text:
Spencer v. Board of PharmacyAnnotate this Case
Download PDF
Circuit Co urt for Baltim ore City Case No. 24-C-01-001405 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 36 September Term, 2003 LINDA ANN SPENCER v. MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY Bell, C.J. Raker Wilner Cathell Battaglia Rodowsky, Lawrence F. (retired, specially assigned) Bloom, Theodore G. (retired, specially assigned), JJ. Opinion by Raker, J. Bell , C.J., con curs in the jud gme nt on ly Filed: March 11, 2004 This case arises o ut of a dec ision by the M aryland State Board of Pharmacy, an administrative agency. The decision was reviewed first by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City and then by the Court of Special Appeals, 150 Md.A pp. 138 , 819 A.2d 38 3 (2003). Petitioner sought review of the decision by the Court of Special Appeals because the remedy that court fash ioned, she c ontends, ex ceeded its a uthority and vio lated the Maryland Constitution and Administrative Procedure Act, Md. Code (1984, 1999 Repl. Vol., 2003 Cum. Supp .) §§ 10-101 to 10-30 5 of the State Gov ernment Article [herein after APA]. 1 Whether a court has exceeded its statutory and judicial authority over an administrative agency is a question that involves the constitutional balance of power between the judiciary and executive administrative agencies. That balance of power is governed by an established area of administrative law dealing with the scope of judicial review over the various types of administrative agency decisions. In this case , we consider w hether the Court of Special App eals exercised the proper stan dard of judicial review over an administrative agency decision in a matter that is committed, ultimately, to the agency s discretion. I. Linda Ann Spencer, a pharmacist, continued to practice pharmacy after her license expired on July 1, 1999. On August 16, 199 9, Spencer s supervisor , having co nfirmed w ith the Maryland State Board of Pharmacy ( the Board ) the expiration and non-renewal of 1 Except where o therwise in dicated, all fu ture statutory refe rences sha ll be to provisions in the Administrative Procedure Act, Md. Code (1984, 1999 Repl. Vol., 2003 Cum. Supp.) §§ 10-101 to 10-305 of the State Government Article. Spencer s pharmacy license, instructed Spencer to cease practicing pharmacy, which she did. Spencer then contacted the B oard to inquire why her license had not been renewed, asserting that she had timely submitted the required renewal application. An internal review of the Board s office records, however, indicated that no application or accompanying fee was received. Spencer surmised that her application had been lost in the m ail and therefore submitted a renewal application to the Board on August 30, 1999. Although her application included certification that she had acquired the requisite number of continuing education credits, the majority of those credits were obtained after her license had expired in June. Nevertheless, the Board granted Spencer s renewal application on September 14, 1999, after whi ch S pencer resum ed her practic e of p harm acy. The Court of Specia l Appeals described the remaining events that led to this appeal as follows (referring to the B oard as appellant and to Spencer as app ellee ): Appellant issued charges against appellee on February 16, 2000, alleging that she had practiced p harmacy w ithout a license for a period of six weeks and that she had failed to maintain records of required continuing education credits. Appellant scheduled a case resolution conference (CRC ) to attempt to resolve the matter without the necessity of a hea ring. Mr. Stanton Ades and Ms. Laura Schneider, two members of the Board, represented appellant at the CRC. The settlement negotiations were unsuccessful. Both Mr. Ades and M s. Schneider sat on the panel of Board members who e ventually heard this con tested ca se. On ma ny occasions , beginning in July 2000, appellee sent letters to counsel for appellant, seeking to have the matter referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). Appellee believed appellant incapable of giving her a fair and impartial hearing because appellant had been intimately involved in s ettlement ne gotiations w ith 2 appellee and may have prejudged the case. Appellant repeatedly denied appellee s requests to move the case to OAH, stating that appellant s knowledge of settlement negotiations did not disqualify it from hearing evidence. In further justification for refusing to move the case, appellant stated that appellee failed to assign any specific facts indicating the Board would not be an impartial arbiter, and also noted that the Board ha[d] never delega ted a m atter to th e Off ice of A dminis trative H earings . Fin ally, on Aug ust 14, 200 0, appellee filed a motion to refer the case to the Office of Administrative Hearings or, in the alternative, to recuse members of the Board. Appellant denied that motion on September 15, 2000. Appellant held a hearing on the matter on September 20, 2000, and resumed the hearing on January 8, 2001. Counsel for appellant had given books containing exhibits to the members of the Board on the morning of the hearing. When counsel for appellee arrived for the hearing, he noticed that at least one member of the Board was reviewing evidence before the start of the hearing . Counsel for appellee complained about the member reviewing documents that were not in evidence, and asked that member to recuse himself. This request was denied. He then renewed the motion to move the case to OAH and appellant denied that mo tion also . Fina lly, counsel for appellee asked that the two mem bers who were inv olved in settlement negotiations recuse themselves, and that request was also denied. Appellee did not dispute that she had practiced pharmacy without a license for a period of six weeks. Her counsel argued, however, that her prac tice of pha rmacy without a license was authorized under Md. Code (1984, 1999 Repl. Vol.), § 10-226(b) of the State Government Article, because she had submitted a timely renewal application. Appellee did not present any evidence, other than her testim ony, that she had filed a renewal a pplication prior to the expiration of her license on July 1, 1999 . Appellant s records did not reveal any application, check, or money order from appellee prior to July 1, 1999. Appellant determined that appellee's testimony on the matter lacked credibility and found that she had not filed a timely 3 renewal application. During the hearing, counsel for appellee accused members of the Board of prejudging the case, of sleeping during the hearing, and of not paying attention to testimony. After the accusation about sleeping, the hearing deteriorated to the p oint where several membe rs of the B oard eng aged in a heated conversation with counsel for appellee involving demands for apologies and chastiseme nts about finger pointing from cou nsel and mem bers of the Board. Finally, one of the Board members asked counsel for appellee to leave the room, but he remained and continued arguing. Eventually, counsel was asked if he would act appropriately, and he said he would, so the hearing continued. Later, counsel for appellee objected to the entry of a mail log, and argued that it does not go to [appellee s] credibility. Ms. Hawkins, one of the Board m embe rs, stated sure it d oes. When counsel then said to the Board, Ms. Hawkins already said out loud it went to credibility, Ms. Hawkins denied saying it and then adde d, I did not [s ay that], and you're a b old-faced liar. Counsel for appellee objected to being called a liar during the proceeding and attempted to have Ms. Hawkins removed from hearing the case, but that request was denied. On February 21, 2001, appellant issued its Final Decision and Order, finding that appellee had violated Md. Code (1981, 2000 Repl. Vol.), §§ 12-301, 12-701, 12-707(e), and 12-313(b)(24) of the Health Occupations Article. Appellant placed appellee on probat ion, imp osed a f ine, and reprim anded her. 150 Md.A pp. at 142-46, 819 A .2d at 385-87 (footno tes omitted). Spencer then filed a Petition for Judicial Review in the Circuit Court for B altimore City, alleging , inter alia, that she had been deprived of procedural due process because M r. Ades and Ms. Schneider participated both as representatives of the Board in settlement negotiations and as memb ers of the panel adjudica ting her case. Agreeing with Spencer s 4 arguments, the Circuit Court vacated and reversed the B oard s Final Decision a nd Order. The Circuit Court ruled that there w as not subs tantial eviden ce in the reco rd to support the Board s decision; that the Board s renewal of Spencer s license pending the outcome of the investigation operated as a waiver of the violations subsequently found by the Board; and that Spencer had been deprived of due process as a result of the arguments that took place at the Board hearing between her attorney and two Board members. The Board appealed the Circuit Court s ruling to the Court of Special Appeals. The Court of Special Appeals agreed with the Circuit Cou rt that Spenc er was de nied her righ t to a fair and unbiased hearing, focusing on Ms. Hawkins accusation that Spencer s counsel was a bold-faced liar. The intermediate appellate court reversed the Circuit Court s ruling that the Board s renew al of Spencer s license h ad foreclosed the B oard from taking disciplinary action against her. Consequently, it remanded the case to the Circuit Court with instructions to remand the case to the Board, directing [the Board] to delegate the authority to conduct the contested case hearing and to issue the final administrative decision in this case to the OAH. 150 Md.App. at 155, 819 A.2d at 393. Spencer then filed a petition for writ of ce rtiorari in this Court. 376 Md. 49, 827 A.2d 112 (2003). Although petitioner has phrased the first question for our review as whether the Court of Special Appeals, by its order to the administrative agency to refer the case to the OAH, violated Article 8 of the Declarati on of Rights and § 10-205 of the A PA, a more accurate way of formulating the question, as we explain infra, is whether the Court of Special 5 Appea ls afforded the administrative agency the proper level of deference in a matter committed to the agen cy s discretion. P etitioner s seco nd questio n is whether the order to remand the matter to the OAH contravened either res judicata or double jeopardy principles as applied to administrative proceedings. Petitioner argues that th e Court of Special A ppeals exc eeded its jud icial authority when it fashioned a remedy that interfered with the Board s discretion to determine whether her case should be remanded to the OAH. She contends that the Co urt of Spe cial Appe als violated Article 8 of the Declaration of Rights in ordering the Board to send the case to the OAH, because in so doing , that court performed a non-judicial function, violating the constitutional mandate that the power of the three branches of government in Maryland be forever separate and distinct. See Dep t of Nat. Res. v. Linchester, 274 Md. 211, 334 A.2d 514 (1975). Petitioner also argues that because § 10-205 of the APA does not explicitly authorize the courts to delegate matters to the OAH, the Court of Special Appeals did not have authority to do so. Although the Board, as respondent, initially opposed these argumen ts in its Answ er to Petition f or Writ of C ertiorari, in its brief, respondent reversed course and now ag rees with petitioner that the Court of Special Appeals performed a nonjudicial f unction in violat ion of A rticle 8. This Court, of course, is not bound by the concessions made by the parties on issues of law, which we may inde pende ntly review . See In re Heather B., 369 Md. 257, 266 n.9, 799 A.2d 397, 402 n.9 (2002). But w e agree with both p arties that the Court of Special 6 Appea ls exceeded its authority when it compelled the Board to exercise discretion the Legislature explicitly g ranted to the adm inistrativ e agen cy. We therefore will reverse in part the intermediate appellate court s judgment and remand the matter to the Board.2 II. We address first the procedural and analytical posture of this case as it com es before this Court. W hen this C ourt sits in review of an adm inistrative agency decision, we reevaluate the decision of the agency under the same statutory standards as would the circuit court; we do not employ those standards to reevaluate the decision of the circuit or intermediate appellate co urt. See Divisio n of Labo r v. Triangle , 366 Md. 407, 416, 784 A.2d 534, 539 (200 1); Dept. of Health v. Campbell, 364 Md. 108, 123, 771 A.2d 1051, 1060 (2001) (noting that it is the final decision at the administrative level, not the decision of the reviewing court, which is the focus of each level of judicial review). Thus, as to the merits of such a matter, ordinarily and primarily, the inquiry is not whether the Court of Special Appeals erred, but whether the administrative agency erred. In the present case, in what w ay might the B oard hav e erred? T he answ er to this question lies with the two disputed a dministrative actions taken by the B oard that were 2 Because of the reasoning of our opinion, we will decline to address the constitutional argumen ts posed by the parties, for this Court regularly has adhered to the principle that we will not reach a constitutiona l issue when a case can be disposed of properly on a non-constitutional ground. Piscatelli v. Liquor Board, 378 Md. 623, 629-30, 837 A.2d 931, 935 (2003). 7 reversed by the Court of Special Appeals. Petitioner s original motion to the Board requested either (a) that her case be referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings or, in the alternative, (b) that the Board members who participated in the settlement negotiations recuse themselves. Petitioner asked the Circuit Court to review both the denial of the recusal motion and the denial of the motion to remove to the OAH. These two denials by the Board constitute the two administrative decisions which petitioner asked the Circuit Court and the Court o f Spec ial App eals to re view. The Court of Special Appeals, disagreeing with the Board s denial of both of those requests, held as follows: In light of the actions by the Board that caused an appearance of impropriety in the proceedings in this case before the Board, this Court holds that the circuit court did not err by finding that appellee was denied d ue proce ss in that h earin g. Co nseq uently, we remand this case to the Circuit Co urt for Baltim ore City with instructions to remand the case to the Board, directing appellant to delegate the authority to conduct the contested case hearing and to issue the final administrative decision in this case to the OAH . 150 Md.App. at 155, 819 A.2d at 393. Critical to understanding this case is the observation that the intermed iate appellate c ourt s analysis am ounted to a simultaneous review of two separate administrative actions: (1) the Board s failure to recuse certain members of the panel and (2) the Board s failure to refer the case to the OAH. Although the Court of Special Appea ls apparently considered th e agency s fa ilure to recuse the biased p anel mem bers to go hand-in-hand with the failure to refer the case to the OAH, we think it clear that the 8 determination that the actions of the Bo ard members created an appearan ce of imp ropriety and unfairness is separate and distinct from the determination that the case must be retried before [the OA H]. For e ven if the Board was required to recuse the biased members from the adjudicating panel, it was not logically bound to refer the case to the OAH . The Board could have easily complied with the court s judgment by replacing the biased members, yet persisted in its decision to forgo the OAH. Thus, those determinations were two distinct decisions by the agency, both of which were reviewed by the Court of Special Appeals. With respect to the agency decision denying the recusal motion, the Court of Special Appea ls held that the actions by the Board that caused an appearance of impropriety in the proceedings in this case before the Bo ard . . . denied [petitioner] due proces s in that h earing. Id.; cf. Maryland State Police v. Zeigler, 330 Md. 540, 559, 625 A.2d 914, 923 (1993) (stating that [p]rocedural due process, guaranteed to persons in this State by Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, requires that administrative agencies performing adjudicatory or quasi-judicial functions observe basic principles of fairness as to parties appearing before them ). Petitioner, of course, is satisfied with that ruling and did not raise that issue in the petition for certiorari, and neither did respondent cross-petition on that issue. Acc ordingly, we do not review that ruling b y the Cou rt of Sp ecial A ppeals . See Mehrling v. Nationwide, 371 Md. 40, 44 n.3, 806 A.2d 662, 665 n.3 (2002) (noting that the Court of Appeals will not norm ally address a qu estion not pr esented in p etition for certio rari), and upon remand, the Board must adhere to the court s ruling as it bears on th e defects in 9 procedural due process at petitioner s hearing. It is the second administrative decision taken by the Board, and its review by the Court of Special Appeals, that concerns us in the case sub judice. By this we mean the Court of Special Appeals s holding directing [the Board] to delegate the authority to conduct the contested case hearing an d to issue the final ad ministra tive dec ision in th is case to the OA H. The key point here is that the Court of Special Appeals judicially reviewed the Board s decision to deny the m otion to refe r the case to the OA H, and it found that decision to be wanting. The court s reasoning behind its determination is made in a footnote to its opinion: We recognize that under the APA, the delegation of matters to the OAH is not a man datory functio n but a function within the discretion of the administrative agen cy. [Regan v. Board of Chiropra ctic, 120 Md.App. 494, 513, 707 A.2d 891, 900 (1998 ).] In light of the facts of this p articular case, h oweve r, it would not be appro priate to remand the case to the same tribunal that heard the case originally. * * * In this case, we have held that the actions of the Boa rd members created an appearance of impropriety and unfairness, and for that reason, the case must be retried b efore a differe nt tribun al. 150 Md.App. at 156 n.14, 819 A.2d at 393 n.14. W e do not think it so obvious that this case must be retried before the OA H, and th e Court of Special Appeals did not discuss the appropriate standard of judicial review of the Board s decision not to refer. Because the Court of Special Appeals did not consider the appropriate standard of judicial review and whether, under that standard, the agency s decision must be overturned, that task is now before this Court, as we sit in review of the agency s action and not so much the decision by the intermediate appellate court. Therefore, this case requires us (1) to determine the proper 10 standard of review to apply to the Board s decision not to refer the case to the OAH and (2) applying that stan dard, to determ ine wh ether the Board s decisi on sho uld be u pheld. III. Whether the administrative agency s refusal to delegate to the OAH was improper requires us to determine the standard o f review for such an agency decision. The standard of review for an agency decision, in turn, will depend upon the level of discretion delegated to the admin istrative agen cy with respect to such decisio ns. See MTA v. King, 369 Md. 274, 293-94, 799 A.2d 1246, 1257 (20 02) (Wilner, J., concurring); Hecht v. Crook, 184 Md. 271, 280-81, 40 A.2d 673, 677 (1945); see gener ally A. Ro chvarg , Maryland Administrative Law, §§ 4.29 4 .38 (20 01); E. T omlins on, The Maryland Administrative Procedure Act, 56 Md. L. Rev . 