leader of the nation. . . . The nation as a whole has chosen him. . . . Let him once win the admiration and confidence of the country, and no other single force can withstand him, no combination of forces will easily overpower him. His position takes the imagination of the country. He is the representative of no constituency, but of the whole people . . . the country never feels the zest of action so much as when its President is of such insight and caliber. Its instinct is for unified action, and it craves a single leader. . . .
The President is at liberty, both in law and conscience, to be as big a man as he can. His capacity will set the limit . . . he is the only spokesman of the whole people. [Finally, Presidents should regard] themselves as less and less executive officers and more and more directors of affairs and leaders of the nation – men of counsel and of the sort of action that makes for enlightenment.
This is not a theory of the presidency. It is the hope for a new messiah. That indeed is what the presidency has come to. But any man who accepts this view is not a free man. He is not a man who understands what constitutes civilized life. The man who accepts what Wilson calls for is an apostle of the total State and a defender of collectivism and despotism.
Conservatives used to understand this. In the last century, all the great political philosophers – men like John Randolph and John Taylor and John C. Calhoun – did. In this century, the right was born in reaction to the imperial presidency. Men like Albert Jay Nock, Garet Garrett, John T. Flynn, and Felix Morley called the FDR presidency what it was: a US version of the dictatorships that arose in Russia and Germany, and a profound evil draining away the very life of the nation. They understood that FDR had brought both the Congress and the Supreme Court under his control, for purposes of power, national socialism, and war. He shredded what was left of the Constitution, and set the stage for all the consolidation that followed. Later presidents were free to nationalize the public schools, administer the economy according to the dictates of crackpot Keynesian economists, tell us who we must and who we must not associate with, nationalize the police function, and run an egalitarian regime that extols nondiscrimination as the sole moral tenet, when it is clearly not a moral tenet at all. Later conservatives like James Burnham, Wilmoore Kendall, and Robert Nisbet, understood this point too.
Yet who do modern conservatives extol? Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR. Reagan spoke of them as gods and models, and so did Bush and Gingrich. In the 1980s, we were told that Congress was the imperial branch of government because Tip O'Neill had a few questions about Reagan's tax-and-spend military buildup, and his strategy for fostering global warfare while managing world affairs through the CIA. All this was bolstered by books by Harvey Mansfield, Terry Eastland, and dozens of other neoconservatives who pretended to provide some justification for presidential supremacy and its exercise of global rule. More recently even Pat Buchanan repeated the "Ask not . . . " admonition of John F. Kennedy, that we should live to serve the central government and its organizing principle, the presidency.
What the neocon logic comes down to is this: The US has a moral responsibility to run the world. But the citizens are too stupid to understand this. That's why we can't use democratic institutions like Congress in this ambition. We must use the executive power of the presidency. It must have total control over foreign affairs, and never bow to Congressional carping. Once this point is conceded, the game is over. The demands of a centralized and all-powerful presidency and its interventionist foreign policy are ideologically reinforcing. One needs the other. If the presidency is supreme in global affairs, it will be supreme in domestic affairs. If it is supreme at home, there will be no states' rights, no absolute property rights, no true liberty from government oppression. The continued centralization of government in the presidency represents the end of America and its civilization.
A key part of the theory of presidential supremacy in foreign affairs is the idea that politics stops at the water's edge. If you believe that, you have given up everything. It means that foreign affairs will continue to be the last refuge of an omnipotent scoundrel. If a president can count on the fact that he won't be criticized so long as he is running a war, he will run more of them. So long as he is running wars, government at home cannot be cut. As Felix Morley said, "Politics can stop at the water's edge only when policies stop at the water's edge."
Sadly, the Congress for the most part cares nothing about foreign policy. In that, it reflects the attitude of the American voter. The exception is the handful of Congressmen who do speak about foreign issues, usually at the behest of the State Department, the CIA, the Pentagon, and the increasingly global FBI. Such men are mere adjuncts of presidential power.
