text:
Our sangha is taking some initial steps to try serving the needs of people interested in Zen meditation who aren't able to easily travel to the far south end of town, where our zendo is currently located. This has resulted in us trying to establish relationships with some of the Christian churches in the more central and northern ends of town, churches with rooms we can rent on a monthly basis for the sole purpose of hosting a sitting one or two nights a week for anyone who wants to attend. "Renting" by the room from a church is generally a lot cheaper and less contractually binding than most of the other options, and you might also reasonably think there is, on some level, some sort of potential spiritual connection between the two.
It's been interesting. For the most part, the Catholic Church (a church with a pretty well-established contemplative tradition) and the more liberal Episcopal churches, along with a few of the Methodist churches, have been the most open to our presence. For awhile we sat at a Presbyterian church in what I would consider a strongly conservative area of town; while we were allowed to sit, we were not allowed to chant following the sitting. Certainly the chants are Buddhist-centric, but I frankly couldn't see what harm was being done by chanting — it wasn't as if the words could physically seep into the walls and somehow lodge there and grow, like some sort of dangerously mutating non-Christian fungus – and I only attended one of these sits. Why visit somewhere that you're really not fully welcomed? We moved somewhere else very soon thereafter and are currently sitting in a dark and moldering fellowship hall at another Methodist church, amongst the whirring of power tools and the shouting of workmen and day care workers.
For various reasons – renovations, the need to use rooms for other uses, odd restrictions and some surprisingly high room rental prices, etc. – we have been forced to roam from one Christian venue to another, like Zen nomads. Ironically, our wanderings among the Christian parishes has reminded me somewhat of the wanderings of Moses and his people in the book of Exodus, only we want to stay, not go. We're hoping to establish a permanent, more centrally located zendo soon, but there is some apparently legitimate concern that the current property we're looking at buying will meet resistance from the Baptist church next door. Moving from the fringes of town into the more mainstream central section has made me feel like a stranger in a strange land. Can't we all sit along?
To be fair, I've also witnessed in many Zen practitioners a strong reluctance to intermingle with even the most generic aspects of Christian practice. It just seems to me that Zen and Christian practice have a good deal to offer each other. I'm a former Christian who still finds much value in many aspects of the traditional Christian faith, and the Christian tradition of contemplative prayer could easily be a bridge between both. Coming together in shared silence and stillness, we can each come away with our personal practice, Zen or Christian, the richer for the encounter without danger of either being compromised or "dumbed down." Our Zen teacher, a former Jesuit priest and a teacher of comparative religion, is certainly attuned to this idea and has done what he can to advance it for as long as I've known him. All it would take is for one forward-thinking Christian church to not only provide a comfortable room for sitting, but positively promote the idea in their congregation.
Our noisy, chaotic world could benefit from offering a place of stillness and silence for all. As we chant (where we're allowed) in the Four Vows of the Bodhisattva, "The dharma gates are boundless. I vow to enter them." By which I like to think we mean you never know when, how or where your next teacher is coming from. Let's enter those gates together.


text:
Hundreds of TITAN 4 manipulator systems are in use worldwide every day. TITAN manipulators are the highest quality system on the market for the dexterity and strength needed to withstand the industry's harsh and repetitive needs day after day.
The TITAN 4 manipulator's accuracy is limited only by the pilot's eye. The TITAN 4's master controller includes a six-degree-of-freedom replica master arm that ensures comfortable, intuitive manipulator operation. The TITAN 4's movements are just as sharp when it's moving a 5 lb. object as when it is moving a 250 lb. object.
The controller also contains function keys for selecting menu options and a display for viewing diagnostic and status information. The controller's advanced operational features are individual joint freeze, position scaling (altering the ratio of master arm movement to manipulator arm movement), password security, programmable stow/deploy routines, individual joint movement limits, incremental gripper movement, individual joint diagnostics, and automatic error checking.
For further information regarding our products and rental services pleasecomplete and send this email form
I am interested in getting more information about: FMC Technologies Schilling Robotics Titan 4 Manipulator
Please fill out the form below to receive our newsletter.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
My husband had never even heard of hummus before we were married. Actually, come to think of it, there are quite a few foods we now consume on a regular basis that he had never heard of before we were married! Lucky for me, he is always open and willing to try new foods; because if he wasn't, our only choices for dinner would have to be pizza rolls, frozen 99 cent pizzas, and the occasional tuna noodle casserole. (Yes, before he married me, this is what his dinner repertoire consisted of. No joke!)
Well, now my husband LOVES all sorts of different foods, and somewhere right at the top of his list of favorites is my homemade hummus.
We used to buy hummus from the grocery store, but before long, I soon realized that we could not afford that habit! Our family would finish off a whole container in one sitting! So I started trying to make it at home. It is WAY cheaper (and healthier) to make it yourself, and it is not hard at all.
It did take me quite awhile before I finally got our homemade hummus just how we like it, but now our homemade version tastes better than any we have ever purchased!
This makes a great healthy and delicious snack. Try dipping your favorite fresh veggies in it or serve it with whole wheat crackers or pita chips. Give it a try and let me know what you think!
Healthy Homemade Hummus
- 1 1/2 cups cooked garbonzo beans (or one 15oz can, drained)
- 2 Tablespoons fresh lemon juice
- 1 1/2 Tablespoons tahini (available at health food stores and the international aisle at the grocery store)
- 2 Tablespoons water (additional water may be needed)
- 2 Tablespoons olive oil
- 1/2 teaspoon fine sea salt
- 1/8 teaspoon cayenne pepper
- 1/4 teaspoon garlic powder
- 3/4 teaspoon ground cumin
- Paprika for garnish (optional)
Preparation Instructions:
Combine all ingredients in the bowl of a food processor.
Process until smooth, scraping down the sides of the bowl as needed.
Add additional water if needed to get the desired consistency.
Taste and season with more salt if needed.
Place in a serving dish and garnish with paprika if desired.
Serve with an assortment of crackers, pita chips, fresh vegetables, and any thing else you like!
This post has been shared with Friday Potluck, Foodie Friday, I'm Lovin' It, Fight Back Friday, Full Plate Thursday, Simple Lives Thursday, Pennywise Platter, Tip Day Thursday, Things I Love Thursday, It's a Keeper Thursday, Real Food Weekly, Ultimate Recipe Swap, What's on Your Plate, What's Cooking Wednesday, Gluten Free Wednesdays, and Homemaking Link Up. Check them out for more great recipes and ideas.


text:
PeaceHealth Ketchikan Medical Center
PeaceHealth St. John Medical Center
PeaceHealth St. Joseph Medical Center
PeaceHealth Peace Island Medical Center
PeaceHealth Southwest Medical Center
PeaceHealth United General Medical Center
PeaceHealth Cottage Grove Community Medical Center
PeaceHealth Peace Harbor Medical Center
PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Center at RiverBend
PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Center University District
Ketchikan / Craig
Bellingham / Lynden
Cottage Grove / Creswell / Dexter
Eugene / Springfield
PeaceHealth Cottage Grove Community Medical Center Foundation
PeaceHealth Ketchikan Medical Center Foundation
PeaceHealth Peace Harbor Medical Center Foundation
PeaceHealth Peace Island Medical Center Designated Fund
PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Center Foundation
PeaceHealth Southwest Medical Center Foundation
PeaceHealth St. John Medical Center Foundation
PeaceHealth St. Joseph Medical Center Foundation
Our Foundations
Planned Giving
Volunteering at PeaceHealth
Our Mission & Values
Our Catholic Identity
Our Promise
Governing Boards
Executive Leadership
Community Benefit Reports
Community Health Needs Assessment
Community Magazines
General Information
Pay a Bill
Health Exchanges
Financial Assistance
For Employees
For Medical Professionals
For Volunteers
For Vendors
For the Media
Destination Medical Center
Patient-Centered Care
Focus on Patient Safety
Evidence-Based Design
State-of-the-Art Technology
Healing Environment
More than 500 patients, doctors and nurses spent thousands of hours providing input into the design of Sacred Heart at RiverBend to ensure the creation of an environment that is both patient-centered and efficient. Community members, many from Sacred Heart's Patient/Family Council, served as members on more than 120 clinical process teams providing feedback from a patient's perspective on topics such as the design of the patient room, surgery registration and simplifying the patient discharge process. To learn more about the patient input process, please view video clips of members from the Patient/Family Council. These interviews were taped after the group toured the new hospital for the first time in March 2008.


text:
IRMACS Centre's Management Committee
The Management Committee is responsible for overseeing the operational direction of the IRMACS Centre, setting policy, and making recommendations on the assignment of resources. Meeting on a monthly basis, the Management Committee assesses and approves recommendations from the Executive Management Team. The Management Committee reports to the IRMACS Board of Directors for oversight, particularly regarding University interests.
The IRMACS Centre Management Committee currently consists of the following members:
Pam Borghardt | IRMACS Centre | Managing Director |
Peter Borwein | IRMACS Centre, Mathematics | Founding Director, Professor, Burnaby Mountain Chair |
Felix Breden | IRMACS Centre, Biological Sciences | Executive Director, Professor |
Brian Corrie | IRMACS Centre, WestGrid | Technical Director |
Uwe Glaesser | Computing Science | Professor |
Bahram Gustaspi | SFU IT Client and Research Services | Director |
Veselin Jungic | IRMACS Centre, Mathematics | Deputy Director, Senior Lecturer, Associate Chair |
Richard Lockhart | Statistics & Actuarial Science | Professor, Departmental Chair |
Arne Mooers | Biological Sciences | Professor |
Fred Popowich | Computing Science, VIVA | Professor |
Alexander Rutherford | Complex Systems Modelling Group | CSMG Scientific Director, Adjunct Professor |
Andrew Sixsmith | IRMACS Centre, Gerontology Research Centre | Deputy Director, Professor |
Ljiljana Trajkovic | Engineering Science | Professor |