196 (1 997). To discover the proper stand ard of judicial review, we begin with the APA. Becau se this case involves an agency acting in a quasi-ju dicial capacity, adjudicating the personal rights of petitioner, judicial review is governed by § 10-222, which is applicable to final decisions in contested cases. See § 10-222 (a). Were w e reviewin g the agen cy acting in its policymaking or quasi-legislative capacity, a wholly different analysis governs the decision. See § 10-125 ; Fogle v. H & G Restaurant, Inc., 337 Md. 441 , 654 A.2d 449 (1995). Section 10-222(h) governs the scope of judicial review of final administrative agency decisions in contested c ases as follo ws: 11 (h) Decision. In a proceeding un der this section, the court may: (1) remand the case for further proceedings; (2) affirm the final decision; or (3) reverse or modify the decision if any substantial right of the petitioner may have been prejudiced because a finding, conclusion, or decision: (i) is unconstitu tional; (ii) exceeds th e statutory autho rity or jurisdiction of the final decision maker; (iii) results from an unlawful procedure; (iv) is affected by any other error of law; (v) is un supp orted by competent, material, and substa ntial evidence in light of the entire record as submitted; or (vi) is arbitrary or capricious. Section 10-222(h)(3)(i) (vi) provides a statutory framework for understanding the scope of judicial review of agency decisions and is of particular interest to the case sub judice. Section 10-222(h)(3)(i) (iv) deals with judicial review of agency conclusions of law. Section 10-222(h)(3)(v) deals with judicial review of agency factual determinations. Section 10222(h)(3)( vi) deals with judicial review of any other agency determination for instance, as in the case sub judice, determinations over matters committed to the agency s discretion. Our jurisprudence has expanded on the meaning of these statutory provisions and provided guidance for their application by the courts. When an agency makes conclusions of law in a contested case, the court, on judicial 12 review, decides the correctness of the agency s conclusions and m ay substitute the court s judgment for that of the a gency s. Total AV v. Dept. of Labor, 360 Md. 387, 394, 758 A.2d 124, 127-28 (2 000) (notin g that questio ns of law addressed by administrative agency are complete ly subject to review by courts, although agency s interpretation of a statute may be entitled to some deference). This established principle of administrative law is exemplified in § 10-222(h)(3)(i) (iv), which permits judicial modification or reversal of agency action that (i) is unconstitu tional; (ii) exceeds the agency s jurisdiction; (iii) results from unlawful procedure; or (iv) is a ffecte d by any o ther er ror of la w. See Tomlinson, supra, at 215 n.131 ( Questio ns of law encomp ass the first fo ur ground s listed in the judicial review provision of the APA ). Section 10-222(h)(3)(iv), by authorizing correction of any other error of law, implicitly indicates (a) that courts retain a uthority to correc t all ( any ) errors of law and (b) an understanding that agency errors based upon the previous three provisions are also considered to be legal errors ( a ny other error of law ).3 In contrast, when an agency is not interpreting law but instead makes a finding of fact, we have applied substa ntial evid ence review . Substantial evidence review of agency factual findings is e mbodied in § 10-22 2(h)(3)(v). T hat provisio n grants a co urt authority 3 Even in the case of an agency interpreting law, our jurisprudence has shown a level of deferenc e to an agency s interpretation of law, provided the agency is interpreting its own regulations, MTA v. King 369 Md. 27 4, 288-89, 799 A .2d 1246, 1254 (2 002), or is interpreting the statu te it adm inisters, Jordan v . Hebbville , 369 Md. 439, 450, 800 A.2d 768, 775 (2002). Nevertheless, erroneous interpretations of law are never binding upon the courts. State Ethics v. Antonetti, 365 Md. 428 , 447, 780 A.2d 1 154, 1166 (200 1). 13 to overrule an agency s fac tual finding only when the finding is unsupp orted by com petent, material, and substa ntial evidenc e in light of the entire record as submitted . Accord ing to this more deferential standard of review, judicial review of agency factual findings is limited to ascertainin g wheth er a reason ing mind c ould have reached the same factual conclusions reached by the ag ency on t he reco rd befo re it. See Stansbury v. Jones, 372 Md. 172, 182-185, 812 A.2d 312, 318-320 (2002) (dis cussing su bstantial evid ence revie w in Maryland). Fina lly, there are circumstances when an agency acts neither as a finder of fact nor as an interpreter of law but rather in a dis cretiona ry capac ity. See, e.g., Maryland State Police v. Zeigler, 330 Md. 5 40, 625 A.2d 9 14. Logically, the courts owe a higher level of deference to functions specifically comm itted to the agency s discretion than they do to an a gency s legal conclusions or fa ctua l find ings . The refo re, th e discreti onary functions of the agency must be reviewed under a standard more deferential than either the de novo review afforded an agency s legal conclusions or the substantial evidence review afforded an agency s factual findings. In this regard, the standard set forth in § 1 0-222(h)(3)(vi), review of arbitrary or capricious agency actions, provides guidance for the courts as they seek to apply the correct standard of re view to discretionary fu nctio ns of the a gency. 4 4 Although a few of our cases a ppear to co nflate subs tantial eviden ce review with arbitrary or capric ious rev iew, see, e.g., Insurance Comm r v. Nat l Bureau, 248 Md. 292, 300-01, 236 A.2d 282, 286 (1967), it does not follow that they are one and the same. The substantial evidence test applies to agency findings of fact, as indicated by the very language of § 10-222(h)(3)(v) ( evidence supported by the whole record ). Arbitrary and capricious 14 This Court recently applied the arbitrary or capricious stand ard of review to discretionary functions of the agency in a case closely analogous to this one. Maryla nd State Police v. Zeigler involved a n administra tive agency s d ecision to reopen a hearing after it had already begun deliberations on the matter. In that case, we first determined that the decision to reopen a hearing for add itional ev idence was co mmitte d to the a gency s d iscretion . 330 Md. at 557-58, 625 A.2d at 922. As a discretionary function of the agency, the decision to reopen the hearing , we said, w as subject to ju dicial review , but only unde r the arbitrary or capricious s tandard. Jud ge Eldridg e, writing fo r the Cour t, observed: [A]s long as an administrative agency s exercise of discretion does not violate regulations, statutes, common law principles, due process an d other con stitutional requ irements, it is ordinarily unreviewable by the co urts. It is only when an agency s exercise of discretion, in an adjudicatory proceeding, review, on the other hand, could conceivably apply to any action of the agency not covered by the other provisions of § 10 -222(h)(3). We do not encoun ter, or decide, this issue of whethe r the arbitrary and capricious standard in § 10-222(h)(3)(vi) w ill govern every type of agency action not encompassed by § 10-22 2(h)(3) (i) (v). See Maryland State Police v. Zeigler, 330 Md. 540, 569-570, 625 A.2d 9 14, 928 (1993 ) (Bell, J., d issentin g); A. R ochva rg, Maryland Administrative Law, § 4.38 (2001). It is notable, however, that in contrast to the first five grounds for judicial review in § 10-222(h)(3)(i) (v), § 10-222(h)(3)(vi) does not delineate the type of agency decision to whic h it appli es, cf. § 10-222 (h)(3)(i)-(iv) (imp licitly and necessarily involving legal determinations by the agen cy); § 10-2 22(h )(3)( vi) (e xplicitly applying to evid entia ry, factual finding s), and could conceivably be a catch-all standard of review for any other agency action. And even in the absence of an applicable statutory scheme providing for judicial review, we have held an implied limitation upon an administrative agency s authority is that its decisions be not arbitrary or capricious. Bucktail v. Talbot County , 352 Md. 530, 550, 723 A.2d 440, 449 (1999); see also our line of cases explaining mandamus actions as they apply to ministerial or non-discretionary functions of administrative agencies, discussed in Crimina l Inj. Comp . Bd. v. Gou ld, 273 Md. 486 , 500-504, 331 A .2d 55, 65-66 (197 5). 15 is arbitrary or capr icious that co urts are authorize d to intervene [citing the provision now codified as 10-222(h)(vi), the arbitrary and capricious standard of review]. Id. (citation s omitte d). Similarly, in MTA v. King, we held that an agency s discretion to determine the magnitude of a sanction could only be review ed purs uant to § 10-22 2(h)(3) (vi), i.e., for arbitrariness or capriciousness. 369 Md. at 291, 799 A.2d at 1255-56. Even if the court felt the punishm ent to be d isproportion ate to the violation, the agency s determination of the amount or level of sanction could not be second-guessed, unless the sanction was so extreme and egregious that the reviewing court can properly deem the decision to be arbitrar y or capric ious, a s set for th in § 1 0-222 (h)(3)(v i). Id. The case sub judice does not differ significantly from Zeigler or King in that the decision being reviewed is also one committed to the agency s discretion and is to be reviewed under the same arbitrary or capricious standard set forth in 10-2 22(h)(3)(vi). Whether an action is in fact deeme d arbitrary or capricious will vary depending upon the amount of disc retion g ranted a n agen cy, a matte r of sub stantive law, see King, 369 M d. at 293-94, 799 A.2d at 1257 (Wilner, J., concurring); thus, the level of discretion afforded an agency s decision to re open a he aring, as in Zeigler, may differ from the discretion afforded an agency s decision to forgo the OAH, as in the instant case. Arbitrary and capricious review will apply to both types of decisions, but whether the agency s decision in each case is actually arbitrary or ca pricious w ill correspond to the discretio n afforde d it 16 Applying the legal principles outlined above, we hold that (1) the determination by an agency to refer a case to the OAH is a matter committed to its discretion and that (2) the Board did not abuse that discretion under the arbitrary or capricious standard. First, it is clear that the Board s refusal to refer the case to the OAH was not a legal conclusion or a factual finding but rather a f unction of the Bo ard s discretion. The discretion is granted to the Board in § 10-205(b)5 which declares an age ncy may delegate to the Office [of Administrative Hearings] the auth ority (emphasis added) to hear the case.6 The word ma y connotes a permissive, discretionary function of the agency when it delegates a case to the OA H. See Brodsky v. Brodsky, 319 Md. 92, 98, 570 A.2d 1235, 1237 (1990); Planning Comm. v. Silkor Corp., 246 Md. 516, 522, 229 A.2d 135, 139 (1967) (construing the word may to signa l the ordinary meaning of permission unless the context or the 5 Section 10-205(b) provides for the delegation of a contested case to the OAH: (b) Scope of authority delegated. An agency ma y delegate to the Office [of Administrative Hearings] the authority to issue: (1) propos ed or final f indings of fact; (2) proposed or final conclusions of law; (3) proposed or final findings of fact and conclusions of law; (4) proposed or final orders or orders under Article 49B of the Code; or (5) the final administrative decision of an agency in a contested case. 6 Although it is our understanding that, as a matter of practice, most state agencies subject to the APA exercise their authority to delegate duties to the OAH by regulation or administrative order and usually in broad categories of case types, there appe ars no reason why an agency may not do so on an ad hoc basis in a given case. We do not here address whether an agency s viola tion of its own established protocol with regard to OAH delegation may somehow amount to arbitrary or capricious agency action. 17 purpose of the statute show s that it is meant to be imperative); see also Regan, 120 Md.App. at 513, 707 A.2d at 900 (noting that under the APA, the delegation of matters to the OAH is not a man datory functio n but a fun ction within the discretion of the administrative agen cy). Nor was the Board required to send the case to the OAH, because logically there existed other options to the Board, such as rec using the offending members and replac ing them w ith different members, or, pursuant to § 10-20 5(b), referring to the OAH the authority to make a proposed decision bu t retaining fo r itself the ultimate auth ority to decide the case. In fac t, the Board may very well decide to send the case to the OAH; but if it does so, it shall not be under the aus pice s or c omp ulsio n of the ju dicia ry. Second, it is clear that the Board s decision to forgo the OAH was not arbitrary or capricious. An age ncy s preroga tive with respect to case referra l to the OA H is similar in scope to that of the agency s prerogative in determining the severity of sanctio ns, see King, 369 Md. at 291, 799 A.2d at 1255-56; Resetar v. State Bd. of Education, 284 Md. 537, 562, 399 A.2d 225, 238 (1979) ( It is impossible to catalogue just what would or would not constitute arbitrary action on the part of an administrative agency . . . in imposing sanctions ), or to that of forgoing prosecution of a particu lar individua l. In such cas es, it is most difficult to apply or even articulate a judicial standard b y which the agency s discretionary decision might be deemed arbitrary or capricio us, cf. Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 105 S.Ct. 1649, 84 L.Ed.2d 714 (1985) (holding that the FDA s decision not to take enforcement actions was not subject to judicial review under the federal APA because 18 such enforcement decisions are comm itted to agenc y discretion by law and do n ot supply the courts w ith law to apply, that is, a legal standard to which the agency can be held). The reviewing court, absent some sho wing of fraud or egregious behavior on behalf of the agen cy, will be hard pressed to articulate a reason why the agency acted arbitrarily or capriciously when it did not send the case to the OAH. This is true for the case before us toda y. Even conceding the error of the Board s failure to recuse certain members from the panel, that alone does not suffice to render arbitrary or capricious the Board s decision not to refer to the OAH. The Court of Special Appeals erred when it reviewed this discretionary function and found the a gency wanting and incapable of cond ucting a fair hearing and render ing a fa ir decisio n. To be sure, because of the nature of th e Board m embers p articipating, it was improper for those members who participated in the settlement negotiations to remain as panel members adjudicating petitioner s case, and tho se members may not constitute a part of the panel if or when petitioner s case is reheard.7 But that did not by itself require referral to the 7 We do not adopt a per se rule of recu sal, nor do w e intend ou r holding o r comme nts to imply that recusal is mandatory when a trial judge participates in settlement negotiations. See Maryland Rule 16-813, Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3 (setting forth the situations requiring m andatory recu sal); see also Anno t., Judge s C omme nts U rging Settlement, 6 A.L.R.3d 1457 (1966). In the instant c ase, as the C ourt of Sp ecial App eals aptly noted, two of the Board members participated in settlement discussions with S pencer. 150 Md.A pp. 138, 150, 819 A.2d 383, 390 (2003). The Board considered the settlement negotiations in rendering its final decision, noting in the Order that [a]lthough the Respondent agreed to a proposal at the conference, she later rejected it. It is the overall appearan ce of imp ropriety in this case that requires re cusal. 19 OAH, as any number of other options lay open to the Board. The proper course, in view of the Board s d iscretion to ref er, was to remand th e case to the Board w ith instructions to cure the defects the reviewing court found at the original hearing, bu t without a mandate requiring referral of the case to the OAH. That is what we shall do, and the lower court s direction regarding referral of the case to the OAH is reversed. IV. Petitioner s final argum ent, that a rem and will create issues of res judicata or double jeop ardy, is witho ut merit a nd friv olous. The Board s enforcement of its licensing and disciplinary requirements serve pu rposes essential to the protection of th e public, which are deemed remedial, rather than punitive, and therefore are not subject to double jeopardy principles. See State v. Jones, 340 Md. 23 5, 666 A.2d 12 8 (1995); Ward v. D ept. of Pub . Saf. & Cor. S ervices , 339 Md. 343, 350, 663 A.2d 66, 69 (1995) (holding that where the purpose of the penalty is remedial, it is not punishment for doub le jeopardy purp oses); McDonnell v. Comm n on Medical Discipline, 301 Md. 426, 436, 483 A.2d 76, 81 (1984) (noting that the purpose of disciplinary proceedings against licensed professionals is not to punish the offender but rather as a catharsis for the profes sion and a prophylactic for the public ). Even if double jeopardy was applicable, which it is not, the rehearing would not be precluded, as a new trial (or rehearing) ordinarily is not precluded by double jeopardy principles when a conviction is reversed on grounds other th an suf ficienc y of the ev idence . Huffington v. State, 20 302 Md. 184, 189, 486 A.2d 200, 203 (1985). The remand was not based on insufficiency of evidence but on defects in procedure. Neither is res judicata applicable in this case because there is no final judgment the case is still on appellate review and because issue and claim preclusion require a subsequent cause of action in w hich those d octrines ma y take effect; this appeal is no t a subsequent cause of actio n but all p art of th e same case. See Murray International v. Graham, 315 Md. 543, 547, 555 A.2d 502, 504 (1989) (noting that res judicata principles preserve the conclusive effect of judgments, except on appeal or other direct review, and quoting Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 27 (1982) that [w]hen an issue of fact or law is actually litigated and determined by a valid and final judgmen t, and the dete rmination is essential to the judgm ent, the determination is conclusive in a subsequent action between the parties, whether on the sam e or a different claim ). JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEA LS REV ERSED IN PART. CASE REMANDED TO THAT COURT WITH DIRECTIONS TO VACATE THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCU IT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY AND TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE CIRCUIT COURT WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION. COSTS TO BE EVENLY DIV IDED BETWEE N 21 PETITIONER AND STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY. Chief Ju dge Bell concurs in the jud gme nt on ly. 22


