text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guest Host: Chuck Todd
Guests: Mark Halperin, Richard Wolffe, Tyler Mathisen, Jenny Beth Martin, Mark Meckler, Bob Baer, Steve Clemons, Todd Harris, Steve McMahon
CHUCK TODD, GUEST HOST: A game of Washington chicken?
Let's play HARDBALL.
Good Thursday evening. I'm Chuck Todd in Washington, sitting in for Chris Matthews, who's on assignment in Israel.
Leading off tonight: The Democrats blink. As we wrote in "First Read" this morning, if the budget battle were a game of chicken, the Democrats would already be in the ditch. Democrats keep caving and caving to the point where they appear to be (ph) to the Republicans' initial proposal. Still, the Democrats somehow managed to make the Republicans look like they're the obstructionists today.
Plus, one group making sure the Republicans don't blink in this game of chicken, the Tea Party. They rallied in Washington, urging the Republicans to hold the line. But it comes as a second poll in two days shows the Tea Party steadily losing some popularity in the middle of the electorate. Is that party ending?
Also, let's face it, in one week, Donald Trump has transformed himself into the nation's leading birther—which he doesn't like that term, by the way. He's jumping into a cesspool where a lot of Republicans office holders and voters have been lurking. We'll ask the HARDBALL "Strategists" what the party can do to climb out of that mess and what Democrats do, if they want to, to try to exploit that madness.
And here, one right out of the James Bond file. While it's true there are no U.S. ground troops in Libya, "The New York Times" and a lot of news outlets are reporting that the CIA has placed clandestine operatives inside the country. We're going to talk to a former CIA officer about just what they're trying to do in Libya, how they're trying to do it, and whether they can succeed.
And finally, which member of Congress fears the fighting in Libya could spread to—wait for it—more fighting in Africa? Think about that for a moment. And then think about this. The congressman sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. He's landed himself in the "Sideshow."
And we start with the battle over the budget. "Time" magazine's Mark Halperin is an MSNBC senior political analyst and Richard Wolffe is an MSNBC political analyst, and he joins me now, a seatmate, usually, over at the White House. And we've got Mark over at the White House.
So Mark, I'll start with you over there. When you look at the numbers, Vice President Biden told reporters last night, quote, "There is no reason why we can't reach an agreement to avoid a government shutdown because the bottom line is here is we're working off the same number."
That number, Mark Halperin, is $33 billion. Now House Speaker John Boehner said today they weren't operating off that number. But let's put this number in perspective. The original Paul Ryan proposal was $32 billion. Biden is saying $33 billion. And of course, the current House number is $61 billion. It's a game of chicken. Democrats keep caving. But is it now all eyes on the Republicans?
MARK HALPERIN, "TIME," MSNBC SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think they're caving less on the question of the amount, although they have caved somewhat on that—the bigger caves are tax increases aren't on the table, something a lot of Democrats would like to see, and they're not—they're digging right deep into the discretionary—non-defense discretionary spending that Democrats think will hurt the economy and hurt less fortunate Americans. So they've lost the PR battle on the terrain, and now they're giving inch by inch on the actual number.
TODD: But for the first time, Richard Wolffe, we actually did see at least the White House try to play the PR game. Last night, Joe Biden goes out there and said, Hey, we're working off the same number. And it led to this today. John Boehner had to say this. Take a listen.
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Now, here's the bottom line. Democrats are rooting for a government shutdown. We're listening to the people who sent us here to cut spending so that we can grow our economy. There is no agreement on a set of numbers, and nothing will be agreed to until everything is agreed to. I've said it and I'm going to continue to say it because that is the fact.
TODD: So Richard Wolffe, they got job Boehner to say there's no agreement. That's actually something they've been trying to do because now it looks like he's standing in the way of the deal.
RICHARD WOLFFE, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. Here's the different dynamic. The White House is playing for independents. It wants to be reasonable, look reasonable, no matter what the number is, and that's going to annoy the base because they're giving up too much. They are caving to a greater degree than Republicans.
But the Republicans are not playing for that same group. They're playing the body-building game for their base, for the Tea Party folks. And so when you've got one side wanting to look tough and the other side looking reasonable, well, you know who wins that argument in the short term. That's the number game. But the bigger game that the White House is playing, the bigger audience is those independent voters that moved away from them in the last couple of years.
So yes, this is a small skirmish over this particular phase, and maybe Democrats are going to have to be very unhappy because they've given up so much here. The problem here is the next round. What now—
TODD: Right.
WOLFFE: -- can the White House do when they go into the spending limits, the next budget?
TODD: Right.
WOLFFE: What else can they give up here and still look reasonable?
TODD: And you know, Mark Halperin, what I found fascinating today is this contradiction between what Biden said last night and Boehner said today. It was all fodder for the Jay Carney briefing. And Jay Carney said, Oh, no, no, no, we agree with John Boehner. We know that there's—we know that when you have a deal, it's a deal for all of it. We just think that we all agree. We're pretty close on the number. We're just working out the details.
The White House doesn't want to throw John Boehner under the bus publicly, do they.
HALPERIN: He's their negotiating partner, and Boehner has been in private in these talks, from all reports, pretty reasonable. And he recognizes that he has a balancing act to do. He must get support from some Republicans, but in the end, this deal is likely to be like the tax deal they passed during the lame duck session and like the other—the last CR was. This is likely to be a deal that gets passed only because it gets sufficient votes from both Republicans and Democrats, the kind of bipartisan compromise that the president said he would put through on a range of issues as president.
This is a challenge for John Boehner more than anyone else, but it's clear he knows from the comments he made today he can't deliver what the Tea Party wants. Even if he wanted to, even if he was willing to take the political risks Richard was talking about—
TODD: Right.
HALPERIN: -- he can't deliver that because it can't pass the Senate.
TODD: And Mark Halperin, very quickly, do you imagine a deal where John Boehner votes for it and Eric Cantor, the number two, votes against it, where there's a little bit of a split there?
HALPERIN: I think that's absolutely possible, and it would be—it would be representative of the two strands of thought and strategic thought within the party right now.
TODD: Richard Wolffe, I want to play some back-and-forth that we—that was over this issue of riders. So the White House actually has backed off of it. They've now drawn a line, I think, in the air. Biden last night—these amendments, these riders—this is the defunding of Planned Parenthood—
WOLFFE: Right.
TODD: -- for instance, defunding of NPR—this is what Biden said last night. "The president and I are not really big on riders at all. We've made it clear that we think they are the non-starters, both the numbers and riders, but I'm not going to negotiate out here." He didn't draw the line in the sand.
Here's Michele Bachmann today about this issue of riders. Take a listen.
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN ®, MINNESOTA: Cutting off funding to groups like Planned Parenthood has to be one of those issues that we're just not going to back down from!
TODD: So it seems the White House is basically saying, Look—to John Boehner—we'll give you some riders, if you need it. You just can't send us over the Planned Parenthood and NPR riders.
WOLFFE: Right. I think there are some red lines around this. They're not saying explicitly which riders are the worst for them, but all of them are going to be difficult to swallow. And in this kind of negotiation, what you give up—the problem is they've already given up their number—
TODD: Right.
WOLFFE: -- and in trying to look reasonable, they've already had to move where the goal post is, as they moved with the Republicans. I don't know that there are many of those riders that the base will accept for the Democrats. So you know, to give up one and maybe get less in terms of cuts to some of these discretionary spending programs, maybe that's a compromise that they'll take. But they're really looking for that next game, which is, What do you do on the next round of cuts? This is not—the Republicans are not going to stop here with a couple of riders. This is just a temporary—
TODD: Right.
WOLFFE: -- a temporary point right now.
TODD: Mark Halperin, Newt Gingrich was speaking today to the House Republican freshmen today, right? And these—this is a group that, for the most part, they want to fight a little bit harder, it seems, than the leadership. You get a sense the Republican leadership says, Hey, let's—we have a debt limit fight we got to do, all these extra fights that Richard Wolffe was just pointing out. What advice was Newt Gingrich or what do we think the advice Newt Gingrich, who went through before in the '90s, was giving to these freshmen?
HALPERIN: To stand by their principles. This is the popular position. And anyone who's thinking of running for president—you talked before about perhaps Eric Cantor being against a final deal but John Boehner being for it. I can almost guarantee you that every Republican presidential candidate, like Newt Gingrich, is going to be against it. They're going to side with the Tea Party, with the base of the party, and say, This deal isn't good enough. We need to fight for more.
The reality is, though, again, the shutdown risk that Gingrich might be willing to take, even though he says he's not for a shutdown—he might be willing to take it. I don't think John Boehner wants it. I know the president doesn't want it. They would prefer to avoid that shutdown, avoid the risk that comes, both substantive and political, with taking that on, going into the unknown.
TODD: What's the likelihood of a shutdown? I mean, it seems as if all the leadership doesn't want it, but is there a point of no return?
WOLFFE: No. Eight out of ten voters don't want it. If the leadership wanted to go down the shutdown route, they'd have done it already. So I think we're beyond that point now.
TODD: That sort of—that's the cable (ph) candidate (ph) game.
WOLFFE: Yes. And also, there—look, I think the Republicans are playing quite a clever game here in saying, Democrats want the shutdown.
TODD: Right.
WOLFFE: They have the Schumer stuff. You know, they—they want—everyone's trying to make each other look unreasonable. But Boehner's compromise with the Tea Party folks is not that different from what Pelosi had to do in terms of holding onto her group and saying, I'm fighting as hard as I can. If I have to lose some people, and they look like they've pushed me as hard as they can go—
TODD: Right.
WOLFFE: It works out for everyone.
TODD: I had somebody say he needs the theatrics a little bit.
WOLFFE: He does, and—
WOLFFE: -- Tea Party folk can need (ph) to vote against this.
TODD: Very quickly, Mark?
HALPERIN: Chuck, we could have a shutdown because, remember, in these budget things, particularly when you need votes from both the Democrat pot and the Republican pot of votes, you go to the floor without the votes, the leadership might say, yes, we got a deal—
TODD: Right.
HALPERIN: -- but that doesn't mean you get to the majority on the floor.
TODD: Look at the TARP—the original TARP vote. Anyway—
HALPERIN: That's right.
TODD: -- Mark Halperin, Richard Wolffe, MSNBC contributors both of you, thanks very much, Mark at the White House, Richard here. I'm very confused! Anyway, thank you both.
TODD: All right, coming up next, we're going to talk about the Tea Party and this issue of whether they're going to be holding John Boehner's feet to the fire to the point that he could face a primary challenge? We'll see what happens. That and more straight ahead.
This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TODD: Oh, this is good stuff for junkies! A 2012 primary calendar fight is brewing within the Republican Party. Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are scheduled to hold their contests in February 2012 -- one, two, three, four. But Florida already has a primary date, and it's ahead of all of them in January 2012.
Well, now South Carolina and Iowa Republicans are fighting back, urging the Republican National Committee to punish Florida to the point where they would move the entire convention out of the state and get it out of Tampa. Well, the RNC issued a statement today, saying, Look, the convention will stay where it is, but at the same time, it will enforce the rules agreed to by all states with respect to the primary and caucus calendar. So if Florida even tries to do a beauty contest or any of this stuff, they will lose half their delegates and be in a hotel room somewhere in the Everglades. To be continued.
We'll be right back.
BACHMANN: I think that you have made it abundantly clear! Stop spending money you don't have! Right?
TODD: Welcome back to HARDBALL. That was Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota speaking at the Tea Party's "Continuing Revolution" rally today. She and fellow Republicans urged their colleagues to hold firm on cutting that $61 billion from the budget that the House Republicans passed a month earlier. Here's more from the rally.
BACHMANN: I think it's time to get serious, don't you?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes!
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes!
BACHMANN: And cutting $61 billion, in my opinion, is a starting point, it is not the goal!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I stood in front of my colleagues this morning and I said, If you choose to fight on the $61.5 billion, I'll stand and I'll fight with you!
REP. MIKE PENCE ®, INDIANA: And if liberals in the Senate would rather play political games and shut down the government instead of making a small down payment on fiscal discipline and reform, I say shut it down!
REP. JOE WALSH ®, ILLINOIS: The president and the White House has no clue! He doesn't get it! The Senate Democrats are in denial! Your House Republicans understand! Your House Republicans understand!
TODD: Well, Jenny Beth Martin is the national coordinator for Tea Party Patriots and organized today's rally, and Mark Meckler is co-founder of Tea Party Patriots, and he's out—I thought you were in California—out from Sacramento.
MARK MECKLER, TEA PARTY PATRIOTS: That's right.
TODD: But let me start—let me start with you, Jenny, on these poll numbers that we've seen of late in this Tea Party. And every pollster asks it a little different, but generally, it's sort of supportive of the Tea Party, favorable, unfavorable. Here was the CNN poll. Now the favorable rating's at 32 percent, unfavorable at 47 percent. The unfavorable number is growing. And when you look inside the numbers, among independents, it's a net negative. Among Republicans, it's a net positive.
Do those numbers concern you, that you're losing the middle. The independents who were with you in 2010 -- are you concerned that you're losing them now?
