text:
Backgrounder #2663 on Regulation
March 13, 2012
March 13, 2012 | Backgrounder on Regulation
Abstract: During the first three years of the Obama Administration, 106 new major federal regulations added more than $46 billion per year in new costs for Americans. This is almost four times the number—and more than five times the cost—of the major regulations issued by George W. Bush during his first three years. Hundreds more regulations are winding through the rulemaking pipeline as a consequence of the Dodd–Frank financial-regulation law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency's global warming crusade, threatening to further weaken an anemic economy and job creation. Congress must increase scrutiny of regulations—existing and new. Reforms should include requiring congressional approval of major rules and mandatory sunset clauses for major regulations.
In January 2011, President Barack Obama announced, with much fanfare, a new get-tough policy on overregulation. Acknowledging that "rules have gotten out of balance" and "have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs," he pledged a comprehensive review of regulations imposed by the federal government.[1] Despite this promise of restraint, however, the torrent of new rules and regulations from Washington continued throughout 2011, with 32 new major regulations.[2] These new rules increase regulatory costs by almost $10 billion annually along with another $6.6 billion in one-time implementation costs.
During the three years of the Obama Administration, a total of 106 new major regulations[3] have been imposed at a cost of more than $46 billion annually, and nearly $11 billion in one-time implementation costs. This amount is about five times the cost imposed by the prior Administration of George W. Bush.
This regulatory tide is not expected to ebb anytime soon. Hundreds of new regulations are winding through the rulemaking pipeline as a consequence of the vast Dodd–Frank financial-regulation law (the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act), Obamacare, and the Environmental Protection Agency's global warming crusade, threatening to further weaken an anemic economy and job creation.
In much the same way that high taxes hamper investment and innovation, escalating regulatory costs undermine the American economy. Small businesses in particular are under siege. When surveyed in December 2011 about their single biggest problem by the National Federation of Independent Business, 19 percent of respondents cited "regulations and red tape," up from 15 percent a year ago, and second only to "poor sales."[4]
But regulations are not just a problem for entrepreneurs. American workers and their families have been hit hard by the persistent lack of job creation that results, in part, from regulatory excess. Meanwhile, regulatory costs are passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices and limited product choices. For example, last year's price controls on the fees that banks may charge to process debit-card transactions have prompted cancellation of customer rewards programs and free services, as well as higher fees on checking accounts and credit cards.[5]
Tracking the New Burdens . Neither Congress nor the Administration keeps tabs on the total number and cost of regulations. But by mining the Federal Register and various government databases, new regulations may be identified and regulatory costs calculated. During 2011, the Obama Administration completed a total of 3,611 rulemaking proceedings, according to the Federal Rules Database maintained by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), of which 79 were classified as "major," meaning that each had an expected economic impact of at least $100 million per year.[6] Of those, 32 increased regulatory burdens (defined as imposing new limits or mandates on private-sector activity).[7] Just five major actions decreased regulatory burdens. The remainder of the rules adopted were non-regulatory in nature, such as those setting spending criteria for government programs.
Regulations adopted in 2011 cost Americans some $10 billion in new annual costs, according to estimates by the regulatory agencies.[8]
Overall, from the start of the Obama Administration to January 20, 2012, a total of 10,215 rulemaking proceedings were completed. Those included 244 rulemakings classified as "major," of which 106 increased burdens on private-sector activity. Only 11 major rulemaking actions decreased regulatory burdens. The estimated cost of these new burdens tops $46 billion.[9]
Obama v. Bush. The total number of rulemaking proceedings during the first three years of the Obama Administration (10,215) is slightly less than the total undertaken during the first three years of the Bush Administration (10,674). This led President Obama to assert in his January 2012 State of the Union address that "I've approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his."[10] But looking only at the total number of rulemakings provides a misleading picture. While some have substantial impact, the vast majority of the thousands of rules adopted each year are routine actions, such as setting payment rates for Medicare or aviation maintenance bulletins.
It is also important to distinguish between rulemakings that increase regulatory burdens on businesses and individuals and those that do not. During the early 2000s, for example, the Federal Communications Commission adopted hundreds of rules related to freeing radio spectrum for commercial use, actions that generally eased government constraints on the private sector. Those rulemakings alone erase most of the gap in total rulemaking between Obama and Bush.
Taking these factors into account, a far clearer picture of relative regulatory activity emerges. According to Heritage Foundation calculations using the GAO database, the George W. Bush Administration adopted 28 major regulations in its first three years, barely a quarter of the 106 imposed by the Obama Administration during its first three years. In terms of cost, the gap was even wider, with the Bush Administration imposing $8.1 billion in new annual regulatory costs compared to the $46 billion imposed during the Obama years to date, a five-to-one ratio[11].
Excessive regulation, of course, cannot be blamed on the White House alone. A great many of the rules and regulations imposed each year are mandated by Congress, and many others are made possible by intentionally ambiguous statutory language. Others are promulgated by so-called independent agencies not subject to White House control (although they are run by presidential appointees). Regardless of responsibility, the result is the same: more burdens for Americans and the U.S. economy.
The 32 regulations that increased regulatory burdens adopted by federal agencies in 2011 covered a broad range of activity, including energy standards for fluorescent ballasts, refrigerators, freezers, clothes dryers, and air conditioners; testing and labeling requirements for toys; limits on automotive emissions of "greenhouse gases"; employer requirements for posting federal labor rules; more explicit warnings for cigarette packaging; health plan eligibility standards under Obama's health care legislation; expanded employment requirements for the disabled; and higher minimum wages for foreign workers.
The largest proportion of regulations by far stemmed from the 2010 Dodd–Frank financial-regulation statute, which was responsible for 12 major rules increasing burdens in 2011, including six from the Securities and Exchange Commission, five from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and one from the Federal Reserve. Hundreds more Dodd–Frank rules remain to be written.
The most expensive regulation of 2011 was imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which issued a total of five major regulations at a cost of more than $4 billion annually. Among the new regulations are three that impose stricter limits on industrial and commercial boilers and incinerators, at a total cost of $2.6 billion annually for compliance and $5.8 billion for one-time implementation costs. The EPA had postponed the new rules pending reconsideration by the agency and court review. However, in a legal challenge by environmental groups, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia vacated the agency's administrative stay in January, making the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (the Boiler MACT) immediately enforceable (although EPA officials have stated that they would not enforce it while the agency modifies the regulation).[12]
In other court action, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has delayed implementation of more stringent limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants pending court review. The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, issued in August, is estimated by the EPA to cost $810 million annually. The State of Texas challenged the rule, claiming that the EPA used faulty assumptions in devising the standards.[13]
More stringent energy conservation standards for refrigerators and freezers also rank among the most costly regulations of 2011. Imposed by the Department of Energy, the mandatory standards will increase regulatory costs by nearly $1.4 billion annually. Energy conservation standards for furnaces and air conditioners will cost an additional $650 million per year, while requirements for fluorescent ballasts will add $363 million more in costs annually.