text:
Article brought to you by: Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)WHAT? Breast screening 'doesn't cut deaths,' study says
By Catholic Online (NEWS CONSORTIUM)
June 11th, 2013 Catholic Online (www.catholic.org) It flies in face of all known medical recommendations and advice given for the past several years - but according to a recent study, screening for breast cancer does not cut the chance of dying from the disease. Forty years worth of data compiled in the United Kingdom produced "no evidence" there was a greater fall in death rates in women who underwent mammograms. LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - In fact, the age group that showed the steepest fall in mortality rates were women younger than 40 years of age, who are not eligible for the regular X-ray check-ups.The study casts doubts on the effectiveness of screening. Some experts now suggest that advances in treatment are more likely to account for the better chances of survival. The study was conducted by scientists from Oxford University's Department of Public Health, who looked at the Oxford region before and after the introduction of the NHS's screening program in 1988. Comparing the results with Britain as a whole, they found no evidence that death rates fell greater in screened women. Lead researcher Toqir Mukhtar said although the two million women a year who undergo screening may still benefit because cancer can be detected earlier, the annual cost of the program should be reviewed. As published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, the study contrasts with last year's Department of Health review, which concluded that screenings cut relative mortality by 20 percent. "The good news for women is that breast cancer death rates are falling, but it is almost entirely attributable to better treatment rather than screening," Professor Michael Baum, a skeptic of screening, said. In response, Eluned Hughes, of the charity Breakthrough Breast Cancer, said it was hard to "unpick" the factors that contribute to improving survival rates. "It's important that women have all the information available to them on the pros and cons of screening in order to make an informed choice that's right for them," she said. Baroness Delyth Morgan, of Breast Cancer Campaign, claimed the Department of Health's "comprehensive" review proves that screening "does save lives." And Professor Julietta Patnick, director of the NHS Cancer Screening Programs, said check-ups play a "key role" in giving women the best chance of receiving successful treatment. "All new evidence about the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening is kept under review to ensure that the breast screening programs are based on the latest available evidence," she added. Article brought to you by: Catholic Online (www.catholic.org) |


text:
Nearly 10,000 future educators at colleges and universities across Pennsylvania belong to Student PSEA. Join Student PSEA TODAY!
Connect with Student PSEA on social media:
Student PSEA News:Get the latest Student PSEA happenings on our blog. Student PSEA President Lauren Williams shares updates and information from across the state. And look for our e-newsletter, Student PSEA Shout Out!
November 2014: Degrees Not Debt Student PSEA President Lauren Williams' November video update deals with the growing problem of college affordability.
Watch the update here:
"Student loans hinder those with talent, passion, and determination. Growing up I heard, "you can be anything you want to be," but excessive loans make continuing my education feel impossible."-Gabrielle Gombos, East Stroudsburg University
"Even with financial assistance, I struggle now to afford my own education. Without this aid, I could not attend college to pursue a career I have aspired to have for years. I know I am in this field for the love of school, children, and learning – not the money and not the insurmountable debt I will soon have to find ways to pay back."-Alexandra Jedlowski, Bloomsburg University
Read more...
October 2014: Transformations and Movements
September 2014: New Team, New Members, New Beginning


text:
Sophie Wyllie
Monday, February 3, 2014
A couple fear they may have to move out of their "forever home" if a dispute over an environmentally-friendly boiler is not settled by a planning chief.
Mother-of-four Tracy-Ann Moore, 40, and her husband Joe, 42, are concerned about the health impacts of smoke from a straw/wood boiler fitted in a farm outbuilding next to their farmhouse on Burgh Road, Aylsham.
The couple also object to the height of the metal flue - the subject of a listed building enforcement order from Broadland District Council.
Bure Valley Farm owners David and Jackie Browne have appealed the order and an independent planning inspector is due to visit the site on February 11.
Mrs Moore, a part-time holistic therapist and carer for eldest son Harrison, 11, said: "The smell is disgusting. It is acrid, makes your nose tingle and throat hurt. The children hate it and dread it. The flue is an eyesore to look at."
The couple also have daughters Mianna, nine, Isabelle, six, and son Wilson, four, who has asthma. It is not known if the condition is related to the smoke.
Mr and Mrs Moore, who are not against green energy, moved to the Grade II listed farmhouse, dating back to the 15th century, in August 2011.
They bought the home from Mr and Mrs Browne who moved to a converted barn on the farm.
According to the therapist, smoke problems started in April 2012 when their neighbours fitted a boiler which heats their barn and three holiday lets. The flue also spoiled the look of the farmhouse.
"We are lovingly trying to update the house to make it our forever home. We are hoping that the boiler will go but moving will be a consideration if it doesn't."
The couple first complained to Broadland's environmental health department in September 2012.
Mr and Mrs Browne did not want to comment on the appeal before the planning inspector arrived. But in a letter to the council they said a biomass boiler was put in with a flue after planning and listed building consent was granted for their barn conversion. The flue height was increased after smoke complaints and the council told them to paint the flue black.
A Broadland letter says the flue was erected without listed building consent and the large metal flue had an unacceptable impact upon the character of the surrounding listed buildings.
A council spokesman added the biomass boiler needed a new listed building application which "has not been done" - so an enforcement notice had been issued requiring the flue to be removed.
The inspector's decision would be given in writing and would take about six weeks following the visit.
What do you think about biomass technology? Email email@example.com
5 comments
That's not quite the point, the smoke is very invasive - "green energy" or not! and causing them potential health problems. Perhaps you should go and spend some time round at their house to get a handle on exactly what the problem is? I strongly suspect that if your gardens were filled with smoke and interfering with your comfort and enjoyment, you would be the first to complain!!!
Monday, February 10, 2014
think yourself lucky i have two gas boiler flues belonging to the flats below, that send their contents straight into my kitchen! and their nothing anyone will do about it. it is three years since we opened our kitchen window.
Monday, February 3, 2014
My partner is the son of David & Jackie Browne and I moved onto the farm about 3 years ago. I work on the farm and am often wandering around the yard and as far as we can see the smoke is of no issue. I myself had asthma as a child and Jackie has serious problems with smoke inhalation, she can't really go near a coal burning fire but the smoke from our boiler has never caused us a problem, even when we load wood and straw on to the boiler with the door wide open. We have tried everything possible to try and ease the problem. We heightened the flue length, by 1.5m, in the hopes it would disperse the smoke higher up which it does, though then we got walloped with a listed building enforcement notice. When they complained about the smell of the straw burning we stopped burning straw when the wind is in their direction and only burn wood, and we don't see how the smell from this could be a problem as they have 2 wood burners which they appear to use regularly. David and Jackie also spent out further by fitting a flu fan which was designed by the boiler company to comply with the new EEC emissions laws in a further attempt to solve the issue. I would also like to point out that the enforcement notice issued to us was only about listed building consent for the flue and has absolutely nothing to do with any smoke complaints from Mr & Mrs Moore. A biomass boiler and flue have been in place since 20052006 after planning permission had been granted to convert the cottages. A conservation officer has spoken with us and told us that the boiler itself is fantastic and that they only have a problem with the added 1.5m of flue which we personally don't want anyway. David and Jackie are upstanding members of the community and feel incredibly let down and disappointed with how things have been conducted. We try to be as green and eco-friendly as possible, holiday guests have told us a major part of why they stay with us is for the green credentials. Surely we all should be taking a leaf out of their book and doing all we can to save our planet! The only reason they declined to comment on the issue in this article was because they were led to believe nothing would be published until after the 11th, if they had known it would go ahead before, they would have.
Monday, February 3, 2014
The article claims that Mr &Mrs Moore are not against green energy. Why is it then that they have created an entire facebook page to BAN biomass on their doorstep? This doesnt sound very supportive of green energy to me
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
Amazing how green energy is always acceptable in someone else's back yard but not your own!
Monday, February 3, 2014
The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site


text:
How to Play: Stations
Filed under: Activities: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Activities: Big Kids, Activities: Tweens, Activities: Family Time, Kids' Games
How to play: Before the game, write down names of destination cities on the index cards -- one city to a card. Have all players sit in chairs set up in a circle. Give each player the name of a destination city. Choose one player to be the Station Master and give him the index cards with the destination cities.
The rules: At the starting signal, the Station Master will read the names of two destination cities. Those players will get up and change places. The Station Master will try to steal one of their chairs. If he is successful, he will give the destination cards to the player left standing to be the new Station Master. If he is not successful, he remains the Station Master. More than two destinations can be called out, and there is an "All Change" option where everyone must change seats.
How to win: You can keep up with who is Station Master for how long and award the winner to the Station Master with the shortest tenure in the position.
What else you need to know: This game can get a bit rough, so be sure nothing breakable is nearby.
Related: More Kids' Games


text:
My Little Pie Maker is a perfect tool in making delicious pies at home. Pies are not just popular among kids but also for those kids at heart. Whether you serve it as quiches, hot pies, or sweet pies, these mini scrumptious desserts are a great hit for everyone.
Can this pie maker create delicious pies in minutes?
This amazing pie maker is the quick and easy way to make delicious mini pies in just 10 minutes. This pie maker is a non-stick silicone pie pans that makes your pie easy to get out. The design is perfect to use in toaster ovens and best for parties, cookouts, holidays, or anytime. It comes with a pie cutter to help you cut perfectly shaped pie base and attractive design and a spatula so you can lift, transfer and serve them.
Is this pie maker worth your money?
Charlene is a pie enthusiast since she was a child.
"When I was a little girl, my mother and I would bake pies in the kitchen together", Charlene said.
"This made me a pie enthusiast and I continued to bake pies until I moved out. When I saw lil pie maker, I had to buy it. I liked the idea of baking warm little pies in no time without hassle".
"As a grown woman, I love this little pie making kit", Christine added.
The popularity of My Lil Pie Maker is slightly diminishing due to some inconsistency on the product. First, you still have to spray some PAM before you load the pie so they come out fine. In addition, you have to put a metal pan underneath the pie maker to ensure that nothing moves and the pies hold their shape.
Using this pie maker, you can make four different flavor pies at a time. It is like hitting four birds with one stone, simply amazing! You can now enjoy baking pies together with your kids and celebrate those special occasions in a completely different way. Kids and adults will have their own individual-sized pie with their own choice of fillings.
With this small pie maker, you can bake up to four mini pies at a time. All you have to do is to press in the piecrust, fill it with your favorite filling, set the upper if you want, and put it in the oven and bake.
I love my pie maker. It is great for all my kid's parties and weekends with the family. ~Megan T. from Grand Rapids, MI.
Desserts will never be the same again with this pie maker. You can do flavorful pies in minutes and make your family meals full of smiles and laughter. Want more? When you buy one, you get one free! Are you craving for more? When you buy now, you will receive:
- Two pie makers
- Two spatulas
- Two pie cutters
- Two instruction and recipe guides
This offer is not available in stores, so order your own pie maker by clicking here and filling out the form.
This My Lil Pie Maker set together with bonus spatulas, pie cutters and instructions will be sent free with an additional P&H. You can send your feedback and results obtained using this product. You can be included in our testimonial site by sending us your full name, address and picture.
"Update: 1/25/13 Our research has found that people interested in the Little Pie Maker have been getting great results using the Little Pie Maker".


