text:
The Chief Justice's 2012 Year-End Report
The Chief's year end message about the state of the judiciary is here. His prose is amazing! If this Supreme Court thing doesn't work out, the Chief should turn to writing fiction (no, his NFIB saving construction doesn't count!).
Make sure to tip your waitresses. I digress.
The report enters the fray of politics, albeit slightly.
Two hundred years after the War of 1812, our country faces new challenges, including the much publicized "fiscal cliff" and the longer term problem of a truly extravagant and burgeoning national debt. No one seriously doubts that the country's fiscal ledger has gone awry. The public properly looks to its elected officials to craft a solution. We in the Judiciary stand outside the political arena, but we can continue to do our part to address the financial challenges within our sphere.
Roberts also talks about how little money the courts receive–but doesn't mention the bounty that is PACER.
Yes, for each citizen's tax dollar, only two-tenths of one penny go toward funding the entire third branch of government! Those fractions of a penny are what the courts need to keep court facilities open, pay judges and staff, manage the criminal justice system (including pre-trial, defender, and probation services), process civil disputes ranging from complex patent cases to individual discrimination suits, and maintain a national bankruptcy court system. Those fractions of a penny are what Americans pay for a Judiciary that is second to none.
But there is a huge constraint on cutting the budgets of the courts–The Constitution!
Virtually all of the Judiciary's core functions are constitutionally and statutorily required. Unlike executive branch agencies, the courts do not have discretionary programs they can eliminate or projects they can postpone. The courts must resolve all criminal and civil cases that fall within their jurisdiction, often under tight time constraints. A significant and prolonged shortfall in judicial funding would inevitably result in the delay or denial of justice for the people the courts serve.
The President and Congress totally owe the Chief a solid. After all, this Umpire called the ACA safe at the plate. They should help out here.
I therefore encourage the President and Congress to be especially attentive to the needs of the Judicial Branch and provide the resources necessary for its operations. Those vital resource needs include the appointment of an adequate number of judges to keep current on pending cases. At the close of 2012, twenty-seven of the existing judicial vacancies are designated as presenting judicial emergencies. I urge the Executive and Legislative Branches to act diligently in nominating and confirming highly qualified candidates to fill those vacancies.
And, in conclusion, Constitution.
I am privileged and honored to be in a position to thank all of the judges and court staff throughout the land for their continued hard work and dedication. In a certain sense they share the heritage of those sailors who stood on the decks of Old Ironsides. But they also share a vantage that was not yet within the sailors' sight. Throughout its history, our Nation has withstood daunting tests and always emerged strong, secure, and optimistic. We can all look forward with confidence, beyond the pitch of dark waters, to more promising horizons. We know from experience that our durable Constitution provides the framework needed for able hands to overcome any obstacle, consistent with the rule of law.
H/T Derek Muller
"Maximize Outputs" and "Minimize Costs" of the Fourth Amendment
Ric Simmons has an interesting piece forthcoming in the Harvard JLPP that considers the costs of the Fourth Amendment, titled Ending the Zero-Sum Game: How to Increase the Productivity of the Fourth Amendment.
Here is the abstract:
Every criminal procedure student learns on the first day of class that Fourth Amendment policy represents a zero-sum game: a constant struggle between the individual privacy of citizens and the needs of law enforcement. In reality, however, the "competition" between law enforcement and criminals does not have to be zero-sum. In order to see why, we need to see the criminal justice system not as a competition, but instead as an industry. This article applies economic principles to try to find ways to increase the efficiency of the criminal justice system — that is, to maximize output while minimizing costs. The costs to the system are both the intangible loss of privacy that is associated with surveillance, as well as the tangible, actual monetary cost incurred by law enforcement organizations to undertake the surveillance. The output that we are seeking is crime control, or more specifically in the Fourth Amendment context, the identification of those who are guilty of a crime and collection of evidence which can be used to demonstrate their guilt. Roughly speaking, the more money we spend, and/or the more willing we are to infringe on our own freedoms, the more output we receive in terms of identifying the guilty and recovering incriminating evidence.
However, there are two ways that this industry could in fact be a positive-sum game. First, advances in technologies can increase the effectiveness of surveillance in catching criminals without reducing the privacy rights of ordinary citizens — that is, it is possible to increase the output without increasing the cost. And second, changing norms and attitudes may decrease the value of certain kinds of privacy to individuals, causing the cost of certain types of surveillance to decrease. This can work in the other direction as well: when criminals, rather than police, take advantage of technological advances, the output of the system will decrease even if costs are held constant. Likewise, societal norms could change to make certain types of privacy more valuable, thus increasing the cost to the system. In these situations, the criminal justice system becomes a negative sum game. Once we have identified the productivity of different forms of surveillance, we can take steps to encourage more productive types of surveillance and discourage the less productive ones.
The Article first sketches out a basic formula for analyzing the productivity of different surveillance methods by measuring the cost of the inputs and the benefits of the outputs. It then applies this formula to different methods of surveillance to see how certain methods of surveillance are more productive than others, searches for ways to increase the productivity of surveillance generally. Finally, the Article offers some suggestions for changing the way we regulate surveillance techniques in order to maximize the efficiency of the process.
In The Constitutionality of Social Cost, also published the Harvard JLPP, I consider the social costs of many of our constitutional rights, including the Fourth Amendment. From the abstract:
Although the Second Amendment has been singled out from its brethren in the Bill of Rights as the most dangerous right, it is not the only dangerous right. The Supreme Court has developed over a century of jurisprudence to deal with forms of liberty that yield negative externalities. The right to speak freely is balanced with the possible harm that can result from people preaching hate, violence, intolerance, and even fomenting revolution. The freedom of the press permits the media to report on matters that may harm national security. The freedom of association allows people to congregate to advocate for certain types of violence . The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures enables the possession of the fruits and instrumentalities of crime with impunity. Inculpatory evidence seized in violation of this right is generally inadmissible during trial, permitting crimes to go unpunished. Likewise, a violation of a person's Miranda rights renders certain confessions — even an uncoerced inculpatory confession — inadmissible.
Procedural rights during the criminal trial — including the right to grand jury indictment, the right against self-incrimination, the right against double jeopardy, the right of compulsory process, the right of confrontation, the right of a speedy and public trial, and the right of trial by jury — all make the prosecution of culpable defendants significantly harder. The Due Process Clause, which imposes limitations on all government actions, places the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt on the prosecution. The right to non-excessive bail and reasonable fines make it easier for suspects to avoid prison during prosecutions and may allow them to abscond before trial. The right against cruel and unusual punishments removes certain forms of retribution from the quiver of the state, thereby limiting the range of punishments for those found guilty of a crime. The right of habeas corpus ensures that a person — however dangerous — cannot be indefinitely without proper procedures. Liberty's harm to society takes many forms — not just from the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms.
These precedents show how the Court balances freedom and the harm that may result from its exercise. Although a "primary concern of every government [is] a concern for the safety and indeed the lives of its citizens," this concern is not constitutionally sacrosanct.
That Dream Where You Are Unprepared On The First Day of School–But In Reverse
Last night I had that dream where I was unprepared for the first day of class, but as the professor, no the student.
It was the first day of the semester and I show up to my Property I class, though we were't in the law school, we were in my HS Government classroom. I was the teacher. We were supposed to learn Pierson v. Post.
I realized when I walked in that I hadn't prepared for class. So I start frantically trying to remember the case. I had written an article on it and read it so many times, but was drawing a blank. So I decide the wing it.
I panicked, and started asking some questions about the case but didn't really know where I was going.
I don't remember the remainder of the dream.
Obamacare Protects the Second Amendment!?
Apparently the NRA pushed to have a provision inserted into the Affordable Care Act that restricts "the ability of doctors to gather data about their patients' gun use — a largely overlooked but significant challenge to a movement in American medicine to treat firearms as a matter of public health."
The provision says that "wellness and prevention" portions of the health-care law "may not require the disclosure or collection of any information" relating to the "presence or storage of a lawfully-possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property." Further, the measure says the law cannot be used to "maintain records of individual ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition." It adds that the price of health coverage may not be affected by the ownership, possession or use of guns.
And it was added "quietly"
The deal to add gun language to the health-care bill was struck so quietly that several top officials in the Obama administration and in Congress had no idea the passages had been added until approached by The Washington Post last week.
A White House official, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, said the provision was "added into the health-care bill on the Senate floor." For explanation on what happened, the official added, "I'd send you to the Hill."
It's like making sausage. But it's good enough, it's smart enough, and dog-gone-it, people like it!
Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), who sits on the Senate health committee, said he was aware of the late addition and found it "objectionable." But, he said, "it's helpful to remember that we were in the position of having to get 60 votes from 60 senators. And as a result, some things ended up in the bill for reasons I was not privy to and were certainly not to my liking."
This provision was "discovered only in recent days." Discovered? After three years of litigation, nothing about this came up?
On the provision added to the Obama health-care overhaul, Arulanandam said the group requested the language in response to concerns that insurance carriers might use data collected as part of the law to "discriminate" against gun owners. The NRA "worked with people on the Hill and members of Congress" to ensure the provision was included in the final legislation, he said.
This provision hits the George Mason Trifecta. Public choice theory (1), being use to advance the Second Amendment (2), while limiting government's ability to inquire into personal issues (3).
I guess Speaker Pelosi was right. We needed to pass the law to find out what was in it!
"The Real Hazards of E-Devices on Planes"
Nick Bilton refutes every conceivable reason why electronic devices should be banned during takeoff and landing. FAA, please change this asinine rule.
The Table of Contents of "Unprecedented"
Here is how the TOC of my in-progress book stands now, but it is likely subject to change.
Author's Note
Part I. The Once and Future Mandate (1989 – January 20, 2009)
- The Individual Mandate's Heritage
- Hillarycare 1.0
- Hillarycare 2.0 v. Obamacare 1.0
- Obamacare 2.0 v. McCainCare
- Health and Change
Part II. Unprecedented (January 21 2009 – March 23, 2010)
- Obamacare 3.0
- The Constitutional Debate Begins
- The Tea Party
- The Mayflower Compact
- "It's Unprecedented"
- The Senate
- The 40th Vote
- "Not True"
- The House
- The President
Part III. Regulating Inactivity (March 23, 2010 – January 31, 2011)
- Of Wheat and Weed
- Lawsuits Filed Before The Ink Dried
- Broccoli & Limiting Principles
- "Not a tax increase."
- Virginia and Florida
Part IV. Coercing the States (February 1, 2011-November 13, 2011)
- Strings Attached
- New Faces
- Healthcare Is Unique
- Challenges Dismissed
- No Limiting Principle
- Judicial Restraint
Part V. "Secure the blessings of Liberty" (November 14, 2011 – March 28, 2012)
- Baking Freedom
- Changing of the Generals
- Certiorari is Granted
- The Nine
- The Stage Is Set
- Day One: Tomorrow it's a tax, but today it's not
- Day Two: He Choked
- Day Three, The Morning: A Hollow Shell
- Day Three, The Afternoon: Gun To The Head
- The Eagle Has Landed
Part VI. Outside The Supreme Court (March 29, 2012 – June 27, 2012)
- Thursday Morning Quarterbacks
- The Court's Legitimacy
- "False Equivalency"
- "Wobbly"
- The end of the term.
Part VII. The Power to Tax – June 28, 2012
- The Anticipation
- The Handdown
- "The Saving Construction"
- "Invalid In Its Entirety"
- "Survives Relatively Unscathed"
- The Court is in recess
Part VIII. The Switch In Time That Saved Nine (June 29, 2012 – November 6, 2012)
- Immediate Reactions
- The Leak
- The Court's Legitimacy
- Repeal Obamacare
- Romneycare v. Obamacare
- The Election
- Obamacare is here to stay
- Limits on Medicaid
- Other challenges
DOJ Opposes Senators McCain, Graham, and Ayotte From Taking Their Argument
I previously blogged about the notion of Senators defending their own laws in court, focusing on the current efforts by Senators McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte to intervene as amici in Hedges v. Obama. Now the DOJ has opposed that motion, arguing that the Senators should not take away their time.
First, DOJ contends that they opposed Amici's request:
Amici's motion states that "Appellants take no position on the relief sought in this Motion." Counsel for the government, however, communicated to counsel for the amici that the government would oppose their motion to participate in oral argument unless they made clear in their motion that they were seeking additional time, and not seeking to share the oral argument time to be allotted to defendants-appellants. We further informed counsel that to the extent that they were expressly only seeking additional time, the government would then "take no position" on whether this Court should grant the motion.
It's not clear from the Senators' brief that they wanted divided time. Though, I gather DOJ so construed it because the motion did not request additional time. See the conclusion:
For the foregoing reasons, the Senate Amici respectfully request that the Court grant leave for their participation in oral argument and allot them 10 minutes of oral argument time.
In other words, grant them 10 minutes from existing oral argument time, which would, by necessity, come from DOJ's allotment. I'm not sure what the regular practice is here.
Second, DOJ argues that it is "highly unusual" and "unwarranted" to grant such a request:
Thus, to the extent that the motion of the three amici is seeking to share the time to be allotted to appellants, the government opposes the motion. With respect, it would be highly unusual, and we believe unwarranted in a case such as this, to take argument time from the parties who are subject to a district court's injunctive order to allow individual members of one component of the legislative branch to provide their views of the meaning and purpose of a federal statute that — as amici themselves agree (Amici Br. 14-20) — expressly states that it did not change existing law. As to whether the Court should expand the oral argument time allotted to grant amici an additional 10 minutes of time, appellants take no position on the motion.
For reasons I've stated in prior posts–even assuming that the Senators have fantastic arguments–I think it is unorthodox to treat them as anything more than run-of-the-mill Amici.
7th Circuit Implies That Corporations Have Rights Under RFRA In Light of Citizens United
In the past, I have queried whether corporations have First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion.
Tyndale, a D.D.C. contraception mandate opinion addressed, but did not decide this issue.
This Court, like others before it, declines to address the unresolved question of whether for-profit corporations can exercise religion within the meaning of the RFRA and the Free Exercise Clause. See, e.g., First Nat'l Bank v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 777-78 n.14 (1978) (recognizing that corporations have First Amendment speech rights, but declining to "address the abstract question whether corporations have the full measure of rights that individuals enjoy under the First Amendment"); Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky, 586 F.3d 1109, 1119 (9th Cir. 2009) ("We decline to decide whether a for-profit corporation can assert its own rights under the Free Exercise Clause . . ."); Church of Scientology of Cal. v. Cazares, 638 F.2d 1272, 1280 n.7 (5th Cir. 1981) (same).
Now the 7th Circuit has implied that corporations do not lack protection under RFRA. Judges Sykes and Flaum barred the enforcement of the contraceptive mandate against a company operated by Catholic owners. In deciding this case, the court refuted the government's claim that rights under RFRA do not apply to a corporation with a citation to Citizens United. Here is the key passage:
In response, the government's primary argument is that because K & L Contractors is a secular, for‐profit enterprise, no rights under RFRA are implicated at all. This ignores that Cyril and Jane Korte are also plaintiffs. Together they own nearly 88% of K & L Contractors. It is a family‐run business, and they manage the company in accordance with their religious beliefs. This includes the health plan that the company sponsors and funds for the benefit of its nonunion workforce. That the Kortes operate their business in the corporate form is not dispositive of their claim. See generally Citizens United v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 130 S. Ct. 876 (2010). The contraception mandate applies to K & L Contractors as an employer of more than 50 employees, and the Kortes would have to violate their religious beliefs to operate their company in compliance with it.
Though this passage only applies to rights under RFRA, following Citizens United, I don't think any thing precludes entities under a corporate form from claiming free exercise rights. Another front for corporate personhood.
Judge Rovner disagrees in dissent, though does not outright reject the proposition that corporations can receive protections under RFRA:
Although the Kortes contend that complying with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's insurance mandate violates their religious liberties, they are removed by multiple steps from the contraceptive services to which they object. First, it is the corporation rather than the Kortes individually which will pay for the insurance coverage. The corporate form may not be dispositive of the claims raised in this litigation, but neither is it meaningless: it does separate the Kortes, in some real measure, from the actions of their company.
At Volokh, Jon Adler writes: " I agree with the Seventh Circuit that the use of the corporate form is not dispositive, but I would place more weight on the nature of the "corporation" involved."
A related question. The 10th Circuit denied an injunction in the Hobby Lobby case. The 7th Circuit granted the injunction. Does that mean that Hobby Lobby employees in Illinois Indiana, and Wisconsin are exempt from the mandate, and that Hobby Lobby employees in the 10th Circuit states are not exempt? Or is it based on the principle place of business (Oklahoma in the case of Hobby Lobby)? How does this work?
Update: Lyle Denniston weighs in here:
Moreover, it sounds somewhat strange for a commercial entity that is considered to have an artificial legal personality, like a corporation, to "exercise" religion.
But to the family-run corporations that have sued to challenge the new contraceptives mandate, that is not strange at all. In fact, Cyril and Jane Korte in their lawsuit explicitly claimed that their construction company has its own right to exercise religion, and as its principal owners, they have insisted that they run its operations every day to reflect their personal religious convictions. The company's business is, to them, another form of putting their Roman Catholic faith into daily practice.
The federal government challenged those claims in the Kortes' lawsuit, noting that the family business was organized as a profit-making, secular business that makes no mention of a religious purpose in its incorporation papers, and that it sells no religious products or services. "The government is aware of no case in which a for-profit, secular employer with K&L's characteristics prevailed" on a religious freedom claim, it said in a court document in the case.
The key dispute in this context thus appears to turn on whether the faith preferences of the owners of a profit-making corporation can be transferred to the business entity so that it is not an independent entity but rather, for constitutional purposes, an alter ego. The Kortes argue that, since the couple owns 88 percent of the construction company, they do treat it as an alter ego to express their faith. And it appears that, at least for the time being, that claim has prevailed in the courts in their case.
Also, Lyle offers this quote from Justice Sotomayor's opinion as Circuit Justice in the Hobby Lobby case.
"This Court has not previously addressed [religious freedom] or free exercise claims brought by closely held for-profit corporations and their controlling shareholders alleging that the mandatory provision of certain employee benefits substantially burdens their exercise of religion."
The D.C. Circuit Charges $2.90 Per Page For a Transcript of Oral Argument!?
This is ridiculous.
