text:
Debates of Feb. 27th, 2012
House of Commons Hansard #84 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was agreement.
- Question Period
- Criminal Code
- Points of Order
- Senate Reform Act
- Air Canada
- Conservative Party of Canada
- Elevation to Cardinal
- Kootenay Ski Hills
- Oscar Awards
- Automotive Industry
- Shipping Industry
- The Environment
- Religious Freedom
- Public Transit
- Human Rights
- Short Circuit Dream
- Italian Campaign
- Conservative Party of Canada
- Via Rail
- 41st General Election
- Public Safety
- Employment Insurance
- Via Rail Derailment
- 41st General Election
- OECD Centres of Government Meeting
- National Defence
- Agriculture and Agri-Food
- Foreign Affairs
- Citizenship and Immigration
- The Environment
- Foreign Affairs
- Aboriginal Affairs
- Telecommunications
- Justice
- National Defence
- Health
- International Aid
- Official Languages
- 41st General Election
- Presence in Gallery
- Privilege
- Points of Order
- Government Response to Petitions
- Committees of the House
- Investment Canada Act
- Criminal Code
- Elections Canada
- Petitions
- Questions on the Order Paper
- Request for Emergency Debate
- Canada-Panama Economic Growth and Prosperity Act
- Business of Supply
Presence in Gallery
Oral Questions
3 p.m.
The Speaker Andrew Scheer
The Chair has notice of a question of privilege from the hon. Minister of Public Safety.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3 p.m.
Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege to bring to your attention activities which I believe to be a contempt of this House.
On Tuesday, February 14, I introduced Bill C-30. In the days that followed I received a great deal of communications from Canadians in regard to this legislation. These ranged from the personally supportive to the critical and indeed to the humorous, but a handful were deeply threatening. It is with those in the last category that I take exception and rise in the House to seek determination of my rights as a parliamentarian.
First, on Friday, February 17, I indicated by letter to your office that news reports revealed that the vikileaks30 account on Twitter had connections to the House of Commons IT system.
The fact that House of Commons resources appear to have been used in an attempt to anonymously degrade my reputation and obstruct me from carrying out my duties as a member of Parliament is, I contend, a contempt of the House. I take no issue with an open attack on the floor of this House, in which the source of the attack may be seen by all. I take strong issue with the idea that House resources would be used to secretly attack a member of the House.
I will await the results of your investigation into that matter. I reserve the right to make supplementary or new arguments should that be appropriate in view of the finding.
Second, videos posted on the Internet on February 18, 22 and 25, published various allegations about my private life but also made specific threats, all of which are clearly stated to be in reaction to my sponsorship of proposed legislation tabled in the House, namely Bill C-30.
I will continue to do my duty and carry out my responsibilities in respect of this piece of legislation, including seeing a motion moved to refer the bill to committee where it can be discussed and debated in an open forum.
Nevertheless, the actions and threatened actions contained in these videos constitute an attempt by the creators of the videos to intimidate me with respect to proceedings in Parliament. The fact that these videos contained threats and have attempted to intimidate me in my role as a member of Parliament for Provencher I contend is a contempt of the House.
Third, I would like to address the fact that there is a campaign to inundate my office with calls, emails and faxes. This campaign is hindering my staff from serving the people of Provencher and I contend is a contempt of the House. Individuals who have real and legitimate needs have been unable to contact their member of Parliament in a timely fashion.
As you know, Speakers have consistently upheld the right of members to serve constituents free from intimidation, obstruction and interference. Speaker Lamoureux stated in a 1973 ruling that he had no hesitation in reaffirming the principle that parliamentary privilege includes the right of a member to discharge his or her responsibilities as a member of the House free from threats or attempts at intimidation.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we engage in debate in this House. Sometimes that debate may be vigorous, including heated rhetoric. I have served as an elected official since 1995. In that time I have been called many things and, while occasionally distasteful, I have accepted it as part of my job. However, the online attacks launched on both myself and my family have crossed the line.
Attacks on the personal life of a member of Parliament, while not appropriate, can be judged by the public where there is public accountability. This should concern all parliamentarians. Members of Parliament must have the freedom and ability to effectively represent our constituents in the House.
I understand that the hon. government House leader or the deputy House leader will be making further, more detailed submissions in support of this question of privilege.
Should you find that there is a prima facie question of privilege here, I would be prepared to move the appropriate motion.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:05 p.m.
Bob Rae Toronto Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, I had intended to rise today on a question of privilege with respect to the use of House of Commons computers in the matter which has been raised today by the Minister of Public Safety.
I was advised yesterday that an employee of the Liberal Research Bureau is responsible for the vikileaks30 site that the minister has referred to. I discussed the matter with that individual this morning. He offered his resignation and I have accepted his resignation. I want to offer my personal apology to the minister for the conduct of a member of my staff.
I do not share many things with the Minister of Public Safety all the time but one thing I do share with him is a sense of longevity. One of the things that makes public life difficult is when political attacks become personal. I have tried, but have not always succeeded, in my political life to make it very clear that matters of personal and private conduct are not to be the subject of political attack or political reference.
I want to say very clearly that we did not meet that standard with respect to the establishment of that site by a member of the Liberal Research Bureau. I want to apologize unreservedly to the minister for that particular incident and for that particular issue.
I will not comment further with respect to the minister's question of privilege. Some of it is justified. Some of it is a bit more problematic, but that is a view that perhaps others who are a little less directly involved in this issue will be able to comment on.
I want to make it very clear that I am apologizing personally and on behalf of my party for the fact that a certain member of our research bureau was responsible for creating the Twitter account concerning the minister's personal life.
I will repeat what I said previously. I have been in the public eye for 30 years and I have always tried to differentiate between the personal and private matters of everyone in public life. Quite frankly, the rules I have tried to follow in my public life were not followed by a member of our group.
I wish to extend to the minister my personal apology for what has happened. Of course, others may have something to say about the minister's question of privilege, but I will repeat once again that I respect certain aspects of his position and that I disagree with others. However, that will be up to the Speaker to decide.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
February 27th, 2012 / 3:05 p.m.
Joe Comartin Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is difficult for us to get on our feet at this point and be at all sympathetic to some of the requests from the Minister of Public Safety. On the other hand, the vikileaks30 type of approach, that type of politics, is totally offensive to this side of the House and to my political party. I want to be on the record as saying that to the minister.
However, on February 10 the Minister of Foreign Affairs stood in the House and accused my party repeatedly and unequivocally, using offensive terminology and terms like "sleazy practices", of exactly what we have now heard came from a staffer from the Liberal Party. We had nothing to do with that.
On this question of privilege that I have to raise for my party, I have to ask you, Mr. Speaker, to compel the Minister of Foreign Affairs to come back into the House at the earliest opportunity and apologize to my party and the members of my caucus.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:10 p.m.
Peter Van Loan Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I rise in response to the comments just made by the opposition House leader.
In setting out the terms of what the foreign affairs minister said the last Friday we were sitting, I added on a point of order afterwards that of course the reliance was on media reports that had indicated through their research that the source was obviously from the NDP or someone within the NDP in the House of Commons. Obviously that information was incorrect.
Based on the information today, I have every confidence that the Minister of Foreign Affairs will give his most fulsome and complete apology and withdraw those remarks from the last Friday that the House was sitting. I certainly would do the same on behalf of our government.
I will leave it to the minister himself to deal with the apology that has been offered by the hon. member for Toronto Centre on behalf of the Liberal Party in taking responsibility for the actions in this case. I can assure the hon. member that on behalf of the government we withdraw those remarks.
I am sure that the Minister of Foreign Affairs would be prepared to do the same.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:10 p.m.
Louis Plamondon Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC
Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Bloc Québécois and also as dean of this House, I would like to pause to say how shocked we have been by the intrusion into the minister's private life. I believe it is one of the worst attacks I have seen in the 27 years that I have served this House.
We share the minister's indignation and we fully agree that the public and the private lives of a politician should be completely distinct.
In closing, I would like to say to the leader of the Liberal Party that I admire the honest, transparent and most appropriate statement that he gave a few minutes ago on this matter.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:10 p.m.
Vic Toews Provencher, MB
Mr. Speaker, I thank the members in the House for the comments that they have made.
I accept the personal apology from the hon. member for Toronto Centre. I think it is a heartfelt apology and is worthy of acceptance.
I would point out though, and this is something I will have to take under advisement, there were members of the Liberal Party who actively encouraged the use of the vikileaks30 website and continuously promoted the use of that website. Mr. Speaker, I think you have to look into that.
While I am prepared to take the member's comments at face value that he had nothing to do with it, I think the evidence on the public record is clear that there was at least one hon. member who advocated on a continuous basis the use of that website. Mr. Speaker, I would respectfully submit you need to take a look at that.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:10 p.m.
Ottawa West—Nepean
John Baird Minister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, I saw the interventions by the hon. member from Windsor—Tecumseh and the government House leader.
At times emotions get strained in this House. I think they get particularly strained when one has a friend and colleague who is under attack. Sometimes one rushes to judgment and believes certain media reports.
I heard the comments from the opposition House leader. I want to unequivocally and unconditionally apologize and retract my comments to him and to anyone in the New Democratic Party who may have taken offence.
I think I went out of my way to not single anyone out, but I unconditionally retract those comments. I unconditionally apologize to the hon. member, his caucus and the members of his party who were offended.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to retract the comments I made about the Liberal Party on the last Friday the House was sitting as well, in which I said I was not accusing it of anything.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:15 p.m.
Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre
Tom Lukiwski Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I have a further submission dealing with my colleague, the hon. member for Provencher, in his intervention on a question of privilege just a few moments ago. My comments will be restricted to a question of privilege regarding the group Anonymous and not on the Wikileaks issue, which we just clarified a few moments ago.
I am rising to provide the Chair with additional submissions with respect to the question of privilege, as I mentioned a few moments ago. My hon. friend has put before the House a submission that his rights as a member of Parliament have been breached with respect to freedom from obstruction, interference, intimidation and molestation. In particular, his freedom from intimidation in connection with the proceeding in Parliament has been breached, amounting to a contempt.
Moreover, Sir, I submit there is a second contempt in relation to the obstruction of the hon. member for Provencher through an interference of nepotism and an accusation of criminal activity.
The classic definition of parliamentary privilege can be found at page 75 of the 23rd edition of Erskine May's Treatise on The Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament. It states:
Parliamentary privilege is the sum of the peculiar rights enjoyed by each House collectively … and by Members of each House individually, without which they could not discharge their functions, and which exceed those possessed by other bodies or individuals.
A more pithy summary of privilege can be found in Mr. Speaker Lamoureux's decision at page 5338 of Debates for April 29, 1971, where he stated:
In my view, parliamentary privilege does not go much beyond the right of free speech in the House of Commons and the right of a member to discharge his duties in the House as a member of the House of Commons.
Citation 93 on page 25 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules & Forms, sixth edition, states:
It is generally accepted that any threat, or attempt to influence the vote of, or actions of a Member, is breach of privilege.
Citation 99 on page 26 of that same publication adds:
Direct threats which attempt to influence Members' actions in the House are undoubtedly breaches of privilege.
While some parts of the situation are time tested, other characteristics of this case present novel aspects to contemplate. On the one hand, responding to threats is among the first matters of parliamentary privilege dealt with in Canada. Page 198 of the second edition of Joseph Maingot's Parliamentary Privilege in Canada tells us of an incident in 1758 where the Nova Scotia House of Assembly proceeded against someone who made threats against a member.
Although the framework of privilege has largely solidified through centuries of common law statutes and even the Constitution, it continues to have sufficient flexibility to adapt and be applied to a changing environment, such as televising proceedings, as noted at page 63 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition.
Page 225 of Maingot advises:
While privilege may be codified, contempt may not, because new forms of obstruction are constantly being devised and Parliament must be able to invoke its penal jurisdiction to protect itself against these new forms; there is no closed list of classes of offences punishable as contempt of Parliament.
That speaks to the novel aspects in this case where we are dealing with publications on the Internet, particularly with videos on the website YouTube. The YouTube videos of the so-called Anonymous include comments which are, I submit, threats and even blackmail. These comments seek to induce the Minister of Public Safety to undertake certain actions in respect of a bill he has introduced and sponsors.
Before I press further into my submissions, I want to make it very clear that I do not seek to bring ordinary free and democratic expression or critical speech into what is being considered here.
Page 235 of Maingot offers an articulate review of the balance to be considered. It states:
