text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guests: Howard Fineman, Hampton Pearson, Michael Smerconish, Mark Penn, Ben Nelson, Jim Moran, Ron Reagan, Stephen Battaglio
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: The Democratic alliance.
Let's play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews in Washington.
Leading off tonight: The master meets the commander. Bill Clinton returned to the White House today to meet with President Obama and help him navigate the same turbulent waters Clinton faced back in 1994. Back then, Clinton triangulated his way out of danger, working with Republicans on issues like Welfare reform, but still holding his Democratic base. It's a lesson President Obama will need to master, as well.
And as the president moves to the middle, can he win back the all-important independent voter? Can he do what Reagan did coming from the right, in his case moving from the left, unite his coalition across the board?
Plus, Republicans blocked a bill to help cover the health care costs of workers at Ground Zero. Let's get this straight. The party that wrapped itself in the flag after 9/11 now says we don't have the money to help the people who worked at the site of the attacks.
And Sarah Palin takes aim at her Republican critics.
SARAH PALIN (R-AK), FMR. GOV., FMR. VP NOMINEE: (INAUDIBLE) what they are, impotent and limp, and they are weak!
MATTHEWS: Wow. We'll find out what's got Palin's ire up in the "Sideshow."
And "Let Me Finish" with why Democrats should realize that President Obama's tax deal is a second needed economic stimulus.
Let's begin with the meeting of the minds today at the White House, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. The Huffington Post's Howard Fineman's an MSNBC political analyst, and Mark Penn, of course, is a long-time adviser and strategist to both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Gentlemen, I couldn't have two better guests than you guys. This is the alliance made by God and the Democratic Party. You're laughing because there's Bill Clinton back. He grabbed that podium so fast! He didn't want to leave go of it.
MARK PENN, FMR. CLINTON ADVISER: Oh, it was just like old times.
MATTHEWS: Well, here he is. Let's take a look at President Clinton at the White House, at the presidential briefing room, back home, giving advice to the president and speaking to the press.
BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I have a general rule, which is that whatever he asks me about my advice and whatever I say should become public only if he decides to makes it public. He can say whatever he wants, but—
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do you think?
CLINTON: -- we—we—
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Here's what I'll say, is that I've been keeping the first lady waiting for about half an hour, so I'm going to take off, but—
CLINTON: I don't want to make her mad. Please go.
OBAMA: You're in good hands. And Gibbs will call last question.
CLINTON: Yes. Help me. Thank you.
MATTHEWS: This isn't the sunshine boys. This is important. These guys are in their prime. Mark Penn, the president needs help. He needs help center to left. He needs it right across the board. What's the role of the president today, this weekend, next week?
PENN: Well, Barack Obama's—
MATTHEWS: Former president.
PENN: Now, look, Barack Obama's on the move. He's decided to go to the center. He's had a little time to think about it since election day. And he's called on President Clinton, who's been there. President Clinton was there after two years of movement to the left, looked like he wasn't going to get reelected. He moved to the center. He compromised with the Republicans. He did some big legislation. Now, I think President Obama did the tax deal, and Democrats have to follow him, or they're making a big mistake.
MATTHEWS: Howard?
HOWARD FINEMAN, HUFFINGTONPOST.COM, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, one thing I noticed is that even though there have been a lot of Clinton people from Mark's era in the White House, they came to the fore in the last week or so in terms of handling this tax—
MATTHEWS: Who in particular?
FINEMAN: Well, people like Gene Sperling, Jack Lew, Ron Klain. I could go down the list of people who are more visible now working with Congress because they come out of the Clinton era—
FINEMAN: -- when Bill Clinton came to power as a Democratic who was progressive but also not antagonistic by nature to business and—
MATTHEWS: Who filled—
FINEMAN: -- he went to the middle.
MATTHEWS: -- Santa's sack with all that great stuff for the Democrats? The reduced cost of labor, the 2 percent off the payroll tax, the accelerated depreciation for business people. Put all those goodies in that—so that it's bigger than the president's stimulus from last year.
FINEMAN: Well, I think—I think these people—these people—
MATTHEWS: Who did it?
FINEMAN: I think these people—
MATTHEWS: Sperling!
FINEMAN: -- that I mentioned helped out with that—
MATTHEWS: Lew!
FINEMAN: -- because they knew they could sell it to Republicans because it involved cutting taxes, as well.
MATTHEWS: Brilliant. Let's take a look. Finally, they figured out to put the spoonful of sugar in there, they got what they want. Here's President Clinton talking up the tax deal, a very important endorsement. This is going to be on the front page of every newspaper tomorrow, Bill Clinton standing next to Obama, endorsing the deal. Here he is.
CLINTON: In my opinion, this is a good bill, and I hope that my fellow Democrats will support it. I thank the Republican leaders for agreeing to include things that were important to the president. There's never a perfect bipartisan bill in the eyes of a partisan. And we all see this differently. But I really believe this will be a significant net plus for the country. I also think that, in general, a lot of people are breathing a sigh of relief that there's finally been some agreement on something.
MATTHEWS: You know, he got a couple of points there. No telepromter. No partisan's going to love a real bipartisan deal, by its nature. And he also said there's a tonal thing here. Did you catch that thing at the end? The people are going to like to see the parties working together after this election. Mark Penn?
PENN: Absolutely. He said it was good for the economy, good for the country. It's what the people have been asking for, Let me see something bipartisan here, a real agreement. Progress. It's what people—
MATTHEWS: Well, what—let's talk about differences of opinion. You work—you know. You work with a lot of politicians across the board, left, right, to center. Why is his politics so different than—well, Bernie Sanders isn't a Democrat. Anthony Weiner, the big city guys and women, Schakowsky—what's her name? -- out of Chicago, all these people are really screaming against this deal. Why are the inner city liberal white people, in many cases, screaming loudest against this thing?
FINEMAN: Well, there are two things. First of all, they—they are genuinely upset about the fact that rich people, the richest people in terms of both their income tax rates—
MATTHEWS: Yes.
FINEMAN: -- and estate taxes are going to make a lot of money off this—
MATTHEWS: Right.
FINEMAN: -- for the next couple years. So part of it is that sort of populist thing.
MATTHEWS: By the way, Henry Waxman grabbed me the other night and started yelling—
FINEMAN: That's one thing. The other thing is their concern, and I think legitimately—
MATTHEWS: Yes.
FINEMAN: -- that if you cut the payroll tax contribution and if you add all these other debts on top of the national debt and the annual deficit, that it will empower the Republicans in the next Congress to say, OK, we did the tax cut. Now we have to do the spending cuts. And they worry that Medicare, Social Security and other social programs—
MATTHEWS: Yes. But they're not going to be—
FINEMAN: -- will be in their gunsights.
MATTHEWS: They're not going to be the ones who are going to sign on to those—those debt reduction (INAUDIBLE)
FINEMAN: No, no, they aren't. But they're worried that the Republicans will whack them. That's what they're worried about.
MATTHEWS: And they're worried about what's probably going to happen.
FINEMAN: And that Obama will go along with it, too.
MATTHEWS: Look—let's take a look. Here's President Clinton. We can't miss him. Here he is when he talked about going back to 1994, the year that he made the pivot that you know all about, Mark Penn.
CLINTON: We played political kabuki for a year, had two government shutdowns. We can't afford that now. The only reason we could do that is that the deficit was already coming down at a time when interest rates were the problem and the economy was coming up. People just didn't feel it yet in '94. We can't afford that. We have got to pull together and both sides are going to have to eat some things they don't like because we cannot afford to have the kind of impasse that we had last time over a long period of time. We don't want to slip back into a recession. We got to keep this thing going.
MATTHEWS: Wow. He knows what he's talking about, right, Mark Penn? Again, he said, We don't want to repeat the mistake of all that—he said kabuki, it's almost like the Sumi (SIC) wrestlers. They couldn't quite get going in that period after the '94 election.
PENN: Well, after the '94 election, there was a really big wrestling match here. This is much, much faster. But let me tell you, there's also some politics at work here that people don't see, that Obama knows. The over $100,000 voter is now 26 percent of the electorate. They were Obama supporters, 50-50 --
MATTHEWS: The suburban people.
PENN: -- an enormous increase, new, professional, two-wage-earner couples, making over $100,000 --
MATTHEWS: Northern Virginia! Isn't it?
PENN: Exactly.
MATTHEWS: Right.
PENN: And those were critical to Obama's victory. He lost 16 percent of those voters in the 2010 mid-terms. He's got to get those back.
MATTHEWS: Just remember the Philadelphia suburbs, you know, the Pittsburgh suburbs.
FINEMAN: Sure.
MATTHEWS: All those suburban counties went for Obama.
FINEMAN: Right.
MATTHEWS: And they're not poor people. Some of them are, but very few.
FINEMAN: OK, those are—Mark's absolutely right. Those are independent voters, and they like the—they like this, Let's work together thing. They like what seemed to be the pragmatism of President Obama, when faced with this difficult situation, got up in front of the people and said, Look, this is the best we can do.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
FINEMAN: We need a bipartisan deal. And if I were the president, I would follow—I would look very carefully at what Bill Clinton said there about how we can't mess around with the system now.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
FINEMAN: In other words, we all need to be pulling in the same direction. That is the sort of tonal message that I think President Obama has tried to put forth but not always successfully. Now he's got—circumstances have given him the chance to do it.
MATTHEWS: Here's Bill Clinton again, the former president, answering a question about whether President Obama betrayed his party. Couldn't be a tougher question. Here he is answering it. Let's listen.
CLINTON: A lot of them are hurting now. And I get it. And you know, I did 133 events for them. I believe the Congress in the last two years did a far better job than the American people thought they did, at least the American people that voted in the mid-terms. And I went to extraordinary efforts to try to explain what I thought had been done in the ways that I thought were most favorable to them.
But we had an election. The results are what they are. The numbers
will only get worse in January in terms of negotiating. And the president
look, if we had 5 percent growth and unemployment was dropping like a rock, maybe you could have the so-called Mexican stand-off and you could say, It will be you, not me, the voters will hold responsible for raising taxes on middle class people if they all go down, you know, next year. That is not the circumstance we face.
MATTHEWS: Let's talk real politics, Mark Penn and Howard. You're both experts. There's on old phrase in politics, I learned it 40 years ago, Dance with the one that brung you. The people that elected you are the ones you should be observant to and stick with and do as much as you can for. The tricky part is you're not just elected by one faction. To win 51 percent—or he won 53 percent, President Obama—you've got to hold your base, which is 20 to 25 percent at best, of the country, which is progressives—union members, perhaps, minorities, real liberals who say I'm a liberal, or a progressive. Then you have that group of people that are just Democrats. They don't talk about hyphenated Democrats. They were born that way, they are that way. Then you have the Reagan Democrats, who only vote for you if you're a really good candidate or they happen to like you.
How do you hold all three together, dance with all three that brung you?
PENN: Well, you can't always hold them all. But he—the president here—and by that, by president, I mean President Obama—did an amazing political maneuver today. He knocked Pelosi and Reid off the stage and brought President Clinton in.
MATTHEWS: For the weekend news.
PENN: President Clinton, who's at 90 percent with Democrats, who's as beloved as Obama is with the base and the core of this party for his accomplishments. So he's isolated the more left-wing elements. And they have a decision to make. Go with the president now or start to—
MATTHEWS: Are there—are the people on the left—
MATTHEWS: -- the Democratic left, not knocking them at all—I agree with them on most things. Are they going to knock Bill Clinton now over the weekend?
PENN: Well, look, they've—
MATTHEWS: Are they?
PENN: They've knocked the deal, but this is a strong message—
MATTHEWS: Are they going to knock Bill Clinton?
PENN: This is—
MATTHEWS: Howard, will they come out—
MATTHEWS: Will they speak again—will some people on the far left back go after—the netroots people, perhaps—will go after President Clinton now and say, You shouldn't be in on this deal?
FINEMAN: I think some of them will. Talking to some of them and getting the reaction I got when I wrote about how these Clinton people were involved in selling this economic thing, I got a lot of e-mails—
MATTHEWS: Are they mad at Mark Penn for being a centrist?
FINEMAN: Well, sure. They view Mark Penn as the geometry teacher in the school of triangulation.
FINEMAN: I mean—
MATTHEWS: You are so good!
FINEMAN: And that's what he did. And that's what he did—
MATTHEWS: Do you like that title?
FINEMAN: And that's—that's how Bill Clinton got reelected.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
FINEMAN: So you know, they got to—they got to decide—one of the things—few things I've learned in my 35, 40 years in this business is that it's a game of comparison. It's always compared with what, compared with whom. And Barack Obama's ultimately going to make the gamble that when push comes to shove, the left wing of the party, including the African-American community, which by the way, is still very strong—
MATTHEWS: Yes. I know—
FINEMAN: -- for the president—they're going to say, OK, Barack Obama, newborn triangulator, versus whomever the Republicans—
FINEMAN: -- put up. You know? That's the—
MATTHEWS: Somebody pointed this out, the idea of another challenge in the Democratic Party—how does anybody in the Democratic Party say, I'm going to try to knock off the first African-American Democratic president, or any president who's been African-American in history, and I'm going to knock him off so he can't get a second term? Who's that liberal?
FINEMAN: No, that hasn't been talked about very much.
MATTHEWS: I know.
FINEMAN: But is a very important point, I think Mark would agree.
PENN: I don't think there'll be any primary challenge to him. I think the question now is whether or not Pelosi and Reid are going to join with Clinton and Obama.
MATTHEWS: What's Pelosi's politics right now? Figure it for me.
PENN: Well—
MATTHEWS: It's obviously to save her leadership, which is fair enough.
FINEMAN: She went to Norway. Those are her politics.
MATTHEWS: What's that mean?
FINEMAN: Well, I mean she went to support the Chinese human rights activists that she's long been supporting from her San Francisco base. In other words, to me, that meant—I know it's important for her symbolically to be here, but I think that—she knows that she can't be the out front—see one of the reasons why the president—
MATTHEWS: Is she with the president on this tough deal secretly? Is she against him secretly? Because I can't read her. Where is she on this?
FINEMAN: I think—
MATTHEWS: I think Steny's with the president.
FINEMAN: Oh, I—yes, Steny Hoyer, the number two, is definitely.
Well, Steny Hoyer's, you know, been seen and I think is the—
MATTHEWS: Boxer's with the president.
FINEMAN: -- the more Clinton type—
MATTHEWS: And I think Sherrod Brown's with the president—
FINEMAN: Nancy Pelosi's a little more to the left, given her district and her background, and I could see her voting against the president here, which, by the way, in terms of getting independent votes in the suburbs—
MATTHEWS: OK, against the—
FINEMAN: -- best thing that could happen for Obama.
MATTHEWS: Yes, against him the second time or just the first time?
Because there is a kabuki dance going on there.
FINEMAN: Well, sure. Well, there'll be—there'll definitely be a first vote in which everybody will vote no, and then they'll—then they'll vote yes.
PENN: I think the question is whether or not Bill Clinton now is going to bring Democrats together over the weekend.
MATTHEWS: Bill Clinton.
PENN: Things were getting out of control.
MATTHEWS: Have you talked to Bill about this, the former president?
PENN: No. I haven't talked to him. He—
MATTHEWS: You still like him, though, don't you?
PENN: Oh, absolutely.
PENN: Look—look, he—he was channeling Bill Clinton today.
MATTHEWS: He was so sharp today—no teleprompter, no notes, went through every one of the issues like he's been schooling himself on them to the—like you! You're like this, Howard. You always know exactly what the issues are up to the second. He was unbelievable!
FINEMAN: Well, it was—it was a bravura performance, almost casually done.
MATTHEWS: Yes, casually done!
FINEMAN: Casually done. That's what—
MATTHEWS: Well, let me come in here and be president for 10, 20, 30 minutes!
MATTHEWS: An amazing piece of work. Amazing! That picture we're looking at right now is history-making. Thank you, Howard Fineman. And good news for the Democratic Party, I would say, and progressives and centrists everywhere. Howard Fineman, Mark Penn—I think I covered most of the bases. And also good news for Charles Krauthammer's column writing!
MATTHEWS: Up next, will President Obama's move to the middle and Bill Clinton coming in to back him up pay off with independent voters? Do they want to see Bill back? Much more on that coming up. What a show. What a night.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: United States Senator Jim Bunning, one of my heroes, said farewell on the floor of the Senate today, making no apologies for his occasional strays from Republican orthodoxy.
SEN. JIM BUNNING ®, KENTUCKY: I have been booed by 60,000 fans in Yankee Stadium, standing alone on the mound. So I have never really cared if I stood alone here in the Congress, as long as I stood by my beliefs and my values. I have also thought that being able to throw a curveball never was a bad skill for a politician to have.
MATTHEWS: Well, he's a man of the right, and I've always liked him. Even so, a man from Connie Mack Stadium, the Hall of Famer pitcher from my home town of Philly, the great Jim Bunning. He'll be replaced in the Senate by someone very different, I think, Rand Paul, the Tea Party favorite.
We'll be right back.
OBAMA: I just had a terrific meeting with the former president, President Bill Clinton, and we just happened to have this as a topic of conversation. And I thought, given the fact that he presided over as good an economy as we've seen in our lifetimes, that it might be useful for him to share some of his thoughts.
MATTHEWS: Wow. A couple of heavyweights there. Welcome back to HARDBALL. That's President Obama late today, with President Clinton at his side, at the presidential briefing room.
Syndicated radio host Michael Smerconish, my friend, is here, an MSNBC political analyst, as well, and Ron Reagan, of course, is the author of the upcoming book, "My Father at 100." We all want to go over that when we get that book out. I've got an advance look at it already.
Let me go to Michael Smerconish, because this is about your audience out there, that suburban audience in all those counties outside of big cities that voted for Obama the last time. They wouldn't consider themselves netroots or progressives in many cases, but they are people who liked Obama from the beginning. They still like him, potentially. Has he begun to win them back with this deal?
MICHAEL SMERCONISH, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: I think so.
I think that the group that you talk about are looking for less hyper-partisanship, more pragmatism. Compromise is not a dirty word to the people that you're identifying.
And, Chris, you know what I think of as I look at that imagery? It's hard for me to identify anyone on the political spectrum of America, including the far right, that would be displeased in seeing the presence of Bill Clinton.
I think if you had told me that a couple of years ago, I would have had a hard time believing it. But even on the far right, he's viewed as being less toxic. And they look back at those issues from the mid-'90s, and say, geez, was that really such a big deal in retrospect? That was a pre-al Qaeda, pre-bad economy world. We would take it back.
MATTHEWS: You know, Ron, a couple weeks ago, the Republicans were running around calling the president of the United States a socialist or worse. Now they're calling him a partner in a deal.
I guess there's a plus there, even for people that may disagree with the president on the elements of this deal. Your thoughts. I don't know where you stand yet, so here we go.
RON REAGAN, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think to the question of independents, I think, if I can be equivocal, it's going to help and it's going to hurt him.
It's going to help him in the sense that he got something done. And people like to see something done. They like to see the government moving forward.
On the other hand, the method that he used to get to the place where he got eventually, with a big tax cut for rich people, is going the upset some people. People like leaders who have convictions that they're willing to fight for. And he's gotten into the habit, it seems, of giving away the store before he even enters into negotiations.
And I'm not sure that that is going to please independents. It's certainly not going to please of course progressives, liberals, people on the left.
MATTHEWS: Well, let's take a look at what Charles Krauthammer, a man of the right wing, said today in a weirdly ironic support for the bill. He doesn't like the bill at all. He thinks it's a giveaway to the left.
He said it's a great tax cut showdown of 2010. He said the House Democrats don't have a clue what happened here. "While getting Republicans to boost his own reelection chances, he gets them to make a mockery of their newfound, second-chance, post-Bush, Tea party, this-time-we're-serious persona of debt-averse fiscal responsibility."
Well, Ron Reagan, you're right there. This isn't a fiscal responsibility bill, but it does do a couple of things that may be good for the economy this coming year. It reduces the cost of labor—
REAGAN: It does.
MATTHEWS: -- by cutting the payroll tax, which is one better reason to hire somebody, rather than not hiring anybody. It reduces the cost of capital, but would accelerate depreciation. You buy a new plant, a new piece of equipment, write it all off the first year.
It has unemployment comp, which as people, we all know, spend 100 percent. You get 100 bucks in unemployment comp, you spend 100 bucks. So we know that's all good. The only part of it is that last $120 billion out of the $920 billion that goes to the better-off people at the top. That's the only part of it that is really bad, though, from the Democratic view.
REAGAN: Well, yes, that's true. But let's keep in mind that it does blow a hole in the budget. It is going to raise the deficit. And two years from now, the Republicans are going to turn around and point their fingers at President Obama and say, see, you ran up the deficit. Let's credit them for hypocrisy.
MATTHEWS: Yes, but their supply-side argument would be, by the way, the revenues will increase because we have cut taxes. I know somebody named Ronald Reagan that used to argue that. And they still believe it.
REAGAN: -- that didn't work.
MATTHEWS: I know.
REAGAN: His own people agree that that's nonsense.
MATTHEWS: Let me go back.
Michael Smerconish, let me try you again. The president—the former President Bill Clinton, who, by the way, walked in there today as if he had been schooling himself, as he said, an hour every day studying economics, and he was ready on these issues, he said—on the tonal question, he said people like the idea of these two parties getting together per se.