Agencies Understate Costs. The actual cost of these new regulations is almost certainly higher than the totals reported here. This is largely because the agencies that perform the analyses have a natural incentive to minimize or obfuscate the costs of their own regulations. For some, costs are only partially quantified; for others, not quantified at all. But even quantified costs may often fail to capture the true impacts, as regulators cannot estimate intangibles, the costs of which could dwarf the direct compliance burden. Such undefined costs are inherent in many of the regulations adopted under Dodd–Frank. For instance, in the analysis for its rule providing for shareholder approval of executive compensation, the cost of holding a proxy vote is estimated, but the far larger cost is the risk of losing executive talent, a cost that is probably unquantifiable, but has very real impact. Other intangibles, such as the Fairness Doctrine's infringement on free speech or loss of religious liberty associated with Obamacare insurance mandates, are even more difficult to quantify.
Moreover, some rules categorized as "non-major" by regulators are in fact quite substantial. For instance, last September, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted "net neutrality" rules, which impose broad restrictions on Internet service providers. These new rules, which have been vigorously debated for years, will have vast impact on how the Internet is managed, yet the FCC did not flag them as "major."
In many cases, the quality of the cost analysis is substandard. In his final act last January as inspector general of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), David Kotz bluntly criticized the SEC's cost-benefit analyses as "ambiguous" and "internally inconsistent."[14] In a case decided in 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit threw out the SEC's regulation on proxy voting after concluding that
[T]he Commission inconsistently and opportunistically framed the costs and benefits of the rule; failed adequately to quantify the certain costs or to explain why those costs could not be quantified; neglected to support its predictive judgments; contradicted itself; and failed to respond to substantial problems raised by commenters.[15]
This is no small matter considering that the SEC issued 21 percent of the new major regulations in 2011 that increased burdens, and reported less than 1 percent of the costs.
The EPA is also notorious for understating costs. Last July, the agency finalized its Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which imposed more stringent emissions limits on power plants in 27 states, estimating the cost at $800 million annually. A number of other sources—some tied to the affected industry, some not—forecast much worse impacts. According to the Brattle Group, an economic consulting firm that works with the electrical power industry, for instance, the costs of the regulation would total $120 billion by 2015.[16]
Similarly, the EPA pegged the costs of the Boiler MACT at $2.6 billion annually. The Council of Industrial Boiler Owners, on the other hand, estimates that the regulation will entail compliance costs of $14.5 billion.[17]
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) likewise minimized the cost of its new rule requiring additional notifications to employees about employment laws. The board contended that the regulation will impose a mere $64.40 per employer, on average, in the first year (for a national total of $386.4 million). An analysis by the law firm of Baker & McKenzie estimated that each private-sector employee will spend at least one hour in meetings related to the regulation, resulting in a productivity loss to the economy of $3.5 billion—almost 10 times the NLRB figure.[18]
Hundreds of New Rules Looming. Dozens more regulations were slated for 2011, but the Administration failed to meet statutory deadlines. According to business consultancy Davis Polk, 225 Dodd–Frank rulemaking deadlines have passed.[19] Of these, 164—more than seven of 10—have been missed. Regulators have not yet even released proposals for 24 of the 164 missed rules.
The most recent Unified Agenda (also known as the Semiannual Regulatory Agenda)—a bi-annual compendium of planned regulatory actions as reported by agencies lists 2,576 rules (proposed and final) in the pipeline. The largest proportion—505 rulemakings—is from the Treasury Department, the SEC, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission—all tasked with issuing hundreds of rules under the massive Dodd–Frank statute. The Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for 174 others, while 133 are from the Department of Health and Human Services, reflecting, in part, the regulatory requirements of Obamacare.
Of the 2,576 pending rulemakings in the fall 2011 agenda, 133 are classified as "economically significant." With each of these expected to cost at least $100 million annually, they represent a total additional burden of at least $13.3 billion every year.
This continues the high levels of the Unified Agenda that started in the last two years of the Bush Administration. In the past decade, the number of economically significant rules in the agenda has increased by more than 137 percent, rising from 56 in spring 2001 to 133 in fall 2011.
Meanwhile, rulemaking related to Obama's health care legislation encompasses more than 150 federal agencies, bureaus, and commissions. And, it appears that the rules are changing faster than regulators can write them. Administrators have granted nearly 2,000 waivers to the new health care regulations, for instance, while the long-term-care insurance plan called for in the legislation has been dropped as completely unworkable.
Rule Books Bulging. Other measures of regulatory activity have also shown an increase in recent years. One of the most commonly cited measures is the size of the Federal Register, the official daily chronicle of regulatory changes. Before any new rule can take effect, it must be published in the Federal Register. In 2009, the Federal Register was 68,598 pages long. In 2010, it expanded sharply to 81,405. In 2011, the number of pages hit 82,415, a new record.[20]
In January 2011, responding to criticism that the nation's regulatory burden had grown too onerous, and acknowledging the need to eliminate ineffective and harmful regulations, President Obama issued an executive order calling for an agency-by-agency "retrospective review" of regulations. On January 3, 2012, the Administration released progress reports from the agencies.[21]
The Administration claimed that its reforms would, if implemented, reduce regulatory costs by $10 billion per year. But little or none of this reduction has materialized. Of the four major actions in 2011 that reduced regulatory burdens, none were the product of the regulatory review initiative. Three—involving air cargo screening, family investment advisors, and debit-card price controls—were modifications of recently imposed regulatory burdens. The fourth, the exemption of milk from "oil spill" regulations, was highlighted in the President's State of the Union speech as an example of the success of the review. In reality, it had been proposed by the EPA in January 2009, and put on hold when the Obama Administration came into office.
The Administration also claims a number of lesser successes, and many of these are dubious as well. The Department of Energy has listed the development of new energy standards for battery chargers as progress. Department officials say the new federal regulation would ease burdens by replacing state standards. However, it appears that California is the only state that has such a regulation.
Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency cites as progress its imposition of emissions rules in tandem with the fuel-efficiency standards from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. It is hard to argue that an additional $8.5 billion in new annual costs constitutes regulatory relief. But agency officials claim that the joint standards "will allow the auto manufacturers to more efficiently produce one vehicle fleet to meet the requirements of the National Program." In fact, there have never been two different federal rules, so one new one hardly counts as progress.
Many of the claimed reforms are the low-hanging fruit of regulatory excesses that should have been picked long ago. The Department of Transportation only agreed to reform its mandates on anti-collision systems after the railroad industry sued over the issue more than a year ago. The FCC's official repeal of the Fairness Doctrine cleared the books of a rule that has not been enforced since the late 1980s.
Steps for Congress
Additional congressional oversight is necessary to protect Americans and the economy from runaway regulation. Congress should take steps to increase scrutiny of new and existing regulations to ensure that each is necessary, and that costs are minimized, including:
Despite the weak economy, the Obama Administration continued to increase the regulatory burden on Americans in 2011, adding 32 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens, almost $10 billion in annual costs, and $6.6 billion in one-time implementation costs. From the beginning of the Obama Administration through 2011, a staggering 106 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens have been issued, with costs exceeding $46 billion. While the President has acknowledged the need to rein in regulation, the steps taken to date have been meager.
The President cannot have it both ways—having identified overregulation as a problem, he must take real and significant steps to rein it in. At the same time, Congress—which shares much of the blame for excessive regulation—must establish critical mechanisms to ensure that unnecessary and excessively costly regulations are not imposed on the U.S. economy and Americans. Without decisive steps, the costs of red tape will continue to grow, and the economy—and average Americans—will be the victims.[27]
—James L. Gattuso is Senior Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy, and Diane Katz is Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy, in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Intern Mary Bidgood greatly assisted in the preparation of this report.
Data on the number and cost of regulations are based on rules reported to Congress by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) pursuant to the Congressional Review Act of 1996 and available from the GAO's Federal Rules Database (http://www.gao.gov/legal/congressact/fedrule.html). Rules included are those categorized as "major." All such rules appearing in the database as of February 29, 2012, are included. Rules adopted before that date, but not yet posted in the GAO database, are not included.
Rules that do not limit activity or mandate activity by the private sector were excluded from the totals provided. Thus, for instance, budgetary rules that set reimbursement rates for Medicaid or conditions for receipt of agricultural subsidies are excluded.
The GAO database includes rulemakings from all agencies, including independent agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are not required to submit analyses to the Office of Management and Budget for review. If an agency did not prepare an analysis, or did not quantify costs, no amount was included, although the rule was included in the count of major regulations.
Cost figures are based on Regulatory Impact Analyses conducted by agencies issuing each rule. The agencies' totals were then adjusted to constant 2010 dollars using the GDP deflator at Areppim's "Current to Real Dollars Converter" (http://stats.areppim.com/calc/calc_usdlrxdeflator.php). Adjustments for rules adopted in 2009 and 2010 were made in July 2011; all others were made in February 2012, which result in slight variances due to changes in GDP estimates.
Where applicable, a 7 percent discount rate was used. Where a range of values was given by an agency, costs were based on the most likely scenario if so indicated by the agency; otherwise the mid-point value was used. The date of a rule was based, for classification purposes, on the date of publication in the Federal Register. Rules were attributed to particular Administrations based on the Federal Register publication date.
As this study focuses on the cost of major regulations, rather than the cost-benefit trade-off, no benefits or "negative costs" were included. We believe that an awareness of the total costs of regulation being imposed is itself a critical factor in regulatory analysis, in the same way that accounting for federal spending is a critical factor in expenditure analysis. Inclusion of a regulation in our totals, however, is not meant to indicate that it is unjustified. For actions reducing regulatory burdens, we used estimates provided by agencies that described the savings to consumers or society from the action.
Show references in this report
[1]"Presidential Documents: Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011—Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review," Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 14, January 21, 2011, pp. 3821–3823, at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/jsp/Utilities/EO_13563.pdf (March 1, 2012).
[2]Rules classified as "major" in the Government Accountability Office's Federal Rules Database, and which impose a mandate or restriction on private-sector activity. See Appendix A.
[3] Ibid.
[4]William C. Dunkelberg and Holly Wade, NFIB Small Business Economic Trends Monthly Report, December 2011, at http://www.nfib.com/Portals/0/PDF/sbet/sbet201112.pdf (March 1, 2012).
[5]Diane Katz, "Here Comes the Durbin Tax," Heritage Foundation The Foundry, September 30, 2011, at http://blog.heritage.org/2011/09/30/here-comes-the-durbin-tax/ (March 1, 2011).
[6] "Major" is the term used in the Congressional Review Act of 1995 to designate rules which must be transmitted by the Government Accountability Office to Congress for review. It is similar, but not identical, to the term "economically significant," which is used in to designate executive branch rules for which regulatory impact analyses must be prepared by agencies and reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
[7]See Appendix A for the methodology.
[8]New costs totaled $10.1 billion. Minus $212 million from rulemaking proceedings which lessened burdens, the total net new burden is $9.9 billion.
[9]New costs over the three-year period totaled $48.1 billion. Minus $1.8 billion from rulemaking proceedings which lessened burdens, the total net new burden is $46.3 billion.
[10]Technically, the President only "approves" rules which are reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget, which only looks at certain rules, and none by independent agencies. Of these, 2,010 were approved during the first three years of President Obama's' term, four fewer than the 2,014 approved during President Bush's first three years. See Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/.
[11]This includes $9.0 billion in total new annual costs, minus $920 million in rulemaking proceedings lessening burdens.
[12]David L. Rieser, Neal J. Cabral, Gordon R. Alphonso, D. Cameron Prell, and Dana P. Palmer, "United States: Boiler MACT: Now What?" Mondaq, January 18, 2012, at http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/161326/Clean+Air+Emissions/Boiler+MACT+Now+What (March 1, 2012).
[13]Eileen O'Grady, "Court Delays EPA Rule on Coal Plants," Reuters, December 31, 2011, at http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/12/31/us-utilities-epa-idUKTRE7BT17420111231 (March 1, 2012).
[14]Sarah N. Lynch, "Exiting Watchdog Sees Flaws in SEC's Rulewriting," Reuters, January 30, 2012, at http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/30/us-sec-cost-benefit-report-idUSTRE80T0IV20120130 (March 1, 2012).