In fact, it is the obligation of every patriot not only to denounce a president's actions at home, but to question, harass, and seek to rein in the presidency when it has sent troops abroad. That is when the watchful eye of the citizenry is most important. If we hold our tongues under some mistaken notion of patriotism, we surrender what remains of our freedoms. Yet during the Gulf War, even those who had courageously opposed this intervention in advance mouthed the old clichés about politics and the water's edge and "supporting the troops" when the presidency started massacring Iraqis. Will the same happen when the troops are sent to China, a country without a single aircraft carrier, in retaliation for some trumped-up incident in the tradition of the Maine, the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, and the Gulf of Tonkin?
If there is ever a time to get behind a president, it is when he withdraws from the world, stops wars, and brings the troops home. If there is ever a time to trip him up, question his leadership, and denounce his usurpations, it is when he does the opposite. A bipartisan foreign policy is a Napoleonic foreign policy, and the opposite of that prescribed by Washington in his farewell address.
In the midst of America's war against Britain in 1812, John Randolph wrote an open letter to his Virginia constituents, pleading with them not to support the war, and promising them he would not, for he knew where war led: to presidential dictatorship: "If you and your posterity are to become hewers of wood and drawers of water to the modern Pharaoh, it shall not be for the want of my best exertions to rescue you from cruel and abject bondage."
Sixty years ago all conservatives would have agreed with him. But the neoconservative onslaught has purged conservatives of their instinctive suspicions of presidential power.
By the time 1994 had come around, conservatives had been thoroughly indoctrinated in the theory that Congress was out of control, and that the executive branch needed more power. The leadership of the 104th Congress – dominated to a man by neocons and presidential supremacists – bamboozled the freshmen into pushing for three executive-enhancing measures.
In one of the Congress's first actions, it made itself subject to the oppressive civil rights and labor laws that the Executive enforced against the rest of the nation. This was incredibly stupid. The Congress was exempted from these for a reason. It prevented the Executive from using its own regulatory agencies to lord it over Congress. By making itself subject to these laws, Congress willingly submitted itself to implicit and explicit domination by the Department of Labor, the Department of Justice, and the EEOC. It imposed quotas and political correctness on itself, while any dissenters from the presidential line suddenly faced the threat of investigation and prosecution by those they were attempting to rein in. The imposition of these laws against Congress is a clear violation of the separation of powers. But it would not be the last time that this Congress made this mistake. It also passed the line-item veto, another violation of the separation of powers. The theory was that the president would strike out pork, pork being defined as property taken by taxation and redistributed to special interests. But since pork is the entirety of the federal government's $1.7 trillion budget, this has given the president wide latitude over Congress. It takes away from Congress the right to control the purse strings.
Also part of the Contract with America was term limits for Congress. This would represent a severe diminution of Congressional power with respect to the presidency. After all, it would not mean term limits for the permanent bureaucracy or for federal judges, but only for the one branch the people can actually control. Thank goodness the self-interest of the politicians themselves prevented it from coming into being. After that initial burst of energy, this Congress surrendered everything to the Clinton White House: control of the budget, control of foreign affairs, and control of the Federal Reserve, and the FBI. The Justice Department operates practically without oversight, as does the Treasury, HUD, Transportation, Commerce, EPA, the SEC, the FTC, and the FDA.
Congress has given in on point after point, eventually even granting the presidency most of what it demanded in health-care reform, including mandated equal coverage of the mentally ill. Chalk it up to long-term planning. They came into office pledging to curb government, but are as infatuated with the presidency as Clinton himself. After all, they hope their party will regain the office.
Then the Republicans had the audacity to ask in bewilderment: why did the president beat Dole? What did we do wrong? The real question is what have they done right? James Burnham said that the legislature is useless unless it is curbing the presidency. By that measure, this Congress has been worthless. It deserves to lose its majority. And its party deserves to lose the presidency, whose powers they are so anxious to grab for themselves.
