text:
Missing Their Chance With Monica
I do not necessarily blame Monica Goodling for such a lackluster day of testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. She was as forthcoming as she needed to be given the circumstances. Instead, I blame the Democratic members of the committee, who with their unfocused questions and lack of follow-up made their counterparts in the Senate look like a pack of Perry Masons.
First, who is the Einstein who decided that the lawmakers would get only five minutes each to ask their questions? It devolved into a farce. By the time Goodling was getting to the meat of her answers, or by the time that the politician-questioner had finished with his or her run-up to a good question, time was up. ("You have five seconds left," said Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) over and over again without any apparent sense of irony.) Goodling was off the hot seat until the next lawmaker took a turn.
The committee would have been better off simply allotting a certain amount of time to the Democrats and a certain amount of time to the Republicans and then allowing committee leaders of both parties to divvy it up. That way, Goodling could have been examined at length and in depth without interruption.
Even as it was, though, Democratic lawmakers failed to ask important follow-up questions -- about the role the White House played in the firings, about the level of involvement Gonzales had, about the poisoned environment within the Justice Department. They seemed to get all giddy over the fact that Goodling had confessed to politicizing the department -- duh -- but lost sight of their mission to have Goodling tell the world something it didn't already know. It was a missed opportunity; a blown chance to really get to the bottom of things. And that unfortunately means that this sorry saga will be with us for a while longer.
It's a saga that does not reflect well on Gonzales. He is the attorney general of the United States -- the nation's top lawyer and law enforcement official -- and while he's saying publicly that he doesn't want to compromise the investigation into last year's prosecutor purge at the Justice Department by reviewing official records, at the very same time he is creeping out Goodling, now a former Justice Department official, by offering to her his recollection of the key events and then trying to see if his memory matches hers -- to the point where Goodling, a zealous and "loyal Bushie" to the bitter end, felt "uncomfortable."
How's that for leadership and integrity? We now have Tommy Flanagan, Jon Lovitz' character from "Saturday Night Live" running the Justice Department: "Yeah, yeah, that's it. We'll tell them that Kyle Sampson wrote the list. Yeah, yeah. That's the ticket."
By merely telling the story, Goodling transformed herself Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee from overmatched partisan into sensible lawyer -- she's the one, she told the panel, who knew it wasn't appropriate for potential Congressional witnesses to be meeting beforehand to get their stories straight. Of course, we now also know that she wasn't always sensible -- that she broke the spirit if not the letter of the law when she asked political questions of non-political job candidates at the department.
But Goodling looks better today than she did on Tuesday, and her supervisors at Justice, especially Gonzales and his soon-to-be-former deputy, Paul J. McNulty, look decidedly worse. Gonzales looks like even slimier than before -- hiding behind the "I didn't review documents" dodge so he could say "I can't remember" scores of times before Congress while he was in fact trying to coordinate his testimony. And McNulty probably ought to consider lawyering up for the new round of questions that surely will come in the wake of Goodling's accusations.
Moreover, and most important, we still apparently are no closer to getting the single most important answers we need in this story: who drew up the list of U.S. attorneys to be fired and what role did the White House and the attorney general play in making it so. Jeffrey Toobin, the CNN legal analyst and New Yorker columnist, said it best: the list of fired prosecutors is the result of an "Immaculate Conception" since no one now wants to take credit for it.
By Andrew Cohen |
May 24, 2007; 8:00 AM ET
Previous: Goodling Trashes McNulty; Mum on Gonzales |
Next: Pick an Angle, Any Angle, on the U.S. Attorney Mess
Three key observations from David Iglesias yesterday on the Post Q&A:
1. Iglesias took from Monica's testimony that McNulty was "appropriately briefed."
2. If the list wasn't made at DOJ, it was made at the White House.
3. The truth would best be served here if Rove and Miers were to testify under oath.
I promise not to call Monica "Frankie Pantangeli" any more.
Posted by: ExAUSA | May 24, 2007 10:07 AM
Absolutely true! I found myself listening to the questions asked (or not asked) yesterday and wondering, time and again "Aren't most of these guys lawyers?".
At the end of the day, this hearing was a waste of the American people's time. Not because Ms. Goodling shouldn't have been there - she should have. But our representatives should be attempting to ACCOMPLISH something with these hearings.
We deserve better.
Posted by: John D in Houston | May 24, 2007 10:45 AM
I've had enough. And regardless of what Tony Snow tells the press corp at the daily White House press gaggles, so have the majority of the American people. We are not behind this President. We do not trust him nor the members of his administration any longer. The American people are an intelligent bunch. The president and his cronies need to stop writing us off as a bunch of uniformed idiots. With their actions, they are virtually ensuring that a Democrat, and most probably Hilary Clinton, will be the next President of the united states. That's "just desserts" for the Republican party and their leaders after their arrogance for the last 8 years.
Posted by: Sarah | May 24, 2007 11:01 AM
I've had enough. And regardless of what Tony Snow tells the press corp at the daily White House press gaggles, so have the majority of the American people. We are not behind this President. We do not trust him nor the members of his administration any longer. The American people are an intelligent bunch. The president and his cronies need to stop writing us off as a bunch of uniformed idiots. With their actions, they are virtually ensuring that a Democrat, and most probably Hilary Clinton, will be the next President of the united states. That's "just desserts" for the Republican party and their leaders after their arrogance for the last 8 years.
Posted by: Sarah | May 24, 2007 11:01 AM
Yeah, Cohen, for once I'll agree with something you say (since nothing else you've said has been right)-McNulty really ought to consider "lawyering up" for his next round-as I said about a week ago, Chiaramente would LOVE TO SEE MCNULTY READ HIS MIRANDA WARNINGS.
Those who knowingly do great evil to others, generally get it back in return.
Posted by: chiaramente | May 24, 2007 11:15 AM
What happened at the hearing is the same thing that happens when the TV camera pans the crowd at a baseball game -- ordinary people become complete jackasses when they are on TV. It was as if the whole Congressional line up could say nothing other than "Hi Mom! I'm on TV!" With a few notable exceptions, of course.
We are still stuck with a drippy faucet with little drops of salacious information coming out. When does the flood start? I don't know, but you should start watching the hem lines on Karl Rove's pants for clues.
Posted by: JB | May 24, 2007 11:35 AM
Goodling said that after a public school education she chose Christian schools for higher education becuase of their emphasis on public service.
If this is the public service which Christian schools emphasize, God Help Us!
Posted by: DC | May 24, 2007 11:40 AM
Andrew, while I agree that the testimony lacked the "explosiveness" of the Senate testimony, I disagree that nothing of substance was gleamed. The "Rules" of this game are subtle and require a closer look at what they were trying to accomplish. She basically accused McNulty of perjuring himself, Gonzales of tampering with witness testimony and has opened the door to bringing them back for more direct lines of questioning. Watergate did not happen overnight. One step at a time.
Posted by: yendornyc | May 24, 2007 11:55 AM
I disagree strongly that the hearing was a complete wash.
Credit need to go where credit is due--and Rep. Scott, Davis, Schiff, and Ellison made the most out of their minutes.
Scott had a very disciplined line of questioning regarding Goodling's "crossing the legal line" in hiring decisions.
Ellison had an interesting some interesting exchanges regarding Minnesota.
Schiff helped set the table for Davis.
Davis though had a really exceptional 20 minute exchange which unleashed a few nuggets:
1. The grand-daddy of them all--that Gonzales attempted to manipulate a fact witnesses testimony. A huge no-no.
2. That Gonzales had made misrepresentations in his statements.
3. That Goodling never brought the misstatements issue up with either Gonzales or McNulty--which raises the question: "If the theme of today's witness testimony is McNulty lied; why focus on just that ONE person, when you by your own acknowledgement assert that another, more senior officer made even more serious misrepresentations?"
4. Davis had another line about the U.S. Attorney handbook and Goodling admitted time and again that she "wasn't an expert".
Well, if she wasn't an "expert"; if she didn't even have really a 200 level understand, then what the h-ll was she doing evaluating these U.S. Attorneys? What kind of absentee, irresponsible boss would even put someone like this in such an important position?
In broad outlines some of these details are not new. But these details do matter. Rep. Davis who ended up being the second-to-last interlocutor deserve special mention though--as do the colleagues who put egos aside and ceeded floor time to him so that he could finish his line of questioning.
Posted by: JP2 | May 24, 2007 12:06 PM
The House Judiciary committee sure wasted a grant of immunity for Goodling. Now she can take the entire rap for considering partisan politics in hiring. The other guys will say it was Monica's idea, ask Monica.
If she hadn't been given immunity, prosecutors could have leaned on her to give up those that authorized her to consider partisan leanings of applicants.
Regardless of her hokey law school, Ms. Goodling seems to understand how the law works better than most of Gonzales's henchmen.
Posted by: Louise Fletcher | May 24, 2007 12:11 PM
Conyers pissed me off for constantly interrupting Goodling in order to tell the congress member that their time was up.
I understand he was trying to keep to the rules, but he is under no obligation to announce the time when the WITNESS is talking!
It drove me crazy.
Also, I wish someone had done more questioning on the Griffin CAGING issue.
Posted by: kimoco | May 24, 2007 12:35 PM
I agree with assessment. I have only seen snippits of the transcript, however. Between work (really buried right now) and watching/coaching various sports events with my kids, I didn't get much of a chance to bone up on her testimony. What did you find so interesting about the Minnesota situation? I am especially curious for a couple of reasons -- I lived in St. Paul for many years before moving East and I used to work -- pre-law school -- at the former law firm of the current USA (also the firm of former V.P. Fritz Mondale and former firm of U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar).
Posted by: Nellie | May 24, 2007 12:55 PM
Nellie, Ellison highlighted a few issues:
1. Former USA Hefflinger's association with Indian tribes; Hefflinger stance on voting eligibility of the tribes (a stance that seemed to be at odds with main DOJ).
--Goodling acknowledged that these were considerations in his being placed on a "to be removed" list.
2. He contrasted the resume of a very experienced aUSA, locally based prosecutor, who was apparently "too liberal" for Goodling as a potential Hefflinger replacement with the eventual replacement Rachel Paulose.
The tribes angle is one that I would probably need more local context to understand, but Ellison's line of questioning on this raised some questions in my mind. e.g. Are tribes more prone to support Democratic candidates?
Ellison also asked a question about whether religious preferences entered into removal/hiring considerations--which Goodling, of course, denied.
Overall I thought Ellison did a good job of highlighting the extreme political bias of the hiring and firing process--where ideology and age were about 90% of the evaluation criteria, and then professional experience counted for about 10%.
My personal take on this:
In Paulose's case, she looks like she probably would have a very good resume for an AUSA position, but she had absolutely no business being appointed to a leadership position at this stage in her career. Recent events inside her office would seem to support this line of thinking.
Posted by: JP2 | May 24, 2007 01:19 PM
This is bizarre: she gets away with saying that she may have "crossed the line" (and this is treated as a great revelation) considering political affiliation, based on a list which none of the powers-that- be claim any knowledge where it came from (and yet no problem signing off on dismissing names which no one admits to know where come from), and the latter fact is just accepted contentedly! Was this an orchestrated farce? We already know what the Democrats decided on the war funding bill. I suppose they (maybe thinking they are so savvy)don't want to press hard here after having made the big decision to back away from their hot-air pronouncements about the war funding . GW got his way by yet again pretending as if no other alternative to his desire exists! What did he even concede to?
It makes me wonder if the direction for about face came from the Democrat contenders (and I personally really have ABSOLUTELY NO desire for Hillary or Obama to win,even if the Republican candidate is bad) or otherwise was a sham (tokenism to placate the masses, with no real intention) all along.
Looks like such a joke!
Posted by: Jackson | May 24, 2007 01:34 PM
Although I am on much the same side with Andrew, note many of the same points, and am no fan at all of Gonzalez, I don't think the above weight on the conversation between Goodling and Gonzalez to show the AG's lack of integrity is very strong.
That the AG was "creeping her out... to the point..where she felt 'uncomfortable'" with the implication that it must have been REALLY bad for G, a loyal Bush supporter to the bitter end, with her sensitive and presupposedly infallible female antennae somehow picking up the invisible and symbolic vibrations of impending iniquity , to have felt "uncomfortable", isn't at all warranted by the conversation to which she testified, and which she brought up.
The conversation she testified to wasn't anywhere so bad that only a Bush supporter to the bitter end could have felt uncomfortable; what she said she felt uneasy about a conversation that she herself brought up, was that they were even talking about it, and she denied that she felt he was trying to influence her.
If her impressions of a conversation which she brought up on her own are to be given any substantive weight at all, her verbal description in this instance is all one has to go by, and in that verbal description she denied the psychological inference of her intent that was made above.
But, yeah, I'm in otherwise sympathy with your viewpoint and points.
Posted by: Anton | May 24, 2007 02:03 PM
Jp2: Good points I think. It would have been sad if the reason other congresspeople had not ceded their time was due to their egos. That would not reflect well on what the spirit of our government is supposed to be.
Posted by: Lon | May 24, 2007 02:10 PM
Oh, here we go again-Gonzales, by NO measure, was "coaching" Monica's testimony-geez! I'm no fan of Gonzales, but really, give me a break!
Does anyone understand what that term "coaching" REALLY means? When you "prep" a witness, that's coaching, and guess WHAT-THAT'S PERFECTLY OKAY! Oh, I KNOW what sanctimonious law professors say to the contrary (those who have never litigated) but that's what it boils down to, you can go over material with them, you can run through practice sessions of questions and answers, you can suggest ways to ANSWER INFORMATION THAT THEY ALREADY KNOW.
But of course, if you're looking for a hook of some type, and you have journalists who don't know a damn thing about the subject matter of witness "coaching" and witness "prepping" then you have the accusations that go flying, so Gonzales is talking to Monica about what he recalls, just in conversation, and that automatically becomes "coaching." Sheesh! What idiocy!
Really, Monica was laying it on a little thick-again, a "distraction" measure from her very REAL problem of violation of federal law for using political preference or political affiliation in hiring practices! Geez Louise, has nobody SEEN THAT?? I was, as the Brits like to say, GOBSMACKED at her admissions on that subject!
But give credit to her lawyers here, they "coached" her well! (smile)
Journalists acting as lawyers, and wannabee litigators and lawyers opining on subjects they THINK they understand perfectly-yeah, thanks but no thanks! If you want to actually KNOW about these issues, then go to law school and actually DO litigation, okay?
Posted by: chiaramente | May 24, 2007 02:15 PM
Chiaramente, in reference to the coaching "technique" I remember that not working particularly well in the Scooter-Libby case; or with the Moussaoui prosecution.
If you're a fact witness, don't talk about the case, or try to influence another witness. This is even more reprehensible if you are a supervisor, and your subordinate comes in asking about a potential reassignment.
Gonzales was effectively saying: "You want a reassignment little girl, OK, well first, let's make sure that you get your story right. If you get your story right, then maybe we can talk about your new position. How does that sound little girl?"
Under what part of the legal code of ethics would this kind of behavior be appropriate? What part of the criminal code would condone this activity?
Posted by: JP2 | May 24, 2007 03:26 PM
Jp2- Re the Moussaoui prosecution-what was expressed in those emails by the attorney to the witnesses was no more "coaching" than my ass was "coaching," -if by coaching, we mean telling the witnesses SOMETHING THEY DIDN'T ALREADY KNOW.
As many former prosecutors said, in their blogs (the real ones, the ones who actually DO litigation for a living, that is!) they couldn't see that it was anything other than ordinary witness preparation, (nor could I, for that matter). And here's the kicker, (because you see, yours truly actually READ the transcript which 99.9 people expressing an opinion on the subject did NOT do-shock shock!) the witnesses THEMSELVES testified that it was all information they already knew, they were clearly experts in this area, and that they had already testified to this information in other forums "ad infinitum" said the one witness C. Manno.
But again, journalists, and law school professors, and the great all-knowing (yeah, right!) legal pundits-instead of doing just a leeetle critical analysis, or actually going through the transcript and reading WHAT WAS ACTUALLY TESTIFIED TO BY THE WITNESSES, just picked up on what was said, as if what the defense was saying was the last word on the subject (or even the stupid judge!)
Yeah, GOOD example there-go read Mauet's Trial Advocacy book, if you don't believe me.
Posted by: chiaramente | May 24, 2007 06:26 PM