—all interferences with Members' privileges of freedom of speech, such as editorials and other public comment, are not breaches of privilege even though they influence the conduct of Members in their parliamentary work. Accordingly, not every action by an outside body that may influence the conduct of a Member of Parliament as such could now be regarded as a breach of privilege, even if it were calculated and intended to bring pressure on the Member to take or to refrain from taking a particular course. But any attempt by improper means to influence or obstruct a member in his parliamentary work may constitute contempt. What constitutes an improper means of interfering with Members' parliamentary work is always a question depending on the facts of each case.
The February 18 video of Anonymous said, in respect of my hon. friend, that, "you will cease your efforts...immediately. If you do not...you will soon find yourself not only mocked, but jobless and despised.
The video went on to suggest that my hon. friend, "is bound to have many skeletons in his closet. Some of these have already been brought to light and we have no doubt that this is only the tip of the iceberg". The video later inferred that he would not be allowed "to have any secrets of his own".
The February 18 video also included a broad swipe at all hon. members by threatening, "Let this be a warning to any politician....Your actions will not stand. You cannot run. You cannot hide".
In a subsequent video published on February 22, after disclosing a number of items of personal information in respect to the hon. member and of individuals close to him, Anonymous rhetorically asks:
Do we have your attention? How does it feel to have personal information about your family in the hands of people you know nothing about, with no control over who disseminates it or how it will be used?... Let it be known this is only a taste of the information we have access to. And this is only the beginning.
Later in the video, there was another broad threat to all members of this House. I suppose that this very intervention I am making will come within the ambit of this threat to the effect that, "to the rest of the Parliament of Canada: you would do well to mind your words about Anonymous".
In the most recent video on February 25, a further threat to the hon. member for Provencher was uttered to the following effect, "You have seven days to reflect upon your personal and political crimes. After that, the Canadian people will also be made aware of just how disgustingly unscrupulous and corrupt you are."
As I will review later, there have been false and misleading statements meant to malign the hon. member. We should expect more of the same.
In this weekend's video, there was yet another threat aimed generally at all hon. members:
And to the rest of those who support Bill C-30: do not believe for a moment that you are untouchable. Anonymous has received information implicating many of you in both political and personal scandals....Let the next seven days serve as a period of reflection for the entire House of Commons. Ask yourselves, how many more scandals can you afford?
To summarize the various quotes, they are more than just intimidation or threats. Quite frankly, they are blackmail.
In a ruling on September 19, 1973, Mr. Speaker Lamoureux on page 6709 of the Debates stated that he had:
—no hesitation in reaffirming the principle that parliamentary privilege includes the right of a member to discharge his responsibilities as a member of the House free from threats or attempts at intimidation.
Speaker Bosley, on May 16, 1986, at page 13362 of Debates held that the threat or attempt to intimidate cannot be hypothetical but that it must be real or have occurred.
For his part, Mr. Speaker Parent, on March 24, 1994, at page 2706 of Debates said:
Threats of blackmail or intimidation of a member of Parliament should never be taken lightly. When such occurs, the very essence of free speech is undermined. Without the guarantee of freedom of speech, no member of Parliament can do his duty as expected.
In that instance, a prima facie breach of privilege was not found because the threats were associated with an appeal then pending at the Ontario Court of Appeal.
On page 143 of Erskine May, it says, "The House will proceed against those who obstruct Members in the discharge of their responsibilities to the House or in their participation of its proceedings".
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, your own decision on December 13, 2011, at page 4396 of the Debates, also turned on the principle of whether there was an impact on parliamentary duties. This brings me to whether or not these threats arise from a "proceedings in Parliament". The circumstances before us today arise from Bill C-30, which was recently introduced and now sits on the order paper as an order of the day. Pages 91 and 92 of O'Brien and Bosc quote two definitions of this term "proceedings in Parliament", from Erskine May on Australia's Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987. May's definition states that:
An individual Member takes part in a proceeding usually by speech, but also by various recognized forms of formal action, such as voting, giving notice of a motion, or presenting a petition or report from a committee, most of such actions being time-saving substitutes for speaking.
The Australian statutory definition contains the expression "all words spoken and acts done in the course of, or for purposes of or incidental to, the transacting of the business of a House".
Page 80 of Maingot addresses the point that:
—two of Parliament's constituent elements, the House of Commons and the Senate were established for the enactment of laws, those events necessarily incidental to the enactment of laws are part of "the proceedings of Parliament".
The introduction and sponsorship of a bill cannot get closer to the process of enacting a law. Therefore, I would submit that the threats and accusations are quite clearly relating to a proceeding in Parliament.
While I am making references to Australia, that is one case when the Commonwealth which shares features to this case, particularly with regard to generalized threats to all hon. members.
On May 4, 1993, the President Sibraa of the Australian Senate ruled that page 19 of Hansard on two related questions of privilege. On one of the matters the president said:
The essence of the matter raised by Senator Walters is that a person has allegedly threatened to publish certain supposed information concerning Opposition members of parliament if the Opposition members adopt a certain policy in relation to X-rated videos.
The subsequent Forty-third Report of the Committee of Privileges, in December 1993, described the threats identified by Senator Walters as: first, an alleged threat "to 'out' Liberal party figures if the party adopted what it claimed was a leaked policy document proposing a sex industry crackdown" and second, an accusation regarding a "potential release of security film of a coalition member at a sex shop".
The president found that:
The possible contempt of parliament contained in the matter raised by Senator Walters is that of seeking by threats to influence senators in their conduct as senators. This is one of the well known contempts of parliament...
The alleged threat is directed to Opposition members generally and not to any particular person, but it is well established that the threat to unnamed members, or to a group or category of members, or to members in general, can be a contempt just as can a threat to particular members.
The alleged threat as reported and also directed to Opposition members of Parliament generally, and does not distinguish between members and senators. If the threat as reported were made, it could be regarded as being directed to senators as well as members of the House of Representatives. This is so particularly having regard to the fact that senators could, and probably would, participate in the formulation of any policy relating to X-rated videos.
The formulation of such a policy by a group of senators clearly falls within their duties as senators and their conduct as senators...A threat such as the one reported obviously has the potential substantially to obstruct senators in the performance of their functions.
In the event, after hearing submissions and evidence, the committee concluded that, in view of the further details it acquired, this particular case "did not have the effect or tendency of substantially obstructing senators in the performance of their functions", although the committee did find the actions of those responsible to be "inept and offensive", and part behaviour which was "cavalier and unprofessional".
One area I should address is the identity or source of the threats and the ability to make a specific charge. Citation 99 on page 26 of Beauchesne's states that:
Direct threats which attempt to influence Members' actions are undoubtedly breaches of privilege. They do, however, provide serious problems for the House. They are often made anonymously and it is rarely possible for the House to examine them satisfactorily.
In his September 19, 1973, ruling, Mr. Speaker Lamoureux found, at page 6709 of the Debates, that the instance raised by a member could not be a prima facie question of privilege because the member did not know the identity of the person at the other end of the telephone conversation which gave rise to the complaint.
Nonetheless, the unknown identity of those responsible for breaching privilege did not deter Mr. Speaker Milliken in his October 15, 2001 ruling, at page 6085 of the Debates, from stating:
There is a body that is well equipped to commit such active inquisition, and that is the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, which has a fearsome chairman, quite able to extract information from witnesses who appear before the committee, with the aid of the capable members who form the committee of the House
I have no doubt that the hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London is an even more fearsome inquisitor than his predecessor 11 years ago. I believe that the same principle about the role of committee holds equally true today, that is to say, any unanswered questions can be resolved there.
As for how one could start to get to the bottom of this, I have some thoughts. I am sure others do too. However, my prevailing thought is that it should go to a committee to sort out this approach, hear from appropriate experts and go from there.
Mr. Speaker, I would commend to you the decision of your immediate predecessor from October 6, 2005, at page 8473 of Debates. The Chair wrestled with a novel question related to new statutory and Standing Order provisions pertaining to the Ethics Commissioner and that the officer of Parliament's conduct in respect of an investigation of the hon. member for Calgary East.
In those circumstances, Mr. Speaker Milliken opined that he was prepared to find a prima facie case of privilege, "to afford the House an opportunity to pronounce itself on how it wishes to proceed".
Indeed, Mr. Speaker Jerome asked, in his March 21, 1978 ruling on page 3975:
Does the act complained of appear to me at first sight to be a breach of privilege?
...or to put it shortly, has the Member an arguable point? If the Speaker feels any doubt on the question, he should....leave it to the House.
Mr. Speaker Lamoureux also took this perspective of a member getting the benefit of the doubt on October 24, 1966, at page 9004 of Debates and on March 27, 1969, at page 853 of Journals.
In the present novel circumstances, I think the same course of action is equally appropriate.
Before concluding, I want to turn briefly to the other source of contempt in this argument: the unjust damaging of a member's name as constituting an obstruction.
In the February 22 video, "Anonymous" accuses the hon. member for Provencher, through an inference by using sarcastic language, of nepotism in respect of an employee of a member of the other place.
Again, on February 25, it was said that, "It is widely known that you have engaged in criminal activity to further your political career, as you did in 1999".
It needs to be clear that the hon. member has not been convicted of any criminal offence.
These statements are not only misleading but are false and can only be viewed as an attempt to discredit the reputation of my hon. friend.
Mr. Speaker Fraser's ruling on May 5, 1987, at page 5766 of Debates stated:
The privileges of a Member are violated by any action which might impeded him or her in the fulfillment of his or her duties and functions. It is obvious that the unjust damaging of a reputation could constitute such an impediment. The normal course of a Member who felt himself or herself to be defamed would be the same as that available to any other citizen, recourse to the courts under the laws of defamation with the possibility of damages to substitute for the harm that might be done. However, should the alleged defamation take place on the floor of the House, this recourse is not available.
Nonetheless, Mr. Speaker Milliken issued several rulings with respect to the damaging of a member's reputation, including some decisions with respect to mailings by a member into another member's constituency, as well as the previously mentioned case on comments made by the Ethics Commissioner.
Given this departure from Mr. Speaker Fraser's view, but more so the inseparable nature of the accusations from the threats contained in the video published by "Anonymous", I would submit that the Chair should find this to be further ground for finding a prima facie case of privilege.
In closing, the Chair is faced with a case where those who have legitimately held concerns about some business before Parliament have gone about expressing their opposition, and seeking to secure actions in view with their thinking, in an utterly despicable manner.
Extortion and blackmail are not part of legitimate debate. Threats against MPs to vote one way or else are unbecoming of the Canadian political discourse. Not only are they awful and inappropriate, they cross a line. They are a contempt of this honourable House.
The ancient privileges of Parliament were first meant to secure the independence of members' actions free of the interference of the Crown. They subsequently broadened to encompass freedom from interference regardless of the source.
As an institution, we cannot allow this reckless and irresponsible behaviour to go completely unchecked. The first step would be to find a prima facie case of privilege so that the hon. member for Provencher may offer his motion to refer the matter to a committee where the facts can be investigated and the issues studied so that we may, as a House, respond to such behaviour now and in the future.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:35 p.m.
Joe Comartin Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would like to reserve the right to come back to the House in the next day or two to speak to this in more detail. I do not think I heard anything from the deputy House leader on the government side that I would take issue with, but there were a couple of comments from the Minister of Public Safety on which I may want to make some comments, so I would reserve that right. I will get to it as quickly as possible.
Alleged interference of Minister's ability to discharge responsibilities
Oral Questions
3:35 p.m.
The Speaker Andrew Scheer
The Chair will look forward to the member for Windsor—Tecumseh's response.
Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions
3:35 p.m.
Bob Rae Toronto Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, I seem to be in the correction and apology business today. In the course of question period I referred to a company by the name of Crestview. I would like to withdraw, unreservedly, any association of Crestview with the activities in the 2011 election.
Government Response to Petitions
Routine Proceedings
3:35 p.m.
Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre
Tom Lukiwski Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 38(6) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to four petitions.
Justice and Human Rights
Committees of the House
Routine Proceedings
3:35 p.m.
Dave MacKenzie Oxford, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in relation to Bill C-290, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sports betting).
The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with an amendment.
Procedure and House Affairs
Committees of the House
Routine Proceedings
3:35 p.m.
Joe Preston Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 15th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs in relation to its study of the report of the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, entitled "Responding to Changing Needs – Recommendations from the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada Following the 40th General Election".
Pursuant to Standing Order 109 of the House of Commons, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.