Current pricing and completion
schedules are:
$2.90 per page – 10 business days
$3.05 per page – 7 business days
$4.55 per page – 2 business days
By order of the Court, copies of oral argument tapes may only be purchased once a case has been completely closed. All appeals, remands, or other additional proceedings must be concluded before the oral argument tape can be reproduced.
The transcript for an hour proceeding is easily 100 pages. $300 pages for a transcript of a court proceeding. Unbelievable.
And it costs $30 for a copy of the audio recording.
Any person interested in purchasing a recording of an oral argument may do so by requesting it inwriting from the Court address on the previous page. Please provide the name of the case, the case number and the date of argument. Once a request for an oral argument recording is received, the Court will determine whether or not the case has been completely closed. If the case has been completely closed, the Court will contact the requestor for payment. The current price for one copy of an oral argument recording is $30 and payment must be made by check or money order only. Please do not send cash. The request for the oral argument recording will be processed as soon as payment is received. The requestor should also indicate a delivery preference. The oral argument tape will either be mailed with first class postage or the tape may be picked up from the Clerk's Office. If the case has not been completely closed, the requestor will be so notified.
All this to hear Judge Kavanaugh ask about the Anti-Injunction Act. Harumph.
Update: A generous person, who shall remain unnamed, has sent me a copy of this transcript. You can download it here.
The Social Cost of the Second Amendment
No, this is not some theoretical piece I've put together, but an actual article in the JOurnal of Public Economics, titled "The Social Cost of Gun Ownership."
Here is the abstract:
This paper provides new estimates of the effect of household gun prevalence on homicide rates, and infers the marginal external cost of handgun ownership. The estimates utilize a superior proxy for gun prevalence, the percentage of suicides committed with a gun, which we validate. Using county- and state-level panels for 20 years, we estimate the elasticity of homicide with respect to gun prevalence as between +0.1 and + 0.3. All of the effect of gun prevalence is on gun homicide rates. Under certain reasonable assumptions, the average annual marginal social cost of household gun ownership is in the range $100 to $1800.
And from the intro:
Widespread gun ownership in a community could provide a general deterrent to criminal predation, lowering the risk to owners and non-owners alike. But widespread gun ownership could also lead to increased risks of various sorts, including the possibility that guns will be misused by the owners or transferred to dangerous people through theft or unregulated sale. Whether the social costs of gun ownership are positive or negative is arguably the most fundamental question for the regulation of firearms in the United States.
Notably, the paper makes no effort to define "social cost."
In Judging the Constitutionality of Social Cost, I venture to give meaning to social cost–a term something that courts routinely toss around without ever bothering to define.
The Supreme Court has recognized two types of social cost, that I have labeled liberty costs and safety costs. First, liberty costs, refer to the risk of negative externalities to society as a whole that can result from individuals exercising liberty. Second, safety costs, refer to the risk of negative externalities to individual liberty that can result from the state providing for collective safety.
This article only considers the liberty costs (how owning a gun can harm others), but fails to consider the safety costs (how the government restricting access to gun can harm individual liberty). Both of these costs are very important.
H/T Tyler Cowen via @JustinWolfers
"Most Americans will be left behind, because smart machines will end up devaluing the contribution of workers, including highly skilled workers whose skills suddenly become redundant."
Paul Krugman opines on the fiscal cliff, and why machines may replace humans.
If you follow these things, you know that the field of artificial intelligence has for decades been a frustrating underachiever, as it proved incredibly hard for computers to do things every human being finds easy, like understanding ordinary speech or recognizing different objects in a picture. Lately, however, the barriers seem to have fallen — not because we've learned to replicate human understanding, but because computers can now yield seemingly intelligent results by searching for patterns in huge databases.
True, speech recognition is still imperfect; according to the software, one irate caller informed me that I was "fall issue yet." But it's vastly better than it was just a few years ago, and has already become a seriously useful tool. Object recognition is a bit further behind: it's still a source of excitement that a computer network fed images from YouTube spontaneously learned to identify cats. But it's not a large step from there to a host of economically important applications.
So machines may soon be ready to perform many tasks that currently require large amounts of human labor. This will mean rapid productivity growth and, therefore, high overall economic growth.
But — and this is the crucial question — who will benefit from that growth? Unfortunately, it's all too easy to make the case that most Americans will be left behind, because smart machines will end up devaluing the contribution of workers, including highly skilled workers whose skills suddenly become redundant. The point is that there's good reason to believe that the conventional wisdom embodied in long-run budget projections — projections that shape almost every aspect of current policy discussion — is all wrong.
What, then, are the implications of this alternative vision for policy? Well, I'll have to address that topic in a future column.
In the past, Krugman has written about the danger of outsourcing legal jobs. I, for one, am not worried about our new robotic overlords.
My New Workspace: 7 Screens
Because 6 was not enough. Thanks to the HIS Multi-View II DVI to USB adapter, I was able to add another monitor, on top of the three monitors allowed by the Matrox TripleHead ToGo.
In case you are wondering, each screen has a dedicated function. My MacBook Pro screen is always trained on my gmail. The screen furthest to the left holds my Tweetdeck and Instant Messaging. The next screen to the right holds whatever document, or documents I am reading. The main screen in the middle contains whatever I am typing. The screen furthest to the right contains my Google Reader. My old Macbook Pro is used for ancillary stuff or testing things, and sometimes I will play a video or something on my Nexus 7 Tablet.
The idea is that I can quickly glance at any screen, and know exactly what I'll find, without having to switch windows. Everything is alway open.
This is the virtual equivalent of laying out a lot of books on a big table, and being able to see many thing at once–just much more efficient. (In the proces of writing my single book, I have not used a single actual book, nor have I put a pen to a single piece of paper).
Here is my old workspace.
Green Bag Teaser: A Justice Breyer Bobblehead On The Way?
The Green Bag Bobbleheads are moving from my alma matter of George Mason University School of Law to Washington, D.C. Here is the official notice:
Bobblehead forum conveniens: On January 2, 2013, our bobbleheadquarters will move downtown, to the Washington, DC office of O'Melveny & Myers LLP. The firm has generously offered the bobbleheads a home base close to the Court where their role models work. We hope our many friends who work in or visit DC will appreciate the chance to stop by such a convenient address when they have a certificate to exchange for a bobblehead. All the terms of bobblehead certificates remain in force except: (1) the number to call for an appointment to exchange a certificate for a bobblehead has been changed to (202) 383-5300, and (2) the address to which you should go at the appointed time has been changed to O'Melveny & Myers LLP, 1625 Eye Street NW, Washington, DC. Here is our interpretation (directed by Cattleya Concepcion) of the move, featuring Joshua Cumby performing Dukas's L'apprenti sorcier, and, of course, the bobbleheads.
To commemorate this move, the posted this enchanting video, titled "Bobbleheads and the Right to Travel: Applying Saenz v. Roe to Ceramics" (see Justice Thomas's dissenting opinion for one of the first writings to take the Privileges or Immunities Clause seriously).
But at the end of the video, during the credits, there is this gem.
Several justices are thanked: Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer. One of these is not like the other?
Justice Breyer is the only Justice on the list not to have a bobblehead. But, he is due for a bobblehead.
The Green Bag has taken a somewhat unorthodox approach to Bobblehead releases, but the most recent additions have been Ginsburg, Thomas, and Souter. Chronologically, Breyer is due.
So, look out for the SGB bobblehead. What will he have? A copy of the House Reports (he loves legislative history)!
See, this is why you never leave a movie early.
Also, do watch Justice Ginsburg's bobblehead opera.
The Positively Wrong Second Amendment on WhiteHouse.gov
Here is how the White House describes the Amendments in the Bill of Rights. Which one of these is not like the other:
The First Amendment provides that Congress make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting its free exercise. It protects freedom of speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms. The Third Amendment prohibits the government from quartering troops in private homes, a major grievance during the American Revolution. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure. The government may not conduct any searches without a warrant, and such warrants must be issued by a judge and based on probable cause. The Fifth Amendment provides that citizens not be subject to criminal prosecution and punishment without due process. Citizens may not be tried on the same set of facts twice, and are protected from self-incrimination (the right to remain silent). The amendment also establishes the power of eminent domain, ensuring that private property is not seized for public use without just compensation. The Sixth Amendment assures the right to a speedy trial by a jury of one's peers, to be informed of the crimes with which they are charged, and to confront the witnesses brought by the government. The amendment also provides the accused the right to compel testimony from witnesses, and to legal representation. The Seventh Amendment provides that civil cases also be tried by jury. The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishments. The Ninth Amendment states that the list of rights enumerated in the Constitution is not exhaustive, and that the people retain all rights not enumerated. The Tenth Amendment assigns all powers not delegated to the United States, or prohibited to the states, to either the states or to the people.
The Second Amendment most certainly does not "give citizens the right to bear arms." There is no conferral of rights. Such a description is positively wrong in the descriptive, and normative sense.
Rather, as its text says (and yes, I'll quote both the prefatory and operative clause), "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The Second Amendment prevents the right to keep and bear arms from being infringed. Whatever that right is does not matter for this discussion. What is important is where that right comes from–and it isn't from the Constitution. The Heller Court wrote:
Second Amendment , like the First and Fourth Amendment s, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of theSecond Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it "shall not be infringed." As we said in United States v.Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876) , "[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed … ."
Even if you don't like Heller, the text of the Amendment itself grants no rights. Like the First and Fourth Amendments, it places a limit on what the government can do. Whoever wrote the remainder of these descriptions certainly understands the nature of negative liberty. The description of the First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law." The description of the Third Amendment says "prohibits the government." The description of the Fourth Amendment say s"government may not conduct." Hell, it even gets the 9th Amendment right (more or less). But the Second Amendment, regardless of how you define the right to keep and bear arms, did not confer any rights. Maybe someone should start a petition to get this corrected. That seems to be en vogue today.
Senators Defending Their Own Laws In Court
I have previously blogged about the importance and qualifications of legislators who seek to defend laws they wrote in court.
Now, Senators McCain, Graham, and Ayotte, not content to simply submit an amicus brief, want argument time in an upcoming case that considers the National Defense Authorization Act–a law the trio contributed to. Unsurprisingly, their view differs from that of President Obama's Justice Department, which is litigating the case.
In a brief authored by David Rivkin and Lee Casey (the progenitors of the suit agains the ACA in Florida), and my former classmate Andrew Grossman, the Senators request argument time to address "the history and purpose of the statutory provision under review and the scope of Congress's power under the Declare War Clause."
Senate Amici played a leadership role in the drafting and enactment of Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 ("NDAA"), making them uniquely qualified to explain its history and purpose. And as Senators, Senate Amici have a strong interest in safeguarding Congress's constitutionally-prescribed role in matters of national security and war. While the Senate Amici join the Appellants in seeking reversal of the decision below and dismissal of this litigation, their interests and arguments are distinct from those of the Appellants and may aid the Court in resolution of this matter.
The brief argues that the Senators will defend what the Administration can't:
Although the Appellants, in defending Section 1021, cite scattered passages from its legislative history, they (quite understandably) do not address the broader policy dispute that led to the provision, and may (quite understandably) find it awkward in oral argument to address such issues in thorough fashion. Senate Amici, however, have no such inhibitions
The brief cites a "unique institutional interest":
The Senate Amici's participation in oral argument is also warranted due to their unique institutional interest in the Court's possible resolution of the constitutional question of the scope of congressional power under the Declare War Clause. As members of the Senate, the Senate Amici have a direct and distinct interest in preserving Congress's power to authorize exercise of the President's war powers in such detail and in such ways as Congress sees fit. By contrast, the Appellants' chief interest is preservation of the President's flexibility in the interpretation and execution of war powers authorizations, a quite different matter and one that is in some conflict with Congress's institutional interests.
Huh? That's what separation of powers is for. Congress passes laws, knowing that the Executive will enforce it. Congress preserves their institutional interests by passing laws. Not defending them in Court.
In other words, should the Court move beyond the threshold justiciability issues raised by the Appellants, the Senate Amici have a unique position on Section 1021's constitutionality, one that is distinct, and potentially in conflict with, the Appellants' argumentation. Absent participation by Senate Amici, the views of the co-equal branch of the Federal Government whose action is the subject of this case will go unaired
Being a co-equal branch doesn't allow Congress a say in court.
I recognize that the Senators are participating as Amicus, but would the Senators think they have independent standing to intervene as a party? I never understood why legislators have standing to defend their own laws (yes I am looking at you Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group in DOMA litigation). Of course, when a President fails to defend a law in court, allowing the legislators to step in makes some sense. But here, Obama is actually defending the NDAA. So why are the Senators getting involved? Well, Obama isn't defending the law in the way McCain, Graham, and Ayotte would like.
They said their piece when enacting the law. Anything they say now is pure post-enactment legislative history, motivated by a desire to affect the application of a staute.
They may be uniquely qualified to explain the statute's history and purpose, but didn't they already do that? In the legislative history? In fact, the brief cites statements made by these three in the legislative record! (That's what he said).
Now the brief offers a particularly unreliable form of post-enactment legislative history–statements made by legislators years after a law is enacted geared to a specific conflict that the enactors of the law likely did not forsee. Further, we have a brief by only three senators who profess an interest in "waging war against America's terrorist enemies." What about other members of congress who do not share that aim (I'm sure they exist)? Should their legislative history be discounted? Should the fact that they didn't submit a brief be dispositive?
Why bother engaging in statutory interpretation when those that enacted the law, in an earlier congress, can just tell the courts how the law should be applied?
And, because I never write about politics, please let me offer the headline "Wile E. Ayotte" to any tabloids. (I only found a few google hits for that). It's too good to pass u p.
And is it wrong that I knew Ayotte from her SCOTUS case v. Planned Parenthood before I realized she was also a U.S. Senator? Article III is the last, but not least of the branches.
The Transcript of the Summary Judgment Oral Arguments in Virginia v. Sebelius Resides In Pacer's Black Hole
When I attempted to download the arguments held before Judge Hudson in EDVA on 10/18/10 from Pacer, I got this message:
TRANSCRIPT of proceedings held on October 18, 2010 before Judge Henry E. Hudson. Court Reporter/Transcriber Krista Liscio, telephone number 804 916-2296. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER Redaction Request due 12/7/2010. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 1/7/2011. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 2/5/2011.(liscio, krista) (Entered: 11/07/2010)
Maybe the court reporter simply assumed the Mayans were right, and wouldn't need to bother? I'll call tomorrow.
If you have been wondering why I've been somewhat quiet of late, I am going through all of the lower court proceedings, including the transcripts, in the ACA cases. I've gone through all of NDFL and the 11th Circuit. Now I'm turning to EDVA and CA4.
It's amazing how much stuff is packed into this case.
Update: A court reporter from EDVA returned my call, and said she could sell me the transcript directly. Congress mandated that the charge is $.90 a page (lol, Congress mandated a price for the transcript of the constitutionality of congress's mandate). At 80 pages, that is a lot of money! I will try calling the clerk's office to see why it was not posted on PACER.
Update: I just spoke with the Clerk's office, and for some reason the transcript was never released. I have a copy, which you can download here. Somehow, no one ever bothered to check if the document was available.
I Think Chris Christie Has Some Competition For The Governor Race
Because Vinnie from Jersey Shore wants to be a politician!
"I want to get into politics," Vinny says … "So i was gonna go to law school to get involved in politics."
He added, "I know this sounds stumbling coming out of a club … but I actually have a brain."
This could be a Jersey Gamechanger.
Can you use the First Amendment as a defense to the Second Amendment?
David Gregory is under some kind of investigation for waving around a 30-round magazine on Meet the Press, which is filmed in Washington, D.C., where possession of such magazines is generally illegal. Doug Mataconis raised an interesting historical bit.
For the record, though, if this is indeed a violation of the law, there isn't likely to be a "journalistic" exception. Several years ago, another journalist here in the D.C. area faced prosecution after it was discovered that he had images of child pornography on his laptop. As a defense, he claimed that he was investigating the world of underground child pornography for a story he was writing and that he should be entitled to a First Amendment defense. After several hearings and appeals, the defense was rejected and the journalist in question went to Federal Prison. In other words, you cannot violate the law in the practice of journalism.
Could Gregory possibly use the First Amendment as a defense to what the Second Amendment ought to protect (though Gregory likely disagrees with that construction of the Second Amendment)? In other words, does his journalistic duty as a member of the press give him special protections against gun laws? Hell, if it does, every blogger living in D.C. should cite a 1st Amendment right to possess a 30-round clip.
Nullification: It's Still A Jersey Thing
I have previously blogged about New Jersey's efforts to offer sports gambling in state, even though it is in clear violation of federal law.
Now MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA, and the NCAA are suing New Jersey in D.N.J., after a judge found that the leagues have standing to sue.
David Stern, the long-time commissioner of the NBA, and an attorney, was quite pithy in his comments:
"The one thing I'm certain of is New Jersey has no idea what it's doing and doesn't care because all it's interested in is making a buck or two, and they don't care that it's at our potential loss," Stern said when asked how the advent of sports betting in New Jersey would harm the NBA.
"And wholly apart from the fact that a governor, who's a former U.S. Attorney, has chosen to attack a federal law which causes me pause for completely different reasons since I've at times sworn to similar oaths about upholding the law of the United States,"
Yep, Chris Christie is doing his best John C. Calhoun impression.
I dream of benchslaps
Last night I had an odd dream that I was clerking for Judge Posner, but he was on a district court. I was sitting in the seat in front of the bench were the courtroom deputy would sit. Judge Posner started the proceeding, stopped, started to point at someone in the gallery, and ordered that person to be removed from the court. Everyone started looking around confused. No one knew whom Posner was pointing at, so he got off the bench and walked down to point the person out. (I couldn't tell if that person was being disruptive). The marshalls forcibly removed the person. Then Posner leaned over the bench and told me that I was doing something wrong (not sure what). That's all I remember.