SMERCONISH: Well, I agree with that. I absolutely agree with that.
I think that folks are tired of the split-screen mentality that has now so permeated what's going on in Washington. Here's an observation for you. Imagine that we said to the Tea Party activists 30 or 60 days ago, here's what's going to happen in the immediate aftermath of the election. Something's going to be done to turn the economy around and that something is going to drive us $900 billion further into debt. What would you say about that?
They would have gone bat-"blank." And yet, Chris, having taken four days of phone calls since they hatched this deal, silence, silence from that wing of the GOP, which I find a bit ironic and in with what Krauthammer wrote.
MATTHEWS: Yes. Well, people who are wealthy want the tax cuts.
People who want the economy to grow may be happy.
Let me ask you about your thing you're pushing this Monday. I don't know what it's all about. Mark Penn's wife is involved, Nancy Jacobson. I know the mayor of New York is involved with it. What's this no labels group you're involved with?
SMERCONISH: Well, the idea being that we need less hyper-partisanship, that we have spent too much time glorifying what goes on, on the far left and the far right.
And I perceive it and the reason I'm involved is that it's time for there to be an awakening in America's middle, that there's nothing that says weakness about compromise. There's nothing that says weakness about moderation.
You know me. I'm plenty passionate about everything, but my views don't fit neatly into those faux ideologically driven boxes that I think we all perpetuate.
MATTHEWS: So, why don't you fix yourself? Why don't you get in line with the left or right, Michael? Why don't you fix yourself? Maybe you're the odd man out. Maybe you should be a liberal or a conservative.
SMERCONISH: No, I don't think so, because let me tell you something.
When I go to back-to-school night, when I pump my gas and when I'm buying groceries, I don't meet people the likes of which I meet in the cable TV world or the talk radio world.
It's like Saturday morning wrestling. You remember when Vince McMahon was on 29 and 48 in Philly, and they had the grand wizard of wrestling, and you knew there was the good guy and bad guy, and it was all so predictable what they were going to do and say?
That's what we have become. And these politicians go to Washington and they emulate what we school them in. And enough.
MATTHEWS: OK. But I'm not a media credit. And, by the way, it was called "Fabiani's Mat Time."
MATTHEWS: I loved it.
Let me go back to Ron Reagan.
Are you against labels, Ron? Or do you like labels?
REAGAN: Oh, I don't care much for labels myself personally.
But, here, we have got to be careful that there isn't a false equivalency here. The Democrats, sure, there are some people maybe a little far to the left who are strident sometimes, but, for the most part, the partisanship has been coming from the right and the Republican Party.
The Democrats weren't the ones who were holding the American public hostage in order to get a tax cut for the rich. That was the Republicans. The Democrats are not the one who want to use this sort of budget-busting thing to starve the beast. That's the Republicans.
The Republicans want to kill the budget, so they can come back two years later and say, oh, gee, I guess we have to cut Social Security and Medicare. Gee, too bad.
MATTHEWS: I agree. Ron—Ron, I'm with you. You know who was man of the year last year, Michael and Ron? It was Mitch McConnell.
I don't like what he did, but he screwed the country out of a decent bipartisan agreement on anything, forcing Obama on every issue, from stimulus to health care to fin reg, everything, he had to go to the left. He forced him to build all his coalitions on the left, screwed him over there, then ran against him for being a leftist and a socialist, after forcing him to be that.
Mitch McConnell engineered that disgusting strategy, but it worked.
And I got to keep my eye on what works around here.
Thank you very much, Michael Smerconish. Have a nice holiday.
Ron, if I don't see you again, good luck with the book. When you come on, you will get some help from me.
Up next: Sarah Palin has some strong words. I don't think they're
strong words. I think they're imbecilic, but whatever. We're used to them
about the establishment Republicans. The language she gets away it, let's just leave it to your view. Let me—you will judge. You can't believe the way she talks. She's talking like, well, the people she endorses.
Anyway, we will be right back. Stick around for the "Sideshow," and where she belongs, Sarah Palin, in the "Sideshow," only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL, and time for the "Sideshow."
First: Palin does her thing. Last night on Barbara Walter's "Most Fascinating People" special, the self-proclaimed mama grizzly was asked about Republicans who say she cost their party the Senate by backing weak primary candidates. Palin's response? Those critics are impotent, limp and weak.
Let's listen.
SARAH PALIN ®, FORMER ALASKA GOVERNOR: Aren't these boys just silly with their accusation that Sarah Palin, the hockey mom from Wasilla, cost the United States Senate power base?
No, the GOP wasn't close to winning the Senate. A lot of those accusations, though, came from anonymous sources. They want to be known as such powerful characters, but they are impotent and limp, and they are weak. They hide behind somebody's skirts. And they won't even put their name to the accusations.
MATTHEWS: Is that how regular people talk? She talks like regular people. I don't think so.
Palin knows exactly what she's doing, of course, here with that way she speaks, and she knows no one in the 2012 hunt has her kind of star quality, which brings us to tonight's "Big Number."
How long has Palin been on Walter's annual list of the 10 most fascinating people? Well, three years straight, a feat no other figure has actually pulled off, no celebrities, no artists and certainly no politicians. Palin's three-year stint in the most fascinating category—tonight's telltale "Big Number."
Anyway, coming up: Senate Republicans keep saying no. The latest case, they have blocked a bill that would cover health costs for 9/11 workers, saying it would cost too much. Is that the American people's view, not to help those people that helped us on 9/11? Is this any way to treat those men and women who risked a lot going in there?
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
HAMPTON PEARSON, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I'm Hampton Pearson with your CNBC "Market Wrap."
Stocks edging higher on some positive economic data and another dividend bump from G.E., the Dow climbing 40 points. The S&P 500 adding seven, the Nasdaq gaining 20.
General Electric driving gains on the Dow after announcing its second dividend bump this year. Analysts say the 2-cents-per-share increase signals growing confidence in the economy.
But a tough day for 'The New York Times." Eastman Kodak and Home Depot, they're being taken off the S&P 500 at the close of business next Friday. They will be replaced by Netflix, Newfield Exploration, and F5 Networks. And Cablevision Systems will replace King Pharmaceuticals, which is being acquired by Pfizer.
Chipmaker SanDisk advances after rival National Semiconductor delivered a weaker-than-expected full-year forecast.
And in economic news, the U.S. trade deficit fell to its lowest level in five months in October, growing demand for American goods pushing exports to their highest level in two years.
That's it from CNBC, first in business worldwide—now back to
SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND (D), NEW YORK: This was the most deadly terrorist attack in the history of America. And now, nine years later, this body cannot come together to do what's right? We have a moral obligation to protect these men and women and their families, because they did the right thing. It is now time for this body to do the very same.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
That was of course New York Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand on the 9/11 health care bill, which would have helped emergency workers and volunteers included with all the other workers down there at Ground Zero. They're not getting a penny now.
Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the bill, just as they blocked and stalled legislation that would have allowed gays and lesbians to serve openly and proudly in the military and the ratification so far of the New START nuclear treaty.
Joining me now is Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska and U.S.
Democratic Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia.
I want to start with Senator Nelson.
It just seems the pattern here, the Republicans say we have got one goal, cut taxes, especially for people in the highest brackets. Nothing gets done until that gets done. If that takes three weeks, right up until Christmas, nothing else gets done.
That tactic, is it working?
SEN. BEN NELSON (D), NEBRASKA: Well, I don't know if it's working, but I can say that blocking the 9/11 money to many Americans from all states, including those from Nebraska that were back there helping, that's just outrageous.
And to hold the military hostage with blocking the authorization bill, because they had—disagree with parts of it, that hasn't happened in 48 years. Last time it happened, you were in high school and I was in college.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
NELSON: This is just ridiculous. This is what we're going through, though.
MATTHEWS: This is Mitch McConnell's strategy, the Senate leader. And I say he's man of the year. Like, look, "TIME" magazine has picked people pretty awful. I'm not mentioning their names.
REP. JIM MORAN (D), VIRGINIA: Hitler.
MATTHEWS: Hitler, yes. They have picked bad people.
MATTHEWS: So, I'm not saying he's a good guy. But his ability to just say no to everything, single bill, forcing Barack Obama to build liberal to left coalitions all the time, and then call him a socialist, it's worked.
MORAN: It's worked. They have had control of our nation's agenda for the last two years, Mitch McConnell and Jon Kyl and their colleagues.
And no matter what we do in the House, no matter what Obama wants to do out of the White House, it stops in the Senate, because their policy is to just say no. He tells his contributors that: What we're going to do is make sure Obama has no legislative victories, so we can get out power back, and then we're going to give you all your tax money back.
MATTHEWS: Senator Nelson, what is—what happens to the Senate if it becomes an iron wall down that center aisle? It seems like that iron wall is there, almost like the Iron Curtain used to be there. You don't get anything done if one party says, we're not giving you the 60 votes on anything until we get the one candy jar we want, filled.
NELSON: Well, I think the American people will react very strongly against that tactic as we go forward. It may have worked as a good tactic in strategy to win the last set of elections, but I don't think that it can hold for the next two years. I think the American people understand that at times, you try to get the best possible bill. But in this case, I think they understand when the president's reaching out trying to get the best bill possible.
Eighty percent of the American people have continued to say they want Congress to work together. They want both parties to come together. They don't want an iron wall. They don't a barrier that enables obstructionism to continue into the future when there are so many critical issues to be dealt with.
MATTHEWS: You know, one law of life might be "do no harm," and I—
we can argue about all those ideological issues. But one I think we ought
I think we do agree on, we don't want a second Cold War, don't want to go to war with Putin. And these people, like Palin, who's not even elected of anything, are standing out there saying, let's kill the nuclear deal, let's kill it by pushing all these legislations to Christmas and then fight it next year when they have control with more votes.
MORAN: Chris, we can't make inspections of Russia's nuclear weapons and all we're doing is strengthening Putin's hands and weakening Medvedev, because Medvedev wants to work with the United States; and Putin is saying he's crazy. That's not going to work. Putin represents the hard core conservatives in Russia, and all we've done is to strengthen his hand and weaken our foreign policy.
That's real stuff. This is life and death stuff when you've got thousands of nuclear weapons that can't be inspected. Jon Kyl held it up primarily because he wanted his estate tax. Well, now, he's got his estate tax, $68 billion to 0.24 percent of the American people—
MATTHEWS: Let's look at—
MATTHEWS: Congressman, I want Senator Nelson jumping here. Here's Senator McCain today on the new START treaty, which is we (INAUDIBLE) we thought it was going to get in, it's going to get signed, now the Senate is being held up by all this obstructionism.
Let's listen.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN ®, ARIZONA: But I'd also like to point out, I think that START is very important, OK? And I would like to see it ratified. But I would also point out to you that the last election, last November 2nd, wasn't about START. It wasn't even about Afghanistan or Iraq. It was about 9.8 percent unemployment, jobs and jobs and jobs in the economy.
MATTHEWS: Well, what is he flacking for, Senator Nelson? Why is he flacking for something he's not that interested? He cares about world affairs, national defense. And now, he's saying a nuclear treaty isn't as important as the current leadership agenda on the far right? Senator Nelson?
NELSON: Well, I think, you know, he has a point, that the American people—thank you -- he has a point that the American people have been talking about jobs, the economy, as well as tax cuts and what we're going to do to reduce the debt.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
NELSON: But they're not saying that's the only thing we should do.
And I'm hearing from my colleagues across the aisle that are saying the kinds of things that Senator McCain seems to be saying, that we can't do anything. We've already had two votes on tax cuts. We did a week ago tomorrow. We are working on tax cuts.
That doesn't mean that we have to put everything aside just until we get that deal struck. We need to move forward. We need to get the new START treaty. I think we can do it after the first of the year. I don't think there's any doubt about that, and I suppose we can do the defense authorization bill after the first of the year, although it's totally anticlimactic at that point in time.
They're holding up the progress and very important things for their own agenda. I happen to agree with part of that agenda, but I don't think you have to hold up everything else.
MATTHEWS: Do you think we're going to get a new START Treaty next year once Sarah Palin lands, you know, with both feet and all the right wing is jumping in on that thing? They can't wait until they get 53 Democratic senators and they have a lot more power than they have this year.
MORAN: Absolutely. After the New Year, we've got little opportunity to advance anything—any part of President Obama's agenda.
MATTHEWS: Anyway, thank you.
Senator Ben Nelson, thanks for coming on HARDBALL tonight, on a Friday night. Thanks so much for joining us, sir.
NELSON: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: And Congressman Jim Moran, as always.
Up next: a new book about legendary TV host David Susskind, who really started this business of tough TV journalism and interview show. Bringing back—we're going to bring back, him, to talk about him with the great author out there about this new book about him and also about the guys like Nixon and Kennedy and people like that, and Khrushchev used to come on in his show.
This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: A dramatic seen in Oslo, Norway, today. The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo, who's serving an 11-year jail sentence over in China. And so, for the first time in 74 years, the award was not handed over, instead, it was placed on an empty chair where Liu would have sat. The man is in prison in China. Liu is behind bars in China for urging sweeping changes to Beijing's one-party communist political system. Wow.
HARDBALL will be right back.
MATTHEWS: We're back.
David Susskind was, of course, a pioneer in television, producing TV shows and movies, but he's also best known for his talk show, which he hosted from 1950s to the 1980s, interviewing the likes of Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, Martin Luther King and more.
"TV Guide" magazine's Stephen Battaglio is author of the new book, a great book, "David Susskind: A Televised Life."
David—I mean, Steve, thank you so much. I thought I was going to talk to David Susskind, just kidding.
STEPHEN BATTAGLIO, AUTHOR, "DAVID SUSSKIND: A TELEVISED LIFE": Thanks for having me.
MATTHEWS: I grew up with this guy. In many ways, Susskind had that kind of he was little bit like Charlie Rose, somewhere between Charlie and here at HARDBALL. It had a kind of intensity. It had an importance.
Tell us how he started this whole idea of bringing people on live, important people, and challenging them with serious questions.
BATTAGLIO: Well, as you pointed out, David's real business was producing TV and movies, mostly TV. He was the most powerful and prolific producer of live television in New York during the 1950s. And his TV was growing and more independent TV stations came on, TV stations that were not affiliated with broadcast networks. They needed programming. Talk shows were a very cheap solution.
And there was one station in New York that said, you know, David Susskind, he's brass, he's outspoken, he's glib, he knows everybody in town as a producer. We should give him a talk show.
It was presented to him. And it had the hook—the show is called "Open End," and it would air late at night. And David was allowed to go as long as he wanted. As long as he thought the conversation was interesting, he could take it two or three hours. If it wasn't, it would be—it would go shorter, but it usually went long.
And he used that—he was a very curious guy. David was not like the other mogul—show business moguls from the World War II era. He went to Harvard. He went to the School of Government.
MATTHEWS: Yeah.
BATTAGLIO: So, it wasn't just—it just wasn't culture in show business he was interested in, he was interested in world affairs and politics as well.
MATTHEWS: How long did Nixon's show go, his interview one-on-one with him?
BATTAGLIO: Well, he interviewed Nixon in May of 1960, it went for three hours and 45 minutes.
MATTHEWS: Ha!
BATTAGLIO: And, Chris, that is a lot of Nixon. In think even for you, that's a lot of Nixon.
MATTHEWS: And it's all Nixon.
Let's take a look at this issue of Khrushchev. We just saw a picture of him. Khrushchev, of course, was the leader of the Soviet Union, chairman of the communist party over there, ran the show all through the Cuban missile crisis, the scariest moments in the Cold War. He brought him on when, what, '60?
BATTAGLIO: Well, you know, David had done a show for about two years and it was mostly like—it was really a salon of writers, actors, directors, and politicians were coming on. But was he ready to interview the leader of America's enemy at time? Probably not, and he even knew it.
But what had happened was in the fall of 1960, Khrushchev came in from the general assembly. He came to New York, to the United Nations. The State Department had told ABC, CBS and NBC—look, we know that you have to cover him but take it easy, cover his speeches, his press conferences, don't give him—don't put him on a show.
Susskind saw that he was coming to town and said, great, I'll have him on. He called the Soviet embassy, and Khrushchev accepted the offer. It was the best offer that he had, and David faced tremendous pressure. Editorialists—you know, when you talk about the heated political rhetoric of today, the editorials blasting Susskind for conducting this interview, for giving voice to Khrushchev, a communist enemy. There were pickets outside of his office, outside of the U.N., where he conducted the interview—
MATTHEWS: OK. What about—
BATTAGLIO: Advertisers pulled out of the show.
MATTHEWS: Bring us—bring us closer to home in your book with Martin Luther King and the role he played, Susskind. Because I think this is really a big selling point with your book. The role that Susskind played with getting Martin Luther King on the air, of course. There he is one the air with—
BATTAGLIO: Well, in 1963 --
MATTHEWS: And then the role—that led to Kennedy's role in terms of backing civil rights in '63.
BATTAGLIO: Susskind had become an advocate for civil rights on the show, often discussed, and he gave Martin Luther king a two-hour platform on his show—just in June 1963 when tensions were really heightening in the South. And it was on this program where King said that Kennedy was not doing enough for the movement. And several days later, Kennedy gave his primetime address, announced his legislation, which eventually became the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
MATTHEWS: Well, that's great. Let me tell you, the name of the book is "David Susskind: A Televised Life." It's by Steve Battaglio. It's one heck of a show.
Your thoughts, how did this guy change everything?
BATTAGLIO: He was willful and fearless and you need that when you have a new technology like television emerging. He was always—always wanted to take something to the next level. In terms of quality of—in the quality of television in terms of bringing reality to television.
And when I mean reality, I mean talking about what's happening now.
He brought—he put black performers on—
MATTHEWS: Yes.
BATTAGLIO: -- on the primetime shows when at a time when that was
risky. He would talk about issues and talk about trends that people were -
you would see them first on the "David Susskind Show."
MATTHEWS: Thank you.
BATTAGLIO: Feminism, gay rights, a lot of different issues—
MATTHEWS: You made the case.
BATTAGLIO: -- before they hit the mainstream.
MATTHEWS: You made the case. Steve Battaglio, author of "David Susskind: A Televised Book." A great book if you care about what you want to, which is honest television.
When we return, "Let Me Finish" with why President Obama's tax cut deal basically amounts, when you think about it and go through it as we're going to do, a second economic stimulus, bigger than the one that he passed in his first year in office.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: "Let Me Finish" tonight with the real-life impact of this tax deal that president got from the Republicans.
For one, it's a heck of a lot of stimulus. Almost $1 trillion of money being fed into the economy, tax cuts, unemployment benefits, all going into the marketplace to buy goods and services, pumping the economy up, far more even than the stimulus bill passed last year. I was included into this reality by today's column by Charles Krauthammer, a quite conservative gentleman with whom I rarely share common ground.
Here he went this morning, quote, "Barack Obama won the great tax cut showdown of 2010 -- and House Democrats don't have a clue what he did. In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than the $814 billion 2009 package in exchange for temporarily foregoing a small rise in upper-income rates. Obama pulled out of a—pulled out of his hat a major, massive new stimulus. What the left has been begging for but is heretofore politically found unattainable."
Let's look at what it does to push business investment. We've got $2 trillion right now, and everybody knows it, socked away by business. The deal the president cut would encourage spending of that $2 trillion by cutting the cost of hiring people, by cutting the payroll tax by 2 percent, and cutting the cost of investment in new plant and equipment by letting businesses expense all their new capital expenditures in one year, next year.
The great bulk of the tax cuts in this deal, it turns out not—don't go to the rich—they take the form of measures either pushed by the Democrats or agreed to by both sides. And all of this could be good for the economy—especially if you believe in liberal economic policy, the belief that cutting taxes allows more money to enter the economy, perhaps not with the same bang as direct government spending but a lot of bang nonetheless.
This is what so many have been missing, I think, in the debate—the strong possibility that the Democratic president, our Democratic president, has gotten himself to what is, with some nasty exceptions, a Democratic program.
That's HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us. Right now, it's time for "THE ED SHOW" with Ed Schultz.
Copyright 2010 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.> PASTE THE TRANSCRIPT HERE
Copyright 2010 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.>


