text:
Episode I: The Phantom Menace
Episode II: Attack Of The Clones
Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith
Episode IV: A New Hope
Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
Episode VI: Return Of The Jedi
Episode VII: The Force Awakens
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
Episode VIII: The Last Jedi
(Users Browsing this Thread: )
If it's flashbacks we're talking about, it'll be a first for Star Wars (the movie saga, at least).
Well, seems Kevin Smith had some good things to say about the production of this new film:
After hard thinking I have decided that to me the best Star Wars movie is the first one (episode IV). The other two (episodes V & VI) are of course second and third best for me.
My favourite Star Wars film is ROTJ. Even though the ewoks are a weak point, the Palpatine-Vader-Luke scenes more than make up for it.
I think one thing that would be really awesome is if they included Galen Marek in one of these new films.
Last edited by pax; 10-15-2014 at 03:02 AM.
Goddamnit, no.
I = A New Hope
II = The Empire Strikes Back
III = Return of the Jedi
Fuck the prequels. They are just bad fanfic. And fuck anything Lucas later digitally added to the films. I respect the Star Wars Holiday Special more than the Phantom fucking Menace.
🔮Marianne Williamson 2020🔮
I also only consider the original trilogy canon though. These new films will have to be REALLY have impressive in order for me to change my mind and I doubt they will.
In order of greatness:
1) Empire Strikes Back
2) Star Wars (I'm not calling it A New Hope)
3) Return of the Jedi
Season 1: The humble beginnings -- Seasons 2-8: The classic era -- Season 9: The first season where noticeable flaws began to appear -- Season 10: The last decent season -- Season 11: The first BAD season -- Season 12: The last season with episodes worth watching -- Seasons 13-Present: Zombie Simpsons
I'm gonna go against the flow (the prequel haters) and admit that I don't hate the the PT and consider all six films canon. I'd also much rather watch Episode I than the Holiday Special; it has problems like the rest of the prequels, but I honestly don't think it's such a horrible film; I never could bring myself to hate it (or the other prequels for that matter) and after a recent rewatch, I'd say it's an entertaining fantasy adventure with some good visuals and action.
So yeah, I wouldn't go out and say "fuck the prequels"; I acknowledge that they have several issues but I don't agree about them being the total shitfests the haters make them out to be.
Last edited by CousinMerl; 10-16-2014 at 10:44 AM.
I grew up with the prequels and I used to consider all six films canon too. As I grew older though, I began to realize that there was something off about the prequels. The Phantom Menace and especially Attack of the Clones, just became so dull to me. I still saw some merits in Revenge of the Sith though. Then I saw the Red Letter Media reviews and any appreciation I had for the prequels disappeared. Sure they have flashy visuals and some creative action scenes but all that doesn't matter if the films themselves are completely devoid of good characters and writing. They're soulless movies and when you think about it, quite pointless. I mean we really didn't need a back story for Darth Vader. He was a better character when his past was left to our imagination.
Completely disagree @LukeMassMurderer95, I think they gave a really fascinating look into his backstory and I didn't want it left to my imagination. Somebody becomes that evil for a reason and I think Revenge Of The Sith did a great job at convincing how someone who was all good in his heart became a hateful maniac. Attack Of The Clones wasn't that bad, it was just filled with annoying filler, like Anakin and Padme in their "paradise" or whatever the fuck you call it. The only movie which played absolutely no value to the series (except for that famous Yoda-quote) was The Phantom Menace.
Watch the Red Letter Media reviews @GhoulSpookerSnospisEht
They'll explain the prequels problems far better than I can. Also they're hilarious (I'm actually watching the episode 3 review as I type this)
Red Letter Media fucking sucks.
As a piece of mock film critique, they're sophomoric and moronic. I assume the point was to make fun of actual YouTube film critiques. As an actual critique, they're just so god damn bad. I still don't get why people point to them rather than forming their own complaints about the prequels. So many liberties are taken with the critique, rather than making a decent argument, the guy uses smear tactics, blanket statements, and honestly some really bizarre ways to back up his arguments. Like the questioning five different people who are actually his friends in on the joke.
Last edited by Captain Squid; 10-16-2014 at 09:51 AM.
Their humour is very tongue-in-cheek but their opinions are genuine. The Plinkett reviews were originally just Mike Stoklasa's way of expressing how he felt about the Star Trek: next generation movies and later the Star Wars prequels. He used the Plinkett character to add humour to the reviews and stop them from sounding boring. And I've never had a problem with this. It all comes across as very smart and well backed up. He makes a point about how a certain scene is poorly written and I can't for the life of me think of a counter argument. The part at the beginning of the Phantom Menace review where he asks his friends to describe certain characters may not have been the most reliable method for a real response but it was a good way to make the audience think about the questions themselves. I honestly can't give a good description of Qui-Gon and Padme and even if you did have an answer, he explained later in his review how these characters are completely flat and how all their actions make no sense.
Could you go into more detail on these so called "Bizarre ways to back up his arguments", because it made perfect sense to me?
The only good parts of ROTS were the final battle and Ewan McGregor. Ian Mcdiarmid was also excellent. Everything else was shit. Attack of The Clones was a complete bore. The final battle of The Phantom Menace made no sense. Why the hell didn't Darth Maul finish off Obi-Wan?
Last edited by pax; 10-16-2014 at 10:47 AM.
Padme in TPM, I'll admit, is a weak character, mainly because she is undercover as a handmaiden for most of the film. Still, I'd classify her as inexperienced, headstrong (like Qui-Gon, which lead to them not agreeing on things throughout the film, an aspect they could have played up more), naive, mysterious (recall that when TPM premiered Padme and Queen Amidala were marketed as two different characters, much like Palpatine and Sidious - a nice bit of mirroring and playing up "The Phantom Menace" theme of duel natures).
As far as the bizarre methods of criticism, he relied heavily on nitpicking with no real depth to what he was saying. He describes characters with a single line as "boring", when really they're only there to do a single action of hailing another ship. I have no clue how this is "boring". It's like me saying that the Rebel pilots in ANH's briefing room are boring. A minute into the movie, he says he is "bored already". Of what? I was at TPM on premiere night and it was fucking exciting to see the ship flying towards the space station. All new ship designs and characters, regardless of what people thought of the rest of the film, the first minute was not boring. I might as well call Return of the Jedi's intro boring because hey, it is the exact same intro as TPM. Shuttle flying toward space station, no-name characters getting permission to land.
His arguments that there is no clear villain or main character confuses the hell out of me. ANH began with the droids and it isn't until 20 minutes in that we meet Luke, yet I'm not scratching my head and hating on the movie because they didn't point out who the main character is. In fact, even ANH focuses on several main characters, there are more than one: the droids (first scene), Leia (first human to appear), Luke (not until 20 mins in), Han. Really, TPM - like ANH - is an ensemble film with Luke being the focus of ANH and Qui-Gon being the focus of TPM.
As far as the villain, for starters the movie is called "The Phantom Menace" for a reason. The threat is supposed to be veiled, but we the viewer and those in touch with the OT know that the Emperor aka Darth Sidious is the puppet master pulling the strings. Sidious is the villian, Maul is his apprentice, and the Trade Federation are the pawns. It's so easy to comprehend, yet RLM plays it off like its some sort of indecipherable puzzle.
He'll also post questions and proclaim there is no answer, when the answer is very clear. He'll also purposefully twist what the film clearly lays out and blames the film for his own mistakes:
Plinkett: "So the Jedis are there to do what exactly? According to the opening title crawl, it was to settle a dispute over the taxation of trade routes. So what makes the Jedi Knights experts in intergalactic trade laws."
The opening crawl states that they were sent to "settle the conflict." The problem is not the taxes but the blockade, again as stated in the opening crawl. The situation had switched to the blockade, stating that the Chancellor sent the Jedi in secret because the Republic was useless and just "endlessly debates" without resolving "this alarming chain of events" (the blockade).
But nope, Plinkett is happy to believe what he wants to believe in order to make him sound like the smart one and the movie sounding like the one being confusing.
If I ever had to debate any form of media with somebody like the RLM guy, I'd walk away. Because people like him, parody or not, just want to get under your skin and twist the facts of the argument. Much like most of the people in the Simpsons R&R threads now that I think about it, lol
Never could bring myself to watch the RLM Plinkett prequel reviews; I remember started watching the first but it was essentially the same old bitching and moaning how the prequels are boring and uninteresting, the stories are complicated, the characters are bad and completely flat, nothing makes sense etc. in an somewhat new, annoying coat so I couldn't finish it or even bother with the others (In all fairness, he makes himself sound dumb and dense but then again, I suppose a lot of it supposed to be a spoof).
I'd rather watch critical reviews by an unbiased non-hater who doesn't act like a king snark and make a farce of it all (oh, and good post above @Captain Squid).
Yeah, kind of a stupid title
I'm Krusty, who are you? by NoHomers.net
Backdoor Sluts 9 makes Crotch Capers 3 look like Naughty Nurses 2
I think it's alright. In the past only the second and third films of each trilogy have had a "something of the something" title and personally I don't think it's any cheesier than say, A New Hope.
every star wars movie has a stupid title, we'll get used to it
The Force Awakens is fine. "Attack of the Clones" and "The Phantom Menace" are way cheesier-sounding. I'm just glad they finally announced the title.
Not a great name but not that bad either.
Episodes rated best and worst from each season:
1: Krusty Gets Busted/Homer's Night Out 2: The Way We Was/Bart's Dog Gets an F 3: Colonel Homer/Dog of Death 4: Marge vs. The Monorail/So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show 5: Cape Feare/Bart Gets An Elephant 6: Treehouse of Horror V/Another Simpsons Clip Show 7: Mother Simpson/Homerpalooza 8: You Only Move Twice/The Canine Mutiny 9: Lisa's Sax/The Two Mrs. Nahasapeemapetilons 10: Lisa Gets an A/Sunday Cruddy Sunday 11: Behind The Laughter/Beyond Blunderdome 12: Trilogy of Error/The Computer Wore Menace Shoes 13: I Am Furious Yellow/Homer the Moe 14: The Dad Who Knew Too Little/Large Marge 15: The Way We Weren't/Diatribe of a Mad Housewife 16: Thank God Its Doomsday/Mommie Beerest 17: Marge's Son Poisoning/Bonfire of the Manatees 18: Marge Gamer/Revenge is Best Served Three Times 19: Treehouse of Horror XVIII/That 90's Show 20: Gone Maggie Gone/Coming To Homerica 21: O Brother, Where Bart thou?/The Devil Wears Nada 22: Homer Scissorhands/The Fool Monty 23: Holidays of Future Passed/Moe Goes From Rags To Riches 24: Adventures In Baby-Getting/Whiskey Business 25: Brick Like Me/White Christmas Blues 26: Bart's New Friend/The Musk Who Fell to Earth 27: Halloween of Horror/Every Man's Dream 28: There Will Be Buds/Moho House 29: Gone Boy/Throw Grampa from the Dane
It's at least better than Star Wars Episode VII: We're Doing This For the Money
As far as titles go, "Attack of the Clones" is straight up 60's B movie level.