text:
Friday, May 22
5–10 p.m. Early Housing Check-In
Larson Hall
For those families traveling from afar, you may wish to spend Friday night in the residence halls. An early housing check-in location will be provided at Larson Hall. If you cannot arrive by 10 p.m., please make arrangements with your graduate to check-in at Larson Hall on your behalf.
Saturday, May 23
12–6 p.m. Registration and Check-In
Buntrock Commons, Crossroads
3–5:30 p.m. Celebration Concert
Skoglund Auditorium
This combined concert provides an opportunity to celebrate the musical talents of the St. Olaf Orchestra, St. Olaf Choir, and St. Olaf Band, as well as the outgoing seniors in those ensembles. This event is free and open to the public.
4:30–7 p.m. Dinner in Stav Hall
Buntrock Commons, Stav Hall
Parents, families, and friends are invited to enjoy the variety of tasty foods offered by the college's award-winning food-service provider, Bon Appétit. There is no charge for students with a valid Ole Card.
6–8:30 p.m. Senior Soiree
Skoglund Fieldhouse
Graduating seniors and their guests are invited to this special celebration that offers a variety of extraordinary cuisine. The Senior Soiree will be held in the Skoglund Fieldhouse, which will be completely transformed into a chic lounge. Come when you can, leave when you must. Food and beverages will be served from 6–8:30 p.m. Business casual attire recommended.
Register early, as this event may sell out. Tickets for students and their guests are required. Ole Cards are not valid for this meal.
9 p.m. Illumination Ceremony and Lighting
Skoglund Auditorium
This ceremony honors seniors as they transition from life as a student to becoming a member of the St. Olaf alumni community. The class lanterns will be placed on the campus green on Saturday and students are encouraged to locate their personalized lantern sometime during the day, leaving them in place until after the brief ceremony at 9 p.m. Following the ceremony, everyone is invited to the campus green to enjoy the glow of the lanterns while listening to live music. Refreshments will be served.
At the end of the evening seniors may take their lantern home as a remembrance of their time on the Hill.
Sunday, May 24
7:30–9 a.m. Breakfast
Stav Hall
Pay at the door.
8 a.m.–2 p.m. Registration and Check-In
Buntrock Commons, Crossroads
9–10 a.m. Baccalaureate
Skoglund Auditorium
Graduating seniors and their families and friends are invited to gather to worship and give thanks to God for the life and the community that was shared by the Class of 2014. This capstone worship service is led by the college pastors and will feature the St. Olaf Band and the St. Olaf Choir.
The decision to hold commencement outdoors or indoors is made Sunday morning and is announced during Baccalaureate, posted in Buntrock Commons, available through the college switchboard at 507-786-2222, and — if inside — posted on the college home page. Whether commencement is held in Skoglund Center Auditorium or outside on Manitou Field, the ceremony will be broadcast at various indoor locations on campus. No tickets are required at these broadcast locations, but space is limited. Read more details below, under "Commencement."
10 a.m.–1 p.m. Brunch
Buntrock Commons, Stav Hall
Enjoy brunch with family, friends, and students. Tickets are required. There is no charge for students with a valid Ole Card.
10:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m. Academic Department Receptions
Various locations
Prior to commencement, seniors and their families are invited to attend academic department receptions at various locations across campus. A complete list of reception locations will be printed in the Schedule of Events, available at Registration.
12:30 p.m. Line-up for Seniors
Tostrud Center, lower level
A light snack will be provided for seniors, who should arrive in cap and gown.
1 p.m. Seating opens for Commencement
2–4:30 p.m. Commencement
Commencement is scheduled to be outdoors on Manitou Field; no tickets are required for general seating at this location.
However …
If the ceremony will be indoors due to inclement weather this decision will be announced in the morning during Baccalaureate. Notices about an indoor ceremony will be posted in Buntrock Commons and on stolaf.edu, and information will be available at 507-786-2222.
Tickets will be required for an indoor ceremony. Each graduating senior is entitled to three tickets for guests. Seniors must pick up their tickets in the main office in Buntrock Commons May 19–May 23. No tickets will be available after 5 p.m. on Friday, May 23. If your family will need more than three tickets, your senior is encouraged to ask classmates for extras. In addition, Viking Theater and The Pause in Buntrock Commons, plus Kelsey Theater, Tomson 280, and the Undercroft and Tower of Boe Memorial Chapel will show the ceremony simulcast. No tickets are required for these venues, but arrive early to ensure seating. An indoor ceremony also will be broadcast via campus TV Channel 15 (only available on campus).
Special seating is available at Manitou Field and in Skoglund Center for those who cannot climb bleacher steps. Note that tickets for this section are required whether commencement is indoors or outdoors. Seniors may exchange two out of their three general seating tickets for those in special seating when he or she picks up tickets. If you have questions about seating for physically challenged guests, call the Office of Special Events at 507-786-3811 or email email@example.com. If you will not see your student before commencement, he or she may leave tickets at the information desk in Buntrock Commons.
Shuttles will run between Buntrock Commons and the commencement location.
Campus wheelchairs are limited to emergency use only. If you need a wheelchair for use throughout the weekend, you will need to make arrangements, or bring your own.
4:30 p.m. Commencement Reception
Stav Dining Hall
Graduates and their guests are invited to celebrate together following the ceremony. Seniors may pick up their diploma following the ceremony in the Black and Gold Ballroom, Buntrock Commons. Your personalized lanterns will be at the diploma pick-up location for those seniors who did not collect them on Saturday