[15] Business Roundtable v. SEC, 647 F.3d 1144 (D.C. Cir., 2011).
[16]Metin Celebi, Frank Graves, Gunjan Bathla, and Lucas Bressan, "Potential Coal Plant Retirements Under Emerging Environmental Regulations," The Brattle Group, December 8, 2010, at http://www.brattle.com/_documents/UploadLibrary/Upload898.pdf(March 7, 2012).
[17]Robert D. Bessette, "Comments of the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners on EPA Proposed Reconsidered Rule 'National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers,'" February 21, 2012, athttp://www.cibo.org/pubs/0790_feb21.pdf (March 7, 2012).
[18]"Notification of Employee Rights Under the National Labor Relations Act," Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 168, August 30, 2011.
[19]Davis Polk Regulatory Tracker, "Dodd–Frank Progress Report," February 2012, at http://www.davispolk.com/files/Publication/37a0b7ea-d818-4da0-b097-99031aaef2ec/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/42334bdb-7f53-41b8-bdc0-9f3460e445b2/Feb2012_Dodd.Frank.Progress.Report.pdf (March 1, 2012).
[20]Data from the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register.
[21]The White House, "Campaign to Cut Waste: Regulation Reform," at http://www.whitehouse.gov/21stcenturygov/actions/21st-century-regulatory-system (March 1, 2012).
[22]James L. Gattuso, "Taking the REINS on Regulation," Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 3394, October 13, 2011, at http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2011/pdf/wm3394.pdf.
[23]Legislation to establish such an office, H.R. 214, has been introduced in the House by Representative Don Young (R–AK).
[24]Assumes a cost of $50 million, approximately the same amount that the Congressional Budget Office assumes.
[25]As estimated in Susan Dudley and Melinda Warren, "Fiscal Stalemate Reflected in Regulators' Budget: An Analysis of the U.S. Budget for Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012," George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center and Washington University in St. Louis Weidenbaum Center, Regulators' Budget Report No. 33, May 11, 2011, at http://wc.wustl.edu/files/wc/2012_Regulators_Budget_2.pdf (March 1, 2012).
[26]Legislation to require agencies to conduct such periodic review, H.R. 3392, has been introduced in the House by Representative Benjamin Quayle (R–AZ).
[27]This paper is the sixth in an ongoing series of reports measuring trends in regulatory activity. The previous reports are: (1) James L. Gattuso, "Reining in the Regulators: How Does President Bush Measure Up?" Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1801, September 28, 2004, at http://www.heritage.org/Research/Regulation/bg1801.cfm; (2) Gattuso, "Red Tape Rising: Regulatory Trends in the Bush Years," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2116, March 25, 2008, at http://www.heritage.org/research/regulation/bg2116.cfm; (3) Gattuso and Stephen A. Keen, "Red Tape Rising: Regulation in the Obama Era," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2394, updated April 8, 2010, at http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/03/Red-Tape-Rising-Regulation-in-the-Obama-Era; (4) Gattuso, Diane Katz, and Keen, "Red Tape Rising: Obama's Torrent of New Regulation," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2482, October 26, 2010, at http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/10/red-tape-rising-obamas-torrent-of-new-regulation; and (5) Gattuso and Katz, "Red Tape Rising: A 2011 Mid-Year Report on Regulation," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2586, July 25, 2011, at http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/red-tape-rising-a-2011-mid-year-report.
[28]Letter from Randal K. Johnson and Michael W. Dendas, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to William L. Carlson, U.S. Department of Labor, March 21, 2011, at http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/comments/US%20Chamber%20H-2B%20Wage%20Phase-In%20Comments%20Final%203-21-11.pdf (March 1, 2012).
[29]Ben Protess, "S.E.C. Approves New Rules for Asset-Backed Securities," Dealbook (The New York Times), January 20, 2011, at http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/01/20/s-e-c-approves-new-rules-for-asset-backed-securities// (March 1, 2012).
[30]Petition to the EPA, April 27, 2011, at http://shopfloor.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Boiler-MACT-CISWI-Administrative-Stay-Request-4-27-11-w-Appx.pdf (March 1, 2012).
[31]Diane Katz, "EPA's Boiler MACT Rules Still a Threat," Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 3271, May 25, 2011, at http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/05/epas-boiler-mact-rules-still-a-threat.
[32]Seyfarth Shaw, LLP, "New ADA Regulations Issued: EEOC Rules Mean Virtually Everyone Is Disabled," Uncomplicating Management, April 3, 2011, at http://rickdacri.wordpress.com/2011/04/03/new-ada-regulations-issued-eeoc-rules-mean-virtually-everyone-is-disabled/ (March 1, 2012).
[33]Letter from Winslow Sargeant, chief counsel for advocacy, to The Honorable Jennifer J. Johnson, Federal Reserve, December 23, 2010, at http://www.sba.gov/content/letter-dated-122310-board-governors-federal-reserve-system (March 1, 2012).
[34] R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. FDA, __ F. Supp 2d __ (D. D.C. 2012).
[35]"Comments of the Air Conditioning Contractors of America (ACCA) on the Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces and Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps," U.S. Department of Energy, Docket No. EERE-2011-BT-STD-0011, at https://www.acca.org/Files/?id=788 (March 1, 2012).
[36]Katz, "Here Comes the Durbin Tax."
[37]Nina Mehta, "Cloak Comes Off Biggest Stock Traders in SEC Monitoring Mandate," Bloomberg, August 18, 2011, at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-18/cloak-comes-off-biggest-stock-traders-in-sec-monitoring-mandate.html (March 1, 2012).
[38]News release, "U.S. Chamber Sues NLRB to Block Notification Rule," U.S. Chamber of Commerce, September 20, 2011, at http://www.uschamber.com/press/releases/us-chamber-sues-nlrb-block-notification-rule (March 1, 2012).
[39]"New Emissions Rule to Drive Truck Prices Higher," Truckers News, August 9, 2011, at http://www.truckersnews.com/new-emissions-rule-to-drive-truck-prices-higher/ (March 1, 2012).
[40]"Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Refrigerators," Mercatus Center, George Mason University, Regulatory Report Card, September 27, 2010, at http://mercatus.org/search/apachesolr_search/residential%20refrigerator (March 1, 2012).
[41]Asjylyn Loder and Silla Brush, "Top U.S. Regulator Approves New Limit on Commodity Speculation in 3-2 Vote," Bloomberg, October 18, 2011, at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-18/cftc-votes-3-2-to-approve-new-limits-on-commodity-speculation.html (March 1, 2012).
