text:
Inspired by the values of caring and respect, together we guide individuals with disabilities and other challenges to achieve and enjoy their highest quality of life and personal growth.
Summary: The Direct Support Professional 1 will provide support and assistance in Level 1 residential programs. Staff will provide support to individuals who need daily intervention, supervision and skills training in activities of daily living while managing within a home environment and in the community. Individuals may require physical assistance or accommodation.
Essential Duties and Responsibilities:
- Provide support and assist individuals with skills training in all activities of daily living.
- Create opportunities and provide support to individuals to make decisions in order to develop their skills and foster independence.
- Provide services to individuals according to DDS, DMH, MassHealth, HUD, DPH, CARF and all applicable regulatory standards, as well as Bridgewell policies and procedures.
- Provide support and assist individuals with all medical, clinical and financial needs.
- Transport and accompany individuals as needed to and from medical, recreational and other activities outside the program.
- Maintain required documentation according to DDS, DMH, MassHealth, HUD, DPH, CARF and all applicable regulatory standards as well as Bridgewell policies and procedures.
- Assist individuals with accessing resources and recreational opportunities in the community.
- Administer medications according to MAP regulations, as applicable.
- Maintain core training certifications including CPR/FA, OSHA, CPI, MAP and Driver Safety.
- Maintain additional mandated certifications and trainings as required by the program.
- Develop positive relationships with guardians, family members and other stakeholders.
- Other duties as assigned.
Required Education/Experience:
- Must have a high school diploma or GED. Associates or DSP Certification Preferred.
- A minimum of 1 year of experience working with people with developmental or psychiatric disabilities preferred.
- Excellent written and oral communication skills so that writing of required documents is clear and articulate.
- Excellent organizational and problem solving skills.
- Valid driver"s license and minimum of one year of driving experience.
- Computer literacy to include ability to use proficiently Microsoft products and web based applications used by the agency.
- While performing the duties of this job, employee is frequently required to climb stairs.
- Must be able to lift a minimum of 30 pounds.
- The employee must be able to drive a vehicle and regularly meet driving record requirements of the agency.
- Must have a normal range of eyesight with or without corrective lenses.
- Must have a normal range of hearing with or without corrective equipment.
Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions of the job.
Requires acceptable CORI results according to Bridgewell policy.
Bridgewell is an EOE/m/f/vets/disabled.


text:
To take advantage of this setting:
- Existing tables with variable-length rows must be reloaded
- Existing pages must be modified, followed by further inserts
Advantages of enabling MAX_FILL_DATA_PAGES are:
- More data can be stored in less disk space
- Enables the server to use the buffer pool more efficiently
- Reduces fetch times as more rows can be accessed by reading less number of pages
The possible disadvantages of enabling MAX_FILL_DATA_PAGES are:
- Allowing more variable-length rows per page might store rows in a different physical order
- As the page fills, updates made to the variable-length columns in a row could cause the row to expand so itno longer completely fits on the page. This causes the server to split the row onto two pages, increasing the access time for the row
Example: Suppose you have a table with a column of type lvarchar(6000). If the dbspace in which the table resides is of 4K or 8k pagesize, you might see a lot of unused space in the pages. If you do not have to make updates which would cause most of the rows to expand to their full length, you might want to enable MAX_FILL_DATA_PAGES tobetter use the space in each page.
Suma Vinod

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake announced that 12 new surveillance cameras will be installed along Charles Street in Midtown.
"The CitiWatch program is a vital part of Baltimore's effort to reduce violent crime in our neighborhoods. The cameras serve as a force multiplier that enables the men and women of the Baltimore Police Department to do more to protect the citizens of this great city," Rawlings-Blake said in a statement.
The cameras, funded by the Governor's Office of Crime Control and Prevention and grants from the Abell Foundation, stretch from the Washington Monument to 20th Street, and bring the number of cameras in the city's network to 622, officials said. The mayor's office said 114 of those were added during Rawlings-Blake's tenure.
Much of the cameras are in the downtown area. See a map on the city's Open Baltimore web site. There are debates about how useful the cameras are - last month, five people were shot in a span of 24 hours within view of a city surveillance camera on Greenmount Avenue - but an Urban Institute study on Baltimore's cameras found that the cameras yield $1.50 in benefits for every $1 spent.
In the Mount Vernon-Belvedere Association's latest newsletter, the association said it played a lead role in the Midtown purchase and installation of new security cameras on Charles Street and "several other problem areas."
"The quality of the cameras is so high that they can record license plates over a block away and have already been used to arrest a number of robbery suspects," the newsletter said.


text:
WASHINGTON -- Polling that shows Americans favor women in combat by 2-to-1 is evidence only of the power of misinformation.
And, yes, indoctrination.
Arguments favoring women in direct combat are perhaps well-intentioned, focusing on fairness, opportunity and pride in certain women's abilities. Unfortunately, most people who make those arguments are operating on false assumptions. And, shall we say, mis-truths.


text:
Our programs offer a range of alternatives to complete your traffic school requirement. All programs are fun and highly effective. Login to our online traffic school program and proceed at your leisure from the comfort of your chair.
One price covers everything. Our traffic school course, your traffic school completion and any processing or shipping fees are all included.
We offer an online traffic school course and a workbook traffic school course. If you have a traffic ticket you are at the right place.
Our most popular traffic school course is the online traffic school program.
Start now, protect your insurance rates with out traffic school course. Quick, easy and fun!
We have been in business since 1984 and we have helped thousands of conscientious drivers keep and maintain clean driving records with our traffic schools and Certified Defensive Driving courses.
We guarantee your complete satisfaction with our FunTrafficSchool.Com traffic school course. Eliminate the hassle and anxieties of your traffic ticket experience.
Why FunTrafficSchool.Com?
FunTrafficSchool.Com. 83-095 Indio Blvd., Suite 4 Indio CA 92201


text:
30 June 2006 14:15
ProfCast - ProfCast 1.5
ProfCast record KeyNote and PowerPoint Presentations with audio as it is presented (with pass-thru audio out to the room PA)
1 (1 marks)
Founded in late 2003 and heartquartered in France, we are non-profit and independant.
We believe in the open web, think internet services should be sustainable, build for the long term.
While we are re-launching the service, we only accept new members through invitation.


text:
Legal fights by heirs of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Rosa Parks show difficulty of legacies
- Image 1 of 3
- Image 2 of 3
- Image 3 of 3
WASHINGTON – America's greatest civil rights leaders may belong to the ages. But legal fights among family, friends and outsiders over control of their earthly possessions seem never-ending.
With each court battle, historians worry about the negative impact such infighting might have on the legacy of the civil rights movement.
Martin Luther King Jr.'s daughter accuses her brothers of plotting to sell their father's personal Bible and his Nobel Peace Prize. She says those items are "sacred" and worth more than money.
Malcolm X's daughters are suing to block a book deal, signed by one sister, to publish their father's diary.
Rosa Parks' mementos, including her Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal of Honor, have sat in a New York warehouse for years because of a battle over her estate.


text:
loafs is a valid word in this word list. For a definition, see the external dictionary links below.
The word "loafs" uses 5 letters: A F L O S.
Direct anagrams of loafs:
Words formed by adding one letter before or after loafs (in bold), or to aflos in any order:
f - offals o - loofas r - floras safrol t - floats flotas
Shorter words found within loafs:
al als also as fa fas foal la las lo loaf oaf oafs of os sal so sofa sol sola
List shorter words within loafs, sorted by length
Words formed from any letters in loafs, plus an optional blank or existing letter
Try a search for loafs in these online resources (some words may not be found):
Wiktionary - OneLook Dictionaries - Merriam-Webster - Google Search
Each search will normally open in a new window.
List all words starting with loafs, words containing loafs or words ending with loafs
All words formed from loafs by changing one letter
Other words with the same letter pairs: lo oa af fs
Browse words starting with loafs by next letter
Previous word in list: loafing
Next word in list: loam
Some random words: gesso bwana uxorial erlking epiclike ngultrum idyl
This is not a dictionary, it's a word game wordfinder.
- Help and FAQ - Examples - Home
Privacy and Cookies Policy - Share - © Copyright 2004-2018 Morewords.com - 376.059mS


text:
Markham Web Content Viewer (JSR 286)Actions
- ${title}
Homeowners: Protect Your Home & Your Pipes
Water System Components
City of Markham's Water and Wastewater System Illustration The City of Markham repairs and maintains the water distribution system that provides safe, high-quality drinking water to over 35,000 customers daily. The City is responsible for the public portion of the system – spanning from the water main to the municipal property line. Beyond the Property line is the private portion of the system and is the responsibility of the property owner.
Markham's Water Supply System
Property Owner vs City Responsibilities
Markham's Responsibility
Property Owner's Responsibility
Property owners shall provide free, clear and unobstructed access to the water meter at all times. Tampering or any alteration to the water meter is prohibited under the City's Water Meter Bylaw 2012-242.
Reporting Damaged or Tampered Water Supply Components
If you suspect there is an issue with any component that the City is responsible for, please contact the Customer Contact Centre at email@example.com or 905-477-5530.
Property Owner Maintenance
Maintaining the components of the water supply system that you are responsible for will help avoid unnecessary damage and costly repairs.
Things You Should Know
- Your property's main indoor water shut-off valve can be found near your water meter and is generally located in the basement. It is important to have access at all times in case of an emergency.
Where to Locate Your Meter: Your water meter will generally be located in the basement of your household. They should be never be in cabinets or enclosures. It is important to know the location of your meter in case of emergency.
- Keep neighbourhood fire hydrants clear of snow, trees, or shrubs. Firefighters need to be able to see and access hydrants on your street.
- Leaks left unrepaired can become costly to property owners and result in extensive property damage.
Planning Outdoor Projects Around Your Property
Call Before You Dig
Contact On1Call to request locates for water and all other underground utilities so you can dig safely. Any damage or injury caused by interfering with buried infrastructure is the responsibility of the property owner.
Request your free locate at on1call.com or 1-800-400-2255. Open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.