My experience with Native Americans is that they vote overwhelmingly Democratic. It is very complicated, though, because tribal dynamics can push things around quite a bit. Issues of sovereignty, treaty rights and corruption in the tribal governments are wild cards. The casino money has made the situation worse in some tribes and better in others, but further complicates the equation. But still mostly Democrats.
I'll have to ask some of my friends in Minneapolis about Polouse. She sounds like a real piece of work.
Posted by: Nellie | May 24, 2007 06:30 PM
I mis-posted this earlier to an old thread. I think it interesting so here it is again. For a reader used to picking at nits these stands out like some big engorged ticks.
From Goodlings statement
"In truth I can not say with absolute certainty that I know why Kevin Ryan, John McKay, Carol Lam, David Bogden, David Iglesis, and Margaret Chiara were sked to sesign in December 2006. I can describe what I and others discussed as the reasons for their removal, but I cannot guarantee that these reasons are the same as those contemplated by the FINAL DECISIONMAKERS who requested the resignations of these U.S. Attorneys. I am not aware, however, of anyone WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT ever suggesting the replacement of these attorneys in order to interfere with a particular case, or in retaliation for prosecuting or refusing to prosecute a particular case, FOR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE.
Emphasis added. Seems like very careful drafting. What implications do you get?
Posted by: wrb | May 24, 2007 06:53 PM
wrb: (engorged nits doesn't sound at all pleasant)
Who are these "final decisionmakers" who might have had different reasons , if Goodling was in charge and discussed the reasons for their removal?
"Within the department" does seem like a loophole.
Aren't people, especially officials with real power, at all accountable for obvious intent, or are they allowed to hide behind equally clearly disingenuous wording?
Posted by: Douglas | May 24, 2007 07:43 PM
Chiaramente, at what point in this process did Gonzales sign up as Goodling's counsel?
And on what basis would it ever be appropriate for one fact witness to discuss his recollections of events with another fact witness--especially in the case where the other witness happens to be his subordinate who has just raised questions about getting a job in another division?
Posted by: JP2 | May 24, 2007 07:48 PM
Ch is surprised that no one had noticed that Monica admitted to using political affiliation in hiring. What do you mean?
That's obvious, that's common knowledge, I thought. But she talked as if did it on her own, or who directed it is unknown?!
Posted by: Red | May 24, 2007 07:54 PM
WRB: The testimony you quote suggests that (1) there was more than one "final decisionmaker," and (2) the final decisionmakers were not "within the Department." Let's see, if not within the Department of Justice, where could those "final decisionmakers" be found? And why is Ms. Goodling not able to assure the country that the reasons for termination discussed "within the DOJ" were the "real reasons" for the terminations? Sounds like after-thoughts, makeweights, pretexts to me.
Posted by: P. Bosley Slogthrop | May 24, 2007 08:01 PM
I add that
"for political advantage" seems like an out based on her obvious inability to read the minds of those doing it. Maybe Madam Blavatski told them to, and the spirit world thumps twice to confirm. Who is to know?
Posted by: wrb | May 24, 2007 08:13 PM
I add that
"for political advantage" seems like an out based on her obvious inability to read the minds of those doing it. Maybe Madam Blavatski told them to, and the spirit world thumps twice to confirm. Who is to know?
Posted by: wrb | May 24, 2007 08:13 PM
sorry Jp2-I'm not going to play this stupid game of yours-Gonzales WASN'T A FACT WITNESS, THIS ISN'T A TRIAL, THERE'S NO RULE ON WITNESSES IN EFFECT, AND SO WHAT if he is her boss, and she would like to go for a transfer, what's that got to do with the price of beans-sheesh! Talk about silly nit-picking!
Let's go back to the Moussaoui prosecution again-it seems ONE of the prosecutors interviewed his 2 FBI witnesses together, and he interviewed some of the civilian witnesses together as well, and then he spoke fast and furious to the judge about why he felt that was acceptable! (didn't hear about that, did ya?)
Now THAT latter situation is wholly different in kind from the Gonzales/Monica situation--because there WAS a Rule on Witnesses in effect-and the prosecutor STILL interviewed the two FBI FACT witnesses together-a big NO-NO, BUT, the judge forgave HIM, said not to do it again, or something stupid like that (that's why I mean she-Brinkema-was so inconsistent in her rulings-really astonishingly so!)
Big difference here-Gonzales and Goodling are not two "fact" witnesses in a trial-nor are they in a situation where there is a "rule on witnesses" in effect (which has to be issued, to be in effect, and it is not issued all the time, anyway).
For God's sake, Gonzales was just TALKING TO HER ABOUT WHAT HE RECOLLECTED-and her attorneys are/were trying to slant that, cleverly, to deflect from her clear violation of federal law-by making it seem that HE was doing something improper, and he was NOT.
But now, I guess everyone can't figure this out: MCNULTY IN TROUBLE, BIG TROUBLE. "cuz He WAS the final decisionmaker" and he DID state under oath that the attorneys were fired for "performance based reasons" when clearly, their performances were NOT the issue, and he is the DAG-the buck stops with him.
Like I said, Miranda warnings should be given to him before he testifies again-and it couldn't happen to a more worthy individual (smile)
Posted by: chiaramente | May 24, 2007 08:17 PM
"cuz He WAS the final decisionmaker"
re McNulty.
You don't really believe that, do you?
For the sake of argument, lets grant that McNulty is the worst smelling fish yet dragged up.
Is he not none-the-less a small fish, to be grilled on a side fire, one you will savor, but otherwise a distraction.
If not, why not?
What about his actions rise to the level of the attempted coup d'etat that seems to be the center of this thing
Posted by: wrb | May 24, 2007 09:19 PM
Chiaramente, Gonzales by his own admission IS a "fact witness." Those are his own words. Re-read his testimony from his hearing in front of the House Judiciary Committee.
"CONYERS: OK. In other words, you don't know. And I'm not putting words in your mouth, but you haven't answered the question.
I know the procedure, but look, we've got 30-something members of Congress, much of your staff, you've prepared for this, you've been asked something like this question before now...
GONZALES: Mr. Chairman, if I may respond to that, as I've indicated, I have not gone back and spoken directly with Mr. Sampson and others who are involved in this process, in order to protect the integrity of this investigation and the investigation of the Office of Professional Responsibility and the Office of Inspector General.
I am a fact witness, they are fact witnesses and in order to preserve the integrity of those investigations, I have not asked these specific questions. What I'm here today..."
But these are just details, right Chiaramente?
You say "not a fact witness," Gonzales by his own admission says "I am a fact witness."
Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe, eh?
Posted by: JP2 | May 24, 2007 09:27 PM
1. Yes, I really DO believe that-in fact, I KNOW that-I've been saying it for weeks, and Goodling did in fact confirm it-sorry to disappoint you, but McNulty is a liar and concealer of information, and the DAG is the nuts and bolts of the operation-he is the one that was making the decisions that Gonzales signed off on, because he was the point man for the US Attorneys, since he was a sorry US Attorney no-nothing himself!
2. (sigh) this is painful..... I'm not going to waste any more time talking about this-this is not a trial, there is nothing that says Gonzales can't talk to her about what he remembers, that is not (god!) COACHING.
Yes, Gonzales was a fact witness WHEN HE TESTIFIED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, JP2, okay?. His conversation with Goodling however was quite some time ago, riiiight? right. At least two months ago, because she's been gone since March, don't you remember? okay? Got it figured it out now mr. wannabee lawyer? Not the same situation AT ALL.
Geez-you people read too many wannabee lawyer blogs!
Posted by: chiaramente | May 24, 2007 10:03 PM
The democratic members of the committee missed their chance with Monica because some were too busy trying out their cell phone cameras when she entered the room.
We did not turn over control over Congress just so the democrats can act like a bunch of 16 yrs olds with a new toy.
Posted by: Jawja | May 24, 2007 10:14 PM
Thanks for the parsing Chiaramente--in one fell-swoop you have redeemed the Regent U. law program.
Another potential very large, and shady angle developing in this story concerns the Native American Subcommittee. Apparently 5 of the 8 fired USAs + the former USA from Minnesota were on this committee. Among the new appointees was a former Greenberg Traurig attorney. Abramoff anyone?
Hopefully a skilled reporter can follow-up on these leads and earn a well deserved Pulitzer.
Posted by: JP2 | May 24, 2007 10:35 PM
Nellie, you might appreciate this home state angle. Man this one stinks.
More background on the Heffelfinger, the former Minnesota USA, (as posted by another commentator elsewhere):
"It is interesting that the last Representative to Question, Keith Ellison of the MN 5th District, was the one to ask the Heffelfinger questions. He asked two -- one was about the "too much time on Native American issues" and the other was whether Goodling had any communication with Mary Kiffmeyer, former Secretary of State in Minnesota. Both questions have good back stories.
In 2005, Mary Kiffmeyer forced a law suit into state court regarding rules for what kind of ID had to be presented at the polls. She did not win her case, and there was no strong interest in actually making it on the part of Mike Hatch, then state AG, who is a DFL'er. But What Kiffmeyer was attempting to do was challenge the state registeration laws using the Help America Vote legislation -- essentially she wanted to argue that our state law had been trumped by the Federal Law.
Now Minnesota makes is easy for people to vote -- we have same day registeration at the polls. Since we passed this law in 1973, we have had no fraud problems -- we are always first of second in the US in terms of turn out of elegiable voters, and 40% of Minnesotans over the years have used the same day provisions to vote. Kiffmeyer wanted to challenge this with the HAV laws, and most important, she wanted to challenge college students using the provisions to register and vote from their college residences. Kiffmeyer made major efforts in DC at DOJ to force Heffelfinger to join her suit, and he refused, seeing no grounds for any challenge of our system.
What Ellison needs to do now is write follow up questions asking for all communications on this matter between Goodling, or anyone in Main Justice and Kiffmeyer. Likewise -- any DOJ communication with Heffelfinger. This is not exactly caging -- but it is yet another effort to carve out a part of the electorate, and refuse them the right to cast a ballot.
By the way, Mary Kiffmeyer was defeated in the last election. We now have a DFL Secretary of State. Her defeat was largely over this issue. Anyhow, Ellison needs to get Conyers to request or subpoena all the correspondance about this matter from DOJ.
Now the Native American back-story. There are three sub-matters which did or could have involved Heffelfinger. Most well know, The Red Lake School Shooting. While only one student was responsible for the shootings, there apparently were several others who knew Weiss's thinking before the fact. One of these was the son of the Tribal Chief, who was arrested and ultimately tried in Duluth, but tried as a youth offender, with the trial behind closed doors, and the evidence under seal. Heffelfinger was brought under huge pressure to qualify the kid as an adult and try him in public -- but he refused. The Red Lake Band was very strong that they did not want a public trial in this case as the level of awareness of the Chief's son was really quite slight. (Remember, the case involved Weiss killing his grandparents -- and his grandfather was chief of the tribal police -- the point was to kill him to get his guns so as to attack the school.) Anyhow Heffelfinger got a grand jury to investigate all the issues, and they returned a youth offender charge, and he stood solidly behind that. I think this very much might have angered some of the authoritarian types in Main Justice.
The second Native American matter which might be involved dates from 2002 -- and it is about an effort connected with Abramoff to get two tribes to fight each other over a gameing matter. Two bands of Minnesota Sioux have very successful casino operations in Eastern Minnesota, near the Twin Cities -- Mystic Lake, and Treasure Island. Both bands have fairly strong DFL connections that date back years. Wisconsin's Winnebago were propositioned by the Abramoff people to take over a bankrupt dog track on the Wisconsin side of the St. Croix River -- just a mile or so off the 94 interchange on the Wisconsin side -- and turn the track into a Casino in competition with the Sioux very successful operations. Eventually it was settled with the local people had a vote, and decided they didn't want a Casino in their town -- but that was only after much court effort, where Heffelfinger refused to get involved. (It was an interstate matter, with two Indian Tribes -- he clearly could have gotten involved had he wanted to do so). Anyhow it is the interest of the Abramoff gang in this that intrigues me -- and I suspect not doing what Abramoff wanted in 2002 might have been a black-mark against Heffelfinger. Again -- let's see if there are any records.
The third issue is much less direct -- it was about Rove pushing money through Norm Coleman's campaign in 2002 to support the Green Party Native American Candidate in the Wellstone-Coleman race in 2002. (The Greens ultimately settled this by defeating their own candidate in the September 2002 primary). But it was hot news in the summer of 2002 that Rove was spending money through Coleman to support someone who might fool progressives, and take votes away from Wellstone. At the time it was a big issue, Heffelfinger did comment that he might investigate the matter of Coleman's campaign funds being used for two candidates and two parties -- but it never went beyond that. Again, that probably alienated Rove who was shoveling in the campaign cash.
For those who don't know who Heffelfinger is, I would suggest a little research. On one level he is the Nephew of the 1940 GOP Candidate for President, Wendell Wilkie. His first Cousin, Wendell Wilkie IV was a high level administrator in the DOJ during Bush I -- and worked in Bush II's DOJ during the first two years. The Heffelfinger Family itself is Old Minnesota -- I suppose it is three or four greats, but Chris Heffelfinger was one of the leading officers in the Minnesota First that quite literally saved the Union on the day before Pickett's Charge at Gettysburg, when he led the Minnesota First to confront five confederate regiments at the Wheat Field, allowing Hancock a window to bring up reserves. The Minnesota First suffered 88% casualities in that operation.
Anyhow -- that's what Goodling wrote off so casually yesterday...a Republican line that runs back through Wilkie and further back to one of Lincoln's more adept officers. Their noses need to be rubbed into all this the way you teach a little pup not to poop in the house."
Posted by: JP2 | May 24, 2007 11:30 PM
These hearings are just for show anyway to try to create the appearance of "oversight." The very last thing the Dems want is to upset the status quo. They really don't care what Gonzales & Co. have been up to, they don't care about their constitutents, and democracy is just a word to them. As long as they're allowed to line up, grunting and snorting, at the lobbyist and big corporate feeding trough, they're a very happy bunch of piggies.
Posted by: Helena Montana | May 25, 2007 04:56 AM
Do you work at the MN Historical Society or something? Quite a recitation.
Norm Coleman is pond scum. I voted against him in the DFL St. Paul Mayoral primary and held my nose voting for him in the general election, in large part because the no-longer-independant Republican candidate was a knuckle-dragger. Then he jumped parties. His scruples have only deteriorated since then.
Hey, Helena. Take your Rush-Hannity talking points and puke them up on Last Chance Gulch. If you want to bring a different perspective to the discussion here, then do it with reason and back it up with facts.
Posted by: Nellie | May 25, 2007 09:03 AM
The quote was from another blog, so that's someone else's recollection--not mine (I used quotes). The statement rings true though, and I'm sure that the details can be fact-checked. The writer has some local perspective on this, which provides the kind of background that would probably take an outsider a long time to figure out.
Helena, MT, come on. So it was the Democrats who were praising Gonzales and Goodling in the House Judiciary Committee? It was the Republicans who have been subpoenaing documents in the House? Thanks for the barrel of laughs!
Posted by: JP2 | May 25, 2007 09:17 AM
"I'm not going to waste any more time talking about this-this is not a trial, there is nothing that says Gonzales can't talk to her about what he remembers, that is not (god!) COACHING." - chiaramente
Don't be so self-righteous.
This was not his secretary refreshing his memory. The and AG were major participants in the entire process. Goodling suspected that it could be an attempt by the AG to coordinate stories if it came to testifying under oath. Which is why she said NOTHING.
Othwerwise, it could have been the beginning of a "conspiracy."
Goodling saying NOTHING prevented her from being a party to that, if indeed the AG was indirectly attemping to coordinate possible testimony under oath.
Posted by: | May 25, 2007 11:22 AM
In fairness, I don't get the idea that Helena's statements are Rush/Hannity-like or anti-Democrat at all, but to the contrary, disappointed with the majority of Democrats not following through enough. She (assuming) may have just said her impressions without presenting the explicit facts, but it looks to me that what she is saying (as a general statement on the Democrat "leadership") has been otherwise said pertaining to the Gonzalez matter (including in Andrew's article, whatever points with which one might disagree) , as well as the most pertinent issue of the war funding bill, where such prominent voices as Feingold were far from alone in condemning the result (something like "Democrats chose the side of comfort") which is saying something pretty close to what Helena M above was saying.
Posted by: Trevor | May 25, 2007 12:51 PM
Chiaramente, I gather you have something against Mcnulty, rightly or otherwise, but if Mcnulty is supposed to be THE DECISIONMAKER (even though Monica's testimony which is the only place that mentions decisionmakers, explicitly uses plural), are you saying he just came up with the list entirely on his own initiative, and no one else, AG, the White House knew or directed anything? and is he the highest up so as to have the presumption to do such a thing unilaterally?
Posted by: James B. | May 25, 2007 01:02 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.