JENNY BETH MARTIN, TEA PARTY PATRIOTS: I'm not concerned about it. What we're seeing—we're growth within the movement. I talked to people today from West Virginia who started, like, eight months ago, and they had four people at their first meeting. Now they have 2,000 people in their group. People in Massachusetts who—their groups are less than a year old, and they have 450, 500 people in their groups. We're growing.
TODD: Is the growth, though, inside the Republican Party, when you're basically rebranding conservative Republicans while not gaining independents? Is that a concern?
MARTIN: I think that today's rally shows that we're hard on Republicans and Democrats, so hopefully, the people who are independent, who maybe have lost that messaging, will realize we still—we're still non-partisan.
TODD: Mark, how do you win back these independents that are drifting away from you in this poll? It's not a full-fledged evacuation, but they're drifting away. These numbers are getting lower.
MARK MECKLER, TEA PARTY PATRIOTS: You know, I'm really not worried about it. First of all, let's remember this is a single poll. I don't trust any single poll. So you got a CNN poll that's been touted by Harry Reid as the demise of the Tea Party movement. But you're talking a 32 percent favorable even in a CNN poll, when Harry Reid himself has a 13 percent favorable in Congress. I'll take those comparative numbers any day.
The American people are with us, and they are against people like Harry Reid in Congress that are spending away the future.
TODD: All right, now, there's obviously a debate. There was talk of a deal last night. Vice President Biden came out, said that they've agreed on a number, the $33 billion number that's been floated out, actually, a billion higher than the original Paul Ryan number.
Mark, let me go to you first. John Boehner, apparently, behind the scenes, it sounded like—that number, he's, like, All right, we can work with that number, we'll figure out where the cuts go. I had talked to John Cornyn today. Here's an exchange I had with him about these reports and here's what he said.
SEN. JOHN CORNYN ®, TEXAS: I hope he's right because the American people want us to solve problems. They don't want the gamesmanship and business as usual.
TODD: So you—meaning—hope he's right? That number's OK with you? That sounds like a good number?
CORNYN: I'd like more, but you know, really, this is kind of small ball compared to the big issues like the debt limit.
TODD: Sure.
TODD: John Cornyn's point, Mark, is, like, Look, we've got to get past this issue, it sounds like. And if this is the best we're going to get, get it, get it done, and then start having the bigger fights down the road. Are you OK with that?
MECKLER: Absolutely not. John Cornyn represents politics as usual. I can tell you from talking to people in his home district, he is not popular there now. He's in serious trouble. And people like him who are out of step with the American people are in trouble.
Right now, 69 percent of Americans say they're angry with government and they're angry with government policies. They stand with the Tea Party, not with people like John Cornyn that just want to get it done in the old style.
TODD: But, Jenny, when you look at this, there's also a lot of the public that they're tired of all the Washington games. And if you shut down the government, that looks like a Washington game.
MARTIN: It does look like a Washington game. And it's too bad that Congress and the White House are—are willing to let that happen.
We haven't had a budget passed since 2009. This budget, the continuing resolution we're talking about, is for this fiscal year that started in October of last year, October 1 of 2010. Why haven't they done what they're supposed to do?
TODD: Well, what about this issue of compromise? Here's—here's where this started. OK, Democrats started it. Obviously, they had a budget. They that didn't cut anything that you guys wanted to have cut. Then it got moved and it got up to $33 billion. They have come out to $33 billion, which is halfway of the $61 billion.
Why not—you got that deal—you got it done—this—you're
going to get President Obama to sign that, where you're cutting $33 billion
take that as a victory and move to the next fight?
MARTIN: Our job is to push as hard as we can and push and stand up for the American people.
TODD: Is there a point, though, that you say, OK, we will get to the point, but not shut down the government, or do you have got to go all the way—
MARTIN: You know, we will have to see what happens. We haven't seen anything yet. We haven't seen any bills that indicate this. We have seen a couple of press releases. Let's see what they actually put on the table.
All we're asking for is 2.6 pennies less being spent out of every dollar, 2.6 pennies. And they're saying that's extreme.
TODD: And, Mark, let me have you wrap this up.
If—if there is a compromise—look, there's going to have to be compromise. Democrats control the Senate, and there's a Democrat in the White House. You're not going to get everything you want. At what point do you say, OK, I can accept the compromise, we have pushed them? Like I said, you guys have pushed them a long way from where you started three months ago.
MECKLER: So, we have pushed them from pathetic to anemic. And that's not acceptable.
The reality, like Jenny Beth said, we're asking for 2.6 cents off of every dollar of federal spending. The nation is at risk. My children, your children, our grandchildren are at risk. These guys have to get serious. No, $33 billion is not enough. It's not even a start.
TODD: But if you're only talking about these—this small part of the budget anyway, and you need to tackle the bigger parts, you have got to get this out of the way politically before you can even tackle the real drivers of the deficit and the debt.
MECKLER: Well, look, if there is a government slowdown, which is what it would be, we will lay it squarely at the feet of those to whom it belongs, President Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi. These guys had absolute control of the levers of government. They could have passed any budget that their hearts desired. They could have—
TODD: It takes 60 votes in the Senate .
MECKLER: They wouldn't—
TODD: It's going to take—it took Republican support, too.
MECKLER: They wouldn't even try. They never even proposed a budget. It's outrageous. They're irresponsible, and they're the ones to blame for this situation.
TODD: All right, Jenny Beth Martin, Mark Meckler of the Tea Party Patriots, I have got to leave it there. Thanks for coming in.
MARTIN: Thank you for having us.
TODD: All right.
Up next: the comic stylings of Brooklyn's very own Mr. Comedy, Anthony Weiner. He's at the Catskills tonight, I hear. At last night's big Washington, dinner he wasn't—he was pretty funny. That's in the "Sideshow" right here on MSNBC.
TODD: Back to HARDBALL. Time for the "Sideshow."
First up: amateur night. While three lawmakers did routines at last night's congressional dinner, there was only one star performance.
Without further adieu, the congressman from Brooklyn, Anthony Weiner.
REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: This is really a huge thrill for me. This is all being broadcast on C-SPAN3, so tens of Americans will see this.
WEINER: You know, down at the C-SPAN—down at the CNN table, they're saying: Tens. What's their secret? You know, they're like—
WEINER: And Michele Bachmann, I don't know if she is here. I want to welcome her. If she's not—she's probably not. You know, she's—she's campaigning in Iowa and organizing in that important caucus state because she's running for president.
That's really all I have for that joke.
WEINER: By the way, I—I do the Weiner jokes around here, guys.
WEINER: And, really, like, who is Boehner fooling. What am I, like "Anthony Waynor"? What am I? Like—
WEINER: Like, who are—I'm serious, brother. Just embrace it. You know? I mean—
TODD: Weiner had the comic timing last night. As for poor old Ben Quayle and Rand Paul, Cedric Richmond, guys, get the writers. Trust me. Anthony Weiner found the joke-writers. There are a few of them in Washington. Get help with those speeches.
Anyway, next up: the domino effect.
Republican Congressman Tom Marino has concerns about military intervention in Libya. Why? He thinks it could spread to Africa. That's right. Marino told a local paper—quote—"The bottom line is, I wish the president would have told us, talked to Congress about what is the plan. Where does it stop? Do we go into Africa next? I don't want to sound callous or cold, but this could go on indefinitely around the world."
Well, Libya, of course, is in Africa. Congressman Marino sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Not so good. Remember, when you're a member of Congress, you're held to a little bit of a higher standard when it comes to geography.
All right, finally, who's the boss? Bruce Springsteen is taking on New Jersey's head honcho, Governor Chris Christie. Springsteen wrote a letter to the editor, to "The Asbury Park Press," of course, responding to its story about Christie's program cuts.
The Boss wrote—quote—"The article is one of the few that highlights the contradictions between a policy of large tax cuts on the one hand and cuts in services to those in the most dire conditions. Your article shows that the cuts are eating away at the lower edges of the middle class, not just those already classified as in poverty."
What makes this even more interesting, Chris Christie, of course, is a big Springsteen fan. How big? He's been to over 100 concerts. Some might call that stalking.
Anyway, now for tonight's "Big Number."
The journey came to an end today for the Bronx Zoo's infamous missing cobra. The snake was found alive and well inside a non-public part of the House of Reptiles. How many days of freedom did she enjoy, if you want to call it that? Six, not even a full week. The Bronx cobra had six days on the run. It all ended today. But it was 180,000 Twitter followers later.
Anyway, tonight's "Big Number," six. The cobra is back.
Up next: CIA agents in Libya, what are they up to? What do they do? We're going to actually talk to a former agent to tell us what goes on in these covert operations.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TYLER MATHISEN, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I'm Tyler Mathisen with your CNBC "Market Wrap."
Stocks ending mixed, as falling financials offset rising materials.
The Dow Jones industrials skidded 30 points. The S&P 500 fell two. Nasdaq, however, eked out a fortunately-point gain. And that's it for the quarter. The markets looked downright bulletproof this quarter, posting their best quarterly results since 1998, despite all the global crises and catastrophes.
The energy sector was the biggest winner, surging 16 percent, boosted by rising oil prices and renewed interest in alternative forms of energy.
Looking at stocks today, we had agriculture companies surging on a report showing more crops will be planted this year, especially corn. Retail stocks slumped on concerns about rising inflation. And a lot of investors were scratching their heads about the surprise resignation of David Sokol. He's Warren Buffett's—or was Warren Buffett's potential successor at Berkshire Hathaway.
And that will do it from CNBC, first in business worldwide—now back to HARDBALL.
TODD: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
President Obama has said he won't put U.S. troops on the ground in Libya. That doesn't mean he's not already sending the CIA there. Many news agencies are now reporting, including NBC News, that operatives are gathering intelligence and aiding the rebels as part of sort of a shadow force in Libya.
These activities come after the president signed a secret finding a few weeks ago that authorizes the CIA to do this on the ground. And it's the start of what could be a potential way for them to actually arm the rebels. But the White House says it actually hasn't decided whether to provide direct arms support, and they're not even confirming this signing of this directive.
So does a CIA presence in Libya mean we're now engaged in a clandestine war?
Steve Clemons is a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. And Bob Baer is a former CIA field officer. And he is author of the book "The Company We Keep."
Steve, I want to first start with—there was a lot of briefings on the Hill today. And, obviously, the big focus right now for the Obama administration and for a lot of hawks and a lot of questions on Capitol Hill is the search for Gadhafi and getting Gadhafi.
Here's an exchange between Lindsey Graham and Secretary Robert Gates on that very issue.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM ®, SOUTH CAROLINA: Is Gadhafi the legitimate leader of the Libyan people, in your eyes, legally? And, if he's not, would it be unlawful for some nation, including ours, to drop a bomb on him to end this thing?
ROBERT GATES, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Well, President Reagan tried that.
GRAHAM: Well, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try again.
I believe he's an international terrorist, unlawful enemy combatant. Then we're within our bounds as a nation and our coalition partners to take the fight to him and his cadre of supporters. Is that on the table or not?
GATES: I don't think so, because I think it would probably break the coalition.
TODD: Steve Clemons, is Gates right—
STEVEN CLEMONS, SENIOR FELLOW, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: Gates is right.
TODD: -- that it would break—break the coalition if that were the purpose of the mission?
CLEMONS: Absolutely break the coalition, and it would morph into a narrative of, again, very flamboyant Western intervention yet again and concerns about what our real intentions were in the region. There would be no way to do it.
You have to allow the Libyan people to make that kind of decision.
That can't be a bomb from—a bomb from us.
TODD: All right.
Bob Baer, we know the reports now. There is some—there is some CIA presence in Libya. Frankly, it was one of those things—there's probably been CIA presence in Libya for 40 years, but let's not go there. But there's presence there right now actively trying to assess the situation with the rebels and potentially lead us to a point where they could actually arm the rebels.
Explain what this means. The president signs this directive, allows CIA operatives to do some things in there. What are they doing now in this reconnaissance, and how are they moving forward?
ROBERT BAER, INTELLIGENCE ANALYST, TIME.COM: Well, I think they were there before the covert action finding was signed. And it was a smart move.
We don't know who these rebels are. We don't know who their leaders are. We don't know if they were trained. We don't know if we can do anything with them. So, sending CIA intelligence officers into Libya, it was smart, necessary, and I'm sure it was done.
Now, the question is, if there really is a covert action finding in the works, is, do we arm these people? I would say that's going to be a tough one. The Libyan rebels are not a fighting force. They're not cohesive. A couple of them are defectors, but that's not enough to make a unit.
And do we want the United States in a covert war in Libya? And they can't stay covert, as we have seen with this—these reports, these leaks.
TODD: Right.
BAER: So, it's—we might as well have troops on the ground.
TODD: You know, Steve, what I found interesting today is, Jay Carney at the briefing admitted that they vetted the opposition folks that have been trying to be the leaders, you know, showed up to London, vetted to see if they had an al Qaeda background, all this, because this has been one of the concerns: Who are these people?
Do we—we don't want to get into a situation like Afghanistan in the '70s and '80s, and we were arming the mujahedeen, who then turn out to be the Taliban of today. So, if we're doing that, is that also one of the things these operatives are doing now right there, is simply vetting some of these opposition --