text:
TNR ON L'AFFAIR McCAIN....Gabriel Sherman's TNR piece about the internal struggles at the New York Times over publication of last night's story about John McCain's non-affair with telecom lobbyist Vicki Iseman is now up:
The publication of the article capped three months of intense internal deliberations at the Times over whether to publish the negative piece and its most explosive charge about the affair. It pitted the reporters investigating the story, who believed they had nailed it, against executive editor Bill Keller, who believed they hadn't. ....By late December, the reporters had submitted several pages of written questions to [McCain lawyer Bob] Bennett for comment, and completed a draft of the piece before the New Year. But to their growing frustration, Keller ordered rounds of changes and additional reporting. According to Times sources, [Washington bureau chief Dean] Baquet remained an advocate for his reporters and pushed the piece to be published, but sources say Keller wanted a more nuanced story looking less at personal matters and more at questions of Iseman's lobbying and McCain's legislative record. ....In mid-January, Keller told the reporters to significantly recast the piece after several drafts had circulated among editors in Washington and New York. After three different versions, the piece ended up not as a stand-alone investigation but as an entry in the paper's "The Long Run" series looking at presidential candidates' career histories.
The publication of the article capped three months of intense internal deliberations at the Times over whether to publish the negative piece and its most explosive charge about the affair. It pitted the reporters investigating the story, who believed they had nailed it, against executive editor Bill Keller, who believed they hadn't.
....By late December, the reporters had submitted several pages of written questions to [McCain lawyer Bob] Bennett for comment, and completed a draft of the piece before the New Year. But to their growing frustration, Keller ordered rounds of changes and additional reporting. According to Times sources, [Washington bureau chief Dean] Baquet remained an advocate for his reporters and pushed the piece to be published, but sources say Keller wanted a more nuanced story looking less at personal matters and more at questions of Iseman's lobbying and McCain's legislative record.
....In mid-January, Keller told the reporters to significantly recast the piece after several drafts had circulated among editors in Washington and New York. After three different versions, the piece ended up not as a stand-alone investigation but as an entry in the paper's "The Long Run" series looking at presidential candidates' career histories.
If anything, this makes the whole episode even more puzzling. The four reporters on this piece thought they had "nailed it"? Reasonable people can differ on whether they had enough to hang a story on, but there's no way that they "nailed" anything. And what made Keller change his mind? Adding a couple thousand words about the lobbying aspect of this episode did exactly nothing to take attention away from the bombshell innuendo that McCain was having an "inappropriate" relationship with Vicki Iseman and the reporting on that central assertion doesn't seem to have changed much since late December.
Mysteriouser and mysteriouser. Sometimes stories like this get printed in hopes that they'll kick over some stones and prompt other sources to come forward, and maybe that's what happened here. Stay tuned.
Don't see why you're objecting to the "nail it" comments, Kev. The reporters probably DID think that, and they were talking about their initial story, not what got lawyered out and Kellered out.
For all we know, maybe they DID nail it, or come a lot closer than the "on the one hand, shit in the other hand" story that actually ran.
The Washington Post piece is more damning, in my view. It focuses on Ms. Iseman and how she rose from secretary to partner within a few years. She reportedly repeatedly bragged to other telecom lobbyists about her relationship with Senator McCain.
Is it common for secretaries to become partners within a short period of time?
It seems likely that a lot of content was redacted from the piece, as SocraticGadfly suggests.
Gadfly is right. We have no idea what the reporters initially wrote. My guess is the initial story was a lot stronger than the gutted version Keller published last night.
For what it's worth, my direct observation of elected officials at McCain's level is that if one of them did appear to be in danger of suffering political damage from the statements of some lobbyist, the situation would be handled the way it was reported to be handled in this case -- by staff.
It is understood in Washington that part of the staff's job is to protect the boss: not from getting arrested or jeopardizing national security, but from appearances that might damage him politically. A lobbyist who is bragging about her access to and influence over a Senator is a problem, even if it is just bragging (this is one reason why, traditionally, the best lobbyists have been very discreet). A Senator could always cut the lobbyist off personally, but more often staff are directed to address the situation. Longtime staffers who know their boss well enough sometimes address the situation without direction.
In McCain's case, whether this story turns out to have legs will depend on whether any of the things it hints at -- that Iseman's clients got undue favors because of her access to him or there was some kind of personal relationship between the two of them -- later turn out to be based in fact. If they do, this is a very bad story for McCain; if they don't, it's just a story about staff dealing with an appearance problem eight years ago.
PE, I think not. No wonder her company jumped on the Times even harder than McCain. Given what seems clear, she probably was diddling somebody at the office after she got done with the Schmuck Talk Express.
Ruck and CJ, my feelings on Kelleritis on this piece are even clearer now that I just got done with Sherman's TNR piece.
Dean Baquet, from his effort to stand up for the LA Times newsroom (and Kev, I KNOW you're familiar with that), is not a tabloid-type editor, but WILL stand behind real news work.
I'll agree with Pat Buchanan's guess that somebody from the Times probably leaked to Drudge in December. Here's hoping whoever that was does some more leaking.
"Reasonable people can differ on whether they had enough to hang a story on, but there's no way that they "nailed" anything."
Uhh, wait: the reporters thought they nailed it in the original story, which the editor rejected. I don't see how you can take what finally got published as proof that they didn't nail it in the original story. I also don't see how you don't get this out of the account above. I don't mean that to be as mean as it sounds, but relying on the rewritten account to determine that they didn't nail it in the original account is a head scratcher.
I did not have sex with that woman.
Well at least the NYT didn't sit on the story until after the election, like they tried to with the warrantless wiretapping scandals.
Kevin, what a fool the liberal media is. Didn't the liberal media try this hit job on Bush with Dan Rather's national guard story? The result is going to be no different with McCain. The allegations are going to be disproved, and the American people are going to support in droves John Mccain and his wonderful wife Cindy. Watch me laugh as all of you fail miserably in smearing a conservative. Again.
I can see the sculptor now chiseling the phrase "The New York Times--All The News At A Time That Doesn't Adversely Impact Our Publisher's Friends."
I put this "story" about where I put the Obama "plagarism" one - firmly in the "meh" pile.
It's the press talking to themselves. In the 24-hour news cycle, they're constantly looking for titillation. (Hence the overabundance of coverage on Ms. Spears.) I guess they thought it'd work. It doesn't.
John McCain has shown poor judgement on Iraq, on S&Ls, on abortion, on drug policy and on tax policy. That's why I don't support his candidacy.
This? Yawn.
I will very reluctantly have to agree with the sense of Al's post-- the simplest explanation is that this was an effort by the supporters of McCain to create a Dan Rather type of situation.
Why does this always happen? A story is run that is potentially damaging to a Republican and instead of focusing on the real issue (McCain's ties to lobbyists) the story becomes the sexual innuendo and the "liberal media" which means the real issue gets ignored and it turns out, as Al says, actually helps the Republican.
It remains unclear why the paper sat on the story since December. But whether or not the New York Times has had the goods on John McCain, it didn't stop them from endorsing him in the state's Republican primary last month.
For the details, see: "NY Times Endorsed McCain Before Running Scandal Piece."
I don't know...if four NYT reporters thought they'd nailed it, I'll be looking for futher details to surface down the pike.
At least this story knocked Michelle Obama off the box.
NY Times reports on John McCain affair that both sides deny? Why don't they report on the Larry Sinclair story? Larry Sinclair is taking a polygraph test next week. His story is only going to get bigger and can't be ignored any longer.
I find it very hard to believe this story is a plant. It has the potential to backfire in a big way, just to risky to try...
Ah, Republicans, they have some serious peccadilloes:
Bush a no-show National Guardsman. McCain's dalliance with a lobbyist.
I always go with the Cheney Doctrine: If there's a one percent chance that something is true, then, by God, it's true!
The funny thing about this story is that both legs of it have historical precedent. We know that McCain has been willing to do untoward favors for big donors in the past from the Keating Five scandal, and we know he had at least one affair while he was still married to his first wife.
So although this story is about a previously unreported situation, it fits in perfectly with McCain's record.
I do think they nailed it, even in the published version.
Even if McCain didn't have an affair with Iseman, the reporters have three sources, one of whom is identified and on the record, saying that he had a personal relationship with a lobbyist that was so close that there was a major effort within his organization to keep them apart. Furthermore, they seem to be on pretty solid ground on the observation that McCain did a fair amount to help out Iseman's client. Finally, they do a good job of placing these episodes in a decades-long context of McCain doing favors for supporters, courting lobbyists as contributors and supporters, and generally acting like a standard influence-peddling Washington politician.
Within all of this context, whether or not he was having an affair becomes somewhat beside the point, so I don't see why anyone should judge the success or failure of the article based on whether or not it proves that McCain and Iseman were sleeping together.
The NY Times continually buckles to conservative pressure. The editorial posture that remains resembles nothing close to "objectivity".
They may THINK they're objective, but what they are is afraid of upsetting the conservatives. So even if they manage to get some that shines a poor light on conservatives past their internal censors, it comes out completely milquetoasted.
Conservatives again trot out their "Librul New York Times!" epithet; wash hands, repeat.
The thing to do is to STOP DEFENDING THE NEW YORK TIMES. Don't reply that they aren't liberal. ("The so-called liberal media".) You're fighting on the wrong ground.
Attack them for carrying conservative water! They sat on the FISA story until safely after the election! They sat on this story until it got utterly lawyered by McCain's attoney! They freaking ENDORSED McCain!
Lunar Eclipse: Read the story language. NEITHER SIDE denied anything. Instead, they just got angry, without any specifics. Pull your head out.
Al, even for you, that's a weak post.
Marc: The sexual angle is legit; McCain's pandering to the Religious Right again. Interesting that Huck is saying, for public consumption, I believe McCain, but isn't going out of his way to blast the "liberal New York Times."
Boots, Exactly! Schmuck Talk has both Keating Five and wife-cheating precedents; now the two unite.
Poor Mitt. He's the one who should be really pissed off at Keller. You'd almost think Keller was stuffing this story just long enough for Big John's Republican opponents to go away.
Another election and it looks like the good 'ol liberal smear factory is charged up and ready to go. Of course their front man Obama will claim he is against smear tactics - but the MSM will work for him so he never has to appear partisan and can fool his mindless supporters into thinking he is for a different kind of politics.
Intellectual lefties will not admit it but, NYT -> Dems as Talk Radio -> Repubs.
Problem is NYT is supposed to be news. Talk Radio acknowledges that it is opinion. Liberals are such hypocrites I am so glad I am not one.
Let's both try to clean up our act this election and center on the real issues maybe. OK.
From the conservative perspective, having unified, bipartisan attacks against the Times for running this piece serves to "Rathergate" the paper and tell all other publications not to touch it for fear of branding them smear artists.
Sean does have a point, but most of us who have been following John McCain's public actions have known for a long time that he does favors for supporters, courts lobbyists as contributors and supporters, and generally acts like a standard influence-peddling Washington politician. Of course, the truth might be brand new for a lot of folks, especially members of the mainstream media who have ridden the "Straight Talk Express" and have been utterly seduced by the man.
John Hanson:
It definitely qualifies as news if three staffers from St. Mac's 2000 campaign claim what they have claimed.
NYT is a good punching bag for the conservatives, but it almost always lives up to its reputation of being a good newspaper. Definitely better than the rags that the Tribune puts out.
The fact that you can confuse the content in the New York Times with talk radio is why we're happy you're not a liberal, either.
Marcy Wheeler has some insights on who Iseman was working for. Remember Sinclair broadcasting?
Influence peddling is a real issue.
And we dance in celebration that you are not a liberal every time you foul the threads here with your inane conservatroll apologist blather.
If you are confused about why the reporters thought that they had it nailed, look at a phrase that made it into the piece
Both said Mr. McCain acknowledged behaving inappropriately and pledged to keep his distance from Ms. Iseman.
Wren: Mitt, or Mitt's campaign, IS pissed this story broke late.
Damn. I meant to say that I love how wingnuts want to make nice when they are on the ropes.
No thanks. You lot need to spit teeth, bleed, and wear the scars, hell spend a few decades self-flagellating in the forest, wearing sackcloth and ashes, and show some real god-damned contrition for the mess you idiots have made, before we will ever trust you war criminals and fools, ever again.
Sorry, my bare naked URL above is not about Mitt's campaign, but actually the link for:
McCain presser denial on FCC issues
Oh, a bit OT... Kevin, do we need to call the grammar police?
"Mysteriouser"? C'mon, bro. And, it's not a grammar breaking that adds anything to the narrative.
Gadfly is right. We have no idea what the reporters initially wrote. My guess is the initial story was a lot stronger than the gutted version Keller published last night. Posted by: corpus juris
I concur. It's pretty damning when the reporters send questions to McCain's lawyers and they answer them in such a way that convinces the reporters' that their version of things is correct.
McCain only had a ghost of a chance of winning the election. Now it won't even be close. The wingnuts don't like him, the "religious" right doesn't like him. If you figure that's 30-50% of the Republican faithful, which make up only about 15-20% of American voters anyway, he'll be the Bob Dole for the new millennium.
I couldn't give a sh** if McCain had an affair eight years ago, or yesterday. But it does matter if McCain did favors for a lobbyist he was having an affair with. If the original reporting focussed on the affair, and Keller made them work till they had fleshed out the conflict of interest angle, then he did exactly right.
Mysteriouser and mysteriouser.
It's OK if Lewis Carroll said it first.
Kevin, this could be your winning entry in "weakest post of the week." It certainly has my vote as the worst since the "I'm not hellbent on telco immunity."
Previously, I would have named the Sunday post on Susan Jacoby and the dumbing of America, even if, as a skeptical left-liberal, I was in the minority in thinking you're wrong on that.
Oh, BTW, Kevin, any post of yours that favorably links to Brad DeLong is automatically in the running for "weakest post of the week."
Agree with Socratic Gadfly et al. in light of the TNR piece especially, which I've just read. You've got four WDC reporters and Dean Baquet up against Keller in NY holding out for a corruption-not-sex story, apparently squeamish about the blond lobbyist angle for reasons that escape me.
McCain/Bennett mau-mau Keller into gutting the sex part of the story which we are told the WDC bureau felt was solid enough to run. Under pressure from TNR, eventually, the NYT runs the sanitized piece along the lines Keller wanted. This after having endorsed the man, btw. What's up with that?
One of the reporters--Thompson--quits the Times to return to the Post, this after a McCain beat reporter quit, apparently fed up with the Times's sitting on the story, rumors of which he couldn't even report.