text:
Kata is a Japanese word that means form. In karate, as in other arts, it is a choreographed series of movements designed over the years to train the participant in the technique, movement, transitions, and nuances of the given emphasis of the kata.
The following kata are the primary kata in the karate curriculum requirements for promotion. Advanced students learn other kata not listed below.
Kihon Kata: Kihon means basics in Japanese, and the Kihon Kata takes much of what the student learns in the basics of our system and compiles them into the first kata for the student to be introduced to the execution of the basics while in dynamic movement .
Pinan Katas: The Pinan katas were developed by Itosu Anko in the early 1900′s, who was a senior student of Bushi Matsumura. Itosu Sensei developed these katas to bring karate to the Okinawan school system without introducing the more complex and dangerous principle katas. His intent was to have a series of katas that enabled the student to defend themselves against all attacks. That is why Itosu Sensei called these katas Pinan; it means "Peaceful Mind".
Naihanchi Katas: The Naihanchi katas are a very old series of katas that were reported to have been brought to Okinawa from China as one kata, that were eventually separated into three. It is believed that the famed Okinawan karate fighter, Choki Motobu, only practiced the Naihanchi katas as he believed that they contained more than enough for a dedicated karate practitioner to grow as a fierce fighter. The Naihanchi katas are known for the deep "Naihanchi stance", and the linear pattern. It is commonly believed that one of the primary martial purposes of the katas are to teach the practitioner to be able to fight if backed against a wall. Although that ability certainly conveys through Naihanchi, I don't believe that to be a primary purpose, if even an intended one, as their is plenty of mult-directional application in Naihanchi.
We also practice kata in our kobodo, or weapons curriculum.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article?
- To see articles that could be written, but haven't yet been made, see our To-do list.
What is a RationalWiki article? RationalWiki articles encompass many things and many goals. These vary slightly from other wiki-based projects, so this is a guideline about what a RationalWiki article should be, and what it should not be.
Note: These guidelines apply primarily to pages in our "main" namespace, which contains articles on individual subjects written collaboratively by our editors. Other namespaces may have different standards or no standards at all. For further guidance on the site's namespace structure, please see Help:Namespace.
This document is, like pretty much everything else, free to be altered by anyone who feels they have something to add or change about it.
Contents |
[edit] RationalWiki is not an encyclopedia
""Just remember, whatever you do, keep in mind the question "why does anyone who is a rationalist care about this particular thing?"
Many of the contributors to RationalWiki will be most familiar with wikis that are attempting to be an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias are collections of knowledge, with articles neatly and thoroughly describing a topic and giving pointers about where to go to find the original data or learn what is beyond the scope of the encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is the real big fish in this online pond, but others, such as Citizendium and Conservapedia exist. There are also wikis that cover a specialist topic, including "fan" encyclopedias relating to works of fiction, Memory Alpha and Wookieepedia being prominent examples.
RationalWiki articles are not confined to one specific subject area, and actually cover a huge array of subjects (explore our categories to see yourself) — but they should all in some way serve the RationalWiki missions, which are as follows.
Our purpose here at RationalWiki includes:
- Analyzing and refuting pseudoscience and the anti-science movement.
- Documenting the full range of crank ideas.
- Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism.
- Analysis and criticism of how these subjects are handled in the media.
We welcome contributors, and encourage those who disagree with us to register and engage in constructive dialogue.
Articles on subjects which don't really fit into these missions are likely to be challenged and may be deleted, so before you start a new article, think about how it relates to the missions. If you're not sure whether it would be suitable for RationalWiki, just ask: you could start a discussion in the Saloon bar, the forum, or on the talk page of a related article, or make a new suggestion at the To Do List.
Most of the contributors at RationalWiki enjoy Wikipedia, and we encourage people to use it for research, fun, or anything else that requires more encyclopedic and neutral articles. We cannot and do not want to compete with Wikipedia — we are attempting to create something that is different but hopefully complementary to the projects started by the Wikimedia Foundation.
[edit] RationalWiki is not neutral point of view
In line with the "not an encyclopedia" guideline, RationalWiki is not required to present a "neutral" point of view (NPOV) as some other sites, such as Wikipedia, do. While this doesn't mean that we censor, hide or ignore things, it does mean that we are uncompromising on what is right and what is wrong, and most importantly, why this is so. As a site, RationalWiki does have a strong skeptically-oriented point of view; and that point of view is that the scientific method and the information gained from its application is better than almost anything else humanity has come up with. The site's POV is that the support of, profiting from and creation of pseudosciences is as dangerous as it is wrong. Articles are created from this perspective, demonstrating the strength of science and the folly of the cranks. Similarly, articles relating to authoritarianism, logical fallacies and similar ideas need to expose their flaws and dangers.
[edit] RationalWiki is original research
""These are collaborative essays as much as articles.
RationalWiki is not an attempt to be a repository of knowledge that has already been written. This means that collection and synthesis of sources into new ideas is actively encouraged. While references are always desired, writers should feel free to draw conclusions not clearly stated in a source, and feel free to synthesize multiple sources into a new pattern. Writers should feel free to offer commentary and analysis that is outside their sources, providing they can explain it well. They should feel free to slant the content (but not the facts) towards the goals of our site. There are a wide array of writing styles, from the deadly serious to outright sarcasm, that can be used in order to make points clear.
[edit] RationalWiki does have a sense of humor
""This page needs more goat!
Humor (humour, humeur) plays an important part of what differentiates a RationalWiki article from an article at Wikipedia or other encyclopedia-style sites; the archetypal Wikipedia article being perfectly neutral and dry as the Sahara Desert. RationalWiki has a snarky point of view (SPOV), and when an article is too dry other editors may comment that it "needs more snark" or even "needs more goat"!
Snark can include sarcasm, irony, satire, absurdist commentary, subversive humour and witty asides. These are all part of how RationalWiki presents its material to the world, and make the wiki both fun to edit and fun to read.
Try to be original and inventive when snarking up an article. Avoid overused jokes, obscure cultural references, or anything childish or overtly hateful. There are also a number of in-jokes and memes that the RationalWiki community has acquired over the years (like the whole goat thing) and, while these are usually welcome in discussions, essays and user pages, they should be used very sparingly (if at all) in the main article namespace, as they are likely to be baffling or off-putting to readers unfamiliar with the site.
Most importantly, however, the snark should support our site missions (as outlined above), and not get in the way of them. Snark should never be used as a cover for hatefulness, shoddy research, or thin analysis. A witty comment or two, added into a factual analysis, can help highlight the more ridiculous aspects of a crank belief or organization, while keeping the reader entertained.
[edit] RationalWiki can be serious
""Someone should have finished reading a page having learned something more than five new goat jokes and a random bash against Andrew Schlafly.
Following on from the above point, snark should not be allowed to detract from the RationalWiki missions, which are the major purpose of our articles. An article composed entirely of jokes, memes and mockery, without making any point or providing any substantial information, is probably best placed in the "fun" namespace, or even deleted outright.
Remember, the main name space is what we present to new users as "who we are and what we can do for you" — if the first thing they see is an article that is nothing but inside jokes, not only may it make them ignore the good aspects of good articles but it may well drive them away entirely.
[edit] How to RationalWikify an article
""You can always be bold - mistakes only happen 5% of the time and can be undone. But if in doubt, the talk pages for articles are open to anything and everything.
Remembering all of these guidelines, how might someone go about RWifying an article that has been marked as "good" but still needing some of our good old POV?
The first step to fixing an article might be to start a dialog on the article's talk page. If you have new material, think; how might this material be used to refute a pseudoscience topic, how might this material be misused to support a pseudoscience topic, and how might this topic illuminate some aspect of human thought or culture that might help us answer "why do people believe stupid things"? There are many such questions to ask, and the answers should give you clues about how best to angle the topic to play to RationalWiki strengths.
The final question you should ask when looking at an article is: If someone came and read our article after looking it up on Wikipedia, would they come away with new information, new perspective or new thoughts they could not gain from an encyclopedia entry? If every article we have can answer that question with a yes, then RationalWiki is achieving its aim!
There is a category (Category:Articles needing expansion) which is added to articles in need of expansion i.e. where the subject would be improved by application of some (your?) expert knowledge. Another category (Category:Articles needing RWification) includes articles which could be improved with more rationalist analysis and snarky humour, to improve their quality as RationalWiki articles.