text:
At night when she lays her head down
Thoughts of him will soon come around
From her reality these memories she'll steal
Cherishing how good they make her feel.
And often as she'll usually do
Wonder if he thinks of her too
Her thoughts they rob her of sleep
No complaints not one little peep.
Those times with him spent chatting away
She looks forward to it another day
His warm smile, his eyes slightly winking
Surely he can guess just what she's thinking.
She knows it's just a matter of fate
He came along a little too late
No sense dwellin on the might have been
Although she does do it now and then.
Forever grateful she met him that day
For a certainity she can say
Always there in her mind
Pleasant memories of him she'll find.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Top Definition
A powerful, object-based, interpreted scripting language, created by Brendan Eich, most commonly embedded directly into HTML web pages to manage client-side interaction.
JavaScript is so beautiful and elegant it brings tears to my eyes. I love using it. It completes me as a person.
di Dan Fox 24 giugno 2003
Trending Now
Can you define these popular missing words?
Programming Language, written to sit on a web server but be run on an unknown web *client*. Hence it often doesn't.
If people start writing it to meet w3c standards, and browsers contimue to try to implement w3c standards, there may be some hope for it in the distant future.
If people start writing it to meet w3c standards, and browsers contimue to try to implement w3c standards, there may be some hope for it in the distant future.
JavaScript error #2345432, Object expected. Do you wish to debug?
di nit-pick 09 febbraio 2004
A random assortment of functions and variables used to create special effects on web pages. Gernerally used only to impress people who don't care.
I used some Java Script to spice up my website, cause I'm a fagot.
di BonddeMe 08 maggio 2003
An object-oriented, very simple programming language I've been using since 2006, (and still, even after 3 years, haven't posted any pages, even plain HTML on the web).
I can't believe it, I actually made a Tic-Tac-Toe environment out of a tiny bit of HTML and a deuce load of JavaScript!
di amazing javascript programmer 23 agosto 2009
Scripting language derived from Java (actually it has nothing to do with it); usually a javascript can be found embedded into a HTML page (it is the default client side scripting language) and can be used to implement dynamic features in a webpage .
di Uc@Nap 27 dicembre 2004
Only useful for hiding stuff. That's pretty much it.
Javascript is like a bad version of white-out
di Rie 11 novembre 2003