text:
7 Towns That Really Want Your Sports Team
This month, an National Basketball Association ownership committee voted against relocating the Sacramento Kings to Seattle, which lost its own beloved SuperSonics to Oklahoma City in 2008. Seattle businessman Chris Hansen and Microsoft
Hansen and Ballmer are still determined to build an arena in Seattle and planning to pitch the NBA's board of governors before it votes formally on the matter Monday. But the league doesn't seem to mind having Seattle around as a bargaining chip to extort taxpayer cash of of cities including Portland, Ore., Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, New Orleans or Phoenix, Ariz., for arena upgrades and other sweet publicly funded amenities. It got $341 million out of taxpayers in Sacramento, Calif., so just consider that your starting point.
It's a game that's been played in just about every major sport in the country, but the winners of arena politics are never the same. Hartford, Conn., residents are still reeling from the National Hockey League's decision to move their Whalers to North Carolina in 1997. Hockey fans in Atlanta, meanwhile, have been stripped of their NHL team twice: In 1980 when the Flames left for Calgary and last year when the Thrashers moved to Winnipeg.
Major League Baseball teams used Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fla., as a threat after the cities built a domed ballpark there in 1996. The Chicago White Sox, San Francisco Giants and Seattle Mariners all used the facility as leverage for their own new stadiums until 1995, when league owners finally added an expansion franchise in Tampa and cashed out.
The line for a pro sports team hasn't shrunk. In fact, here are just seven North American cities just waiting to snatch up one of the teams your metro area is taking for granted:

subset: commoncrawl


text:
What You Miss When You Don't Work on Christmas
PORTLAND, Ore. ( TheStreet) -- My stepfather worked for FedEx
Only when compared to the FedEx, UPS
While it was clear he'd rather be anywhere but the terminal on Christmas Eve, I get a better understanding of why he went in 1995 -- when I took my first job in journalism as a newspaper sports intern at The Star-Ledger in Newark, N.J. The National Basketball Association results, horse racing picks and transaction listings don't get a day off, and my first Christmas dinner away from home was spent cobbling together the sports section's agate page and failing miserably in doing so. I had only worked as a reporting and filing intern the summer before and got my trial by fire as a means of giving some of the other folks a night off.
It was terrifying, but it was great in its own right. That night the head of our sports desk, former Star-Ledger editor Rich Guenther, introduced me to the Italian Cheeseburger -- a three-patty burger on a hoagie roll coated in provolone cheese and a bit of marinara sauce and stuffed with french fries. It was served in a round aluminum container that caught excess cheese and fries and was a glorious holiday meal. It wasn't my grandmother's manicotti or my grandfather's candied yams, but it remains one of my favorite holiday meals.
On and off for the next decade, I was a Christmas worker. I'd willingly take my spot on the copy or pagination desk at the Jersey Journal in Jersey City or Herald News in what's now called Woodland Park, N.J. -- formerly West Paterson, for fairly specious reasons -- and enjoy a relatively light night of pre-packaged stories, the occasional police brief and one of the grandest traditions in newsroom or office holiday culture, the Christmas potluck. I replicated my grandmother's manicotti as best I could and, in return, received a spread of samosas, barbecue ribs, pudding, paella and other treats that would stuff the kitchenette fridge with enough leftovers for the next night's shift.


text:
With a STRPASTHR I'm able to qualify the route by using a 2nd parm
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2017 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact


text:
Skip to comments.Liz Cheney's Senate ambition causes grief for Wyoming GOP
Posted on 07/07/2013 3:42:13 PM PDT by Jean S
Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, is eyeing a Senate seat in Wyoming, a state her father once represented in the House of Representatives.
There's only one problem: The seat Cheney covets is already held by a Republican, Sen. Mike Enzi, a friend and former fly-fishing partner of her father's. And as her designs on the seat become increasingly apparent, the state's Republican establishment is growing concerned that her ambition may tear the Wyoming GOP apart, the New York Times reports.
Cheney, who grew up in Virginia due to her father's rotating roles in public service but moved to Wyoming in 2012, called Enzi this year to tell him she may challenge him in a primary race in 2014.
"She called me and said she's looking at it," Enzi told the New York Times, adding that Cheney did not bother to ask him whether he plans to run again.
Enzi said he hadn't heard from his "good friend" Dick Cheney recently, but "I would expect that he'd call before" his daughter declares her candidacy.
The former vice president, since rebounding from a recent heart transplant, has been more active in political circles of late. According to the Times, Republicans spotted Dick and Liz Cheney together at the Crook County Lincoln Day Dinner, and Dick Cheney has spoken with Republican donors in New York about his daughter's prospective candidacy.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
all these families think they have a divine right to be ruling us, no more pro homo , get into all war families.
Sarah and Cruz please get us out of this mess
These DC hacks think they are entitled. Let a Ted Cruz emerge in Tn,
and we will primary out Lamar Alexander.
Never underestimate the selfish ambition of a politician or would-be politician.
The 'good of the people'?
F*** the people.
Sen. Mike Enzi needs to tell Lesb and Dick to pizz up a rope.
GO LIZ!!!! SHe is WAY more Conservative than even her father....maybe not her mother.
Geesh...Liz is the STRAIGHT DAUGHTER WHO HAS 5 KIDS!!! I have never even heard her talk about her Lesbian Sister one time!!
I don't know anything about Enzi, but if he's not a RINO, I think what she's doing is wrong.
"She called me and said she's looking at it," Enzi told the New York Times, adding that Cheney did not bother to ask him whether he plans to run again. Enzi said he hadn't heard from his "good friend" Dick Cheney recently, but "I would expect that he'd call before" his daughter declares her candidacy.Thanks Jean S.
If she disagrees with her dad and her sister about celebrating Mary's "marriage" to a woman and the gay couple raising Liz's nieces and nephews with "two mommies" and not their biological father, then Liz should say so. She hasn't in the past, Dick Cheney has gone on record to say he totally supports it, and Mary Cheney says she can't think of a single issue where Liz disagrees with her dad.
She wants to present herself as the "more conservative" candidate for the U.S. Senate, so let's hear the argument how she is "more conservative" and would legislate to the right of Mike Enzi.
Mike Enzi has a 92% lifetime ACU rating, is ranked by the National Journal as the 6th most conservative member of the U.S. Senate, and is absolutely 100% rock solid when it comes to opposing "gay rights" and illegal immigration, with a voting record to prove it.
So where does Liz Cheney stand?
Lastly..it will help to keep the others honest..
Sarah is NOT comparable to Cruz. SHE has endorsed many RINOS who have been pushing this Amnesty. Time to cast her aside. Lest we be fooled again.
Enzi is like the solid, dependable player on offense or defense whose name doesn't get called that often. He doesn't Make PLAYS.
OK.....maybe she should run in VIRGINIA!!
Let's not forget Simpson(+Mizzoli?). Don't miss him at all.
What is this a Dukedom? These clowns better realize that we are sick of inherited titles.
I hope the people of Wyoming are smarter than this.
It's not hers either. Why doesn't she run for the senate from Virginia? She's spent most of her life there.
respectfully disagree.
Sarah si what we need right now as we need Cruz too.
All these elitist ruling class establishment RINO's can get out
You missed my point..the establishment is trying to make her out as evil for daring to contemplate a primary run..she has every right to do so..she moved her family to Wyoming last year...look..if Hillary can parachute into NY to run for Senate..at least Cheney has long time family roots in Wyoming..
"SHe is WAY more Conservative than even her father...."
That's what they said about George W.
Amen, Brother.
TRUE.....and he was......for a while until LAURA NEUTERED HIM~
Interesting. Is Enzi a RINO, or is Liz the RINO in this match-up?
A carpetbagger is a carpetbagger is a carpetbagger regardless of political party. Cheney should run where she lived.
probably Liz on gays and immigration
She does have every right to RUN for the seat. But she NO right to claim the mantle of the "more conservative" candidate in a GOP primary against an staunch conservative with a 92% lifetime ACU rating. That is the critical issue for a candidate running in a GOP primary and asking voters to replace the incumbent with her. The media is already presenting this race with Liz Cheney as the "more conservative challenger" to Mike Enzi, when their position on the issues would suggest otherwise.
If he allowed her to neuter him, he had no stones in the first place. By that I simply mean that one's truly head principles are firm. If one's spouse says, no you must change your principles as I say, then the aforementioned principles were never for real to begin with.
A heaping serving of situation ethics with a large side order of expediency.
No more excuses for sell outs. No more enabling of two faced politicians. No more "yes, but".
I'm not a Wisconsinite.
However, the growing appearance of these "political families" is turning into a ruling class.
Whatever she has said in statements, don't amount to much in my book. So many Republicans promise and speak with a "tough" attitude. But when it really counts, they rarely show a spine.
Has Liz claimed the mantle of "more conservative" or is the MSM trying to stir up a battle. I suspect she's trying to "Booker" him..make him declare his intentions early on..at 69..he'd have a safe, and east, general election..but he may not want to face a tough primary...and that may prove her point, and mine..that we need more new, fresh blood in the GOP senate..
The One Nation PAC in California is trying to drum up grassroots support for his her bid by collecting 50,000 signatures in favor of "drafting" her for the Senate, and presenting Liz Cheney as the "more conservative" option.
Here's the evil "RINO" she'd be replacing:
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Enzi won a tight primary for election to the U.S. Senate in 1996 and was re-elected by large margins in 2002 and 2008. Since his election, he has consistently been ranked as one of the most conservative members of the Senate. He has a lifetime ACU rating of 92% and was ranked by National
Journal as the sixth-most conservative U.S. Senator in its March 2007 conservative/liberal rankings.
On social issues, Enzi is strongly conservative. He opposes all types of abortion and has voted in favor of proposals that would provide restrictions on the procedure for minors, those stationed on military bases, and other groups. He has voted in favor of failed constitutional amendments that suggested banning gay marriage and flag desecration. Enzi also is a strong supporter of gun rights and is ranked very favorably by the National Rifle Association. In April 2013, Senator Enzi was one of forty-six senators to vote against the passing of a bill which would have expanded background checks for all gun buyers. Enzi voted with 40 Republicans and 5 Democrats to stop the passage of the bill. NY Times predicted a 0% chance of Senator Enzi voting Yay on the bill.
Enzi has voted for the repeal of legislation governing such things as the estate tax and the "marriage penalty." Enzi is a signer of Americans for Tax Reforms Taxpayer Protection Pledge.He supports partial privatization of Social Security and has consistently voted against measures to expand Medicare or to enroll more children or lower-class individuals in public health care.
Enzi takes a hard-line view on illegal immigration and has been rated highly by groups that support tighter border controls. He has voted in favor of the construction of a fence along the U.S.-Mexican border and against the implementation of guest worker programs.
They still have to run a campaign. Liz isn't claiming inheritance of any political office. Maybe the spoiled children of carpenters and grocery store owners shouldn't go into the family business either?
The establishment pubbie fools can learn a thing or two from this woman. Watch some of her interviews and how she makes mince-meat out of the typical idiot lib-hole "journalist"
Well, after all those years of giving squishy Republicans in "red states" a pass, they FINALLY found an "low-key" incumbent in a safe state they WANT to primary. Unfortunately, instead of a RINO dope like Bob Corker, it's someone who is extremely reliable and does what we want 95% of the time. Let's replace him with the daughter of Dick "Gay marriage is awesome cuz my daughter is gay" Cheney.
Geesh, no wonder RATs control the Senate with the geniuses on our side. I guess their next move will be to draft "true conservative" George P. Bush to run against Jim Inhofe or something.
Fair or not, Liz Cheney will lose the GOP primary the first time she is cornered on whether she supports gay marriage like her father and her lesbian sister.
In the general election it wouldn't be fatal. However, in a Wyoming GOP primary, hard to see how she survives without lying through her teeth or doing serious damage to family relations.
Also, it's not "his" seat...
Not hers either. Even if her dad was VP during the disastrous Bush presidency. Record deficits. Medicare expansion. Kennedy-Bush "education reform". Biggest economic crash since 1929. Trillion dollars spent invading Iraq and turning it over to a shiite gov't that is now Iran's closest ally.
"The Freedom Index: A Congressional Scorecard Based on the U.S. Constitution rates congressmen based on their adherence to constitutional principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, national sovereignty, and a traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements. The percentages below are cumulative scores are based on key votes from 1999 through 2013."
Name: Michael Enzi
Senate: Wyoming, Republican
Cumulative Freedom Index Score: 70%
Considering Enzi's fiscal score from other organizations is very, very good, I'm guessing his cumulative score on the "Freedom Index" is lower because they rate politicians for "avoiding foreign entanglements", and Enzi was a pretty strong hawk when it came to Iraq and Afghanistan, supporting the Patriot Act, "enhanced interrogation techniques", Gitmo, etc., so certainly the Paulbot wing of the GOP would object to many of his foriegn policy votes. As for his other votes on "limited government, fiscal responsibility", etc., they speak for themselves:
National Education Association: F
Chamber of Commerce: 75%
Club for Growth: 99%
National Federation of Independent Business: 85%
Americans for Tax Reform: 100%
Citizens Against Government Waste: 77%
National Taxpayers Union: 92%
(Source: http://thehill.com/resources/lawmaker-ratings/76133-sen-mike-enzi-r-wyo )
Now, given that Liz Cheney is Dick's daughter and was a very staunch supporter of the Bush doctrine and Bush administration's interventionist foreign policy, I seriously doubt she is going to be able to bash Enzi for his "neo-con" tendencies and pick up the Paulbot vote. They pretty much despise all that stuff that her daddy implemented and she defended tooth and nail.
If some conservatives want to buy into this fantasy that Liz Cheney is the "true conservative" in the race, bring it on. As others have repeatedly noted on this thread, she's pretty much DOA in the primary once she she gets corned about her family's support for gay "marriage" and has to articulate her own position. It would wise for her to avoid picking a fight with another conservative.
They still have to run a campaign. Liz isnt claiming inheritance of any political office. Maybe the spoiled children of carpenters and grocery store owners shouldnt go into the family business either?
There is a big difference between a carpenter or a store owner and politician. The carpenters and store owners ACTUALLY OWN the businesses they pass on to their children.
A political office is not inherited at this time in the US. The Dukedoms and Earldoms of the old countries have not for the most part affected the US, but it is trending this way.
If you want royalty and cannot see the difference between honest ownership and Royal birthright entitlement you live in the wrong country and are dangerous to this country's future.
Enzi sponsored the internet sales tax legislation.
I've seen Liz in action and she is her mother's daughter.
I don't know how she will address gay marriage, but face it, folks...that ship has sailed.
She's an articulate conservative, she has no fear...and we need leaders.
And idiocy like this shows why liberals continue to control the Senate every election cycle. In addition to the numerous marxist Dems we need to focus on defeating in 2014, there are easily half a dozen RINOs we could purge, all but one of which (Susan Collins of ME) is from a heavily GOP state. Saxby Chambliss, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Lamar Alexander, John Cornyn, and Thad Cochran are all to the left of Enzi and up in 2014.
But is anyone talking about recruiting high profile challengers to THEM? Nope. Liz Cheney and her fans on the internet think we should waste lots of time and money to purge an incumbent Senator from Wyoming who does what we want 95% of the time. Because a pampered politician's kid from a pro-gay marriage family is somehow "more conservative" than the guy who has already PROVEN to be a reliable vote on almost anything.
The libs on DailyKos LOVE this, seeing stupid conservatives eat their own and get distracted trying to "take out" Mike Enzi while numerous socialists in the Senate get a free pass.
You can support Cheney's kid if you want. I'm supporting Enzi if he runs for re-election and I hope she wises up in the future and uses her time to attack socialists from now on. Game on.
Then don't vote/campaign for her. No one should be denied a chance to run for office if there are no legal constraints against them doing so. And I'm happy to be dangerous in your tiny mind.
Sorry, I'm not following you. Any enthusiasm we show for Liz comes at the expense of would-be challengers to the red-state RINOs?
Maybe you can explain the math there. I want the best we can have for a given office.
Can we do better than Graham? Sure. Can we do better than Enzo? No doubt.
Enzo, Enzi, etc...
You might look back at the 2006 election, where a bunch of foolish conservatives focused all their time and efforts on re-electing Al Gore's buddy Joe LIEberman (because the war on terror was "the most important issue"), and didn't bother helping actual conservatives in hotly contested Senate races, such as George Allen (R-VA), Conrad Burns (R-MT), and Jim Talent (R-MO). All three lost their re-election bids by less than half a percentage point, and as a result, the RATs won the Senate by a razor-thin margin of 1 seat (and they continue to control the senate today).
There's an excellent case to be made that they would have won and Harry Reid wouldn't be running the Senate if numerous conservatives had taken their lips off Joe Lieberman's rear long enough to help DEFEAT socialists, instead of wasting time in Conn. Oh well, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
The focus should be on DEFEATING socialists, NOT on defeating solid conservatives or HELPING socialists win re-election. So who's going to run against real RINOs like Lamar Alexander? Right now we have nobody, and conservatives are focused on eating their own in Wyoming instead.
>> Sure. Can we do better than Enzo? No doubt. <<
Enzi has a 92% conservative record. If you want perfection, try recruiting Jesus for a Senate race because he's the only person I know who is 100% perfect. Enzi's not perfect but sure as hell is much more conservative than the vast majority of people in the Senate right now.
>> I want the best we can have for a given office. <<
So how is a pampered politician's kid who doesn't even live in Wyoming "the best we can have" for that seat? I KNOW Enzi is rock solid on opposing gay "rights" and illegal aliens. Liz Cheney is "not proven" at best, and certainly her family and the Bush adminstration is pretty damn lousy in those areas, wouldn't you agree? Are Liz Cheney fans really going to delude themselves into thinking we're better off if we fire Enzi and replace him with someone who will invite her sister's lesbian "wife" to her swearing in? How does that advance conservatism? Liberals will just have more ammo to gloat about gay marriage is "inevitable" if the Cheney family is parading it around Washington. It seems to me that Dick Cheney fans just want to hear the words "Senator Cheney" and are blind to the reality that you'd be moving that Senate seat to the LEFT by putting his daughter in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