text:
"Erdrich is a true original… [and] one of our major writers: She illuminates large swaths of U.S. history and culture, and [The Red Covertible] is a good demonstration of her compelling stylistic innovations, not to mention her literary cunning." —Washington Post Book World
From New York Times bestselling author Louise Erdrich, fresh off her acclaimed Pulitzer-Prize finalist The Plague of Doves, comes The Red Convertible, a stunning collection of short stories selected by the author herself from over three decades of work. A veritable masterclass in the art of short fiction, The Red Convertible features 31 previously published stories and 5 never-before-published pieces. Presented in one collection for the first time, the stories of The Red Convertible cement Louise Erdich's position in the pantheon of consummate, innovative writers of the American short story alongside such luminaries as Flannery O'Connor and Charles Baxter.


text:
Meet Dr. George Weston - Northern Virginia Plastic Surgeon
Dr. George Weston is a board-certified plastic surgeon at The Austin-Weston Center for Cosmetic Surgery, serving Northern Virginia, Maryland and Washington, DC.
Dr. George Weston was drawn to medicine by a desire to make a contribution to others, particularly cosmetic surgery, which improves the way people look and feel about themselves.
Dr. Weston is innovative, versatile, highly visual, and committed to helping his patients reach their appearance goals. Dr. Weston says, "Cosmetic surgery is the happy specialty because it frees people of their concerns about their outward appearance, leaving them time to live life to the fullest."
(LEFT) Dr. George Weston & Family (RIGHT) "My sister recently found this piece of original artwork drawn by me in the 1st grade, lovingly preserved by my mother for over 50 years in a box under my childhood bed. It must be a Thanksgiving theme with the teepee, fire ( or is it a pumpkin? ) rabbits, drums, turkey, tree, and headdress. Notice how legible the signature is. My signature became illegible following the course in medical school on how to write so no one can read it. Please ignore the brown crayon outside the lines of the teepee. My coloring technique has improved over the past 50 something years."
Distinctions Between Dr. Weston And Other Plastic Surgeons
- Only 10% of Board Certified Plastic Surgeons specialize exclusively in Cosmetic Surgery. The other 90% perform reconstructive surgery and some cosmetic surgery. Dr. Weston has performed cosmetic surgery exclusively for 23 years.
- When compared to the Plastic Surgeons who specialize in cosmetic surgery, Dr. Weston performs more than three times as many cosmetic surgery procedures as they do. For 2009, Dr. Weston performed 630 procedures compared to 184 for other plastic surgeons. (Statistics from the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, based on number of facelifts, eyelid lifts, abdominoplasties, liposuctions, breast augmentations and rhinoplasties performed per year.) It is well-known that the more procedures a surgeon performs the better their results will be.
- Dr. Weston was invited for 15 consecutive years to teach the Austin-Weston Center surgical techniques to other Plastic Surgeons at the National Meeting for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Only 2% of Plastic Surgeons are invited to be instructors at this prestigious meeting. Dr. Weston was also invited to perform live surgery for International Plastic Surgeons in Barcelona, Spain.
- The Austin-Weston Center is atypical in that we have three specialized Plastic Surgeons operating simultaneously in our private surgical wing. This allows Drs. Weston, Sigal, and Poindexter to consult with each other easily regarding their patients, sometimes even during surgery. Our patients have instant access to their 50 years of combined cosmetic surgery experience. This instant access to three surgeons, rather than one surgeon, is very valuable to our patients, and is optimal for our doctors as well. We believe this makes the Austin-Weston Center a wiser, safer place to have your cosmetic surgery.
- Only 45% of all Plastic Surgeons are certified in Advanced Cardiac Life Support. (Statistics from the Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.) Not only are Drs. Weston, Sigal, and Poindexter certified, but all of our nurses are also. We strive to provide the safest environment possible for your cosmetic surgery.
- Drs. Weston, Sigal, and Poindexter have published their surgical techniques in major plastic surgery journals and textbooks, including Perspectives in Plastic Surgery; The Aesthetic Surgery Journal; Seminars in Plastic Surgery; and the upcoming Aesthetic Head & Neck Plastic Surgery Atlas, Chapter 31: "Perioral Rejuvenation – Lip Lift, Corner Mouth Lift, and Direct Excision of Nasolabial /Marionette Looseness." Please let us know if you would like a copy of our latest publication.
- The Austin-Weston Center has more than 30 employees who take exceptional care of patients. Over 90% of our staff has had cosmetic surgery by us. Over a dozen of our staff were our patients first before becoming our employees. This speaks to how much they trust and believe in our specialized surgeons.
- The Austin-Weston Center for Cosmetic Surgery was the first free-standing cosmetic surgery center in the Washington, D.C. area. Currently we have five operating suites and are certified by AAAHC, The Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care. We believe this special certification makes our center superior to other facilities operating without this accreditation.
In addition to his busy practice, Dr. Weston has been called upon to instruct other plastic surgeons at the annual meetings of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.
In 1998, he was invited to perform a live surgical demonstration at an international forum in Barcelona, Spain. His innovative procedures have been included in numerous cosmetic surgery medical journals, and textbooks. Dr. Weston earned his medical degree at the University of South Alabama in Mobile. He trained in Plastic Surgery at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C. and completed fellowships in cosmetic surgery at the University of Alabama, Birmingham, and the Charlotte Plastic Surgery Center in Charlotte, N.C.
Dr. George Weston's surgical practice, serving Northern Virginia, Maryland and Washington DC, has focused exclusively on cosmetic surgery of the body and face for over 20 years. Only 10% of board-certified plastic surgeons perform cosmetic surgery exclusively (as opposed to reconstructive plastic surgery). As president of the Austin-Weston Center for Cosmetic Surgery in Reston, VA, his goal is to produce extraordinary results for every plastic surgery patient in a safe, supportive setting that provides both exceptional surgical expertise and exceptional care.
Dr. Weston is married to Kristin, with whom he has with two sons and a daughter. Dr. Weston is an avid birdwatcher and enjoys golfing, skiing, and watching University of Alabama Crimson Tide football games with the family's golden retriever Cuda, who often makes guest appearances on The Austin-Weston Center's Facebook page.