text:
Your favorite campus mascot Keggy here! I just had a pretty cool time walking around campus today. I did tons of stuff. I went to McNutt, the Green, Baker Library, and to the Robert Frost statue. I tried to be a cheerleader, but I don't think I'm built for it…
Anyway, take a look at the pictures below, and look for me around campus sometime soon! And if you want me to show up somewhere in the future, drop me a line. You can comment here, or blitz "keggy" or "jacko." And who knows, maybe I'll show up!
Drunkenly yours,


text:
Local woodworker and historic preservation specialist Chris Weatherly, owner of Bitterroot Woodwright located east of Stevensville, has won the Outstanding Individual Achievement award from the Montana Preservation Alliance (MPA) for his work in preserving Montana's historic places, traditional landscapes and cultural heritage. Weatherly will be honored along with other award recipients, at MPA's annual Historic Preservation Excellence Awards ceremony to be held on September 19 at the Montana Club, 6th and Fuller, Helena at 5:30 p.m. The event is open to the public.
"Each year, MPA takes great pleasure in celebrating individuals who have gone above and beyond to save and protect Montana's special historic buildings and places. Not only do we applaud good stewards and advocates for heritage properties, we also promote the importance of historic preservation as a tool for economic development, community vitality, and increased tourism," said MPA Outreach and Education director Christine Brown.
Weatherly was nominated for the award by Chere Jiusto of MPA. Jiusto notes in his nomination Weatherly's many accomplishments.
For nearly 30 years, Weatherly has worked professionally and as a volunteer to repair, restore, and rehabilitate some of Western Montana's premier historic buildings. He completed nearly all of the restoration and repair work at Historic St. Mary's Mission, including meticulously restoring Chief Victor's cabin for historic interpretation; restoring and structurally stabilizing the historic kitchen; replicating historic windows, doors, and woodwork in the belfry; oiling and restoring the chapel's log walls; and donating much time to researching and building a full-scale replica of a Jesuit/Metis Red River cart for the Stevensville Founder's Day celebration.
Colleen Meyer, director of St. Mary's says, "Chris always goes the extra mile. He has an incredible eye for the era of each building and the utmost respect for the buildings he works on."
Weatherly is also the "go-to" restoration contractor for Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks and is responsible for maintaining and restoring the Chief Plenty Coups Cabin, the historic barn at Traveler's Rest State Park, and Fort Owen. "Chris is the person FWP goes to for historic restoration work," says Darcy Yakoweshen of FWP. "It's just amazing. He's a one-man operation."
The folks at the Lee Metcalf National Wildlife Refuge in Stevensville were also lucky to have Weatherly work on the historic Whaley Homestead there. Weatherly scraped and painted the weathered clapboard siding and repaired windows and doors, and stayed on as a volunteer to help restore the house's front porch and picket fence.
"It's just been amazing to have someone of his skill volunteering so freely at the refuge," says Bob Danley, education coordinator at the Metcalf Refuge. Weatherly has also donated his time to various other projects, including efforts to restore the Hangman's Building in Virginia City, the Stevensville and Ravalli County Museums, and the Fort Missoula Barracks Building. He has also for many years been the President of the Stevensville Historical Museum.
In 2010, Weatherly was named Stevensville Citizen of the Year for his time and energy contributed to saving historic resources near Stevensville. He is deserving of much recognition and honor for all his contributions to history and heritage in the western Montana, wrote Jiusto.
Other people being honored at this year's award ceremony include:
Rialto Community Theater, Inc. & Martel Construction, Deer Lodge – Outstanding Rehabilitation
Mark Kersting and Kiem Building, Missoula – Outstanding Commercial Rehabilitation
Bob Valach, Lewistown – Outstanding Individual Achievement
Michael Schaer, Billings, Outstanding Commercial Revitalization
Crystal Alegria, Marsha Fulton, Livingston – Outstanding Tribal Preservation Project
Helena As She Was website, Kennon Baird, editor – Director's Choice Technology Award.