CLEMONS: Well, I'm sure they're there trying to sort it out, just like Bob Baer said. But I don't think that there's a way to look at a Libyan opposition group that doesn't have some of these elements that we would be concerned about in it.
In fact, I would doubt that any successor administration, successor regime to Gadhafi could survive if it didn't have some of these—these folks in it. We have in the case—we have—you know, I have talked to Tom Malinowski of Human Rights Watch, who is a big advocate of the opposition council, convinced that there are many sincere and genuine human rights advocates on there.
And I told him personally that—I said, unless they have got some thugs around them as well, I would worry about their ability to survive.
But, in the case of—one of the groups that Gadhafi really harassed was the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which has now, you know, changed its name, but, nonetheless, these were jihadists out to fight Western intervention in areas like Iraq and Afghanistan. They were fellow travelers of the mujahedeen in the past.
And they were for a brief time associated with al Qaeda. They are not al Qaeda today. Most of the leaders have repudiated the al Qaeda connection. But they are allied with some of the youth leaders, some of the—
TODD: Right.
CLEMONS: -- others that are—that are part of the equation.
So, we're not going to be able to make a neat, clean cut away—
TODD: Right.
CLEMONS: -- from these groups.
TODD: And, Bob Baer, history has shown the "enemy of our enemy is our friend" policy never works out for the United States in the long run.
BAER: No, there will be blowback from Libya for a very long time.
And as Steve said, there's—the Muslim Brotherhood, if there's any organization that can bring it together, it's them. And we're going to expect them to be showing up a lot more. And Gadhafi emptied his prisons out and a lot of these people have run to Benghazi and are joining the opposition. So, he's absolutely right, it's not going to be a neat break.
TODD: All right. Let's talk about what may be the biggest development of this uprising so far, and that's a defection of Moussa Koussa.
Steve Clemons, explain why the defection of this guy, Gadhafi's right-hand man, is so big. And I'm curious, how did he defect without getting shot?
CLEMONS: Well, one wonders what that is, but I think he was so trusted within the Gadhafi regime, they never thought he would leave. I mean, Moussa Koussa has been part and parcel of every major decision Gadhafi has made for years, former head of the intelligence, involved in everything. This is one of the closest members of the Gadhafi close-knit cabal, if you will.
And so, for him to go is far more important in my book than the skirmishes of the 50, 60 people we see moving from town—
TODD: Sure.
CLEMONS: -- back-and-forth, and whether that matters or not. His defection is a signal about where the winds are blowing around Gadhafi.
I still think Gadhafi is incredibly resilient and we should not underestimate him. But this is a huge loss to the regime. I don't know how he got out of there, but he is a storehouse of intelligence about who matters, who doesn't, where they tilt and who Gadhafi has either so seduced or so threatened so that Gadhafi can continue to operate without real concern. Because one of the questions is: why aren't one of these guys turning a gun on him?
TODD: On Gadhafi, right.
CLEMONS: And they're all worried about themselves. But this is—this is a huge, huge boost for the United States.
TODD: And very quickly, Bob Baer, when you hear this guy is able to get away scot-free, essentially, does that set off any alarm bells in your head?
BAER: No. I think he was disaffected with the regime. You know, after two years, he'd been removed as intelligence chief. He didn't like Gadhafi's sons who didn't like him. Gadhafi liked him, kept him around, and so, he was really wary of the regime early on. What I'd like to see is other defections following his and that would be the head of the major tribes, like the Magriha. If they leave or go over to the rebels, Gadhafi is done.
TODD: All right. Steve Clemons, Bob Baer, I've got to leave it there. Thank you both for your expertise. Good stuff as always.
All right. On deck, there really is no such thing as bad publicity, is that right? Donald Trump has become the nation's leading birther. How does he and the Republican Party crawl out of this PR mess? We're going to ask the HARDBALL strategists.
This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TODD: Look, we've been telling you that Chris Matthews is on assignment in Israel. By gosh, he was, OK? Here he is sharing his wisdom about the 2012 race at the International Tourism Conference in Jerusalem. Watch.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HARDBALL HOST: This Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi—watch this guy for one key reason. He appeals to the Tea Party people but isn't one of them, and that is the combination to the lock. To win a general election in America, you must appeal to the right without looking like one of the cultural right.
TODD: There it is. Chris is back on Monday.
And we'll be back in a moment.
TODD: Well, we're back.
Donald Trump said today that he's, quote, "embracing" and he's proud of the birther issue, he just doesn't like the word "birther," as he contemplates a run for the presidency.
So, is the Donald really serious about a bid or just serious about stirring up some attention?
We'll bring in the HARDBALL strategists: Republican Todd Harris, Democrat Steve McMahon.
Gentlemen, earlier this morning, I got to interview—Savannah and I interviewed Mr. Trump and we litigated this issue yet the umpteenth time. Here's the exchange.
DONALD TRUMP, CEO, TRUMP ORGANIZATION (via telephone): It's not that much of a conspiracy. It's very simple.
TODD: It's an incredible conspiracy.
TRUMP: It's really not, Chuck. Chuck, it's really not. If you look at what's taken place, it's really not. He came in. He was—we all agree he was born, OK? We're all so happy that he was born. OK, now, the ad was put in—
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, MSNBC HOST: It's not an ad.
TODD: The birth notices and death notices are standard.
TRUMP: It was three days later, three days after the fact. Many things could have happened. And he doesn't have a birth certificate. And his family is arguing over which hospital he was born in. The family doesn't even know the name of the hospital. No nurses, no doctors, nobody ever came forward.
TODD: Todd Harris, here's—let me ask you. He was born.
TODD: He was born. This is not some sort of like—he wasn't a creation, not alien apparently and he's not a UFO or anything.
But, Todd Harris, a serious question. You're Reince Priebus, you're
chairman of the RNC, and you've got this bigger-than-life personality who -
if he gets into the debates and passes as a candidate, he's going to get
he's going to qualify for every debate and he's making this the issue.
This is a problem for the Republican Party, is it not?
TODD HARRIS, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: It is a problem. It's not just a problem when he's talking about it. I frankly think it's a problem across the board.
You know, we are in an economic environment right now where two-thirds of the country thinks that the president is doing a poor job handling the economy. His approval ratings are upside down among independents, and we're talking about birth certificates? We have real issues that we can—you know, lay real licks on the president with. And in the more oxygen that this birther issue sucks out of this debate, the better it is for Democrats because it makes Republicans look like nuts.
TODD: Do you go—I mean, if you're Mitt Romney, do you go to Donald Trump and say, "Dude, cut it out, talk about your business acumen"?
HARRIS: I wouldn't, because Donald Trump would then go on TV the next day and talk about how Mitt Romney just came to him.
TODD: Obviously, for Democrats sort of sit there and going, you know, it's like a gift. And, in fact, one of my favorite—forget the conspiracy theories that Donald Trump is buying into, one of my favorites is that I heard a Republican say to me, oh—say on air Trump is an Obama plant. You know, he's just bringing it up just to embarrass the party.
HARRIS: That was also—during those three days, that also was worked out.
TODD: It's all part of the conspiracy that Trump is really secretly working for Obama.
STEVE MCMAHON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: That's right. In fact, Trump actually placed the ads and—
MCMAHON: -- so that 49 years later, he could come back and do this.
Todd is absolutely right. This is the problem for the Republicans because every time a Republican gets up there and makes this argument, the American people and independents in particular roll their eyes and go what are they doing? What are they talking about? There are real issues here.
And I don't agree with Todd's characterization with where the president is on these issues because the public actually is beginning to understand how difficult and intractable some of them are, and he's getting a lot of credit for trying to solve them. The Republicans, on the other hand, are talking about the birther movement. And you look at Michele Bachmann and the Republican nominating process that begins to resemble a circus, and we're just sitting there and going, this is great, this is really great.
TODD: Todd Harris, watching Trump do this and talking to him offline, this—it feels like a publicity stunt. He says, no, it's not. It really isn't.
But he has succeeded in at least getting the conservatives, some of the conservative base to listen to him. He's getting conservatives to say nice things about him. And this was a guy that I don't think anybody was going to mistake for a social conservative.
So, has he—has he actually been smart about going about this if he really is trying to say do well in Iowa?
HARRIS: I think he's a brilliant marketer. We've talked before on this show about, you know, for example, with Governor Palin, you know, there are two different paths she could have gone down after the '08 campaign. She could have gone down the path that points towards the White House, or one that points towards entertainment, celebrity and frankly making a lot of money. And that's the path that she's going down.
It's the same thing with Donald Trump. I don't think that he is seriously going to be schlepping through New Hampshire and Iowa, going door to door, going to town hall meetings, doing all the things you would have actually have to do to win the Republican primary.
TODD: Well, it's interesting. I brought up the bankruptcies. And he said, they weren't bankruptcies, they're Chapter 11s, which is reorganization.
TODD: Where you get to cut down some of your debt and stuff like.
TODD: Exactly. But he was very sensitive to that. And that seems to
you know, do you think he's going to be able to handle the business scrutiny when it comes—you know, the birther stuff, it's become an entertainment side show. The business stuff would be a whole new ball game.
MCMAHON: The short answer is no. He's not going to be able to handle it—which is one of the reasons he's not going to run. The other reason is he'd have to take the show off the air, which is making I presume for him quite a bit of money and getting him and the show a lot of attention that he so desperately craves.
He will not—he will not ultimately run because he will not want to fill out the disclosures, and he will not want all the people who—when he was reorganizing ended upholding bad Trump debt out there talking about what a bad Trump businessman he is.
TODD: And, Todd Harris, you worked with a lot of self-funding candidates.
HARRIS: Yes.
TODD: Talk about the difficulty.
HARRIS: The fiscal piece is always a nightmare. Unraveling the—divesting, blind trusts, you know, across the board, you know, having a—
TODD: That's if you're not involved in casinos.
HARRIS: That's right. Being a self-funder has a lot of advantages, a lot of disadvantages. But he did raise one important point this morning that Americans are wondering about, which is whether your kids were born in this country.
TODD: He seemed to raise a little bit of doubt. He's taking my word for it.
Anyway, Todd and Steve, stay with me. We're going to talk a little bit about unions and Ohio.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TODD: We are back with our strategists: Republican Todd Harris, Democrat Steve McMahon.
Let's talk about some blocking and tackling politics. It's this deal in Ohio. John Kasich is about to sign the collective bargaining.
It's going to be a tougher bill than Wisconsin. But there's a difference in Ohio. You've got 90 days, if you don't like the legislation, to get it on the ballot as a referendum.
Steve McMahon, I'll start with you. If you're the labor movement, are you almost licking your chops? Great, sign the bill, Governor Kasich. Let's go to November.
MCMAHON: Yes. And if you look at Governor Kasich's numbers right now, there was just a poll that came out about four or five days ago that has his approval rating at 30 percent, which is lower than George W. Bush's approval rating, I think, ever gotten in eight years in office. And he's got a real problem out there because he's overstepped on this thing. I think—you know, he may recognize but he's going to plow ahead and assume that, in four years, people will forget.
But you're right, Chuck, if they can get this on the ballot in the next 90 days, which they can do --
TODD: Which is labor. They're already organizing.
MCMAHON: They got the capacity to do it. It's going to be something where independents are going to go with labor on collective bargaining because independents are like Democrats in the way they view that.
TODD: Todd Harris, watching John Kasich handle this, it's been interesting, he—I feel like he did try to learn PR lessons from Scott Walker. He really toned it down, did not take a front and center role.
But, boy, you get this on the ballot in November, this is Ohio. This is our media environment. This will become—this will define the Republican primary for a while, won't it?
HARRIS: It will be all-consuming, but, you know, I don't think anyone assumes just because labor is loud that the public—
TODD: Right. They'll get it on the ballot. The question is can they
HARRIS: Right—are going to be on their side. You know, SP-5, this bill, you know, Governor Kasich had the audacity to tell government employee union workers that they have to cap their annual vacation at six weeks. No more than six, that they can't have more than two weeks on top of that of sick days.
MCMAHON: That has nothing to do with—
TODD: But I was just going to say, this is the message war. If that's the message, Republicans can win that argument. The Democrats and labor want to turn it into—
HARRIS: They're going to say, you know—
TODD: This is about taking away somebody's rights.
HARRIS: -- it's an assault on middle class, which is absolutely absurd, because federal government workers don't have the right, right now, that they do in Ohio. What he's trying to take—
MCMAHON: You're right, it's the message war. The folks in Wisconsin actually got it right because the public is concerned about the rising salaries and benefits of public employees. And the pensions in particular because they read about those things bankrupting communities in California. One other hand, the public, by a margin of about two-to-one, supports collective bargaining for public employees and for unions.
So, this is going to be one of those things where the messaging is going to make all the difference. If this is about whether government employee benefits have gotten out of control, then the governor out there has a chance to win. But I don't think—
TODD: Oh, I know. As a political junkie, come on, we all kind of want to see this election. It's going to be a big fight.
HARRIS: Don't beat against—
TODD: Todd H and Steve McMahon, thank you both.
That's HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.
More politics ahead with Cenk Uygur.
Copyright 2011 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.> PASTE THE TRANSCRIPT HERE
Copyright 2011 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>