text:
With the cloud, solutions that were once only affordable to the largest organizations are now cost effective solutions for small and midsized businesses. Cloud load balancers are one of these things.
While most people associate load balancers with large, complex configurations, they can be indispensable, even if your cloud configuration consists of a single server. There are two reasons to have a load balancer in front of any cloud configuration.
Single IP for Entire Configuration
The cloud is elastic and you have the opportunity to spin up and down servers on the fly. However, each time you do this you will receive a new IP address that you will have to make sure is configured for your application or website.
Having a load balancer placed ahead of your configuration gives you a single IP that you can point your DNS to for the entire site. This IP will never change as long as the load balancer is there.
This affords a number of advantages to your Rackspace Managed Cloud support team. Since you have a single IP, we can go behind it and add or remove nodes easily without worrying about DNS propagation. This means that the downtime you faced in the past due to changing IP addresses is completely neutralized.
Routing Traffic
Cloud load balancers can easily distribute traffic throughout your configuration, making sure no single server is over burdened, causing performance degradation or downtime. This is particularly important for customers who want to leverage the agile nature of cloud configurations. Having the ability to scale your configuration horizontally or make other architectural changes at a moments notice can translate into significant technical and fiscal advantages for customers of all sizes.
Check out Joseph's previous video where he discussed the Managed Cloud support offering at Rackspace. You can also watch the next video where he talks about caching your cloud configuration. Learn more about how the Managed Cloud offering can support your business.


text:
Washington (CNN) -- The Senate voted Wednesday to begin debate on ratifying a new nuclear arms treaty with Russia, a top presidential priority that conservative Republicans were trying to block in the current lame-duck session of Congress.
Immediately after the 66-32 vote to take up the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, known as New START, Senate leaders announced that the formal debate on the issue would begin Thursday, avoiding an expected request by conservative Republicans for the entire treaty to be read out loud.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky agreed with the debate schedule announced in the chamber by Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, noting that the treaty is supported by some leading Republicans, including Richard Lugar of Indiana, the ranking GOP member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Earlier, top Democrats blasted the expected Republican request to read the treaty out loud -- which would take 12 hours -- as an intentional delay in considering the treaty that resumes inspections of nuclear arsenals and limits the number of warheads for both countries.
"This is a new low in putting political stunts ahead of our national security, and it is exactly the kind of Washington game-playing that the American people are sick of," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement.
Gibbs noted that the treaty "has been the subject of nearly 20 Senate hearings and 1,000 questions" and added, "It is the height of hypocrisy to complain that there is not enough time to consider this treaty, while wasting so much time reading aloud a document that was submitted to the Senate months ago."
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina, had indicated earlier he would request that the treaty be read out loud, saying, "I know that a number of Republicans who support the treaty are frustrated with the idea of trying to jam it through with Christmas as our backstop.
"While it's being read, it does give us time to pull together and come up with our ideas and try to talk to the American people through the media," said DeMint, a conservative who has become a leading voice in the Tea Party movement.
A spokesman for DeMint said later that delaying formal debate on the treaty until Thursday achieved the same purpose as taking 12 hours or more to read the document out loud.
Republicans had pledged to block consideration of any other legislative items until passage of both the tax deal and a measure to authorize government spending. The current resolution authorizing government spending runs out Saturday, requiring congressional approval of a new one to cover the rest of the fiscal year.
Reid has said the Senate will remain session to complete its work, even it means cutting into the upcoming holiday recess scheduled to begin Saturday. He blasted DeMint and his fellow conservative, Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, as out of touch with Americans who have to work over the Christmas-New Year's period by complaining that the Senate might have to remain in session beyond the scheduled start of its holiday recess Saturday.
They "have the nerve to whine" about staying "to do the work" of the American people, Reid said of DeMint and Kyl. "It's offensive to me and millions of working Americans" for people to say that working through the holidays is "sacrilegious or disrespectful."
Kyl later said he didn't appreciate Reid's comments, saying it was "disrespectful of the Senate" to rush its consideration of major issues.
Reid has insisted that he has sufficient support to ratify the START accord. But some Senate Republicans, including DeMint and Kyl, have opposed bringing the measure up with so little time left in the lame-duck session.
Kyl told reporters Wednesday that a rushed schedule to debate the treaty would prevent Republican senators from being able to offer substantive amendments that require serious debate. He expressed "great frustration and disappointment" with what he called the refusal of Reid and Senate Democrats to put off the debate until there is time to do it properly in the new Congress that convenes in early January.
At the same news conference, Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah said the START pact would likely win Senate ratification if handled properly, but "to ram this through at this crucial time of the year, ... I think it's just not right."
However, Senate Democrats said Kyl and Republicans have been given plenty of opportunities to discuss and influence the treaty, and now must show that they truly want it to go forward instead of continuing to delay it.
"I would ask them in good conscious to ask themselves why we are here at this late hour," Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said at a news conference. According to Kerry, Kyl had made 13 requests this year to delay consideration of the treaty so that he could push the Obama administration to strengthen efforts to modernize the U.S. nuclear arsenal.
"I think there's such a thing as reciprocity," Kerry said, while Democratic colleague Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan said that reciprocity must be "a two-way street."
The accord, which cleared the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in September, would resume mutual inspections of U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals while limiting both nations to 1,550 warheads and 700 launchers each.
Ratification requires support from two-thirds of the Senate, or 67 votes. Democrats currently control 58 seats and need nine Republicans for ratification. In the new congressional session, the Democrats will have only 53 seats and would need 14 Republican votes to ratify the treaty.
Obama said last week that the Senate would take up the treaty before the end of the year, based on a conversation he had with McConnell, and Gibbs predicted that "START will get done with a strong bipartisan vote."
In a recent Washington Post editorial, five big guns of Republican foreign policy -- former secretaries of state Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger and Colin Powell -- urged their fellow Republicans to support the treaty, which they say is "is clearly in our national interest."
CNN's Dana Bash, Ted Barrett, Alan Silverleib and Tom Cohen contributed to this report.


text:
|2012-06-12, 02:04
|Link #261
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DP 原画 --> ヨハネ
Speaking of signs....
Only loot I got besides a Reimu wall scroll
Keiko's signature is pretty hard to make out...it's actually quite interesting trying to decipher Japanese signatures...
Last edited by Daniel E.; 2012-06-13 at 02:25.
|2012-06-12, 02:21
|Link #263
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DP 原画 --> ヨハネ
More seats = higher chance of hitting
Kalafina's were from the CD though. Buy CD and they sign together with the poster. My friend took the poster
|2012-06-12, 07:24
|Link #264
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Anyway, uploading my photos a little at a time, 1st up, the booths at AFAMY
Artwork from the doujin booths:
Poor artist
The Mirai BMW on display at Danny Choo's booth
Yes, they were selling uniforms in there, although the sizes look too small to fit anyone
And the 'infamous' BL booth
Next up, the stage area events:
Danny Choo's product, MoeKana and MoeKanji (for sale at RM$50 per pack, I didn't buy it):
If they are making this, I'm going to buy it
Max Watanabe (From Max Factory, which produces Figmas) and Takanori Aki (of Good Smile Company) being interviewed by Danny
Team Ukyo, which races with Miku and Mirai livery on their car in the JGTC:
Miku livery for 2012:
And sponsorship chance, you get a Nendoroid and member card I think
You have no idea how close I was to buying this (RM$328)
Mitsuhisa Ishikawa, president of IG Studios, being interviewed and presenting some CMs of upcoming projects
Last edited by JokerD; 2012-06-12 at 07:52. Reason: More Pics
|2012-06-12, 08:44
|Link #266
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Age: 28
Any of you watched the (showings of) awarded animations before the interviews of the boss of Production I.G.? Most of them are quite weird (for me). Up until they showed the edited OP video of Madoka Magica.
Kinda hilarious that somebody 'Woooo'-ed when it began to play. (Actually I was 1 of the person that 'Wooo'-ed on it, because some of the animations made me sleepy )
|2012-06-12, 09:00
|Link #267
Smiling beauty
Graphic Designer
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Indonesia
Age: 29
The doujin booths caught my interest wish I could have the skills like them.
Thanks for the reports and the photos glad you all have fun over there. Hopefully this'll be held annually in the future.
|2012-06-12, 11:06
|Link #269
Feeling comfy
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 43
As expected, my photos can hardly be compared with JokerD's.
But for what they're worth, here are some of them:
Queuing up for our tickets. JokerD spotted the express lane for
users of Canon cameras. No luck for me, for reasons stated earlier.
We had to cross a "river" (Sungai Batu) in a somewhat sleepy corner of
Kuala Lumpur to get to the exhibition area.
It was an early Saturday afternoon, but the turnout was already great
and the atmosphere, vibrant.
Needless to say, there were dolls a plenty, both of the plastic and human
variety. (We've got to get our priorities right, man.)
Motorheads could also dig Danny Choo's itasha and the livery of
Good Smile Racing's Team Ukyo.
Team Ukyo, incidently, were racing in Sepang that day, and they
are a force to be reckoned with. Their Miku-themed car won the
2011 Super GT championship, and had the honour of being designated Car 0.
By the end of Saturday's preliminaries, both of Team Ukyo's cars had qualified,
with Car 0 finishing fourth. The second car was Mirai-themed.
Find out how you can be a personal sponsor of the team.
You may get a special edition Hatsune Miku nendroid.
Others, however, may prefer wings over wheels.
This one's for
closet lolicon JokerD.
OK, that's it for now. I have some photos of cosplayers
to share but, as usual, JokerD has the lion's
share of the better photos.
I'll leave this for now.
The guy won the prize for best costume at AFA Malaysia.
Kaname presented him the award, with a "kiss".
|2012-06-12, 15:32
|Link #270
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 29
Sakuya : IPad.......WAIT.
Me : *knifed*
That aside, since Joker has the most professional camera amongst us, I suggest that we get him a Pedobear costume for this November...... would certainly compliment his camera.
We can then invite Asuki members to identify themselves with the cape bearing the acronym POMF (Protect Our Mini Friends) with pedobear as our mascot!
|2012-06-12, 17:13
|Link #271
Feeling comfy
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 43
The shorter hair somehow makes her cuter. She looks sweeter, bubblier and friendlier, in a girl-next-door kind of way. In other words, totally the kind of girl I would hit on, given the chance.
That said, her debut concert (it was the first time she appeared on a big stage in front of a live audience) sucked. The choice of songs didn't suit her voice. She was drowned out by the music and couldn't project herself. She had zero stage presence and would have been totally forgettable if she hadn't been such a sweetie. The crowd was tremendously supportive, though, of course, no one asked for an encore, unlike for Maon Kurosaki, who performed before her.
|2012-06-12, 20:26
|Link #272
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
More photos tonight, provided I don't get caught up in Diablo 3 farming
|2012-06-12, 20:39
|Link #273
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DP 原画 --> ヨハネ
More high-profile songs would also be good. And about being drowned out by the music, well, screaming your lungs out isn't much fun either if it bursts your ear drums in the bargain. The amps at these events should really be toned down. When Kurosaki sang something as relatively gentle as Magic World it still felt as sharp as rifle fire wtf....
|2012-06-12, 21:22
|Link #274
Join Date: Oct 2006
Now i need to wait details for AFA Indo...
Hope the artist line up and features is as great as Malay and Singapore...
Btw, to all that attend AFA MY, how big is the doujin booth in Malay?
Is it the same as Sing last year??
|2012-06-13, 02:13
|Link #275
A random-man
Join Date: Aug 2009
Am I the only one who can get the tickets as soon as I got to PWTC?
I mean,the ticket booth is ALWAYS empty when I get there,early or late
Anyway,here's some picture
Spoiler for Warning:Huge amount of picture inside:
And erm...some of the picture are horizontal even though I fixed them already...
|2012-06-13, 03:15
|Link #276
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DP 原画 --> ヨハネ
Looks like it...I arrived at 9:30, got tickets at nearly 11....
@ all those who have autographs....intending to laminate? I know I am.
Lol the SWAT and Chobbits...saw them doing weird shit for like both days...
|2012-06-13, 06:09
|Link #277
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Age: 28
By the way, here's the loots I got during this 2 days:
Spoiler for Images:
|2012-06-13, 07:25
|Link #278
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Now for the booths and figurines on display,
1st up, Ultimate Modoka from Good Smile Company, SH already has the details in an earlier post
Other good stuff from Good Smile Company:
Saber on cycle:
Luka and Miku
Miniature cars with Miku livery
And race winner Vocaloids (not for sale )
Position of Team Ukyo FEEL THE POWA OF MIKU!!
No 0 means they won last year's championship
The Macross fans' booth, I personally love Macross because it was what started me off on anime.
These are all owned by members and donated for display in this event, they really have a wide selection. They are encouraging people to join their facebook since if members want to sell off their stuff, they would post there 1st (sorry I don't have the link)
First the mechs
They even have a SDF1 Macross (TV ver) these are rare... (and very expensive)
Now for the bishoujo figurines
Short haired Sheryl Nome from the movie edition
Dolls on display
The Bandai booth
Tiger & Bunny: Dragon Kid is so cute
From the series Gokaiger
MS girl
And Doraemon
Danny Choo's booth (other than that BMW)
And finally, a loli snow globe treat for TRL:
Last edited by JokerD; 2012-06-13 at 07:28. Reason: spelling
|Thread Tools