text:
Americas Best Value Inn Use Terms
When you voluntarily provide us with information, such as your name, address, phone number, credit card information and room preference, your information is encrypted if transferred over a Secured Sockets Layer (SSL) browser, available on browsers such as Netscape Navigator or Microsoft Internet Explorer. The padlock icon on the lower right side of your screen will appear locked and the first characters of the Site address will change from "http" to "https" if you are accessing a secure server. Once information reaches us, we store it behind a secure firewall that blocks access to the information outside our server.
We will not sell, trade, rent or release your private information to anyone outside our company and franchisees, without your approval and giving you the opportunity to opt out. We may disclose your information to parties requiring it under law or use it to perform credit checks, report or collect debts owed or protect the rights or property of Americas Best Value Inn by Vantage, the Site or its users.
If we offer a contest, sweepstakes, and promotion, we will post clear rules about how we may request additional private information that may be used by our sponsors for marketing. You will be given the option to opt out of the opportunity to receive additional information from us or our sponsors.
If you leave the Site via links on the Site, we are not responsible for the privacy or other policies on those sites.
Site Use
You are responsible for the content of your submissions, and you allow us to use that content in ways consistent with our privacy policy below. You may not post or transmit to the Site any unlawful, defamatory, profane or like material that could give rise to civil or criminal liability under law.
The rates listed on the Site are provided by the individual hotels and are represented in their local currency. Currency may be converted at the Site, however, it is provided for informational use only. We base international currency conversion on publicly available sources, so we do not warrant or guarantee that conversion rates will be the same at the time you pay the hotel. Your payments to hotels on the Site are exclusively between you and the hotel, and we do not assume any liability or involvement in disputes you may have with a hotel. Hotels may change price and availability of rooms listed on the Site without notice.
Our Address


text:
June 13, 2006
New Google Homepage Design
Going to google.com, I saw a new design that puts the navigation on the left side of the page. Maybe they try to make the homepage design consistent with the new SERP look.
Here's another homepage design experiment.
Related experiments (from April):
Extended snippets | Top result | Left navigation on SERP.
12 comments:
- AnonymousJune 13, 2006 at 1:06 PM
This is quite old...It start appearing since last month.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJune 13, 2006 at 2:22 PM
Did you check your browser cookie to see what was set that gave you the new homepage?ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJune 13, 2006 at 6:10 PM
Why is Google's homepage so LAME?ReplyDelete
I think Yahoo does a better job, recognizing that users want to personalize the site they use every day.
- AnonymousJune 13, 2006 at 8:40 PM
RE anonymous,ReplyDelete
which is it that you use everyday, Google or Yahoo? If it is Google than you are definitely able to personalize your homepage. All you have to do is click the Personalized Home link (upper right hand corner). In fact I think Google does a better job at letting users personalize their pages than Yahoo.
- AnonymousJune 16, 2006 at 3:30 AM
Google have the right idea with there design, it's been the same since as long as I've been using it and its its simplicisty and results that make me use it. I have recently set up my Personalized Google page and am findiing it fantastic, its replaced my rss reader pretty much. A great company, doing more for the user than any other.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousApril 26, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Google is so plain why dont you make it more atractive. like yahoo. Google only has a typing bar and thats it, but yahoo has all this other stuff but for some reson i stick with google because its easy to use and its easy to do stuffReplyDelete
- AnonymousJanuary 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM
I think that the google homepage has been lik,e this for a very long time so i think you should change it to somthing better coulorful and more attractive so it looks alot better try it see wat you thinkReplyDelete
- AnonymousApril 23, 2010 at 5:02 AM
So...Then how do you stiff up the Google page on only your very own computer? You know, like change it and make a backgroud to it or something...ReplyDelete
Use iGoogle to personalize Google's homepage with themes and gadgets.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJune 10, 2010 at 2:39 AM
I want the plain homepage background. If Google want to offer a background design facility, why not point out this is available by adding it to the toolbar?ReplyDelete
Why should I have to design a blank background?
Google - LEAVE WHAT EVERYONE HAS USED FOR YEARS ALONE.
- AnonymousDecember 22, 2011 at 3:24 AM
Goole- this is rubbishReplyDelete
this is really too useful and have more ideas from yours. keep sharing many techniques. eagerly waiting for your new blog and useful information. keep doing more.ReplyDelete
school prospectus design uk | school prospectus uk


text:
Artist Collection: (324 of 413)< Previous | Next >
Tags: smooth coated otter, otter, lutrogale perspicillata, brown, endangered, mammal, animals, captivity, england, kent, sandwich, wild, wildli
- + MOUSE OVER image to zoom in
- + CLICK to enlarge
smooth coated otterby serenityphotography
- Medium
- Photography
- Artist Notes
- The Smooth-coated Otter is listed as a vulnerable species, and occurs throughout much of southern Asia. They are carnivorous, eating insects, earthworms, crustaceans, frogs, rodents, birds, if they can't get their preferred choice of fish and reptiles. See more at www.SerenityPhotography.co.uk
- Contact Artist Send Artist an Email
More about serenityphotography
- Location
- kent, england
- Artist Biography
- Born in Dover, England, I became disillusioned with the rat race and began travelling in 1997. On my first round the world trip I discovered a passion for travel, photography and scuba diving. Since then I have spent a total of five years on the road, become a diving instructor and semi-prof ...


text:
Chelsea manager Rafael Benitez has hinted at being replaced by current Real Madrid manager Jose Mourinho.
Bottom-dwellers Hull City gave league-leading Chelsea a fight, but that's all it was in a 2-0 defeat at Stamford Bridge.
Granit Xhaka was sent off for the second time in his debut Premier League season and it almost cost Arsenal as they needed a late goal to win 2-1 over Burnley at the Emirates.
Andre Gray scored a stoppage time penalty to draw Burnley level with Arsenal but the Clarets couldn't hold on and dropped a 2-1 decision in the 8th minute of stoppage time.
Southampton let two first half goals help this coast to an eventual 3-0 win over Leicester City, though key defender Virgil van Dijk had to limp off early with an ankle injury.
Leicester City continue their lackluster league campaign, specifically on the road, with a drab performance in a 3-0 loss to Southampton.
Crystal Palace is slowly running out of time to figure things out under new manager Sam Allardyce after another loss.
AFC Bournemouth bounced back from going behind twice to grab a 2-2 draw at home to Watford.
Andy Carroll scored twice and Jonathan Calleri netted in stoppage time as West Ham United moved into 10th with a 3-1 win over Middlesbrough at the Riverside Stadium on Saturday.
Middlesbrough saw their winless streak extend to five matches as they were defeated 3-1 by West Ham United at the Riverside Stadium on Saturday.
Darren Fletcher and Chris Brunt scored within six minutes of each other as West Brom continued their strong form with a 2-0 home win over Sunderland.
Sunderland continue to sink after a 2-0 loss to West Brom along with a shocking Swansea win at Anfield.