text:
Auto Aluminum Heat Exchanger For Saab E No 4070728 - Chinaprice: contact company for price
Ruian Weibang Auto Parts Co, . Ltd is a PROFESSIONAL
manufacture of Heat Exchanger. our products include
Mechanical and Brazed type.
Mechanical Heat Exchanger for SAAB
Cars applied: SAAB
Packing: Netural packing
10pcs/ CTN
Guarantee period: one year
Company: Ruian Weibang Auto Parts Co, . Ltd
Contact: Emily Jiang
Mobile: 0086- 15088959731
Tel: 0086- 0577- 65091109
Fax: 0086- 0577- 65096922
Company Contact:
- Posted By: Ruian Weibang Auto Parts Co,.Ltd
- Phone: 0086057765091109
- Address: Xiawan village,Pandai Street,Ruian,Zhejiang,China, Ruian, China
- Email:
- Website: http://www.wb-heater.com
Published date: April 25, 2014 -
- Business Description: Ruian Weibang Auto Parts Co, .Ltd is a PROFESSIONAL manufacture of Heat
Exchanger.our products include Mechanical and Brazed type.
And our products have got ISO/TS 16949:2009.we also export it to Russia, France, UK, Germany, USA, Japan etc.
LOCATION:Ruian Weibang is located at Xiawan Industrial Zone in Ruian city, Zhejiang provice.
FACTORY:Weibang factory is built in 2007 on 4000 ㎡ covering Area , 6500 ㎡ total construction Area 8000 ㎡ plant buildings 80% utilization Ratio of Plant 3000 ㎡ warehouse capacity
Related listings
Selling R134a Auto Receiver Drier FilterAutomobile - Parts - Heating / Air Conditioning - Nanchang Ever Bright Industrial Trade Co., Ltd - China - December 1, 2015 - contact company for price
Brand EBI Is_ Customized Yes Material aluminum or Iron Size customized Certification SO/ TS16949: 2009 Latest Price Please feel free to contact us Application Universal car air conditioner' s hose assemblies OEM accept drawings and samples are welcom...
Auto Air Conditioning Compressor For Daewoo Hyundai Kia AutomobileAutomobile - Parts - Heating / Air Conditioning - Y. J. Corporation - Korea - February 6, 2015 - contact company for price
We are a reliable manufacturer of Auto A/ C compressor in Korea. We can supply you various kinds of high quality compressor for Daewoo, Hyundai, Kia Especially V5 compressor and it' s parts. ( brand new and reman both) In this field, we have long exp...
Air Blower For Mercedes BenzAutomobile - Parts - Heating / Air Conditioning - Jiangsu Saintek Co., Ltd - China - July 30, 2014 - contact company for price
Bosch No. 130063022 OE No. 1078300208 Apply for: Mercedes- Benz R107 Motor Terminal Voltage: 12.0V Motor current: 13.5A Motor shaft speed: 3000rpm we specialize in manufacturing and exporting automotive motors and motor parts ( starter, alternator, b...
Safe Trade Tips
- Ask for business references and check them
- Use a payment method that offers better protection for all such as Letters of credit and verified professional escrow services. Avoid payments in advance such as money transfers
- Verify their business via their local Chamber of Commerce
- Search the internet using their website address, their business name, their phone and fax numbers, and their email addresses to see if you can find any feedback about them.
- Get to know more about scams to avoid: Internet Crime Complaint Center - International Financial Scams
- This site is never involved in any transaction, and does not handle payments, shipping, guarantee transactions, provide escrow services, or offer "buyer protection" or "seller certification"