text:
The wait is over and the early signs are that UK sales of the Nintendo 3DS since midnight on Thursday have been very healthy.
Many pre-order purchasers will have woken to the ring of the doorbell this morning with postal workers across the land getting the best reception they've had since Christmas. Not only did the 3DS take the PlayStation 3's crown as the largest pre-ordered console ever with Amazon, it has outsold it by more than 70%.
The 3DS has two screens, the lower one a touch screen while the upper one displays the 3D images without the need for the glasses. The 3D Depth Slider lets you adjust the impact of the image. Games available at launch include Ridge Racer 3D, Pilotwings Resort, Super Monkey Ball 3D, Rayman 3D and Super Street Fighter IV 3D.
The 3DS boasts a number of features Nintendo hopes will see the glory days return when it was selling games units in the hundreds of millions, and comes with a price tag of up to £229.
Price check has tracked down the best deals at the time of publication, but prices are likely to move fast so add any cheaper deals below.
High street
If you are eager to get your hands on a 3DS now, Morrisons offers the best in-store price of £187 – but stocks are very limited, so ring ahead.
The best in store package is offered by Tesco, which is selling the console plus any 3DS game for £209. Asda are promoting a similar in-store deal of console plus game for £212.
If you can wait a while to get your console the best price online is at Amazon, also for £187. In addition, it is also offering a package of 3DS with a game and screen protector for £202.
Asda is also charging £187 online with the opportunity to purchase one of 14 games for a further £15.
Trade-in prices
A few outlets are offering trade-in deals with previous Nintendo consoles. Argos lets you trade in your DSi XL to get the 3DS plus an accessory kit and vouchers for £109.99. Hand over your DSi and you will pay £144.99.
HMV is the best place to trade in the DS Lite, meaning your pay £164.99 for your 3DS console.
If you wanted to sell it independently and put the money towards a 3DS the average sale price on eBay for the DSi was about £75, and for the DS Lite about £60, though obviously these prices fluctuate.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Ideas for the Mobility Strategy
Design and create with sharing in mind
Strive for reusability, simplicity, and platform-independence to the maximum extent practicable when developing mobility solutions.
Voting on Ideas
Vote for your favorite ideas by clicking on the up arrow.To undo an upvote, simply click the arrow again. This second click removes your vote.
16 votes
Idea No. 34