I knew the Mittsters were pissed. My real question is whether or not Keller and the Times slowed the release of the story until after Mac got the nomination. When they endorsed him, the Times had the fully nailed story right in front of them. But they endorsed him none the less. If Keller is taking questions I would ask...knowing what you know now would the NYT still endorse MCCain in the NY Primary?
Grammar Police, Lewis Carroll had poetic license. I hardly think a political blog qualifies. Unless we're in a Jabberwocky-type hunt for the McCain-Iserman sex tapes.
It doesn't have quite the same ring as when I invented (so clever! so original!) the term "l'Affaire Lewinsky" that others then imitated.
How about "la Mésalliance McCain"?
Exactly. Gadfly missed the Carroll reference.
It's as I said - journos gossiping among themselves.
But now that I've dug further, it's actually interesting!
In 1930's radio voice:
"WHY did the NYT publish now? WHAT ELSE do they think they know?"
"WHO leaked to Drudge?"
"WHY did McCain hire Bob Bennett?"
"WHO is the mysterious EllaLohan?"
From a strict media-watching pov, it's kinda fun. And the story does shine some light on the real McCain, not his brand.
Wren, good point. I'm guessing that the NYT op-ed structure has Keller on the editorial board for endorsement interviews, endorsements, etc. (I'm a newspaper editor, but never at a paper of nearly that size; so this is my semi-insider guesstimate.)
I would guess that Keller had his cards close enough to the vest that nobody else on the editorial board knew what was up. Prolly nobody had read the WaPost story in December or seen any blog linkage to the Drudge piece at that time. And, as we see most often and most spectacularly at the WSJ, major dailies can sometimes have huge disconnects between newshole staff and op-ed writers.
Literary allusions are OK with me.
Unless we're in a Jabberwocky-type hunt for the McCain-Iserman sex tapes.
That certainly sounds marvelous.
Not Ella: I've already noted on my blog the importance of Schmuck Talk hiring Bob Bennett. You just don't do that unless some real shit is up. So, wingers who claim this is all smoke, if they know inside Washington, know there's plenty of fire.
Who leaked to Drudge? One of the four reporters, most likely. Keller was already sitting on his hands and somebody was pushing. May not have been a direct leak. One of the NYT writers could have leaked to somebody on the politics beat at the WaPost, hoping that it being made known to Drudge, and a tidbit for a competitive paper would push Keller to get off his ass.
Grammar Police/Shortstop... I would have caught the Lewis Carroll ref with a bit more context; as is, Kev dumped it kind of blindly, with no lead-in.
Le nepotisme-iseman?
The key meme from the Right: Why did the Times unload this just after McCain became the evident presumptive nominee? Others wonder (liberals or open-news promoters), why did they wait so long?
If anything, this makes the whole episode even more puzzling. The four reporters on this piece thought they had "nailed it"? Reasonable people can differ on whether they had enough to hang a story on, but there's no way that they "nailed" anything.
Gee, Kevin, I guess you are right. It is perfectly normal for a married Senator's advisers to be flipping out about him hanging out with a young lobbyist way too much. Senators' advisors are, after all, notorious for kicking over their Senator's reputation by getting upset over nothing at all.
I was getting pretty cynical for a while there about politics, but now I am back down to Earth. Thanks, Kevin.
Maybe I'm from another planet?, but the possibility of a sexual relationship is not as big a deal as government favors to a lobbyist based on any kind of personal relationship (sexual or otherwise) and poor personal ethical judgment.
Especially from the 'straight-talk express' himself...
After all, McCain remarried one month after divorcing his first wife and as far as I know it was generally known he was having an affair with his second wife before the divorce. So if there was a relationship it shouldn't be a huge surprise.
Maybe at least this will prevent the press (including NPR) from parroting how upstanding John is, and actually look as his entire blemished record. If he can still win with those blemishes exposed than more power to him - but need to expose all the candidates blemishes, not just the Dems.
It is hilarious watching all the cons trip over each other criticizing the newspaper that broke a much less significant Whitewater story and ran it on the front page for two+ years...
Now I have it figured out: they were probably just very, very, very good friends, like in the "My Buddy and Me" toy commercial they used to run on TV years ago.
McCain was like a non-employer, opposite-sex mentor, who totally inexplicably described his relationship with Iseman as "behaving inappropriately."
Kev, did some Republican bully walk up to you and dunk your head in a toilet bowl until you agree to write this post?
Not only was it generally known, McCain himself admitted it in his autobiography.
Brian, given that, after years of mutual antagonism, McCain has been sucking up to the Religious Right since the start of his presidential campaign, and the RR has a strong focus on sexual issues, I think the sex side is as relevant, in a different way, as the FCC interference, etc.
That's why Mitt's mad. And, unlike Huckabee saying "I believe McCain because he's a man of character," Mitt would be doing something with this.
Oh, go look at TPM's screen capture of CNN coverage of McCain's pressure.
Does Cindy McCain have the look of death, daggers in the eyes, choose your metaphor?
Hope you got a king-sized doghouse at home, Schmuck Talk.
And, as for you, Cindy, per your history, live by the male sword, die by the male sword.
Ah yes, lets talk about re-casting stories because, at first TNR was going to be the one to "drop the bombshell" about the affair, but now, the stories all about WHY the NYT didn't "nail it" before printing it.
I guess it was just a bad joke played at the expense of NYT. How dare they say ANYTHING negative about Republicans, those paritsan news people. BUT nothing EVER gets said by a truly partisan rag call the Washington Post. You can trash Dems but not Repugs. People like Kevin make damn sure of that.
Kevin does this over and over and over again.
Fuss up Kevin, you're no Democrat, you're a Republician, posing as a Dem, in order to trash Dems. It's the very same scenario the TNR is doing, the whole reason the dying pub keeps right on publishing it's trash, no money need to be made, it only has one objective, owned by Repugs that went looking for Dems willing to trash Dems. A Karl Rove side-kick gimmick for liberals.
Kevin doesn't know if the journalist at NYT "nail it" or not because Kevin doesn't know what evidence the journalist at NYT have in their possession, but, of course that doesn't stop him from trashing those journalist.
The biggest loser at NYT is Keller, the guy let Judith Miller write stuff she certainly NEVER nail, but Kevin never worried about any of that and defended Miller's need for a sheild law to the present moment. Miller never, ever "nail it" anything and Kevin Drum never spent a monent trashing her for it.
Kevin Drum - you're not a liberal, just a Republican carrying a Dem voting card.
Whatever the original story that Keller rejected is, there is no way that the evidence in it "nailed" the fact of the affair down. It is simply unbelievable that last night's story has less actual evidence of the affair than the first one. One would have to believe Keller objected to the printing of real evidence of the affair rather than the printing of the suspicion of the affair itself. Such a position is laughable on its face.
me-again: "Kevin Drum - you're not a liberal, just a Republican carrying a Dem voting card."
And when they made your type of Democrat, they thankfully broke the cookie-cutter. Just who exactly are you, that you feel so qualified to judge who's a good Democrat and who isn't?
I know Gadfly. There is a reason his speculations seem authentic. He really is a newspaper editor. He has put up a nice post summarizing his thoughts at WTWC.
Wow...more than two hundred comments associated with the two posts today concerning McCain and his lobbyist pal.
Eight on elections in Iraq. Just sayin'.
You are right. In addition there is nothing about Michelle Obama. Cindy McCain seems to be preoccupied by a real news story. The press canceled the scheduled mud wrestling match.
brian, above, is right. There was NOTHING in the Whitewater story, and neither right-wingers nor The Times have ever apologized or even admitted to the vacancy. The Times McCain story is certainly a satin pillow of innuendo wrapped around McCain's casual personal and business methods. Whether McCain and Iseman were having sex is pretty much irrelevant to the picture of a man in love with his story of his own rectitude.
While the NYT seems to have been motivated primarily by the desire to destroy McCain's candidacy after first helping him to drive more conservative candidates from the field, it appears that their hatchet job may in the end benefit McCain more than hurt him. This smear job has done a far better job of uniting conservatives behind McCain than anything he could do or say. And by November, no one will remember that the Times insinuated that he had an affair with a lobbyist.
a far better job of uniting conservatives behind McCain
And you think that's an accident? Welcome to the Hundred Years' War. Great for newspaper sales, eh?
DBL, "smear job"? Nice to see you graduated from crayons to two-finger typing.
After November, he can cut a Viagra commercial with Dole.
I have nothing to add to this discussion, but I did see McCain's press conference where his wife appeared at his side...she's one scary looking woman.
JD - I assume when you say there was "nothing" to the Whitewater story, you mean that there was no compelling evidence that the Clintons knowingly participated in the Whitewater savings-and-loan fraud for which several other people were convicted, rather than just being innocent dupes of the scamsters. That is true. I do wonder, however, what Susan MacDonald would have said had she testified - you recall, I hope, that she adhered to her oath of omerta and went to jail rather than testify.
This smear job has done a far better job of uniting conservatives behind McCain than anything he could do or say. And by November, no one will remember that the Times insinuated that he had an affair with a lobbyist. Posted by: DBL
The story may indeed rally conservatives. But as conservatives (aka wingnuts) make up a very small minority of American voters, it won't help him much. And if the story gets as much traction as I think it will, you'll see the "religious" right even more put off by the likely Rethug nominee.
And BTW who cares whether he's humping the woman or not? What's Senator Saint doing on a private plane with a lobbyist, even if she was a he and looked like Dr. Funkenstein?
You should get out more. Talk to some normal people, who aren't obsessed with politics. All they are getting out of this story is that the Times claims McCain had an affair with a lobbyist, but there's no evidence of that, and they both deny it. By November no one will remember or care.
DBL you are spot on. Obama needed those rightwing swing voters. Now McCain gets ALL the independents and all the conservatives (economic, religious, social and otherwise). I'm guessing Huck is on a plane right now set to endorse McCain. Obama hasn't got a chance. But don't forget, Monica didn't end up hurting Bill Clinton just Al Gore. Look for the blowback in 2012 or 2016.
Thersites: As I previously posted, given McCain's new pandering to the Religious Right, the sex story by itself is relevant.
And, speaking of such... where was Larry Flynt? Or maybe HE has more to spill.
Once again, to use the British English, the people who get their knickers in a knot about sex bring this on themselves.
Sidebar No. 2 -- let's not be so harsh on "me-again." I halfway agree with him myself. I've been pushing Kevin by e-mail for some time to talk about vouchers as part of discussing the shortcoming of both Obama's and Clinton's healthcare plans. So far, not a peep.
I'll just point out that its breaking at just the right time to distract attention from McCain's to-do with the FEC over whether or not he has withdrawn (or can withdraw) from the public financing system. If it turns out that this story doesn't go much of anywhere but stays active just long enough for McCain to secure a favorable resolution from the FEC without any attention to the details, it will have been mighty convenient for him.
Ladies and jellybeans, DBL.
While DBL seems to be motivated primarily by the desire to spew meaningless garbage after first appropriating pathetic talking points from mindless conservative websites, it appears that his on the knees work may in the end benefit everyone except McCain. His smear job does a far better job of illuminating the sad meaninglessness of conservatism and conservatives behind McCain more than anything he could do or say. And by November, no one will remember that DBL's broken winged buzzing took a feckless passing swipe at all things not explainable by third-grade reasoning.
You are so right, by November all the average voter will remember about the story is that McCain had sex with a lobbyist. You got us there.
The story may indeed rally conservatives.
The NY Times story may inspire neo-conservatives to support McCain, but not values conservatives. This story will keep millions of bible belters from the polls, and may even breath new life into Huckabee's campaign. I expected Huckabee to win the Texas primary before this story broke, now I expect Huck to win overwhelmingly.
At the very least, now McCain has to seriously consider Huckabee as a running mate. That is not especially good news.
That is true. I do wonder, however, what Susan MacDonald [sic] would have said had she testified - you recall, I hope, that she adhered to her oath of omerta and went to jail rather than testify.
Oh, if only we had a first-hand account by Susan MacDougal so we could know! Oh, wait, we do:
"The Woman Who Wouldn't Talk: Why I Refused to Testify Against the Clintons & What I Learned in Jail" by Susan McDougal and Pat Harris
And from an interview McDougal gave:
BUZZFLASH: The title of your book is The Woman Who Wouldn't Talk....Why didn't you give Kenneth Starr what he wanted?
SUSAN MCDOUGAL: That is really the entire book. It's one reason I wrote the book is it's so hard to explain in a short, pithy way -- you know, for television newscasts.
I met with the Independent Counsel's office for the first time when I got my first subpoena. And I went with the hope that they would ask me questions, and I would answer them, and I would be able to shed light on what I thought was an honest investigation. Buy when I got to the first meeting, they were not interested in asking me any questions -- they told me that was not what the meeting was about. Even though they had never met me before, they said that they would trade global immunity for a proffer against the target of their investigation, Bill and Hillary Clinton.
I told them then that I didn't know anything that I could give them in a proffer. I didn't say, "Oh, gosh, I would never say anything bad about the Clintons." Or, "I'm the Clintons' friend." Or anything like that. I said, "Look, I don't know anything they've done that's illegal. I can't help you there."
So the pressure escalated, and they started to threaten me and told me that they would prosecute me and they would put me in jail.
....I was not going to give them a lie. So I decided I would go to trial, and I'd be found innocent.
....Well, let me just tell you, I believe to this day that they knew that the charges that they were trying to prove against the Clintons were not true. I think that they knew all along that the story David Hale had told them -- that Clinton had come to him and told him he wanted to borrow $300,000, but he couldn't have his name on the document, so Susan McDougal should come and sign the documents and give him the money -- was not true.....
BUZZFLASH: You described in your book, if I recall, that you were kind of surprised, because you'd been told usually the way they go after "big fish" is to get the little ones to rat on bigger ones. In this case, the big fish, in terms of criminal conduct, was the chief witness for the prosecution or for the Independent Counsel in this case.
MCDOUGAL: There were no big fish to them except Bill Clinton.
BUZZFLASH: And yet in the case they claimed to be pursuing, really David Hale was the big fish. But he ended up being their chief witness.
MCDOUGAL: Yeah, he was. He was the guy. Yeah, he was the biggest criminal of all, and he got less time than anybody. I was starting to really feel like these were a bunch of people who are not caring at all what the truth is. They can see who their witnesses are. So I was getting angrier and angrier. Then they convicted me, and man, I was like there is no way these people believe that I'm guilty. There was no evidence against me at all except the word of David Hale.
Thank god. Now if there was only some way to keep her off the box.
CmDicely: What you're saying is, since the opt-out/opt-in on public financing hinges on a loan technically made to McCain's campaign, this:
John McCain needs to have sex with a campaign staffer of his and then intervene with the FCC on behalf of his campaign.
What a brilliant idea!
Brojo: Good point. As I am in the Bible Belt, and specifically in the now-being-fought primary state of Texas, I am indeed curious what is going to happen to Schmuck Talk's polling here.
As for the local MSM, The Dallas Morning News ran the NYT story straight up, but buried it on A14 without a P1 teaser.
I'll try to remember to watch local network news to see where it plays, or go to a website or two right now.