text:
EB WCDMA & LTE Basestation Variant Design
The number of WCDMA & LTE frequencies multiplies the R&D effort needed to meet market requirements for basestations. With capabilities in full turnkey design, EB can assist OEM's to broaden their portfolio with needed variants of WCDMA & LTE basestations, thus shortening the customer's time to market for basestation variants dramatically.
Main Benefits:
- Quick time to market for WCDMA & LTE basestations variants.
- Minimizing customers management and design efforts.
- Experienced engineers with transparent way of working.
Solution Overview
The variant design model is based on EB's solid track record in product variant designs. It enables OEM's to focus on main technology development at the same time as EB manages the development of needed variants for different frequency bands and form factors. Focusing on development variants enables continuous learning and performance development resulting in short pay back time for R&D investment & increased profit.
Basic Project Deliverables are:
- Feasibility Study.
- RF Design.
- Mechanical Design.
- SW Design.
- BB/FPGA Design.
- Test SW Design.
- Integration and Verification.
- Performance Testing.
- Environmental Testing.
- Type Approval.
- Transfer to Production (NPI).
- Support.


text:
Mon, May 4, 09 at 1:09
Hello! I have a slight predicament. My friends garden has a layer of clay about half a foot away from the surface of the ground. This aquatard is causing the surface soil to saturate completely with very light rainfall and snowmelt. I'd like to figure out how deep this layer of clay is before any action is taken in order to re-profile the soil. In order to do this, I need some sort of a tool to provide me a rough estimation of the depth of this aquatard. How do you suggest I go about this? Have any of you tried to use an auger? Any help is greatly appreciated! Thank you in advance :D |
Follow-Up Postings:
- Posted by petzold6596 8b southern NM (My Page) on Fri, May 8, 09 at 22:25
Try the old fashion shovel. A soil auger will be expensive and very difficult to penetrate clay especially if it is dry. |
Does he have clay or caliche? Caliche gets very hard and won't let water penetrate. I bought the awesome auger, works with a drill and I use it to dig holes when planting even when I'm at a spot the ground is not hard. It might be just what you're looking for. https://www.awesomeaugers.com Gemfire |
- Posted by albert_135 Sunset 2 or 3 (My Page) on Wed, Jun 3, 09 at 10:25
I've an auger bit that - I know it was cheap because I am - that fits into a battery powered electric drill. It is about two inches in diameter and will drill to about 14-16 inches deep. I've no idea what the thing was originally designed for, not the garden I'm sure as it was purchased at a hardware store in small town Nevada where nothing much grows because the town is on an ancient lake bed and everything is alkali. I used it to drill holes through the calichi so the raised beds would drain if over watered. |
- Posted by dickiefickle 5 Dousman,Wi. (My Page) on Wed, Aug 5, 09 at 23:18
Post hole digger |
Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum. If you are a member, please log in. If you aren't yet a member, join now!
Return to the Tips & Techniques Forum
Information about Posting
- You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
- Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
- Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
- After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
- Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
- We have a strict no-advertising policy!
- If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
- If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.
Learn more about in-text links on this page here


text:
The Seventeen Celeb Beauty Tip!
It's a beauty bonanza! Get your daily dose on all things glam from the experts behind the coolest looks seen on the top celebs, the pages of Seventeen, and more!
By Elizabeth Denton
Becky G's Graffiti Nail Art
Who: Becky G
The Expert: Celebrity manicurist Ayana Clark
The Look: Abstract, graffiti-inspired nail art
The Tip:
- Start by applying COVERGIRL Outlast Stay Brilliant Nail Gloss in "Snow Storm" for a white base.
- To get the graffiti design, apply spots of red, blue, yellow, and green polish. Then, tap a makeup sponge on the nails while they're sill wet to mix the colors!
Main: Courtesy of Covergirl. Inset: Larry Busacca/Getty Images