text:
Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment has announced the formation of WB Games San Francisco, a new studio in San Francisco set to open this year.
The studio will specialise in developing and publishing "high-quality, free-to-play, mobile, social and browser-based games".
"We are extremely pleased to add WB Games San Francisco to our global portfolio of studios and publishing capabilities," said Martin Tremblay, president, Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. "As our company has grown over the years, it has been a high priority to attract and cultivate creativity and innovation in top markets for game development around the world."
WB Games San Francisco will also oversee publishing of all other mobile games developed by Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment.
Source: Press release


text:
© 2017 CFL. All rights reserved.
Now Reading
CFL.ca Staff
HAMILTON – Veteran quarterback Quinton Porter is hitting the open market a month before he was set to become a free agent after being released by the Hamilton Tiger-Cats today. The 'Cats also announced that Marwan Hage has agreed to a new contract that will see the veteran offensive lineman remain in Hamilton through the 2015 season.
Porter, who dabbled as the club's starter throughout his tenure, played five seasons with the Black and Gold. He completed 358 of 562 passes for 4,095 yards and 21 touchdowns with 18 interceptions. The 6-foot-5, 228-pound pivot also rushed 169 times for 919 yards and 15 touchdowns.
The Boston College grad was used sparingly last season while backing up Henry Burris, seeing action primarily in short yardage situations.
A former East Division Most Outstanding Lineman, Hage, was slated to become a free agent next month. Since being selected in the second round (14th overall) of the 2004 CFL Draft, Hage has suited up in 126 regular season games over nine seasons and has been the Ticats starting centre since 2005.
"I'm pleased to extend my contract and have the opportunity to finish my career with the Tiger-Cats. I couldn't imagine myself playing for any other team," said Hage. "I feel a sense of loyalty to this city and our great fans, and I look forward to working with my teammates to bring the Grey Cup back to Hamilton."
Hage has established himself as one of the league's premier offensive lineman over the course of his career, earning recognition as a CFLPA All-Star four times, an East Division All-Star twice and a CFL All-Star once. Hage has also been named the Ticats Most Outstanding Lineman four times and was selected as the East Division's Most Outstanding Lineman in 2010.
"Marwan is not just an outstanding player, he's a respected leader in our locker room and a great representative of our organization in the community," said Vice President of Football Operations, General Manager and Head Coach Kent Austin.
Hage is also renowned for his contributions to the Hamilton community. His community program, Hage's Heroes, has welcomed over 5,000 underprivileged youth to Tiger-Cats home games, fed over 6,000 families through food drives and made numerous donations to local charities since its inception in 2007.
He was honoured with the CFL's Tom Pate Memorial Award in 2009 in recognition of his efforts in the community.