Was that interview given under oath? Oh, I guess not. In any event, if she asserted her 5th amendment right not to incriminate herself, they could have forced her to testify by offering her immunity. I can't recall but isn't that what they did? Wasn't the reason she was sent to jail because she refused to testify notwithstanding the grant of immunity? What possible reason could she have for not testifying in those circumstances except to protect someone? Even the interview you so helpfully excerpt doesn't explain that.
I did see McCain's press conference where his wife appeared at his side...she's one scary looking woman
St. John should rent a copy of "Basic Instinct" and watch the last scene.
Better check under the bed every night, Johnny Boy.
I think this was a dumb thing for the New York Times to run if they're trying to help ensure that a Democrat gets elected.
John McCain - despite what the national polls say now - is I believe not a strong candidate (even if he might have been in 1992 or 1996 [he may even have run back then were it not for the Keating thing]) and anything that might lead to his stepping aside and the possibility that GOP elites get to hand pick a much stronger nominee is bad if you're a Democrat.
Maybe I should've bought those Giuliani shares after all.
PS If this has legs it's classic sex+ stuff. If Monica had been a lobbyist or working for one of those Asian guys who slept in the Lincoln bedroom it would have been the end of him.
McCain and the FCC
....the McCain campaign has responded at length to the New York Times story, and the statement strives to beat back any impression that McCain had given any undue consideration to clients from Vicki Iseman's firm, Alcalde and Fay -- in this case, Paxson Communications, which was seeking the FCC's approval of a deal. The statement goes out of its way to claim that no one from Alcalde and Fay had ever "personally asked" McCain to send the letter....There are a couple things wrong with that. For one, the lawyer who represented opponents of the deal told The Boston Globe back in 2000 that McCain's letter was " improper, unethical, violated FCC rules barring such contacts on pending FCC matters, and appeared designed to assist a major contributor." ... As for the Paxson letter, McCain's aides confirmed that he had written the missive at the request of Alcalde & Fay, the Washington lobbying firm retained by Paxson....
McCain staff exits â¦McCain fired his campaign manager this morning, prompting his longtime chief strategist to resign. Soon after, McCain's chief of staff of 18 years followed the two out the door. Terry Nelson, an Iowan who had been a top operative in the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign, was forced out, reportedly at the urging of Davis. With Nelson gone, John Weaver, McCain's closest political adviser going back to the 2000 campaign and a sometimes Davis rival, tendered his resignation. Weaver's move then spurred Mark Salter, perhaps the closest personally of any staffer to McCain and the co-author of all his books, to also resign his post as campaign COOâ¦
What part of Susan McDougal wouldn't lie for Ken Starr don't you want to believe. If she had any evidence that they did anything wrong she would have thrown the Clintons over in a heartbeat.
She just refused to commit perjury to advance the crazy Mellon/Starr efforts to get the Clintons. A lot of folks (more than 1/2 of the country it would seem) believed her. Only wingnuts with serious cases of CDS think the way you do. I would suggest you get treatment. I would also suggest that you drop the "ends justifies the means" thinking that is at the bottom of everything neocons seem to be about this last 20 years. It is time that we all became Americans again and real Americans believe in honor before smear.
The untapped source who will bring this story together: Felix Bonehammer. Mark my words.
Don't be a dingbat. Two investigations and a gazillion taxpayer dollars later, the Clintons were cleared of any wrongdoing. Whitewater is over. Let it go.
GOP elites get to hand pick a much stronger nominee
Who? There ain't no stars on the GOP bench. The "great hope" given the lackluster initial field was Fred Thompson, and look how that turned out. McCain might not be a great candidate (though I would dismiss him), but I think he's pretty clearly the best the GOP has available.
"Wasn't the reason she was sent to jail because she refused to testify notwithstanding the grant of immunity?"
No. She was sent to jail because she refused to lie. She told him she had nothing to say; he didn't believe her and he sent her to jail.
Econobuzz: Now if there was only some way to keep [M. Obama] off the box.
Hopefully, by now someone will have explained to her: there are some things you just don't say out loud, even if they're true, if your spouse is running for political office. Even relatively honest politicians have to live by this rule.
"You should get out more."
ROFL... Oh, the irony... Dear heart, you really should practice what you preach. People like McCain *always* deny affairs. Everyone knows this and, mostly, they don't believe the denials.
From my blog, following up on my comment above to CmDicely:
We need John McCain and one campaign staffer (presumably female) ⦠For a special appearance before the Federal Elections Commission.
Sorry, wrong URL in the hyperlink above. Try this;
DBL, seven years of federal investigations and untold millions of taxpayers' dollars only proved that Whitewater was to presidential scandals as Oakland was to Gertrude Stein -- there's no "there" there.
So, please take at face value Lucy's kind and gentle hint, and get a life.
I can't recall but isn't that what they did? Wasn't the reason she was sent to jail because she refused to testify notwithstanding the grant of immunity? What possible reason could she have for not testifying in those circumstances except to protect someone? Even the interview you so helpfully excerpt doesn't explain that.
You must not have read the whole interview, then:
MCDOUGAL: And so, after we were convicted, Jim McDougal decided that he was going to also claim that the David Hale story was true. And he came to me and said, "I'm going to say whatever they want me to say, because I do not want to die in jail." And I said, "I understand. I absolutely understand. Jim, you know that I am not going to do that. I could not live with myself and do that." And he said, "Well, you're an idiot."
So I came to believe over time that they were pressuring Jim to have me also make that deal. But Jim McDougal would come back from meetings with them, after he had decided to cooperate. And he would be kind of laughing and telling me these stories that they were making up to try to convict the President with. And he was kind of saying, "How does this story sound?" And he would give me these detailed stories of what he was going to say that Clinton and he had done.
And I said, "Jim, how are you ever going to go to court with these made-up stories and survive? They're going to kill you." And he looked at me so seriously -- just dead in the eye -- and he said, "The Independent Counsel is giving me the documents to weave these stories around, Susan. And the Clintons don't have them."
And I was like, oh, man, I am such an idiot. I kept thinking there's no way anyone's going to believe these stories. And then Jim's telling me that they've got these documents that they're weaving these lies around to make them look real. And I thought, my God. And at that time I pretty much decided not one step more. They are not going to do this with me. And watching Jim McDougal become this craven sort of lackey for Kenneth Starr made me just sick, because Jim McDougal was the man I had once loved and respected.
To see him turn into this person who could just kind of laughingly tell lies about someone to destroy their life -- and know that he was under terrible pressure to do that -- it made me hate them. And I decided then, watching him, that I would have no part of it. No matter what it cost me.
....Then I went to the grand jury and I told them that I loved this country. I loved the laws of the country --.... But I did not believe that the people who were holding the grand jury -- the Independent Counsel -- were looking for the truth, and that I would not be answering their questions.
If they wanted to give me anyone else -- a U.S. attorney -- any other investigative body, then I might talk. But I did not believe that Kenneth Starr wanted the truth.
Wealthy powerful man Has sex with woman who is not is wife. This is not a story. Ho Hum
Not sure what angle TNR is playing. Surely McCain is most likely to kill hundreds of thousands of Muslims, which is TNR's raison d'être. Why dig up dirt on the guy?
Hillary was their candidate, as she curtsied in all the right directions. Now it looks like Obama, not sure they have a play here. Unless this is timed to help McCain. Seems farfetched, but possible.
uh, luci, you might be interested in the current issue of TNR, featuring Jonathan Chait's "Maverick vs. Iceman: The Cold Calculations of the Straight Talker":
It is a truly impressive skill McCain has--the ability to adopt new beliefs and convince his new allies that his conversion is genuine (or, at least, irreversible) while simultaneously strengthening their belief in the immutability of his principles. I suspect that, in the end, it will come to tears for McCain's new allies--just as it has for most of those, including me, who thought they had a bead on him in the past. But, really, who knows?
Since it's behind a subscription wall, here's more:
McCain did not leave his party, but he came close. The Washington Post (at the time) and The Hill (again last year) reported that, in 2001, McCain met with Democratic leaders to ponder a party switch. McCain and his allies deny these accounts, which are obviously devastating to his current prospects, and reporters almost never mention it in their McCain coverage. They also rarely mention how, in 2004, John Kerry wooed him to join his ticket as vice president. The reported half-dozen conversations the two held on the topic are about a half-dozen more than would have been needed if McCain truly was a dyed-in-the-wool conservative Republican. After the Kerry flirtation ended, McCain obviously decided that his only plausible path to the presidency lay with the Republican Party in 2008. So he set about reingratiating himself with the GOP establishment while maintaining his reputation as an unwavering man of principle.
After the Kerry flirtation ended, McCain obviously decided that his only plausible path to the presidency lay with the Republican Party in 2008. So he set about reingratiating himself with the GOP establishment while maintaining his reputation as an unwavering man of principle.
Why would you assume that the New York Times is trying to help ensure that a Democrat gets elected?
Try Googling "new your times endorses mccain".
Well, that would be interesting, but I think this will work better: "new york times endorses mccain"
Well, that would be interesting, but I think this will work better: "new york times endorses mccain" Posted by: kenga
Meaningless. The Seattle Times, the right leaning of Seattle's two dailies, endorsed McCain for the Rethug nomination one weekend and Obama the next weekend for the the Democratic nomination. It's standard practice.
It seems pretty clear to me that the article the NYT published was the watered-down version Keller wanted. They took out reference to any affair and instead used vague references to "inappropriate" communications.
So we have no idea whether or not the reporters did, indeed, "nail it."
Wealthy powerful man Has sex with woman who is not is wife. This is not a story. Ho Hum -Bakho
I am more concerned about the telcom relationship. Did McCain cheat? Probably. Who cares? The moral majority.
I think this will work better: "new york times endorses mccain" Posted by: kenga
Having no life at all, I tried it both ways. The result was about the same. Them googles is smart.
So we have no idea whether or not the reporters did, indeed, "nail it." Posted by: Asher Miller
Here, let me fix that for you.
So, we have no idea whether he nailed her and whether the reporters nailed that.
You're welcome.
Where was Keller when Judy Miller helped lead us to war?
It's weird reading this blog, mainly because its 'proprietor', a California liberal, is the most moderate and rational contributor to it. In that sense, it's like auditing a day-care class. For those of you here who are still unaware of the fact that this country has elected two Bushes, a Clinton, and a Reagan since 1980 in spite of the little moral majoritan dreamworld most of you seem to inhabit, allow me to point out that to every conservative-to-moderate male voter in this country, this story is win-win for McCain. If it's true it means that he's been shagging not one but two hot younger blonds (thereby negating the age and studliness advantage of Obama); if it's false, it means that the Times has libelled him and that Rush and his army of Dittoheads are now his new best friends--plus his actual dealings with lobbyists are now coated in Teflon. As for the timing of this listless libel--too late to hurt him against Romney, too early to hurt him in November--it's all good. And, as an extra added bonus, it's declared open season for the Cons to retaliate with their 'magic Negro' slanders. As in 'two unnamed sources state that Obama had inappropriate relations with a convicted drug dealer.' Now it's inevitable that you'll see a meme like that on Fox.
So keep on dreaming. It sure beats winning, doesn't it?
In the real world elections are still (just barely) about policies that appeal to centrists like me, Get it? It's not about demonizing--or glorifying--individual candidates, all of whom have feet of clay.
Does anyone have a spare Xanax?
As for the timing of this listless libel--too late to hurt him against Romney, too early to hurt him in November--it's all good. And, as an extra added bonus, it's declared open season for the Cons to retaliate with their 'magic Negro' slanders. As in 'two unnamed sources state that Obama had inappropriate relations with a convicted drug dealer.' Now it's inevitable that you'll see a meme like that on Fox. Posted by: Hope Muntz
Why thank you, spokesperson from the Big Bopper School of There-Is-No-Such-Thing-As-Bad- Publicity.
Next up: Why checking into rehab is wonderful for your acting, music or sport career.
The Hillary/Obama debates in Texas are going to be on at 7pm CST! If you don't have cable, but have satellite or DSL internet you can watch it at CNN.com
Which is why in the real world George W. Bush won the 2004 election by appealing to centrist policies and without demonizing John Kerry....
And, as an extra added bonus, it's declared open season for the Cons to retaliate with their 'magic Negro' slanders. As in 'two unnamed sources state that Obama had inappropriate relations with a convicted drug dealer.' Now it's inevitable that you'll see a meme like that on Fox.
Because they never would have done that otherwise.....
So I guess you weren't around for that whole Clinton-Lewinsky thing, huh?
So I guess you weren't around for that whole Clinton-Lewinsky thing, huh? Posted by: Stefan
Long before the Clinton-Lewinsky thing there was this Clinton-somebody else thing (Jennifer Flowers?). I still remember the nighttime news show interview, with Hillary gazing lovingly at Bill while he said something about denial or forgiveness. They seemed to manage the gaff just fine. I expect McCain will too, if there is any truth to it.
"I expect McCain will too, if there is any truth to it."
It's not the sex, it's the hypocrisy, something that could not be said of Clinton. It's also a matter of their core voters, not to mention McCain's undeserved "straight talk" reputation. If it's true, McCain will have a far more difficult time riding this out than did Clinton.
Note to Obama campaign: Don't forget to appeal to "centrists" who think McCain is studly for "shagging" two blondes 8 years ago.
It's also a matter of their core voters, not to mention McCain's undeserved "straight talk" reputation. If it's true, McCain will have a far more difficult time riding this out than did Clinton. Posted by: PaulB
I bet they rationalize it away, unless they get real smoking gun proof. What they have now is pretty flimsy, embarrassingly so for a major news source. Even with a smoking gun I bet most will choke it down, so to speak. It will be interesting to see.
McCain was known for being a "player" when he was still in the Navy while still married to wife #1. I'm not surprised about the "40 going on 25" comment she made.
I bet they rationalize it away, unless they get real smoking gun proof. What they have now is pretty flimsy, embarrassingly so for a major news source. Posted by: sjrsm
No. What we got was an apparently watered down story considered too inflammatory for the unwashed masses, the Rethug faithful and the ever more conservative NYT.
The point Josh Marshall is hammering away at, and something that makes the eyes of most Americans glaze over, is that McCain's ethics vis-a-vis lobbiest and corporate special interest is challenged beyond recovery. But how can that possibly compete with the sex angle?
McCain's ethics vis-a-vis lobbiest and corporate special interest is challenged beyond recovery. But how can that possibly compete with the sex angle?
It can't. Which is why it's marginally convenient that instead of just happily accepting favors and cash from all those other lobbyists while rigorously pretending that he's anti-lobbyist, McCain apparently acted on the dumber-than-rocks urge to bop one of them, thereby ensuring that a few people might pay attention.
Today's WaPo story on McCain's lobbyist-packed campaign team is pretty devastating.
Boy, check this delicious piece ttp://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/02/22/bill-kellers-glass-house-adultery
Bill Keller has his own baggage to reckon with...Is he mad?
The NYT editor, Keller, had a wife AND pregnant mistress? who would have thought?