The best moments in the 104th Congress were when a few freshmen talked quietly of impeachment. Indeed it is their responsibility to talk loudly, openly, and constantly of impeachment. Today's presidency is by definition in violation of the Constitution. Talk of impeachment ought to become routine. So should ridicule and humiliation. For if we care about liberty, the plebiscitary dictatorship must be reined in or tossed out.
John Randolph had only been a Senator for a few days when he gave an extraordinary speech denouncing John Quincy Adams. "It is my duty," said Randolph, "to leave nothing undone that I may lawfully do, to pull down this administration. . . . They who, from indifference, or with their eyes open, persist in hugging the traitor to their bosom, deserve to be insulted . . . deserve to be slaves, with no other music to soothe them but the clank of the chains which they have put on themselves and given to their offspring." John Randolph said this in 1826. This was a time, writes de Tocqueville, when the presidency was almost invisible. If we cannot say this and more today, when the presidency is dictator to the world, we are not authentic conservatives and libertarians. Indeed, we are not free men.
This speech was delivered near the imperial capital on October 6, 1996, at the John Randolph Club.


text:
This is Where Things Get Good.
Leading a busy life? Trying to keep up with the kids? Thanks to Heinz, there's always time to sit down to a nutritious, delicious meal together.
Wish you could squeeze in some entertaining? Heinz can serve up some great solutions there, too!
First, check your pantry or your freezer, where you're sure to find some good stuff from Heinz. Then check out our recipe library to see what you can whip up using Heinz foods that are available in your area.
Copyright ©2013 H.J. Heinz Company All rights reserved.


text:
BBNC Receives AMA's 'Corporate Marketer of the Year' Prism Award
BBNC's director of shareholder and corporate relations Andria Agli and Tiel Smith, vice president of Land and Regional Operations, accept the American Marketing Association's Alaska Corporate Marketer of the Year award in Anchorage on October 25, 2012.
PHOTO: Andre Horton
Bristol Bay Native Corporation (BBNC) was the recipient of the American Marketing Association's Alaska Chapter's inaugural "Corporate Marketer of the Year" Prism Award.
The Corporate Marketer of the Year Prism Award is given to a nominated business that embraces and practices marketing excellence and supports the marketing field for campaigns that ran between October 2011 and October 2012. Nominations were judged by AMA chapters outside Alaska.
BBNC has invested in a marketing campaign aimed to educate Alaskans on the importance of traditions and lifestyle of the Bristol Bay region. BBNC's marketing program – created working with Strategies 360 and Walsh/Sheppard – is focused on sustainable development in the region as well as the creation of domestic and global business partnerships.
"We are proud to be among the first recipients of the AMA's Prism Awards for the Alaska chapter," said BBNC President and CEO Jason Metrokin. "We created this campaign to help all Alaskans understand that the people and resources of the Bristol Bay region are important to both Alaska and beyond, and to define BBNC as a major economic force within the state of Alaska based on our cultural values and record of success."
To see the latest BBNC ad campaign, go to our website at www.BBNC.net.
About BBNC: Bristol Bay Native Corporation (BBNC) is a responsible Alaska Native investment corporation dedicated to the mission of "Enriching Our Native Way of Life." Established through the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA), BBNC works to ensure the continuation of the life and culture of its over 9,000 shareholders – the Eskimo, Indian and Aleut Natives of Southwest Alaska's Bristol Bay region.
Posted: October 30, 2012


text: Hmm... let's see. What happened today?? Nothing memorable, aside from the fact that I only said one sentence to Brandon. (<---- accomplishment.) And Danielle bitched out Stephanie. (Not my Stephanie, the little 8th grade Stephanie) So.. that made me happy. Because Tom is like a brother to me, and anyone who hurts a brother hurts me. And if she hurts him, and therefore me, then the only thing that would keep me from beating that Buffy down would be him. Because I love him. Like a brother.Yanno, in the movie Thirteen, Evie and Tracy are really close. Like.. best best best friends. And it made me think... I don't really have a best friend. One that I spend a bunch of time with and can tell absolutely anything to. I want one of those. I wonder how much they cost...Well, I'm off now. =)


text:
A portfolio is a collection of your best work samples that is presented in the interview to the prospective employer.
