text:
North Carolina House Speaker Thom Tillis captured the Republican nomination to oppose imperiled Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan Tuesday night, overcoming anti-establishment rivals by a comfortable margin in the first of a springtime spate of primaries testing the strength of a tea party movement that first rocked the GOP four years ago.
In Ohio, Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald won the Democratic nomination to challenge Gov. John Kasich in the fall. US House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican, rolled to re-nomination for another term in Congress, his 13th.
On a night that was kind to Republican incumbents in three states, GOP Rep. Susan Brooks of Indiana easily fended off a challenge from the right, rolling up 75 percent of the votes in a three-way race. First-term Rep. David Joyce of Ohio had a slightly tougher time but was running well ahead of his tea party rival.
Anti-war Republican Rep. Walter Jones defeated his challenger in North Carolina.
In North Carolina, Tillis was winning about 45 percent of the vote with ballots counted in 72 percent of the state's precincts, easily surpassing the 40 percent needed to avoid a July runoff. Greg Brannon was trailing despite support from tea party favorite Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, and Mark Harris, a Baptist pastor, was third.
Also in North Carolina, former "American Idol" runner-up Clay Aiken had a narrow lead as he sought the Democratic nomination to oppose Republican Rep. Renee Ellmers in the fall. A Democratic runoff was possible.
Democratic State Rep. Alma Adams was comfortably ahead for a pair of nominations at the same time: in a special election to fill the unexpired term of former Rep. Mel Watt, and also for the November ballot in the heavily Democratic district.
Tuesday marked the beginning of the political primary season in earnest, and over the next several months Republicans will hold numerous contests featuring incumbents or other establishment figures against tea party challengers. Some of the races are in states where the identity of the party's candidate might mean the difference between victory and defeat this fall, such as Alaska, Georgia, Iowa and Kentucky, as well as North Carolina. In other areas, it will matter less, including Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma and South Carolina.
Hagan, whom Republicans have made a top target in their drive to win a Senate majority in the fall, won renomination over a pair of rivals with about 80 percent of the primary vote
Tillis scarcely had time to savor his victory over Brannon, Harris, and five others before the Democrats unloaded on him Tuesday night.
"No one in the country has done more for the Koch brothers than Thom Tillis — cutting public education nearly $500 million, cutting taxes for the wealthy while refusing pay raises for teachers and killing an equal pay bill," the party's Democratic senatorial committee said in a statement referring to the billionaire businessman brothers whom party leaders hope to make into national whipping boys in the fall campaign.
The National Rifle Association countered for Tillis, saying in a statement of its own that "Thom has long been one of most effective gun rights advocates in North Carolina."
Tillis ran as a conservative with the support of the US Chamber of Commerce, the National Right to Life Committee, and former presidential candidate Mitt Romney. American Crossroads, a group founded by Karl Rove, aired television commercials supporting him.
Brannon had the backing of Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. Harris countered with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, whose popularity with evangelical voters briefly made him a force in the race for the 2008 presidential nomination.
Hagan is among the Democrats' most vulnerable incumbents in a campaign season full of them, a first-term lawmaker in a state that is ground zero in a national debate over the health care law that she and the Democrats voted into existence four years ago. Americans for Prosperity, a group funded by the billionaire Koch brothers, has run about $7 million worth of television commercials criticizing Hagan for her position on the law.
Boehner's nomination to a 13th term in the House was never in doubt, despite challenges from tea party adherents J.D. Winteregg and Eric Gurr. His seat is safely Republican for the general election, as well, and it will be up to fellow Republicans — assuming they hold their House majority — to decide if the 64-year-old Ohioan serves a third term as speaker.
Kasich was unopposed for nomination to a second term as governor, a race viewed as a possible prelude to a 2016 run for the White House.
Fitzgerald wasted no time in pocketing his primary triumph, blasting out an email that declared, "As of tonight, this race is officially between me and Gov. Kasich."
North Carolina hosted the most closely watched race of the night, at the intersection of the tea party's long-running challenge to the Republican establishment and the GOP campaign to gain the six seats needed to win a Senate majority in the fall.
Establishment figures made little or no secret of their desire for Tillis to prevail, fearful that any other challenger to Hagan could mean a replay of 2010 and 2012, when Republicans lost winnable Senate races in Nevada, Indiana and Missouri.
"You can't defeat Kay Hagan with a factionalized (party)," Tillis said at one point, making a case for his own nomination.
Paul, whose upset victory in a 2010 primary in Kentucky served notice that the tea party was a force to be reckoned with, hailed Brannon. The first-time candidate is "a true believer and we need true believers in Congress," Paul said as Brannon battled the establishment.
For his part, Harris damned Tillis with the faintest of praise, saying Monday the state assembly leader is the man to support "if you want an establishment ... style of United States senator, someone that is going to work in the system."
If Republican Party leaders preferred Tillis, Democrats seemed to want anyone but him, or at a minimum, a runoff that would require Republicans to battle one another into midsummer.
Hagan's campaign recently sent out a mass mailing that said Tillis had once called Obamacare a "great idea" — an obvious attempt to influence the outcome of the primary by holding down his support among conservative primary voters. Tillis favors the law's repeal, and in fact called the law "a great idea that can't be paid for."
An outside group dedicated to electing Democrats ran a television ad assailing Tillis over severance packages that went to two members of his legislative staff said to have had inappropriate relationships with lobbyists.
Associated Press writer Gary Robertson and AP television news reporter Alex Sanz in North Carolina contributed to this story.
Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


text:
23/09/2007 (Reuters), India - Global palm oil prices, which have been on the boil for the last couple of months, could ease from January if the United States cuts incentives it gives to biofuel producers, a leading analyst said.
"Palm oil prices are likely to reach 2,000 to 2,100 ringgit per tonne by March, down from the current levels of around 2,600 ringgit per tonne," James Fry, managing director of London-based LMC International, told reporters at a conference in India.
"The U.S. may cut subsidies to its biofuel units and if it does that by January global palmoil prices will start softening."
Palm oil prices in Malaysia touched a record high of around 2,700 ringgits in June as a large chunk of the cooking oil was diverted to produce biofuel amid soaring crude oil prices.
"The subsidy the U.S. government gives is meant to encourage local soybean oil being converted into biofuel. But many people are importing palm diesel instead of using local soyoil to make biofuels," Dorab Mistry, a leading analyst, said.
"They import palm diesel, mix it with 1 percent local diesel, make the blend, that is biofuel, and collect the subsidy ... We have been expecting the U.S. to stop this misuse of the subsidy for the last six months," Mistry said.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|Forum Tools
|Search this Forum
|Latest News
Posted in Disneyland News
On 21st October 8:51am
Disneyland California is the only major Disney theme park to not reopen after all the... Read More »
Posted in Disney Shopping
On 18th October 9:02am
Disney has reduced the price of its large soft toys by up to 50%. Bargains... Read More »
Enjoy Up To 4 Free Nights In Disney Resort Hotels + 14 Day Ticket for price of 7 + $200 Spending Money
Posted in Disney Offers
On 13th October 10:56am
Disney has released details of their UK & Ireland Early Booker promotion for Spring and... Read More »
|theDIBB Menu
|Exchange Rates
US Dollar Rates
Euro Rates
|DIBB Premium Membership
|Did you know you can help support theDIBB with Premium Membership?
Check out this link for more information and benefits, such as...
"No adverts on theDIBB Forums"
Upgrade Now


text:
Jewish World Review Sept. 10, 2013/ 6 Tishrei, 5774
We still must be civilization's gatekeepers
By Christine M. Flowers
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | (MCT) There are a number of legitimate reasons to oppose intervention in Syria. There are many smart people, people whom I respect and with whom I share a philosophical foxhole, who lay out those reasons with eloquence and passion.
Why now?
(Why, indeed, when we did nothing in Rwanda and the Sudan?)
Syrian President Bashar Assad is no worse than the Islamic jihadists challenging his authority.
(True, even though he has bigger guns.)
It's a civil war. Why should Americans risk our own blood and treasure to save Syrian souls?
(Good point, except today's Syrians are tomorrow's Iranians, and both tribes hate us.)
Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons and it took us more than a decade to notice, or to care.