text:
Sponsored by: Desert Diamond Casino
Jan 21, 2010 7:19 PM
The Department of Public Safety and the Arizona Department of Transportation have released the following road restrictions:
Interstate 17, southbound direction only, will be opened briefly from now until 9 p.m. in order to clear out waiting traffic and commercial drivers waiting in Flagstaff to get south to the Phoenix area. After 9 p.m., the interstate will be re-closed until further notice.
At 6 p.m. both I-40 and I-17 will be closed indefinitely. Both interstates could be closed until noon Friday.
I-40 westbound will be closed in Winslow.
I-40 eastbound will be closed at the U.S. 93 South Junction east of Kingman.
I-17 northbound will continue to be closed north of Camp Verde at the Sedona Exit 298 or the Junction of I-17 and SR 179.
I-17 southbound will be closed at the I-10 and I-17 Junction in Flagstaff.
I-10: Dust storm and high wind warning between Phoenix and Tucson.
I-10 Milepost 192-194 in Casa Grande Dust storm-visibility zero, Westbound lanes of I-10 are blocked at milepost 210.5 just northeast of Picacho Peak.
I-10 milepost 230-240 Dust and 40mph winds near Eloy, just north of Tucson. The use of high profile vehicles along I-10 is highly discourged, especially in the areas in-between Phoenix and Tucson.
We have a semi which rolled onto it's side, in high winds, at milepost 210.5 on westbound I-10.
The westbound lanes are blocked. No report of injuries with this roll over. No other vehicles involved.
We have two separate traffic situations working on that section of the highway.
Due to high winds as well as several Semi-Tractor trailer which have blown over, Interstate-8 is closed eastbound at milepost 40 or Cacna and westbound at milepost 67 or Dateland. We expect I-8 to be closed for the next three hours. We highly discourge high profile vehicles including Commercial Tractor Trailers to travel in the area of I-8 as well as I-10 in Pinal County.
Westbound I-8 at milepost 67 is completely blocked due to a collision involving a Semi tractor trailer rig and a passenger vehicle. Westbound I-8 at milepost 57 #2 lane is blocked due to a collision involving a semi tractor trailer. Eastbound I-8 is completely blocked at milepost 169 due to another overturned commercial truck. All of these trucks are overturned due to high wind conditions.
Snow is reported on SR 82 near Sonoita.
Snow Bowl has informed DPS and ADOT that they are closed through at least tomorrow as they've lost power.
For current road conditions in Pima County, call (520) 547-7510.
For current road conditions statewide call 511.
8 hours ago


text:
Your Customers Have A Secret: Why Now Is The Time To Transition To Cloud
While selling hardware may be your bread and butter right now, it's very possible that your customers are hiding something from you.
The 100 Coolest Cloud Computing Vendors Of 2015
The 2015 installment of the 100 Coolest Cloud Computing Vendors highlights the best of the best in platforms and development, security, infrastructure, storage and software.
Here are 10 recent searches by CRN visitors.


text:
Goldcorp donation paves way for addiction medicine fellowship at St Paul's Hospital
A new Vancouver program designed to train doctors in addiction medicine is set to be established next year, following a $5 million donation announced today (Sept 21).
At a news conference this morning, mining company Goldcorp announced $3 million to help establish a fellowship at St Paul's Hospital that will train 20 fellows over five years in treating patients with addictions.
Dr. Evan Wood, who will be the head of the program, said it will "greatly expand" the number of certified addiction physicians.
"This fellowship will create specialist physicians who will be able to offer, for instance, early intervention for young people just fooling around with drugs before they get addicted," he explained.
Wood is the co-director of the Addictions and Urban Health Research Initiative at the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. He noted that typically when a patient is admitted to a teaching hospital in B.C. with anything other than drug or alcohol addiction, they will be seen by "a whole gaggle of physicians". For patients with addiction issues, chances are there will be no addiction physician available.
"Even at St. Paul's Hospital where there are addiction physicians, chances are they haven't been through a standardized training program in addiction, and they would have had to go to the United States to get that training," he said. "And most certainly, they wouldn't have a gaggle of learners going with them and climbing the rungs and graduating from those programs."
The new fellowship, which will be the first of its kind in Western Canada, is expected to launch in July 2013.
Another local program that offers health-care services for people with addictions received funding through today's donation. Vancouver Coastal Health was given $2 million to support its Assertive Community Treatment Program.
The program consists of a 24-hour outreach service that supports people in the Downtown Eastside with severe mental illness and addiction with services including crisis assessment, psychiatric counselling, and substance abuse treatment. The team, which currently includes a psychiatrist, registered psychiatric nurses, a social worker, and an addictions specialist, will also include fellows from the addiction medicine program once it has launched.
"The program itself is very client-centred—we deal with individuals, we work with them, engage with them, developing individualized care plans with them, and we not only deal with their addiction issues and mental health issues, but just all the activities of their daily life, and how they can integrate better into the community," said Anne McNabb, the director of mental health and addiction, inner city, with Vancouver Coastal Health.
Chuck Jeannes, the president and CEO of Goldcorp, noted funding for that program was based on a one-time grant that is set to run out.
"Our grant will allow that program to continue, and hopefully give us time to secure additional funds to make sure that the program continues indefinitely," he said.
Jeannes said he has learned a lot after being personally impacted by addiction.
"I've learned that addiction is not a weakness, I've learned that it's a disease," he said. "I've learned that people don't choose to become addicts, they don't choose to throw away their jobs, alienate family members, create severe health problems and the things that go along with that. And so, the real simple answer, I believe, and it's not simple of course, is that treatment is necessary."
In 2010, a $10-million Goldcorp donation to Simon Fraser University caused some controversy. Some SFU students and staff, and activists urged the school to return the money to Goldcorp, which has been criticized for its mining activities in Latin America.
Want to know more:


text:
My Boyfriend Has Psoriasis – How Can I Help?
2) Test the Waters if Your Boyfriend Has Psoriasis
Some men are very open about their psoriasis, whilst others would rather avoid the topic at all costs. If your partner is in the latter group, tread lightly, you don't want to awaken the caveman and hurt his male ego! You can show interest but don't constantly bring it up and turn it into an issue – wait until he is comfortable enough to talk about it or the context fits.
For example, wait until he's rubbing in moisturiser to ask him about his psoriasis flare-up; his defences will be down and he might open up a little. As the relationship progresses, chances are he will be more relaxed about it.
3) Be Tactful and Helpful
Tact is important too – try not to yelp out if his skin is a little rough when you're hugging or rolling around on the bed, or complain if his special tar shampoo STINKS! Instead, show your support by looking for a great moisturiser to help keep his skin nice and smooth (hint: nothing too floral!), accompany him to the dermatologist, or offer to wash his hair even though your hands might smell like concrete afterwards.
If he has psoriasis on his hands, and it's going through an extra rough patch, offer to wash the dishes when it's his turn or do his half of bathroom scrubbing. He might not be telling you that washing-up liquid and bleach shred his skin, but he sure will appreciate it when you help out. All of this shows him that you want to help!
In the event that your boyfriend has psoriasis "down there" – keep in mind that psoriasis is not transmitted or passed on through sex or anything else. Using condoms and extra lubricant will make everything feel a lot better, too. As a last resort, you can use hydrocortisone on his noodly appendage to make it feel better if you're planning a romantic weekend or something else and have a few days warning
If your boyfriend has psoriasis, and you truly care about him, it won't get in the way of a great relationship. It's all about giving your unconditional love and support!


text:
Crepe Swimwear
$ 1,250
Turn heads as you lounge by the water. This modestly cut swimwear features heat-applied micro studs that create pattern and texture without adding weight.
- Tulle, Synthetic fabric, Polka dots, Lined, Contrasting applications
Composition: 68% Polyamid, 32% Elastane
Made In Italy
Select color
Select size (Size Guide)
Add to Shopping Bag
This item is sold out


text:
BEST ENTRANCE: Entry 2 near Bloomingdale's The Outlet Store
LOCATION IN MALL: Near American Signature Home
(954) 845-0404
Then Get Our Can't Miss Style Reports, Retailer
and Event News Before Everyone Else.
Plus you'll be entered to win a $1,000 Shopping Spree.
View our privacy policy / No spam. We promise.