text:
Traditional surgical methods carry with them some inherent risks. We examine some of those risks, especially in light of nonsurgical techniques available.
Dr. Rivkin believes that his patients deserve superior alternatives to invasive, painful cosmetic surgery that requires a long recovery time. He has pioneered several non-surgical treatments, which provide exceptional cosmetic results while avoiding the downside of surgery.
Non-surgical treatments are superior to cosmetic surgery in many areas including the following.
Our Brentwood non-surgical procedures involve no significant pain. Our treatments require, at most, a topical numbing cream or a small injection of lidocaine.
After most non-surgical treatments patients can go back to work immediately, the same day. A few of the most extensive treatments (Non Surgical Eye Lift, Non Surgical Facelift) may require two or three days of recovery (due to mild bruising). This is in contrast to surgery, which can require months of recovery before normal activities can be resumed.
All of the standard risks of surgery, such as serious infection and anesthesia complications are avoided. Risks with non surgical procedures are limited to minor bruising and swelling.
Because non-surgical treatments are temporary and do not involve removing skin, muscle or bone, the results can be adjusted as your face changes with time. During most of these procedures, you will be asked to provide feedback and you will have total control over the results.
Also, non surgical treatments are more precise than their surgical counterparts. We are changing only the small areas that need adjustment, so the effect is limited to exactly the changes that you want to make.
Non-surgical treatments usually take about thirty minutes to perform (including anesthesia) and do not require lengthy preparation time. Surgical procedures can mean taking days out of your busy schedule.
Aesthetic plastic surgery is usually very expensive. It is usually out of reach for the average working person. Non-surgical treatments cost a fraction of the price of surgery and there are no hidden fees. Non surgical treatments are designed to be accessible to the average client.
Dr. Rivkin's patients know that they can get in touch with him at any time. He's always in the office at Westside Aesthetics, and is personally involved in every treatment.
© Westside Aesthetics. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