(Yes, and look how well that worked out.)
I sympathize with the reasoned arguments against a wholesale intervention, one that involves boots on the ground and the ghostly, ghastly prospect of dead soldiers.
But none of them can drown out the single most horrific sound known to the victimized and the tortured around the world: silence.
Silence is deafening when it comes in response to cries for assistance. It is soul-crushing when it follows the pleas of children who have been gassed in their classrooms and paralyzed in their beds. It makes the eardrums bleed, the head pound and the heart break.
I find myself in the unenviable position of agreeing with Nancy Pelosi, someone whose silence is normally precious gold. The former Speaker of the House has, albeit half-heartedly, supported intervention, although one suspects that it has more to do with remaining a member in good standing of Team Obama and not because she's abandoned her pacifist roots.
To be fair, many of those who oppose intervention are at least partly motivated by a desire to deny this Hamlet of a president his wish (whatever that is on any given day).
But as someone who has spent 20 years dealing with refugees and asylum applicants, I simply cannot fathom the possibility that my country will again do nothing but wring its hands in the present and engage in earnest, useless mourning in the not-so-distant future.
Before she became Obama's controversial ambassador at the United Nations, and before she called Hillary Clinton a "bitch," Samantha Power wrote a magisterial book called "A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide." In it, she examines how America has reacted to "race murder" over the past century, and comes to this disturbing conclusion: "It is in the realm of domestic politics that the battle to stop genocide is lost. American political leaders interpret society-wide silence as an indicator of public indifference. They reason that they will incur no costs if the United States remains uninvolved but will face steep risks if they engage."
It kills me to say that she's right, given the fact that Power carries the water for Team Obama and shed her scholarly mantle when she crassly attacked Clinton. And yet, her message is crystal clear, and correct: The moral imperative of stopping genocide is no match for the need to save your political soul.
Not everyone who takes a stand for or against intervention is motivated by rank partisanship. Far from it. There are some liberals who are challenging the president as they did with the drone strikes, and some conservatives who are lining up to give him cover.
Who could have imagined, in the dark days of Campaign 2008, that John McCain would have ever joined forces with the harbinger of hope and change? This is even more striking when you hear McCain's former running mate taunting the president and his decisions (or lack thereof). While I like Sarah Palin (a lot), I think that she channels the worst aspects of the "noninterventionists" when she says things like, "Let Allah sort it out."
Tell that to the dead babies, please.
But those who think that we have no business getting involved in someone else's family feud are willing to surrender our legitimate reputation as civilization's gatekeepers, the ones who see the red line and refuse to shrug our shoulders when evil crosses over.
People like Sens. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz seem to believe that we should all just live in a star-spangled bubble where the rest of the world can be kept at bay while we tend to our own. That's not the lesson I was taught by my very conservative parents. It may not take a village to raise a child, but it sure as hell takes an international community to make sure that that child isn't butchered.
There is also naivete in the belief that the use of chemical weapons doesn't pose a national security risk to the United States. Allowing Assad to kill his own people essentially guarantees that he won't stop at Syria's border. And if he won't, neither will his friends the mullahs.
We didn't bomb the concentration camps. The Killing Fields of Cambodia filled up with blood and we turned away. Seven thousand fell at Srebrenica while the West looked on.
We say "never again."
It's time to mean it.
if (strpos(, "printer_friendly") === 0)
else {
=<< Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
© 2013, Philadelphia Daily News. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
© 2013, Philadelphia Daily News. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.


text:
Age Range: 0 to 4
Creation, based on the bestselling storybook Bible of all time, is part of the Baby Beginner's Bibleboard book series crafted for parents to share with their youngest children to experience the Bible through colorful illustrations and simple words. For added benefit, the complete story of Creation is told at the end of the book.
Other books in this series include Noah's Ark, Daniel and the Lions, and Jonah and the Big Fish.
eBooks purchased here are fulfilled by our partner, Glose. Please note that:


text: Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Volunteering in Israel Get TEFL Certified & Start Your Adventure Today! Job Discussion Forums"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!" FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in Volunteering in Israel Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Israel View previous topic :: View next topic Author Message sonyaJoined: 25 Feb 2006Posts: 51Location: california Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 6:01 pm Post subject: Volunteering in Israel I'd really like to volunteer in Israel for about a month this summer, and I have no idea how to go about it. I'm a fourth year undergrad; I specialize in linguistics, and French, and I also speak Chinese. So, I thought it'd be really cool to try to find something language related.. What should I do? Should I write university departments asking if they could use anyone? Any feedback would be appreciated :) thanks so much sonya Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Israel All times are GMT Page 1 of 1 Jump to: Select a forum Where to Begin----------------General DiscussionNewbie ForumCurrent Events ForumTechnology ForumOnline Teaching Forum Africa Forums----------------General Africa Forum Asia Forums----------------CambodiaChina (Job-related Posts Only)China (Off-Topic)Hong KongIndiaIndonesiaJapanMalaysiaPhilippinesSingaporeTaiwanThailandGeneral Asia ForumVietnam Caribbean Forums----------------General Caribbean Forum Europe Forums----------------Czech RepublicFranceGermanyGreeceItalyMacedonia and the BalkansPolandRomaniaRussia & C.I.S.SpainTurkeyUkraineUnited KingdomGeneral Europe Forum Latin America Forums----------------ArgentinaBrazilChileColombiaCosta RicaMexicoMexico (off-topic)PeruGeneral Latin America Forum The Middle East Forums----------------BahrainEgyptIsraelKuwaitOmanQatarSaudi ArabiaUnited Arab EmiratesGeneral Middle East Forum North America Forums----------------General North America Forum Oceania----------------Australia/New Zealand You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling. Contact Dave's ESL Cafe Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group Teaching Jobs in China


text:
I recently purchased an Aspire XC600, but am having trouble installing Arch. I haven't installed on UEFI before. I want Arch as the only OS on the disk.
I wrote the Archboot x86_64 image to a USB stick and booted from it successfully. The booting had to be done through a compatibility layer.
In the "Install Bootloader" step, I chose UEFI_x86_64, EFISTUB and GUMMIBOOT_UEFI. Gummiboot setup aborts with this error:
error setting up gummiboot-efi
I don't think I'm in EFI mode, because:
# modprobe efivars
# efibootmgr
Fatal: couldn't open either sysfs or procfs directories for accessing EFI variables.
Try 'modprobe efivars' as root.
Is the problem that I'm not in EFI mode? How can I fix that, as the USB drive can't be booted from in EFI mode? vc7 doesn't show any extra info.


text:
Comcast will buy the 49-percent of NBCUniversal it doesn't already own from GE for 16.7 billion clams. That's right, Kabletown is bigger than ever now. Regulatory approval for Comcast's purchase of 51-percent of the company cleared last year—now the cable and media giant owns the whole shebang.
That means that Comcast now owns in their entirety the following: NBCUni's huge number of television properties, including Bravo, SyFy, The Weather Channel as well as Universal Pictures, and a 32-percent stake in Hulu. Hurray for consolidating media companies into massive conglomerates. [BusinessWire]


text:
professional developmenttrainingeducationcareers
The School Readiness Project is committed to helping Chemung County's early care and education professionals strive to obtain and maintain EXCELLENCE in their programs.
Use this site to access resources that will help you take your program to the next level!
Want to open a child care business?
Call Chemung County Child Care Council to get started in a great career! Call (607) 734-3941
Kid's Page
| Programs | Resource Library
| Events | FAQs |
For Providers | Home
About SRP | News |
Contact Us


text:
Perriello hears "racist" talk in 5th District
Congressman Tom Perriello tells MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski that race is a component in some of the vehement opposition to President Barack Obama's health reform that he encountered in oft-raucous town hall meetings, Politico reports. While rare, Perriello says he did hear racist remarks that sometimes were called out by the audience, sometimes not. The GOP responds that Perriello, much like Jimmy Carter and Nancy Pelosi, mistakes genuine opposition for bigotry, and that's the result of his Ivy League "elitism."
55 comments
I greatly appreciate the lack of solutions your propose. Way to
I am a fan of small government, period. Do you think the government knows how you should run your life better than you do? You should be allowed to do WHATEVER you want, as long as you are not taking away freedoms of others, it should be that simple.