text:
Glass Heart Ornament, Iridescent
Product Actions
Additional Information
Artisan-Crafted Iridescent Glass Heart Ornament
- Heart-shaped glass ornament has an intriguing iridescence
- Hang on your tree, in a window or any special place
- Handmade; each one is unique
Beautiful mouthblown glass heart has an intriguing pattern that catches the light. Each one is a unique work of art for your home and is sure to be a cherished gift, too. Crafted by artisans in Washington State, every ornament contains a bit of ash from Mount St. Helens.
Product Details
- Glass
- Approx. 3" W x 3-3/4" H x 1-1/4" D
- Hanging ribbon not included
- Made in USA
There are no special shipping restrictions or charges associated with this item. For detailed information about our delivery methods and charges, click here.
We're proud of the fact that this item is shipped to you directly from our warehouse in Vermont, by one of our 250 employee-owners. In-stock items are packed with care and shipped within the next business day to ensure prompt delivery to your home and garden!


text:
Today NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco announced that Dr. Rick Knabb has been named the new director of the National Hurricane Center in Miami. He replaces the retiring Bill Read.
As director Knabb is the face of NOAA's forecast, and has the job of prompting emergency managers to take action in the face of hurricane threats.
"I am humbled and very, very much looking forward to this opportunity," Knabb said. "For as long as I can remember it is a job I have seen as a career goal."
Knabb previously spent much of his career at the hurricane center before going to The Weather Channel two years ago to become their hurricane expert. He has a Ph.D. in meteorology from Florida State University and, as a kid, spent sometime living in — wait for it — Katy.
During a conference call with reporters this afternoon I asked him about his research goals for the hurricane center. He said he wants to continue tackling the intensity forecast problem under the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Program.
"The challenge of forecasting intensity is a priority, although, the track forecast problem is not completely solved," Knabb said. "Fortunately to address the intensity forecast problem there already is in place a well-funded and concerted effort within NOAA to engage the research community. There are some early signs that this will bear some fruit."
Knabb replaces Read, who has served in the post since 2008 and took over when there were significant morale issues. By all accounts Read has done a sterling job in bringing the office together, and his team's forecasting work has borne this out.
A former director of the Houston/Galveston office of the National Weather Service, Read has said he really enjoyed his time in the position.


text: Pepsi or Mountain Dew 12 pack $1.50 at Lowes 12-Count Pepsi 12 Oz. Fridgepack Flag this deal What's the matter? Choose a reason (5) Dead deal Duplicate Bad link 5 Spam Inaccurate No value Alive again Edit deal portal45 Oct 04, 2011 Shows product, but says to enter ZIP. After that it redirects to "pipes and fittings". I can't drink fittings!!!! :( Reply Load More Comments


text:
- Text Size:
- ASmall Text
- AMedium Text
- ALarge Text
A car ended up in a small lake near Southwest 138th Street and May Avenue in southwest Oklahoma City Saturday night.
Fire officials said a man had to go underwater to connect the car to a wrecker. Police said the person driving the car was a minor and was not injured.
The views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use.blog comments powered by Disqus


text:
A potluck dinner and dance begins at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday at the American Legion hall, 617 W. Seventh Ave. Liz Whitfield will be DJ. Cover charge included. For more information, call 806-373-4907 or 806-383-2729.
The Randall High School American Sign Language Christmas concert originally scheduled for Dec. 2 will be at 7 p.m. Friday in the RHS auditorium, 5800 Attebury Drive. ASL students will sign many Christmas season favorites and refreshments will be served following the program. The cost is $3.
Amarillo Youth Choirs will present its holiday concert, Songs of the Season, featuring 210 young singers in four choirs at 3 p.m. Sunday at the Globe-News Center for the Performing Arts, 500 S. Buchanan St.
The program includes holiday classics such as "Carol of the Bells," "Who Is This Tiny Babe" and "Hanukkah, Hanukkah." All choirs will combine to perform "Do You Hear What I Hear?" for the finale.
The concert also will feature past Amarillo Boy Choir and Amarillo Girl Choir members in the combined Amarillo Youth Choirs Alumni Choir. Past members since the Amarillo Youth Choirs' inception in 1989 will perform.
Admission is $10 for adults and $5 for children ages 8 and younger. For information, call 806-372-1100.
"A Holiday Gift of Song" featuring Devlon Jones is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. Saturday at St. John Baptist Church, 2301 N.W. 14th Ave. Admission is free. Call 806-373-3272 for information.
The Flying J Wranglers, a cowboy western quintet from Ruidoso, N.M., returns for its annual show at 8 p.m. Friday at Amarillo Little Theatre Mainstage, 2019 Civic Circle.
The group will sing a mix of cowboy Christmas tunes and classic standards. Tickets to the all-ages concert are $25. For information, call 806-355-9991 or visit www
Santa Claws Holiday Pet Photos from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday and Sunday at PetSmart, 2800 S. Soncy Road, is sponsored by the Amarillo Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Information is available at 806-622-0555 or www.amarillospca.net.
The public is invited to a traditional Christmas service featuring the King's College "A Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols" at 5 p.m. Sunday at St. Andrew's Episcopal Church, 1601 S. Georgia.
The service will include carols and readings from the Bible. Among the carols will be "Once in Royal David's City," "O Little Town of Bethlehem" and "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" as well as "Aria in Classic Style" by Marcel Grandjany.
Also featured will be the Evensong of the High Plains Choir and the St. Andrew's Ringers, accompanied by Rick Land and Russ Tapp.
Caregivers and others who participate in their loved one's care are invited to attend a Caregiver Support meeting at 10 a.m. Tuesday at Childers Place, 6600 Killgore Drive (between Amarillo and Wallace boulevards). The topic will be Gifts We've Received From Those We Love.
The meeting is sponsored by Hospice Care of the Southwest, 806-356-0026, and Crown of Texas Hospice Foundation.
Dozens of houses in the Bishop Hills community, off Farm-to-Market Road 1061, west of Loop 335, are aglow with lights and decorations for the holiday season.
Through Christmas Day, spectators can view the displays from 6:30 p.m. to midnight on Friday and Saturday and from 6:30 to 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. The tours are free, but the Downtown Amarillo Lions Club will accept donations. For information, call 806-418-4192.
Horse-drawn carriage rides at 6 p.m. nightly through Dec. 23 will start from Carpets Unlimited Warehouse, Interstate 27 and Moss Lane.
The annual tours of the Wolflin neighborhood by horse-drawn carriage are sponsored by Ferguson Hitches of Sunray. Reservations will not be accepted this year, said owner Jim Ferguson. "We'll do it first-come, first-serve," he said.
Three large-hitch wagons carrying between 10 and 24 passengers each will tour the neighborhood. Rides are $10 per person.
Events that include a traditional brisket dinner and the annual alumni basketball games will begin at 5:30 p.m. Jan. 3 at the Alamo Gym, 1900 N.E. Spring St. Graduates of Price College, Alamo Catholic High School and Holy Cross Catholic Academy will be recognized between the women's and men's games.
The brisket dinner will be served from 5:30 to 7 p.m. at a cost of $10 a plate and the basketball games will begin about 7 p.m. Tickets for the dinner can be purchased at the school office or at the door.
Alumni interested in playing can call the school to sign up. Former cheerleaders also are invited to come cheer. For more information, call 806-355-9637.


text:
There was a lot of build-up but not much delivery for "Reckless," at least in terms of ratings.
Around 4 million viewers tuned in for the Sunday premiere of the sultry CBS legal drama set and filmed in Charleston, down from the nearly 6 million who watched "Big Brother" on CBS an hour before. "Reckless" received a 0.7 in the key 18-49 demographic, finishing in fourth for the 9 p.m. time slot, according to preliminary Nielsen ratings.
"Reckless" did fare better than "Southern Charm," the other show set in Charleston that just finished it's first season. That show's Monday night debut in March drew 983,000 viewers and pulled a 0.5 Nielsen rating in the 18-49 age bracket. But the reality show aired on Bravo, not a major network.
"Reckless" stars Anna Wood and Cam Gigandet as dueling attorneys who stumble upon a scandal that could rip apart Charleston society.