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Example 1: "Calculate the number of elements of order 2 in the group $C_{20} \times C_{30}$"
To do this, I split the groups into their primary decompositions and got that the groups with elements of order 2 are $C_4$ and $C_2$. From here, to then work out the number of elements of order 2 I did:
$\varphi(4) = 2$, $\varphi(2) = 1$
So number of elements of order 2 will be $(2 + 1)^2 - 1 = 3$, which was the correct answer.
Example 2: "Compute the number of elements of order 35 of the group $\mathrm{Aut}(C_{6125})$"
To do this, I can just check that 35 divides 6125 and then use the Euler totient function. Why do I not have to split 6125 into its primary decomposition and then use that little formula to work out the number of elements? Is it because this is a cyclic group and so I can just use the Euler function, however as the other one is a direct product, I need to use a different method?


text:
38060 Chicago Avenue
Wadsworth, Illinois 60083
Listing Office: Keller Williams Success Realty
Disclaimer: The data relating to real estate for sale on this website comes in part from the Broker Reciprocity Program of Midwest Real Estate Data, LLC. Real estate listings held by brokerage firms other than @properties are marked with the Broker Reciprocity thumbnail logo and detailed information about them includes the name of the listing brokers.
The Village of Wadsworth is home to rural farms, forest preserves and a gold-plated pyramid. Residents by and large enjoy the quiet rural life here. Notwithstanding the Pyramid house, moat and 50-foot King Tut statue built by a homeowner in…Learn More
School information is provided by the National Center for Education Statistics. This information should only be used as a reference and does not warrant or guarantee enrollment. Please contact applicable schools or school districts directly to verify information and enrollment eligibility.
No Nearby Public Transportation Found