text:
Under Eye Dark Circle Cream – Eliminating Circles to Look Your Best
Under eye dark circle cream can be effective in helping to reduce the look of dark circles under the eyes. In some cases, these circles might be caused by genetic issues or a medical condition, so not everyone will find an under eye dark circle cream that works for them. You should do a little research to learn about the different products available and learn which types of under eye dark circle cream will offer you the most success with your endeavors. Since everyone is different, you might have to try a few products before you succeed.
Under eye dark circle cream helps to reduce the look of fine lines and wrinkles, making it easier for you to look better. You don't have to worry about finding the cure or elimination for these circles because under eye dark circle cream won't actually eliminate dark circles. It will help to alleviate them and make your eyes less dark, but it will not cure the issue. In fact, many people don't even get results that are that great with under eye dark circle cream. The problem is that there are chemicals in these products that can help to improve the look of dark circles but nothing can cure the cause of the problem unless you figure out how the circles started.
Under eye dark circle cream is available in hundreds of different types and price ranges. Keep in mind that the most expensive under eye dark circle cream isn't always going to be the most effective, either. You need to look at more than just the cost involved in under eye dark circle cream to make the best decisions about which products you want to use. There are so many different types of products to choose from that price should be your very last concern aside from finding products that are within your budget.
You can get rid of circles for the most part with under eye dark circle cream, but very few people will ever see a complete removal of the circles unless they get healthy, change their diet, and have no genetic or medical factors playing into their dark eye circles. Under eye dark circle cream is not going to work the same way for everyone so it is up to you to find what works and figure out which products are going to provide you with the relief that you need. With 9 out of 10 adults reporting issues with under eye circles, finding helpful information online should be a breeze.
Top Eye Creams
Also Remember These Dermatologist Recommended Important Tips:
- Age has nothing to do with the lines that appear on the corners of your eyes... it's a combination of heredity and careless abuse of the area.
- Skin is skin... it all needs to be cared for in one way or another. For my younger readers, this means not pulling on the skin when removing eye makeup.
- The eye area is prone to fine lines and wrinkles, so it is really important not over-work the area, squint, and stay away from smokey rooms. Your eyes won't like that either.
- One of the best ways to protect this area of your face is to put on a pair of sunglasses every single time you go outside spring, summer, fall and winter.
- There are very few oil glands in the eye area, so it can dry out very quickly, especially if you spend a great deal of time out of doors.
- When you chose an eye cream, be sure to choose one that is especially formulated for this delicate skin. Don't use a day cream that could be full of ingredients that will irritate this area. Too rich a cream can cause as many problems as ignoring the area.


text:
People at Savannah: Ren Lawrence Profile
Follows the Profile of Ren Lawrence <renlawrence>.
Open Items submitted by Ren Lawrence
GNU nano:
Open Items assigned to Ren LawrenceNone found
General Information
|Real Name:
|Ren Lawrence
|Login Name:
|Email Address:
|Site Member Since:
|Wed 11 Aug 2010 03:02:28 PM UTC
|This user did not enable Resume & Skills.
Project/Group InformationThis user is not a member of any Group
You Could Send a Message if you were logged in.


text:
Don't miss your chance to see Randy Houser in Springfield! Check out the schedule below for the concert date of your choice, then buy your Randy Houser Springfield tickets before they sell out!
Looking for Randy Houser tickets in other cities? View all Randy Houser tickets »
Sorry! We couldn't find any events for Randy Houser in Springfield.
If you were searching to see if Randy Houser is coming to Springfield, then you're in luck! For their latest tour, Randy Houser will indeed hold a concert in Springfield. Have an awesome concert experience when you go to see Randy Houser in Springfield. Get your Randy Houser tickets Springfield and join fellow fans for a concert to remember!


text:
The PokéCommunity Forums
Pokémon: General Discussions
Pokémon General
> Wat pokemon scares u the most?
View Full Version :
Wat pokemon scares u the most?
March 31st, 2008, 1:45 PM
For me its jynx. look at it! Its so freaky...o_O
March 31st, 2008, 3:06 PM
Well, not SCARED, but Gulpin and Swalot, I just don't trust them.
March 31st, 2008, 3:28 PM
Well, not SCARED, but Gulpin and Swalot, I just don't trust them.
...and you trust starfish with giant gems and psychic powers? k...
Salamence scares me, even tho its one of my favorites. Imagine meeting up with IT on your way to school. Not entirely out of the question in the pokemon world either.
March 31st, 2008, 3:48 PM
None scare me in the games.
In real-life? Possibly any of the Ghastly evolutions. Getting near them means they can eat your soul... Heck, they possess people even.
March 31st, 2008, 3:53 PM
...and you trust starfish with giant gems and psychic powers? k...
Salamence scares me, even tho its one of my favorites. Imagine meeting up with IT on your way to school. Not entirely out of the question in the pokemon world either.
Hey! Don't bag on Starmie, it's a kick ass pogey! But think about it, especialy with Swalot: that thing is huge, it's mouth opens to outrageous proportions in comparison with it's size, and I'm sure you could start being digested by tripping into it, and not even into it's mouth. It's like the blob, it creeps me out. And yet, I seem to have no problem with Muk (other than its smell).
Guardian Soul
March 31st, 2008, 4:40 PM
If it were real, Yanmega.
That's one freaky lookin' thing.
March 31st, 2008, 4:52 PM
I don't fear any of them, really. Oh, wait. I fear female Machoke, you know, because of the whole chest incident. <<; And female Wobbuffet, it looks wierd with lipstick. :D;
April 1st, 2008, 1:22 AM
Why do people not fear pikachu. And how can you trust it. Its all cute and cudly sure but come on. That liddle thing will go charlie manson on your asses.
April 1st, 2008, 1:43 AM
back in R/B games, I was scared of huanter, that think just looks horrific, I was a kid too, scared to death of the thing.
April 1st, 2008, 1:53 AM
Whoa whoa whoa, why is everybody a mod all of a sudden?
I wasn't really scared of any pokemon when I started (I was eight then.)
However, Yanmega does creep me out. I thought Yanma was cute...:(
April 1st, 2008, 2:20 AM
Whoa whoa whoa, why is everybody a mod all of a sudden?
April Fools...
Not really scared of Pokemon, but the ones that have a premise to be scary IF Pokemon were real... various ghost types I guess, such as Dusknoir, Purugly for sheer... ugliness, and don't forget Shedinja - according to the good old Pokedex, if you were to look in the crack on its back, it'll steal the spirit from you... and looking at its backsprite...
Others - the 'scary intimidating' ones, like Gyrandoes, as well as Quagsire. It's so... ugly! Gah! It's face and beedy eyes!
April 1st, 2008, 5:54 AM
The Arbok sprite in Red/Blue freaked me out... I couldn't see its real face and Arbok's markings in the game just look like a huge freaky-looking face. o_O
IRL I would be scared of pretty much every bug Pokemon. x-x;
April 1st, 2008, 7:25 AM
Back in the days...
In R/B versions, the ghost sprite freaked me out..especially with that music...
that was when I was..uhh..young xD
April 1st, 2008, 9:00 AM
Well......now (if I met it in r/l) it'd be Dusclops. A cyclop-looking ghost. How cute....
In r/b/y the ghosts!
April 1st, 2008, 10:31 AM
im scared of gliscor looks scary
April 1st, 2008, 12:28 PM
Well, no Pokemon scares me because of the way it looks.
It's what the Poke'Dex says that scares me! ):
Lets take Dusclops for example:
It's body is hollow. Is is said that those
who look into its body are sucked into the void
Like what the fudge?! ): Thats freaky~!
April 1st, 2008, 12:54 PM
Giratina is scary D: But then again, so is Garchomp.
April 1st, 2008, 1:04 PM
Giratina is scary D: But then again, so is Garchomp.
Omgosh~ I forgot all about Girantina! XD
Yeaah~ He's pretty freaky looking. D:
April 1st, 2008, 1:26 PM
I agree with some here bout Yanmega, it's just so... buggish O.o
But I think Giratina is the scariest, I once had a nightmare bout it >.>
April 1st, 2008, 1:36 PM
The Machoke sprite in Pokémon Silver.
Nobody will probably understand this but I found it scary.
April 1st, 2008, 1:52 PM
Muk, d00d! thats one scary pokemon
April 1st, 2008, 1:52 PM
Muk, d00d! thats one scary pokemon
sorry for double posting.
April 1st, 2008, 3:30 PM
If Pokemon were real, I'd be terrified of Pikachu, Raichu, Ratatta and Raticate. I hate regular rats, so I don't need ones that can conduct electricity or are super-sized.
April 1st, 2008, 4:02 PM
I don't know how things would be for me if pokemon were real, but just as things actually are, Electivire and Beedril scare me a lot XD. Electivire's constant smile/grimace is just weird, and just regular bee stings hurt so much, so I almost shudder every time I think of what it'd be like to be stung by a Beedril XD
April 1st, 2008, 4:09 PM
well I'm not scared of any pokemon, but if a tangela or a tangrowth were real like in life and it tried to touch me then I would run and be scared. lol :laugh:
April 1st, 2008, 4:33 PM
Dunsparse OMG So ulgy ahhhhhhhhhh!!!!11
Dragon Dance
April 1st, 2008, 5:24 PM
Jigglypuff! OMG HERE IT COMES!!!! *Hides in Corner*
1st generation
April 2nd, 2008, 3:00 AM
Definitely croagunk because it's unchanging giant smile...... waiting and watching without even blinking. No matter what you do to it, it'll still be smiling...........
Tater Tot
April 2nd, 2008, 3:08 AM
None of em' scare me, they're not real. But the weirdest I would say would be Yanmega probably. It freaks me out. O_O
April 2nd, 2008, 6:15 AM
I would say Ursaring because nobody wants to wake it up!
April 2nd, 2008, 6:57 AM
croagunk is disturbing in that way. I would say granbull, its a pit bull which i fear
April 2nd, 2008, 8:13 AM
Any ghost especially Dusclopps, Duscnoir (or something like that, well Dusclops evo) and Giratina. I guess Gengar as well... :\
April 2nd, 2008, 9:11 AM
from Gen1 to Gen3 no Pokemon scares me until gender differences were introduced. Female Wobbuffet scares me.
April 2nd, 2008, 5:07 PM
Shedinja and Banette, if they were real.
April 3rd, 2008, 5:29 AM
Oh, an water pokemon scare in the same way as real fish scare me. Especially crabs and shrimp! Krabbys!
April 3rd, 2008, 5:43 AM
Skuntant freak me, too. Mostly because of the sound they make on the game.
April 3rd, 2008, 7:30 PM
beedrill is the pokemon that scares me
April 3rd, 2008, 7:36 PM
shuckle and numel. Im not sure why, they dont 'scare' me, just creep me out
April 5th, 2008, 12:10 AM
Pikachu - if i touched him I'd be beaten silly by all his rabid fans
Tater Tot
April 6th, 2008, 7:18 AM
When I was little, I used to be scared of Gengar. But then after I went out of that phase, I had this huge obsession with it. XD
April 6th, 2008, 7:24 AM
Mewtwo.... But not really.... I just have a theory that Mewtwo is made up of Skeleton and Lizard.
April 6th, 2008, 7:38 AM
yeah yanmega and gliscor are the only moderately scary pokemon and that is only because they look like freacks.
Cruelty And The Beast
April 6th, 2008, 11:52 AM
grimer and muk would be the obvious ones-just, disgusting.
Other than that hoothoot. Just far, far too weird for my liking.
However, I do want a pet mew.
I'm Dan btw, I'm new-nice to meet all you beautiful people =)
The snorlax master
April 6th, 2008, 12:01 PM
For me, deoxys is my scariest pokemon!
April 6th, 2008, 1:23 PM
IF they were real, the Ghastly evolution line and Shedinja.
Shedinja: A discarded bug shell that came back to life. Peering into the crack on it's back is said to steal one's soul.
Haunter: It licks with it's vicious tongue to steal one's life force. It lurks in darkness for it's prey.
Gengar: It hides in darkness. It is said that when GENGAR is hiding, the room cools down by 10 degrees F. Lurking in the corners of rooms, it waits for chances to steal it's victim's life force.
April 6th, 2008, 3:25 PM
Dodorio..Who wouldnt freak out from a giant three headed ostrich?
Tater Tot
April 7th, 2008, 6:20 AM
Eh, Deoxys is a little freaky.
Spiritomb too.
But none of em' scare me...
Ecept Arceus. XD
Motsuko Live
April 7th, 2008, 2:25 PM
It's not really a Pokemon, but that ghost thing in Red/Blue & FR/LG. The one you need the Silph Goggles (or whatever they're called) to see, and it ends up being a dead Marowak. Yeesh, even my Pokemon were scared stiff! That thing gives me the Heebie Jeebies!
Also, the sprite of Golbat from R/B...Look at this thing;
With his tounge just flappin' wildly about...Eww! *crumples picure of Golbat, burns and buries the ashes*
April 7th, 2008, 10:47 PM
Nobody's mentioned Tentacool and - oh god - Tentacruel? I once came across this massive jellyfish washed up on the beach in Spain. The size of a small child. There's something not quite right about them D:
I agree with a couple of you - Deoxys scared the heck out of me in that Pokémon special episode with Solana. The noises and stuff =|
And oh god, Motsuko Live, I saw that Golbat sprite yesterday. I'm almost relieved I never played R/B =|
April 8th, 2008, 12:43 AM
NON Acually scare me but if pokemon was real i have my own and i would kick there A S S but all the goust pokemon kinda kreep me out
April 8th, 2008, 2:10 PM
im scared of gengar comn by ten degrees that would make my blood crawl
oh and garchomp and tyranitar imagine if you come home and their eating your fridge
out and your cat but the only escape is fighting what would you do?
April 9th, 2008, 2:50 AM
i think it has to be jynx its just sooo scaryy i dOnt like it!!
April 9th, 2008, 6:43 AM
Drowsy scares the crap outta me,his voice and the way he moves his hands jeez!!! and Jinx is the devil...Drifblooms description scares me,lures children away by taking their hand AHHH!
April 11th, 2008, 11:17 AM
Oh yeah, and obviously Giratina.
May 24th, 2008, 10:25 PM
Kyogre...Defintaly. That monster tried to flood the world!!! That's just evil....