[42]William B. Cassidy, "ATA Takes Anti-Fatigue Driver Work Rule to Court," The Journal of Commerce, February 14, 2012, at http://www.joc.com/regulation/ata-takes-anti-fatigue-driver-work-rule-court(March 1, 2012).


text:
Advantage Hunting Whitetail 2 Man Trap Door Blind
Product Information:
Advantage Hunting Whitetail 2 Man Trap Door Blind is great for gun or crossbow hunting. It offers a through-bolt design with interlocking corners and is lightweight and virtually maintenance free. This blind features a weather and bug resistant heavy duty polyethylene shell with carpeted 3/4" pressure-treated plywood floor, tinted corner viewing windows for 360 degree view and tinted polycarbonate window that flips up and out of your way!
Click here for additional information relating to the Manufacturer's Warranty.
- Through-Bolt Design w/Interlocking Corners
- Lightweight
- Virtually Maintenance Free
- Weather/Bug Resistant
- Ground or Elevated
- Tinted Polycarbonate Window that Flip Up
- Tinted Corner Viewing Windows for 360 View
- Heavy Duty Polyethylene Shell
- Carpeted 3/4" Pressure-Treated Plywood Floor
- For Gun/Crossbow Hunting
- Platform Required
- Dimensions: 60"W x 60"D x 73"H
- Advantage Hunting
Click here for additional information relating to the Manufacturer's Warranty.
Country of Origin: ImportedWeb ID: 12290460
Customer Reviews:
Rated 3.3 out of 5�by 3 reviewers.
Rated 2 out of 5�by cowboy not happy the biind said it could be used on the ground or up in the airand it requires a small platform so i made a 2in platform but wen i put it together i realiz that it has to be up at least 4 feet up in air July 25, 2016
Rated 4 out of 5�by PAHunter Good product for the price. I purchased this product in the summer of 2013. I built a wood frame for it to sit on and had it approx 5' off the ground. The only disadvantages I have found is, if there is snow on the roof and you use a small heater the melting snow will drip down over the windows and cause the windows to freeze shut if you don't have them opened up a little. The window hinges will make some noise when opening in extreme cold temps. Overall this is a great product and would recommend it to anyone. December 9, 2013
Rated 4 out of 5�by bobohead verses competition Way less than expensive hard sided blinds offered by Bass Pro Shops. Simple to put together, but took more time for 2 people to assemble than was advertised.Once assembled it is amazingly sturdy. I would recommend caulking corners w/clear silicone when bolting together to help stop wind driven rain and help w/scent blocking. August 14, 2013
1-3 of 3

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|Thread title
|Last replied
|Now searching...
quote LIVEMine's inThe Crackdown 2 Agency Dispatch Twitter feed is giving away free early access demo codes! To be in with a chance to win, @reply on Twitter (http://twitter.com/) to the CD2Dispatch_UK Twitter account with a reason why you should be accepted for Agency Training by gaining early access to the Crackdown 2 demo. Your message must also include the tag #CD2demo. Winners will be picked at random.
Terms and Conditions
1. This prize draw is open to residents of the United Kingdom except employees of Microsoft Corporation and its affiliates, contractors, agents and their families, and anyone else directly or indirectly connected with this prize draw. Entrants must be over 18 years of age at the time of entry and Microsoft reserves the right to verify the eligibility of entrants and check their identity.
2. Participants will be deemed to have accepted these terms and conditions and to agree to be bound by them when entering this prize draw.
3. This prize draw starts at 09:00 BST on 18th June 2010 and will run until 12:00 BST on 19th June 2010 (the "Prize Draw Period").
4. No purchase is necessary to participate. In order to enter the prize draw, participants must @reply on Twitter (http://twitter.com/) to the CD2Dispatch_UK Twitter account with a reason why they should be accepted for Agency Training by gaining early access to the Crackdown 2 demo. Messages must also include the tag '#CD2demo.'
5. Entries can only be made on Twitter (using the tag #CD2demo), and you must allow direct messages to be sent to you by CD2Dispatch_UK in order for Microsoft to notify you if you have won. Nothing in these terms prevents you from subsequently blocking CD2Dispatch_UK from sending you direct messages. Personal data which you provide when you enter the prize draw may be used for future Microsoft marketing activity and by entering the prize draw you consent to this.
6. By submitting your entry you agree that Microsoft may publish, display or use your entry in any medium it sees fit, including publication on www.xbox.com and Xbox LIVE.
7. 200 winners will be selected at random to win the prize. The prize is an early access demo token for Crackdown 2. Demos will be made generally available to all Gold Xbox Live Members on Monday 21 June 2010 and to Silver Xbox Live Members on Monday 28 June 2010.
8. No cash alternative to the prize will be offered and Microsoft reserves the right to vary or amend the prize for a prize of equal or greater value in its sole discretion. The prize is as stated and is non-transferable.
9. The winning entrants will be selected at random. Microsoft's decision as to prize winners is final and no correspondence will be entered into.
quote TitanUhhh yeah, they do. Hiddens are Blue, LIVE orbs are Grey (at least, when offline they are), and Agilities are, of course, green.The thing is that I am missing 2 orbs in Crackdown 2 and I know you can use the Orb Ping, but does Agility Orbs show up on it, because hidden orbs, and live orbs do?
quote Curt ConnorsOh right. Dont know why I thought you got them all in one sitting..By playing the demo like twenty times, the achievements stay unlocked after every playthrough like normal ones.
Anyone tried out the harder difficulties yet?
Oh and I am genuinely not understanding the 'meh' feeling, sure the graphics are a little more simplistic to compensate for hundreds of freaks on screen, but it just doesn't bother me. Just about everything else is on a par or improved from the original, freak lair invasions are spectacular, orb hunting is better and just as addictive, and the supply point mechanic has been much improved. Demo feels meh because it's a demo and has strict limits imo.
quote tallteen86You do realize that, by playing about 20 times, you've actually already played this game for like 10 friggen hours?
Powered by neoforums v3.0.0b
Copyright Neo Era Media, Inc. 1999-2017


text:
Back To Spooky Swim Styles
Dolfin Crackle Female Polyester DBX Back
Item # 9965C
The Dolfin Crackle Female DBX Back has a colorful pattern that is great for teams or practice. Featuring the DBX Back design, wider straps offer great support, comfort, and great freedom of motion. Made from Chloroban Polyester, this suit will last longer than the average Spandex suit.