I'm not sure how Americans paying for their own healthcare equals the government subsidizing it, unless you think everyone should be on welfare.
Why do we not have the same problem with auto insurance, or home owners insurance? Competition is the correct answer, stop worrying about who is going to regulate it (someone always will in America). If your insurance company is screwing you, you drop them and get a new one. Competition promotes fair treatment of consumers (unless you consumers are uneducated i.e. the subprime crisis, but again, a different argument).
Finally, go to some other country that has a good healthcare system. Doctors cannot be sued for the same pettiness they can here. A doctor trying to save your life should not be penalized when he does something wrong (unless they are drinking on the job or something wreckless along those lines). Furthermore, when I refer to litigation I mean more than just tort reform. Blocking people from getting insurance due to "prexisting conditions" is just as big a problem. Its further litigation that creates red tape and drives up costs.
So Pits, maybe I am naive to see it as so black and white, but instead of whining about my solution, why dont you try explaining your vastly over complicated one. Or do you not even have a solution?
Rodney should have kept his mouth shut. His remarks have painted him as backward,insenstive indeed. POOR, POOR judgement here! He shot himself in the foot for sure. (May cost him the election). I'm unsure he is up to the task.
I am happy to see many here actually read the article. This seems to be the flip side of what happened during the early years of the current Iraq war. Then: criticize the war = traitor to the USA. Today: criticize Obama (his health care) = racist
Obama's radical policies are CAUSING people to become openly racist. His far left leadership is causing a growing divide in the nation that is resulting in a resurgence in racism as he continues to push his own agenda and not that of a united nation.
there are absolutely people who don't trust obama because he is black. There are many many more who trust him BECAUSE he IS black. Go figure...
The bottom line however is that those feelings should not be injected into the health care debate any more than the weather should be factored into a basketball game at an indoor stadium.
Race baiting goes both ways. This was a dumb politial mistake that Pereillo may pay a high price for.
You all need to read the quote. Perriello isn't saying the same thing as Carter or Pelosi at all. Everyone who has seen signs from the tea parties knows that some of the participants have resorted to racism. Perriello says that while SOME of the participants have injected racism into the conversation, for the most part his town halls (all bagillion of them) were civil. Give the guy a break; or at least read his quote before you freak out about it.
Concerned: What a fricken laugh. The policy Obama is offering is about as ar opposite of the left as possible. It' s complete fascism, where government is being used to subsidize the profits of a monopolistic non-competitive for profit industry. Since when is that leftist?
People are mad because they are being told they are supposed to spend 10-20% of their income on private insurance premiums that don't even cover their entire health care bill.
Show us you are more than an echo chamber please.
Periello is a complete bozo. Is that rasist you elite bigot.
This isn't about Bush or Cheney, they didn't get it right either. Bush atleast attempted to moving towards the center on issues like education reform and drug proposals but that was about it. Obama said he was a departure from typical politics, I haven't seen it. Either way its time to stop blaming Bush, and if you are comparing Obama to Bush, well then you must not think highly of Obama either.
Caesonia, while I do see how you could come to such a conclusion, as socialism and facism are quite close (eventhough on opposite ends of the spectrum), socialism is a distinction and a battle between classes, while facism is against class warfare. The healthcare bills is written in such a manner that the upper class should subsize the poor, NOT the government subsidizing an industry (while that is what they are doing in the financial industry, but thats a different argument). The healthcare industry is noncompetitive because companies cannot compete across state lines. The proposals Obama is pushing do not address that problem. Furthermore, fascism promotes the right to property. A government option (Im not arguing Obama is pushing one, yet) is the exact opposite of private property. The majority of the brunt of this healthcare reform is beared by small businesses, something fascism tries to protect.
My point is that the system doesn't need to change, the cost structure needs to be changed. Allow individuals to get their own insurance from ANY company in the nation. Get rid of all the litigation and malpractice suits doctors and drug companies have to insure themselves against. THAT'S how to fix this. Not letting the goverment take over. We have all seen in the past how the government screws things up, left or right.
As a conservative in a very liberal location, I don't think Obama is a bad President because he is black. It is because he talks without saying anything!
There are a multitutde of ways to correct a listing, capitalistic economy -- some known and ignored, others unknown and thus untried.
One of the great problems complicating the current situation is not racism. Racism is a smokescreen promulgated by the rich to distract poor people. And they do it because it works. If you are busy hating people because of their race, you are far too distracted to focus on core issues, like why does the top 1 percent of the wealthy in this country congtrol more money than 95 percent of the remaining population combined? Why are the 95 percent majority bailing out the 1 percent minority who were reckelss, degenerate gamblers with mortgage debt, credit default swaps, 401K plans and other financial instruments with which they were entrusted?
To paraphrase Shakespeare, first thing we do is kill all the MBAs.
Rodney Thomas, candidate for Rio seat of Albemarle County supe just lost the election w/his racist remark about desegregation:
ââ?¬Å?I could care less whether it was going to happen or not, and all of us were that way. "Š I don't know if it helped the black people feel more equal or not. I never was on that side of the coin," Thomas said. ââ?¬Å?I don't see why I would have been for it. I can't understand why in the world anybody would have been for it back in that time."
"RC go to France"
Typical pinhead...
You seem to keep agreeing with me. I pointed out that uninsured people cost the tax payer. So I am glad we agree. As I said, being that it is the CURRENT system, the debt to tax payers could not get worse. But you seem to believe insurance should be mandated. Wouldn't that cost taxpayers and the government more than it does now according to your argument? It seems you are running in circles. You seem to just want to argue for the sake of arguing, how liberal of you. Again, I NEVER said I oppose coverage requirements, I just pointed out my logic for both sides of the debate, but you continue to extrapolate the meaning of my statements to fit your argument. Also another liberal tendency. (SO YOU DONT READ TO FAR INTO THIS ONE EITHER, people too far down the conservative side do this too, but you have made it blatantly obvious which side of the fence you stand on).
If the auto insurance industry is subsidized by the government, how come that industry isn't having the same problems? Are you also stating homeowners are subsidized by the government? Either way, I'm not sure how the government mandating anything results in BIGGER government. When the government gives a tax break they are subsiding consumption, does that mean a tax cut results in bigger government? Again, you seem to be less concerned about the substance of this debate than you are with proving me wrong since I do not worship the ground Obama walks on. (How liberal of you).
You are going to need to explain how YOU misspelling government ("gub'mint") is insulting me in anyway. The only thing I could take from it was your were implying a some sort of southern draw or slang. Which, either way, would again make you a racist.
Can't wait to hear your next round of attacks on me, instead of any substance to your debate. (Because the only substance you have provided thus far is you agreeing with me).
Are you telling me that Obama, Holder and the "green" czar aren't racist with their remarks degrading whites? People like this guy make me sick. It seems as though only the right can be racist. Bull. That's totally untrue. Black people are as racist as anybody.
"We don't have to own a car. We DO however have to have healthcare."
- EXCELLENT point! I wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately, some seem to feel that not everyone should have healthcare.
"Mandate coverage, and you will see even LESS competition in the market."
I suppose I take for granted that the supply side will catch up with demand. Obviously, there will be a lag period, but since MD's are not the only healthcare providers out there (i.e PA's and nonphysician practitioners can also provide much primary care), I think it fair to assume that the supply side can catch up (if, as you point out, it is allowed to).
Pit and Concerned:
What you guys seem to miss with health insurance vs car insurance -> We don't have to own a car. We DO however have to have healthcare.
No, I am not going to mandate purchasing healthcare for ' full coverage." For one it doesn't really solve any of the problems with access to healthcare. After all, I would gladly not go to the ER for a small group of stitches after midnight. But I have no choice. There are no small clinics open. Secondly, the AMA has kept the number of doctors graduating from medical school the same as it was when Nixon graduated. That creates a static supply of physicians versus a growing demand based on population growth. Mandate coverage, and you will see even LESS competition in the market.
I am not against private insurance or even the possibility of a mandate, but only if it is extremely heavily regulated like in Switzerland, or Germany. And the preimums have to be squashed as in those countries.