text:
Chances are, you or someone you know in Lawrenceville is facing the possibility of foreclosure. But you need to understand that you are not alone.
Today, 1 out of every 6 homeowners in America is behind on mortgage payments. These are tough and frustrating times. Now more than ever, it's important to identify your options. Foreclosure can be avoided, your credit can be saved, and your financial future can be salvaged.
Through my experience handling distressed properties at Georgia Vision Realty Solutions LLC, I've found that homeowners today have more questions than answers about their circumstances. I have created this site to help you understand the possible solutions to foreclosure, as well as provide a detailed explanation of short sales, which may be the best course of action for some homeowners.
You may also have noticed that I'm offering you a FREE Report to explain your options and help you decide on a course of action. The idea of losing a home can be overwhelming, and I feel it is vital for you to have all the facts necessary to make an informed decision.
As an agent with the CDPE® Designation, I have a strong and unique appreciation of the factors affecting the market, and know that there are options available to you.
If you would like to know more about your options, please call me at (678) 429-2650.
I am here to help … in any way I can.
Leslie Mathews
The above brokerage assumes no responsibility nor guarantees the accuracy of this
information and is not engaged in the practice of law nor gives legal advice.
It is strongly recommended that you seek appropriate professional counsel regarding
your rights as a homeowner. The above brokerage is not associated with the government,
and our service is not approved by the government or your lender. Even if you accept this
offer and use our service, your lender may not agree to change your loan.
©2018 Charfen Institute. | All Rights Reserved
| Privacy Policy


text:
Living Room Drapes, Blinds & Window Treatments
- Durable treatments for a high traffic area
- Welcome guests with stylish window decor
- Sheer and cellular shades softly filter light
- Go cordless for increased child and pet safety
- Motorized shades for hard to reach spots
Your living room blinds will help create an inviting and welcoming atmosphere for family gatherings and visiting guests while at the same time protecting your furniture from harmful UV rays and reducing the heat gain from direct sunlight. Top down/bottom up is a great living room window treatment option that lets in light from the top while maintaining privacy by keeping the bottom of the shade closed. Wood blinds and shutters can bring the warmth of real wood into your home while providing great light control and privacy. Roman shades can provide vivid color and pattern choices to showcase your unique style.
1 results
Sort By:
Levolor® Perceptions® Soft Vertical Shades Linen & Translucence
33% off retail $522.26 $349.92 + an extra 15% off
Customizeback to products
customer reviews for living room
"Level or Review"
By Sandy from Ohio
I simply love them. Color was the same as the sample, and the price was great! Will order again! Installation was very simple also. I received them after just one week.View this product
"Keep going back..."
By NewestFan from Chicago
This is the 3rd condo for which I have purchased Blinds Galore. Levelor Perceptions are absolutely stunning. My husband was able to install them and he is Not a carpenter by any means. I had an incidence where I wasn't happy with the choice I made concerning the side they stacked up, so I called and the agent promptly offered to send another rail with an opposite draw. I tell everyone I know to order from Blinds Galore, it really takes the stress out!View this product


text:
POMONA, Calif. - Notes from round 1 qualifying in Funny Car at the NHRA Mello Yello Drag Racing Series, 53rd annual O'Reilly NHRA Winternationals presented by Super Start Batteries listing lane, driver name, elapsed time, top speed, and position in order following run:
Left Lane: Del Worsham Runs 4.104/306.26, Now #1
Right Lane: Phil Burkart Runs 4.280/286.50, Now #2
2:31 p.m. Weather conditions: air temperature 73 degrees, relative humidity 25 percent, barometer 28.95 inches, adjusted altitude 2,419 feet, track temperature 95 degrees.
Worsham has returned to driving this year in the DHL Toyota Funny Car. Burkart
is driving Steve Pluger's Monte Carlo.
Right Lane: Gary Densham Runs 4.053/307.09, Now #1
Local hero, Densham, lays down a career best ET and MPH and then doesn't have a parachute. It's short here at Pomona and the Charger goes into the kitty litter, and stops before the net. He's quickly out of the car and walking around.
The great news quickly became the bad news.
Gary Densham's incremental times: 60ft-0.900 sec., 330ft-2.298, 660ft-3.259/265.12 mph.
Left Lane: Todd Lesenko Runs 11.749/63.41, Now #5
Right Lane: Tony Pedregon Runs 6.579/101.92, Now #4
2:51 p.m. The sand box is empty, so we are back to racing.
Two broken runs and they both stop on the track.
Weird! At the green, Pedregon's car left hard with a strong 0.903 sixty foot time and then was done before the 330 lights. He left a light snow of plastic from the Funny Car body wrap in the air going on down the track.
Left Lane: Alexis DeJoria Runs 4.232/244.83, Now #4
Right Lane: Bob Tasca III Runs 4.190/305.08, Now #3
Tasca is away first and makes a strong pass, until near the top end, where the header flames get weird.
DeJoria Camry left hard and was quicker to the 330 foot light and then the parachute came out right after that.
Bob Tasca III's incremental times: 60ft-0.923 sec., 330ft-2.389, 660ft-3.386/257.97 mph.
Left Lane: Matt Hagan Runs 4.097/304.46, Now #2
Right Lane: Jeff Arend Runs 7.107/95.17, Now #8
More stuff on the top end. Time out for clean up.
3:06 p.m. Arend's car was lazy off the line and he clicks it off early.
Hagan leaves with the best sixty foot time of the session nd thunders on down the track into the new number two spot. Nice!
Matt Hagan's incremental times: 60ft-0.892 sec., 330ft-2.305, 660ft-3.294/255.82 mph.
Left Lane: John Force Runs 6.626/98.58, Now #9
Right Lane: Tim Wilkerson Runs 4.221/283.25, Now #5
Wilkerson was away first and running strong until near the finish line, where the engine got unhappy. He lifts, but there is a wall of smoke from the car and the sweepers are rolling.
Tim Wilkerson's incremental times: 60ft-0.906 sec., 330ft-2.352, 660ft-3.373/249.63 mph.
Force's Mustang made a strong leave, but kicked the tires before the 330 lights. He pumps the pedal to no avail.
3:11 p.m. Lots of dusting and cleaning between the 1000 and 1320 on the track.
Left Lane: Robert Hight Runs 8.083/86.25, Now #12
Right Lane: Johnny Gray Runs 4.087/308.78, Now #2
3:19 p.m. Back to qualifying. This should start the bump spot.
Gray takes the long way down, with the car drifting towards the centerline on the top end. He just missed the reflectors to save the run. It's good enough for the new #2 spot and the fastest run so far.
Hight, joins Force with tire smoke right off the line.
Johnny Gray's incremental times: 60ft-0.921 sec., 330ft-2.334, 660ft-3.299/266.06 mph.
Left Lane: Courtney Force Runs 4.071/311.49, Now #2
Right Lane: Cruz Pedregon Runs 4.093/296.44, Now #4
Robert Hight is on the bump spot at 8.083.
Courtney shows Force Power and drive her Mustang right on down the track to be the next to take over the number two spot.
Pedregon was right behind her, with similar incrementals, but looked to have clicked it a little early on the top end.
Courtney Force's incremental times: 60ft-0.893 sec., 330ft-2.320, 660ft-3.291/268.12 mph.
Cruz Pedregon's incremental times: 60ft-0.894 sec., 330ft-2.307, 660ft-3.293/256.65 mph.
Left Lane: Ron Capps Runs 5.115/146.91, Now #12
Right Lane: Jack Beckman Runs 4.148/309.13, Now #7
The team mates leave almost together and Capps gets a strong lead until right after the 330 lights, where the tires start to smoke.
Beckman's car gets unhappy in the lights and there is a bunch of smoke from the engine. No oil though.
Jack Beckman's incremental times: 60ft-0.928 sec., 330ft-2.374, 660ft-3.351/263.15 mph.
3:27 p.m. Gary Densham stays number one with a 4.053 and Ron Capps is on the bump spot at 5.115.
Copyright ©2018 AUTOSALES INC, dba Summit Racing Equipment
Ready to take your order at 1-800-230-3030 | Customer Service 1-800-517-1035