text:
In the Name of the Father
If there remained any doubt in Netanyahu's mind about the Via Dolorosa awaiting him, it was dispelled after the attack by Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz.
It was three or four weeks ago. The important European guests asked for an evaluation of the political situation in the aftermath of the disengagement. Despite the many ears cocked to hear his words, Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert gave free rein to his tongue. He detailed the timetable for approving the state budget, surveyed the power relations in the Knesset and discussed the slim to nonexistent chance that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government will finish December with an approved budget for 2006. Assuming that the budget will not pass the Knesset by March 31, 2006, the minister asked, why wait until March, why not declare elections as soon as December?
According to close associates of Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Europeans visiting Olmert's bureau were not the only ones to have heard of this proposal. Rumors about the plan to take advantage of a failure to pass the budget to advance the elections also reached Netanyahu's court.
MK Michael Ratzon of the Likud "rebels," who had been Olmert's deputy at the Ministry of Trade and Industry, has been voicing for months the thesis that Sharon has made up his mind to run in the next elections on a social platform. That is why, when Olmert talks about the rejection of the 2006 budget, he is not necessarily referring to the social lobby made up by Labor, Meretz and Shas. For some time now there has been a brooding suspicion in the Netanyahu camp that the 2005 budget will be the last to win Sharon's support. The budget-cut champ has done his bit and now the time has come for him to go.
Netanyahu has known Sharon for a long time. He knows that the prime minister would not hesitate for a second to turn him into the enemy of the poor and don a Robin Hood costume himself. An election budget could send the economy into reverse. It is not hard to guess to whom Sharon and Olmert would send the bill.
If there remained any doubt in Netanyahu's mind about the Via Dolorosa that was awaiting him in the coming months, it was dispelled after the attack by Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, considered to be Sharon's man and mouthpiece, in his Saturday interview on Channel 2.
Netanyahu knew it was impossible to go to the newspapers with the story that he had decided to resign in order to escape from the trap that Sharon and Olmert have set for him. In a simulation held on Saturday in his home, Netanyahu had to deal with the scenario where commentators paint him as a "serial divorcer."
After turning his back on two wives, he is now abandoning his latest love - the Israeli economy. He had to take into account that he will not only be accused of meanness, but also of stupidity. Who is going to take seriously the talk that history will tear him to bits because he remained in a bizarre government that relinquished territories without getting anything in return? You would have to be a narcissist and a megalomaniac to assume that a hundred years from now, historians are going to care whether the finance minister resigned from the government of Israel.
Even the leaders of the Yesha Council of Settlements (Yesha, which means "salvation" in Hebrew, is an acronym for Judea, Samaria and the Gaza District) know that the disengagement horse left the stable long ago and that Netanyahu's resignation will not bring it back. Among Netanyahu's close friends there are those who are relentlessly whispering in his ear that it is to his benefit that Sharon pull Israel out of the mud of the Gaza Strip and establish a precedent for dismantling settlements. This will make the next prime minister's life a great deal easier.
In particular, they warn him against wrathful prophecies that after the disengagement will come the Qassams. And what will happen if Hamas does keep the cease-fire, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) does put his house in order and the disengagement does become a success story? And anyway, how can you bring the Hamas branch in Ein Hilwe into the Likud Central Committee when elections are just around the corner?
The prevailing explanation, that once again Netanyahu was motivated by hysteria, seems unlikely to be true. The decision to resign was preceded by prolonged indecision and a series of consultations. Perhaps there is something to what one of his advisors said, that the explanation should be sought in Netanyahu's complex relationship with his father - historian Benzion Netanyahu - with his brother Ido and with his wife Sara, who has tied an orange ribbon to the car's antenna.
Kahane still lives
More than a year and a half ago, MK Roman Bronfman (Meretz-Democratic Choice) asked the United States Embassy for details about Jewish organizations that have been honored with a place on the State Department black list. Ten days later, Bronfman received a letter from Ambassador Dan Kurtzer with a list of more than 20 Jewish organizations the U.S. has outlawed and whose assets it has confiscated. Included in the list were the New Kach Movement, Kahane Was Right, the Rabbi Kahane Memorial Foundation, the Jewish Legion, Young Meir and the Voice of Judah.
With up-to-date information in hand, Bronfman wrote then-attorney general Elyakim Rubinstein saying, "The gravity of the danger that derives from the activities of these illegal organizations necessitates taking all the measures at the disposal of a state governed by law." He assumed that anyone who is bad for the United States cannot be good for Israel, and that the attorney general would act to outlaw all of these organizations.
After checking with "the relevant elements," the Attorney General's Bureau informed Bronfman that "the evidentiary infrastructure upon the basis of which the government of the United States came to declare the organizations of the Kahane Lives movement to be terrorist organizations is not in our possession." However, the attorney general noted that the cabinet decision from 1994 - after the massacre at the Tomb of the Prophets in Hebron - to declare two Kach groups terrorist organizations permits legal action against "every group of individuals" that acts to achieve similar aims.
The attorney general added that the meaning of the declaration in Israel is in many respects broader than the U.S. government's decision, "something that allows war along a broader front against acts of terror that the organization and its combinations and derivatives create." He stressed that parts of the defense establishment "frequently devote attention to the activity of these organizations and, in coordination with the State Prosecutor's Office, from time to time take various actions with respect to them."
Apparently, Eden Natan Zada never heard of these actions, nor had the Jewish bullies who last March attacked Ma'arouf Hussein from the village of Yasuf near the Jewish West Bank settlement of Kfar Tapuah, the crucible of the Kahanist who carried out the act of terror in Shfaram.
Hussein told of six young people who attacked him while he was plowing his land. "Two of them grabbed my arm and twisted it hard behind my back. The third punched me in the eye. My head was bleeding and my face was covered in blood. After that, they pushed me off the terrace and fled," he said. A shepherd who was nearby heard Hussein's cries for help and helped him get to the gate of the settlement of Tapuah.
The guard at the gate called police and a Red Crescent ambulance took the wounded man to the hospital.
Hussein told activists from the Yesh Din organization that he could identify his attackers. Hussein's case was added to the scores of other cases that have accumulated in the office of the organization's attorney, Michael Sfarad.
The Kahanists aren't made to pay for their deeds unless an Arab dies, preferably an Israeli citizen.
In Sneh's name
Avigdor Lieberman often makes use of MK Ephraim Sneh of the Labor Party to promote the sale of the idea of handing over the villages of the Triangle to the Palestinians, with their Israeli inhabitants, in return for the annexation to Israel of the settlement blocs. Quite a number of journalists have relied on Lieberman, assuming that the leader of an important political movement quotes other people correctly.
In a letter sent to Lieberman yesterday, Sneh informs him that he has never proposed handing any locale over to Palestinian control and asks him to stop sharing paternity of the idea with him.
Want to enjoy 'Zen' reading - with no ads and just the article? Subscribe todaySubscribe now