The Star Wars Rebels movie was actually really good! If you like the expanded universe stuff/don't mind CGI, check it out. Rebels takes place five years before "A New Hope", and the TV show has been great so far.
"The Force Awakens" should open like this:
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)


text:
* Brent oil tops $80 for the first time since late 2014
* U.S. 10-year debt yields hover above 3.1 pct
* Dollar hits highest level in four months vs yen
* Wall St dips, Britain's FTSE 100 at record closing high (Updates with close of U.S. markets)
By Lewis Krauskopf
NEW YORK, May 17 (Reuters) - Yields on benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasuries rose on Thursday to their highest level in about seven years, extending this week's bond market selloff and pushing the U.S. dollar to a four-month peak against the yen.
Oil prices topped $80 a barrel for the first time since November 2014 before pulling back.
Wall Street's main stock indexes slipped, wobbling amid trade jitters as the United States and China hold talks. European stock markets climbed and Britain's FTSE 100 notched a record closing high.
The rising U.S. Treasury yields have been a driver across financial markets this week and come as data shows a strong U.S. economy that could indicate firming inflation
The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury note yield rose above 3.1 percent, continuing a surge from earlier in the week.
"I think it's the same thing we have had really for the past couple of weeks: The inflation trade is being put on," said Walter Todd, chief investment officer at Greenwood Capital in Greenwood, South Carolina.
The rise in bond rates, the dollar and oil "is being driven by the same backdrop, which is the U.S. economy is hitting on all cylinders," Todd added.
On Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 54.95 points, or 0.22 percent, to 24,713.98, the S&P 500 lost 2.33 points, or 0.09 percent, to 2,720.13, and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 15.82 points, or 0.21 percent, to 7,382.47.
The major indexes for the month of May so far are all up more than 2 percent.
The rise in yields "has added a little bit of volatility in markets, no question. But I don't think it would be enough to derail the recent move in stocks," said King Lip, chief investment strategist at Baker Avenue Asset Management in San Francisco.
Shares of retailer Walmart Inc and network gear maker Cisco System Inc fell after both companies reported quarterly results, weighing on indexes. Energy shares rose 1.3 percent on the higher oil prices.
U.S. President Donald Trump said that China and other countries had become "very spoiled" on trade, as U.S. and Chinese officials hold high-level talks in Washington on trade ties.
"I think this trade mess is certainly affecting the mood and uncertainty, and it seems to me the market is negative because this whole trade debate with tariffs," said Jim Bell, president of Bell Investment Advisors in Oakland, California.
Strong oil prices helped Britain's top share index, the FTSE 100, seal its highest ever closing level as it climbed 0.7 percent.
The pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 stock index rose 0.62 percent, while Italy's benchmark index bounced 0.3 percent following heavy losses on Wednesday on concerns that a new government could relax fiscal discipline.
MSCI's gauge of stocks across the globe shed 0.01 percent.
U.S. 10-year Treasury yields rose, extending this week's bond market selloff, as traders and investors have not reached a consensus on whether it was time to buy or if the market was vulnerable to more selling.
Benchmark 10-year notes last fell 5/32 in price to yield 3.1131 percent, from 3.095 percent late on Wednesday.
"The market is trying to figure where the bottom is. At this point, it is not clear," said Mary Ann Hurley, vice president of fixed income with D.A. Davidson in Seattle.
The dollar index, which measures the greenback against a basket of major currencies, rose 0.1 percent. The Japanese yen was flat versus the U.S. currency at 110.79 per dollar.
Concerns that Iranian exports could fall because of renewed U.S. sanctions, reducing supply in an already tightening market, drove oil above $80 a barrel for the first time since November 2014.
Brent settled up 2 cents at $79.30 a barrel, after rising as high as $80.50. U.S. crude settled flat at $71.49 a barrel.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
This election cycle, msnbc.com is presenting a series, Briefing Book: Issues '08 which will assess controversies that the next president must confront once he takes the oath of office.
In this story, we look at the courts and marriage. Can same-sex couples marry? Is such a right is guaranteed by state constitutions and by the United States Constitution?
As these controversies make their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, will the next president have the opportunity to appoint justices who'll address these questions?
Why it's a problemFor same-sex couples, the rulings by the California Supreme Court on May 15 and the Connecticut Supreme Court on Oct. 10 were historic victories. Those courts ruled that their states' constitutions protect the right of same-sex couples to marry.
On Election Day, Californians go to the polls to decide a gay-marriage ballot question, the second time in eight years that the issue has been put to the voters in the nation's most populous state.
In 2000, California voters approved a ballot measure that said "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California."
In March 2000, 61 percent of California voters passed Proposition 22, which specified in state law that only marriage between a man and a woman was valid in California.
But last May, the California Supreme Court overruled the statute enacted by Proposition 22. The judges said laws that limit marriage to one man and one woman violate the equal protection clause of the state Constitution.
What is on the California ballot on Election Day is a proposed amendment to the state constitution. It says what the 2000 ballot measure said — that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid. If voters approve it, it would essentially overturn the California Supreme Court ruling.
Both Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama have said that they oppose granting legal recognition to same-sex marriages.
But neither candidate wants to alienate voters who support marriage rights for same-sex couples. And gay and lesbian campaign donors can be a powerful force, particularly in the Democratic Party.
McCain can't afford to forfeit the support of conservatives in his party who abhor gay marriage and who believe the California and Connecticut rulings are examples of judges imposing social policy changes on the electorate.
Apart from Connecticut and California, same-sex marriage is recognized only in Massachusetts, where the state's highest court ruled in 2004 that the state's constitution implied protection for marriages between two people of the same sex.
Forty-five states have laws prohibiting same-sex marriages, including 26 states with constitutional amendments that define marriage in the traditional terms: one man and one woman.
This year's California and Connecticut rulings may pose a problem for the 45 states that do not recognize same-sex marriages — if the United States Supreme Court overturns the 1996 federal law called the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
That law, signed by President Clinton, says that no state shall be required to recognize any same-sex marriage performed in another state.
But if marriage to another person of the same sex is a fundamental right protected by the United States Constitution, then DOMA would be unconstitutional and same-sex marriages would be constitutionally protected in every state.
In that case, same-sex couples from California, Connecticut and Massachusetts could move to any of the 45 states that don't recognize same-sex marriages and those states would be compelled to grant recognition to their marriages.
The U.S. Supreme Court's Lawrence v. Texas ruling in 2003, which struck down state sodomy laws, seemed to indicate that the court might someday rule that there is a constitutional right of gays and lesbians to marry.
The question of marriage itself was not before the court in the 2003 case, but the majority opinion, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, said, "Our laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education."
The Constitution, Kennedy added, demands respect "for the autonomy of the person in making these choices." Then he added, "Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do."
Does the "autonomy" of which Kennedy spoke include the right to marry?
The court has not yet said.
And that's another reason why the Supreme Court justices appointed by either President McCain or President Obama will be so important.
Reacting to the Connecticut ruling, conservative leader Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, said, "It is imperative both presidential candidates address the problems created by four activist judges in Connecticut."
He urged McCain and Obama "to explain what they would do as president" to ensure "that judges they appoint follow the law of the land and not legislate from the bench."
Both McCain and Obama have said they believe the states should decide their marriage policies. Both men have said they support civil unions, rather than full-fledged legal marriages between same-sex couples.
But McCain has been contradictory on civil unions, at times saying that he supports them, at other times saying he does not. "I do believe that people ought to be able to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people have relationships can enter into," he said in 2006.
On the day the California Supreme Court announced its ruling, Obama's campaign issued a statement saying, "Barack Obama has always believed that same-sex couples should enjoy equal rights under the law, and he will continue to fight for civil unions as President. He respects the decision of the California Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage."
McCain favors the proposed amendment to the California constitution.
"I support the efforts of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution between a man and a woman, just as we did in my home state of Arizona," he said.
Obama is against the proposed California state constitutional amendment. "I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states,'' he said.
Evolution and shifts in positionIn 2004, when he was running for the U.S. seat Senate in Illinois, Obama repeatedly said he opposed same-sex marriages.
"I'm a Christian, and so although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman," he said in 2004 on Chicago TV station WBBM.
He told gay rights supporters in Iowa last year, "You want the word 'marriage,' and I believe that the issue of marriage has become so entangled, the word 'marriage' has become so entangled with religion, that it makes more sense for me as president, with that authority, to talk about the civil rights," rights that would come from civil unions.
Obama also said in late 2003 that he was against repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. But he switched his view on that question early in 2004 and said he would work to repeal DOMA.
Obama has said he is opposed to same-sex marriages, but he has not explained why he also opposes measures to ban them.
And Obama now thinks DOMA should be repealed. If he gets his way and it is repealed, then in time the states where same-sex marriage is banned would likely be forced to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples who move in from the states that permit same-sex marriages.
In that event same-sex marriages would be legal in all states, even if some states wanted to keep it illegal.
McCain, like Obama, opposes same-sex marriages, but he also voted against an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would have outlawed such marriages. He did so, he said in 2006, "because I think the states should decide. That's the essence of federalism."
The Arizona senator did say in 2006 that if the Supreme Court were to strike down DOMA, "then, and only then, would the problem justify Congress making the momentous decision" to amend the Constitution to outlaw same-sex marriages.
But it was far easier to enact DOMA than it would be to amend the Constitution, which requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures.
How they have votedMcCain voted for DOMA in 1996. Obama was not a member of the Senate at that time.