text:
Climate Change and Sustainability Services
Climate change and sustainability are becoming more important to governments, businesses and people everywhere.
On the one hand, businesses face increasingly complex regulatory requirements – that differ by country and industry – as well as the weight of public expectations. On the other hand, the climate change and sustainability agenda presents companies opportunities to generate revenues and cut costs. For many organizations, striking this balance means embedding climate change and sustainability into the hearts of their business. Only by doing so can they meet short-term objectives and create long-term stakeholder value.
EY can help. Our Climate Change and Sustainability Services team is grounded in our core skills in assurance, tax, transactions and advisory. On top of that we have the specific knowledge to help you understand business and regulatory threats and opportunities, explore and execute commercial transactions, monitor performance and assure public disclosures on progress. You'll receive a tailored service supported by global methodologies to address issues relating to your specific needs. Wherever you are in the world, we will provide the right professionals to support you.


text:
janereid on Family Tree Circles
sort: Date Alphabetical
view: full | list
view: full | list
Journals and Posts
Looking for John Murdoch and Elizabeth Bell
I have only the details of them from their monument inscription in Kirkmichael, Ayrshire. On that it states that Elizabeth died 18 April 1788 aged 75. John died 10 May 1798 in his 83rd year. Any information would be much appreciated.
- Displaying 1-1 of 1 Journals
- 1
- of1


text:
Australian New Zealand Regional Science Association International
The Australia New Zealand Regional Science Association International Inc (ANZRSAI Inc) is part of an international association concerned with all the aspects of regional analysis and development.
With academic origins, it has expanded and evolved to embrace people who implement regional policies and projects.
ANZRSAI Inc. has managed to maintain its appeal to an increasing mixture of members whose backgrounds and professional activities include geography, economics, politics and planning, all with some degree of regional interest.
The implementers have equally diverse backgrounds and employment status, providing a comprehensive mixture of public, private and research interests.
This extraordinary mixture has an unusual, perhaps unique, quality which is the attraction to its members, a feature which accurately reflects the width and dynamics of regionalism itself.