Otherwise, you are talking about a system such as in Mass, that has already shown that not only is it a faulure, but it has only radically increased premiums for most people, while providing even less access.
Frankly, I am sick and tired of only one side of the equation being handled and protected - supply side. It' s time we start looking at demand.
Keep in mind both of you I come from this a pretty cold hearted economist who has had to write a white paper or two on this in the past. And the exploding costs predicyied back in the 90's have ALL come true.
Obama and Congress are handing the Us citizen a pile of non-competitive dog poo that is GREAT for the suppliers, and terrible for the demand side. since its all supposed to be about improving competition, its a laugh.
I get tired of the average citizen being expected to subsidize the profits of businesses that really offer little in value.
in person, with my own ears, i attended an albemarle county forum hosted by mr perriello
i clearly heard commentary that was rooted in race-bias and anti-semitism
for example: a straightforward comparison of mr obama to the 'Antichrist' (in the Christian apocalyptic literature) and specific naming of the jewish advisors in the white house (or the spokesperson's words 'obama's czars') as 'forces taking over the government' ...
i looked around the room to see how hurt many in the audience were at the overt hatred of the anti-obama speakers
i wondered if those speaking 'as Christians' understood how much their words were in opposition to the direct teaching of Their Lord to love one another, and teachings of the early Christian fellowship (to sell what they owned in order to provide for the widows orphans, and those in need : which is generally considered by scholars to be a 'socialism' of property in early Christian fellowships, by those who had actually known Jesus) that the rest of the world would 'know the believers by their love' (Not their hate)
did others have a similar experience?
My lord you are an idiot. You continue to try to make two contradictory points. The government is mandating insurance, therefore subsidizing the insurance industry. And the government is mandating insurance, therefore increasing the size of the government. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. The government is either taking control of healthcare or they are subsidizing a PRIVATE industry. IT CANNOT BE BOTH. Stop interchanging those two arguments, you're contradicting yourself, and thus proving you're an idiot (the same thing you seem to be accusing me of, which makes you sound like Barney Frank talking about the subprime crisis).
You also assume the goal of healthcare is to insure everyone, proving once again that you cannot think beyond a party line stance. The goal of healthcare reform should be to LOWER COSTS because even if the end goal is to insure everyone, it cannot happen unless costs come down. I'm sure you don't understand this for the same reason you probably think Medicare is a great, well-functioning system.
Once more I will spell out the point I am making. The government is slow and bureaucratic, and will never be able to do things as effectively as private industry. That being said, the government IS NECESSARY (shocker right?) as they must provide certain things such as security, infrastructure, education, and social safety networks (which should be farmed out to private industry because otherwise you end up with bankrupt systems like Medicare). Are there anymore BASIC assumptions I must point out to you or would you like to yell at me for not clarifying that I understand the Earth is round?
Finally demeaning a regional dialect is racism. If you made fun of someone's accent, you are being racist. Since you obviously don't understand that, you have upgraded yourself to an ignorant racist. Congratulations.
P.S. Please type slower because obviously how slow you type affects my ability to read.
You're mad that Tom hasn't provided examples? He was interviewed on Friday morning. No one asked him on that interview for examples. I imagine that if someone asked him, he could provide examples. Maybe he will when he is back in the District this weekend, if someone asks him.
By the way, the Lyndon LaRouche folks who were there with posters of Hitler mustaches painted onto posters of Obama sure seems like they had racist overtones to me... And I DID see those, at both of the two town hall meetings that I attended.
By the way, the budding scandal here is that the NRCC has been sending out documents that purport to be transcripts of Tom's interview, with key words edited out. Politico did a story, using the NRCC "transcript" without checking its facts; their story complained that Tom was calling his constituents racist. When the author of the story was called on it, he apologized, blaming it on the NRCC flak for their misleading information. From Glenn Thrush's apology today to Tom Perriello, which you can read at http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/ , you can see the whole quote from Tom, with the portions that the Republican flak left out put in brackets:
ââ?¬Å?I conducted over a hundred hours of town hall meetings in central and southern Virginia [and the vast majority of them were civil; people disagreed passionately on ideological grounds]. And there were [rare] cases where very racist remarks were made. Sometimes they were called out by neighbors in the audience; sometimes they weren't. Clearly, race remains a factor in America, [but] there's also a lot of disagreement here that is genuine and not based on race, so I think we have to have both conversations."
Tom, unlike Jimmy Carter, did not say that "most" of the negative reaction was due to racism. He thought that the racist responses were "rare." The Republicans wanted to try to paint Tom as having the same response as Carter and Pelosi, and it just isn't true.
Some of the utter horses**t I'm reading here is stunning. Obama, Holder, and Jones are racist? You are deluded... read your own comments!
I naively thought that having a mixed race president would bring the US together. Instead, every two-bit racist KKK freak has crawled out of the woodwork to make their real views known.
The debate over health care and the racist comments directed at our president have proven one thing-- compared to Europe and Canada, we are incredibly backward. Judging by some of the rhetoric I'm reading here, we're a country largely made up of uneducated suspicious hayseeds and willfully ignorant peckerwoods. Then you've got the "I got mine, you get your own, jerk" douchebags dominating the dialog.
I can't believe that so many in this state, and in this country, possess such a resentful mean streak. Frankly, I'm more ashamed to be an American now than I was under BushCo
One point... it actually costs more to maintain a disease then to deal with it in one fell swoop.. so from a financial standpoint it is cheaper let someone die an early death from heart disease then treat them for twenty years. Sounds cold, but if we are talking about money here it negates the argument about preventive medicine.
It is a shame that that people think this President is an idiot because he is black when the fact is he is an idiot because he has a low IQ which he probably got from his mother who was dumb enough to be duped at an early age by a jerk from Kenya.
Calling you stupid would be an insult to stupid people. And reading comments like yours reaffirms my position that abortion is absolutely justified in cases of incest.
Pit Shaver -"I suppose I take for granted that the supply side will catch up with demand."
Why? There is a long history in economics of monopolies and oligopolies maximizing profits by cutting back on service and quality, unless compelled to provide via res. For example, electrical utilities. When all the utilities were deregulated in most cases, prices JUMPED, not the reverse.
If we are going to treat healthcare as a commodity like a utility, and we get the best bang for the buck by having a few suppliers becuase of the barriers to entry (cost) then we need tor egulate the crap out of it.
There is NOTHING in this bill that really does that. Real Reform isn't even on the table. Even with what we have we could do better, but too many profit off it, and can game it. Those dragons must be slayed.
"I never mentioned mandates."
Well, yes you did, when you took issue with Caesonia's complaint about the government propping up the insurance industry and then equated health insurance to auto and home owners insurance, which are literally (auto) and practically (homeowners) mandatory.
"Mandates are a different issue as people should not have to purchase insurance if they don't want to (in theory). In practice however, those who do not purchase will most likely never foot the bill of their healthcare coverage, which will place the burden on the tax payer, but this is the current system, so I believe that to be an irrelevant point."
It is completely relevant to the problem at hand - namely that the government is already paying through the nose for the healthcare of uninsured and underinsured Americans. If you believe that people should not be required to have insurance (of some kind) then you must be ok with the government footing the high costs associated with caring for the uninsured - ER visits instead of well-visits, increased rates of preventable illness, lost productivity, higher costs of medical procedures for those not belonging to a group plan, etc...
Like it or not, unless everybody is covered by some sort of plan, Uncle Taxpayer is going to pick up the tab for those who either cannot afford coverage or those who "choose" to remain uninsured.
"MORE IMPORTANTLY, you have yet to explain how regular Americans purchasing insurance is a government subsidy. Can you please explain how Americans spending money equates to a government handout?"
As I said before, REQUIRING all Americans to purchase health insurance (by whatever means - employer plans, vouchers, individual out-of-pocket, etc.) from a private provider would amount to a subsidy for the insurance industry. Apparently you now oppose such coverage requirements, so I guess I was responding to your previous position.
"Also ââ?¬Å?small gub'mint"? Was that your attempt to poke fun at my intelligence? Are you implying that a person from the south is less educated? What are you racist or something?!"