text:
22 Listings:
With over a years of combined experience, the Avant Business Brokers is a full service main to mid-stream Business Brokerage, assisting all types of companies - from Main Street Start-up Businesses to well established Middle Market public and private entities.
Proud of our heritage, expertise in consulting, financing and local market reach and popularity, we are committed to provide the best in brokerage services and assist business owners not only maximize, but ultimately realize enterprise value. We as a company work towards the goal of competently and confidentially serving clients and our solid background in this industry makes us an invaluable resource that business owners find helpful to navigate the complicated and ever-changing marketplace.
As a business broker, we have the best people, process & marketing working for you and we've taken great care in creating a reputation that will carry us successfully through the 21st century.
Ahmedali Saiyed
Avant Business Brokers
Warminster, PA
Excellent location, with 41 years of clientele. Great potential for growth. Business installs custom window shades, pleated shades, blinds, custom made draperies, woven woods, shutters, drapery rods, carpets and valances.
Bucks County, PA
Selling online vanities, shower enclosures, shower doors, shower panels, tubs and saunas.
Established business with the strong website and stable income.
Has ability to grow.
Thank you for signing up for the BizBuySell bulletin.
Sign up for the BizBuySell Bulletin and get advice on:
You can opt out of the BizBuySell Bulletin at any time.
Business listed by:
Unknown Broker
Unknown Broker Company
Full name is required.
Get free alerts via email when new businesses are listed matching your Bucks County Home Furniture & Furnish... search criteria.
Reveal hidden alerts and unlock advanced features on search results and detail pages to help you find the perfect business.
Premium Members also get valuable insight into the buying process via our
video series, access to our advanced
business search agent, and more!


text:
Dave Ramsey offers tips for working with or without an agent
Dear Dave,
My husband has written a historical novel, but we�re not sure how to obtain an agent or market the book. Right now, he�s self-published and has sold about 100 copies. What would you suggest to gain more exposure?
�Mary in New York, N.Y.
Dave Says: Having an agent isn�t a bad thing, but it can take time to find a good one who is willing to work with you. When I first wrote Financial Peace, I self-published the book and carried copies around in the trunk of my car. I�d talk about it to anyone who would listen, and I worked up speaking engagements with small groups. In the meantime, I�d suggest getting in touch with book clubs and libraries in your area. There are probably some historical groups nearby with interests unique to the period of history your husband has written about, and he could approach them about the possibilities of speaking and doing book signings. Make sure he�s got a Facebook page and Twitter presence to get the word out, as well. It might also be a good idea to read Mike Hyatt�s book "Platform." It�s about launching and marketing things, and the processes of building and implementing a platform for your work. Good luck!
Brought to you by: American Profile


text:
Project to address flooding in eastern FD
Flooding would be reduced in the area around Crossroads Mall and traffic would move more efficiently under a preliminary improvement plan introduced to the public Tuesday evening.
Work on the plan, which is part of the East Region Storm Sewer Project in Fort Dodge, would begin this spring with the burial of overhead power lines along First Avenue South between Veterans Bridge and 29th Street.
Some storm sewer work could start this fall, according Wade Greiman, a project manager with Snyder & Associates of Ankeny. That company prepared the plans for the project.
Greiman said street improvements will begin in 2014 or 2015.
He presented the plans to owners and managers of businesses in the area during a Tuesday evening meeting in Crossroads Mall.
Greiman said all the plans he displayed Tuesday are preliminary and subject to change.
He estimated it would cost $10 million to $11 million to do all of the work. He said $8 million to $9 million has been secured, leaving a funding gap of $1.5 million to $2 million.
Streets around the mall have been covered with water following every major rainstorm for decades. Councilman Dean Hill said Tuesday that the area has been a problem spot for 20 years or more.
"This is a project I've been excited about for a long time and supported all the way," he said.
Cary Kemna, the dealer at Kemna Auto Fort Dodge, 10 S. 25th St., said during the meeting that he supports the project and added that he would consider donating some needed land to the city to complete it.
The lot at Kemna Auto Fort Dodge has flooded repeatedly and in some cases, vehicles were ruined by high water.
The power line work will be the first step in the project. In October 2012, the City Council directed MidAmerican Energy to bury the wires and recover its costs via a charge added to its customers' bills.
The cost of burying those lines has been estimated at $1.4 million. Paying that off will cost the average residential electrical customer in Fort Dodge $4 a month.
The storm sewer work will start in the fall after the power lines are down, according to Greiman. Because the plans are still being refined, he could not say which specific storm sewer project would be started first.
The plans unveiled Tuesday envision the potential for three ponds that would store rain water that pours off streets and parking lots and into the storm sewers. One of those ponds would be near the east end of the Veterans Bridge near Hiway Truck Equipment. Another one would be south of CS Bank on North 29th Street. The third would be east of Hobby Lobby, 301 S. 29th St.
Greiman said engineers are still trying to determine if the ponds will be needed.
A new 42-inch diameter storm sewer under South 25th Street is among the other proposed drainage improvements.
New right-turn lanes would be created where First Avenue South intersects with 25th and 29th streets. Greiman said those turning lanes will reduce traffic backups and enable more vehicles to get through the intersections when the traffic signal is green.
South 25th Street, which is now four-lanes wide between First and Fifth avenues south, would be reduced to three lanes.The revamped street would consist of a northbound lane, a southbound lane and a center turning lane. Greiman said the three lanes will handle the volume of traffic just as well as the current four lanes.
He said access to all businesses will be maintained while the construction is under way.