Both men voted against the proposed amendment to the United States Constitution in 2006 that would have defined marriage as only between one man and one woman.
Surprises for the new presidentIt is possible that at some point in the next president's term, the Supreme Court could decide a case that would determine whether the U.S. Constitution implicitly guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry.
In his dissenting opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, Justice Antonin Scalia warned that the decision "leaves on pretty shaky grounds state laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples."
Yale law professor William Eskridge, a gay rights activist and a scholar whose research was cited in the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, said in 2003 that "Justice Scalia is right in the long term" that Lawrence v. Texas will add to the momentum for recognition of gay marriages.
It also seems likely that one of the justices will retire during the next four years, setting the stage for a contentious Senate battle over confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee whose views on same-sex marriage would be of great interest to the senators questioning him or her.


text:
Allentown, Pennsylvania (PRWEB) January 23, 2013
The flu epidemic now affects people in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The young, the elderly, and those who already have lung conditions are hit hardest. The Centers for Disease Control recommends the vaccination for people who are at higher risk for flu complications due to a chronic pulmonary condition, such as asthma or COPD. And the US Preventive Services Task Force has stated that evidence suggests influenza vaccination reduces COPD exacerbations. The USPTF, as far back as 2009, has also theorized that spirometry may help people with COPD, asthma, emphysema, cystic fibrosis, or a lung transplant closely monitor their lung health and help increase flu vaccination rates.
A recently introduced solution for monitoring lung health is Spiro PD Personal Spirometer. People with chronic breathing problems associated with asthma, COPD, bronchitis, emphysema, cystic fibrosis, or a lung transplant are using Spiro PD to track lung function trends to help prevent possible complications from colds and the flu.
As the world's first personal spirometer, Spiro PD empowers people with respiratory conditions to easily and accurately monitor their breathing any time and anywhere: at home, work, school, play, or while traveling.
Spiro PD helps patients anticipate and prevent respiratory disease exacerbations, which may reduce expensive emergency room visits and hospital stays. It also helps prevent readmissions, so hospitals can avoid costly Medicare penalties.
According to a Johns Hopkins University study, home spirometry detected a decline in lung function 16 days before patients felt symptoms and sought medical care.(1) Spiro PD's ability to note early detection of decreased lung function can catch problems before they worsen and keep chronic respiratory patients out of hospitals.
Plus, the innovative telemedicine feature of Spiro PD permits patients to easily upload their data to their computer and share it with doctors between office visits. The telemedicine feature is proving particularly valuable for people who are physically challenged or live a long distance from their doctors. This feature also may be popular at a time when, due to an overload of flu cases, physicians are seeing only the sickest patients. And only if necessary should people risk exposure by visiting the doctor or hospital.
Wayne Meng, Founder, Chief Executive Officer, and President of PMD Healthcare, the maker of Spiro PD, states, "We're proud that Spiro PD may help people with respiratory conditions not only protect their lung health during this flu epidemic, but also help educate, motivate, or just remind them to get a flu vaccination."
In the United States, the cold and flu season is considered October through May, usually peaking in February.(2,3) Each year, colds and flu usually account for 200,000 hospitalizations and 41,000 deaths in this country.(4) People with respiratory conditions, including asthma, COPD, bronchitis, emphysema, cystic fibrosis, and a lung transplant, are particularly susceptible, and can develop life-threatening complications including pneumonias and acute respiratory distress syndrome.(5)
For more information about all the advantages that Spiro PD offers people with respiratory conditions, please visit http://www.SpiroPD.com.
About Spiro PD
"Spiro" stands for spirometer, a device used to measure air entering and leaving the lungs; "PD" stands for personal device. Spiro PD is the first personal spirometer that enables people with lung diseases – COPD, asthma, CF, and lung transplants – to easily and accurately monitor their breathing anytime and anywhere.
Spiro PD tracks lung function trends to help patients anticipate and prevent respiratory disease exacerbations, which helps reduce expensive emergency room visits and hospital stays. According to a study conducted at Johns Hopkins University, home spirometry detected decreased lung function 16 days before patients felt symptoms and sought medical care.(1)
Spiro PD enhances medication adherence. The medication alarm helps patients remember to take their medicine. The medication history provides a time stamp to show doctors that patients have been following their therapy.
Spiro PD also allows patients to set alarms reminding them to perform spirometry tests and do breathing exercises. Plus, patients can quickly upload data to their computer and share it with their doctor.
Spiro PD is cleared by the FDA for home use by the patient to test lung function in children, adolescents, and adults. Many insurance companies cover the cost of Spiro PD.
Spiro PD meets American Thoracic Society (ATS) and European Respiratory Society (ERS) standards. Spiro PD is also certified with the CE mark for the European Union (EU).
For more information, visit http://www.SpiroPD.com.
About PMD Healthcare, Inc.
PMD Healthcare, manufacturer of Spiro PD, is dedicated to creating innovative, easy-to-use, portable, and affordable personal medical devices that empower people worldwide to improve their healthcare and quality of life. For more information about PMD Healthcare and Spiro PD, please visit http://www.SpiroPD.com.
1. West NE, Boyle MP, Mogayzel PJ, Riekert KA, Lechtzin N. The ability of home spirometry and symptom monitoring to predict exacerbations in cystic fibrosis. Pediatric Pulmonology 2009; Vol. 34, S32 "Poster Session Abstract" poster 376.
2. CDC Questions and Answers 2010-01-27, Retrieved 2010-08-10.
3. CDC: The Flu Season. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season.htm. Retrieved 11-22-12.
4. Molinari, Ortega-Sanchez, Messonnier, Thompson, Wortley, Weintraub, Bridges. The annual impact of seasonal in?uenza in the US: Measuring disease burden and costs doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.03.046 PMID 17544181.
5. Flu Season Overview North Carolina Immunization portal. Retrieved 11-22-12.
Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/personalspirometer/personalspirometry/prweb10345233.htm.
|Source: PRWeb
Copyright©2012 Vocus, Inc.
All rights reserved


text:
Vail Daily columnist Allen Smith: You can call me … Admiral
Vail, CO, Colorado
Immediately after graduating from high school, I made a bold move: I enlisted in the Navy. Even though the Vietnam War was revving up, it seemed like the right thing to do.
I was a prime target for the draft. I had no aspirations for higher education, and more importantly, I was sorely in need of discipline and organization.
Unfortunately, it didn't take me long to figure out that military life wasn't for me — about three weeks. I didn't particularly care for living in the same room with 40 other guys, I was never allowed to sleep in, and I wasn't very good at taking orders. But it did have one thing that made a lot of sense to me: uniforms and rank.
Since the beginning of time, the military has used uniforms and rank to identify people with special skills and seniority. Uniforms help identify individuals who have earned distinction and respect by their experience, training and if nothing else, the raw tenacity to put up with the military way of life.
Of course, rank isn't always an accurate indicator of ability. As a seaman, I was constantly harassed by new ensigns. The only difference between me and them was they had college degrees and I didn't. Nonetheless, you could always tell where you stood just by looking at the uniform they were wearing.
After starting a new job last year and meeting dozens of people, I quickly became mired in so many new acquaintances and names that I quickly forgot who they were and what they did. Were they the CEO or a mailroom clerk? Did they instantly deserve respect whether or not they earned it, or did they spend 20 years crawling their way up the corporate ladder just like me?
It occurred to me how helpful it would be if the civilian world adopted the practice of wearing uniforms and awarding ranks. It could start from the first day you were born.
Newborns would be awarded one stripe the minute they popped out of their mother's womb, sort of like the rank of a seaman recruit in boot camp. The only thing you have to do to earn a seaman's stripe is continue to breathe, day in and day out.
For every phase of school you completed, you would earn another stripe: seaman apprentice for getting through grade school; seaman for high school graduates; ensign for finishing four years of college; commander and captain for master's degrees; and admiral if you earned a Ph.D.
If you chose the other route and went to trade schools, you could work your way up the chain of command from petty officer first class to master chief petty officer and proudly display your rank on your sleeve.
To help everyone understand your background and expertise, you'd probably wear an insignia on your shoulder. Stay-at-home moms would sport a picture of a station wagon crammed with screaming kids. People in the world of finance would show off a broken dollar sign. Teachers would wear a bullwhip, and hookers might display a used condom.
The richest and most significant people in the country — like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Christy Walton — would naturally wear gold shoulder boards and epaulettes with bullion fringe.
People with management jobs would wear gold-braided citation shoulder cords and have the freedom to choose whatever headgear they wished from berets to campaign hats (known to many as "Smoky Bear" hats), Yeager Corp., Glengarry, coonskin, bearskin, Russian military, bicorne hats or a pope's mitre. For special occasions, it's likely everyone – from the lowliest enlisted man to the highest Admiral – would cast away their work uniforms for their dress attire that included white leggings, red sashes worn diagonally across the chest and possibly a fez or turban. Oh, and a sword.
Another helpful distinctions used by the military are ribbons and medals of achievement. When I was in the Navy, they gave all of us a National Defense Service Medal, basically for doing nothing.
Over time, if you achieved your goals and demonstrated unparalleled leadership, you could accumulate quite a chest of fruit salad. These went along with the hash marks you wore on your sleeve to indicate how many years you'd been in military service.
Civilian uniforms could have the same thing. In addition to the common awards like the Good Conduct Medal (which you received at your annual review), high school teachers could earn the Distinguished Service Cross and combat action ribbons. Second grade teachers would automatically be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor — the highest award given to a civilian for "conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his or her life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against the youth of the United States" — even though most of them would probably be awarded posthumously.
Anyone caught in a low-paying job they hated but kept because they desperately needed the money would be eligible for a POW ribbon. Mothers would be awarded ribbons for having children — baby blue for boys and pink for girls, with silver oak clusters if they had twins, and gold oak clusters if they had triplets or more.
Anyone surviving a divorce would automatically be awarded a Purple Heart. People in the entertainment industry (like Elizabeth Taylor or Richard Burton) might earn five or six Purple Hearts before they retired.
Of course, like any new policy, there would likely be complaints. For instance, enlisted civilians and low-ranking officers would have to salute senior officers in passing everywhere they went — at the supermarket, Walmart, the dentist's office and swap meets. Officers would be prohibited from fraternizing with enlisted personnel.