Fully lined
Fabric: 100% Chloroban Polyester
Color: Blue, Green, Multi, Purple, Red
Limited Selection - While Supplies Last!


text:
by Anton Shilov
Microsoft Corp. on Tuesday disclosed the first official details regarding its next-generation portable digital media player. As expected, the new Zune HD will feature touch-screen, high-definition radio tuner as well as a new version of Windows CE operating system and revamped Internet browser.
"This device is created to go head to head with the iPod Touch. Zune buyers will also be able to play HD content on their TVs via a dock," said Chris Stephenson, general manager of global marketing for Microsoft Zune, in an interview with Cnet News.com web-site.
Microsoft indicated that Zune HD will use flash memory, even though the company will continue to ship its Zune versions with hard disk drives. In addition, Zune HD will be equipped with OLED multi-touch screen with 3.3" diagonal and 480x272 resolution. Unfortunately, no additional technical details have been revealed: capacity and pricing of flash memory inside Zune is unknown; it is also unclear whether the new Zune HD supports 802.11n Wi-Fi or relies on older-generation 802.11g.
The main feature that will distinguish Zune from its competitors, such as Apple iPod Touch, will be HD radio, which provides high-quality music experience. By contrast, Apple iPod does not support any radio at all. Another important feature of Zune HD is gradual integration of Xbox Live and Zune store services into one. For example, the device will be able to output video in 1280x720 resolution (720p) to HDTVs.
"It's really one of the first portable HD radio receivers out there.It's going to be important for us to communicate the value of HD radio since it is a fairly nascent technology," claimed Mr. Stephenson.
Microsoft Zune HD will be released in early Fall, however, its pricing is yet to be unveiled.
Microsoft remained tight-lipped regarding Zune HD's video-gaming capabilities as well as potential plans to create Zune-based music cell-phone. But while gaming abilities of Zune HD are projected to be discussed at the forthcoming E3 trade-show, other Zune-based products are projected to emerge only in the coming years.
"This is enough work for us this year. Going forward, Zune will start to surface on multiple platforms across the ecosystem. Expect to see it pop up in many different places," said Mr. Stephenson.


text:
Tara Foley serves as a Foreign Affairs Officer in the State Department's Office of WMD and Terrorism.
Hello Dipnote readers. It's been awhile. In the past few weeks, I've been fortunate enough to visit both of my alma maters, Boston College and the University of Chicago, to speak to students there about my work for the Department. At BC, I participated in a "Women in Diplomacy Panel," and at the U of C, a career panel for students in the Committee on International Relations masters degree program. Since several Dipnote readers have asked about my background, how I found my place with the Department, and why I choose to do what I do, I thought this might be a good time to share some of my history with you. Being invited to speak at my alma maters was an honor. It was inspiring to talk with students who are so passionate about and invested in their work. It also provided me the opportunity to look back on the past few years on my life, and think about how I got here, musing about my life on Dipnote (who would've thought?). So, as Lewis Carroll says, let's begin at the beginning...
Tuesday, September 11th, 2001 was something like my fourth day of college. That's not the whole story, but it is an important piece of it. I was sitting in a Fundamentals of Politics class that morning when the planes hit the Twin Towers, completely unaware of what was going on outside of our classroom. Later, I watched the events of the morning unfold on TV, and, as many Americans, grappled with so many questions, layered over feelings of confusion and loss. As a newly independent young adult, out in the world on my own for the first time, that day, in many ways, framed the way that I looked at the world, both as an individual and as a student of political science. It caused me to look at myself, and my country, in the larger context of the world, to ask questions, and to apply myself to some of the challenges we face as a nation. I started studying Arabic, and I added a Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies minor to my Political Science major.
I was fortunate that BC, a Jesuit Catholic school, is an institution that encourages students to think about their role in the larger world. One of the school's mottos reads, "Men and women for others," and I can't think of a better way to describe my path from Chestnut Hill to Washington . My education was rooted in the values of community and public service. We were constantly encouraged to think about our place in the community – whether the immediate group of friends and family, our nation, or our global society. My experiences at Boston College demanded that I think about my role in my wider communities, what I had to offer, and how I could contribute.
Throughout my time as a student, I took every opportunity to explore new ideas and interests – study abroad in Morocco and the UK, picking up a new language, a summer internship here at the State Department, community service in Boston, and cultural immersion programs in Nicaragua and Kingston, Jamaica. Experiences like these prepared me, as well as one can be prepared, for the work I do today. After BC, I went on to receive my Masters degree in International Relations from the University of Chicago . It was, as a professor warned me it would be, "academic boot camp." It was also a wonderful opportunity to continue to ask questions and cultivate my topical expertise. After Chicago , I was offered a Presidential Management Fellowship, a program specifically for people with graduate degrees wishing to enter the federal government. And that, along with the incredible support of family and friends, is how I find myself here, at State, and blogging on Dipnote.
To call myself an American diplomat is one of the greater privileges I've experienced in my life. It truly is such a rewarding career, one that is intellectually stimulating and constantly engaging. The experiences I've outlined here are just one perspective, but I think the lives we live do inform our world view, and help determine how we interact with the larger world. At BC, we were told to consider three questions in life: 1) What do you love? 2) What are you good at? and 3) What does the world need? Where these three answers intersect, we would find our vocation. Here at the State Department, serving my country and working in the wider world of foreign affairs, I believe I've found my answer. I am fortunate for the opportunities I've had, and I'm still learning. I hope that the students I spoke with at BC and at Chicago, as well as interested readers, will consider a career in public service, and join me in the experience.
YC writes:
Sounds like you're having fun there. I have always looked for ways to contribute to the community myself, and I have yet to find a better way than an honest job in the private sector.
Have you ever watched "Africa Addio"? As for the "cultural immersion", I'm glad to see that you emerged unscathed. Kingston has undergone quite a change in the past 50 years (murder rate up by 1000%). As for the questions:
1) What do you love?
- playing "save the world" at taxpayers expense while accomplishing the opposite
2) What are you good at?
- coercing the taxpayer into forking over his money for said activity
3) What does the world need?
- certainly not more people who are good at 1) and 2) while also promoting "cultural immersion" at home.