text:
This information is produced and provided by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The information in this topic may have changed since it was written. For the most current information, contact the National Cancer Institute via the Internet web site at http://cancer.gov or call 1-800-4-CANCER.
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in pregnant and postpartum women, occurring in about 1 in 3,000 pregnant women. The average patient is between 32 to 38 years of age and, with many women choosing to delay childbearing, it is likely that the incidence of breast cancer during pregnancy will increase.
Breast cancer pathology is similar in age-matched pregnant and nonpregnant women. Hormone receptor assays are usually negative in pregnant breast cancer patients, but this may be the result of receptor binding by high serum estrogen levels associated with the pregnancy. Enzyme immunocytochemical receptor assays, however, are more sensitive than competitive binding assays. A study using binding methods indicated similar receptor positivity between pregnant and nonpregnant women with breast cancer.[1] The study concluded that increased estrogen levels during pregnancy could result in a higher incidence of receptor positivity detected with immunohistochemistry than is detected by radiolabeled ligand binding, which is because of competitive inhibition by high levels of endogenous estrogen.
The natural tenderness and engorgement of the breasts of pregnant and lactating women may hinder detection of discrete masses and, therefore, early diagnoses of breast cancer. Delays in diagnoses are common, with an average reported delay of 5 to 15 months from the onset of symptoms.[2,3,4,5] Because of this delay, cancers are typically detected at a later stage than in a nonpregnant, age-matched population.[6] To detect breast cancer, pregnant and lactating women should practice self-examination and undergo a breast examination as part of the routine prenatal examination by a doctor. If an abnormality is found, diagnostic approaches such as ultrasound and mammography may be used. With proper shielding, mammography poses little risk of radiation exposure to the fetus.[7] Mammograms should only be used, however, to evaluate dominant masses and to locate occult carcinomas in the presence of other suspicious physical findings.[7] Since at least 25% of mammograms in pregnancy may be negative in the presence of cancer, a biopsy is essential for the diagnosis of any palpable mass. Diagnosis may be safely accomplished with a fine-needle aspiration, core biopsy, or excisional biopsy under local anesthesia. To avoid a false-positive diagnosis as a result of misinterpretation of pregnancy-related changes, the pathologist should be advised that the patient is pregnant.[8]
Overall survival of pregnant women with breast cancer may be worse than in nonpregnant women at all stages;[7] however, this may be primarily the result of delayed diagnoses.[9] Termination of pregnancy has not been shown to have any beneficial effect on breast cancer outcome and is not usually considered as a therapeutic option.[2,3,5,10,11]
|Elledge RM, Ciocca DR, Langone G, et al.: Estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2/neu protein in breast cancers from pregnant patients. Cancer 71 (8): 2499-506, 1993.
|Hoover HC Jr: Breast cancer during pregnancy and lactation. Surg Clin North Am 70 (5): 1151-63, 1990.
|Gwyn K, Theriault R: Breast cancer during pregnancy. Oncology (Huntingt) 15 (1): 39-46; discussion 46, 49-51, 2001.
|Moore HC, Foster RS Jr: Breast cancer and pregnancy. Semin Oncol 27 (6): 646-53, 2000.
|Rugo HS: Management of breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy. Curr Treat Options Oncol 4 (2): 165-73, 2003.
|Clark RM, Chua T: Breast cancer and pregnancy: the ultimate challenge. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 1 (1): 11-8, 1989.
|Yang WT, Dryden MJ, Gwyn K, et al.: Imaging of breast cancer diagnosed and treated with chemotherapy during pregnancy. Radiology 239 (1): 52-60, 2006.
|Middleton LP, Amin M, Gwyn K, et al.: Breast carcinoma in pregnant women: assessment of clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical features. Cancer 98 (5): 1055-60, 2003.
|Petrek JA, Dukoff R, Rogatko A: Prognosis of pregnancy-associated breast cancer. Cancer 67 (4): 869-72, 1991.
|Barnavon Y, Wallack MK: Management of the pregnant patient with carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 171 (4): 347-52, 1990.
|Gallenberg MM, Loprinzi CL: Breast cancer and pregnancy. Semin Oncol 16 (5): 369-76, 1989.
Procedures used for determining the stage of breast cancer should be modified for pregnant women to avoid radiation exposure to the fetus. Nuclear scans cause fetal radiation exposure.[1] If such scans are essential for evaluation, hydration and Foley catheter drainage of the bladder can be used to prevent retention of radioactivity. Timing of the exposure to radiation relative to the gestational age of the fetus may be more critical than the actual dose of radiation delivered.[2] Radiation exposure during the first trimester (>0.1 Gy) may lead to congenital malformations, mental retardation, and increased relative risk of carcinogenesis. Doses greater than 1 Gy may produce congenital abnormalities. Doses of 0.1 Gy may result in fewer defects.
Chest x-rays with abdominal shielding are considered safe, but as with all radiologic procedures, they should be used only when essential for making treatment decisions.[1,3] A chest x-ray delivers 0.00008 Gy.[4]
For the diagnosis of bone metastases, a bone scan is preferable to a skeletal series because the bone scan delivers a smaller amount of radiation and is more sensitive. A bone scan delivers 0.001 Gy. Evaluation of the liver can be performed with ultrasound, and brain metastases can be diagnosed with a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan. Data on MRI during pregnancy are not yet available, but gadolinium crosses the placenta and is associated with fetal abnormalities in rats.[5]
|Gwyn K, Theriault R: Breast cancer during pregnancy. Oncology (Huntingt) 15 (1): 39-46; discussion 46, 49-51, 2001.
|Barnavon Y, Wallack MK: Management of the pregnant patient with carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 171 (4): 347-52, 1990.
|Nicklas AH, Baker ME: Imaging strategies in the pregnant cancer patient. Semin Oncol 27 (6): 623-32, 2000.
|Gallenberg MM, Loprinzi CL: Breast cancer and pregnancy. Semin Oncol 16 (5): 369-76, 1989.
|Yang WT, Dryden MJ, Gwyn K, et al.: Imaging of breast cancer diagnosed and treated with chemotherapy during pregnancy. Radiology 239 (1): 52-60, 2006.
Suppression of lactation does not improve prognosis. If surgery is planned, however, lactation should be suppressed to decrease the size and vascularity of the breasts. If chemotherapy is to be given, lactation should also be suppressed because many antineoplastics (i.e., cyclophosphamide and methotrexate), when given systemically, may occur in high levels in breast milk and would affect the nursing baby. In general, women receiving chemotherapy should not breastfeed.
Fetal Consequences of Maternal Breast Cancer
No damaging effects on the fetus from maternal breast cancer have been demonstrated, and there are no reported cases of maternal-fetal transfer of breast cancer cells.
Consequences of Pregnancy in Patients with a History of Breast Cancer
Based on limited retrospective data, pregnancy does not appear to compromise the survival of women with a previous history of breast cancer, and no deleterious effects have been demonstrated in the fetus.[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] Some physicians recommend that patients wait 2 years after diagnoses before attempting to conceive. This allows early recurrence to become manifest, which may influence the decision to become a parent. Little is known about pregnancy after bone marrow transplantation and high-dose chemotherapy with or without total-body irradiation. In one report of pregnancies after bone marrow transplantation for hematologic disorders, a 25% incidence of preterm labor and low birth weight for gestational-age infants was noted.[10]
|Clark RM, Chua T: Breast cancer and pregnancy: the ultimate challenge. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 1 (1): 11-8, 1989.
|Harvey JC, Rosen PP, Ashikari R, et al.: The effect of pregnancy on the prognosis of carcinoma of the breast following radical mastectomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 153 (5): 723-5, 1981.
|Petrek JA: Pregnancy safety after breast cancer. Cancer 74 (1 Suppl): 528-31, 1994.
|von Schoultz E, Johansson H, Wilking N, et al.: Influence of prior and subsequent pregnancy on breast cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol 13 (2): 430-4, 1995.
|Kroman N, Mouridsen HT: Prognostic influence of pregnancy before, around, and after diagnosis of breast cancer. Breast 12 (6): 516-21, 2003.
|Malamos NA, Stathopoulos GP, Keramopoulos A, et al.: Pregnancy and offspring after the appearance of breast cancer. Oncology 53 (6): 471-5, 1996 Nov-Dec.
|Gelber S, Coates AS, Goldhirsch A, et al.: Effect of pregnancy on overall survival after the diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 19 (6): 1671-5, 2001.
|Gwyn K, Theriault R: Breast cancer during pregnancy. Oncology (Huntingt) 15 (1): 39-46; discussion 46, 49-51, 2001.
|Rugo HS: Management of breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy. Curr Treat Options Oncol 4 (2): 165-73, 2003.
|Sanders JE, Hawley J, Levy W, et al.: Pregnancies following high-dose cyclophosphamide with or without high-dose busulfan or total-body irradiation and bone marrow transplantation. Blood 87 (7): 3045-52, 1996.
Surgery is recommended as the primary treatment of breast cancer in pregnant women. Since radiation in therapeutic doses may expose the fetus to potentially harmful scatter radiation,[1] modified radical mastectomy is the treatment of choice. Conservative surgery with postpartum radiation therapy has been used for breast preservation.[2] An analysis has been performed that helps to predict the risk of waiting to have radiation.[3,4]
If adjuvant chemotherapy is necessary, it should not be given during the first trimester to avoid the risk of teratogenicity. Chemotherapy given after the first trimester is generally not associated with a high risk of fetal malformation but may be associated with premature labor and fetal wastage. If considered necessary, chemotherapy may be given after the first trimester. Data on the immediate and long-term effects of chemotherapy on the fetus are limited.[2,4,5,6,7,8,9]
Studies using adjuvant hormonal therapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy for breast cancer in pregnant women are also limited. Therefore, no conclusion has been reached regarding these options.[10] Radiation therapy, if indicated, should be withheld until after delivery since it may be harmful to the fetus at any stage of development.[1]
|Kal HB, Struikmans H: Radiotherapy during pregnancy: fact and fiction. Lancet Oncol 6 (5): 328-33, 2005.
|Gwyn K, Theriault R: Breast cancer during pregnancy. Oncology (Huntingt) 15 (1): 39-46; discussion 46, 49-51, 2001.
|Nettleton J, Long J, Kuban D, et al.: Breast cancer during pregnancy: quantifying the risk of treatment delay. Obstet Gynecol 87 (3): 414-8, 1996.
|Kuerer HM, Gwyn K, Ames FC, et al.: Conservative surgery and chemotherapy for breast carcinoma during pregnancy. Surgery 131 (1): 108-10, 2002.
|Clark RM, Chua T: Breast cancer and pregnancy: the ultimate challenge. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 1 (1): 11-8, 1989.
|Giacalone PL, Laffargue F, Bénos P: Chemotherapy for breast carcinoma during pregnancy: A French national survey. Cancer 86 (11): 2266-72, 1999.
|Rugo HS: Management of breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy. Curr Treat Options Oncol 4 (2): 165-73, 2003.
|Cardonick E, Iacobucci A: Use of chemotherapy during human pregnancy. Lancet Oncol 5 (5): 283-91, 2004.
|Berry DL, Theriault RL, Holmes FA, et al.: Management of breast cancer during pregnancy using a standardized protocol. J Clin Oncol 17 (3): 855-61, 1999.
|Isaacs RJ, Hunter W, Clark K: Tamoxifen as systemic treatment of advanced breast cancer during pregnancy--case report and literature review. Gynecol Oncol 80 (3): 405-8, 2001.
First-trimester radiation therapy should be avoided. Chemotherapy may be given after the first trimester as discussed in the section on Early Stage Breast Cancer. Because the mother may have a limited life span (most studies show a 5-year survival rate of 10% in pregnant patients with stage III and IV disease), and there is a risk of fetal damage with treatment during the first trimester,[1,2] issues regarding continuation of the pregnancy should be discussed with the patient and her family. Therapeutic abortion does not improve prognosis.[1,2,3,4,5]
|Hoover HC Jr: Breast cancer during pregnancy and lactation. Surg Clin North Am 70 (5): 1151-63, 1990.
|Rugo HS: Management of breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy. Curr Treat Options Oncol 4 (2): 165-73, 2003.
|Gwyn K, Theriault R: Breast cancer during pregnancy. Oncology (Huntingt) 15 (1): 39-46; discussion 46, 49-51, 2001.
|Clark RM, Chua T: Breast cancer and pregnancy: the ultimate challenge. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 1 (1): 11-8, 1989.
|Barnavon Y, Wallack MK: Management of the pregnant patient with carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 171 (4): 347-52, 1990.
Call 1-800-4-CANCER
For more information, U.S. residents may call the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Cancer Information Service toll-free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237) Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time. A trained Cancer Information Specialist is available to answer your questions.
Chat online
The NCI's LiveHelp® online chat service provides Internet users with the ability to chat online with an Information Specialist. The service is available from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday. Information Specialists can help Internet users find information on NCI Web sites and answer questions about cancer.
Write to us
For more information from the NCI, please write to this address:
|NCI Public Inquiries Office
|Suite 3036A
|6116 Executive Boulevard, MSC8322
|Bethesda, MD 20892-8322
Search the NCI Web site
The NCI Web site provides online access to information on cancer, clinical trials, and other Web sites and organizations that offer support and resources for cancer patients and their families. For a quick search, use the search box in the upper right corner of each Web page. The results for a wide range of search terms will include a list of "Best Bets," editorially chosen Web pages that are most closely related to the search term entered.
There are also many other places to get materials and information about cancer treatment and services. Hospitals in your area may have information about local and regional agencies that have information on finances, getting to and from treatment, receiving care at home, and dealing with problems related to cancer treatment.
Find Publications
The NCI has booklets and other materials for patients, health professionals, and the public. These publications discuss types of cancer, methods of cancer treatment, coping with cancer, and clinical trials. Some publications provide information on tests for cancer, cancer causes and prevention, cancer statistics, and NCI research activities. NCI materials on these and other topics may be ordered online or printed directly from the NCI Publications Locator. These materials can also be ordered by telephone from the Cancer Information Service toll-free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237).
The PDQ cancer information summaries are reviewed regularly and updated as new information becomes available. This section describes the latest changes made to this summary as of the date above.
Editorial changes were made to this summary.
About PDQ
|Full description of the NCI PDQ database.
Additional PDQ Summaries
|Treatment options for adult cancers.
|Treatment options for childhood cancers.
|Side effects of cancer treatment, management of cancer-related complications and pain, and psychosocial concerns.
|Tests or procedures that detect specific types of cancer.
|Risk factors and methods to increase chances of preventing specific types of cancer.
|Genetics of specific cancers and inherited cancer syndromes, and ethical, legal, and social concerns.
|Information about complementary and alternative forms of treatment for patients with cancer.
This information is intended mainly for use by doctors and other health care professionals. If you have questions about this topic, you can ask your doctor, or call the Cancer Information Service at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237).
Purpose of This Summary
This PDQ cancer information summary for health professionals provides comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based information about the treatment of breast cancer and pregnancy. It is intended as a resource to inform and assist clinicians who care for cancer patients. It does not provide formal guidelines or recommendations for making health care decisions.
Reviewers and Updates
This summary is reviewed regularly and updated as necessary by the PDQ Adult Treatment Editorial Board. Board members review recently published articles each month to determine whether an article should:
Changes to the summaries are made through a consensus process in which Board members evaluate the strength of the evidence in the published articles and determine how the article should be included in the summary.
The lead reviewer for Breast Cancer Treatment and Pregnancy is:
Any comments or questions about the summary content should be submitted to Cancer.gov through the Web site's Contact Form. Do not contact the individual Board Members with questions or comments about the summaries. Board members will not respond to individual inquiries.
Levels of Evidence
Some of the reference citations in this summary are accompanied by a level-of-evidence designation. These designations are intended to help readers assess the strength of the evidence supporting the use of specific interventions or approaches. The PDQ Adult Treatment Editorial Board uses a formal evidence ranking system in developing its level-of-evidence designations.
Permission to Use This Summary
PDQ is a registered trademark. Although the content of PDQ documents can be used freely as text, it cannot be identified as an NCI PDQ cancer information summary unless it is presented in its entirety and is regularly updated. However, an author would be permitted to write a sentence such as "NCI's PDQ cancer information summary about breast cancer prevention states the risks succinctly: [include excerpt from the summary]."
The preferred citation for this PDQ summary is:
National Cancer Institute: PDQ® Breast Cancer Treatment and Pregnancy. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Date last modified <MM/DD/YYYY>. Available at: http://cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/breast-cancer-and-pregnancy/HealthProfessional. Accessed <MM/DD/YYYY>.
Images in this summary are used with permission of the author(s), artist, and/or publisher for use within the PDQ summaries only. Permission to use images outside the context of PDQ information must be obtained from the owner(s) and cannot be granted by the National Cancer Institute. Information about using the illustrations in this summary, along with many other cancer-related images, is available in Visuals Online, a collection of over 2,000 scientific images.
Based on the strength of the available evidence, treatment options may be described as either "standard" or "under clinical evaluation." These classifications should not be used as a basis for insurance reimbursement determinations. More information on insurance coverage is available on Cancer.gov on the Coping with Cancer: Financial, Insurance, and Legal Information page.
Contact Us
More information about contacting us or receiving help with the Cancer.gov Web site can be found on our Contact Us for Help page. Questions can also be submitted to Cancer.gov through the Web site's Contact Form.
Last Revised: 2010-12-03
This information does not replace the advice of a doctor. Healthwise, Incorporated disclaims any warranty or liability for your use of this information.