text: I would like to make people aware of a serious fault in smart4two front coil springs. We have had both fail. The first after 26,000 miles and the second within 10,000 later. We were lucky in that it did not cause any other serious damage but I have read that others have had shredded tyres and worse! To top it all, the manufacturer and our dealer Mercedes-Bristol have refused to pay to put it right. I think this is a serious safety issue. It appears that they going to wait until someone is killed before they recall this.


text:
Linda G. Mills Youngblood, age 66 of Nashville, formerly of La Vergne died at her home Wednesday.
She was a native of Huntsville, AL and the daughter of the late Hum Gene and Annie Rene Mills. In addition to her parents she was preceded in death by a sister Becky Glenn.
She had been a 50 year member of the Bell Road Nazarene Church in Antioch and retired from the Academic Records Department at Trevecca Nazarene University.
Ms. Youngblood is survived by four children Terry (Tammy Ann) Youngblood Sr. of Norene, Tony Youngblood (Lilly Norris) of LaVergne, Troy Youngblood of Taylorsville, GA and Tammy (James) Pollitt of Potomac, IL; two sisters Barbara (Jimmy) Morrison of Murfreesboro and Frances (Lee) Price of Antioch; eight grandchildren and a host of loving family and friends.
Visitation with the family will be Friday from 4:00 until 8:00 pm at Woodfin Chapel, Smyrna and funeral services will be held Saturday, Feb. 23, 2013 at 10:00 am at the First Church of the Nazarene in Murfreesboro with Bro. Don Mellish officiating. Burial will follow in Roselawn Memorial Gardens.
Online condolences may be left at www.woodfinchapel.com


text:
Equinix Blog
The JK1 partner data center is located at Cibitung which provides excellent supporting infrastructure for stable and ample supply of electricity, telecommunication, security and other supporting facilities. The site is located approximately one hour from the Sudirman Central Business District. This state of the art data center offers a full range of premium colocation, interconnection and support services to a wide range of secure digital ecosystems built by networks, enterprise, content, cloud and IT services companies and financial institutions as part of Platform EquinixTM.
JK1 - Jakarta IBX Data Center
The JK1 data center located at Cibitung offers colocation and interconnection services to secure digital ecosystems built by networks, enterprise, cloud , IT companies and financial institutions.
Equinix is committed to providing standards-compliant data centers, with many of our facilities having undergone audits for SSAE16 or receiving certification for ISO or LEED. Additionally, our IBX data centers are the recipients of industry awards in a variety of categories including operational reliability, market leadership and green initiatives. Please contact us to learn more about a particular facility.
Cibitung Industrial Estate
Jakarta, Indonesia
Direct: +65.6723.8888
Email: Email
Support: Submit a Ticket
Get the specifications on how JK1 delivers reliability, security, and interconnections to serve as your premier Jakkarta colocation solution.
Step inside Sydney's state-of-the-art digital hub for business.
Our global growth is closely tied to our success in the Asia-Pacific region, where continuous expansion has strengthened the capacity and appeal of our entire data center footprint. Watch the video to see the historical highlights.


text:
Top Definition
some one who excessively says the word caca,cacahead,or cacaface. Can also be a person made out of poop or crap that comes out of toilets and eats people
you have been such a CaCaman lately that i could only concentrate on my toilets feelings.
Beküldő: Oliver Garcia 2006. december 14.
Trending Now
Can you define these popular missing words?


text:
Featured Golf News
When the Hunter Gets Captured by the Game
Jerry Garcia and Robert Hunter were singing about love in the song ¡°When the Hunter Gets captured by the Game¡±, but the concept applies in golf as well. For even though golf¡¯s greatest names come loaded for bear as they hunt for one of the game¡¯s most coveted pelts, at the U.S. Open it¡¯s the players who come away bloodied as the golf course cuts a terrible swath through them like buckshot.
At the national championship of American golf instead of fostering an atmosphere where the players are encouraged to play creatively and aggressively, they are instead handicapped; forced into a boring, dictatorial, learned-by-heart dirge - ¡°hit it here, then hit it here, then scrape a par.¡± Although we are told by broadcasters in stentorian tones that ¡°this is the way a major should be,¡± there is a groundswell surging among rank and file golf fans, writers and players that the time has come to dispel that myth and improve the U.S. Open at the same time.
While some people mindlessly parrot the tired and misguided opinion that the U.S. Open ¨C and even other majors ¨C need to be excruciatingly difficult to truly test the games of the contestants, at one of the flagship events of American sports ¨C wouldn¡¯t it fair to expect more birdies, not less? Do you think more birdies would be less exciting? No, the U.S. Open has evolved from a hard test of golf become a cheerless grind; hard for hard¡¯s sake with no rhyme or reason other than to make sure no one breaks par. We care more about the winning score than the winning player¡and it doesn¡¯t have to be this way.
For most of the year, PGA tour players are marksmen, indeed sharpshooters. Steadily they walk, stealthily they stalk; big game hunters in search of their trophy. They move with the confident aggression of an armed man; brimming with self-assurance, impeccably prepared and possessed of laser-sharp concentration. They execute with pin-point accuracy. They see a mark, they take it down, no problem.
But at the U.S. Open safari, the hunter becomes the hunted. For one week, the greens become torture chambers, sending balls slithering every which way. The rough swallows balls, the bunkers are savage and players plummet to earth as fast as names dropping off the leaderboard. If the Masters and British Open are the Serengeti Plains and Australian Outback hunt, then the U.S. Open is Jurassic Park, the animals are more likely to eat the hunters. All is quiet¡then with a rustle of grass, a flash of a steely talon and a mournful wail, it¡¯s the player who is bagged, tagged, trussed up, and sold to the butcher.
With fabled Oakmonster as this year¡¯s host, the usual river of talk of ¡°the course is the star¡± and ¡°hardest open ever¡± has turned from its usual gurgling stream to a free-flowing confluence as mighty as the Allegheny, the Monongahela and the Ohio. This year we are told is ¡°perhaps the hardest Open ever.¡± ¡°But it seems every year that we¡¯re told ¡®this is the hardest Open ever¡¯¡± notes Sports Illustrated columnist John Garrity sadly. ¡°And difficulty does not equal greatness.¡±
Indeed, the Masters is still the greatest tournament in the world because the course design encourages players to give in to temptation. The thrill of an eagle just within reach but the danger of a double bogey lurking right behind like its evil doppelganger makes names shoot up and down like fireworks. The back nine at Augusta allows players to make a move. By succeeding or failing at that borderline, tempting shot ¨C the difference between making a 3 or a 6 ¨C the Masters fosters an exciting synergy of romance, tragedy, and triumph. The Masters is swashbuckling excitement.
Conversely, at the U.S. Open temptation is all but eliminated. It¡¯s almost as if the USGA not only wants to dictate what score will win, but what type of shot must be played. Geoff Ogilvy even famously quipped along the lines that if he only played PGA events, he¡¯d only get good at the 60 degree lob wedge.
Now all year we¡¯ve been told it¡¯s Johnny Miller¡¯s fault ¨C and believe me, Miller would love for the myth to be further proliferated, but it¡¯s just bunk that his 63 was the impetus. It didn¡¯t help, that¡¯s true, but the seeds were sewn more than fifty years ago.
In 1950 the USGA started to secure more rigid control over course set up. They standardized fairway width according to the difficulty of the hole, the height of the rough according to the type of grass, and the speed of the greens to be consistent from hole to hole. That way the course would play consistently that week and each year, there would be a blueprint for making the championship consistent each time the event was contested.
Then, in 1951 Robert Trent Jones redid Oakland Hills for the U.S. Open. The course was so penal ¨C so wasp-waisted, rough-grown and some say unrecognizable from Donald Ross¡¯ masterpiece ¨C that Ben Hogan called the course a ¡°monster.¡± Things didn¡¯t get any better. In 1953, Oakmont played so penal that Cary Middlecoff, already known for his temper withdrew from the tournament in spectacular fashion. Well out of contention and playing the tenth hole, he deliberately hit the ball over the green and into the Pennsylvania Turnpike. ¡°Some people swear they saw it go into the back of a truck and head off who knows where down the highway; a six hundred mile shot!¡± reminisced one irreverent sportswriter.
The horror stories continued. Inverness, in ¡¯57, Winged Foot in ¡¯59, Congressional in ¡¯64 ¨C the U.S. Open was murder long before Miller. Miller¡¯s 63 was simply the last straw. But the by-product of the search for consistency and a tough test was the birth of the misguided ¡°harder is better, faster greens are better¡± mantra. Nothing has ruined more member courses in this country and raised maintenance expenses so needlessly. It cannot and must not be lionized. ¡°Too fast¡± greens mean less contour you can use and loss of some interesting pin positions. There is such a hue and cry that the tree removal at Oakmont brought the course back to what it looked like in 1904, but to truly bring it back to what it played like in 1904, the greens should Stimp in single digits.
But here is the kicker. This is the national championship and we seek to suppress scoring? We don¡¯t raise the hoop, broaden the paint, and call more traveling and ticky-tack fouls in the NCAA Championship game, do we? At the World Series, we don¡¯t suddenly move the mound closer, the bases further away, move the foul poles closer together and mandate ¡°we want the winning score to be 2-1¡å, do we? We don¡¯t stop calling pass interference and narrow the football field so that no one scores 55 points in a Super Bowl ever again, do we? Of course not, that would be the height of folly and the hatcher of such a hare-brained scheme would be tarred, feathered and dragged though the streets in chains. But in golf, we are preconditioned and afraid of change. People are actually getting less excitement for their dollar than at any other major sporting event all because people don¡¯t question the ridiculous mantra of ¡°harder is better.¡±
Let¡¯s be quite plain ¨C is there a major sporting event with less electricity? Most people thought the Steelers ¨C Seahawks Super Bowl was boring as it was marred by penalties, lousy punts, missed field goals and incomplete passes. 0-0 soccer games have all but condemned the game to death in America. Hockey has not resurrected itself partly because people want to see goals, not skating in circles, but that is exactly what the Open has become; skate in these circles, don¡¯t fall through the ice.
¡°For one week, I like seeing the pro struggle like I do¡± said one fan, but you know what? Not at the national championship, the height of the season and the celebration of crowning a king. At the Super bowl, World Series and other sporting championships we are watching players succeed and ascend to the pinnacle because they are able to show us the talent that made them beat everyone else in the first place. But at the U.S. Open, we get to watch them play the USGA¡¯s obstacle course and survive to be last man standing. If I want to watch guys stub chips, shoot 82 and three-jack all day, I¡¯ll bring my camcorder along next time my lunkhead golf buddies play on the weekend. See how many hits that gets on YouTube.
¡°When you trick up the course, you get weird winners¡± observed veteran sportswriter Art Spander. ¡°It¡¯s become an incredible grind and it rewards guys like Simpson and Janzen.¡± Spander puts his finger on just one of several flaws in the doctrine. While Johnny Miller ridiculously rhapsodizes that ¡°the U.S. Open is the hardest major to win,¡± he completely ignores that it¡¯s the easiest to back into.
Spander continued, noting with conviction that ¡°The Masters was the U.S. Open this year and people complained it was not as exciting. But what sometime goes unnoticed is that we change par. There was no need to reduce Oakmont¡¯s 71 to 70. All that does is change the numbers, not the aggregate.¡±
Spander is spot on. One important factor is lost in all the discussion about the winning score in relation to par ¨C the aggregate winning score. So long as the winning score hovers around 279, or (Heaven forbid!) stays clear of the major championship aggregate scoring record, does it really matter whether the winning score is 1-under par or 5-under or even 9-under? Are the members at Augusta crying a river every time 12-under wins their tournament? No, the aggregate is still 276 ¨C an entire eleven shots clear of David Toms¡¯ record of 265.
By keeping par at 71 ¨C not 70 ¨C you have no effect on whatever the aggregate winning score is. But the patrons will feel as though they saw more birdies and therefore have a more exciting tournament experience. It¡¯s sleight of hand that¡¯s fiendishly clever in its intricacy. The players look a little better, the fans go away happier and the members get to rave about how, yet again, the course stood up to the best in the world ¨C from an aggregate scoring perspective.
But sadly, some people still parrot the tired argument about how ¡°it¡¯s nice to see the pros squirm.¡± Thus, the U.S. Open is not about how many birdies you get ¨C its how many bogeys you avoid. How exciting is that? All the movement is downward with only a little percolation as players bob to the top like corks before taking on water again. As one Golf Observer writer noted, ¡°they try to separate the great from the merely pretty good, then end up awarding the trophy to the merely pretty good.¡±
Sadly, the fans suffer just as much as the players. Tickets to the U.S. Open frequently surpass $100. Yet nobody is under par ¨C often because a par 72 course is played as a par 70. ¡°Nobody¡¯s under par except the winner and that¡¯s the way it should be¡± we are instructed¡indeed indoctrinated. Now some golf fans think it¡¯s a good idea simply because they are told it on television. That¡¯s a hangover we don¡¯t deserve.
The only reason we tolerate it is because like a video replay, we do what they say. We see it on TV, we parrot it without question. That¡¯s just downright un-American. In our ¡°we can do anything,¡± on-demand society we are being sold a product that could be vastly improved, yet we mindlessly regurgitate that we like it because a guy on TV told us to like it without analyzing whether it was wrong from the beginning. Therefore at the flagship tournament in America we get a mere a cheese-paring scrap of birdies. That¡¯s un-American too.
Like the Greek myth where Zeus turned hunter Acteon into a stag and he was killed by his hounds, so to does the USGA release the hunters into a the wild to be torn apart. They do it for sport and we are told how great it is, but what¡¯s the point? Even the sturdiest of ships can¡¯t sail in the face of wind and tide. But it doesn¡¯t have to be that way.
Back in ¡¯80 Baltusrol Manager MarkDeNoble said ¡°everybody was happy with Nicklaus¡¯ record 272. It was a tribute to the preparation that had been put into the course.¡± If that attitude were proliferated so that just a little cushion were allowed, the tournament would be so much more exciting. But no, it¡¯s the fans who¡¯ll cheer the least this week. Indeed, cheers are few and far between compared to the other 51 weeks in the golf calendar. Augusta? It¡¯s ¡°roaring on the pines.¡± The U.S. Open? With minus-1 or even-par winning, it¡¯s pained groans and golf claps. It¡¯s restrictor-plate racing for golf. Patrons, taut with anticipation, waiting to explode into gleeful ecstasy, more often see their hopes ¨C so tantalizingly close ¨C dashed away in the curl of a sharply breaking six-footer. We wait for the lightning bolt that almost never strikes.
If golf is to mirror life, then virtue must be rewarded, but what virtues are rewarded at an open? Courage? Certainly not. Wisdom? Yes Fortitude? Yes and temperance as well. Courage, however, is rarely rewarded. And that¡¯s definitely un-American.
Since launching his first golf writing website in 2004, http://www.jayflemma.thegolfspace.com, Jay Flemma's comparative analysis of golf designs and knowledge of golf course architecture and golf travel have garnered wide industry respect. In researching his book on America's great public golf courses (and whether they're worth the money), Jay, an associate editor of Cybergolf, has played over 220 nationally ranked public golf courses in 37 different states. Jay has played about 1,649,000 yards of golf - or roughly 938 miles. His pieces on travel and architecture appear in Golf Observer (www.golfobserver.com), Cybergolf and other print magazines. When not researching golf courses for design, value and excitement, Jay is an entertainment, copyright, Internet and trademark lawyer and an Entertainment and Internet Law professor in Manhattan. His clients have been nominated for Grammy and Emmy awards, won a Sundance Film Festival Best Director award, performed on stage and screen, and designed pop art for museums and collectors. Jay lives in Forest Hills, N.Y., and is fiercely loyal to his alma maters, Deerfield Academy in Massachusetts and Trinity College in Connecticut.
Story Options
|Print this Story