Huh?? How on earth am I supposed to know where you hail from or what color you are? Insecure much? As a matter of fact, I'm from the South so no I was not poking fun at Southerners' intelligence. I was poking fun at yours though .
TOM, PLEASE lay it ALL on the table.
ohmy-- we ARE backward. Europeans and Canadians know that adequate health care for all should be a right, not a privilege. They know that this is the civilized thing to do.
Americans apparently can't figure that out...
If you care about the economic well being of the poor and middle class no matter what their race --please care about Slutzky signing a pledge to support a water plan no matter what the cost. To make those least fortunate pay the lions share of the cost, hopefully rates right up there with what someone said in high school. I consider what Mr. Slutzky signed to be blatantly false and hopefully honesty matters when picking a candidate.
This is the statement signed by Mr. Slutzky, Snow, Cummings and Rooker. Mr. Thomas did not sign this and I respect him for that. Please ask these candidates how they know this is the most economical plan if no one --I mean no one knows the cost !
Consensus Statement on the 50 year Water Supply Plan as endorsed by candidates for the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Each of us has independently reviewed the specifics of our community's long-term Water Supply Plan. We have concluded that the plan as approved by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors in 2006 meets our community's obligations to present and future citizens in the most practical, environmentally sound and economical way possible. We support moving ahead with this plan as soon as possible.
"The debate over health care and the racist comments directed at our president have proven one thingââ?¬â?? compared to Europe and Canada, we are incredibly backward."
ROFL.....Stop it! You are killing me here.
"I naively thought that having a mixed race president would bring the US together. Instead, every two-bit racist KKK freak has crawled out of the woodwork to make their real views known."
You are not naive. This is something that plagues all mixed societies and brought to the forefront when an event likes this takes place. For this country to even elect this President is a major hurdle that has been cleared. There are many more to go.
So I assume you think the agenda of Bush and Cheney was that of a 'united nation'?
I would give more credence to the talk of the folks on the "right" if they could learn to spell correctly.
Perriello is just laying the groundwork to explain why he'll vote for ObamaCare, against the wishes of the majority of his constituents. The explanation? Those against ObamaCare (or anything Perriello's puppetmaster desires) are racists. That sounds better than the fact that Obama says "jump" and Perriello responds "How high?". Come 2010, I plan on making the first contribution to a political candidate I've ever made in my entire life, that being to whoever is running against Perriello.
I wasn't aware that pointing out the flaws in your arguments obligated me to single-handedly solve the nations' healthcare dilemma. My experience tells me that the guy who thinks he is full of all the answers is usually full of something else - present company included.
If you really must know, I actually DO favor an insurance requirement for Americans. My earlier post merely sought to point out your hypocrisy in pretending that such a requirement does not amount to a big government handout to industry. How exatly does a government MANDATE to purchase an industry's product jibe with your "small gub'mint" instincts? And how does the boon that results for that industry not equate to a de facto government subsidy? Simply because the dogmatic small-government lens through which you seem to see all issues does not permit you to admit supporting a government subsidy, the facts seem to say otherwise.
In answer to your "whining" (not mine), I would say that our current healthcare crisis requires us to be open to a whole range of possible solutions - insurance mandates, public options, healthcare cooperatives, stricter industry oversight, yes even tort reform. My sense is that the answer will be far from black and white and will require a combination of solutions. Though, again, I would not be so arrogant as to pretend that I have all the answers.
I never mentioned mandates. Mandates are a different issue as people should not have to purchase insurance if they don't want to (in theory). In practice however, those who do not purchase will most likely never foot the bill of their healthcare coverage, which will place the burden on the tax payer, but this is the current system, so I believe that to be an irrelevant point.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, you have yet to explain how regular Americans purchasing insurance is a government subsidy. Can you please explain how Americans spending money equates to a government handout?
I will admit the answer is not as simple as I potray it to be, but change has to be made incrementally, and to do that you start small and simple.
Also "small gub'mint"? Was that your attempt to poke fun at my intelligence? Are you implying that a person from the south is less educated? What are you racist or something?! Maybe Tom heard YOU screaming from the back of the town hall meeting.
I attended many of these meetings, and never heard any racist comments, nor saw any racist signs. With the amount of videotape, camcorder, and cell phone recordings that occurred at these meetings, there should easily be proof of his claims. The fact that he, and Nancy, can't show anything supporting their claims, is akin to yelling fire in a theater when none occurs, and they should be penalized accordingly. This is just an attempt to shut down debate, and he should be ashamed of himself. Next he'll be telling us that the Holocaust didn't occur.
RC go to France
If he can seriously say "I can't understand why in the world anybody would have been for it back in that time," then he has real problems with understanding other people's points of view. "Anybody"? What he really means is "I can't understand why in the world anybody who lived and thought exactly like me would have been for it back in that time." He doesn't define "anybody" to include, oh, I don't know, black people. He doesn't define "anybody" to include progressive whites who opposed segregation. His definition of "anybody" just happens to be exactly coterminous with his own self. That's a sign of someone who can't empathize, someone who can't look at the people living very different lives from him or with very different beliefs and even fathom their point of view. That's not a problem with politically incorrect language: it's a problem of being narrow-minded, parochial, and unimaginative.
I also liked this quote from him: "do they mind me calling them a Negro anymore? Is that improper also?"
If he truly has no idea, has paid NO attention at all to shifts in public discourse regarding race, if he really has no fricking clue that the word 'Negro' is largely archaic, then...again, it's not a matter of being politically incorrect. It's a matter of being clueless.
He complains that integration was "shoved down our throats" at the same time that he acknowledges that he and everyone else he knew like him was against integration, meaning they would NOT have done it themselves. So the government is bad for forcing people to do a thing that he says "was necessary" but that people wouldn't have done on their own. Sounds like the government can't win in Thomas's worldview. Wait around forever for racist white southerners to make equal educational opportunities to blacks? Or just get the whole thing rolling on their own? Damned if they do, damned if they don't. I guess what he means is "I like the government shoving federal highways and satellites and inspecting the food that I eat and standards for auto safety down my throat, but not making me sit next to black kids at school."
Concerned: No. Socialism and fascism are not close. Socialism functions in a capitalist society, like Germany and Switzerland.
Fascism and Communism are at opposite ends of the spectrum while being very close.
Really, I wish you would get with the ticket. The economic differences in stuff like this I had to spend a lot of time on.
I would be GLAD to see a little real socialism in this country when it comes to health care for everyone.
Look, you think-headed, troglodytic, neanderthal! They are the same. A government mandate to purchase private health insurance (where no mandate had previously existed) would amount to a boondoggle for insurance companies (read: subsidy). At the same time, while it would not grow the bureaucracy to the same degree that a takeover would, it will most certainly increase the size of government. (At the very least there will be increased regulation - which you affirmed in an earlier post.) If the government takes ANY steps (public or private) to fix the healthcare mess, it will be increasing its breadth and scope. Sorry.
"You also assume the goal of healthcare(sic) is to insure everyone..."
WRONG. The goal of healthcare reform is to provide HEALTHCARE. To EVERYONE.
"The goal of healthcare reform should be to LOWER COSTS because even if the end goal is to insure everyone, it cannot happen unless costs come down."
Talk about party line BS... Look chief, no matter how far you lower costs, there's gonna be a free-rider problem (people who remain uninsured - and cost Uncle Sam in the long run) unless you somehow mandate coverage. By the way, lowering costs is great, never said anything to the contrary - remember that stuff I said about the increased purchasing power of large group plans? What did you think I meant?
"I'm sure you don't understand this for the same reason you probably think Medicare is a great, well-functioning system."
As a matter of fact, my experience with Medicare during my parent's catastrophic illness was absolutely fantastic. It sure beat the alternative of bankruptcy. Was it perfect? No. But nothing is.
"...demeaning a regional dialect is racism. If you made fun of someone's accent, you are being racist."
I'll say it once more - I never demeaned anybody's dialect. But for the record, here's what Merriam-Webster has to say about your little notion of racism...
Function: noun
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
You, sir, are a complete and total horse's backside.
i'd like to know what exactly perriello heard that was racist or that he thought was racist.
i went to a town hall and didnt hear anything of the sort.
he claims there was overt racism.
where and what specifically, Rep. perriello?