subset: commoncrawl


text:
"There's not a lot to say," – Vince Vaughn, "Couples Retreat"
I never saw this movie, but the former Swingers star says this in the ads after his son pees in a display toilet in a store. I think it sums up last night's game very well. Something awful happened and we were powerless to stop it from happening. All that can be done is to apologize, clean up and move on.
Paul Maholm was awful. Dana Eveland was worse and was DFA'd after the game.
And that's it. I'd rather not rehash the whole thing. Here's to hoping tonight is better. Go Bucs.
Filed under: baseball, Pirates | Tagged: baseball, Dana Eveland, Paul Maholm, Pirates, Vince Vaughn |


text:
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)
The Greenville Transit Authority (GTA) dba Greenlink has established a goal of 17.13% for the participation of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs) in the provision of goods and services for FYs 22-24. All DBE firms are encouraged to participate in GTA contracts. GTA will accept comments on the new goal for 45 days. A presentation on GTA's goal-setting methodology and consultation is scheduled for July 25, 2019 and August 19, 2019. Please contact Kayleigh Sullivan at firstname.lastname@example.com or 864-298-2753 for more information.
The Greenville Transit Authority (GTA) has established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program in accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), 49 CFR Part 26. GTA has received Federal financial assistance from the Department of Transportation, and as a condition of receiving this assistance, GTA has signed an assurance that it will comply with 49 CFR Part 26.
It is the policy of GTA to ensure that DBEs, as defined in Part 26, have an equal opportunity to receive and participate in USDOT–assisted contracts. It is also our policy: 1) To ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of USDOT – assisted contracts; 2) To create a level playing field on which DBEs can compete fairly for USDOT-assisted contracts; 3) To ensure that the DBE Program is narrowly tailored in accordance with applicable law; 4) To ensure that only firms that fully meet 49 CFR Part 26 eligibility standards are permitted to participate as DBEs; 5) To help remove barriers to the participation of DBEs in USDOT assisted contracts; 6) To assist the development of firms that can compete successfully in the market place outside the DBE Program.
GTA's overall DBE goal for FY19-21 is 0.93% of the federal financial assistance we will expend in USDOT assisted contracts exclusive of FTA funds to be used for the purchase of transit vehicles.
The Transit Planner has been delegated as the DBE Liaison Officer. In that capacity, the Transit Planner is responsible for implementing all aspects of the DBE program. Implementation of the DBE program is accorded the same priority as compliance with all other legal obligations incurred by GTA in its financial assistance agreements with the Department of Transportation.
If you have any questions or would like further information regarding the DBE program, please contact:
Kayleigh Sullivan
Transit Planning and Grants Coordinator
100 W. McBee Avenue
Greenville, SC 29601
(864) 298-2753


text:
(This article appeared in the Anderson Valley Advertiser December 2012)
"It is more blessed to give than to receive." Jesus, Acts 20:35
John Steinbeck's preface to his wonderful The Log From the Sea of Cortez is a celebration of Ed Ricketts, Steinbeck's friend and mentor and co-author of that fascinating record of their marine biological expedition to the Sea of Cortez—the text rich with philosophical asides. Steinbeck felt that Ed's great talent and finest gift to his friends was his ability to receive, and in receiving with grace and delight and heartfelt gratitude, he gave the givers priceless gifts. The idea that receiving can be a gift contradicts hundreds of famous directives, Biblical and otherwise, but it seems deeply true to me.
Einstein said, "The value of a man resides in what he gives and not in what he is capable of receiving." But I don't think Einstein really meant receiving, I think he meant getting or taking. Receiving involves surrendering, and that is the gift—opening our hearts to the giver.
One of my favorite books is a little tome entitled Love Is The Wine: Talks of A Sufi Master In America, the master in this case being Sheikh Muzaffer Ozak. Here is the beginning of his talk on Generosity.
Many years ago, a traveler came to a small town. The custom at those times was to open your door to whoever came as "God's guests" as they were called. When someone knocked on your door and said, "I am God's guest," you were to invite him in, feed him, and give him a place to sleep.
The traveler came upon a group of townspeople and asked, "Is there a kind person in town who has space to put me up for the night? The next morning I will continue my journey."
The townspeople said, "Well, yes, there is one person who does welcome guests. If you stay there, he will feed you, put you up, and be very kind to you. However, we have to warn you that he has a strange habit—in the morning, when you are leaving, he will beat you up."
It was winter and very cold. The traveler said, "I'm not going to spend the night on the street, hungry. I will go and take what comes to me. I will eat, sleep in a warm room, and if he'll beat me up, he'll beat me up."
The traveler knocked on the door and a very pleasant man opened the door. The traveler said, "I am God's guest." The man replied, "Oh, come in, please come in."
He offered the traveler the best place and his best cushions. The traveler replied "Eyvallah." (Eyvallah means "As you wish". It literally signifies our willingness to accept whatever we are given—good or bad, delightful or unappetizing—remembering that it comes from God.)
"May I put a pillow behind you to make you more comfortable?"
"Are you hungry?"
The host brought out a delicious dinner, and then asked his guest if he would like some more.
The host said, "Coffee?"
"Would you like a cigarette?"
"May I make up your bed?"
The host made up a wonderfully soft bed and put a feather comforter on it.
"Would you like some water before you go to sleep?"
In the morning the host was up early. He asked the traveler, "Would you like some breakfast?"
The host served a wonderful breakfast.
Once breakfast was finished the traveler realized it was time to take leave of his host. After the stories he had heard, he was afraid of what might happen, though this man had just devoted almost a day to take care of him. "I would like to take my leave now," he said, fearfully.
The host replied kindly. "Eyvallah," and added, "You seem to be a man without much money. Would you permit me to give you some money?"
The host gave him ten pieces of gold. The traveler thought to himself, what a beating I'm going to get after this!
The host saw him to the door, saying, "May God go with you. Goodbye." The astonished traveler said, "I beg your pardon? There is terrible gossip going around about you. You are the most generous person I have ever seen. They say that you act hospitably with guests but that in the morning you beat them up. May I go and spread the word that you do no such thing, that you are a wonderful man and wonderful host?"
The host said, "No, no. What they say is true."
The astonished guest said, "But you did not treat me that way."
"No, you are different. My other guests are much more trouble. When I offer them the best place in my house they say, 'Oh no, no thank you, you sit there.' When I offer them coffee they reply, 'Well, I don't know. I don't want to bother you.' I ask them to have dinner and they say, 'No, it will make too much fuss.' Those people I certainly beat in the morning."
"We are not cisterns made for hoarding, we are channels made for sharing." Billy Graham
When I was forty-eight, I blew out my knee and was on crutches for six months. I was living alone in a second-floor dwelling and did not have a washing machine and dryer, nor did I have a car or any feasible way to get to a coin-op laundry, let alone to a grocery store. This was the first time in my adult life I was so incapacitated I had to ask friends for help, something I had never done before and something I found almost impossible to do.
I will never forget the day my friend Mindy came to get my laundry to take to her house to wash. "Your sheets are scary," she opined, glancing at my unmade bed. "I'll wash those, too."
"No," I said, trembling with shame. "You can't."
She smiled quizzically. "Why not?"
"Well," I said, panicking, "I just…they…"
I sat on my living room sofa listening to her strip my bed and I became so upset and so terrified, I shouted, "Stop! You don't have to do that. I'll…I can do it. I'll wash them in the bathtub and…"
"Cool it," she said, coming out of my bedroom. "I enjoy helping you. I'll see you in a couple hours."
In those couple of hours, I came face-to-face with a big fat fundamental rule governing my life: no one was allowed to do anything for me; and that rule, otherwise known as a crippling neurosis, explained the nature and quality of my relationships with women up to that point in my life, as well as the nature and quality of all but a few of my friendships. I could never have asked the host in that Sufi tale to put me up for the night, but would have spent the night on the freezing streets if I lacked money to pay for a room.
I'm a little better—fifteen years later—about allowing people to do things for me, but only because of practice gained while I was ill or injured and needed help from others in order to survive. And what I find most fascinating about my particular neurosis is the large number of people I have met who suffer from the same malady.
Where did this crippling neurosis come from? One therapist I spoke with suggested that as the child of alcoholic parents I became a classic enabler at a very early age. In order to avoid my parents' wrath, I learned to fend for myself, to do my parents' bidding in hopes of pleasing them, and to ask as little as possible from them. As the therapist was suggesting this to me, I remembered that one of the very first things I learned to do for my parents—I was six-years-old—was to make coffee for them in the morning.
Knowing how miserable and angry my mother was until she'd had two cups of coffee, I would get up long before anyone else in the family, tiptoe into the kitchen, climb onto a high stool, fill the kettle with water, and start it heating on the electric range. Then I would open a drawer adjacent to the electric range and take out a big round piece of brown filter paper, which I would fold in half and then in half again so the folded filter would fit into the top of the hour-glass-shaped Pyrex coffee maker. Then I would spoon seven scoops of Hills Brothers' dark roast coffee from a two-pound can into the filter and pour boiling water over the ground coffee again and again until the bottom of the hourglass was full of black brew.
I remember that for the first year or so of making coffee for my mother, I lacked the strength to lift the kettle high enough to pour water onto the coffee in the filter atop the hourglass, so I would pour the boiling water into a metal bowl and use a ladle to scoop the water over the coffee. After the coffee was brewed, I would make my lunch for school: a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and a banana. Then, if my mother hadn't gotten up and come into the kitchen, I would tiptoe down the hall to my parents' bedroom and say quietly, "Mommy, your coffee is ready."