text:
Join the 85,000 open source advocates who receive our giveaway alerts and article roundups.
open source software influenced by positive result of patent lawsuit
Total victory for open source software in a patent lawsuit
Get the newsletter
The jury verdict last Friday in favor of Red Hat and Novell in a case based on bad software patents owned by "non-practicing entities" is an important victory for the open source community. Those in the business of acquiring bad software patents to coerce payments or bring lawsuits should be worried. Two such businesses were plaintiffs in our case, and they did their best to confuse the jury in one of their favorite locales, eastern Texas. But it didn't work. The jury unanimously found that the patents were not infringed, and, even worse for the plaintiffs, that the patents were invalid.
The case was about allegations by IP Innovation, L.L.C. (a subsidiary of Acacia Technologies), along with Technology Licensing Corporation that Red Hat and Novell infringed four claims from U.S. Patents 5,072,412, 5,394,521, and 5,533,183. The patents share a common disclosure and are all titled "User interface with multiple workspaces for sharing display system objects." The patents relate to a computer-implemented system and method for providing a graphical user interface with multiple workspaces.
Like most patent cases, this one involved technical subject matter and terminology. However, the plaintiffs came forward with minimal evidence to support their argument of infringement. They also faced abundant evidence showing that the patents were invalid based on prior art. In other words, there was nothing new in these "inventions" sufficient for a patent.
In these circumstances, you might suppose that a rational patent plaintiff would dismiss the case, perhaps in return for a token payment. Instead, the plaintiffs decided to ask the jury for millions of dollars. Their theory appeared to be that the jury might be confused by the technical terms and unsympathetic to out-of-state businesses with creative business models.
With that end apparently in view, the plaintiffs' counsel launched an attack on the theory and practice of open source software. It was clear during jury selection that our jurors had no prior knowledge of, or experience with, open source. Plaintiffs attempted to exploit this inexperience by arguing that open source software involved behavior that was, if not downright illegal, at least ethically dubious. They promoted the fallacy that open source distributors unfairly take the property of others and thereby unfairly profit. They also suggested that Red Hat's public criticisms of the U.S. patent system as it relates to software and related calls for legal reform were un-American and indicated a secret fondness for the writings of Karl Marx. I kid you not! As absurd as this argument sounds, after many hours of sitting on a hard courtroom bench, I briefly wondered whether the jury might fall for this version of the classic FUD strategy and be so fearful and confused as to find for the plaintiffs.
It turned out that there was no cause for concern. Michael Tiemann, Red Hat's vice president of open source affairs, explained the fundamentals of open source so as to make them clear, and even inspiring. He explained that open source software is about voluntary collaboration, not involuntary expropriation. He also made plain that Red Hat's legitimate criticisms of the existing patent system in no way shows a proclivity to infringe patents or indifference to patent claims, and that Red Hat respects and abides by the law.
Our side took the opposite approach from the plaintiffs, basing our case on facts and evidence, rather than emotion and confusion. Our experts carefully showed that our products were noninfringing and demonstrated specific examples of prior art. In the end, the jury saw through and quickly rejected plaintiffs' FUD. The jurors took a bit more than two hours to find every one of 23 issues in favor of Red Hat and Novell.
We learned many things from this experience, but I'll note just three here. We now know for certain that those in the business of bringing software patent lawsuits are not invincible, even in the supposedly patent-friendly jurisdiction of the Eastern District of Texas. We know that Texas juries are willing to reject bogus infringement claims and invalidate bad software patents. And we know that attacks on open source based on FUD will not stand up when subjected to the light of truth.
About the author
Recommended reading
81 Comments
We are largely in agreement. Four years after approval is too long, but four years after public disclosure works. That said, I think any argument for software and process patents is intrinsically weak.
The sole advantage of approaching the issue by limiting term length is ease of legislative implementation. Somehow I think the ideal number -- a term length of zero -- wouldn't fly.
If there is a 4 year limit, since sw patents have such a broad claim, you in any case are NEVER sure you will not be sued by someone owns a patent you never heard about (consider that there almost 100.000 so far in US, if I recall correctly), or by someone owns a patent you misinterpretated and thought was not relevant to your work.
Since consequences of patent's infringement could be devastating, you'd better no code at all in any case.
The only reasonable solution is have only copyright (I know for sure if I copied someone else code or not), and no patents at all.
And of course copyright is abused also, they could fix by a 10 years + unlimited duration if the license is copyleft (GPL) of Creative Commons!
In my opinion as a non-lawyer, the biggest problem with the US Patent Office is that they forget the part of the US Constitution where it says the purpose of patents and copyrights is "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". It is abundantly clear that software patents retard progress of Science and useful Arts and as such should never be issued. It makes sense to provide patent protection in those non-software areas where it takes a huge amount of R&D to create a new technology but very little for someone else to copy it. With software, the vast majority of the effort is in implementing functionality so copyright alone is more than adequate to protect R&D.
Copyrights have done an excellent job of promoting progress of software and got Microsoft and Apple where they are today. All patents do is create a "war tax" that everybody has to pay and imposes barriers to prevent better products from happening.
I also think of software as an expressive work like a book or music, and as such should be protected by the First Amendment under Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. If the Supreme Court can consider corporate political spending to be Freedom of Speech, how can software -- especially FLOSS -- be considered otherwise?
Back to the real world -- I am delighted that Red Hat was able to win this victory. If FLOSS gets enough of these kinds of victories, the trolls and monopolists will have to go elsewhere.
>> US Constitution where it says the purpose of patents and copyrights is "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts"
This discussion is interesting: http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/index.php?id=177 with a reply to it here http://news.swpat.org/2010/04/patent-absurdity/#comment-420
>> First Amendment under Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press
We need to remember that the First Amendment is an amendment to the Constitution. Any conflicts between the initial text and an amendment means the amendment is the law.
>> If the Supreme Court can consider corporate political spending to be Freedom of Speech, how can software -- especially FLOSS -- be considered otherwise?
Not just the written software on paper but the full work as an interactive experience with the computer.
The freedoms would also argue against copyright infringement, at least if we develop independently. I think independence is a defence against copyright infringement; however, patents don't have an independent inventor defence.
Although I think there should be no patent rules for software, this will be very difficult to implement in the near future.
I very much like the idea of 4 years for a software patent. This ensures that:
a) software devs of any company or open source project can grow by basing new software on previous innovations
b) patent holding giant companies will be forced to continue to innovate because their present patent-based "monopoly" is only temporary, and they better work hard to offer their user base some new innovations by the time 4 years has expired and their patented software becomes free domain.
Ultimately, this will further drive innovation.
Also, I think in a system like this, we will start to notice that so many different companies, working with the same free-domain (ie: non-patented) software base, will still have such different product profiles as to move a step further towards public realization that patents for software are not really necessary.
Phrasing another way, it is not the patented part of the software that is its real distinguishing characteristic; moreso, it is the IMPLEMENTATION of it. Think of this: the whole free software movement has a base of code that anyone can use, and yet we have Gnome, KDE, K3b, brasero, etcetera. The projects and software products are distinguishable and unique not because any of them use any proprietary patented software, but because the developers have a different approach and different ideals.
Hence, even IF all of apple and M$'s code was free domain, they would still retain their uniqueness.
So what's all this fuss about patents...?
The point of what software can and cannot be patented should be reviewed and should be required to meet more highly specific criteria then has to be met by the USPO currently. Maybe too, the discussion should focus on the length of patents, in time (years), from some rational, modern perspective.
When the concept of patents were introduced in colonial America, people were still traveling by horse and buggy. As a result it took much more time to do everything from accessing materials to build their products, then market and ship same. At that time, twenty years was probably the right amount of time for the inventors to recoup their investment and make a decent profit before others were allowed to compete with them.
Today, however, the economy moves at light speed, products are created and brought to market in vastly shorter time periods. Consequently, the initial investment and decent profit is arrived at much quicker.
So much so that by the time a software patent expires these days, the software is so antiquated that the patent exists throughout much of its useful life. At which point few people would bother to compete with an alternative product.
The American founders clearly stated their goals where patents are concerned: to encourage innovation by giving the inventor a limited monopoly on their ideas so they could profit from their investment. Not to own the idea and profit from it throughout its useful life.
Software patents, under consortium's, cartels, and huge single corporations are effectively becoming a form of technical feudalism (the copyright extension act proves that corporate pressure on politicians is moving us closer to this feudalism).
Addressing more reasonable lengths for patent terms would, I think, go far in correcting this.
just a question, what if some day RH is bought by a company fond of patents, say IBM, microsoft, what happens to RH patents portfolio? It can be used against FSOSS, right?
Well, regardless of my general thoughts on the patent system, especially with regard to software, it's fantastic to see RH stand up to these bozos instead of maybe paying a smaller bill to make them go away. And even more that the courts actually worked, and in a reasonably timely fashion.
And thanks for the post here--good to hear about the trial. I hope the transcript and/or briefs are published; I would love to read what was presented to the jury.
But what happens when the next troll steps up? It could well have a better patent and better lawyers, who know exactly how to play the game, as SCO has done, There are good (business) reasons that companies settle this kind of suit; I hope the system is fixed before RH--or any Linux company--has to pay off a troll. A long shot, I'm afraid.
Rob could you address the doctrine of LACHES as it may pertain to companies like Microsoft and MPEG LA continually FUDing about their IP being infringed but never acting on it. Instead, just using unsubstantiated threats to damage their competition by instilling Fear Uncertainty and Doubt in people who might otherwise use their competitors products. Effectively subjecting their competitors to a perpetual limbo. As such, huge amounts of resources have been expended by their competitors while the perpetual sword of Damocles hangs over their heads.
"LACHES, DOCTRINE OF (legal definition)
Based on the maxim that equity aids the vigilant and not those who procrastinate regarding
their rights; Neglect to assert a right or claim that, together with lapse of time and other
circumstances, prejudices an adverse party. Neglecting to do what should or could, have been
done to assert a claim or right for an unreasonable and unjustified time causing
disadvantage to another.
Laches is similar to 'statute of limitations' except is equitable rather than statutory and
is a common affirmative defense raised in civil actions.
Laches is derived from the French 'lecher' and is nearly synonymous with negligence.
In general, when a party has been guilty of laches in enforcing his right by great delay and
lapse of time, this circumstance will at common law prejudice and sometimes operate in bar
of a remedy which is discretionary for the court to afford. In courts of equity delay will
also generally be prejudicial.
But laches may be excused from ignorance of the party's rights; from the obscurity of the
transaction; by the pendency of a suit, and; where the party labors under a legal