text:
Everyday Life in the Hood: New York 1970-197
Camilo José Vergara
Puerto Rican Wedding, East Harlem, 1970
Click here for more images from essay.
When I arrived in New York City in 1970, the Bronx was burning. I was photographing New York City during the Vietnam War before it barely escaped bankruptcy and before the Internet. Once-imposing and elegant buildings were derelict; the streets were dirty; parks were semi-abandoned and decrepit-looking schools evoked a culture different and separate from mainstream America. Abandoned buildings decayed. packs of dogs moved in and trees spontaneously took root and grew on their roofs. Squatters forced open doors and made holes in the walls. They removed boards from the windows to allow for light and ventilation, transforming empty buildings into homes for the homeless, places to sell drugs or serve as "shooting galleries." The diamond-topped clock at Bloom Jeweler on Westchester Avenue in the Bronx had stopped at 6:20.
Bushwick, Brooklyn, 1970
I was attracted to ghetto neighborhoods because they were gritty, tough, militant places, as evidenced in the large murals painted on the side of burnt-out shells encouraging blacks and Latinos to break the chains of oppression, to be born again, to be free. These were decaying, depopulated, dangerous, mysterious and exciting neighborhoods. The vibrant street life, the rebellious spirit, the absence of white people, the scenes of destruction all around me and the constant fear of being mugged made my visits unpredictable and memorable. In the streets I encountered a level of suspicion, anger and confusion matching my own. People didn't know where the next blow was coming from.
Sidewalks were an extension of people's confined living spaces. Men stand against a wall, rolling dice. Churches keep their doors open for ventilation as they conduct Bible-study programs, choir practices and board meetings. Church members sat on the sidewalk in front of their houses of worship. In those days, adults smiled as you photographed their children, asking you to share the photos with them.
I became an eavesdropper and a voyeur because I believed that the spirit of the ghetto would reveal itself through random bits of overheard conversation. I situated myself near public phones, listening intently to what people said and writing it down. In one long conversation I heard a man describe how his girlfriend had thrown all his belongings out of the apartment window into the street below.
Since I admired the work of photographers Helen Levitt, Aaron Siskind, Henri Cartier-Bresson and Roy DeCarava, I was delighted to encounter street scenes similar to those captured by these masters: black children playing with white dolls, jumping on discarded mattresses, and opening fire hydrants to spray friends and passersby. I photographed people walking up and down the stairs to the subway, men playing dominoes, naïve commercial signs, torn and faded advertisements, and, of course, graffiti. Sometimes I joined family members photographing weddings as they spilled out onto the streets. I went inside tenement buildings to make portraits of elderly people sitting in the dark looking at the street.
I wanted to capture the intimate life of the ghetto with the most sensitive film — my choice was high speed Ektachrome. I carried several lenses with me: wide angle lenses to capture panoramas and a telephoto in order to better record scenes undetected. During my early documentation I neglected to record names of people and addresses of buildings. What was the point of recording such information when the masters of photography themselves seldom included it with their work? All Henri Cartier-Bresson did was label a photograph "Family, Mexico 1934." Like them, I was simply trying to capture essences that transcended time, personal names and physical space.
Fear was part of my photographic ventures. I learned to walk fast and to cross the street to avoid groups of menacing youths loitering on the other side. Several times I was told to clear out of the neighborhood — otherwise my camera would be taken or broken. Once I was punched in the face. My glasses fell in front of an unlicensed "gypsy cab." Face on the ground, I watched the cab run over them. On the rare occasion when I encountered a police car on these blocks, policemen usually suspected I was in search of drugs. After asking if I was lost, they advised me to leave, warning me that if I stayed I would be robbed.
Lower East Side, 1970
In the early 1970s I witnessed the stabbing of a young black man from the Metro North commuter train platform at East 125th Street and Park Avenue. It was a sunny afternoon, and I never thought of photographing the event. The blood was shinning red on the bare chest of the victim. I remember the assailant carrying the knife, first running slowly away, looking back several times as if not wanting to break his link with his victim, then running faster until he disappeared around the corner onto Madison Avenue.
When I showed my photographs to gallery and museum curators they were disinterested. Among these is the photograph of a black man driving his horse-drawn carriage full of junk north toward Harlem, along what seems to be Park Avenue. Another photo shows an elderly woman sitting on the sidewalk — on the wall behind her is a painted mural of the skyscraper city. Another one taken from the elevated subway platform show a man reading about the Baltimore Orioles.
Eager to be tough, I rejected my beginning efforts as sentimental and unoriginal. In 2013, I am happy my earliest pictures of New York survived. I see these images as fading glimpses of a city that disappeared — unique historical artifacts depicting intimate moments of people who stayed behind and documents of the decrepit buildings they inhabited.
Camilo José Vergara is a 2002 MacArthur fellow whose books include American Ruins and How the Other Half Worships. His newest book Harlem, the Unmaking of a Ghetto will be published by the University of Chicago Press in the fall. Vergara may be reached at firstname.lastname@example.com.
Text and images courtesy of Time Lightbox.


text:
Privacy Rights for Students
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 prohibits Utah State University from releasing certain personally identifiable information from a student's record to a third party (e.g. parent, spouse, etc.) without the student's explicit consent.
Securityphrases and Delegates
A security phrase is primarily used by the Registrar's Office, University Advising, Admissions, and Financial aid offices to have conversations about your personal information over the telephone.
A delegate may act on your behalf at USU. A delegate is especially useful for, but not limited to, students who may be taking a leave of absence from the University for church or military service. If you plan to take a leave of absence, a delegate can assist you in making a smooth transition back to USU by acting on your behalf.
To create your securityphrase and assign delegates visit: https://ID.usu.edu
If you have questions or need assistance please visit the securityphrase FAQ or contact the IT Service Desk at:
Phone: 435.797.HELP (4357)
Toll Free: 1.877.878.8325
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Student Forms
- Parent Declaration of Student Dependency (pdf)
The Office of the Registrar at Utah State University (or other university officials, such as an academic advisor) may disclose personally identifiable information concerning the student's educational record to the individual(s) listed on this form. These individuals also become eligible to act in the student's behalf. Releasable information includes, but is not limited to, the following: eligibility to register, coursework completed in prior terms, transcript and grades, academic standing, credit hours, class schedule, balance due, and financial aid information.
- Privacy of Directory (Public) Information (pdf)
Used to place or release a Privacy Hold on student records. A student who invokes their right to privacy completely disallows ALL others from viewing their student records indefinitely. This action requires ALL transactions with the student to occur face-to-face with Photo ID at Utah State University. Privacy Holds may be invoked or removed by visiting the Registrar's Office in person.
- Student Information Release Authorization (pdf)
This form is used to release specific student records information to a specific third party who would otherwise not have access to the specified records. For example, some entities require grades and/or GPA in order to release tuition assistance. This form allows USU to provide this information to the specified third party with your authorization.
FERPA Tutorial for Faculty and Staff
The FERPA tutorial can be accessed online by University personel using the link below. This is an audio/video presentation with optional closed-captioning. To record your participation, please follow the instructions using the link at the end of the tutorial.
FERPA Tutorial w/ Audio (ILS Training Site)
General Information
This law, commonly referred to as FERPA or the Buckley Amendment,(1) provides that students will have access to inspect and review their educational records and (2) protects the rights of a student to privacy by limiting access to the educational record without express written consent.
A student is defined as any individual who is attending or has attended Utah State University. (Note: Certain rights are extended to the parent(s) of a dependent student, where dependency is defined by Section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.) *
An educational record is any record (1) directly related to a student, and (2) maintained by Utah State University or by an agent of the University.
With respect to a student's educational records, FERPA affords a student the right:
- To inspect and review the student's educational records;
- To request the amendment of the student's educational records to ensure that they are not inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise in violation of the student's privacy or other rights;
- To consent to disclosures of personally identifiable information contained in the student's educational records, except to the extent that FERPA authorizes disclosure without consent;
- If a complaint cannot be resolved within the University, to file with the U.S. Department of Education a complaint concerning alleged failures by Utah State University to comply with the requirements of FERPA;
- The Student Records Policy and Procedures for Utah State University is available in the General Catalog.
Categories of records
There are two categories of educational records under FERPA. Directory information (or releasable information) is general information that may be released to anyone without consent of the student, unless the student indicates otherwise. Personally identifiable information (or non releasable information) includes all information not defined as directory information and may not generally be released without consent of the student. The following is considered releasable information/directory information at Utah State University:
User ID (A-Number)
Local & Permanent Address
Electronic Mail Address
Telephone Number
Most Recent Institution Attended
Residency Status
Degrees & Awards Received
Academic Level
Major Field of Study
Department and/or College
Enrollment Status (Undergraduate or Graduate, Full-time or Part-time)
Participation in Official Activities/Sports
Dates of Attendance & Graduation
Weight/Height of Members of Athletic Teams
Directory information is considered public information. However, the University does not release lists of students or name-and-address labels or e-mail lists to businesses or agencies outside the University.
Students may control the release of directory information by completing forms at the Registrar's Office. Students may remove a Privacy Hold by visiting the Registrar's Office in person. Students accessing educational records must provide identification. It is important to note that for educational purposes, University Officials have access to all student records. For additional information contact the Registrar's Office TSC 246 or (435) 797-1116.
FERPA Links
Notification of Rights Under FERPA - USU General Catalog


text:
Last week, I visited the Portland Harbor Community Advisory Group at the Bureau of Environmental Services Water Quality lab near the St. Johns bridge. Great group! Portland is blessed with citizens and staff with great knowledge and interest in improving our community together.
Steve, my spouse, took this photo of the bridge a while ago. Posted because blogs are better with pretty pictures.


text:
Alumnus to Debut New Film in Sioux Falls
"You Don't Know Bertha Constantine," a film shot in the Badlands and written and directed by Andrew Kightlinger, a 2008 graduate of Augustana, will make its world premiere at 7 p.m. on Friday, April 15, at the Washington Pavilion's Belbas Theatre.
Kightlinger, a native of Pierre, S.D., is a graduate student at Boston University's College of Communication, Film Production.
The "Bertha" screenplay has already won wide acclaim – it was named "Most Original New Screenplay" at the Newport International Film Festival and won the short screenplay catagory at the Honolulu International Film Festival.
The film stars Dr. Julia Pachoud Bennett, former assistant professor of Theatre at Augustana, as "Bertha Constantine," a woman poised to celebrate her 25th wedding anniversary when her husband, Larry, suddenly dies.
In a state of grief, Bertha decides to honor her husband's wish to be buried in South Dakota's Badlands. She wraps Larry's body in a sleeping bag and uses a plastic sled to drag him across the jagged terrain.
With authorities hot on her trail, Bertha must kick into high gear in hopes of reaching the burial site before facing arrest.
"You Don't Know Bertha Constantine"
World Premiere: 7 p.m. Friday, April 15, Washington Pavilion Belbas Theatre
Augustana Showing: 7 p.m. Friday, April 29, GSC 100
"You Don't Know Bertha Constantine" is a stirring and unusual exploration of the grieving process and the actions one must take to satisfy the soul.
Kightlinger will also present the film and participate in a Q&A with students at Augustana at 7 p.m. on Friday, April 29, in GSC 100.
Read the story about Kightlinger's premiere in South Dakota Magazine.
Kelly Sprecher
Director of Communications & Media Relations