Today, if an employee turns out to be a bad apple, you just fire him and a month later he's got another job that's probably better than the one he left.
With the new civilian uniform guidelines, employers would be required to ceremoniously strip the scofflaw of his rank and break his sword over their knee in front of the entire office staff, then drum him out of the building – literally. That way, when interviewing for a new job, the applicant would have to explain the frayed stitching and dark area where his stripes used to be , as well as why he only had half a sword.
It could work the other way, too. If an employee struggled single-handedly to successfully bring in the McAfee account, unit supervisors would have the authority to award him a field promotion, effectively outranking the no-good creep he's had to work for all last year.
I know it's unlikely that civilian companies are likely to adopt the military tradition of uniforms, but it seemed to make a lot of sense to me when I was sent home for three days without pay for telling an off-color joke to our new Mormon chief financial officer. I didn't know who she was. I thought she'd enjoy it.
Allen Smith, of Vail, is the author of "Watching Grandma Circle the Drain" and "Ski Instructors Confidential." You can reach him at http://www.snowwriter.com.
Support Local Journalism
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User
Eagle County bear sightings have doubled from 2019
Are we seeing more bears because there are more bears on the valley floor, or because we're all spending more time at home? It could be a bit of both.


text:
Odin's Path Dresshoodie
Designed by Valhyr
Can't find what you're looking for?
Check out the community marketplace! Over there people from the community share what they create. From prints and jewelry to tattoos and cartogtaphy - your trusted source for everything authentic community related!
About our products
Inspired by Norse Mythology, Paganism and The Viking Age
We wish to create clothing that appears like normal clothing for a contemporary and everyday life until you realize the elements used in them are of pagan, mythology, slavic or viking origin. We also aspire to create the best smart casual, streetwear, sportswear and street fashion clothing for the pagan crowd. It is our goal to provide great quality items with unique art on them and to evolve and provide for the folk community.
A lot of our inspiration comes from folklore, norse mythology, slavic tales, baltic stories and many other cultures as well. You can read more about each item, what it contains and what is the meaning of it as we wish to incorporate hidden meaninings on most of our products for you to explore! We hope you enjoy these and thank you for your support! Thanks to you we can continue to create new and innovative projects which would bring more people back to their old ways and for the people already on this path to have something fun and interesting to do! Our biggest goal is to research the ancient ancestors and learn more about our roots and the people that grew them for us and with your help all of this is possible


text:
Photo Gallery for How to Train Your Dragon in 3D
Hiccup is a Viking teenager who doesn't exactly fit in with his tribe's longstanding tradition of heroic dragon slayers. Hiccup's world is turned upside down when he encounters a dragon that... (more)View All Photos View Movie Info
Remove ads with our VIP Service
Block Ads With VIP Service
You can view this photo gallery without the ads by signing up for our VIP Service. Check out what other great features are available to our VIP Members!
Home - About Us - Ad Info - Feedback
News Headlines - Theaters - Movies - Reader Reviews - Movie Links
Your Account - VIP Service
News Headlines - Theaters - Movies - Reader Reviews - Movie Links
Your Account - VIP Service
|The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a service of SVJ Designs LLC. All graphics, layout, and structure of this service (unless otherwise specified) are Copyright © 1995-2020, SVJ Designs. The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a trademark of SVJ Designs. All rights reserved.
'ACADEMY AWARDS®' and 'OSCAR®' are the registered trademarks and service marks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.


text:
Guest Host: Chuck Todd
Guests: John Heilemann, Michael Steele, Sue Herera, Martin Fletcher, Susan Page, Willie Brown, John Feehery, David Corn
CHUCK TODD, GUEST HOST: Mitt rising.
Let`s play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I`m Chuck Todd, in tonight for Chris Matthews. Leading
off tonight: Is Newt still the front-runner? The roller-coaster ride
that`s been the Republican nomination fight has been even wilder this week.
On Monday, the question was, How strong was Newt Gingrich going to get?
After the final Iowa debate last night, the question has to be asked, is it
really fair to even refer to Gingrich as, quote, "the front-runner"?
Mitt Romney, at least for this 24-hour period, seems to be embracing
that inevitability campaign again. Gingrich, who was probably disappointed
Romney chose not to attack him last night, instead had to fend off those
behind him in the polls. The race has been so unpredictable that one poll
has had five leaders in its last five surveys. The final stretch at the
top of the show.
Plus, Newt is certainly what military strategists call a target-rich
environment. We`ll take a look at some of the nastier things Republican
establishment types have been saying about Newt, hoping to knock him off
before President Obama gets a chance to do it.
Also, a very important story that has been under the radar, a third
party run. Our pollsters believe it now looks increasingly likely that no
matter who is nominated, someone will make a serious independent bid. You
think you know which party benefits? You may be surprised.
And which Republican candidate earned a 12th -- count them, 12th --
"Pants on Fire" for yet another whopper during last night`s debate?
And at the end, we`re going to remember one of the gifted, most
erudite, talented, just entertaining writers of our time, a man who was
among -- one of Chris Matthews`s most favorite guests right here on
HARDBALL, Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens lost his battle with cancer
yesterday at the age of 62.
Well, we`re going to start with the Republican field. John Heilemann
is a national affairs editor for "New York" magazine, and of course, an
MSNBC analyst, and Susan Page is the Washington bureau chief for "USA
Today." Welcome, both of you.
John, let me start with you. Mitt Romney got a big old plane today,
his first press charter...
JOHN HEILEMANN, "NEW YORK" MAGAZINE, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.
TODD: ... loaded up members of the press, flew that nonstop flight
that doesn`t exist from Sioux City to Greenville (ph), South Carolina, got
the most important rising star governor to endorse his campaign. Mitt
Romney acting like a front-runner again.
HEILEMANN: He is, Chuck. I saw him this morning in Sioux City in the
one event that he did at a steel company just before he took off for South
Carolina. He had a very confident, very assured mien to him out there, as
he did in the debate last night.
And I think, you know, part of the reason for that is that he had the
Nikki Haley endorsement in his pocket. He`s also, I think, starting to see
some movement internally in their polling. There`s some that`s reflected
in the public polling also, that seems like Gingrich is softening. And
he`s also been in Iowa a little bit, and he`s had a chance to look at the
television in Iowa, where he see his...
TODD: Right.
HEILEMANN: ... pro-Romney super-PAC pounding Gingrich mercilessly
over the air, alongside Ron Paul, who`s doing the same thing. And I think
those are all reasons why they are starting to think he might just -- might
just -- win the Iowa caucuses.
TODD: You know, $3 million in attack ads are airing right now against
Newt Gingrich. He`s fighting back with $275,000 of air. There is no money
in the Gingrich bank account right now, or I think we would be seeing it on
the air. But right now, we were just showing pictures. Mitt Romney is
campaigning in South Carolina today.
But Gingrich did come under fire. Michele Bachmann is the one who was
the aggressor last night. And I want to show this fight that she picked
with Gingrich over an issue that can go to the concerns of some Iowa
caucus-goers. Here`s what she hit.
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: He had an
opportunity to de-fund Planned Parenthood and he chose not to take it.
That`s a big issue.
Sometimes Congresswoman Bachmann doesn`t get her facts very accurate. I
had a 98.5 percent right-to-life voting record in 20 years.
BACHMANN: ... because this isn`t just once. I think it`s outrageous
to continue to say over and over through the debates that I don`t have my
facts right, when as a matter of fact, I do. I`m a serious candidate for
president of the United States, and my facts are accurate.
TODD: It got testier. Today Bachmann was asked if there was a sexist
element to how Gingrich treated her last night. Listen to how she
responded to that question earlier today.
BACHMANN: I think that`d be an observation that people -- people
looking at that would have to make that observation. I`m a serious
candidate for the presidency, and I think it`s important that I be treated
as an equal on that stage. They said this is a two-man race, and I would
agree. It`s Newt Romney versus Michele Bachmann.
TODD: What did you -- it was interesting she would not rule that --
she wasn`t shutting that door, which, of course, means she`s doing this.
Yes, if somebody wants to call it sexist, then yes, I...
SUSAN PAGE, "USA TODAY": I think it`s pretty clear she thinks it was
TODD: Right.
PAGE: And you know, Michele Bachmann did not back down last night.
You know, she didn`t just make her initial planned attack on Gingrich, but
she came back at him again and again, and on a couple issues.
TODD: Right.
PAGE: And this is great for Mitt Romney because Michele Bachmann --
you should definitely treat her seriously, but we don`t see her as the
likely nominee. But every vote she peels away comes from -- more likely to
come from Gingrich than from Romney. The better she does, the worse
Gingrich does, and that`s all good for Romney.
TODD: You know what`s interesting here is that in an informal survey
of colleagues, this is splitting along gender lines. And some of my
colleagues today who are women thought it was sexist. And some of the men
thought, well, maybe just it gets under Gingrich`s -- she just gets under
his skin.
PAGE: Well, Gingrich can be condescending to men and women.
TODD: Equal opportunity.
PAGE: Yes, equal opportunity condescension. But when there`s only
one woman on stage and you`re condescending to her...
TODD: Yes.
PAGE: ... then I think it comes across as sexist.
TODD: John Heilemann, this is one of those cases -- you know, I think
your partner in crime tweeted this last night, Mark Halperin, saying that
somehow Perry -- maybe it was you tweeted it -- you know, you guys have
become one entity, like Newt Romney, right?
But the way Rick Perry gets under Mitt Romney`s skin, where he just
does -- he almost gets rattled with anger when he gets attacked -- we`re
sensing that a little bit between Bachmann and Gingrich, with Gingrich, no?
HEILEMANN: Yes, I think so. And look, I think the point you guys
made about him being an equal opportunity offender when it comes to
arrogance and condescension is a fair one. But she does seem to have his
number a little bit. And they are aware of that in the Bachmann campaign,
and they are going to try to exploit it.
I think that all three of the second tier candidates last night had
reasonably decent nights. I mean, I think Bachmann had the best night at
the debate. Perry had not as good a night, but still a decent night for
him. And Rick Santorum did OK.
And as Susan was saying, it`s the case for all three of those
candidates that if they start to inch up in the polls -- and there`s some
signs out here in Iowa that that might be happening -- that`s all good news
for Mitt Romney because everything that they take, every vote they take
either out of Newt Gingrich current -- his current level of support...