You should begin to develop your portfolio during your first semester. A resume should also be started and updated each semester.
Instructors can offer advice as to what items to include. Mary McGinnis will help with all the details of assembling a dynamic portfolio.
Job Board
For Students, Alumni and Employers upload a résumé, find a job, post a job, search résumés all online and 24/7
Contact Career Services
Lois Trimbur
Career Services Specialist
724.287.8711 Ext. 8310
Mary McGinnis
Career & Academic Counselor
724.287.8711 Ext. 8264
Online Resources
College Central Network allows students and alumni to post a resume and employers to post job openings.


text:
Start learning with our library of video tutorials taught by experts. Get started
Covers the basics of operating the mocha software, as well as advanced tracking and rotoscoping techniques.
"Your tutorials are superb: easy to understand, entertaining, and really help feed the passion." —Ken A.
more from our members »


text:
Bergamot FCF
Customer Reviews for Bergamot FCF
3 Item(s)
per page
- My favourite oil in Office Review by Kero
- When I am feeling depression or stress, I will diffuse Bergamot during work or in the office. It can benefit my colleagues also. Bergamot gave me the feeling of antidepressant, uplifting and refreshing. This is a perfect stimulant, it can light up yourself and give you the feeling of joy and happiness. (Posted on 9/17/14)
- Non-phototoxic excellence Review by Dr. Justin
- This wonderful floral oil is great for blending with other fine essential oils. The light and citrusy scent is relaxing and can build confidence and is uplifting to the mood. Has been reported to have great, positive effects on women during their monthly cycle. (Posted on 9/7/14)
- Bergamot - Finest citrus Essential oil Review by COREY
- Bergamot is the finest of all citrus essential oils. This one is sweet and lemony fresh at the top with a warm, floral balsamic undertone. This blends well with citrus, floral, woody, spices and orientals. This type of citrus is more exotic then other citrus EOs. I recently used Bergamot FCF & Coriander to create a cheerful, uplifting and calming body Lotion for my dry skin. Bergamot is the only classified citrus essential oil that works as an aphrodisiac. Because this Bergamot contains no bergaptene, this oil will not irritate the skin when it is exposed to the sun. Bergamot essential oil is unisex so it adds character to feminine floral EOs for women and sweetens deep earthy / dry woody masculine EOs for men. Overall, if you want an exotic citrus EO that will not irritate your skin (phototoxic) then Bergamot FCF is the citrus oil of choice. (Posted on 9/6/14)
3 Item(s)
per page


text:
Skip over navigation
Login Page
Share something about yourself and begin the process of owning your own Concept:
We woud like to know what part of our Country or the wider World in which you plan to ride your Ransom Concept, and perhaps your level of experience in motorcycling.Bikes previously or currently owned are also of interest.
©2011 RANSOM Motorsports LLC, All rights reserved. | site: design, polizzi


text:
Ahead of Castleford Tigers' Tetley's Challenge Cup match at Batley Bulldogs on Sunday, Castleford Rugby League Players Associations' Geoff Smith delved into the archives to find out a little bit more about our hosts and their Head Coach, John Kear.
When the Northern clubs made the break from Rugby Union, Batley were one of the leading outfits and became the first ever winners of the Challenge Cup in 1897 before successfully defending the trophy the following season.
Those early years saw great times for the 'Gallant Youths' as they won the Challenge Cup for the third time in 1901.