text:
Top Definition
a crap circle around the neck, usually left after insertion of head into anothers rectum.
After Sammy stuck his head as far as it would go up Mikeys butt, there was a crap circle rectal collar in the same place most people would wear a necklace.
بواسطة diogio rome نوفمبر/تشرين الثّاني 10, 2008
Trending Now
Can you define these popular missing words?


text:
The Evening Brief: Texas Headlines for Feb. 1, 2013
New in The Texas Tribune
• Speaking to SBOE, Perry Talks of Need for More Charters: "Gov. Rick Perry's brief remarks at the State Board of Education on Friday echoed his State of the State address, where he called for the creation of more charter schools and the expansion of career and technical courses for high school students."
• Perry's Call for Tax Relief is Subject of Confusion: "The $1.8 billion in tax relief that Gov. Rick Perry called for this week was short on details, but the few that ...


text:
Former Maui resident Evan Strong won the inaugural Winter Paralympics men's snowboardcross gold medal Friday in Sochi, Russia.
The 27-year-old Strong, who lived on Maui from age 7 to 20 and now resides in Nevada, had a total time of 1 minute, 43.61 seconds
Each competitor took three runs on the Rosa Khutor Alpine Center course, with the two fastest times used for a total. Strong had a 51.62 in his second run - best of all competitors in any of the three heats - and a 51.99 in his third, after opening with a 52.55.
Article Photos
Evan Strong competes in the inaugural Paralympic snowboardcross Friday on the way to taking the gold medal.
AP photo
Strong celebrates on the podium after leading an American sweep of the medals.
AP photo
Strong, who had his left leg amputated in 2004, after a traffic crash in Haiku, led an American sweep of the podium - Michael Shea took the silver in 1:44.18, and Keith Gabel (1:47.10) claimed bronze.


text:
Spicy Ginger Mango SaladElizabeth Stark
A vibrant mango salad is the perfect accompaniment to a light breakfast or brunch. With a hint of sweetness, gingery spice, and cooling cilantro, this easy salad is loaded with flavor too. And, a gorgeous array of vivid hues mean it adds color and cheer to any table. Head below for our simple recipe.
Spicy Ginger Mango Salad
Serves: 2 – 4
Prep time: 10 minutes
1 large mango, peeled and cut into 1/2-inch chunks
1 teaspoon minced ginger
1 tablespoon lemon juice
1 tablespoon honey
1 tablespoon extra virgin olive oil
pinch each sea salt, black pepper, and ground cayenne
1 tablespoon cilantro
1/4 teaspoon red pepper flakes
In a small bowl, combine the ginger, lemon juice, and honey. Whisk in the olive oil with a fork. Add the salt, pepper, and cayenne.
Toss the dressing over the mango chunks, fold in the cilantro, and finish with the red pepper flakes.
More from Brooklyn Supper on Babble:
The Surprising Health Benefits of Cruciferous Vegetables and 14 Ways to Eat Them
Healthy Lunch Made Easy: Spinach Salad with Broccoli and Red Peppers
18 Unique Root Vegetable Recipes
Read more from Elizabeth and Brian on Brooklyn Supper.
Follow Brooklyn Supper on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter for updates.
Don't miss the latest from Babble Food Like Us on Facebook!


text:
Product Information
Los Angeles Kings Reebok 2012 Stanley Cup Champions Playbill Tri-Blend T-Shirt
Add some championship gear to your wardrobe with this Los Angeles Kings Reebok 2012 Stanley Cup Champions Playbill Tri-Blend T-Shirt. Made from a tri-blend construction- this Los Angeles Kings t-shirt features screen print graphics of your favorite team's logo and the official Stanley Cup Championship logo. Rep your team and boast about their Stanley Cup win with this stylish shirt. 2012 Stanley Cup Championship T-Shirt Rib knit collar Screen print graphics Machine washable 50% Polyester/37.5% Cotton/12.5% Rayon Officially licensed
SHOP.COM ReviewsWrite a Review
This product has not yet been reviewed. Be the first to write a review.