disability, as insanity, infancy and the like."
By my understanding of this, a submarine patent may be upheld if the patent holder can claim ignorance (believably) of the infringement, but in Microsoft's and MPEG LA's case they've been claiming for years that their patents have been infringed by others but they never act. In fact, this appears to be a textbook case of the reason this law was established.
What am I missing? Many others may be wondering about this as well...
I am going to take a contrarian view here. My father is the patent holder on two software patents, on a subject where all of the PHOSITA's said his method could not work. Unfortunately for them, it did.
The small inventor deserves to have some protection against the predators in order to reap the benefits of his or her knowledge and ingenuity. That protection should be granted for a limited time to allow them to get a toehold in the market. You only have to look to i4i vs. Microsoft to see where that ability can be a good thing.
Where the concept breaks down is when we see NPE's use patents to extract money from Practicing Entities. The solution to this (in my opinion) is simple. If you (or a licensee) are actively producing a product based on the patent, you are safe. If there is no one producing your product, it is up to you to defend the issuance of the patent.
I should not have to prove prior art in order to invalidate a "blue sky" patent. You (as the holder of the patent) must have the responsibility to prove that the patent was solid and unemcumbered.
Additionally, if a patent ownership is transferred to another entity, it can only be done with the proviso that the patent will actually be used. An entity that produces nothing incurs no losses. An entity that has produced a product based on the claimed invention, who is then damaged by a competing product based on the same claimed invention can prove that it made some effort to capitalize on said invention. That would effectively negate the damage that NPE's cause by simply relying on "submarine patents" as their revenue stream.
>> on a subject where all of the PHOSITA's said his method could not work.
[Ref http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_having_ordinary_skill_in_the_art ]
How many times has the following scene been played out throughout history across neighborhoods in every city?
Some kids get together and mostly agree that something cannot be done. One or two in the group disagree of the assumed impossibility and allege they can do it. After some taunting and some wagering, eventually, maybe one of these was able to achieve the feat, maybe even after some days or weeks of practicing.
Now, imagine these kids are adults, and every so often one of the ones that achieves the feat goes out and writes up a general description of the achievement and submits it to the patent office, who them proceeds to bar anyone else in the country, for 20 years, from being able to accomplish the same feat and exploit it.
Or how about:
"Hey, I have this great puzzle, but if anyone can describe the solution in general terms, they get to control who else can solve the puzzle over the next 20 years. And it doesn't matter if you don't really know the optimum solution or even a great or good solution. Just describe some features of the solution and you can bar anyone else from coming up with a solution that also has those features."
Sounds like a pretty foolish law, doesn't it? Let's hope the SCOTUS will agree it is foolish (Bilski).
What affect do you believe turning the Web into a giant global database will have on freedom to innovate?
"And we know that attacks on open source based on FUD will not stand up when subjected to the light of truth."
The case was decided on its own merit. But the description of open-source sentiments as being close to Marxism is not FUD. One word is sufficient to tell that - community.
Reasoning by entomology? give me a break.
even if that argument is true, it isn't something to shrink from. after all, this is only a limited mostly voluntary communism, it is more like a union. there is a great deal of free source code that can be built on, more choice to use what best suits your purposes. open source software can even be used without supplying source code from the finished product under some restricted circumstances. you just can't make money on it without consulting the people whose code you used, for rights or licensing. seems reasonable to me.
throughout the history of man, it never was the thought of one man that made a difference, it was that man conversing with many others. something about standing on the shoulders of giants. and occasionally somewhat shorter men.
Communities across America will be happy to know that "Unidentified" thinks they have something in common with Marxism.
Its amazing how readily people will give up the rights of others.
If you have never exercised the rights to secure a patent or have been named a party in an IP lawsuit ( as I have ) you have little to say if interest. If you want to play in the game - then do so. Otherwise your JAFO.
Its like men who have a "strong position" on abortion: guess what, if you don't have a vagina - you don't have an opinion worth listening to. Having a mangina doesn't count.
For US citizens only: Unlike the rights to get an abortion or any number of other imagined rights the courts have created for us. The right to secure patents and copyrights is specifically enumerated in the US Constitution.
That corporations abuse these and other rights should not prevents individuals from exercising them - even if inconvenient for the OSS community.
The above lawsuit shows the IP laws actually work - and that spurious allegations of infringement can be fought, and won, in defense of OSS. My case is another example. And while it was painful and expensive, the FSF nor ACLU nor any of these other groups were there to provide any assistance at all.
-- Bob
Sounds like you're fairly bitter regarding the whole matter, Bob.
BTW, did you ever seek the support of the FSF, ACLU, or any of these "other" groups?? Did you post online with a summary of your issue and appeal to FOSS advocates for their support??
Since you don't tell anything about your issue, it is tough (impossible) for any other reader/poster here to make a judgement on your case. Maybe the FSF and others SHOULD have supported you, and then again maybe NOT.
So, if you don't give more information, your vague allusion is JAFO.
BTW, regarding your "mangina" (sounds like a good distro name for a Mandriva fork) comment.
I don't own a gun, so does that mean I am not qualified to make a judgement in society that it is wrong for humans with guns to kill other humans...??
You mention that the right to hold a patent is in the US constitution.
a) You don't give any specific reference, so again, JAFO.
b) So does that mean that the USA is allowed to dictate its own laws on other countries of the world??
I'm tired of thinking about and replying to your comments in your post.
>> Its amazing how readily people will give up the rights of others.
I agree that too easily some wealthy and greedy patent supporters leverage the contributions of society yet want to stop others from similarly enjoying the fruits of their own labor and creativity and leveraging of society regardless of how much time and effort these others put into their own work and research (even before the patent was taken out).
>> If you have never exercised the rights to secure a patent or have been named a party in an IP lawsuit ( as I have ) you have little to say if interest.
I've never murdered or been murdered, but I have a lot of important opinions about murdering that I think others would care about.
Imagine if only murderers and the murdered were allowed to write the laws about murdering?
Bottom line is that I don't intend on becoming the next victim. This goes for murdering as well as for patent destruction.
If you don't want my opinion, then write me out of the law. Make me immune from murderers and from patent attacks.
As long as you can drag me into the courtroom with a good chance of getting an injunction or forcing me to pay you for what I created without any special help from you (and without a contract) or wasting much of my time and money or use the threat of that to stifle my creativity and invested time and effort, then my opinion will matter.
>> The right to secure patents and copyrights is specifically enumerated in the US Constitution.
The framers of the Constitution were not keen on monopolies of any kind. They conditioned any limited time "exclusive rights" on progress being promoted.
A 1 month monopoly for almost any "software patent" is much more likely to promote the progress than would be a 5 year monopoly, never mind a 20 year one.
For interesting observations and a significantly different interpretation of that clause see http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/index.php?id=177 and the comments that follow.
>> even if inconvenient for the OSS community
How odd that the very large and talented "OSS community" gives society and other inventors a lot more wealth and material to work with than do those taking out patents, yet the OSS community doesn't even demand any sort of monopoly or royalties.
I can understand why some patent supporters would feel shamed by this reality, and with one of their principle arguments for the need for monopolies having fizzled into a great void somewhere.
"Our side took the opposite approach from the plaintiffs, basing our case on facts and evidence,... Our experts carefully showed that our products were noninfringing and demonstrated specific examples of prior art. In the end, the jury saw through and quickly rejected plaintiffs' FUD...."
This reminded me of a touching moment (if a morsel of wartime propaganda) from Michael Powell's THE LIFE AND DEATH OF COLONEL BLIMP, when General Candy announces to his batman that armistice has been achieved:
(Candy) "Murdoch, do you know what this means?"
(Murdoch) "I do, sir. Peace. We can go home. Everybody can go home. "
(Candy) "For me, Murdoch, it means more than that; it means that right is might after all. The [enemy] have shelled hospitals, bombed open towns, sunk neutral ships, used poison gas, and we won -- clean fighting, honest soldiering have won."
In the comments made here, I think the central reason for victory is being trampled underfoot. Patent trolls sought to profit through deceptive and bombastic means. They were met with fact, explanation, transparency. And we prevailed, in front of a jury that was not generally expert in the realm of software patents.
Rob, congrats to you and your team for your "honest soldiering."
Patent trolls,... be en garde.
Your latter point about a non-expert jury is very valid, indeed. Its why I opted NOT to have a jury trial for my own IP trial. As I told my lawyer at the time, "I'd rather we have to convince one smart person of the truth than 12 complete idiots."
-- Bob
...that's not a given, with judges, either.
Hi Brad,
I'm curious, you said the jury also found the patents to be invalid. Did this require filing a seperate motion within the same case or was seperate action necessary?
How does this actually influence the ruling by the USPTO? Which I believe is the only place were the patent can be declared invalid.
Participating in the patent system clearly has ethical hazards, and saying one has to participate to defend oneself is akin to saying "you have to join them to beat them". Red Hat has been one of the greatest contributors to free software and insuring this can't be undone by a LBO is a valid concern. Still it's unfortunate this thread is dedicated to that subject when many other aspects could also be explored.
Thanks for the article and all your hard work...
I meant to address my comment to Rob.
I typed Brad my mistake.
Although I'm interested to hear the technical details of how the invalidaty is actually enacted by any informed parties.
Thanks again to everyone making the effort to post.
I suggest that the trial transcript be published and that the defendant's comments be used as a script, a template, in any future such cases. Why not just read from or use as notes, the transcript to future juries?
let's kill all the lawyers.
That was very informative and well written. Mentioned below is an excerpt of an article on Open source software:
"Open source has today become a necessity for most businesses. It is estimated that 99 percent of all companies using software use at least one open source component. The business value added by open source products makes them inevitable for every company. In addition to software, open source has today expanded its tentacles to many areas from open text books to open drug discovery and is fast spreading to other areas......to read more please visit http://www.sinapseblog.com/2010/10/open-source-business-reality.html"
Many of us see it as being about 'techie' software, written by 'beard & sandals' brigade academics and hackers, that will run your computer more reliably than M$ ever did. This of course being predicated on the dubious assumption that you could figure out how to find and install it...never mind the issues to do with ongoing development, support, training, etc Itransition Software
Open source software can be studied by anyone. This makes it possible to have more than just one entity provide support. It also adds a peer review and audit process by the public that just isn't possible with proprietary ("behind your back") software.
Like a piece of open source software? Then study it, and add it to the line-up of software you support.
Open source breaks monopolies while adding accountability, lowered costs, improved access, and more efficient reuse of peer contributions.
Open source software development allows programmers to cooperate freely with other programmers across time and distance with a minimum of legal friction. As a result, open source software development encourages software re-use. Open Source Software is so strong now, that any new entrant will provide an royalty free open sourced format, or will allow open source implementation. custom php