The 1923/24 season saw Batley finish second in the league and top the Yorkshire League. In the top four play-off, they beat Oldham to qualify for the Championship Final and two tries for Herbert Murray helped Batley beat Wigan and they became League Champions - something Castleford R.L.F.C has yet to achieve.
Batley used to share changing rooms with a cricket club and had to walk across the cricket field to enter the rugby pitch.
Batley's Head Coach, John Kear is an ex-Cas player and a winning Challenge Cup coach with Sheffield Eagles at Wembley and Hull FC at Cardiff's Millennium Stadium. He was also a member of Malcolm Reilly's coaching team when Cas were Wembley winners in 1986.
John and his brother shared score board duties at Wheldon Road when school boys, while his father, Herbert, made five appearances for Castleford during the second World War.
John Kear
Career appearances: 115 + 145
Tries: 34
Points: 120
Batley Bulldogs v Castleford Tigers tickets are on sale now. Click here for more ticket and travel details.
View the full article


text:
James, Wade combine for 70 as Heat win Game 4
James dismissed the idea the Heat were desperate team.
"That's a strong word," he said. "It's a team with a lot of veterans and a lot of fighters."
Danny Granger scored 20 and Paul George 13 to lead the Pacers. Center Roy Hibbert, so dominant at both ends in Game 3, had just 10 points and was in foul trouble in the second half.
Indiana coach Frank Vogel second-guessed his decision to keep Hibbert and David West on the bench for a long stretch after halftime. But it was the Pacers' inability to stop Wade and James that was the difference.
"You get the ball out of one of those guy's hands and it gets to the other guy's," he said. "It's not like one superhero and a bunch of role guys."
Granger's 3-pointer had given Indiana a 61-51 and the Pacers, outhustling the Heat to loose balls, appeared poised to take a commanding lead in the series.
But that's when James and Wade put on a jaw-dropping spectacle, combining for all but two points in a 25-5 run that put Miami up 76-66.
During one sequence, Wade lost his balance and fell and was lucky to push the ball toward James near the top of the key. As Wade scrambled to his feet, James alertly passed him the ball and he calmly knocked down a 3-pointer to give the Heat a 64-63 lead. The pair made easy shots, tough ones and did everything in their power to steer Miami away from a 3-1 hole.
Only eight teams in league history have overcome a 3-1 deficit to win a best-of-seven series. That's what the Heat were staring at with a loss in Game 4.
The Heat took a 76-70 lead into the fourth, and every time Indiana got close, either Wade or James responded.
Miami also got a huge lift down the stretch from Haslem, who hasn't been a factor in the series but made four big jumpers in the final six minutes despite having his head split by an elbow by Indiana's Tyler Hansbrough.
"Those guys carry a large load," Haslem said of Wade and James. "But sometimes we need other guys to step up and tonight was my turn. Next time it might be somebody else."
Granger's 3-pointer got the Pacers within 96-91 with 1:33 left, but Haslem hit another short shot and James closed the Pacers out with three free throws in the last 16 seconds.
Following the game, James sat in front of his locker icing both knees and reading a hard copy of "Hunger Games."
After finishing a page or two, he set the book down. There'd be time for that later.
The Heat were heading home, feeling good about the next chapter.
NOTES: James, Wade and Haslem combined for 53 of Miami's 55 second-half points. ... Before the game, Miami F Juwan Howard and Pacers G Stephenson exchanged words. In Game 3, Stephenson mocked James by flashing a choke sign after James missed a foul shot and Howard confronted the Indiana reserve. Pacers assistant coach Brian Shaw stepped between the players. ... Granger was slapped with his second technical in two games after getting in Wade's face late in the second quarter. ... James was one rebound shy of his postseason high. ... The national anthem was performed on harmonica by 85-year-old Carl Erskine, who pitched for the Brooklyn Dodgers from 1948-59. Erskine is an Indiana native. ... Heat owner Micky Arison was asked for his autograph by several fans sitting near the Miami bench. "You must be desperate," he cracked.