text:
In Touch with Prairie Living
November 2001
By Michael M. Miller
The Germans from Russia Heritage Collection (GRHC) at the NDSU Libraries in Fargo reaches out to prairie families and former Dakotans. In various ways, it affirms the heritage of the Germans from Russia as an important part of the northern plains culture.
In September, Bob Dambach, director of programming and productions, Prairie Public Television (PPTV), Fargo, and I traveled to south-central North Dakota and north-central South Dakota for videotape documentary filming projects. We filmed in the Eureka, Bowdle, and Roscoe, SD, area for the 2002 PPTV iron cross documentary and the 2004 Glueckstal documentary. We filmed at the Hague Cafe, Hague, ND, with Helen Grefroh Fischer making her famous strudels. In Linton, ND, we filmed Viola Welk Bosch making German-Russian foods. Father Thomas Welk, Wichita, KS, was filmed for the 2003 Kutschurgan documentary.
In October, we traveled to Bismarck and Strasburg, ND, filming Germans from Russia foodways including Bernadine Lang Kuhn and Erika Lang Wangler, natives of Napoleon, ND. We also filmed at the well-known annual church supper and bazaar at Saints Peter & Pauls Church, Strasburg.
We have designed two new color-coded laminated 11 by 17 inch maps of the former Germans villages of South Russia. These maps include German villages of Bessarabia, Crimea, Dobrudscha, Beresan District, Kutschurgan District, and Liebental District, as well as Mennonite and Hutterite colonies. Ancestors of the Germans from Russia community in the Dakotas immigrated from these villages in South Russia. For further information, write to me or visit: http://library.ndsu.edu/grhc/order/maps/maps3.html. The two maps were completed in 1999, with revisions in 2001. These maps, clearly identifying locations and names of the homeland villages, have been popular at GRHC outreach events.
Reservations are being taken for the Journey to the Homeland Tour (May 26-June 7, 2002) sponsored by the NDSU Libraries. The tour will include Odessa, Ukraine, and the nearby former Bessarabian, Black Sea, and Crimean German villages; Stuttgart, Germany, and Alsace, France. Limited space is available.
GRHC has published two important books that unfold the tragic story of the Germans who stayed in South Russia (today Ukraine), the famine and suffering they experienced. Well Meet Again in Heaven: Germans in the Soviet Union Write Their American Relatives: 1925 - 1937," written by Ronald J. Vossler, shares their dramatic first-account story. The book includes many letters translated from German to English including these family names: Boschee, Dockter, Eckman, Feiger, Goehring, Graf, Heupel, Hochhalter, Ketterling, Kirschmann, Kramer, Lang, Morlock, Opp, Rudolf, Rueb, Schauer, Speidel, Stock, Viel, and Wanner. Ron Vossler writes: "The family names clearly show a direct link, one of old love and also of family ties, between the Dakota pioneers and those unfortunate family members who remained behind in Russia."
In the new biography published by GRHC, Why are you still alive?: A German in the Gulag by Georg Hildebrandt, Heidelberg, Germany, the author writes about his life story and the suffering by the Ukrainian Germans. Many Germans died in Siberian detention camps during Stalin's dictatorship. Hildebrandt's biography revives this story originally published in 1993 in the German language. His biography is a shocking document of the Germans in the former USSR. He documents what happened with amazing memory and precision. Hildebrandt celebrated his 90th birthday in July, 2001.
The award-winning documentary videotapes The Germans from Russia: Children of the Steppe, Children of the Prairie (1999), and Schmeckfest: Food Traditions of the Germans from Russia (2000), continue to be well received throughout North America. To secure the videotapes, contact Prairie Public at 1-800-359-6900. The videotapes include 20 minutes of bonus video footage not shown in the one-hour documentary. See many interesting pages about the documentaries at the Prairie Public Broadcasting website: http://www.prairiepublic.org.
For further information about German-Russian heritage; donations to the Collection, including family histories; outreach programs; videotape documentaries; Journey to the Homeland Tour; German-Russian cookbooks; and GRHCs publications including recent books: Streeter, ND book; The Germans by the Black Sea Between Bug and Dniester Rivers; Marienberg: Fate of a Village, and The Dark Abyss of Exile: A Story of Survival, contact Michael M. Miller, NDSU Libraries, PO Box 5599, Fargo, ND 58105-5599 (Tel: 701-231-8416; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.com; GRHC website: http://library.ndsu.edu/grhc).


text:
Take The Money Free
by: BRAIN BROS MOB • 333
All Android applications categories
by: BRAIN BROS MOB • 333
brain-bending intellectual competition.
Get the app and test your skills. Woo-Hoo! Is that the scent of VICTORY in the air?
500 Ways to Prove You're Really, Really Smart
Fifty-thousand satisfied and highly-obsessed app addicts can't be wrong. They've tuned in and been turned on by the 500 brain-teasing questions generated by this madly mind-stimulating and mystifying app. BOO-YA! You will be stoked when you ace a question and want to cry "BOO-HOO" when you're stumped— but either way, you will never be bored!
Interested? Here's the nitty-gritty. Connect to the "Take the Money" app using Wi-Fi or a mobile network to challenge your friends to a match; or play alone to see how you fare. Inspired by classic television quiz shows, this clever app gives YOU the chance to participate in a stimulating high-stakes "victor take all" competition similar to quiz shows you've watched on television.
Check out the Frequently Asked Questions to find your answer.
If you still can't find your answer then drop us a email. We will be happy to reply =]
Tags: take the money free gioco
from 333 reviews
Download Take The Money Free
Free - 2.3.4 - 6M
Sorry ...
This app is no longer available.Explore Android
Share this app


text:
In this day and age of electronic traction and stability control-equipped cars and trucks, terms like "oversteer" and "understeer" are heard more and more infrequently. Drivers who came of age in the era before electro-nannies, however, have very likely experienced both (par ... Read more
The Goodguys AutoCross program has fast been gaining favor with muscle car fans; it's an excellent way to put those Pro Touring modifications to the test. For the past few seasons, the Goodguys Rod & Custom Association has been holding autocross competitions at some of its events, offering a ... Read more
* Up on Truckfax, they recently celebrated Fargo, Mopar's maple-leaf truck brand. Until now, I've never given pause to wonder why Chrysler chose the name of a North Dakota town for its Canada-only brand. Did Chrysler execs at the time just associate anything northerly and cold with Cana ... Read more


text:
We mentioned earlier that dimwitted Esquire readers voted Adriana Lima, born and raised in Brazil, the third most gorgeous/beautiful American. To thank us for continuing to promote her career in increasingly ridiculous and spectacular ways, Lima sent us these nudes photos of herself she took a couple years ago with the following compliments, roughly translated from Google Translation:
"Thank you Scanner Brian. If I hadn't married that Serb guy in Jackson Holy Wyoming, of all places, I would have married you. Or whatever idiot it was that put me up for that vote. Muchas gracias, or whatever thank you means in Portguese."
Obviously, I just made that up. Except for the part about Jackson Hole, Wyoming, which is apparently where she got married last year. Bizarre.