text:
Skip to comments.Imposing Weight-Loss Guidelines: Another Function of ObamaCare?
Posted on 05/20/2013 1:00:12 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
The federal Affordable Care Act, better known as ObamaCare, may provide activists and government a little-known wedge to advance their obesity agendas through regulated health-care providers specifically Americas nearly 3,000 non-profit hospitals. One organization, The STOP Obesity Alliance, recently identified this wedge as a way to have such hospitals embrace its core convictions, including one principle which questions the role of personal responsibility as a cause and a solution to obesity.
Community Health Needs Assessments. Section 9007 of the Act requires non-profit hospitals, as a condition of maintaining their tax-exempt status, to conduct Community Health Needs Assessments (CHNAs). These documents, which must be filed with the IRS, will demonstrate the health needs of the hospitals local communities and explain how hospitals are meeting those needs. One assessment of CHNAs likened them to banks responsibilities under the Community Reinvestment Act, in the sense that the documents might be used as tools by activists to prompt agreements or actions. Its likely the STOP alliance understood this when it made its recommendations.
STOPs Recommendations. The STOP Obesity Alliance strongly encourages nonprofit hospitals to overcome and prevent obesity on the following core principles. On balance, the coalitions principles are laudable (encourage physical activity, encourage best practices, address and reduce stigma). One recommendation that CHNAs use a sustained loss of five to ten percent of current weight as a barometer to successful weight reduction may be troublesome for hospitals. If hospitals incorporate such a specific goal into their CHNAs, and their patients dont achieve such consistent weight loss, that could provide STOP and other advocates with the clear data they need to oppose continued non-profit status at the IRS or with a potent stick to prod hospitals to certain actions.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Nanny State PING!
gonna love it when the obama voter find out ... LOL ... could be a revolt of the fat or the fat could be thrown around.
What's the time? obama voters can plead they were prisoners of doubt ... they filled in the blank under ignorance and thought they check none of the above.
EVERYTHING about your life will "have and effect on the healthcare system",
and therefore subject to regulation.
All your menus are belong to Big Brother.
Who's gonna whip Barack into shape, so he can benchpress a buck and quarter?
If you don't want to have to navigate the terrible future of Obamacare, you may want to lose weight and get healthy as you can, because they will deny any of us Conservatives any help for the good of the "children"...
This will blow back on them like all of the other scandals that will drag the Obummer administration to it's knees.
People don't realize what they've asked for, and I'm going to enjoy watching them get it.
I didn't read the bill, but I know how communists work. This is coming. Make no mistake, Obamacare is law, and won't be overturned.
Physicals will be mandatory. Not going will result in increased rates, fines, and eventually exclusion from Obamacare.
Doctor's recommendations will no longer be suggestions, they will be orders. Failure to comply will result in increased rates, fines, and eventually exclusion.
I can't wait until those fat b*st*rds living in mom's basement, blogging for Obama, get the business end of Obamacare. The cries will be like music to my ears.
She'd be a great "run stopper" with that low center of gravity.
"EVERYTHING about your life will have and effect on the healthcare system,
Except being a homosexual.
gonna love it when the obama voter find out ... LOL ... could be a revolt of the fat or the fat could be thrown around.
What you mean we can't buy ding dongs and ho hos with my EBT card anymore....
Everyone who is NOT an elitist will recieve a caloric ration card, much like a debit card, to be presented anywhere u buy food. When that is met for the month, time for some mandatory weight loss. Based upon an adults mandatory 1,800 daily caloric intake, you will be alotted 11,100 calories a month.
I'm 5'10" and 260lbs as of this AM.
Looking at their BMI charts, I'm moribundly obese.
An on again/off again gym-rat I could tie most doctors, not to mention politicians, in knots with my bare hands.
According to the governments numbers, in order to not be considered "dangerously fat", I need to get down to 183. I could probably lose 20 lbs, but almost 80?
Maybe if they amputate both of my legs...
who's got a War on Women NOW???
Because the real "target" is Christianity.
And homos are a great spear point for criminalizing Christianity.
Remember, this is coming from the party who had the slogan that no one should come between you and your doctor.
"Whatchoo mean I gotta loose fitty pound? I hain't gonna do dat no way no how! Doanchoo take my phone!"
A simpler and probably legal solution - modifying food stamps to limit food purchases like WIC. You only get fresh fruit, vegetables, low fat milk, low fat cheese and healthy items. No more junk food or pre-prepared food. Given that 20% of households receive food stamps, and poverty correlates to obesity, this type of change could be made in the name of both health and cost savings.
or be forced to exercise to Richard Simmons videos......
Fine and smart idea. I can hear the complaining already.
I'm with you. I'm 6'3" and 274 lbs this morning. I bench press 495, ride a couple hundred miles per week on my bike and eat no carbs or wheat products. Yet, I'm morbidly obese according to the BMI charts. Go figure!?!?!
I read an article last week that indicated that waist / height ratio is a more effective gauge of proper weight than the dumb BMI. It indicated that your waist should be no more than 50% of you height. Makes sense to me, and is quite generous in the proportions - IMO.
Permission to starve old farts in hospital.
Leg night tonight. Warm up squats started at 285... Stopped at 425. Still working through a bad knee...
Did do another 100 broomhandle squats, curls, toe-raisers, leg-extensions, and lunges. Always hard to make it up the stairs after a good session. ;-)
When are they going to reinstate sodomy laws or laws against adultery? Surely the government is going to enforce monogamy, because promiscuity is a burden to the health care system.
They voted to be a ward of the state. It's not very complicated government is paying for your health care, your housing. Their money their rules. Or more accurately our money and our rules. Drop the Chalupa.
Or they can leave their parents basement and Obama's plantation. And grow up.
That's fine with me and every other taxpayer. You are relying on somebody else to feed you. Remember the old line that your mom and dad told you. Our house our rules. Now shut up and eat your veggies.
Have at it with your menu. Let them eat brussels sprouts.
Just leave freedom loving people alone.
yep, it is gonna sizzle when the fat goes into the fire.
Congratulations. You are now on the DOJ terrorist watch list. If you want to get to the top, just use the word "constitution."
Thanks for the ping!
There will have to be a racial component to this because it will never work.
>The STOP Obesity Alliance strongly encourages nonprofit hospitals to overcome and prevent obesity on the following core principles. On balance, the coalitions principles are laudable (encourage physical activity, encourage best practices, address and reduce stigma). One recommendation that CHNAs use a sustained loss of five to ten percent of current weight as a barometer to successful weight reduction<
Let me get this straight. Some bean counters decided, in order to "prevent" obesity, to make losing 10% of an individual's current weight a demand?? What if the person is 23, 5'2' and weighs 110????
If Jesus could suffer and die on a cross, the DOJ is nothing.
The sheeple/fellow citizens/publik serpents in charge will change.
Alamo-girl, can you do me a favor and replace your "thanks for the ping" to a different one. Not that I don't love it.:-)
Just respond with: "coercing citizens to eat right, excercize and quit smoking is NOT a legitimate gubmint function. Unless they are paying for your healthcare costs."
Well said, dear Eric Blair 2084!
I will also be there, to taste their salty tears. Yeah, baby!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


text:
"Can't we all just get along?" asked Rodney King. No, answers Matt Barnum on Dropout Nation. School reformers and traditionalists have different ideas on "what's best for kids." Ideas matter.
A Teach for America alum, he criticizes TFA President Wendy Kopp for writing, "We have to stop thinking of ourselves as locked in an ideological battle and focus on doing everything in our power to give students today the education they deserve."
. . . Kopp seems to create a dichotomy between ideologues –those "locked in an ideological battle" – on the one hand, and those who want to do what's best for kids, on the other. In actuality, ideologues not only want what's best for kids, they actually have ideas – some good, some bad – for how to achieve results. Reformers emphasize school choice, parental empowerment, and teacher quality; traditionalists focus on class size, early-childhood education, and wrap-around services.
It seems to me that part of the problem in education is not too many, but rather, too few ideologues.
Traditionalist Diane Ravitch and union leader Karen Lewis have engaged in increasingly vicious attacks, writes Barnum. Reformers have employed "harmful and distasteful rhetoric." He favors "discussing ideas over demeaning people."
At times, compromise may be necessary Barnum concedes. But not always. An "uncompromising, ideological vision of change to our education system may, in fact, be what's best for kids."


text:
Thanks Alder Bruer, Et Al
We're grateful for those who seek to serve.
As we look back at the Spring election we are impressed with the number of contested races that were featured on the ballot. There were more than usual and that's good for democracy. We were also impressed with the quality of those candidates and the campaigns they ran. And as always we appreciate the desire to serve that resulted in these folks making the commitment to hold elected office.
We want to give special recognition however to Alderman Tim Bruer who was defeated in his bid for reelection to the Madison City Council. Bruer was the council's longest serving member having been elected in 1984. Twenty-nine years is a lot of Tuesday nights in the City-County Building, to say nothing of the countless additional hours required or offered. Bruer lost a hard fought race, but no one worked harder for his South Madison constituents over the last three decades. That part of town is better for having had Bruer represent it, and that's made Madison a better city as well.
E-Newsletter Registration
Get the Madison Magazine E-Newsletter
Sign up for e-newsletters to get the first taste of Madison Magazine's top stories and more!Read More »


text:
Too Many Males Makes Breeding Unlikely for Magenta Petrel
Contributing Monkie G Living Staff Monkies
Topics of Interest chatham island taiko, rodents, storm petrel
Published on September 8, 2008
Section G Living, Nature / Non Human Stories
It's too bad there's no match.com for birds. At this point that seems to be the only thing that's can save New Zealand's Magenta Petrel. This rare and critically endangered seabird (also known as the Chatham Island Taiko) is, like so many of us, having a really hard time getting lucky.
Not to be confused with New Zealand's Storm Petrel, the Magenta was first discovered at sea in the late 1860s. In 1978, it was rediscovered on New Zealand's Chathan Island but with an 80% population cut, courtesy of introduced species like pigs, cats and rodents competing for the Petrel's nesting burrows.
If you thought finding a mate was hard, try these odds: of the known Magenta Petrels in existence, 95% of them are male. And if you weed out the potentially sterile ones or the shy ones (who knows…there could even be some gay ones), you're left with somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 to 15 breeding pairs in the world.