SNP in Syria writes:
Not sure if Ms Foley promoting the Jesuits or service at State. But will take the opportunity provided by this post and add to the fact that despite being secular, and in away do not believe Jesus ever existed. We hold the Jesuits with great respect and I personally thankful and appreciative of the fine education they gave me. Perhaps even more important is the instilling of the disiplined life and Civic education in me that lasted for a life time, formed the basis of my character. These assets attributed directly to the Jesuit education. Despite the fact that many of the classmates throughout the years composed of large part of Sunni Moslem in Homs, Syria, they have treated me and fellow students with the bestest of treatment. We are every appreciative and hope will have the opportunity to reciprocate in kind.
DipNote Blogger Tara Foley writes:
@ YC -- Ouch. I'm under no illusions that I can save the world. It's just that not trying isn't good enough for me. We do good work here in the Department and throughout the government, I firmly believe that; and while we have more work to do, that's all the more reason to keep trying, isn't it? I agree that the public sector isn't the only way to contribute -- we need people in all sectors to contribute, and to think about how their work and their choices affect others. I think it takes both lines of work to keep society progressing and improving.
@ SNP in Syria -- I see we share an appreciation for the Jesuit education system! You make a great point -- It does seem that many people of various nationalities and religious backgrounds thrive under a Jesuit approach to education. Probably because many of these values are so universal... Perhaps also because the approach encourages a young person to connect their individuality/personal development with a sense of meaning and belonging in the wider community... Anyway, glad to hear you had such a positive experience!
Irene in Greece writes:
It's very nice to "hearing" you again Mrs Foley. Your last post was wonderful.
A real victory for the 21st century women. This is too.
I do not know who asked you about your Masters or background (in fact you have earned PhDs in your heart), you speak 3-4 languages... For sure you are a Master Mind.
And you had a no problem to make a simple ...security check in "the Kingdom"?
This is why plenty of American sayings are really philosophical. In this instance: Simplicity! Brave heart!
But, I think that you have also added 3 more serious meanings of life, contributing even more to the American philosophy:
1) What do you love? 2) What are you good at? and 3) What does the world need?
You had to face a very different culture and an extremely change of personal life, but still you had the passion and the patience to welcome a "respectful" lady that told you that "her husband is her Id..."
And still you didn't react, but you remained sober.
You write: "To call myself an American diplomat is one of the greater privileges I've experienced in my life."
I would add that it's our privilege to have you in the Global diplomacy, no matter if I am Greek.
After all, Diplomacy is a Global issue.
John in Greece writes:
@ SNP in Syria -- Do you think that this is the appropriate forum to transform it to a religious forum?
This is a diplomacy forum.
Don't preach -- I am sure you can't teach.
By the way, Ioannis wrote something about http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/index.htm
...and your "Syrious" problems with Human Rights.
Dan in Washington, DC writes:
Ms. Foley -- thanks for your continued provocative contributions to DipNote, and thanks for your service to the State Department, the United States and the international community.
Regarding the "men and women for other" motto, as I'm sure you know, this is Boston College's motto as it is the Jesuit's motto.
Re: YC's comments, I think this 2001 quote from President George W. Bush speaking to U.S. government employees provides a useful perspective:
"I hope you'll never take the honor of public service for granted. Some of us will serve in government for a season; others will spend an entire career here. But all of us should dedicate ourselves to great goals: We are not here to mark time, but to make progress, to achieve results, and to leave a record of excellence."
SNP in Syria writes:
Thank you John, DipNote and the State Dept. for giving us fair opportunity to voice our opinions on the post here. It is a proof that The United States is one country in this world that freedom of expression and opinion can still be granted and tolerated.
The comment posted is not about religion, SNP is a secular organization. It is about the fine teaching a person receives at any Jesuit School or College anywhere in the world even in Muslim Syria. This is due to the focus on teaching and the building of the person character, his civics and the world he or she belongs to, not trashing the young person with religious doctrines and dogmas. It does make a big difference in the person, what school prepares him for life and through various stages. If you to attend Islamic Azad University, you will end up talking and thinking silly and naive just like Mahmood Ahmadinejad and Mottaki. If you to attend a Saudi Madrassa, you will end up, well, a mental case.
As to Human Right records in Syria, they are in fact the best in the world. The application of law is crude and makes it appear as a violation. These Syrians that you hear now crying foul, signing up all kind of declarations, standing in front of Syrian Embassies with microphones are in fact the ones that ceased the Syrian people lands, homes, nationalized all industries, separated families, banned students from university admission, passed all of the obscene, oppressive laws and stole all of Syria's wealth. Now that our smart president Bashar Assad and before him, his father Hafez kicked them out of power that they ceased illegally, they are complaining and protesting human rights violations. They first need to give us back what they stole and apologize for the terrible trassgression they committed against our people and Syria. The only one these thugs are fooling is the CIA money bag handler. They have no credibility whatsoever in Syria. Should they think that Syria will ever not be ruled by Bashar Assad, give them the bad news, we holds them and their grand-grand children accountable for everything.
John in Greece writes:
@ SNP in Syria -- You are welcome. (irony!)
However, I am not the SD or working for the FG (fortunately 4U).
I'm just a blogger like you.
So thank SD and DipNote only.
I have to admit that I do not understand plenty of the things you write. Either on the ground that English is not my native language, or because, I do not know the "area" you are referring to.
Nevertheless, I "suspect" that you are an "organization," as you say.
I'm just a person.
But, I see that all the time -all the time- through our blogging, you open up issues making an Anti-American propaganda.
This time you have a CIA problem? Why don't you lawsuit the guys? They will "appreciate" it! According to my knowledge, CIA does not faction outside the U.S. ..moreover, dealing with "organizations."
You have a problem with Tara because she may be a Catholic? Who cares about the Church she goes to, as long she is a real Lady?!
You always have something to say and... it's always against U.S.A.
NB in Pakistan writes:
Ms. Tara Foley: Your "Ouch!" to YC's posting of Mar-12 is quite justified. It's nice that you reached the intersection where the three "W's" meet, many of us with walking sticks still haven't been so fortunate. I'm sure you'll be able to carry a lot of load on your young shoulders and widely educated head. Such young educated people with broad vision are the need of the day. I wish you success. Keep up the good job.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Ms Foley: 9/11 was an event that many people globally recall what they were doing at the moment they heard the news. I find some commonality in your personal reaction to it as you re-directed the focus of your energy to serve this nation and "we the people" in a time of war.
It is one thing to believe in yourself, it is another to believe you can affect change by becoming an integral part of it, and work to that goal and meet with success. Well done!
For myself, that involved finding writing to be a strength and talent I had never suspected I had in me.