text:
Only 4 left
Lonely Planet: The world's leading travel guide publisher
Lonely Planet New Zealand's North Island is your passport to the most relevant, up-to-date advice on what to see and skip, and what hidden discoveries await you. Explore still-seething volcanos and bubbling mud pools, pull on your boots to tramp or kayak a Great Walk (yes, you can!) and learn how Maori culture is so much more than just rugby and the All Blacks; all with your trusted travel companion. Get to the heart of New Zealand's North Island and begin your journey now!
Inside Lonely Planet New Zealand's North Island:
The Perfect Choice: Lonely Planet New Zealand's North Island, our most comprehensive guide to New Zealand's North Island, is perfect for both exploring top sights and taking roads less travelled.
Authors: Written and researched by Lonely Planet, Brett Atkinson, Sarah Bennett, Peter Dragicevich, Lee Slater.
About Lonely Planet: Since 1973, Lonely Planet has become the world's leading travel media company with guidebooks to every destination, an award-winning website, mobile and digital travel products, and a dedicated traveler community. Lonely Planet covers must-see spots but also enables curious travelers to get off beaten paths to understand more of the culture of the places in which they find themselves.
Lonely Planet guides have won the TripAdvisor Travelers' Choice Awards in 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 in the Favorite Travel Guide category.


text:
JAMBOX by Jawbone portable wireless speaker features big sound in a small package (review)
If you have tried any of the new crop of portable wireless speakers, you have no doubt discovered that small speakers these days can produce a big sound.
With people on the go so much, many folks are looking for that little device that won't be a big burden to carry around, but still want a quality sound.
One speaker in this category that I recently tested is the JAMBOX by Jawbone, and I'll let you know how it performed.
Size, color
The JAMBOX by Jawbone comes in a small rectangular shape.
The exact specs are 5.9" long, 1.6" wide and 2.2" high. It's very portable, as it only weights about 0.8 pounds. Throw it in your bag or even a large jacket pocket if you'd like, and it's on the go with you.
The speaker comes in various colors, including red, blue, gray and black. The quality of the materials used on this device is solid, so if it takes a few knocks.
There aren't many buttons on the device. On top you get volume up/down buttons and a TALK button. And on the side you get an on/off switch, a 3.5 mm audio input jack, and a micro USB port for charging.
Sound quality
This is obviously the most important thing you're going to be judging in a portable speaker --- after all, its job is to play music.
The sound comes courtesy of a pair of 1.25-inch drivers up front and a passive radiator woofer in the back. And in my time using the JAMBOX, I was impressed on the whole with the sound quality that came through it. If you turn the volume up too high, the lower-end bass can get a bit muddled, so it's best not to go full-blast. But outside of that small concern, the sound was generally sharp across the spectrum of lows, highs and mids. Range is good too, as it's powerful enough to be heard from a pretty far distance -- about 33 feet or so.
It's not going to rival a full-size speaker system (really, no speaker this size does that), but it's not going to inspire too many complaints either. You'll hear your music loud and clear.
Where can you use it?
There are many situations where you might use a speaker of this kind. If it's OK to listen to music on your desk at work, this will do it in style. If you're throwing a small party and want to entertain the crowd, it will do the job. Or if you're outside in the summertime taking care of some yard work or just suntanning or entertaining guests, this is an easy way to get some music going in the background without any heavy equipment to lug around.
How easy is it to connect?
In a word, very easy. Just go to your phone's Bluetooth settings and it takes just seconds to get the device synced with your phone. Then just turn on Pandora, Slacker, Spotify, Google Music, iTunes or any other music service you use, and the music will flow through the JAMBOX.
Volume can be controlled by buttons on the speaker, or through the volume buttons on your phone. In addition to phones, music can be streamed from a tablet or any other media device with Bluetooth capability.
If you link your phone to the JAMBOX, it can serve as a speakerphone, too.
This type of wireless connectivity is the draw of small portable speakers like this. You don't have to worry about having the proper cables with you to connect your device to the speaker. Just turn in on and stream your music wirelessly.
Battery life
Battery life was decent, as it offers about 10 hours of play time before you'll need to recharge. If you push the button on top of the JAMBOX, it will say out loud how much battery life is left. It's important to remember to turn it off when not in use, or the battery will go away more quickly. Recharging of the device is quick, too.
The device comes with a wall charger, as well as a carrying case.
The JAMBOX by Jawbone retails for $179.99 at the Verizon Wireless website and directly from Jawbone. That's a bit overpriced in my view, but there are other alternatives which cost even more and don't sound much better. This is not a must-have item of course, but if you're in the market for a portable speaker, $179.99 is not the worst price out there. There are other models that go much higher, but then again there are some that are less expensive. It's really up to the individual to determine what amount they are willing to budget for a portable speaker like this, and if $179.99 crosses that line.
The JAMBOX is offered elsewhere online too, and you might be able to find it for slightly less, but you'll still likely pay $150 or more. (SIDE NOTE: Jawbone also offers a supersized JAMBOX with even bigger sound that retails for closer to $300, if you want an extra-large sound.)
Bottom line
If the basis for judging a device is whether it does its intended job properly, the JAMBOX by Jawbone lives up to the hype. It is well-designed, features quality sound and is extremely portable for people on the run who want to take their music with them and be able to share it out loud.
If the price is right for you, you'll get lots of enjoyment from the JAMBOX.
On the Web
For more information on the JAMBOX by Jawbone, visit www.verizonwireless.com or www.jawbone.com


text:
Currency Displayed in
Supported chromed rods for 3D Printers, CNC machines, laser cutters and related equipment.
We received the flexible filament some time ago and had some great fun …
Copyright 2020 3D Printing Store.co.za. All Rights Reserved. Sitemap |
Bigcommerce Premium Themes by PSDCenter
All prices are in ZAR.
Compare Now