TODD: Right.
HEILEMANN: ... or out of his potential level of support -- it`s all
Gingrich suffering in those situations. And a Ron Paul victory or a Mitt
Romney victory, obviously -- those are both good outcomes for Mitt Romney.
As long as he can stop Newt Gingrich, he`s the winner in Iowa.
TODD: You know, Susan, timing`s everything in -- sometimes in a
debate, and Gingrich got hit early on Freddie Mac, then seemed to get his
footing. And in fact, he was enjoying talking about his own issue --
temperament issues. Here`s how he handled one question, and he literally
decided, Well, I`ve got to get this temperament issue out of the way and
I`ve got a funny way to do it. Here`s how he handled it.
GINGRICH: I sometimes get accused of using language that`s too
strong. So I`ve been standing here, editing.
GINGRICH: I`m very concerned about not appearing to be zany and...
TODD: Of course, "zany" being in reference to the question about --
that Jeff Zeleny of "The New York Times" asked Mitt Romney, whether zany
ideas will come out of the White House, and of course, Mitt Romney picked
up that word "zany" with relish.
Did Gingrich -- how is Gingrich holding up? I mean, he seemed to be
OK at the debate, but boy, he`s getting pummeled on the air.
PAGE: You know, I think it`s -- I think it`s hard when everybody is
attacking you and you are on the defensive, not on one issue that you can
address, but you have to address the Freddie Mac issue, and then you have
to address the abortion issue, and then you have to address the temperament
issue. There`s a cumulative effect.
I thought it was an hour into the debate before he really seemed to
find his sea legs and be the kind of confident figure that we saw just
there. That was pretty far into the debate. I had already filed two
TODD: Right.
PAGE: ... for two editions of "USA Today" by the time that happened.
TODD: Well, there you go. Timing a lot. John Heilemann, you know,
what was -- what I feel like is a story that we can`t fully report out yet
until the fund-raising reports go in -- but it seems clear to me that
Gingrich, while surging in the polls, doesn`t -- didn`t get this on-line
surge of money that we have seen other candidates get when they`ve surged.
Particularly look at a Herman Cain, right? Much less sort of presidential
credibility when he surged, and he was getting all these donations.
Is the Gingrich campaign just not good at this?
HEILEMANN: Well, that certainly seems to be part of the case, Chuck.
Although, you know, yesterday that Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas
billionaire, pledged $20 million to Gingrich in -- obviously not in direct
TODD: Well, for what it`s worth, they deny the...
TODD: They do deny the $20 million figure, but then that`s all they
TODD: Clearly, some money`s coming from Mr. Adelson.
HEILEMANN: Yes. Yes.
TODD: Go ahead.
HEILEMANN: And I know that the Gingrich campaign -- the Gingrich
campaign thinks that that`s the case. You know, but they -- they do not --
they have not exploited that in terms of fund-raising, you`re absolutely
right, Chuck.
And I find the whole thing curious even on a bigger level than that.
Put aside the fact that Gingrich is getting attacked. He`s not really --
he doesn`t seem like he`s really running for president still. I mean, he
is not in Iowa today. Everyone did at least one event here in Iowa today.
Iowa is key to his success. He`s not here today.
Nobody really knows where he is. He`s gone back to Washington to go
to church. There`s an event for Callista in Virginia. Why is there an
event in Virginia when the Virginia primary`s a long way off? He`s not
really planning to come back to the state in significant way until after
Christmas, and that seems just extraordinarily strange.
He seems to have bought the notion that he can win this thing in a
totally unconventional way...
TODD: Yes.
HEILEMANN: ... that when people wrote him off back in June, they were
all foolish. He can do this his way. And I got to say, it looks very --
it`s very curious because he has enough support out here, even among some -
- Iowa establishment figures...
TODD: Right.
HEILEMANN: ... he could run a pretty strong public schedule out here,
but he`s not really trying. And everyone`s sort of scratching their head.
TODD: Susan Page, let`s look at this trend line, RealClearPolitics.
First you see Gingrich`s rise since the first of November, but then there`s
a hook in that rise that occurred just over the past few days signalling a
slight drop in the polls.
Now, of course, they average all these polls -- whereas Mitt Romney`s
line has been hovering between 20 to 25 percent mark, of course, the entire
time, what (ph) you see there, which, of course, has been Romney`s problem.
So -- which brings me back to the Nikki Haley endorsement. It is, on
one hand, payback, Mitt Romney one of the first presidentials to endorse
her before she was the clear front-runner. He did it before it was cool to
get behind Nikki Haley, before Sarah Palin did it and all of those things
back during those primaries in 2010.
But it now does raise expectations in a state that he did not do well
in four years ago and nobody thinks he`s going to do well in this time.
PAGE: Well, I don`t think we quite know how he`s going to do in South
TODD: Well, that`s true. Hey, you never know.
PAGE: But let`s see. Does somebody get a head of steam out of Iowa,
or do you have such a mixed result, or a Romney victory or a Ron Paul
victory that doesn`t catapult anybody who we would see as a serious
contender for the nomination?
I mean, you know, it certainly provides with him some important
endorsement in South Carolina, and it makes it more of a game there for
him. And of course, their real prize, Florida, the next state down the
line. That`s where the Romney people really hope to be able to go head on
head with whoever the other finalist is and make it clear that Romney`s the
TODD: Hey, John Heilemann, very quickly, very short, and then to you,
Susan Page.
HEILEMANN: Yes.
TODD: If Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses, I have a few sort of elite
type of sources around Washington, D.C., who secretly have been trying to
kill the Iowa caucuses for years. They make the claim if Ron Paul wins
Iowa, this is the beginning of the end of Iowa.
HEILEMANN: There are people, serious people in the Republican Party,
and probably some in the Democratic Party out here, who have been saying
exactly the same thing to me this week.
TODD: Susan, you agree with that?
HEILEMANN: You wanted short.
PAGE: So Bachmann...
HEILEMANN: I gave you short.
PAGE: Bachmann wins the Ames straw poll...
TODD: Straw poll.
PAGE: ... and then Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses...
TODD: And the one-two punch.
PAGE: Yes.
HEILEMANN: Yes.
TODD: That is devastating to our friends in the Iowa Republican and
Democratic parties. Hey, I like Des Moines. I like eastern Iowa. I like
Sioux City. And you guys found out out there, right, John, they have
pretty good Mexican food in Sioux City, don`t they.
HEILEMANN: (INAUDIBLE) Juanita. It`s the best -- best non-regional -
- non-border state taco in America.
TODD: It`s a -- there`s a lot of good Mexican food. It`s a hidden
gem of Iowa. Anyway, Susan Page, John Heilemann, thank you both.
Coming up: Is 2012 a year that we`re going to see a serious
independent run for the presidency, like `68, like `92? It could happen.
And it could tilt the balance to one of the major party candidates. That`s
You`re watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TODD: Well, here`s a potentially huge political story that no doubt
has the Obama reelection team in a potential rage. Democratic senator Ron
Wyden of Oregon has signed on to Paul Ryan`s new Medicare plan. The plan
would give seniors a choice between Medicare, as you know it now, or a
privatized system. And that happens to be the same plan that Mitt Romney
is pushing, a tweak of the original Ryan plan.
So a Democrat from a blue state like Oregon gives the bipartisan stamp
of approval to the Romney/Ryan plan, a plan the White House and Democrats
were hoping to run against up and down the ballot in 2012.
We`ll be right back.
SEAN HANNITY, HOST, FOX NEWS "HANNITY": Will you promise, if -- if
you don`t win this nomination -- and you`re doing very well here in Iowa --
that you will support the Republican nominee and not run third party?
REP. RON PAUL (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I`ll give the
same answer I`ve given about 39 times now, that I have no intention of
doing that. I plan to do my very best and see what happens in the next two
TODD: Welcome back to HARDBALL. That was Ron Paul on Fox last night,
leaving that door wide open on the possibility that he could run as a third
party candidate. It`s an idea that seems to be gaining some momentum as
millions of Americans expect to be distressed by their choice in November,
no matter who the two nominees are.
The latest "USA Today" Gallup poll shows a majority of Americans
believe a third party is needed. In fact, 54 percent of Americans
nationwide believe the two major parties have done such a poor job that a
third party is needed. If someone does run as an independent for
president, which party gets helped and which one gets hurt?
Willie Brown is the former mayor of San Francisco and Michael Steele
is a former RNC chairman, who is also an MSNBC political analyst.
Mr. Mayor, I`m going to start with you because I distinctly remember
1992, a very, very weak -- perceived to be weak Democratic nominee limping
out of the primaries, barely beating Jerry Brown in primaries, a guy named
Bill Clinton.
And you were among some who were going, Well, look, if this Clinton
guy`s going to be this weak, let`s just nominate Perot, because you feared
Perot would hurt Clinton. It turned out Perot helped Clinton. But do you
sense that same feeling in `92 that you saw today in 2012?
WILLIE BROWN (D), FMR. SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR: I do think that there`s
the distinct possibility of a third party candidacy in the year of 2012. I
also think that the Obama people would not really want that to happen.
There are, obviously, some real difficulties with any third party
candidacy and with the predictability of which party benefits from it. My
guess is almost all of the candidates would prefer for politics to be
played between Republicans and Democrats and no independent involvement.
TODD: Well, it does mess up the math. You know, Michael Steele, it`s
interesting that Mayor Brown says that, only -- only because I can`t -- you
do the numbers and you crunch this, and I go seven out of ten times, and I
think a third party candidacy makes an Obama landslide more likely than we
realize. What do you say?
MICHAEL STEELE, FMR. RNC CHAIR, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Actually, I
kind of agree with the mayor there. And it`s good to see the mayor again.
And I think that he`s on to something. I think it really boils down to who
that third party candidate is.
I think, in the case of the GOP, if you`re looking at a Ron Paul
jumping into the third-party ring, yes, he`s going to have an impact,
because he`s going to have a lot of libertarian conservatives and
conservatives generally who are not, you know, enamored with Mitt Romney,
if Romney is the eventual nominee, saying, look, I`m going to go this way,
which opens up a real avenue with independents for Obama.