text:
With the government's sequestration deadline just a couple days away, the markets are hardly batting an eye. The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJINDICES: ^DJI ) is surging despite the cloud of uncertainty hanging over Washington: The index is up a whopping 155 points, or 1.1%, to tip back over the 14,000 mark. Even with many nervous eyes watching as sequestration fast approaches, other economic indicators came out today that have investors cheering -- and forgetting all about what the politicians might do.
Bernanke and housing lift the markets
Pending home sales climbed 4.5% in January, according to the National Association of Realtors. This follows yesterday's good news that home prices rose in December. Together, this data is a positive sign that housing is continuing its recovery no matter what sequestration does. No doubt many investors are tired of the budget drama by this point, already worn out by the fiscal-cliff fight that cast a pall over the markets late last year.
Ben Bernanke's also helping markets rise today -- particularly the financial sector. The Federal Reserve chairman expressed his support for continuing his $85 billion per-month bond buyback stimulus program, reiterating that the latest round of quantitative easing will continue until unemployment falls. JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM ) and Bank of America (NYSE: BAC ) have ridden Bernanke's confidence higher, with shares of the bank stocks up 3.4% and 1.9%, respectively, to rank near the top of the Dow. More quantitative easing will only mean good things for these two stocks, sustaining a rise that has buoyed B of A in particular to spectacular recent gains.
Industrials are also having a strong day, with Caterpillar (NYSE: CAT ) and United Technologies (NYSE: UTX ) picking up 2.3% and 1.4%, respectively. Orders for durable goods excuding transportation rose nearly 2% in December -- the fifth straight month of gains and the largest jump in more than a year. Manufacturers like Caterpillar and UTC are gaining faith in the economic recovery and are free to invest with the fiscal cliff now a distant memory. While sequestration could slow down the industrial sector, investors and companies are largely ignoring the mandated and unpredictable cuts that are coming.
Boeing (NYSE: BA ) is also soaring today despite the ongoing problems with its grounded 787 Dreamliner. So far shares of the aerospace giant are up 2.6%, fueled somewhat by FAA chief Michael Huerta's expectation of an internal report on short-term fixes to the 787's battery problems sometime next week. While the FAA isn't ready to approve test flights of the aircraft yet, it's a small sign that the 787's saga is moving forward -- and one that investors have happily bought into today.
Boeing's opportunity in its multitrillion-dollar industry is massive. However, the company's execution problems and emerging competitors have investors wondering whether Boeing will live up to its shareholder responsibilities. In this premium research report, two of The Fool's best industrial-sector minds have collaborated to provide investors with the must-know info on Boeing. They'll be updating the report as key news hits, so be sure to claim a copy today by clicking here now.


text:
We use cookies on our website to help give you the best online experience. Tell me more
Help us save nature at places like this. From £3 a month.
Reserves by name
National Cycle Network 2
Topsham station (Exeter to Exmouth line). From the station turn right, then right again into Elm Grove Road, walk along Elm Grove Road into Bowling Green Road. Cross the small stone bridge and follow this road as it twists its way to the hide.
Using the 57 service (Exeter to Exmouth) to Topsham's Elm Grove Road stop: walk along Elm Grove Road into Bowling Green Road. Cross the small stone bridge and follow this road as it twists its way to the hide. Note: the Elm Grove bus stop is only one stop away from that for the RSPB Shop at Darts Farm.
On the eastern side of the Exe Estuary, 5 miles (8 km) south of Exeter and 6.5 miles (10.8 km) north of Exmouth. Bowling Green Hide is on Bowling Green Road, Topsham. No verge side parking. Please use Topsham's Holman Way (see 'By car' for directions) or The Quay car parks.
From Holman Way car park turn left and walk via Monmouth Avenue and Monmouth Street (RSPB sign) to Bowling Green Road (12 minute walk along delightful country lanes). From Topsham Quay car park, walk along the Strand, then the Goatwalk, which leads into Bowling Green Road (15 minute walk with stunning estuary views).
If you have a satellite navigation system that can accept POI files, please see our POI page for a download link and instructions.
The summer foot ferry links this reserve with our Exminster Marshes reserve. It departs Passage Inn, Ferry Road, Topsham for the Topsham Lock Cottage on the west bank. Ring 07801 203338 for ferry details.
Click a word to find more places tagged with that keyword.


text:
The best things usually come in small packages. And the same holds true for all 2.75 ounces of LAVANILA's new Vanilla Coconut Healthy Body Butter. Have you tried it yet? If you haven't, you are missing out on simple, luxurious skin care at an affordable $10!
The mousse-like texture of Vanilla Coconut Healthy Body Butter makes it appear rich without feeling thick and greasy on your skin. And just like mousse, it melts right in…to hydrate and nourish. The fragrance is intoxicating (I was ready to book a vacation) while shea and cocoa butter moisturize your skin. This body butter also contains Goji Berry and Kakadu Plum – super anti-oxidants for your skin! Read more


text:
History of Credit Bureaus: Equifax, Experian, TransUnion & Innovis
|Email Print
Did you know that TransUnion started as a parent holding company for a railcar leasing company? Or that Experian is not based in the United States? I started reading about the history of some of the credit bureaus and was fascinated with what I found. For example, did you know Experian was founded in 1980 while Equifax was founded in 1899?
Read on to find out more about the major credit reporting agencies.
Equifax is the oldest of the three bureaus, having been founded in 1899 as Retail Credit Company. It began as two brothers, Cator and Guy Woolford, keeping a list of customers and their creditworthiness for their local Retail Grocer's Association. He would sell the book to other merchants in the association and credit reporting was born. They eventually settled on Atlanta, Georgia as their home and founded the Retail Credit Company.
By the 1960's, when TransUnion was formed, Retail Credit Company was one of the largest credit bureaus with data on millions of Americans and Canadians. After years of criticism of the credit reporting industry in the 1960's and 1970's, Congress passed the Fair US Credit Reporting Act to regulate the collection, dissemination, and use of consumer information. It is believed that Retail Credit Company changed its name to Equifax to improve its image.
Equifax is based out of Atlanta, Georgia.
Experian began as CCN Systems in 1980, making it the youngest of the three bureaus. It's only the first one founded outside of the United States, as its birthplace was in Nottingham, England. It acquired a US presence by purchasing TRW Information Services in 1996. TRW Information Services was a subsidiary of TRW, also one known as Thompson Ramo Wooldridge Inc., a conglomerate that included defense, which was acquired by Northrop Grumman in 2002.
CCN Systems was established by Experian's former parent company, GUS, and was to provide internal credit checking services to other parts of GUS, most likely the Home Retail Group. In late 2006, GUS completed the demerger of Experian and Home Retail Group.
Experian is based out of Dublin, Ireland.
In 1968, TransUnion was created as the parent holding company of Union Tank Car Company. Originally they manually collected business intelligence information about consumers. One year later, they acquired the Credit Bureau of Cook County (CBCC), who collected consumer information on about 3.6 million people stored in 400 seven-drawer file cabinets, and a credit reporting agency was born.
As an aside, their story reminded me a lot of American Express, which started as a shipping company in 1850 and slowly morphed into a credit company by 1958. When they began shipping financial instruments for banks, they started to move into money orders and traveler's checks in 1882, then credit cards by 1958. You go where the business takes you.
TransUnion is based in Chicago, Illinois.
Did you know that there is a fourth credit bureau? It's called Innovis, or CBCInnovis, but it's believed that very few companies use them. They aren't even mentioned on AnnualCreditReport.com, the website set up by the government for free credit reports. Innovis was founded in 1970 as Associated Credit Bureaus (ACB) and, after some renaming, acquired by CBC Companies in 1999. I don't know much about them but I figured you should at least be aware they exist.
Innovis is based out of Columbus, Ohio.
A little background on the credit reporting agencies useful for those trivia nights!{ 23 comments, please add your thoughts now! }


text:
In article <email@example.com>,
Bert <firstname.lastname@example.com> wrote:[color=blue]
>If I may beg the assistance of the group, I have a question:
>We own a DNS domain, let's say question.com and our ISP hosts the DNS
>zone for this domain. The network team at our headquarters manages
>the zone. We have contracted with a web design group to create and
>host, on their physical servers and site, a site for our business
>unit. I have the IP address for the new site. When I asked our
>network group to add a record for the new site and point it to the IP
>address of the design groups server, they said they could not. The
>reason, we cannot have a DNS record in our domain that points to an IP
>address owned by another entity. Is this correct? I have never been
>aware of restrictions on DNS records pointing to IP addresses. Am I
>just loosing my mind?? Any info would be appreciated.[/color]
Get a new network group. The one you have now are idiots.
OE and OEM: MB, BMW, parts: [url]http://buyeuroparts.com[/url]
[url]http://www.mbz.org[/url] | Mailing lists: [url]http://lists.mbz.org[/url]
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Classifieds: [url]http://ads.mbz.org[/url]
2 X 280SE | Wrist Watch list: [url]http://watches.list.mbz.org[/url]


text:
In the early stages of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) use, the combination of antiarrhythmic drug concurrent with the device seemed redundant, akin to "a belt plus suspenders." Before long it was discovered that, over time, most patients eventually required antiarrhythmic medication in addition to the ICD. In this issue of JAMA, the results of the Optimal Pharmacological Therapy in Cardioverter Defibrillator Patients (OPTIC) trial reported by Connolly and colleagues1 raise the issue of whether antiarrhythmic therapy, plus a β-blocker, should be initiated at the time of initial ICD implantation in an effort to reduce the likelihood of ICD shock. To respond to this question, it is important to examine the interaction of antiarrhythmic drug therapy with the ICD, and the consequences of such a combination.
Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.
Download citation file:
Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.
More Listings atJAMACareerCenter.com >
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a link to reset your password.
Enter your username and email address. We'll send instructions on how to reset your password to the email address we have on record.
Need assistance?
Athens and Shibboleth are access management services that provide single sign-on to protected resources. They replace the multiple user names and passwords necessary to access subscription-based content with a single user name and password that can be entered once per session. It operates independently of a user's location or IP address. If your institution uses Athens or Shibboleth authentication, please contact your site administrator to receive your user name and password.