text:
Join us for the 3rd Annual Through The Veil; A Paranormal and Metaphysical Gathering.
Some of the evening highlights include:
Friday the 10th, check in starts at 4 pm, Opening ceremony at 7, Keynote James Redfield at 7:30, Live music from 9p-12a. Departure- A Journey Tribute Band Saturday evening at 9p is the Past Life Costume Party - Come As You Were, with Karaoke...
Speakers: James Redfield, Chip Coffey, John Zaffis, Marie D. Jones, Chris Fleming, John Oliver, Shaman John Coughlin, David Schrader, Stacey Jones, Edy Nathan, Don Simmons, Herman and Kathy Trader, Larry Flaxman, Christopher Moon, Patricia Cassidy, Jennifer Wallens, Chris Dedman, and Michelle Griffin.
Tickets: Full event pass $125, Friday only $75, Saturday only $75
Contact Michelle for Group Discount
Through the Veil, 10-12 June
Started by carlotta , Feb 23 2011 07:12 AM
No replies to this topic
Posted 23 February 2011 - 07:12 AM
Who owns the land? Only the land knows. We mortals are passersby, and our lives are but a brief moment in the great span of time and space. We are born, we live out our lives, and most of us do the best we can with it, but the wind is forever, and the rivers flow forever to the sea, and all the seasons of the weathers will come and go after we are gone. But the Earth endures, the Earth is eternal" - Earl Hamner
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
I raced, too: Buddy Arrington
by Anthony Hager
It's July 31, 1965, a relatively mild summer evening at the old half-mile Nashville Fairgrounds Speedway. Off the fourth turn a familiar Plymouth charges to the checkered flag, winning the Nashville 400. It's Richard Petty's first win in 9 months. Finishing second is the point leader and eventual Grand National Champion Ned Jarrett.
On Sunday, May 6, 1979, the Winston Cup competitors gathered at the 2.66-mile Talladega Speedway for the Winston 500. Bobby Allison survived a 20-car wreck on the race's fourth lap and drove Bud Moore's Ford to victory with Darrell Waltrip finishing second. What could possibly link these two races, separated by more than 14 years and 80 mph in average speed?
Believe it or not, there's a common thread. Buddy Arrington finished third in both races. They would be the best finishes of his 25-year career. In fact, by Buddy's own account that Winston 500 was the best race he ever ran.
Buddy Arrington's NASCAR career rose from the youthful desire to go fast. He made his first Grand National start in December of 1963 at Speedway Park, a half-mile dirt track in Jacksonville, Florida. He finished eighth that Sunday. But the 5000 fans in attendance will remember it not because of Buddy Arrington's first race. They will remember it as the day Wendell Scott became the first and only black man to win a race at NASCAR's highest level.
Such would be the case for Buddy's 25-year NASCAR career. Even on his better days, the spotlight shone elsewhere. That didn't, however, blunt Arrington's desire to race or his loyalty to the Chrysler brands. Perhaps it's fitting that they rode together when all others left the fold.
Overall, Buddy Arrington started 560 NASCAR races and completed 147,899 laps. He may not have been on the point that often, but you didn't have to look at the rear of the field to find him. Buddy posted 103 career top ten finishes and placed 15th or better in Winston Cup points 7 straight years between 1977 and 1983, including a career best seventh in 1982.
Despite the lack of checkered flags, no one questioned Buddy's ability.
"He ran a clean shop, as efficient as any big money operation," said Will
Pannill, marketing director for the former Pannill Knitting Co., Buddy's
last sponsor. Buddy knew the situation, and himself, better than anyone.
Daytona's backstretch would again prove unfriendly in 1970's 500-miler. A cut tire veered the #5 Dodge Daytona into a viscous rendezvous with the outside wall. Buddy suffered rib injuries, again, and a ruptured spleen in what he remembers as the worst wreck of his career.
Every driver feels the pain of an accident. But for the owner-driver that pain extends to business, too. When there's no factory support or deep-pocket sponsors the shops aren't filled with disposable race cars. As a matter of fact, it wasn't unusual for an independent to arrive at the track wondering where he'd get his next set of tires. Buddy was no exception to the rule. But what he lacked financially he made up for with friendly volunteers.
Unsung volunteers contributed to every owner-driver's operation. All were
appreciated, but there's always a few who stand out above the rest. At
Arrington Racing those standouts were Sam, "Sis" and Brenda Leash, and Jim
and Phyllis Willard. Buddy recalls their contribution as, "a big part of us
making it as long as we did." Not only did they help with the car on race
weekend, they also prepared meals for the other crewmembers. And keeping
people fed was a major expense for Buddy.
Feedback can be sent to firstname.lastname@example.com
Go to our forums to discuss this article