text:
Today is the word of technology. People rely mostly on the way that do the work fast. download rpp-kkpi-smk book free pdf rpp-kkpi-smk ready for download hotfile.com rpp-kkpi-smk fileserve.com rpp-kkpi-smk torrent rpp-kkpi-smk |
Here you can find free Ebooks about Rpp Kkpi Smk, You can download PDF files about Rpp Kkpi Smk for free, but please respect copyrighted ebooks.
PDF Search Engine do not host any PDF file, Your can download a tons of PDF files for Free


text:
Mary L. G. Theroux on the Epic Life of Willard Garvey Recorded: Sunday, November 17, 2013
Mary Theroux, Senior Vice President at the Independent Institute, is interviewed by Bob Weeks of WichitaLiberty TV. Mary reflects on the accomplishments of her father's life as told in the book Willard Garvey: An Epic Life authored by Maura McEnaney.
Experts: Mary L. G. TherouxType: TelevisionIssues: Business, Culture/ Society, Free Market Economics, Housing
Flunking Professor Bernanke Recorded: Thursday, April 12, 2012
Vern McKinley, Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, speaks with James Freeman, WSJ Assistant Editorial Page Editor on Fed Chairman Bernanke's views regarding the financial bailout interventions.
Experts: Vern P. McKinleyType: TelevisionIssues: Banking and Finance, Business, Economic Policy
Vern McKinley on the Dysfunctional Banking System Recorded: Monday, February 6, 2012
Research Fellow Vern McKinley interviewed on MSNBCs The Dylan Ratigan Show on the failure of Federal Regulators and the dysfunctional Mortgage/Banking system from the perspective of his new book, Financing Failure: A Century of Bailouts.
Experts: Vern P. McKinleyType: TelevisionIssues: Banking and Finance, Economic History and Development (U.S.), Economic Policy, Fiscal Policy/Debt, Political Ideology and Philosophy
Vern McKinley: Why Not to Bail Out the Banks Recorded: Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Research Fellow Vern McKinley discusses bank bailouts and his new book Financing Failure with the Wall Street Journal.
Experts: Vern P. McKinleyType: TelevisionIssues: Banking and Finance, Business, Economic History and Development (U.S.), Government Waste/Pork, Housing
Mary Theroux on BART Cell Phone Shutdown Recorded: Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Mary Theroux, Senior Vice President at the Independent Institute, engages with Judge Napolitano on Fox Business Network's Freedom Watch about BART's cell phone shutdown in San Francisco.
Experts: Mary L. G. TherouxType: TelevisionIssues: Civil Liberties/ Human Rights, Technology, Transportation
Mary Theroux on the Independent Scholarship Fund Recorded: Friday, April 10, 2009
Mary Theroux, Independent Institute Senior Vice President, appears on Comcast Newsmakers to discuss the Independent Scholarship Fund, a privately funded organization offering K-12 private and parochial school tuition assistance to San Francisco East Bay students.
Experts: Mary L. G. TherouxType: TelevisionIssues: Education