text:
One of my struggles involves my general disdain of all things domestic. Whether it's getting four loads of laundry cleaned, folded and put away, or preparing lunches in the morning, or figuring out meals for the week, or going grocery shopping and putting everything in some kind of order at home, or washing dishes after being at school for three hours.
It's not like I walk around with a huge sour puss all the time or something. I'm not swearing as I transfer the cool, wet and dark clothing from washer to dryer, or slamming pieces of bread together as I make my 10,000th peanut butter sandwich. But I usually don't see them as joyful things, either. I see them as to-do items to slog through so I can get to the better parts of my day.
I mentioned in an older post that I got the chance to read Becoming Who You Are over Christmas. It's really a stunning book, and because it's so slim (about 90 pages), it's the kind of text that's easy to return to again and again. There were several times while reading it that I had to stop and digest a particular page or paragraph, not because it was difficult to consume, but because it contained so much wisdom I had to pause and linger a bit.
One such page quoted the late author Andre Dubus. Dubus was paralyzed after he was hit by a car. He had stopped to help another driver who was having car trouble when another car struck him. James Martin, SJ, the author of Becoming Who You Are, quotes from an essay that Dubus wrote:
Each moment is a sacrament, this holding of plastic bags, of knives, of bread, of cutting board, this pushing of the chair, this spreading of mustard, this trimming of liverwurst, of ham. All sacraments...if I remember, then I feel it, too."
I think of Andre Dubus, whose short stories I have read many times in college, trying to do something that is so easy for me, and being so grateful to do it. He writes, "...I can do this all with one turn of the chair. This is a first-world problem; I ought only to be grateful." Sure, he had to remind himself from time to time, as he writes in the part Fr. Martin quoted. Because how can we not forget? When we're tired, frustrated, angry.
But I suppose it's our charge to remember. Or to at least attempt to remind ourselves every now and then. Fr. Martin says that such a realization "can imbue even the quietest moments of one's life with a special grace."
Amazing, right?
(I'm linking to Dubus's entire essay, which can be found in an anthology called God Is Love: Essays From Portland Magazine. It's a quick read. And a wonderfully beautiful one. And more complex and lovely than I could do justice describing.)


text:
Home >> Course Descriptions >> College of Education
Survey of Special Education
Three semester hours.
A survey of special education as seen from the perspective of normal psychomotor, cognitive, social, and behavioral norms with the focus on a basic overview of the federally determined categories of disabling conditions. Also includes an overview of the national legislation; litigation and advocacy trends; the Texas Rules and Regulations for Special Education; as well as research in the field. Prerequisite: Admission to the College of Education.
Home - General Information - Student Services -
Academic Undergraduate Regulations -
Undergraduate Degrees - Academic Graduate Regulations -
Graduate Degrees - Course Descriptions - Faculty -
Appendix A - Appendix B - Appendix C - Appendix D


text:
A former personal chef of Sean "Diddy" Combs is accusing the rapper/entrepreneur of taking the concept of breakfast in bed to an X-rated level, according to a recently filed lawsuit.
Cindy Rueda, who worked for Combs between January 2015 and May 2016, alleges Combs made her serve him up post-sex meals while he was still unclothed, according to the lawsuit.
"The plaintiff was regularly summoned by Mr. Combs to immediately serve entrees and appetizers to him and his guests while Mr. Combs and/or his immediately engaged in or immediately following sexual activity," according to the suit.
On another occasion, Rueda alleges a nude male houseguest of Combs approached her while she was in the kitchen preparing a meal and asked her to "admire his genitals" after he had engaged in sexual activities with another houseguest.
Rueda says she was ultimately fired by Combs after she was set up to look like she stole one of his watches after complaining about the treatment she received.
When reached for comment a representative for Combs said, "This is a frivolous lawsuit by a disgruntled ex-employee who was fired for cause."


text:
Dr. Alan G. Stolberg
ALAN G. STOLBERG is Associate Professor of National Security Studies, faculty member of the National Security Policy Program, and former holder of the Henry L. Stimson Chair of Military Studies at the U.S. Army War College. A retired Army colonel, he served in a variety of intelligence and policy and strategy positions as a European and Eurasian Foreign Area Officer, to include Soviet/East European Political Military Planner for the Joint Staff J5 during the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall, American Liaison Officer to the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) during the siege of Sarajevo in 1995, and Chief of the Europe/North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Division in United States European Command (USEUCOM) J5 during the Kosovo conflict and the first year of the Global War on Terror. His current research focuses on policy and strategy making, European and Eurasian security, security cooperation, and the U.S. Government interagency. He holds an M.A. in international relations from the University of Southern California, an M.A. in national security and strategic studies from the U.S. Naval War College, and a Ph.D. in political science from Temple University.
*The above information may not be current. It was current at the time when the individual worked for SSI or was published by SSI.
SSI books and monographs by Dr. Alan G. Stolberg
How Nation-States Craft National Security Strategy Documents
October 29, 2012
Authored by Dr. Alan G. Stolberg.
This monograph compares and contrasts how different countries craft their national security strategy documents. It highlights similarities as well as differences, and provides lessons learned that all national strategy makers can apply.


text:
Quiz: What coffee beverage are you?
Which coffee drink do you gravitate to when you need that caffeine jolt? A latte? An espresso? Or -- are you more of a tea person?
CALCULATOR: How much is coffee costing you?
Take USA TODAY's quiz and find out which drink fits your personality best.
Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1jiaLYE


text:
By The Hays Daily News
DODGE CITY -- They needed a bit of help, but the Hays Larks clinched the 2013 Jayhawk League Championship with a win Wednesday night against the Dodge City A's.
Heading into the night with the possibility of needing two wins to clinch their second straight league championship, the Larks earned an 8-4 victory against the A's for their 22nd Jayhawk win. That, coupled with a doubleheader split between Wellington and El Dorado, put Hays enough ahead of Wellington for the title.
Hays moved to 30-11 overall and 22-10 in league play, earning their second straight league title after winning last season for the first time since 2008.
The Larks grabbed a 1-0 lead in the third inning on an RBI fly out by Ty Gilmore, then blew the game open with a five-run fifth. Clayton Garland, part of his 2 for 5 night, drove in three on a bases-clearing double in the inning.
Larks starter Jason Zgardowski, who ended up in a no-decision, struggled in the fifth. He gave up three runs to let Dodge City back in it. Zgardowski ended his day with two outs in the fifth, having given up six walks with five strikeouts, allowing three earned runs on two hits.
Ian Bentley (3-1) got the win in 1.1 innings of relief. He gave up another Dodge City run on tow hits before DJ Carr and David Owen finished the game.
Garland finished the night with two doubles four RBIs, and Aaron Cornell drove in two, going 2 for 5 with a triple. Jake Placzek was 3 for 5 with two runs scored, and Zair Koeiman added a pair of hits with a double.
Dodge City dropped to 15-25 overall and 8-25 in league play. The two teams are scheduled to close the regular season at 7 p.m. today at Larks Park.
Hays clinched the Jayhawk's top seed in the "Championship Week" of the National Baseball Congress World Series, and will begin play either Aug. 2 or 3.


text:
Two- and Three-Dimensional Holey Phononic Crystals with Unit Cells of ResonatorsY.F. Wang[1][2], Y.S. Wang[1], L. Wang[2]
[1]Institute of Engineering Mechanics, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China
[2]Department of Mechanical Engineering, Østfold University College, Halden, Norway
We show in this paper that by careful design of the geometry of the resonators, complete bandgap with relatively low center frequency can be obtained for 2D and 3D Phononic Crystals with resonators. The generation of the bandgap is due to the local resonance of the unit cell. Spring-mass and spring-pendulum models are developed to predict the boundaries of the complete bandgap. The predicted results are in general agreement with the numerical results. The geometry of the resonator has significant influences on the bandgaps. This study is relevant to the optimal design of the bandgaps in light porous materials. More detailed structures of the resonant unit cell can be designed by following the same idea of the present paper


text:
Table Talk: Five gallons of cider hit the floor
Pictured above is a glass carboy with a handle around the neck, just like the volatile combination referenced in this post. Photo from Flickr user stuttermonkey.
As a homebrewer of beer and cider, the thought of a glass carboy — full of fermentables — breaking had once or twice crept into the corner of my mind. But I've always ushered it away, preferring not to think of that nightmarish scenario.
Last month, however, the unthinkable happened: One of my five-gallon, glass carboys full of two-week-old, half-fermented cider broke in two when I picked it up by the neck handle. Fortunately, no one was hurt during the debacle, and my guest room now smells faintly of sweet cider intermingling with a strain of Belgian saison yeast.
Here's how the whole shebang went down:
I bought five gallons of unpasteurized cider from Cornwall's Windfall Orchards, as part of a local cider-brewing club. When I introduced the Belgian saison yeast to the equation, the cider came to a beautiful krausen — a foamy, yeast-filled head that protects the fermenting process from outside bacteria. After five days the krausen settled, and the cider continued to bubble, fermenting at a healthy pace for about the next week.
When I first pitched the yeast, I began soaking oak chips in bourbon, which I had planned to add when siphoning the cider from the primary fermenter (the carboy used in the first week or two of fermentation) to the secondary fermenter (the carboy used in the secondary stage of fermentation). The reason cider, or beer for that matter, is siphoned (called racking in brewerspeak) is that it gets the cider off of the dead yeast cells and other sediment at the bottom of the carboy, allowing for a cleaner, clearer and — some say — more alcoholic final product. After a week or two, much of the sediment had settled to the the massive glass receptacle.
So here I was, one month ago: ready to siphon the cider into the secondary fermenter and leave the crud behind.
I sterilized the secondary and the equipment used for siphoning (a plastic tube and racking cane). I put the bourbon-soaked oak chips on the counter and headed to my closet, where I put this particular batch to ferment. I picked up the 50-pound carboy full of cider by the handle, which was attached around the neck — a popular tool used by many a homebrewer. The heavy jug of fermentables swung slightly back into my closet and out into the room, hovering six inches above the ground.
I took one step, and "CRASH!"
The carboy separated in half, sending a sea of sticky, yeasty, half-fermented cider rushing out onto the carpeted floor of my apartment.
"I'll have to call you back, Mom," said my fiancee into the phone, as she sidestepped around little waves of cider rolling into the hallway.
You can imagine what happened next.
First, the expletives: "Sh*$, [email protected]^, F!(K,"etc.
Then, the freak-out began: "Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!"
Then, the freak-out subsided: "Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!"
Finally, the cleanup started. It took days, so I'll speed it up for you: Broken carboy tossed in dumpster, rugs absorbed mess, broken glass meticulously picked up, floor dried after one week, vacuum applied to floor and, last but not least, secret weapon engaged — the Woolite Rug Stick.
A quick note on the rug stick — it's amazing. If you slept in my guest room, not that I'm passing out invitations, you wouldn't notice a thing.
So at the end of this whole escapade, I was left to ponder: "What happened?"
After a lot of introspective analysis (less on the introspection, more on the analysis) and discussion with fellow homebrewers, I've come up with two possible theories to explain why the carboy broke.
First, it's possible that the carboy got dinged. It's decades old and is a hand-me-downed hand-me-down, so the glass could've been compromised at some point over the past 30-40 years. But I'm not convinced. I used the carboy more than a handful of times, and a week prior to this incident, I moved the carboy to my closet without a problem.
What I think cracked my carboy was the neck handle that homebrewers around the world have used for decades. A friend with years of brewing experience told me such handles are known to punish carboys (don't let your mind waver here, follow me now). I began to scour the web, looking for forlorn brewers with broken dreams like mine.
What did I find? Dozens of examples of those little handles shattering carboys. One poor character, for instance, was carrying a 6.5-gallon carboy down his stairs when "CRASH!" — Oktoberfest all over his basement.
On several forums, brewers recommended a simple device called The Brew Hauler, used for — wait for it — hauling brew. But perhaps even better than this gizmo is an old-fashioned milk crate. It protects the glass on the bottom and sides, it's cheaper if you get it at the right place, it puts force on the carboy from the bottom rather than from the top and it eases the task of carrying a full 5-gallon carboy.
Don't be the victim of a broken carboy — use protection. Use a milk crate.
Side note: Plastic buckets and carboys are another option for homebrewers and they're far less susceptible to breaking than glass carboys. But I'm not willing to switch over. This stubborn homebrewer loves watching the fermentation process through the glass, and after drinking out of plastic for almost two straight years in China, I'm not dying to do it anytime soon. Plastics definitely influence the flavor of liquids, particularly when they're stored in plastic for an extended period of time.