ââ?¬Å?I conducted over a hundred hours of town hall meetings in my district in central and Southern Virginia, and the vast majority of them were civil; people disagreed passionately on ideological grounds. And there were the rare cases where very racist remarks were made. Sometimes they were called out by neighbors in the audience; sometimes they weren't. Clearly, race remains a factor in America, but there's also a lot of disagreement here that is genuine and not based on race, so I think we have to have both conversations."
"Rare cases..." "the vast majority of them were civil..."
There's too much jumping to conclusions and assumptions being made, rather than giving Congressman Perriello a fair hearing, as he gave lots of people in all the town halls he did. You know what they say about assumptions.... they make an.... out of U and ME!
Anybody who thinks racism does not exist in the 5th district of Virginia is living in a dream world.
We might debate how overtly it is displayed, but let's not pretend it's not here. As a life long resident, I who went to school in a basement when Charlottesville
Schools refused to integrate, I just wish we could move
away from the issue of race and on to solving the important issues of our time.
"The healthcare bills is written in such a manner that the upper class should subsize the poor, NOT the government subsidizing an industry..."
Let's get real. Requiring Americans to purchase private insurance amounts to a government subsidy for the industry.
"The healthcare industry is noncompetitive because companies cannot compete across state lines."
Citizen, I imagine you to be a fan of limited government (at least limited Federal Government) and a proponent of state authority. What do you suppose would happen to the authority of states to regulate the insurance industry within their own borders if those insurance companies were allowed to operate across state lines? Would the (gasp) Federal Government become the primary regulator? Would it be the state in which the company is headquartered? And if so, would it be very long before all insurance comapnies simply moved to the states with the least stringent consumer protections?
"Get rid of all the litigation and malpractice suits doctors and drug companies have to insure themselves against. THAT'S how to fix this."
Hogwash! Tort reform is a red herring bandied about by those opposed to real reform. The states that have experimented with tort reform have seen absolutely no decline in healthcare costs.
Get your facts straight and stop pretending that there are simple solutions to complex problems.
The congressman is asked a question by a reporter and he answers it. Because some don't like the answer, they suggest that he is making facts up? That he is a liar?
Race crying wont get you out of this mess congressman......
I don't suggest he's making things up, I am curious as to what he heard. specifically. MY anecdotal evidence was that I didnt hear anything like that, so i was curious what he heard.
i don't doubt it could have happened in the 5th dist. but wanted to know what was said at which town hall. seeking clarification is not weak. a good reporter would have asked a followup.
"It's best to keep your mouth shut and let people think you're stupid than to open it and leave no doubt."
Excellent advice for our leaders.
It was periellos own racist words that he heard.
I think Mequa Shore is correct in suggesting that Tom should be more specific about what he means and exactly what he heard. Were the meetings taped? Maybe it is all on tape. A big problem with regard to racial issues is that people (including politicians) are afraid to talk about the exact details. I'm afraid that is what is going on here. Come on, get it out Tom! What exactly did you hear? Folks want to know what racial comments the inappropriates are spouting off. Putting the entire facts on the table can fix problems. One more suggestion Tom, as you were the leader in charge, why didn't you ask those yelling out racial comments to leave? Please open up the conversation more.
If it weren't for racism, 100% of Americans would approve of The Messiah's proposed legislation. His vast experience as a community organizer working with the likes of that wonderful organization known as ACORN made him eminently qualified to be President. The magic formula to be so qualified is, apparently, ZERO executive experience. How else can you account for the tax cheats and 9/11 truthers he's appointed? Little Tommy Perriello's landslide victory last November shows that virtually everybody in the 5th Congressional District thinks he's as well qualified for Congress as The Messiah is for the Oval Office. So anybody objecting to The Messiah's policies and plans better just shut the he*l up, put away your Klan paraphanelia and GET WITH THE PROGRAM!!
It's not like we live in a democracy with freedom of speech you know. The only kind of freedom of speech you're now entitled to is that which agrees with The Messiah.
"But you seem to believe insurance should be mandated. Wouldn't that cost taxpayers and the government more than it does now according to your argument?"
No. Learn to read. The government pays more now b/c it has to pay for much more costly procedures that result when uninsured people delay going to the doctor until they are extremely sick, or they use the ER as their primary care facility ($$$). Don't forget the cost savings that insurance companies (and Medicare) are able to demand for medical procedures simply because of the large pool of consumers that they represent. Uninsured patients pay more for the same procedures, and those costs get passed on to taxpayers.
"If the auto insurance industry is subsidized by the government, how come that industry isn't having the same problems? Are you also stating homeowners blah blah blah..."
Huh? Who's running in circles here and extrapolating meanings to fit their arguments? I will say this agin, and TYPE IT SLOWLY SO THAT YOU CAN COMPREHEND: My point was that if the goal of health care reform is to cover everyone, and the means through which we accomplish that goal is by government mandating private coverage for everyone (i.e. NO GOVERNMENT OPTION), then we should not delude ourselves into thinking that we are not giving a huge boost to a private industry - which is pretty much what Caesonia pointed out in the first place and YOU DISAGREED WITH. Period. End of story. I suppose I gave you too much credit for being able to read between the lines (and holding to one position).
The point where I split with Caesonia is that I am ok with such a dependence on private industry (even at the expense of a public option) as long as the ultimate goal of covering everyone is achieved.
"Either way, I'm not sure how the government mandating anything results in BIGGER government."
Really? I know lots of conservatives who would take issue with that statement. And the guy who wrote that "You should be allowed to do WHATEVER you want, as long as you are not taking away freedoms of others..." SHOULD probably take issue with the statement as well (if he weren't to busy talking aout of both sides of his face).
The Gub'mint crack was intended to portray you as the type of knee-jerk "conservative" who likes the notion of small government but 1) really has no idea what the term means in practice and 2) that he benefits in many many ways from the type of robust government protections that he himself (if he thought about it) would consider to be "big gub'mint." Based on your delusional remblings here, I think that assessment is dead-on.
"The only thing I could take from it was your(sic) were implying a some sort of southern draw(sic) or slang. Which, either way, would again make you a racist."
How do you equate demeaning a regional dialect (which I was not since I share that dialect myself) with racism!!?? If anything, I was trying to demean one very particular moron about whose race I have no clue.
Sigh...Politico reporter already apologized for only giving part of the quote...go to politico website to see..was manufactured controversy by the right, which redacted portions of the quote and gave it to the reporter who didn't check it
The only things I can think of that are truly discriminatory are things like the United ***** College Fund, Jet Magazine, Black Entertainment Television, and Miss Black America. Try to have things like the United Caucasian College Fund, Cloud Magazine, White Entertainment Television, or Miss White America; and see what happens...Jesse Jackson will be knocking down your door.
These politicians like Perriello are black sympasizers and why? THE VOTE! He came here and took Virgils seat, simply because the children voted democratic. They are the ones who elected Obama and Perriello. Now, the grown up tax payers have to live with these mistakes. Obama and his gang have not dont ONE thing that he promised, not one.
If you want to do something about the health care system, try looking at whos in the system. I think your going to find the children and parents of poor people that America is supporting. The "Project" people with 5 shildren, receiving WICA and Welfare, that are allowed to have these children that grow up poor, and the suffering continues....Thats the American way, we the people who work and pay taxes. pay for Felons, Thieves, Health Care, BMW's, Crack and Ignorance.