The Associated Press


text:
The Department of Homeland Security's biggest weapon in securing American borders is not a fence or a fingerprint, but data -- and lots of it.
DHS and its component agencies clear some 1 million people across U.S. borders and process some 60,000 maritime and air-freight containers daily, just a small portion of the $2 trillion worth of imported goods that enter the country every year.
The incoming flow of goods and people also comprises massive datasets DHS continuously runs against other federal databases – no-fly and watch lists, for example – allowing the agency to differentiate among risks specific to a particular passenger or cargo.
DHS has been collecting and logging these datasets for upwards of 10 years, building petabyte-sized "haystacks of data" in which hide elusive needles of useful information. The department's evolutionary successes in handling the information has turned big data into a big part of its strategy in protecting borders, according to Alan Bersin, assistant secretary of international affairs and chief diplomatic officer for DHS.
Big data, he said, has changed the way DHS looks at borders.
"We typically think of borders as the first line of defense, with hard lines, but in the global context, our job is to keep dangerous people and dangerous things away from the homeland," said Bersin, speaking Oct. 30 at the Bipartisan Policy Center. "We don't do that by looking at borders as the first line of defense, but as the last line."
By Bersin's count, there are three ways to approach the problem. The government's post-Sept. 11 attempt at one of them – looking at every piece of data – was a failure, Bersin said, noting that border personnel can't possibly open every trunk of every vehicle that comes by.
The second, using specific intelligence such as a suspected terrorist's phone number to find the person works only if that specific intelligence is available.
Where DHS has been successful in recent years is with the third approach, making the proverbial haystack smaller, Bersin said. The ability to differentiate among risks "is where big data comes into play," he said.
The case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man jailed for attempting to bring down Northwest flight 253 over Detroit in 2009 with a bomb hidden in his underwear, is "the seminal case that changed the way we looked at using data," Bersin said.
Abdulmutallab purchased a one-way ticket to the U.S. in Africa and carried no luggage. Today those unusual data points would be scanned against previous flight records and a series of other databases, leading authorities to a rapid secondary examination of such a passenger.
Were Abdulmutallab's scenario to unfold again, DHS's big data efforts would likely have prevented him from getting aboard his target flight. As it was, he was foiled by a quick thinking flight attendant.
About the Author
Frank Konkel is a former staff writer for FCW.
E-Mail this page
Printable Format
Advanced Search
Nominations are now open for the 2015 Federal 100 awards. Get the details and submit your picks!
Make a nomination today
You now have until Monday, Jan.5 to get them in. Happy holidays!
In an interview with FCW, the Department of Veterans Affairs' chief technology officer talks about overhauling the digital experience for VA customers.
The National Information Exchange Model's usefulness extends far beyond its origins in justice and law enforcement.
ACT-IAC'S Rick Holgate and Dan Chenok look ahead to what's next for federal IT in 2015.
A bill that will allow DHS to hire cybersecurity professionals faster and pay them more now heads to the president for his signature.
How NASA and other agencies are using contests to bring better ideas into acquisition.
ONC will focus more on data interoperability and the use of health IT to improve patient outcomes.
A new report from the DOD CIO offers soup-to-nuts guidance on security for commercial cloud providers and Defense Department customers.
Steve Kelman considers the costs of corruption in Mexico, China, and most developing countries -- and argues that Americans should keep their own government troubles in perspective.
A lot of this data is pure garbage and causes useless cargo examinations that produce nothing 99% of the time and only hamper efforts by personnel...
All the data in the world (which Big Data people not only lack but are unable to fully and quickly process what they do have) is useless to provide any sort of defense if you do not have a physical presence to identify, intercept, and stop the threat. So if Big Data is the first line of defense then we obviously have a poor line of defense and will continue to do so with that attitude running the show.
8609 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 500Vienna, VA 22182-2215 703-876-5100
© 1996-2013 1105 Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved. This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only.To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, visit: www.1105Reprints.com