text:
I am getting a large bed together for planting asparagus in the spring, and I am wondering if anyone has any experiences to share (good or bad) with SFG asparagus. Mel says plant one or four crowns per square foot. Most asparagus planting instructions are for planting rows, but they indicate that spacing too-close can decrease yields and increase the risk of fungal disease. Four per square foot seems like too many. Instructions that I have found for planting asparagus in a raised bed says to ensure that the plants are at least sixteen to eighteen inches away from the edge of the bed, for frost protection. That would rule out even one crown per square foot. My asparagus bed will be 4' by 12'. How many crowns would be "right" for that space? I live near Toronto, ON, zone 6A. |
Follow-Up Postings:
I have 2' by 2' boxes and I put 4 plants per box, which is one plant per square ft. I have an abundance of asparagus. |
- Posted by lavender_lass WA zone 4 (My Page) on Tue, Dec 29, 09 at 17:12
So, one per square foot is a good rule to follow? I have two beds that are 2' x 8' and I'd like to plant one with green asparagus and the other with purple asparagus and edge the front with alpine strawberries. I was hoping to plant in kind of a staggered v-shape with the strawberries in between the front asparagus plants. Hopefully, this gives some idea: A_A_A The beds are only 2' deep because they're against the fence, with purple raspberries on the other side. This is a garden I share with my nieces and nephews, so that's another reason to keep the beds on the smaller side. Any suggestions? |
- Posted by dan_staley USDA 5/S 2b (My Page) on Wed, Dec 30, 09 at 13:08
If I get approval from the fam soon I'll do a 86 sf raised bed with asparagus and raspberries, 30 sf of it will be asparagus and I'll buy 25 crowns from Territorial for the 30 sf space. All the asparagus beds I have ever done for myself and others have had 1' spacing and there is no need to crowd them any more than that - spend the money on something else. They'll fill in and soon you'll give some extra to loved family or friends. A 4x12 is plenty for a small yard for starters, and depending upon where you buy, you'll usually get a choice of 10 or 25 crowns. Depending upon your budget, minimum 3 or better 4 sets of 10 is good, 2 sets of 25 is probably too much to pay, 1 set of 25 might be an extra year or two for it to get packed. Much, much cheaper is a packet of seeds and you'll wait an extra two years, but you'll get a higher % of females. Yum! Dan |
Mel says try four per square foot, but I think that is too much. I tried two 4x4 boxes of corn last year planted four per square foot, per Mel's recommendation, and it did not go well at all. Lots of stalks did not make ears, and the ears that did grow were small. Then, to add insult to low-yield injury, the squirrels stole them. :-( I realize that corn is not asparagus, but I think that there might be an analogy there. Even at one per square foot, I wonder if that will leave the perimeter crowns too close to the edge. The outside plants will be only six inches from the edge, and thus at greater risk for frost damage in winter. |
I will be receiving my asparagus crowns soon, so I am resurrecting this post from the fall to see if anyone has any last minute advice... Thanks! Paully |
1st timer for SFG Asparagus for me too!... I though the 4 per sq was kinda tight also, so I compromised and planted two per square on the 3rd.. We shall see what becomes of them... |
- Posted by natschultz 5 (My Page) on Mon, Apr 12, 10 at 1:04
Based on everything I've read about asparagus, 4 per square foot is WAY too close, stick with one per square foot. Remember, they SPREAD! And DEEP soil is a must! As for corn, you must pollinate it by hand to get the ears to be anything worth harvesting. That is why I no longer plant corn - I'm lazy. |
- Posted by Anna(email@example.com) onWed, Feb 2, 11 at 22:56
I made an asparagus bed error that has cost me 3 years! I planted it adjacent to a raspberry and strawberry patch, assuming there was plenty of distance from the raspberries, and the strawberries would be easy to contain. All had perfect growing environments, leading the raspberries to invade the asparagus even though the asparagus was taking off, and the strawberry shoots to grow undetected under the thick asparagus ferns. Annoying and concerning...and then last summer it became too much for the asparagus, overwhelmed by the canes. A mess! To fix this problem, I dismantled the raised bed (a 4' deep x 16' x 30' monstrosity against a fence), and built 6 4x8' raised beds, @ 18" deep. I will be dedicating a box to just asparagus, no companions. I'm not sure about starting a new raspberry patch unless I can find a space that won't mind the invasion. Strawberries will be planted in a space where new growth can't hide. Hope my error spares other new gardeners some grief. |
- Posted by Cyndee 4(firstname.lastname@example.com) onTue, Jun 21, 11 at 11:24
I too would like to start a sfg bed with asparagus plants. My question is that from my readings in Mel's book it appears that he puts a liner under his beds. Is this true for all beds including asparagus. With such deep roots, wouldn't a liner be counterproductive? |
Cyndee, You should not put a liner under your asparagus. Asparagus has roots that can grow up to ten feet according to the experts. The roots fan out, so some will run almost horizontal, just below the surface of the ground. Some go straight down, and lots will grow in between. Healthy asparagus has a very big root system! After posing many questions and doing a lot of reading and searching, I ended up planting my crowns about 12" inches apart in a row, and I put three rows down a four foot box. After one year, I was able to harvest for about two weeks this spring, and now, I kid you not, some of the ferns are seven feet tall! You can see pictures of my one-year-after-planting asparagus on the Senior-Gardening.com blog by Steve Wood. He was a great help to me when I was planning my bed, and he has been good enough to share my experiences in pictures on his blog. The link is below. Let me know if you have any more questions! Paully |
Here is a link that might be useful: Senior-Gardening Blog
- Posted by SeniorGardening 6 (My Page) on Sat, Jul 28, 12 at 16:25
After all the considerations of soil preparation, spacings, and nurturing of asparagus patches, here's one you might enjoy. Beyond our property in an untilled section of land behind us has been an old, well established stand of asparagus. We've lived at our current location for eighteen years, and the asparagus patch was there when we moved in, so it's really an old one. The landowner used to come pick asparagus once or twice each spring. When I ran into the her at the grocery last summer, she asked if I'd picked asparagus from the patch this year. Since I keep her barn lot mowed, I guess she assumed I used her asparagus, too. We hadn't, as my mama taught me not to take things that weren't mine! The landowner suggested that I go ahead and use the patch, as she now lives in an assisted living facility and doesn't get out much. So last summer, I fed the patch a bit of commercial fertilizer a few times and mowed the spent stalks in the fall. We did a light picking from the patch this spring. While there weren't a lot of shoots, those that emerged were quite thick and healthy (and tasty). We stopped cutting asparagus early from what we've always called "Bonnie's asparagus," as we'd like the patch to thicken a bit. I've kept a path mowed to the asparagus, as the field it's in is filled with poison ivy. I'll need to do some more weeding underneath the foliage, as there are some nasty weeds still there. And this fall, it could use a good covering of manure. But with some TLC, we should have a second asparagus patch that should continue producing for years to come. The funny thing is that the patch has enduring all these years without much care. |
Here is a link that might be useful: Senior Gardening
I know I am late to his discussion, but surely the point of 4 per sq ft is 1 at each corner of a sq ft thus giving a spacing of 1 ft between plants (which for asparagus is still too close). Dear old Mel consistently neglects to point this out. In a 4. X 4 bed you w ould able to plant 16 asparagus (at 1 ft spacing), 1 in the middle of each 1 ft square. Same with strawberries. |
Here is a link that might be useful: Gallery1a
Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum. If you are a member, please log in. If you aren't yet a member, join now!
Return to the Square Foot Gardening Forum
Information about Posting
- You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
- Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
- Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
- After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
- Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
- We have a strict no-advertising policy!
- If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
- If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.
Learn more about in-text links on this page here


text:
Located in stunning Cheshire, Pesto Widnes combines Pesto's fresh, original piattini menu with a selection of real ales in a traditional pub environment.
Located just a short drive from bustling Liverpool, Pesto Widnes is ideal for a relaxing lunch, group outing, family meal or party.
Download our main menu here.
To make a reservation call the restaurant direct on: 0151 424 3729
217 Birchfield Road, Widnes, Cheshire WA8 9AH
£7.95 daytime menu available Monday – Friday from 12pm – 7pm and Saturday – Sunday 12 – 4pm
Opening times: Sunday – Thursday 10.30am – 10:30pm Friday and Saturday 10.30am – 11pm


text:
The latest version of Adobe Flash Player is required to watch this video. Please click on the link below to download the latest version. Thanks!
The governor of North Dakota has been sent two new pro-life bills. If signed the measures would move to outlaw most abortions in the state.
Lawmakers recently passed the bills. One bans abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy. The other prohibits women from having the procedure because a fetus has a genetic defect, such as Down syndrome.
If made law they would be the most restrictive abortion laws in the U.S
Pro-choice activists have promised a legal battle over the measures if they become law.
Log in or create an account to post a comment.
Are you seeking answers in life? Are you hurting? Are you facing a difficult situation?
Find peace with God, discover more about God or send us your prayer request.
Call The 700 Club Prayer Center at 1 (800) 823-6053, 24 hours a day.
A caring friend will be there to pray with you in your time of need.
CBN News is a national/international, nonprofit news organization that provides programming by cable, satellite, and the Internet, 24-hours a day. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Google+.
More Info
Sign up for the CBN News Dispatch and receive CBN News Reports in your inbox each day.Subscribe Now >>
Add CBN News, articles, latest videos and blog feeds to your favorite RSS reader. Subscribe Now >>
E-mail us your news tips, story ideas, questions & comments. Contact Us >>


text:
dental crown
Adenocarcinoma adenoma Animation banding bleeding cancer colon colonoscopy duodenum echocardiography endoscopy esophagus gastric gastroenterology gastroscopy GIST gynecology HEART Histopathology laparoscopy laryngology oncology polyp polypectomy rectum stomach surgery TUMOR ulcer varicesDental Crown Removal - "A" Point Improvisation
There are many toysto remove a crown - however - often, we have to section a crown in half, and then use something to "break the cement seal". Of course, we don't have anything that can apply any kind...
views: 2301 comments: 1
Simple Method To Handle Implant Crowns
The lab techs hold many secrets - and this is one of them.
views: 434 comments: 0
Gold Adjustment - Really Abrasive Wheel
There are many ways to adjust gold contours - this is just another method that I recently learned to efficiently adjust a crown.
views: 418 comments: 0
Diamond Impregnated Rubber Disc
Diamond impregnated rubber disk to quickly initiate the polishing of a gold crown. There are many ways to polish gold - this is just another method that I recently learned to quickly polish gold crowns...
views: 605 comments: 0
Triple Tray Dual Arch Impression
Here is my dual arch impression back from the lab and an important learning point comes with it.
views: 392 comments: 0
Diamond Coated Dental Crown Holders
These are diamond coated dental crown holders to prevent your crown from flying across the operatory.
views: 349 comments: 0
Don'T Fracture That Temporary Crown!
Ok - You've got your definitive restoration. The case is closed. Don't fracture that provisional restoration - you may need it if the "real" one doesn't fit!
views: 917 comments: 0
Chairside Porcelain Crown Polishing
There are a million ways to polish porcelain. I'm using a heatless stone and Diasheen (polishing paste). I've contacted Axis dental, but they appear insensitive to the needs of dental students.
views: 1196 comments: 0
Crown Tryin - Gingival Collapse - What Would...
This patient has a relatively thick biotype - or - well - would best be suited for a gingivectomy (maxillary anterior). After fiddling with his crown extraorally for a few minutes, his gingiva has collapsed...
views: 1446 comments: 0
Crown And Bridge Lab - Ever Needed To Separate...
Here is a way that a Belgian lab tech taught me to separate dies that were really close - use the saw apically to coronally.
views: 1004 comments: 0


text:
Sponsored By
Become a Sponsor
Spinitron Home Member Logon About Spinitron Charts KDHX's web site
SPINITRON home
Current playlist Program schedule KDHX's web site
BrowseArtists · Disks · Labels
Search the selected month Artists Disks Songs
Thump merch
Disks on Thump logged in KDHX's playlists:
Anthony B Merch
Smokin Reggae Buy it!
Brenda and The Tabulations Merch
The Touch Of You Buy it!
DAVID OLIVER Merch
LOST & FOUND Buy it!
dj Cubanito Merch
Latin House Extravaganza Buy it!
Fifth Dimension Merch
One Less Bell To Answer Buy it!
FRANKIE SMITH Merch
Old School Buy it!
Garland Green Merch
Best Of Buy it!
Jealous Kind of Fellow Buy it!
Heatwave Merch
R & B Lost and Found Buy it!
R&B Lost & Found Buy it!
Isley Bros Merch
HERE WE GO AGAIN Buy it!
Isley Brothers Merch
Old School Love Songs Buy it!
Jackie Ross Merch
Lil Anthony Merch
Tears On My Pillow Buy it!
Linda Lewis Merch
I'm Not A Little Girl Buy it!
Mad Lads Merch
SO NICE Buy it!
The Notations Merch
I'm Still Here Buy it!
Single Buy it!
Ohio Players Merch
Old School Vol. 2 Buy it!
Stylistics Merch
Payback is a Dog Buy it!
Thee Midniters Merch
Greatest Hits Buy it!