text: Swarovski is an esteemed crystal business, founded within Austria in 1895. With a vision of making 'a diamond for everyone'; Swarovski made crystals and the eccentricity of owning one affordable. In 1935, Swarovski delved into making their first set of eyewear – binoculars – and heralded a resounding success. Swarovski have not retreated since, producing lavish premium eyewear – including a deluxe range of glasses. As expected, Swarovski provides a diverse range of woman's glasses which will make any wearer shine. Frames are meticulously formed to create a variety of styles – whether wanting a Circular frames or even a 'Geek chic' pair. They are made from acetate and resistant metals which will provide a durable product which will ensure longevity. Embellishments are a Swarovski speciality; gemstones and in some cases marble decorate the arms and frames to ensure your glasses have the wow factor. Colour schemes range from Dark Havana to Violet. Delve into our extensive range of Swarovski Prescription Glasses here at Glasses Station; including the best-selling pair – the Swarovski Elina – available in two colour schemes and encrusted with marble.Mens Swarovski Glasses


text:
Fairway Privacy Policy
This Privacy Policy governs your use of the Fairway web sites, web pages, interactive features, applications, blogs, software, tools, mobile applications, Facebook, Twitter or other social networking Fairway sites, and their respective contents, and other online wireless offerings that post a link to this Privacy Policy, whether accessed via computer, mobile device or other technology (the "Sites"). By visiting the Sites, and/or using the services offered on or through the Sites, you agree to the terms of this Privacy Policy as they may be amended from time to time. As we update and expand our services, this Privacy Policy may change, so check back to this page from time to time. This Privacy Policy is incorporated into, and part of, the Fairway Terms and Conditions, which governs your use of the Sites in general. The Sites are intended for users who are located in the United States of America, and shall be interpreted under the laws of the United States.
Protecting your Privacy
Your privacy is a serious matter to us. In order to make your visits to the Sites and use of the services available through the Sites as worthwhile as possible, we may ask you for Personal Information and we may collect certain information from your computer, mobile device or other internet compatible device each time you visit us. "Personal Information" includes, for example, your name; home and/or business address; e-mail address; telephone, wireless and/or fax number; short message service or text message address or other wireless device address; instant messaging address; credit card and other payment information; demographic information and/or other information that may identify you as an individual or allow online or offline contact with you as an individual. This privacy statement explains, in general, what Personal Information and other information is collected on the Sites, how the information is used, and with whom we may share such information. Please take a few minutes to read our Privacy Policy so that you understand how Fairway treats your information.
Right to Opt Out
You have the right to "opt-out" of certain of our uses of your Personal Information. For example, at the time you are requested to provide Personal Information on the Sites, you may have the opportunity to elect to, or not to: (1) receive correspondence from us, or (2) have your Personal Information shared with third party entities for their marketing purposes. (We will not share, sell or trade your Personal Information with other entities outside of The Fairway Family for their marketing purposes without your permission. See the "Do We Share Personal Information and Web Site Usage Information with Others?" section below for more information about our data sharing practices.)
You may also opt-out of Fairway's promotional e-mails by clicking on an opt-out link within the e-mail you receive. Please understand that if you opt-out of receiving promotional correspondence from us, we may still contact you in connection with your relationship, activities, transactions and communications with us. Also, a request to have us stop sharing your Personal Information with other entities for marketing purposes will only apply as of the date of your request, and we will not be responsible for any communications that you may receive from entities that received your Personal Information prior to such request. In these cases, please contact that entity directly.
What Information is collected on the Sites?
User-Provided Information
We collect Personal Information from users of the Sites, for example, through such users' activities, transactions and completion of online forms on the Sites. Such information is collected, for example, when users register or subscribe for accounts, electronic newsletters or other features on the Sites, make online purchases, enter any sweepstakes and/or contests, complete surveys, contribute to an open forum that we may make available on or through the Sites, submit a comment or question to us using a "contact us" or similar feature on the Sites, send us an e-mail, or in any other way submit Personal Information to us via the Sites.
You may be able to send information about our products and services to your friends and family members through the Sites by clicking on an "E-mail to Friend", social media share feature or similar button on the Sites or in an e-mail that we have sent you. In some of these cases (unless you simply forward our e-mail on your own), you may provide the name and e-mail address of your friend or family member to us. Such information will be treated in accordance with this Privacy Policy and applicable law.
You may also be able to send an online card to a friend or family member, or send them a gift or gift certificate. If so, you may be required to provide us with your friend's or family member's Personal Information. Such information will be treated in accordance with this Privacy Policy and applicable law.
Web Site Usage Information
We may use "cookies" to keep, and sometimes track, information about you. Cookies are small data files that are sent to your browser or related software from a web server and stored on your computer's hard drive. Cookies track where you travel on the Sites and what you look at and purchase. They may store the information in your shopping cart, and/or your username and/or password. A cookie may enable us to relate your use of the Sites to other information about you, including your Personal Information. All of these purposes serve to improve and personalize your experience on the Sites, to determine which areas and features of the Sites are most popular, and to make improvements and updates to enhance the experience on the Sites.
Most web browsers can be set to inform you when a cookie has been sent to you and provide you with the opportunity to refuse that cookie. Additionally, if you have a Flash player installed on our computer, your Flash player can be set to reject or delete Flash cookies. However, refusing a cookie may, in some cases, preclude you from using, or negatively impact the display or function of, the Sites or certain areas or features of the Sites including preventing you from purchasing products from the Sites.
Clear GIFs
We may use "clear GIFs" (aka "web beacons" or "pixel tags") or similar technologies, in the Sites and/or in our communications with you to enable us to know whether you have visited a web page or received a message. A clear GIF is typically a one-pixel, transparent image (although it can be a visible image as well), located on a web page or in an e-mail or other type of message, which is retrieved from a remote site on the Internet enabling the verification of an individual's viewing or receipt of a web page or message. A clear gif may enable us to relate your viewing or receipt of a web page or message to other information about you, including your Personal Information.
IP Address and Clickstream Data
Our server automatically collects data about your server's Internet address when you visit us. This information, known as an Internet Protocol address, or IP Address, is a number that's automatically assigned to your computer by your Internet service provider whenever you're on the Internet. When you request pages from the Sites, our servers may log your IP Address and sometimes your domain name. Our server may also record the referring page that linked you to us (e.g., another web site or a search engine); the pages you visit on the Sites; the web site you visit after the Sites; the ads you see and/or click on; your product interests and purchases; other information about the type of web browser, computer, platform, related software and settings you are using; any search terms you have entered on the Sites or a referral site; and other web usage activity and data logged by our web servers. We use this information for internal system administration, to help diagnose problems with our server, and to administer the Sites. Such information may also be used to gather broad demographic information, such as country of origin and Internet Service Provider. We may also link this information with your Personal Information.
Any or all of these activities with regard to Web Site Usage Information may be performed on our behalf by our services providers.
How is the Personal Information used?
We will use the Personal Information you provide on the Sites, for example, to respond to your requests and to provide you with our product and service offerings. For example, we will process your orders, respond to your requests and inquiries and provide you with the products, services and features offered on or through the Sites. We may also use your Personal Information to help us develop and improve the Sites, tailor the Sites to your interests, and maintain our internal record keeping. We may match information collected from you through different means or at different times, including both Personal Information and Web Site Usage Information, and use such information along with information obtained from other sources, including third parties. In addition, we may send you notices (for example, in the form of e-mails, mailings, and the like), and otherwise correspond with you, about products, services, companies, coupons, promotions, contests and events, sponsored by us and others, that we think might interest you. Fairway may offer electronic newsletters and e-mails as a service to our users. You will only receive a newsletter or promotional e-mail from Fairway if you agree during registration, or during your other activities on or through the Sites, or using our newsletter sign up form, to receive these items. Unsubscribe instructions are included in each electronic newsletter and e-mail. You may opt-out of receiving such notices from us by following the instructions in the Right to Opt Out section above.
We may analyze user behavior as a measure of interest in, and use of, the Sites and e-mails, both on an individual basis and in the aggregate.
Do we share Personal Information and Web Site Usage information with others?
The Fairway Family
We, together with our affiliates, are collectively referred to in this Privacy Policy as "The Fairway Family." We may share your Personal Information and Web Site Usage Information among The Fairway Family, both for business purposes and for advertising and promotional purposes.
Co-sponsored Contests, Sweepstakes and Offerings
Some of our contests, sweepstakes and other offerings that we may make available on or through the Sites from time to time may be co-sponsored by another company. In those situations, the information we obtain from you in connection with such contest, sweepstake or offering may be shared with our co-sponsor, unless you instruct us not to by following the instructions in the Right to Opt Out section. In those situations, our co-sponsors will have the right to use your information for their own purposes, in accordance with their own policies. We are not responsible for how our co-sponsors may use your information.