text:
Wiring the house for a Home Network - Part 5 - Gigabit Throughput and Vista
UPDATE: Here's a Bit.ly Bundled Link of the complete "Wiring your house for Gigabit Ethernet 5 PART SERIES."
I posted earlier about copying files across my new Gigabit home network. I was getting about 10 MB/s (that's MegaBytes) between two laptops and I got responses like these in the comments that shook my confidence. Here's my thoughts after each interesting comment that appeared in the previous post.
"You should be pushing at least 100 megabytes per second with gigabit ethernet."
Hm..that doesn't sound right. Given bits/bytes math and some Maximum speed given overhead, etc, is usually 80% of spec, so 1000Mb/s means about 80MB/s. But, still, the point is taken.
"His stats only caught my attention because just today I was profiling the speeds of a new hard drive array for one of the programmers and copied 3.2gb in 7 minutes over our 100mbit ethernet connection."
That's about 8-10 megs a second, so that's on par which what I was seeing. This makes me wonder about the hard drive speed.
"10Meg/sec is well below what I'd expect even for a laptop to laptop exchange over a gigabit connection where the drives probably top out at 30-50Meg/sec"
I checked my hard drive throughput and it was 70MB/s sequential writes and 40MB/s sequential large file reads on the big machine and 30/20 on the laptop. Certainly fast enough that I'd want to see similar network speeds when copying a single large VM, etc. However, I was copying hundreds of files on a medium fragmented drive, so 10MB/s isn't unreasonable, IMHO. I'll look at disks in a second.
"You should be getting about ~32meg per second with standard 5400rpm notebook hard drives copying a single large file."
OK, sure I can believe that, assuming there is nothing else going on and there's a nice contiguous spot to lay it down, absolutely. So, let's break this down step by step.
Starting Point
Here's where we start, as possibly useful background, I recently built a house and put some amount of effort into the Home Network.
The house is all Cat 6 wiring, and the main switch is a NetGear 24-port with 20 gigabits of total managed bandwidth. For this test machines are OFF the corporate network and I've physically turned their wireless cards OFF. They are single-homed on a basic flat 192.168.x.x network. Nothing fancy.
I brought VS2008 down from the cloud, the files, not the single file large ISO and copied the 3 gigs of files via Explorer Drag Drop between two Vista 32-bit RTM machines and got disappointing results.
No music was playing. The machines are all dual or quad core machines, one with a 10,000 RPM hard drive and the others are pretty fast laptops, so they are beefy machines.
Why mention this? First we eliminate slow or crappy hardware. In this instance, we know it's not CPU that's causing this. That doesn't mean the network cards aren't poo or something, but we gotta start somewhere. Point is, they are more than fast enough to handle the traffic.
The Initial Sub-Optimal Results
So, after the first run, I was getting 10MB/s between a Vista RTM machine (a Mac) and an SP1 machine. When Vista SP1 talks to Vista RTM it'll talk SMB 1.0, the common protocol between them (the one that's been used forever).
Of course this isn't a BAD result, as one of the commenters pointed out. I mean, 10 MB/s is more than reasonable most often and this is the kind of thing one would only come up against when copying giant files. Still...now it's a mystery...
Disk Speed
Perhaps Disk Speed is the problem? Commenters on previous posts say Nay, Nay. SATA disks should get 40 to 70MB/s, and that's consistent with my test. The Hanselman-Atwood Ultimate Developer Rig gets 70Mb/s for sequential writes. Of course this assume non-fragmented disks and that nothing else is moving the disk heads around. The MacBookPro and Lenovo t60p get between 20 and 30MB/s, so they are not slouches either. All this points away from Disk Speed.
Here's disk throughput on a laptop:
C:\>disktest.exe -file "Random" -iobytes 8388608 -pipeline 2 -totalbytes 1073741824
File name: Random
Total size: 1073741824 bytes
I/O type: read
I/O size: 8388608 bytes
I/O concurrency: 2 (asynchronous)
Buffered: no
---Running the test...---
App. Throughput: 33.2 MBytes/sec (30.9 seconds)
Disk Throughput: 33.2 MBytes/sec (27 samples, 1 high variance)
Min. I/O latency: 250 ms
Avg. I/O latency: 480 ms
Max. I/O latency: 811 ms
So, disk throughput is fine.
Network Cards
In cases like these, it's always a good idea to step back and read the manual. I checked out the release notes for each of my Network Cards and confirmed that they do work on Gigagbit and on Vista and had no issues that smelled like what I am seeing.
One useful tip from Ed Briggs:
"One thing to watch. On some motherboards, the gigibit NIC (usually a Marvell Yukon 88E8001) is wired to the PCI-33 bus, even if there is a PCI express bus. I find this on a number of boards where they advertise multiple Gig Eth NICs. So say, you'll have an NVidia on the PCI-E or the southbridge, and a Marvell on the PCI-33, and your Intel Pro1000 on the PCI-E. So you'll see some differences there because PCI-33 runs out of steam. "
This wasn't the case for me, but it is very good to know.
Even though it shouldn't matter I checked all the cables and confirmed that the house was Cat6. I had been using Cat5 (not 5e) patch cables, so I swapped those out for Cat 5e, and ordered some Cat6 ones just to have.
Next, I confirmed that my Switch saw these different machines connecting as Gigabit. Here's a screenshot from the Administration Interface of my switch.
I'm going between g18, g19, and g21. The administration interface for the switch also shows the length of the cables.
Everything is reasonable from a cabling perspective.
Does the Center Hold?
I determined that I must be making some terrible mistake. Rather than pulling and proding, I just started testing with traffic. Here's a NTttcp run. Note the CPU and MBits. You can get NTttcp in the Windows 2000 Resource Kit.
Total Bytes(MEG) Realtime(s) Average Frame Size Total Throughput(Mbit/s)
================ =========== ================== ========================
1342.177280 20.649 1424.681 519.997
Packets Sent Packets Received Total Retransmits Total Errors Avg. CPU %
============ ================ ================= ============ ==========
942090 83137 0 0 7.27
Here's a result with two threads. Kind of weird that it's more, but it is over 800 megabits. This implies that the network is generally OK.
Total Bytes(MEG) Realtime(s) Average Frame Size Total Throughput(Mbit/s)
================ =========== ================== ========================
2684.354560 26.500 18753.481 810.371
Packets Sent Packets Received Total Retransmits Total Errors Avg. CPU %
============ ================ ================= ============ ==========
143139 175153 3 0 15.46
Then I tried
I tried iPerf, the standard cross-platform network throughput tester.
Z:\ntttcp\iperf>iperf -c 192.168.1.14
Client connecting to 192.168.1.14, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 8.00 KByte (default)
[132] local 192.168.1.9 port 49642 connected with 192.168.1.14 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[132] 0.0-10.0 sec 360 MBytes 302 Mbits/sec
Notice the small TCP window size. I'll try again with a larger one.
Z:\ntttcp\iperf>iperf -c 192.168.1.14 -w 64k
Client connecting to 192.168.1.14, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte
[132] local 192.168.1.9 port 49654 connected with 192.168.1.14 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[132] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.08 GBytes 926 Mbits/sec
Ok, so that's good and implies again that the network doesn't totally suck. Note also that this very good test happened between a Vista RTM machine and a Vista SP1 machine.
Local TCP Settings
Next, I checked the window size on my MSFT Corporate t60p Laptop with Vista SP1 and was shocked to see the tuning level set to highlyrestricted. Not sure who set that but it wasn't me (that I remember). I switched it back to "normal" but it didn't affect any of the tests – I ran them again. Everyone is set to normal.
C:\Users\Scott\Desktop\ntttcp>netsh interface tcp show global
Querying active state...
TCP Global Parameters
Receive-Side Scaling State : enabled
Chimney Offload State : enabled
Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level : highlyrestricted (should be normal)
Add-On Congestion Control Provider : none
ECN Capability : disabled
RFC 1323 Timestamps : disabled
The standard setting of "normal" should work for nearly everyone although some folks swear by "disabled."
Gigabit Jumbo Frames
Marc suggested enabling Jumbo Frames, usually a NIC Driver Level settings. If all your NICs and router/switch support it, you can have frame sizes up to 9014 bytes. However, only to of my NICs supported it, so
I didn't bother.
UPDATE: Turns out that Jumbo Frames are obscenely useful. If your network card and router supports them, go for it. More on this at the bottom.
Reintroducing The Players
Right now here's the machines:
- Quadpower – The Good Lord's own machine. Truly. nForce chipset. Vista x64 RTM. WEI 5.8
- MacBookPro – Vista x86 SP1 Beta from last week. WEI 4.9. This machine is no slouch.
- Lenovo T60p – Vista x64 SP1 Beta from last week. WEI 4.2. MSFT Domain joined, but not right now.
- Server – Windows Home Server machine, based on Windows 2k3
The Test Matrix
Here are the four machines in question.
|Quadpower x64RTM
|MacBookPro x86SP1
|T60p x64SP1
|WHS 2k3
|Quadpower x64RTM
|MacBookPro x86SP1
|T60p x64SP1
|WHS 2k3
So it appears the problem is on/around/near/adjacent to Quadpower. When stuff goes into or out of it, it's slower.
Here's SP1 to WHS (W2k3) copying a 1 gig file of random data.
Here's SP1 to RTM:
Here's the Lenovo t60p with Vista SP1 to a MacBookPro running Vista SP1
This is starting to sound familiar. I'm mixing my network protocols, specifically SMB2 vs. SMB1.
"These are some of the key enhancements in SMB 2.0:
- SMB 2.0 supports an arbitrary, extensible way of compounding operations to reduce round trips. This makes the protocol less chatty as compared to SMB 1.0. Chattiness of SMB 1.0 has often been a major pain point.
- SMB 2.0 supports much larger buffer sizes compared to SMB 1.0.
- SMB 2.0 greatly grows the restrictive constants in the protocol, so we never need to worry about the protocol itself being the limiting factor for scalability. This includes increasing the number of concurrent open file handles on the server, and the number of shares that a server can share out, among other things.
- SMB 2.0 supports durable handles that can withstand short network glitches.
- SMB2.0 has support for symbolic links. "
NetMon 3.1 confirms that I'm talking SMB1 between my RTM and SP1 machines and SMB2 between SP1 machines.
One thing worth pointing out that slowed down my analysis was that I only saw this slowdown when doing a File Copy. I was assuming this was a Network Hardware or TCP issue, perhaps between Vista RTM and Vista SP1. However, the tests above that showed 900+ Mbits/s were actually between and RTM and SP1 machine. Vista Networking works rather fine it seems. It was the older SMB1 protocol being negotiated between my RTM and SP1 machines that was the bottleneck.
I was also prodded to look more into Jumbo Frames. (Thanks Robert G!) Seems my Windows Home Server machine's network card has a Marvell Yukon that supports Jumbo Frames, as does the Marvell Yukon in the MacBookPro. Even though the machines will be using SMB1 as their protocol, the 9104byte frame size makes a massive difference. How much? With a 1 gig file, twice as fast, so 65+ Megabytes a second, even over SMB1. Cool!
The NVidia nForce hardware chipset supports Jumbo Frames, but the drivers do not yet. NVidia is mum on the issue, which is lame. This the the chipset in my primary machine, the one I'd really like to support Jumbo.
In the Lenovo T60p there is a Intel Pro/1000 PL with an Intel 82573L chipset which apparently doesn't support Jumbo Frames when Active State Power Management (ASPM) is disabled, and since it's in a laptop, it's disabled. No Jumbo Frames on a Lenovo t60p, even with the latest Intel Network Adapter Driver for Vista 64-bit.
"Intel does not plan to resolve this erratum in the 82573 Gigabit Ethernet
Controller. Jumbo frames is not supported in 82573E/V & is supported with the
workaround above in 82573L."
Regardless, it turns out SMB2 is a way better protocol than SMB1. As far as I'm concerned, problem solved, I'm upgraded to Vista SP1 everywhere and am enjoying Disk Speed on the wire. Now I've gotten speeds up to 33MB/s between machines when copying large files depending on the disk of the machines involved, etc, without Jumbo Frames, and up to 66MB/s with Jumbo. I'll be sure to only get network cards that support Jumbo Frames in the future. I'm happy I went gigabit and I'm happy I went Vista SP1 and I'm happy I went Cat6.
Whew. I was worried I'd have to tear my walls open. ;)
About Scott
Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.
About Newsletter
Comments are closed.


text:
The Rigalite focuses on the People who lived in Marina...
- by Terry147
- Rating:
- Published: 19 Jan 2017
- Updated: 19 Jan 2017
- Status: In Progress
"Nobody's Child" Cassie is an eleven year old girl who has been in a children's home since she was four years old. Very bright, Cassie excels in most subjects and can play Brahms and Mozart on the piano at the age of only six. Because of her age nobody wants to adopt her. Mrs Cummings the manager of Auton House is a wicked woman who treats Cassie and the rest in her charge badly and beats her with regularity. One day she is sent to clean out the toilet and bathroom and Mrs Cummings comes along to inspect them. Running a white glove over everything and looking for dirt. When she doesn't find any she then reaches up on the door - Cassie is only three feet six inches tall and was unable to reach up to the top of the door and Mrs Cummings sets about her with a cane. She beats her so badly that Cassie runs at her forcing her back where she hits her head on a wash basin. Cassie in her panic rushes out and runs away.- It is there that she meets Don a ex docker who takes pity on the girl - rea
Join MovellasFind out what all the buzz is about. Join now to start sharing your creativity and passion
Loading ...