If it`s Huntsman, on the other hand, Huntsman could very well eat into
that very strong independent base that the president`s going to rely on for
his reelection, which would probably more likely benefit the Republican
TODD: You know, Mayor Brown, the other thing that I hear, one of the
theories of the case is, we should stop assuming it`s going to be one, that
we have such a volatile nature in the electorate, Occupy on the left, which
seems to be upset, about a quarter of the American public, Tea Party on the
right, another quarter of the American public, put them together, that`s
You can`t imagine one guy or gal being able to appeal to both of those
populist entities, so maybe we end up with two semi-serious independent
candidacies that get 5 or more percent on the ballot. You in California,
you guys do this a lot.
BROWN: Well, I think it would be a mistake, frankly, to limit the
potential to just Huntsman or Paul.
I genuinely believe that our friend Newt Gingrich is a more distinct
possible third-party candidacy coming out of the Republican operations than
almost anybody else on the ballot. After all...
TODD: What gives you that?
BROWN: Well, he`s the guy that has no real structure for running for
president. He`s the guy that appeared to have abandoned the race some time
He`s the guy that has a considerable amount of baggage. He`s the guy
that a number of Republicans are already speaking about in a negative
fashion. And Newt is a real fighter. He doesn`t take that easily. And he
will view himself as being a viable candidate for Democrats, for
Republicans, and for everybody else, and that he`s without the need to have
any of the usual party structure.
And if he thinks that way, his ego, I think, is massive enough to
propel him into the race, and for the first time, a real, serious,
mainstream party politician running as a third-party candidate. That,
persons should fear more than anything else.
TODD: You know, Michael Steele, actually, Mayor Brown brings up an
interesting issue. The Republican Party establishment not treating Newt
Gingrich very nicely. If you do perceive to alienate him, it could push
him -- and I have noticed that, for instance, with Ron Paul, in fact, there
seems to be almost be a concerted effort, particularly on that stage with
those candidates, where they`re like, no, no, no, we love you, Ron Paul,
stay here.
STEELE: You`re my boy.
TODD: Right. We`re seeing a little bit more of that, because they
have seen those polls. Paul would be just a real problem for a Republican
STEELE: Well, I think you`re dead-on there, Chuck.
I think the way they`re going after Newt right now -- and it`s
visceral. I mean, people are reacting. The establishment`s reacting in
every quarter against him. I mean, you know, yes, I`m sure it`s stinging
Newt very strongly. I don`t know if it stings him strong enough to want to
buck the party and go third party.
I just don`t see that element in place. I do give credence, though,
to what the mayor just said about how it could potentially play out with
certainly the two that we have already mentioned and having Newt Gingrich
kind of lingering in the wings, thinking about this thing, particularly if
this savage beating he`s getting continues.
TODD: You know, these wildfires in politics always start out West,
Mayor Brown.
I know that Americans Elect, which is this entity that is trying to
get on the ballot in all 50 states, they claim they`re not a third party,
just a third way to get on the ballot, and that whoever`s the nominee then
has to find somebody of their opposite party.
Getting -- what -- are they getting buzz in California or is this idea
of somebody else getting buzz in California? It just strikes me that we
would hear it there first because of the volatility you guys have been
experiencing in politics, frankly, more than we have.
BROWN: Well, at the moment the Democrats dominate California.
There`s a huge independent base, but the independent base is to the
left of the Democratic Party in California. There virtually is no real
significant Tea Party movement in California or real conservative movement
in California. So, no, there does not appear to be the kind of volatility
surrounding a potential oddball third-party independent challenge that you
are seeing in some of the other states. California is pretty much in the
box as it relates to Democrats.
TODD: And, Michael Steele, any CEOs out there that you think of,
business world folks? Who is that you think could be viable?
STEELE: For a third party?
TODD: Yes.
STEELE: Oh, man, that`s hard to say.
I mean, you know, you got -- you have got some folks in the business
community who may look at something like this, but I will tell you, the
politics right now, Chuck, as you know, in this town is so poisoned. A lot
of the business community -- you can see this with the money. They`re
sitting back. And I can`t see someone actually jumping into this thing and
saying, I`m going to put my name into the ring that way.
TODD: Yes.
STEELE: And having said everything that I have said so far about
this, at the end of the day, I still think that it`s not that likely that a
third-party candidate`s going to emerge, because it`s just not practical
from the standpoint of jumping in this thing at the time they`d have to
jump in to do it, to get on those ballots and to be successful in the fall
without helping or hurting one candidate or the other.
TODD: Well, I didn`t mean to try to stump you there, but I wanted to
make that point. There`s the issue here. There is no obvious person.
There is no Ross Perot.
STEELE: That`s right.
TODD: There is no George Wallace. There is no obvious, obvious
third-party candidate.
Willie Brown, Michael Steele, always a pleasure to talk to you both.
STEELE: You got it.
BROWN: Thank you, Chuck.
TODD: All right.
Up next, which Republican presidential candidate earned a 12th pants
on fire rating from our friends over at PolitiFact for not telling truth at
last night`s debate again? That`s next on the "Sideshow."
You`re watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TODD: Back to HARDBALL. Now time for the "Sideshow."
First up, busted. During last night`s Republican debate, candidate
Michele Bachmann found herself in need of some backup. Where did she turn
during that tiff with Newt Gingrich over the money he brought in from
Freddie Mac after leaving Congress? Let`s listen.
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The speaker had
his hand out and he was taking $1. 6 million to influence senior
Republicans to keep the scam going in Washington, D.C.
We can`t have as our nominee for the Republican Party someone who
continues to stand for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
NEWT GINGRICH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: What she just said is
factually not true. I never lobbied under any circumstance.
BACHMANN: Well, after the debates that we had last week, PolitiFact
came out and said that everything that I said was true.
TODD: Or maybe not.
He`s what the team at PolitiFact did back up among Bachmann`s claim,
that, until recently, Newt Gingrich has been advocating for the individual
mandate. But there was also this statement from Bachmann at the last
debate: "If you look at Mitt Romney as the governor of Massachusetts, he`s
the only governor that put into place socialized medicine."
Well, that line actually earned Bachmann her 11th pants on fire rating
from PolitiFact. And now that she`s claimed that the group endorsed
everything she said at the debate, PolitiFact has awarded Bachmann pants on
fire number 12.
I have a feeling the Gingrich campaign may pass that around after last
night`s little back-and-forth with Bachmann.
Also, Rick Perry may have gotten the least amount of speaking time at
last night`s debate. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. But he did manage to
give us one of the more standout quotes of the evening.
The topic, would Rick Perry`s debating skills really be able to hold
up against President Obama? Here`s Perry`s attempt at reassuring
Republican voters.
GOV. RICK PERRY (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I`m kind of getting
where I like these debates. As a matter of fact, I hope Obama and I debate
a lot.
There are a lot of folks that said Tim Tebow wasn`t going to be a very
good NFL quarterback. There are people that stood up and said, well, he
doesn`t have the right throwing mechanisms, or he doesn`t -- you know, he
is not playing the game right.
And, you know, he won two national championships. And that looked
pretty good. We`re the national champions in job creation back in Texas.
And so -- but am I ready for the next level? Let me tell you, I hope I am
the Tim Tebow of the Iowa caucuses.
TODD: I have to say, it was pretty clever. I love throwing mechanics
-- throwing mechanics. Anyway, the trouble is Tebow is known for the
terrible starts and fantastic finishes. So, obviously, Perry is hoping
that he did the terrible start and he gets the fantastic finish. We shall
By the way, the Tim Tebow shout-out wasn`t also just a throwaway,
being an evangelical, lots of evangelicals in Iowa, which is the true focus
right now of the Perry campaign.
And finally: playing the Nazi card. When will politicians learn?
Republican Representative Allen West from Florida is known for slamming his
opponents with incendiary comments. But this one ramps it up a notch.
Yesterday, West was asked to comment on a recent Pew poll that found that a
plurality of Americans, 40 percent, blamed Republicans alone for the
constant gridlock in Congress.
His response -- quote -- "If Joseph Goebbels was around, he would be
very proud of the Democratic Party because they have an incredible
propaganda machine."
All right, let`s think about that for a moment. West is comparing
Democrats to Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi minister of propaganda, an anti-
Semite so fanatical that when it became clear that Germany had lost the
war, he murdered his six children and then committed suicide with his wife.
West`s office released a statement saying that his comments were not
anti-Semitic and attempts to call them that are an example of the
propaganda machine he mentioned originally.
OK. That defense isn`t holding up with many of West`s colleagues, who
are still calling for an immediate apology.
And, Congressman West, a lot of Floridians were Jewish that you
All right, up next, a lot of conservatives don`t want to see Newt
Gingrich win the Republican nomination. And we have got a list of some of
their most scathing attacks. This is a pile-on like we haven`t seen in a
long time inside the Republican Party.
You`re watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
SUE HERERA, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Sue Herera with your CNBC "Market
The Dow Jones industrial average ends down about two points. The S&P
500 finished up four. And the Nasdaq gained about 14.33.
While the markets were little changed today, it`s a different story
for the shares of Research In Motion. Late Thursday, the maker of the
BlackBerry reported a sharp drop in quarterly profits. It also said its
highly anticipated new smartphones would be delayed until late next year.
That sent the stock down 11 percent.
Shares of Zynga debuted today on the Nasdaq, but the maker of the
popular games like "FarmVille" and "Words With Friends" ended the day 5
percent lower.
Inflation was under wraps last month. That`s according to the latest
read on prices. The Consumer Price Index was unchanged in November as
energy prices slumped. And six former executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac are facing fraud charges. Securities regulators say they misled the
government and taxpayers about how many subprime mortgages were on their
That`s it from CNBC. We are first in business worldwide -- and now
back to HARDBALL.
JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC: Let me tell you something. The Republican
establishment will never make peace with Newt Gingrich. They just won`t.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But if they spoke out...
SCARBOROUGH: No, no. But I`m saying is they won`t -- this is an
important point -- because the Republicans I talk to say he cannot win the
nomination at any cost. He will destroy our party. He will reelect Barack
Obama and we will be ruined.
TODD: Well, an NBC/"Wall Street Journal" certainly set that message
this week.
Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Conservative opinion-writers seem to also agree with Joe Scarborough.
"The New Yorker"`s Ryan Lizza pulled together some of the best lines
from the deluge of Gingrich takedowns that Acela corridor folks,
conservative columnists have written from New York to Washington.