Service Providers
Currently, we use a third party partner to provide our e-commerce solution, and we may use other third party partners to help operate the Sites and deliver products, services and promotional materials on behalf of the The Fairway Family. We may share your information with our third party e-commerce solution partner, our affiliates, service providers and other third parties that provide products or services for or through the Sites or for our business (such as web site or database hosting companies, address list hosting companies, e-mail service providers, analytics companies, distribution companies, fulfillment companies, and other similar service providers that use such information on our behalf). We require our service providers to maintain the confidentiality of your Personal Information.
Aggregate Statistics
We may disclose aggregate statistics regarding user behavior as a measure of interest in, and use of, the Sites and e-mails to third parties in the form of aggregate data, such as overall patterns or demographic reports that do not describe or identify any individual user. Aggregate information is non-personally identifiable/anonymous information about you, such as age, gender, types of products purchased, pages you access most frequently or search terms you enter. Aggregate information is used in a collective manner, and no single person can be identified by that compiled information. For example, the number of people who visit the Sites who are 25 years of age is aggregate information that does not personally identify a specific user.
Legally Compelled Disclosures
We may disclose user information to government authorities, and to other third parties when compelled to do so by government authorities, at our discretion, or otherwise as required by law in our good faith belief, including but not limited to in response to court orders and subpoenas and as otherwise required in connection with a judicial or government proceeding or legal process. We also may disclose user information when we have reason to believe that someone is causing injury to or interference with our rights or property, other users of the Sites, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities. Fairway cooperates with law enforcement inquiries and other third parties to enforce laws, intellectual property rights and other rights.
Business Transfer
In the event that Fairway, any entity of The Fairway Family, or substantially all of its assets, are acquired by one or more third parties as a result of an acquisition, merger, sale, reorganization, consolidation or liquidation, Personal Information may be one of the transferred assets.
Third Party Ad Servers
We may use third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit the Sites. If so, a list of these ad-serving companies will be available here. These companies may use information (generally not including your name, address email address or telephone number) about your visits to this and other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. These companies may employ cookies and clear gifs to measure advertising effectiveness. Any information that these third parties collect via cookies and clear gifs is generally not personally identifiable (unless, for example, you provide personally identifiable information to them through an ad or e-mail message). We encourage you to read these businesses' privacy policies if you should have any concerns about how they will care for your Personal Information. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, see the Network Advertising Initiative's consumer web site at http://www.networkadvertising.org/about-nai/about-nai
Wireless Addresses
If the email address you provide to us is a wireless email address, you agree to receive messages at such address from Fairway and the rest of The Fairway Family (unless and until you have elected not to receive such messages by following the instructions in the Right to Opt Out section above). You understand that your wireless carrier's standard rates apply to these messages, and that you may change your mind at any time by following the instructions in the Right to Opt Out section above. You represent that you are the owner or authorized user of the wireless device on which messages will be received, and that you are authorized to approve the applicable charges.
Your Access Rights
You may review the Personal Information that is stored in your user account on the Sites by emailing your request to our customer service department at email@example.com. We will send you a copy of the Personal Information we have on file in your user account (if any). You may provide us new or updated information at any time. We will endeavor to respond to your request to access, update or delete your information as soon as practicable. Before we are able to provide you with any information, correct any inaccuracies or delete any information, however, we may ask you to verify your identity and to provide other details to help us to respond to your request.
Protecting your information is a priority for Fairway. We will take reasonable steps to protect the security and integrity of all Personal Information provided to the Sites. For example, we use industry standard Secure Socket Layer (SSL) technology to protect the security of your sensitive online transactions. However, due to the inherent nature of the Internet as an open global communications vehicle, we cannot guarantee that information, during transmission through the Internet or while stored on our system or otherwise in our care, will be absolutely safe from intrusion by others, such as hackers. No transmission of data over the Internet is guaranteed to be completely secure. It may be possible for third parties not under the control of Fairway to intercept or access transmissions or private communications unlawfully. While we strive to protect your personal information, Fairway cannot ensure or warrant the security of any information you transmit to us. Any such transmission is done at your own risk.
If you contact us by e-mail, you should be aware that your transmission might not be secure. A third party could view information you send by these methods in transit.
You may be able to create an account on the Sites with a username and password. If so, you are responsible for maintaining the strict confidentiality of your account password, and you shall be responsible for any access to or use of the Sites by you or any person or entity using your password, whether or not such access or use has been authorized by or on behalf of you, and whether or not such person or entity is your employee or agent. You agree to (a) immediately notify Fairway of any unauthorized use of your password or account or any other breach of security, and (b) ensure that you exit from your account at the end of each session. It is your sole responsibility to control the dissemination and use of your password, control access to and use of your account, and notify Fairway when you desire to cancel your account on the Sites. We will not be responsible or liable for any loss or damage arising from your failure to comply with this provision, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless Fairway and other members of The Fairway Family for any improper, unauthorized or illegal use of your account.
We will have no liability for disclosure of your information due to errors or unauthorized acts of third parties during or after transmission.
In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your Personal Information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development. If a notification is appropriate, we would endeavor to do so as promptly as possible under the circumstances, and, to the extent we have your e-mail address, we may notify you by e-mail. You consent to our use of e-mail as a means of such notification.
With identity theft a continuing problem, it has become increasingly common for unauthorized individuals to send e-mail messages to consumers, purporting to represent a legitimate company such as a bank or on-line merchant, requesting that the consumer provide personal, often sensitive information. Sometimes, the domain name of the e-mail address from which the e-mail appears to have been sent, and the domain name of the web site requesting such information, appears to be the domain name of a legitimate, trusted company. In reality, such sensitive information is received by an unauthorized individual to be used for purposes of identity theft. This illegal activity has come to be known as "phishing."
If you receive an e-mail or other correspondence requesting that you provide any sensitive information (including your password or credit card information) via e-mail or to a web site that does not seem to be affiliated with the Sites, or that otherwise seems suspicious to you, please do not provide such information, and report such request to us by sending an email to firstname.lastname@example.com.
Children and Privacy
Fairway is concerned about the safety of children when they use the Internet. We encourage parents and guardians to spend time with their children online and to be familiar with the sites their children visit. We will never knowingly request personally identifiable information from anyone under the age of 13 without prior verifiable parental consent when legally required. If we become aware that a customer is under the age of 13 and has registered without the legally required prior verifiable parental consent, we will remove his or her personally identifiable registration information from our files.
Consent to Processing
The Sites are hosted and operated in the United States, pursuant to United States law. By providing Personal Information to the Sites, you understand and consent to the collection, maintenance, processing and transfer of such information in and to the United States and other countries and territories.
Third Party "Linked-To" Web Sites
When you are on the Sites you may have the opportunity to visit, or link to, other sites not operated by Fairway, including other web sites operated by unaffiliated third parties. These sites may collect Personal Information about you. Fairway does not control sites that are operated by these entities and is not responsible for the information practices of these sites. This Privacy Policy does not address the information practices of those other web sites.
Changes to this Privacy Policy
Fairway reserves the right to change or update this Privacy Policy, or any other of our policies or practices, at any time, and will notify users of the Sites by posting such changed or updated Privacy Policy on this page. Any changes or updates will be effective immediately upon posting to the Sites. Under certain circumstances (for example, if we would like to use your Personal Information in a manner different from that stated in our Privacy Policy at the time of collection), we may also elect to notify you of changes or updates to our Privacy Policy by additional means, such as by sending you an e-mail.
Contact Us
If you have any questions or comments regarding our privacy practices, you may contact us at firstname.lastname@example.com
Updated: January 2019


text:
Griffin Land Company Inc et al v. Bayer CropScience LP
Filing 5
CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER transferring this case to the Eastern District of Missouri. Signed by Jeffery N. Luthi, Clerk of the Panel, on 8/19/10. (bkp)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


text:
Listen to free music played by isanfranciscoi
Blip.fm is internet radio made social. It's easy to search for, play, and discover free music recommended by real people. Join today to create your own free station and start listening to @isanfranciscoi.
isanfranciscoi 432 = ❤
kurt2 gave props on Feb 2 at 11:44 pm
No badges yet
Friends: MerchantCircle | Charity Blossom | Website Load Testing