text:
François Forget
Mars Express Interdisciplinary Scientist, Université P. & M. Curie, France
Subjects: Martian climate, atmospheric water cycle, ozone and methane content
As far as climate is concerned, is Mars comparable to Earth in some way today? What are the major differences? Were Mars and Earth more similar or different in the past?
Today Mars is a cold and dry desert. But from the meteorological point of view, it is the most Earth-like planet in the Solar System. The length of a martian day is almost the same as that of an Earth day. The seasonal cycle is also similar because Martian obliquity (the inclination of the axis of rotation) is almost the same as that of Earth.
One of the consequences of these similarities, and because the martian atmosphere is relatively transparent like Earth's, is that the major patterns of atmospheric circulation are the same.
Mars is thus like a small arid Earth, about 50% further away from the Sun. Mean temperatures are lower than on Earth, but the major differences arise because the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide) is very thin.
The surface pressure is so low that liquid water cannot really form. In this dry environment, clouds (made of ice) are thin, and dust lifted by the wind is not washed out from the atmosphere by precipitation - the atmosphere is always dusty. There are dust storms, clouds of both water vapour and carbon dioxide, frost, dust devils, carbon dioxide snow storms. It's very active, but it never rains.
In the past, martian climate has varied a lot on a geological timescale. Of course, the most fascinating aspect of past martian climate is what happened more than 3 to 4 thousand million years ago. There is a lot of geological evidence suggesting that Mars' climate used to be more Earth-like. At the time, the atmosphere was certainly much thicker, so liquid water could exist. Temperatures were warmer, at least episodically, probably partly because of the greenhouse effect of a thicker atmosphere. But I also believe that meteor impacts and geothermal heating played a role in the history of the water cycle.
Mankind keeps sending missions to Mars, many with the search for traces of life among their objectives. As an expert on martian climate, can you tell us what makes us think that finding them is actually possible?
The major problem is that liquid water is not really stable on the martian surface (there is a lot of water available, but in the form of ice or vapor). Life as we imagine it requires liquid water. Martian life on the surface or near-surface would need to use an unknown biological trick to survive in such a dry environment.
However, I could more easily imagine that a form of life could still exist at a depth in subsurface niches, where ground water is melted by geothermal activity. Such forms of life have been found in Earth's crust, but locating them is a very, very difficult task.
An easier task would be to look for remnant traces of past life in near-surface rocks, or possibly the presence of gaseous signatures of life in the atmosphere. Although, that would also be difficult. Such research would first give ambiguous results, at best. But it is possible to start the search.
What should one be looking for in the martian atmosphere and within its climate if you wanted to spot the presence of present – or past - life?
On Earth, the presence of life is obvious when you analyse the atmosphere. There are a lot of gases that would not have been present in the observed amount if Earth was devoid of life. Oxygen is the most striking example, but there are many others.
On Mars, we have not yet been able to detect anything characterising biotic chemical production, despite many efforts. This actually shows that if there is life on Mars, it must be very limited (its total metabolism must be lower than that on Earth by many orders of magnitude). One exception is methane, which is now confirmed to be present on Mars (in tiny amounts).
We do not know of a purely atmospheric process that can produce methane, so its source must be in the subsurface. It could be related to volcanism, but some scientists think that life may play a role. However, there again, it would be difficult to demonstrate. In the future, state-of-the-art spectrometers are planned to look for possible biotic molecules with extreme precision. For instance, if the SOIR spectrometer currently onboard Venus Express was put on a Mars orbiter, it could look for unexpected trace gases with exquisite sensitivity.
What about past life? I would say that we first need to study the atmosphere to better understand martian climate, and thus the past of the planet.
We have to understand an entire new world, we have just begun!


text:
Black Holes: Space Warps and Time Twists at Lowell Observatory
January 18, 2014 - May 4, 2014
This exhibit was developed by educators and scientists at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA). Its interactive stations address a number of questions, such as: What is a black hole? Where are black holes? How do we find black holes if they are really black? What would happen if you fell into a black hole?One popular exhibit station allows visitors to experience their own black hole adventure. Using one of three "excursion pods," they will embark on a fantasy "adventure vacation" to the black hole at the center of our galaxy. As they make their way toward this "deep space dive," visitors explore the phenomena around the black hole, including warped space, the slowing of time, and the dangerous magnetic fields and radiation that could leave them stranded on their cosmic adventure.
As they travel through the exhibit, visitors carry their own bar-coded Explorer's Card, which they can use to collect discoveries and to generate a personalized website that only they can access. Once visitors return home, their journal becomes a personal portal to further black hole exploration and a platform for sharing their Black Holes experience with friends and family.


text:
Long lines form outside American for liquidation sale
Bargain hunters lined up early as one of southeast Wisconsin's larger furniture and electronics stores prepared to go out of business.
American TV and Appliance announced earlier this week that it would close its doors for good after struggling to remain profitable in a competitive market.
VIDEO: Shoppers flock to American TV, but not everything's a deal
The parking lot at the Brown Deer store had a line of cars stretching out into the street Thursday morning as the liquidation sale began.
While some shoppers told WISN 12 News they got great deals, not everyone was leaving satisfied. Tom Gitzlaff left empty-handed.
"The same TV in there that I bought at Christmas is more now than I bought it at Christmas, so there's no deals in there but people think they're getting deals," Gitzlaff said.
That is why the Better Business Bureau sent a warning to consumers saying that not all liquidation sales are a good buy.
"You probably don't want to just assume that it's a great deal and the lowest price you can get, so have an idea of what the price is for the product before you go to the liquidation sale," said Liz Fredrichs of the Better Business Bureau.
The BBB recommends that liquidation shoppers do the following to protect themselves:
- Check items you're buying thoroughly, because returns are not usually an option
- Use gift cards as soon as possible, or they will become worthless plastic
- Use a credit card if you can, because it has built-in protection if a liquidator doesn't deliver on promised goods
American closes for good in late April.


text: APR's Full Exhaust is a stainless steel, mandrel bent system. APR's Full Exhaust begins with a stainless downpipe and center pipe which contains a small resonator. The pipe continues back to the polished muffler and then to the polished tip or tips depending on your vehicle. With TIG welding, fully stainless construction, and CNC'ed hangers, you will not find a higher quality system on the market.


text:
A unique wood wallet case made from real wood sustainably sourced from around the world.
The case is made of natural wood with a PU binder and a soft sturdy rubberized matt holder inside to keep your cellphone completely secure. There is a useful Credit Card slot on the inside of the Wallet case.
The case gives your cellphone a very smart and stylish finish whilst still allowing full access to all cellphone functions and sockets, as well as offering protection to the front and back of your cellphone from scratches and dirt.
As wood is a natural material, each case is completely unique which adds to the beauty of this product. (This means there may be slight variations between the case you receive and the listing photographs including the color and markings on the wood. These variations in the grain and color are to be expected, but will not affect the fit of the case).
FREE delivery within the US on all orders over $25.
Delivery times will be displayed at checkout.
Any queries on postage or delivery please contact us at email@example.com
For your peace of mind we offer a no quibble money back guarantee on all unwanted items returned to us within 30 days of purchase in an unused condition.
Please contact us at email@example.com if you have any questions or wish to return or exchange an item.
All our products are covered under a 12 month manufacturer's warranty against any defects when the product has been used under normal conditions.
For more information please visit our FAQ Page.


text:
27 February, 2014 | (01 hr)
Sign In to access this Webcast
Millions of people around the world have been inspired by the performance, courage, and determination of elite disabled athletes. How have they achieved so much against all the odds? According to recent research from The Conference Board, today's business leaders require a clear sense of purpose, trust, collaboration, resilience, and performance edge. So what can business learn from elite disabled athletes? This three-part webcast series explores these leadership characteristics by talking to successful elite disabled athletes to understand what these characteristics mean to them and how they develop them.
Part I: Finding your Purpose
Exploring your purpose and its fit with that of the wider organization is fundamental to finding meaning in work.
Talking points:
- Finding your purpose & that of your organization
- Finding meaning in what you do
- Getting back on track
- Coping with moral dilemmas
- Personal motivation & inspiring others
- Importance of trust and collaboration
To view the recording of Part II: Resilience - click here
To view the recording of Part III: Developing Performance Edge - click here
Karen Lewis-Archer
Formerly a very accomplished swimmer, Karen joined Red Star Athletics Club in Glasgow and with coach Ian Mirfin, soon started breaking world records. In the lead up to the Sydney Games Karen was ranked number one in the world, however it was then that she developed a serious wrist problem that wo...Full Bio
Peter Russian
Peter is the Chief Executive of Investors in People Scotland, and has overall responsibility for the long-term growth of Investors in People in Scotland. Since his appointment in 2003, Peter has led a major programme of change which has impacted on how IIP is used to support change and employee e...Full Bio
David Learmond
David Learmond is a senior advisor and senior fellow in human capital at The Conference Board. In these roles, he supports the human capital practice, which includes Human Capital Exchange™, research, conferences, webcasts, and other human capital programs.


text:
Louis Vuitton has a new home...in fact it is referred to as The Townhouse....Oh Mr. Selfridges would be pleased!
The Townhouse is spread vertically over 3 floors with the piece de resistance being : the lift...which stands centre stage, all glass wrapped in a double helix steel structure travelling through the centre of the store at the speed of light...well maybe not. But!... it does spiral as it goes up giving the passengers within its glass walls, a 360 degree view of their luscious surroundings.
Gasping with anticipation?....here's more!
The ground floor is for accessories....filled to the brim with all the LV goodies money can buy..."sweet dreams are made of this"....
There is a made to measure service as well as the Mon Monogram embossing station.
The first floor is dedicated to menswear designed by Kim Jones and second floor showcases Marc Jacob's much coveted "last "Autumn/Winter 2013 womenswear collection.
For all LV fans out there....and for those who plan to shop for them: jingle bells,jingle bells...Vuitton on the way!!!


text: "If you are a fan of such modern day greats like N+ or Super Meat Boy you are probably not going to want to pass up on Obsessive Collecting Disorder (OCD). A brand new fast paced platformer from Super Smith Bros with some great comedic social commentary underpinning the gameplay." - Alex Wilkinson