text:
What are we?
Hitchin' Post Pizza is the only dine-in pizza parlor and restaurant located up the Clackamas River on Hwy 224 in the city of Estacada. map
Our proximity to both the upper-Clackamas River and the Mt. Hood National Forest combined with the ease of entry into Estacada by automobile, bicycle and mass transit, makes for a convenient ride with beautiful landscapes from any direction. Best of all, we are biker friendly.
Hitchin' Post Pizza has award winning pizza dough, but don't take our word for it, come see for yourself, and don't forget to share with friends, family and co-workers at your next party.
Yes, Hitchin' Post Pizza gladly hosts parties of any size and for any occasion. Be they sports, birhdays, employee, or just for the fun of it. You can't go wrong with Hitchin Post Pizza, but be sure to make a reservation for parties so we can better serve you, and remember that 10% gratuity will be included in parties of 8 or more.
The Watering Hole Saloon is a full service bar adjacent to the restaurant serving your favorite refreshing beverages, offering our full menu, Oregon Lottery games and pool table available throughout each day and evening.
From the saloon you can relax on our outdoor patio. It hosts smoking & non-smoking sections and it's the only place in town where you can enjoy a full meal, your favorite cocktails and light up with your favorite smoke without leaving your chair. So, come on in today and belly up, ante up or just plain old fill up.
Hitchin' Post Pizza began slinging pizza pies in 2000 and has since been a staple of the Estacada community since.
Supporting many local organizations throughout the years, Hitchin Post Pizza is very proud of our history of sponsorship and donations. We continue to support the following:
- Estacada softball & baseball teams since 2002
- Dining & Dignity
- Clackamas County 4H
- Estacada Area Community Events
- Estacada Area Arts Commission
We are extremely proud of our history of 100% ratings on the Oregon Department of Human Services facility inspections. A recent article in the Estacada News can speak to that.
Sun-Thurs 11-9
Fri-Sat 11-9:30
Sun-Thurs 11-9
Fri-Sat 11-11
Where are we?
From I-205:
Head south on I-205 S
Take exit 12A to merge onto Carver Rd/OR-212 E/OR-224 E toward Clackamas
Turn right at Clackamas Hwy/OR-224 E
Turn left at SW 2nd Ave
Turn left at S Broadway St
Take the 1st right onto NE 1st Ave
From Mollala/Woodburn:
Take Molalla Rd/OR-211 E/Woodburn-Estacada Hwy NE
Continue to follow OR-211 E/Woodburn-Estacada Hwy NE
Turn right at OR-211 E/Woodburn-Estacada Hwy
Turn left at OR-211 E/OR-224 W
Take the 2nd right onto SE Main St
Turn right at the 1st cross street onto NE 1st Ave


text:
Forwarders associations push emissions measure
Two freight forwarders' associations, with its combined membership representing more than 164 countries, united in advocating for a global emissions measure.
The International Federation of Freight Forwarders Associations (FIATA) and CLECAT, the European freight forwarders' association, want an emissions measure that will create a more sustainable business environment for airfreight.
FIATA and CLECAT are hopeful that the International Civil Aviation Organization will agree on the details of a solution in the coming week at the ICAO General Assembly in Montreal.
"We have good reason to be optimistic, as ICAO secretary general Raymond Benjamin at the assembly's opening news conference assured us that he is confident when the session closes on Oct. 4, ICAO's member countries will have reached a global accord," said FIATA's past president William Gottlieb, who is representing the freight forwarding industry in Montreal. "We look to the ICAO Assembly to demonstrate the willingness of governments to progress on tackling aviation CO2 emissions. We are hopeful that this will bring to fruition a global agreement, which has been discussed for several years in keeping with the global aspirational goal of carbon-neutral growth, including global market-based measures, to help reduce emissions."
The EU's recent attempt to include international aviation in its Emissions Trading System (ETS) has been placed on hold. FIATA and CLECAT said governments need to keep this in mind and seek to settle differences in order to avoid further regional legislation.
Under the EU system, intercontinental flights to and from European airports are exempted from the ETS, but under the draft resolution, which is up for agreement by ICAO, the EU would be permitted to re-include intercontinental flights, including those to and from third-party countries. But the emissions covered would be restricted to those in EU airspace, rather than the whole flight, as directed under the original EU legislation.
The European Commission has accepted the compromise under the draft ICAO resolution, in hopes of a final global deal.
"Our associations are hopeful that an overall agreement with the goal of carbon- neutral growth from 2020 can be reached," Veronique Corduant, chairwoman of CLECAT's working group on sustainable transport, said. "The environmental challenge of the airline industry is a global challenge. Global issues must be addressed globally, and now is the time to do it."


text:
The Message (MSG) | New International Version (NIV) |
10 I have a serious concern to bring up with you, my friends, using the authority of Jesus, our Master. I'll put it as urgently as I can: You must get along with each other. You must learn to be considerate of one another, cultivating a life in common. | 10 I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. |
Published by permission. Originally published by NavPress in English as THE MESSAGE: The Bible in Contemporary Language copyright 2002 by Eugene Peterson. All rights reserved. (The Message Bible Online) | Scripture quoted by permission. Quotations designated (NIV) are from THE HOLY BIBLE: NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica. All rights reserved worldwide. (New International Version Bible Online) |


text:
Select () or exclude () categories to narrow your recipe search.
As you select categories, the number of matching recipes will update.
Find exactly what you're looking for with the web's most powerful recipe filtering tool.
I love to find quick and easy recipes my family will love.
Mexican, Indian and American "country southern style" cooking


text:
Who do you think looks best today? (5 photos)
The best street style from London Fashion Week: http://ow.ly/p48HS via @StyleCaster
Forty embroidered Camélias embellish this exquisite organza Chanel Haute Couture gown. Knightley, who has been the face of the Coco Mademoiselle fragrance since 2007, played the role of Chanel in a short film directed by Karl Lagerfeld. ?I?m proud to work with such an iconic fashion house,? the actress said.Read MoreLess


text:
Going by what is being posted lately, we have a lot of things to think about that some times cause us nightmares.
Things That Go Bump In the Night… December, 2008
They are the small bumps in the road that the casinos throw in our path to slow us down while they tell us to speed up play with only one or two players at the table. The "Grand Victim" casino boat in Elgin even goes one step further by posting a request that nobody should set the dice. This is one bump in the road that can be fixed by simply not playing there. There are better boats in the pond that are bigger, cleaner and intelligent people running them.
Saturday night at the boat brought out some of the every night nuisances we have to contend with. A randy was placing a late bet, down on the hook, at the other end of the table while Laser910 was having a nice run. Laser nails him on the knuckles and sevens out. Laser goes ballistic and wants to go and punch him out. It took a little while to calm him down. I told laser if the guy puts his elbows on the rail again, I will nail him with a fast ball. Later on the guy has a nice roll and Laser goes over and tells him he made up for getting in the way of the dice.
We had been playing at a $10 table for a couple of hours and then they change it to $15. The next four shooters had to be reminded it was now a $15 game. Now it was my turn to goof up. I asked for a $6 C&E. Wrong! The stick says it has to be a $10 C&E at a $15 table. I said make it $12 and then threw two three's before establishing five for my point. I put $18 on the six and eight and want to balance it out with $10 PL odds. Wrong again! The stick says you have to put at least $15 odds on a $15 table. I put out $20 to get the proper payout.
Things were rolling right along and I had the Iron Cross set up and was into a good roll. The dealer, stick and box never missed reminding me to bet the C&E or renew my six and eight when I made one of them as the point. Two things they never did were to remind me to take my PL odds or replace my Field bet when I lost it to the 5, 6, and 8.
During the roll the stick slid the dice over to me with the seven on top. We both stood there looking at the dice. The stick got very apologetic and flipped them over to the point. I told him I wasn't superstitious; just give me the dice with the point on top. He did!
During play I asked why they didn't have the Fire bet on this table. The box person said that these two tables were reserved for high rollers and they didn't want it for them. Doesn't make since to me! The whales usually go for the dumb bets.
Where did my favorite bet, the Big 6 and 8 go? Only idiots would make that bet. Now how am I going to be able to tell who the idiots at the table are? Now they have this under over seven gimmicks that I never saw get any action.
Final bump in the night: Not being a proposition player outside of playing the game within a game (C&E bet on the come out only), I wonder what you have to bet on the other prop bets at a $15 table. How about the Hop bets?


text:
@OeKc05 - My doctor did an endoscopy (a peek down the esophagus) and diagnosed me with GERD. Also he stretched the muscle valve where the throat goes into the esophagus. I had been having trouble with food like rice and bread getting stuck in the entrance to the esophagus.
Sometimes food still gets stuck in the esophagus so I'll probably have to have that stretched again.
I, also take medicine to neutralize the stomach acid, but food still comes up to my mouth. So, who knows, maybe neutralizing the stomach acid with medicine causes non-acid reflux. I know what you mean about drinking water making it worse.
I didn't know about the pH monitoring that can be done to determine if it is acid or non-acid reflux. I guess I better go back to the doctor and see what's what.