We took that list, along with some of its bonus phrases, as the basis
for a look at the conservative reaction to Gingrich -- the conservative
elite. We should really put it in that box there.
David Corn is an MSNBC political analyst and Washington bureau chief
for "Mother Jones" magazine. John Feehery, a Republican strategist who
worked on the Hill during the Gingrich era, has seen up close how he
All right. Let`s go right to some of these columns.
Conservative columnist George Will gives perhaps the most literary of
the Gingrich takedowns, not surprising, writing: "Gingrich embodies the
vanity and rapacity that makes modern Washington repulsive. There is
almost artistic vulgarity in Gingrich`s unrepresented role as a hired
larynx for interests profiting from such government follies as ethanol and
cheap mortgages."
John Feehery, now, George Will in that column does take note that his
wife works for Rick Perry. I don`t think that had anything to do with Rick
TODD: That`s a pretty tough column.
JOHN FEEHERY, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: So I guess we will put Will down
as an undecided?
TODD: Undeclared delegate, yes.
FEEHERY: You know, to know -- to know Newt is to love him, I guess.
I would say, though, this whole concept that the Republican
establishment is against Newt Gingrich is a little bit of overkill. I
mean, there are certain people who worked with Newt Gingrich who have some
scores to settle with Newt Gingrich, and are looking to kind of stab him
back in the back. And those are the ones who are very, very anti-Newt.
And then there are other folks like the guys from the class of 1994
who just didn`t think Newt was a very effective speaker, who don`t like
him, and want him not to get the nomination.
And then, you know, there`s, like, the other folks like George Will,
who have close ties to other campaigns.
Now, Newt is a very interesting character. He`s got some really good
ideas and a lot of really bad ideas.
And I`ve always thought that Newt was an interesting speaker. At
times, I think he`s needlessly polarizing, which really kind of detracts
from his bigger message as progressive conservatism.
TODD: Right.
FEEHERY: Like old conservative opportunity society, Jack Kemp and
some other folks. You know, people like Newt, but they don`t want him to
be president.
TODD: It`s funny you should bring up Jack Kemp. But Newt tries to
claim he`s a right wing conservative and he wants to be the Reagan mantle.
And Newt was one of the Kemp guys, and the Kemp guys were sort of a
different breed -- David Corn, you know this. But, boy, some of this
stuff, it`s not just George Will. I mean, it`s gone on and on and on.
And even, I mean, Quinn Hillyer, he writes, "As personally
trustworthy as Joe Isuzu."
In case you forgot who Joe Isuzu was, here`s who he is.
JOE ISUZU: Hi, you want to save $2 million? It`s easy. Just buy
1,000 Isuzu Troopers.
TODD: And then he continues, "A history of extravagant and self-
defeating utterances, no debate can help Newt after his lizardry."
He`s a senior editor of "American Spectator" but he was also a Hill
guy. I mean, Quinn, originally, before he went back to writing columns, he
had a lot of experience on the Hill.
DAVID CORN, MOTHER JONES: When you hire somebody for a job, what`s
the most important thing to do? Check their references.
And what -- you just heard John say this. The class of `94, the
people who brought Newt to power, who he led -- remember he talks about his
leadership abilities, even teaches at military academies about this -- the
people who he led believes that he is not a good leader. That he`s
undisciplined, he`s unfocused.
And I think John has a great slogan. He has a lot of good ideas and
a lot of bad ideas. I think when it comes to a president, eventually --
now, the Republican primary voters may go off the cliff nor guy, but he`s
going to be a very hard sell to anybody who looks to a president to be a
stable force, to someone who is sober, who doesn`t throw bombs.
I mean, the essence of Newt is bomb-throwing. I think in a lot of
ways, he`s been the Charlie Sheen of Washington.
TODD: That`s a rough statement.
You know, John Feehery, one guy that actually should be for him in an
odd way is "New York Times" columnist David Brooks, who "The Times" might
say is a conservative, conservatives say he`s not, but he`s clearly a
center-right columnist. He writes, "He has every negative character trait
that conservatives associate with the `60s excess: narcissism, self-
righteousness, self-indulgence, intemperance."
And now, in Brooks` defense, it was a column going, "I should be for
Newt." He`s a guy that sort of likes government, but he couldn`t do it,
and it seemed to be personal.
FEEHERY: I`ve always thought that Newt is more of a Henry Clay type
of leader -- for the speaker who really wanted to transform the role of
speaker, and also believed in an activist government.
He`s a big concrete guy. He believes that government has a role in
health care. He`s not one of your 1920s, Joe Cannon type speakers, who
wants government to do absolutely nothing.
So, in a sense, you`re right. David Brooks should be with him. But
Brooks also doesn`t like the fact that Newt can kind of flame out and say
something crazy, and you know, he says a lot of crazy things. And it`s
hard to be president if you say a lot of crazy things.
TODD: But, David Corn, let me present an alternative theory here.
We`re all judging Newt Gingrich in the box that he`s in today. If he shows
the discipline to somehow beat Mitt Romney in a long fight and in June has
the 1,000 -- I think it`s going to be 1,215 delegates that he needs to be
the nominee, doesn`t that prove some of the skeptics wrong? And he`s
actually viewed a little bit differently.
CORN: There are a lot of people that will bet you $10,000 --
TODD: All right, that`s funny. I hear you.
CORN: No, Chuck, you`re right. If he can sort of take this moment -
TODD: If.
CORN: But people have been watching him for 30 years. He had this
moment before. It was called being speaker of the House of
Representatives, you know, maybe the second most powerful job in
Washington, and he blew that opportunity.
TODD: All right.
CORN: And we`ve seen him again and again not know when to stop or
when to be someone other than his true Newt.
TODD: David, I --
FEEHERY: Real quick?
TODD: John, I can`t. They just yelled at me in my ear.
TODD: I talk too much. John Feehery, I`ll see you on the basketball
court. David Corn, thank you both.
Up next, to hear Republicans tell it, President Obama is selling out
our ally, Israel. But what do Israelis actually think? We`re going to go
to Tel Aviv for the answer, next.
This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TODD: Baseball`s official all-time home run king, Barry Bonds, has
been sentenced to 30 days house arrest for giving misleading testimony to a
grand jury. Prosecutors wanted him to spend 15 months in prison, saying
house arrest for a guy who lives in a 15,000 square foot house in Beverly
Hills isn`t much of a punishment. I think not being in the Hall of Fame is
pretty big punishment for Barry Bonds these days.
We`ll be right back.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I am proud to say that
no U.S. administration has done more in support of Israel`s security than
ours. None.
On my watch, the United States of America has led the way, from
Durban to the United Nations against attempts to use international forms to
de-legitimatize Israel. And we will continue to do so. That`s what
friends and allies do for each other.
So don`t let anybody else tell a different story. We have been
there. And we will continue to be there. Those are the facts.
TODD: We are back.
That was President Obama this afternoon, defending his record on
Israel to a Jewish group in Washington.
It`s a topic that Republican presidential candidates have used to
attack him. They say his policies in the region have hurt the Jewish state
and emboldened hardliners on the other side.
But did one Republican go too far last week? Newt Gingrich made
inflammatory statements about the Palestinians calling them, quote, "an
invented people."
How is the race being viewed in Israel and the region? Who better to
bring in -- Martin Fletcher, special correspondent, of course, for NBC
News. More importantly the author of a new novel about post-World War II
England called "The List". Good stocking stuffer, also on the menorah.
He joins us now from Tel Aviv.
Martin, one of I think the misconceptions for folks that are only
following Mideast politics through the presidential race right now is
they`re going to somehow get the picture that President Obama is unpopular
in Israel. That`s not the case, is it, right now?
MARTIN FLETCHER, NBC NEWS SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it`s
changing. When Obama was first elected, his approval rating here in Israel
was in single figures, less than 10 percent. Now, the latest polls show
that around 53 percent of Israelis believe Obama is doing a good job.
There`s been quite a dramatic change, obviously, in that period.
And, yes, you know, this -- first of all, the statement we just heard
from President Obama, that really sounded heartfelt, didn`t it? There`s
clearly a serious sense among his people that you need to impress upon
Jews, upon Israelis, especially Jewish voters in America that Obama is with
And I think here in Israel, as I say, the sense is changing, and
there is a feeling that, whereas in the beginning of his administration, he
was too openly pushing for reform in the Arab world to the detriment of
Israel, that`s now changed, they feel.
TODD: Obviously that U.N. speech and the decision to do everything
they could to hold off that referendum inside the United Nations that the
Palestinians were circulating was a big help. But what about how the
Republican race is being viewed in Israel? For instance, the Newt Gingrich
comments about calling the Palestinians an invented people. Would -- how
many members of the Likud Party would say something like that?
FLETCHER: It`s good question. Actually, quite a few. I`m not sure
how many would really mean it.
And that the -- the thing is that, by saying that, Gingrich became --
I think he was seen as a little bit more Catholic than the pope, more
Jewish than the rabbi, maybe. He went too far.
After all, Israeli leaders have won the Nobel Peace Prize, Begin, and
Rabin, and Peres, for the Oslo agreement with the Palestinian leader Yasser
Arafat. You know, the Palestinians are a people. The Israeli government`s
official position is that there should be a two-state solution, they should
make peace eventually with the Palestinians.
So, to say that Palestinians are invented people, that didn`t go down
that well. The editorialists in the newspapers, a lot of the conversation
among the people on TV was, it isn`t true, it simply isn`t true. Having
said that, by the way, historians will say the Palestinians, as a people,
were a fairly recent concoction of Arabs. But you know --
TODD: That`s pretty much the entire Middle East map.
FLETCHER: Exactly. I mean, the whole map --
TODD: Yes.
FLETCHER: That`s right. I mean, the whole map was drawn by the
colonialists. It`s almost all artificial, and the Palestinians are no more
artificial than anybody else.
But the key point is the Israeli government has decided openly and
publicly and officially that a two-state solution is the way forward. So,
it didn`t go very well. It didn`t sound very smart, frankly.
TODD: Yes. I`ve got to leave it there. Your new book is called
"The List." It`s a novel for holidays, folks. Check it out.
Thank you, Martin Fletcher.
Coming up, we`re going to remember the brilliant Christopher
Hitchens, and if I`m going to find a bottle of scotch, I`m going to find it
real quickly.