text:
Serviços Personalizados
Links relacionados
- Citado por Google
- Similares em Google
SAMJ: South African Medical Journal
versão On-line ISSN 2078-5135
versão impressa ISSN 0256-9574
SAMJ, S. Afr. med. j. vol.100 no.7 Cape Town Jul. 2010
Validation of a dosing regimen for fixed-dose, weight-adjusted, subcutaneous unfractionated heparin for the acute treatment of venous thrombo-embolism in a population from a resource-constrained environment
J I MunsamyI; H KertlandII; A ParrishIII
IBPharm. Doctor of Pharmacy Programme, Faculty of Pharmacy, Rhodes University, Grahams-town, E Cape
IIPharmD. Doctor of Pharmacy Programme, Faculty of Pharmacy, Rhodes University, Grahams-town, E Cape
IIIFCP (SA). Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, Walter Sisulu University, Mthatha, E Cape
To the Editor: A study in Canada and New Zealand (Kearon et al.) suggested that fixed-dose unmonitored subcutaneous (SC) unfractionated heparin (UFH) is as effective and safe as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the acute treatment of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE). While this trial has limitations, it provides evidence to support the use of SC UFH in a resource-constrained environment. However, because public sector patients with VTE in South Africa often have multiple co-morbidities and are thinner and younger than those in that study, the local validity of the published dosing regimen is unclear.
VTE is a potentially fatal disorder manifesting as deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE).1 Initial standard management of VTE was with intravenous UFH with dose adjustments according to the partial thromboplastin time (PTT).2 This regimen is effective, but is limited by the requirements for intensive monitoring and ensuring a constant heparin infusion rate. The introduction of SC LMWH using weight-based dosing offered an attractive alternative to UFH, with proven efficacy and safety.3 Although LMWH is more expensive, this cost is offset by reduced laboratory costs, as PTT monitoring is not required.
Kearon et al. performed a randomised, open-label, adjudicator-blinded trial (FIDO) suggesting that fixed-dose, weight-adjusted SC UFH, without PTT monitoring, appeared as effective and safe as fixed-dosed, unmonitored SC LMWH in patients with acute VTE.4 SC UFH was given as a loading dose of 333 units/kg followed by 250 units/kg 12-hourly.4 A recent review concluded that SC UFH appeared to be as effective and safe with regard to rates of bleeding and death.5 However, the authors declared that more robust data were needed to recommend SC UFH without PTT monitoring.
Although the use of LWMH is established, the considerably less costly approach of fixed-dose, weight-adjusted, SC UFH is appealing in a resource-constrained setting. However, there appears to be no published evidence to indicate that this regimen has been validated locally in patients who differ from those in the FIDO study in age, weight, and presence of multiple co-morbidities.
The protocol was approved by the East London Hospital Complex Research and Ethics Committee. The sample size was based on a previous study that looked at optimal dosing of SC UFH for the treatment of DVT.6 Patients provided written informed consent. Concurrent chart review was performed on all consecutive eligible patients (age >18 years; newly diagnosed VTE) admitted between November 2008 and February 2009 to internal medicine wards at Cecilia Makiwane Hospital and who had been prescribed SC UFH according to the FIDO study. All other aspects of care were delivered as standard of care. The primary measure of interest was the proportion of patients with a therapeutic PTT (patient PTT 1.5 - 2.5 times the control value) measured approximately 6 hours after the morning dose of UFH on any day from the 2nd to the 6th day of SC UFH therapy as in the FIDO regimen. Neither safety nor efficacy of patient outcomes were collected as the sample size was chosen only to validate the published dosing regimen.
A total of 25 inpatients were recruited of whom 24 had acute DVT confirmed on Doppler ultrasound, and one had clinical evidence of PE and a strongly positive d-dimer result. The mean age of the patients was 37.6 years (SD 15.03); mean body weight 57.2 kg (SD 16.79) and 68% were female (Table I). Pulmonary tuberculosis was the most prevalent concomitant disease (64%). The mean loading and maintenance doses of UFH were 320 units/kg (SD 66.87) and 250 units/kg (SD 5.57) respectively. PTT was measured on a single blood sample obtained a mean of 6.0 hours (SD 0.37) after the morning dose and a mean of 3.48 days (SD 0.92) after starting SC UFH. Twelve (48%) of the 25 patients had a PTT within the therapeutic range, 8 (32%) patients were found to have a supratherapeutic PTT (patient value >2.5 times control value) and 5 (20%) had a sub-therapeutic PTT (patient value <1.5 times control value). The mean PTT ratio (PTT patient/PTT control) was 2.44 (SD 1.40; 95% CI 1.89 to 2.99). The mean duration of heparin therapy was 8.5 days (SD 3.39).
Baseline characteristics of patients in this study including gender, age and weight differed from the SC UFH treatment arm in FIDO (Table I). There were relatively more women than men (68% versus 49% in FIDO) and the mean ages and weights were less (38 years v. 60 years and 57 kg v. 82 kg).
None of our patients had previous VTE, compared with 11% of patients in the SC UFH group in FIDO. Sixteen patients were diagnosed with DVT and concomitant tuberculosis but none in the SC UFH group in FIDO.
In FIDO, the PTT (therapeutic PTT: 60 -85 seconds) was measured in 197 patients, a mean of 6.0 hours after the morning dose and a mean of 2.8 days after starting UFH.4 Thirty-seven patients (19%) had a PTT within the therapeutic range, 121 (61%) were found to be supratherapeutic (>85 seconds) and 39 (20%) sub-therapeutic (<60 seconds).4 A higher proportion of patients in our cohort appeared to have therapeutic values, while a lower proportion had supratherapeutic and a similar proportion sub-therapeutic values. The low sub-therapeutic ratio for 1 patient in our cohort may be attributed to 2 dose omissions prior to the blood samples taken for PTT monitoring.
In a small but real-world pragmatic study, the use of a weight-based dosing nomogram appeared feasible, and PTT results obtained were within the range achieved in a previous large trial comparing LMWH with fixed-dose, weight-based SC UFH. Our study provides preliminary support for the local generalisability of the FIDO dosing model, offering a promising alternative for the treatment of VTE in a resourceconstrained environment.
1. Haines ST, Zeolla M, Witt DM. Venous thromboembolism. In: Dipiro JT, Talbert RL, Yee GC, Matzke GR, Wells BG, Posey LM, eds. Pharmacotherapy: A Pathophysiologic Approach. 7th ed. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2008: 331-371. [ Links ]
2. Raschke RA, Reilly BM, Guidry JR, Fontana JR, Srinivas S. The weight-based heparin dosing nomogram compared with a "standard care" nomogram. Ann Intern Med 1993; 119: 874-881. [ Links ]
3. Van Dongen CJ, van den Belt AGM, Prins MH, Lensing AWA. Fixed dose subcutaneous low molecular weight heparins versus adjusted dose unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD001100. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001100.pub2. [ Links ]
4. Kearon C, Ginsberg JS, Julian JA, et al. Comparison of fixed-dose weight-adjusted unfractionated heparin and low-molecular weight heparin for acute treatment of venous thromboembolism. JAMA 2006; 296: 935-942. [ Links ]
5. Vardi M, Zittan E, Bitterman H. Subcutaneous unfractionated heparin for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD006771. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006771.pub2. [ Links ]
6. Kearon C, Harrison L, Crowther M, Ginsberg JS. Optimal dosing of subcutaneous unfractionated heparin for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Res 2000; 97: 395-403. [ Links ]
Accepted 11 May 2010.
Corresponding author: J Munsamy (firstname.lastname@example.com)


text:
Hello Guys,
I just wanted to know if anyone has had experience making their own Invisible Deck. I had made 3 attempts so far. First one was an epic fail, although it know makes a pretty cool paperweight. Second one was awesome. I love it. Its perfect and doesn't flash unless I want it to. Third one came out perfect as well. Please tell me your experiences, thoughts, ideas and opinions. Oh and don't worry. As soon as I get some extra cash I am buying the Arcane Invisible Deck.
Last edited by ARTisWAR; 10-25-2014 at 10:55 PM.
Follow me on Twitter @FIRSTTIMEMAGIK