text:
Holiday Gift Guide: All her favorites
Survive the Holidays (In Style!) with these Boot Essentials
Make some noise in Dr. Martens boots
View more on the blog
Get it Today with FREE In-Store Pickup! See Details
Free Standard Shipping on everything! See Details
Your Account
Sign In /
Join Now


text:
Apparently, my family isn't the ONLY one in the house that likes white rice.
I had two different kinds of rice - sushi rice and white rice - both in separate heavy duty ziploc bags. My sushi rice seems to be ok, but when I looked in the white rice, there were a bunch of little white worms! I went through and cleaned it out, but I'm about to cook rice now, a week later, and there are more of them. My mom told me to throw the rice away (I just put it away so I could clean it again later) and get rice from a 25 lbs bag of rice that was taped shut (pretty tightly too, it took a lot of effort to open it). Sure enough when I open it, not only are there these tiny worms, but there are little dead moths as well. I actually almost cried at the sight of my rice bag.
Is there any way to save my rice from the bugs? My heavy duty bags don't work and sealing the rice bag does nothing either =/
I don't think anything will be getting into your plastic rice bag - plastic is pretty impermeable. I rather suspect that the culprits were there in the rice already before the rice was put into the bag. My suggestion would be to change your rice supplier.
My blog is Food and Shoes
meurtre, it sounds like you may have an infestation of meal moths. They are sometimes called grain moths or flour moths. . The rice was probably infested when you bought it.
I once had a meal moth problem at my old house - I still remember seeing one of them flying out of a box of jasmine rice when I opened it - and it was a nightmare to get rid of. First, dump the infested rice - dont put it back! Then get a moth trap to get rid of the adults, and kill any you can get manually (the moths are slow and easy to catch). Getting rid of the larvae (the worm-like things) completely is tough. You have to clear off all your shelves and inspect any bags or boxes you have that have grain or nut based products in them - flour, rice, cornmeal (polenta), noodles, pasta. They especially love cornmeal and whole wheat flour, or products made from them. They also prefer brown rice to white. If the batch of whatever it is looks clean, then get it out of the infected area, and preferably store it in a freezer for a while - that would kill off any eggs that you can't see. (You may feel squeamish about this and want to throw it away regardless.) If you see any signs of critters or cobwebby strings, throw it out. Then, wipe all your shelves down completely - I used hot water. You can put stuff back on the shelves, but make sure everything is closed properly. The meal moth larvae will eat through thin plastic bags - put things in completely sealable containers, double-bag them, etc. Observe the area well for a few weeks and keep checking for critters. If you don't see any more, you're clear.
Good luck! :/
The Big Onigiri.
- Wherever you go, there you are. -
We tend to store stuff in tupperware D boxes
And yeah if I see anything like that in any foodstuff I tend to switch the supplier. Though for sushi rice that's a bit hard since it seems to be hard to come by around here.
But we tend to get these every so often. If the food is stored properly it shouldn't matter if they flutter around. Atleast the cats have some fun chasing them ;)
I have been seeing a lot of moths lately.... and I just recently got into the habit of making a lot of rice almost every other day. we have a lot of it around right now.... time to investigate. thanks Maki!
These bugs are common in rice, switching suppliers is not likely to help. The good news is you can still safely eat the rice!
This link has the the most realistic and accurate advice to approaching your "problem". <3
|Last Post
|Sesame salad dressing
|5 years 12 weeks ago
|Authentic paella?
|5 years 13 weeks ago
|IMPORTANT: If you have a blog on JustBento...
|5 years 16 weeks ago
|Shiso - uses for this herb
|5 years 18 weeks ago
|Fuki (Japanese Butterbur) Tsukemono Recipes
|5 years 18 weeks ago
@justbento - strictly site updates
@makiwi - Maki tweets at random


text:
Main Content
Canvas Support
Canvas is here!
A new courseware system to improve the learning experience at Penn
Learn more about Canvas and the transition from Blackboard
Log into Canvas
Already using Canvas? Click here to access your sites.
Get Started
Request a course site for a current or upcoming course.
Learn Canvas
- Upcoming Workshops and Office Hours
- CNVS 001. An Introduction to Canvas: A Canvas course about Canvas. No login required.
- Canvas Support for Faculty and Staff: Learn how to use the different features in Canvas
- Canvas at Penn blog
For additional information, you can email us at email@example.com.


text:
(1) Please treat ALL posters / users with respect and courtesy.-
- Anyone who is found to be abusive to another member will be subject to the Warning system below.
(2) No Obscenity -
- You must not post any obscene messages or pictures, including pornography or links to said material. Doing so may result in an instant ban.
(3) No Trolling -
- Do not post comments which have the sole purpose to cause an argument. You may express your opinion on a topic, however abuse to anyone who doesn't have the same opinion as you will not be tolerated. So again please think twice before you post.
(4) No Flaming or posting of material intended to start a flame war.--
- Forum wars are stupid and childish we will not get involved with them.
(5) No Racism or Discrimination -
- You must not post any racist comments or discriminatory slurs. These acts will not be tolerated, even if said or meant in a non inflammatory way. Every user has a right to expect equality. Doing so may result in an instant ban.
(6) No Piracy* -
- You must not post links to illegal downloads or copyrighted material such as movies and music.
(7) Keep it legal -
- With all forums you / we are held responsible for all posts so please beware and think before you post.
(8) No posting of personal contact information -
- This is for your safety, any public posting of personal contact information will be removed.
(9) Spamming of any type is not allowed---
- Any spam will be removed and the offender warned then possibly banned.
(10) No Smurfing - ---
- Users only require only one account to participate in AoCZone discussions, or sign up for tournaments. Smurf Accounts will be banned, and the original/main account will receive warnings or temporary bans.
If for some reason you feel you require a 2nd account, message the mods explaining why and your request will be considered.
Warning System :-
A three strike system is in effect for any user failing to fully comply with the rules:
- First Offence: A warning. After 1 month removed.
Second Offence: Suspended from the forum for 1 week. After 3 months removed.
Third Offence: A longer or even permanent ban.
In severe cases the offender may be banned before reaching 3 offences.
If you have a problem with any particular user, Please send a PM to one of the moderators. Please do not contact moderators or Admin about petty squabbles.
- We want everyone to take pride in this forum, however there may be times where some of our members or guests may feel upset. If this is the case please send the Admin a pm clearly stating what you are upset about ,, if you can take a screen shot to back up your claim then please do. Alternatively click the Report Post icon and add details as to why you are reporting.
Anyone found to be abusing the complaints system will be subject to the three strike warning system.
* By Piracy we mean
Illegal copying of a product such as software or music.
The unauthorized duplication and/or use and distribution of a software program, including Music, Programs,Movies etc.


text:
With learning centers in 900 communities and on the internet, the Rohr Jewish Learning Institute (JLI) is the world's preeminent network of Jewish learning.
Read more >
"Our nation is not a nation without Torah."Saadia Gaon
"God peered into Torah and created the universe"Holy Zohar II, 161a
"I [God] have inscribed Myself and handed it over"Talmud, Tractate Shabbat 105a
"Torah is our life and the length of days."Liturgy
Judaism Decoded: The Origins and Evolution of Jewish Tradition
Register Now