You`re watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TODD: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Last night, Christopher Hitchens lost his battle with cancer.
Hitchens was one of the most talented writers for our time. He was
merciless, erudite, brilliant, outrageous, always, always entertaining. No
one was safe from Hitchens` most devastating weapon, his wit, not Princess
Diana, not Mother Teresa, not even God.
And we loved having him here on HARDBALL. Chris Matthews just loves
him. Here are just a few of the most memorable moments of Chris Hitchens
from this show.
CHRIS HITCHENS: I`m not that big on Obama. But I think it`s become
morally and intellectually impossible to vote for the Republicans, and if
you`d like, I`ll say why.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HARDBALL HOST: Go, sir.
HITCHENS: Well, it seems to me, I hate to say it in a way, but it
has to be said, and I think a lot of people are noticing, John McCain is a
lot older than he was in January, a lot older, and it shows. And he sounds
querulous. He looks weird. He automatically raises the question, with all
the collapsing scenery speeches that he`s making, you never know what he`s
going to say next. So, you got a feeling he doesn`t know either.
He therefore makes very majors to consider the question, well, who
has his picked for his caretaker? Which makes it doubly, triply, quadruply
more disgraceful, he`s picked someone who is not by any stretch of the
imagination qualified. Maybe not to be governor of Alaska.
MATTHEWS: Let`s just talk about George W. Bush. My sense is that
even eight days out, he`s failed to close the people with the American
people, with all this opportunity.
HITCHENS: Oh, sure.
MATTHEWS: Of desire of the American people, a change, a turning over
the pillow, a change in the guard, whatever they want to call it, a
cleaning of the barn, as Ross Perot used to say, there is still this
hesitancy to say, yes, Bush, yes. What`s that about?
HITCHENS: Well, because he`s managed lucky to be governor of Texas.
MATTHEWS: Because?
HITCHENS: Well, because he`s unusually incurious, abnormally
unintelligent, amazingly inarticulate, fantastically uncultured,
extraordinarily uneducated, and apparently quite proud of these things.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our human rights don`t come from government.
They come from our creator.
HITCHENS: Sir, you are being very stubborn. This does not say
Christian. At any point, it doesn`t even imply it. The person who put in
the word self-evident on that committee was Ben Franklin, who was
undoubtedly an atheist.
The main draft of the Thomas Jefferson was by no means a Christian.
George Washington wouldn`t take communion. It`s all true.
MATTHEWS: You called Mother Teresa a thieving fanatically Albanian
HITCHENS: Yes.
MATTHEWS: Well, anything you say about Barack Obama is puny compared
to that.
HITCHENS: That`s nothing to what she said when she took up her Nobel
Prize award and made a speech and said the main threat to world peace is
abortion and contraception. They`re moral equivalence of murder. I mean,
come on.
MATTHEWS: And Princess Diana is a simpering Bambi narcissist.
HITCHENS: That`s also true.
MATTHEWS: OK. So, what do you think of Barack Obama?
HITCHENS: At least no one tried to give Princess Diana the Nobel
Peace Prize. Though, they did give it to another person involved in the
landmine --
MATTHEWS: What is wrong with him taking it?
HITCHENS: Well, it would be like giving someone an Oscar in the hope
he would one day make a good motion picture.
TODD: There he is, Christopher Hitchens unplugged. Christopher
Hitchens was 62 years old.
That`s HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.
"POLITICS NATION" with Al Sharpton starts right now.
Copyright 2011 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
Guest Host: Chuck Todd


text:
Will you be able to get pregnant and have children after an abortion with pills?
A medical abortion does not affect your ability to conceive or bear a child in the future. In fact, if you do not want to become pregnant at this time, it is important to start using contraceptives as soon as you start having sexual relations again. The risks are the same as after a spontaneous miscarriage. Of course prevention of complications is very important.
More scientific info:
The results of one study suggest that if a woman who has never given birth has an early medical abortion using Mifepristone and Misoprostol (or other protaglandine) it will not cause problems during a future wanted pregnancy. 23 67
A publication intended to help doctors understand induced abortion states, "Induced abortion does not harm a woman's reproductive capacity. Premature birth, infertility, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, and adverse pregnancy outcomes are not increased in frequency after abortion". 30


text:
Friedrich Kohlrausch, a German physicist who did pioneering work on how electricity is transmitted in solutions, was born on this day in 1840. Kohlrausch is best known for a method to measure electrical conductivity using an alternating current, which determined that conductivity is lower in more dilute solutions. Kohlrausch also showed that there are two molecular players involved in conductivity: the cation, or positively charged ion, and the anion, or negatively charged ion.
[Source: Trevor I. Williams, Ed. A Biographical Dictionary of Scientists, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons. New York. 1982.]


text:
SAN DIEGO — All-Star slugger Adrian Gonzalez was in Boston on Saturday to take a physical exam needed to complete a trade from the San Diego Padres to the Red Sox, two people familiar with the situation told The Associated Press.
SAN DIEGO — All-Star slugger Adrian Gonzalez was in Boston on Saturday to take a physical exam needed to complete a trade from the San Diego Padres to the Red Sox, two people familiar with the situation told The Associated Press.
The people spoke on condition of anonymity because the trade hasn't been finalized.
Gonzalez had surgery to clean up the labrum in his non-throwing right shoulder on Oct. 20. The Padres said then that the three-time All-Star and two-time Gold Glove Award-winning first baseman was expected to be ready for spring training.
Besides passing the physical, Gonzalez and the Red Sox will have to agree to a renegotiated contract because of the caliber of prospects Boston is giving up, one of the people familiar with the deal said. That person said the teams hope to wrap up the trade before the winter meetings start Monday.
The Padres, who have a long history of dumping star players due to financial reasons, will receive three of Boston's top prospects, plus a player to be determined in exchange for Gonzalez. The prospects are right-hander Casey Kelly, first baseman Anthony Rizzo and outfielder Reymond Fuentes.
Rizzo is probably two years away from the big leagues, so the Padres will have to sign a free agent to play the position to begin the season. Kyle Blanks, a first baseman who had been switched to left field to give him playing time, had reconstructive surgery on his right elbow in late July and is expected to be sidelined until perhaps midseason.
Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein did not respond to an e-mail seeking confirmation. Padres GM Jed Hoyer hasn't responded to requests for comment.
Hoyer worked under Epstein in Boston's front office before he was hired as Padres GM following the 2009 season. Additionally, Padres assistant GM Jason McLeod was Boston's scouting director for seven years before returning to San Diego last December. McLeod drafted Kelly, Rizzo and Fuentes.
The popular Gonzalez grew up in the San Diego area and was the No. 1 overall pick by Florida in the 2000 amateur draft. He was obtained in a trade with Texas before the 2006 season and has blossomed into one of the game's best first basemen. The left-hander hit .298 with 31 homers and 101 RBIs last season.
Boston was interested in Gonzalez last winter.
While many had expected Gonzalez to be traded before the deadline last summer, the Padres were surprise contenders in the NL West and had to keep the slugger.
The Padres went 90-72 despite opening the season with a payroll of $37.8 million, second-lowest in the majors. San Diego was in contention until the final day, when its loss at San Francisco, coupled with Atlanta's win over Philadelphia, eliminated the Padres from the NL West and wild-card races.
Hoyer has said for some time that the Padres wouldn't be able to afford the kind of big-money contract Gonzalez would command if he hit the free-agent market.
Hoyer also has said he anticipated Gonzalez being on the opening-day roster. But the allure of prospects is probably too much to pass up for a team that anticipates a player payroll of approximately $40 million.
The Padres recently exercised Gonzalez's $6.2 million option for 2011, the final year of a team-friendly $15 million, five-year contract he signed in 2007.
In five seasons with San Diego, Gonzalez has 161 homers — two shy of Nate Colbert's club record — and 501 RBIs. Including parts of two seasons with Texas, he has 168 homers and 525 RBIs.
He set a Padres record with his fourth 30-homer season. His third 100-RBI season tied Phil Nevin for the most in club history.
The Padres already have lost right-hander Jon Garland, shortstop Miguel Tejada and catcher Yorvit Torrealba to free agency, and won't re-sign outfielders Scott Hairston and Tony Gwynn Jr. They also declined to pick up right-hander Chris Young's $8.5 million option.
In a salary purge that lasted from September 1992 to July 1993, the Padres traded All-Stars Fred McGriff, Gary Sheffield and Tony Fernandez, and let Randy Myers and All-Star Benito Santiago leave via free agency. They also traded Craig Lefferts, Bruce Hurst, Greg Harris and Darrin Jackson.
After being swept by the New York Yankees in the 1998 World Series, they let Kevin Brown, Ken Caminiti and Steve Finley leave as free agents and traded Greg Vaughn.
Less than two weeks after that World Series ended, voters overwhelmingly approved Petco Park, which was supposed to have provided the revenue to make the Padres consistent contenders. San Diego won the NL West in 2005-06, but has won only one postseason game since 1998.


text:
Find a Reseller in APAC
Our FortiPartners form a network of highly-qualified distributors and resellers committed to the same objectives as Fortinet: providing world-class products, services, and technical support to our customers. All FortiPartners displayed below have followed our latest training courses on Fortinet offerings and employ on-site Network Security Expert (NSE) Level 4 engineers. For all sales or technical inquiries, please contact your local reseller. Our Partners will be able address and resolve inquiries relating to basic networking and configuration, and can advise you on the products and services that best fit your needs.
For any comments, please send an email to: firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
See this post on my new website, here!
I just picked up the first roll of film shot on my new (old) Canonet 28 from Looking Glass Photo in Berkeley, and I could not be more excited! It took me a few months to shoot this roll of HP5 but the results are well worth the wait. The fixed 40mm 2.8 lens on the Canonet 28 is incredible sharp.
Meet my friend Griffin. I saw him with his skateboard and asked him to pose for this photo. After a few months he finally has the result. With this roll of film I really tried to branch out in my 'style' of photography. I took more candids and portraits and it was a great exercise in creativity. Forcing yourself to evolve is the best way to prevent getting bored or stagnating creatively.
This is just a small preview from the Canonet until I have some more time over the long weekend to post more photos and write an extensive review of the camera itself. Check back for updates! I have a lot of insights to share if you're considering a compact film rangefinder.
Thanks for stopping by!