text:
|C.O.D. Capital, a U.S.-based finance company that develops innovative collect-on-delivery (C.O.D.) and financing solutions, has introduced C.O.D. GUARANTY(SM), an offering designed to protect senders against losses from insufficient C.O.D. payments and to offer receivers terms on their C.O.D. payments. Keywords: c.o.d. financing, cod financing, third party check purchase, third party check purchaser, 3rd party check purchaser, 3rd party check purchase, 3rd party check, third party check
©2015 - 2016, C.O.D. Capital℠. All Rights Reserved. Patent Pending


text:
Get DVD Talk Feeds
Reviewed at the 2011 Tribeca Film Festival
Massy Tedjedin's Last Night begins with a sequence that is a bit worrisome, it seems so self-consciously artsy. Married couple Joanna (Keira Knightley) and Michael (Sam Worthington) are going to a cocktail party, some kind of work function, but their time at home before, their taxi journeys back and forth, and their encounters at the event are played in fragments, hopscotching to and fro to the accompaniment of rather sad piano music. We brace ourselves for a mannered and overwrought examination of white people problems.
To some degree, Last Night is that. It is also a very good film. Does it suffer from the kind of upscale New York insularism that turns some people off of, say, Woody Allen's movies? Sure. The characters that populate Last Night are, for the most part, wealthy and privileged, preoccupied with matters that don't require them to cast a gaze further outward than the four walls of their fabulous downtown apartments. But when the characters are drawn with complexity, and when the dialogue they exchange is intelligent--as in Allen's films, and as in this one--those concerns are of little consequence. Once it gets past its somewhat too-precious opening and in to the heart of matters, the picture penetrates.
It comes to life, really, during that first sequence, when Joanna glimpses Michael out on a balcony with a gorgeous co-worker, Laura (Eva Mendes, temptation personified); their backs to Michael's wife, Laura touches him in a seemingly intimate, lingering way. Joanna is quietly furious all the way home; that night, they have an exhausting, circular argument, her wardrobe (a men's undershirt) the first of several no-doubt-deliberate echoes of Eyes Wide Shut. The portrait of their marriage is commendably complicated; they're not unhappy, and they're comfortable, which is good, and they're honest, right? No one wants to rock the boat. "I'm sorry," Michael says, spent. "What for?" she asks. "I'm not sure," he replies. The married men in the audience nod in agreement.
The next morning, he's off to Philadelphia on a business trip--with the woman in question, natch. Joanna, meanwhile, runs into her ex-boyfriend Alex (Guillaume Canet), a smooth-talking French Patrick Dempsey clone; he's in town for one night, and would she like to have some dinner? Well of course she would. And then we intercut between the two people, the two cities, the two opportunities.
It's a simple premise, but it's not a simple film. These matters are complicated; contrary to the monsters and angels normally created for cinematic takes on infidelity, it's not a matter of good and bad relationships, or easy choices. Tadjedin (who also wrote the script) captures, for both of them, the sexy thrill of these encounters, the charge of possibility presented by flirtation ("I always think of you when things aren't going well," Joanna tells Alex), the way that these innocent exchanges lead inevitably to points of no return--perhaps.
The picture's only major flaw is the casting of Worthington, the slabbed but blank lead in action films like Avatar, Terminator: Salvation, and Clash of the Titans, who confirms here that, no, he was not hiding some deep reserve of skill in those shallow blockbusters. He's just sort of dull and lifeless (if he's trying to underplay, he does it to a point of inertia), and Knightly simply acts circles around him. She's terrific; the way her eyes burn when she glimpses them on that balcony pivots the whole movie. It's a genuinely sexy performance--as much or her wit and intelligence as for the longing that she occasionally allows to take her over. Mendes is quietly good, resisting the urge to overdo (and overvamp) her role the way a lesser actress would. Canet is charismatic, if a bit of a blank slate.
So the quality of writing and performances is a bit uneven--but for once, in the favor of the female roles, so those complaints are registered mildly. Overall, Last Night is a nuanced and compelling picture, and has moments so honest and true, it's almost uncomfortably personal to watch.
Jason lives with his wife Rebekah and their daughter Lucy in New York. He holds an MA in Cultural Reporting and Criticism from NYU. He is film editor for Flavorwire and is a contributor to Salon, the Atlantic, and several other publications. His first book, Pulp Fiction: The Complete History of Quentin Tarantino's Masterpiece, was released last fall by Voyageur Press. He blogs at Fourth Row Center and is yet another critic with a Twitter feed.


text:
Tourist Tip #37 / Bubble Tea
Even in Israel, you can find the the chewy, tapioca-infused tea drinks beloved in Asia and cities around the globe.
Israel, the land of hummus, kebab, mint-infused lemonade … and bubble tea?
That's right, world travelers. Bubble tea, also known as boba, the tapioca-infused refreshment beloved across Asia and well-known in major cities around the globe, has made its way to Tel Aviv. So just because you've traveled far, don't fret. Even in Israel, you can have your boba and drink it too.
The Tel Aviv store offers the sweet and milky drinks, which are stuffed with tapioca – wobbly pearls in gaudy rainbow colors, that look a bit like oversized fish roe.
If you're not so into the tapioca, which are made from the roots of the cassava plant, you can opt for tea with bubbles formed from jelly and filled with fruit syrup.
This Israeli shop is part of a Taiwanese franchise that has stalls all across Europe.
Flavor options include taro, green tea, coffee, ginger and a garden's worth of fruits. Specify tapioca or bubbles, and watch as your drink is stuffed with pearls and then sealed with a plastic-wrap lid. A huge plastic straw, wide enough to suck up the boba, is then inserted, piercing the lid and giving you a sweet and chewy drink that's ready to chomp on the go. It's a drink, it's a snack … it's Israeli boba tea!
BoboQ, Dizengoff Street 118, Tel Aviv
Want to enjoy 'Zen' reading - with no ads and just the article? Subscribe todaySubscribe now


text:
This is the text version of Hungry Girl.
To see the accompanying visuals and links, go to:
Hungry Girl Today: 5.01.09
Need a little help surviving Italian restaurants? You're in luck. HG is here with
all you need to know...
DOs and DON'Ts!
DO start your meal off with a house salad (light dressing on the side) or
some minestrone soup. (Broth-based soup before a meal often means lower
calorie-intake overall!) Be careful with salad entrées though! Some are
worse than most regular meals, so watch out for red flags like oily croutons,
creamy dressing, fatty meats, and lots of cheese.
DON'T be afraid to make special requests, just make sure you're super-nice
when you do it. Swap fatty sides for veggies. Ask for whole-wheat pasta in
place of regular -- many places (including Olive Garden) offer up the fiber-
rich stuff as an alternative to plain white pasta, and it's better for you and
more filling.
DO save some to take home. Most Italian eateries serve up crazy-huge
portions -- so before you even start eating, get it into your head that youre
not going to consume that whole ginormous serving. Then eat slowly and
savor your meal!
DON'T eat bread AND pasta at the same meal. In Italy, that's a no-no.
(Clearly, they understand the dangers of carb overload.) If you choose
bread, skip the butter. If you go for pasta, choose tomato-based (not creamy
or cheesy) sauce, and keep the portion reasonable. And if you feel like being
really good, avoid the bread and pasta altogether.
DO have a glass of wine, if you like (and if you're legal!), but control
yourself. A 4-oz. serving has about 100 calories and a POINTS® value of 2*,
but you should know that a glass often contains a few ounces more than that.
So if an Italian dinner without vino seems wrong to you, go for that glass,
just make it last. And be careful with sangria. A glass at Olive Garden has
220 - 250 calories (POINTS® value 4 - 5*). And we all know how one glass
can lead to another... and another...
Italian Chain Shockers!!!
Olive Garden, Chicken & Shrimp Carbonara
PER SERVING (1 dinner portion): 1,440 calories, 88g fat, 3,000mg sodium,
80g carbs, 9g fiber -- POINTS® value 35*
Clearly, anything in a carbonara sauce is NOT going to be light. But say you
really want it. How bad could it be? Well, in addition to the crazy amount of
calories coming from the pasta, there's the insane fat content of a sauce
made with eggs, cheese, cream, and bacon. It would take too much time on
the treadmill to justify this one. NEXT!
Romano's Macaroni Grill, Pinot Grigio Chicken
PER SERVING (1 serving): 1,630 calories, 82g fat, 3,910mg sodium, 131g
carbs, 10g fiber, 88g protein -- POINTS® value 39*
Macaroni Grill is notorious for having insanely high-cal meals. That place also
serves up some stuff that sounds light and innocent yet is actually REALLY
bad! Like this entrée. Chicken in a white wine sauce? Seems safe.
Unfortunately, it's crusted with Parmesan, topped with mozzarella, and
served up with a ginormous pile of pasta. Eeeks!
Bite It!
Appetizers: Steamed mussels, steamed clams
Entrées: Grilled, steamed or broiled chicken or seafood (in tomato sauce or
with a squirt of lemon)
Sides: Steamed or grilled veggies, whole-wheat pasta (small serving)
Desserts: Sorbet, fresh berries, biscotti, coffee or espresso with no-calorie
sweetener and skim milk
Fight It!
Appetizers: Fried calamari, fried mozzarella, fried ANYTHING
Entrées: Breaded Parmesan-style dishes, Alfredo pastas
Sides: Mounds of white pasta, buttery garlic bread
Desserts: Tiramisu and other rich desserts, full-fat cappuccinos and lattes
HG Recipes Italiano!
Faux-Fried & Fabulous Calamari - You won't even look at the real fried stuff
after this.
Fiber-ific Fried Cheese Sticks - The best guilt-free fried mozzarella fix
around... and probably the ONLY one!
Fettuccine Hungry Girlfredo - In four awesome varieties! Click and CHEW...
Veggie-rific Noodle-Free Lasagna - Who needs noodles? Not this lasagna.
Fiber-ific Chicken Parm - Our no-harm Chicken Parmesan swap will knock
your socks off!
Cannoli Cones - Every good dinner should end with a dessert that's this
delicious. Click & scroll.
For links please go to:
HEY!! - Need more survival tips? HG will whisper (well, speak) them in your
ear. Check out Hungry Girl: The Official Survival Guides, our super-cool
audio book! Buy the adorably packaged CDs or download the guides online.
Friday, May 1st, isn't just the start of a new month. It's also National
Chocolate Parfait Day! Whip up a Yum-tastic Double Chocolate Peanut Butter
Parfait (click & scroll) to celebrate.
Didn't your mama teach you any manners? Click "send to a friend" and
*The Points® values for these products and/or recipes were calculated by
Hungry Girl and are not an endorsement or approval of the product, recipe
or its manufacturer or developer by Weight Watchers International, Inc., the
owner of the Points® registered trademark.
Privacy Policy:
Terms & Conditions:


text: 0 0 By Linus Walleij In Core DumpPosted August 20, 2015U-Boot on ARM32, AArch64 and beyondU-Boot became the de facto bootloader on most ARM systems during the early 2000s. What is the best bootloader to use for any one system is a subject of debate. There have been pushes to [...] READ MORE