text:
It is possible to have ultherapy after fillers are given but it is also likely that you will lose some volume of the filler if you do the Ultherapy within several weeks of the fillers.
However, it is possible to see the fillers during the Ultherapy and it can be avoided as much as possible. In the worst case, the filler would be diminished and it can be touched up at some point after the Ultherapy.


text:
The South and West Devon Personalised Learning Service (SWDPLS) is a local authority pupil referral unit. We are part of a county-wide education provision – Devon Personalised Learning Service -that works with young people who have been excluded from school or who have additional needs that are preventing regular attendance at school. We work in partnership with other organisations to make sure that young people have their needs identified and met by those schools, services and communities that are in place to support their growth and development.
With young people we create personalised learning plans that ensure their education is right for them and will inspire them to achieve the best they can. Our aim is to secure high quality outcomes for young people through best practice in teaching and learning and effective leadership and management.
It is anticipated that we will convert to Sponsored Academy status on 1st March 2015.


text:
quote:Define "real deal" because they're not beating Bama, A&M, and LSU. So that's 3 losses automatically and no better than 4th in the West.
quote:He also points to Ole Miss and says, "Real deal this year."
quote:Ole Miss will win the games they should but paired up against the big boys in SEC will lose. I don't see the powerhouses overlooking Ole Miss this year.
quote:As real of a deal as last time?
quote:it never ceases to amaze me how LSU fans, year after year, discount ole miss
quote:People that are saying 9-3 will be mad if we go 10-2 or 11-1. I just dont see 3 regular season losses. Lsu hasnt done that since 09. That was the worst offense in the miles era. Just nit gonna happen.
quote:Not sure why everyone assumes Ole Miss and LSU cant beat A&M... I doubt they will have as much success this year as they did last
quote:9-3 would be a good year with the schedule LSU has.
quote:who looks ahead to this coming season and projects LSU as going 9-3. He also points to Ole Miss and says, "Real deal this year." What does the Rant say to all that?
quote:W W W W W W W W W W W
quote:[I think that sums it up.]
quote:Miles will never run the table....


text: In view of the massive amount of hot air billowing forth from the Republican Party, I am revisiting an oldie but goodie that I recorded a couple of years ago. I think that you'll find that it's still highly relevant today. The Republicans have "borrowed" patriotism for years. They use it as a smokescreen to distract working people from the issues that affect them and their families. The Republicans give patriotism a bad name. I think that they have defaulted on our involuntary loan of patriotism to them. You can call in that loan by visiting my Listen Here! page.


text:
Millwall striker Jermaine Easter has had his contract cancelled by mutual consent.
Millwall will sign striker Jermaine Easter on a one-year contract after a successful loan spell at the club last term.
Millwall have lined up a loan move for Crystal Palace striker Jermaine Easter.
Jermaine Easter admits he is relishing the opportunity at Crystal Palace as he bids to keep them in the league.
Championship side Crystal Palace have signed striker Jermaine Easter from MK Dons for an undisclosed fee.
Skysports.com understands Crystal Palace are poised to sign Jermaine Easter from MK Dons.
Jermaine Easter's loan spell at Swansea City has been cut short after the striker was recalled by parent club MK Dons.
Jermaine Easter remains hopeful of securing a permanent move to Swansea after scoring his first goal.
Swansea loan striker Jermaine Easter is hoping to return to action this weekend in order to help boost his chances of landing a permanent deal.
Jermaine Easter is determined to secure a permanent deal at Swansea after his loan move from MK Dons.
Swansea have confirmed Jermaine Easter has joined the club on loan from MK Dons until the end of January.
Swansea have signed Jermaine Easter on loan from MK Dons until the end of January, with the striker saying it's a 'perfect opportunity'.
Skysports.com understands Swansea City are set to pounce for MK Dons striker Jermaine Easter on loan.
MK Dons manager Karl Robinson has backed under-fire striker Jermaine Easter despite his lack of goals this season.
MK Dons manager Karl Robinson says the club rejected a bid for striker Jermaine Easter on transfer deadline day.
Skysports.com understands MK Dons rejected a deadline day offer from a Championship club for Jermaine Easter.
MK Dons striker Jermaine Easter has warned his side's League One rivals that Karl Robinson's men are yet to hit top form.
John Toshack will not step down as Wales boss despite admitting his side have not progressed.
Antony Kay headed home the winner in a five-goal thriller as Huddersfield Town came from behind to beat MK Dons 3-2.
Mark Carrington's ice-cool finish earned MK Dons their second successive win to end Colchester's undefeated start.
Watch every goal from every game in the Football League on your computer, mobile or tablet...


text:
Event Name
- OR - Select an option belowLocated on the A.Hugh Adams central campus of the Broward College offers a broad spectrum of planetarium events. Its erection was made possible thanks to a generous donation from the Emil Buehler Trust. With its Zeiss M 1015 projector and its modern digital audiovisual equipment, this is one of the most advanced planetariums in South Florida. Astronomy lovers are offered sky presentations and telescope observing at the Observatory.