I found myself the evening of Sept 11 wondering if my former brother in law was at work that morning w/ Morgan Stanley in the WTC, and trying to make sense of the comments scrolling by on CNN's chatline. Fully a third of which spoke of nuking Afghanistan the next day.
Earlier that day I had met with a good friend from Afghanistan who had over time, educated me in the history of his homeland as well as the political, being a member of the royal family. Godson of Zahir Shah to be specific.
Out of days worth of continuous discussion (which lasted many months beyond the sending of this and other letters) came to be what I can only describe as a solid effort in personal diplomacy, and an interesting case of parallel thinking at a time when no plan had been made public.
One serves as one can, with the resources available. This letter was a joint Afghan/American effort among friends in service to both our homelands.
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:41:03 -0600To: email@example.com: Eric (edited for posting)Subject: "Powell doctrine"-Exit optionsDear Mr. Secretary,
It seems logical to me when looking at the rebuilding of Germany and Japan after WW2, why we haven't been targets of terrorism by these former enemies, it may also be logical to view the rise of Hitler as a direct result of the sanctions imposed upon Germany at the end of WW1.
I agree that the war that has been declared upon us will take time, and cost much to win. I hope you will forgive my being so bold as to propose the following:
Based upon the fact that the people of Afghanistan have no self-determination of their fate, and are at the mercy of the Taliban(or who-ever controls them), and given the fact so many are abandoning the country in fear, it seems to me that this mission must be a liberation, not a reprisal, I mean by this that we perform surgery-heal the patient(Afghanistan).
In order to retain support, especially throughout the Arab world, for a sustained presence in the region, it will be necessary to address the humanitarian needs of the refugees immediately to:
- Show compassion in the midst of our wrath.
- To prevent further human suffering due to terrorist acts upon us.
I will base the following on the assumption that the military surgery undertaken will remove the cancer in a similar fashion as in WW2-unconditional surrender. (*)
Given the resulting void in government structure, and to avoid setting up what might be viewed as a "puppet" government, I propose this as an alternative:
Restore the government prior to the Soviet invasion, most of that ruling family is in exile.(although a monarchy,it held democratic ideals despite the influence of the Soviets and had no clue about the Soviet agenda until too late). I have only my gut instinct to go on,but the "northern alliance" might agree to this as it would bring the country full circle, bringing hope again and the ability to function as a distinct political entity in the UN.
In addition I believe that the whole premise by which we may safely exit the situation with the goals in hand is this:
If the average Afghan citizen can say they're better off than they were before the Taliban took over, and having the world's help rebuilding, not only will the world respect us, but we'll give them nothing to hate us for in the future.
The massive response with food, shelter, clothing to the refugees prior to any action against the Taliban or bin Laden will immediately let the world know without a doubt that we consider them victims of terrorist aggression, and that our mission is to rid them of this and restore sanity.
If we do this right, the long term prognosis will be a full recovery from a terminal illness. Afghanistan may need a decade of peace to achieve this.
The stability necessary for this can only come from the people's desire to be at peace, and a hope for the future.
(*) Unconditional surrender in this case does not require use of nuclear weapons to achieve objective, if used, all support will evaporate, and the objective(long term) is lost. I believe it's logical given the terrain, that this may have been considered, hopefully only for a fraction of a second.
(End excerpt, personal info edited )
Be well Tara, and thanks for the perspective.
SNP in Syria writes:
One would expect that with all the known evidences now available on the internet about 911, Eric will be quite and act like the rest of the 300 million Baaaaa in America. But he rubs it in the nose and irritates people like SNP rather than repent by publishing a book telling it all as it is, the plain truth. I guess he can not, for legal reason, and wants others to expose the facts globally, that is why he keeps rubbing it in public.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
I've often found in the training of a dog to be "man's best friend", that it is necessary to properly house-train the puppy. Rather than beating the pup half to death, or yelling at it till it becomes deaf, it is much more effective to rub the pup's nose in the mess it made on the carpet and put it outside till it whines to be let in for a hour or two. One measure of the intelligence the dog possesses how many times it becomes necessary to do this until the puppy learns to defecate in the great outdoors, rather than in its own home.
If SNP wishes to continue to sit on the hole in the carpet of their rhetoric and defecate on the hopes of humanity, then I should also note that as a "guest" of the Taliban, bin Laden broke all the rules, including disturbing the peace of his hosts.
RK in Florida writes:
Dear Ms. Foley:
Thank you for posting on this blog. I appreciate how you provided a personal perspective into your working life at State. I must say that I can relate to you in that I have recently had a "calling" to enter into public service, mainly after becoming a citizen last year. I would like to somehow get involved with the Civil Service sector at the State Department. Would you be willing to share your insight on how someone on the outside (private sector) can land a position as a Foreign Affairs Officer? I feel it is something that I will love to do and help make a difference in the world, whether it is minuscule or large. I appreciate any input you would have for all of us out there looking to leap to the State Department. Thank you for your time and I look forward to your future posts.
John in Greece writes:
@ SNP in Syria -- What's next? Tell us more about the doggies...
After the "church preaching," now you are a Pavlov, Ivan Petrovich teaching, Russian physiologist known chiefly for his development of the concept of the conditioned reflex?
In a now-classic experiment, he trained a hungry dog to salivate at the sound of a bell, which was previously associated with the sight of food. He developed a similar conceptual approach, emphasizing the importance of conditioning, in his pioneering studies relating human behavior to the nervous system. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1904 for his work on digestive secretions.
What is bin Laden? Is "it" a dog? Or is it a dog?
Because plenty of us are sure that he is a TERRORIST.
As well as that you love... Russians. Can we call you Ivan instead of SNP?
SNP in Syria writes:
If you only know the tremendous efforts spent to keep the peace for the host in the past 30 years. While the host handing out cash, sending emissaries and shaking hands with Saddam, Bin Ladin and the likes all over the world, sleeping with the enemies, withheld support and shunned allies and friends. Lets see when Bush walks out the door what will be left few months later. It is going to be as you said; a world that is the HOPE OF HUMANITY. ENJOY IT, LOL, ADDIOS AMIGO.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
No, I wasn't referring to bin Laden as a dog, more like the item the dog left on the carpet that some here apparently think is worth chroming to sell as a trinket of their idiocy.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
But then beyond 9/11 and all that's past, comes the question:
When battleships give way to sailboats, how does the world realize its true self? WMD-Free.
Either that or we're back to sticks and stones.
John writes:
U.S.A. will also remain STRONG and HEALTHY AND after the service of The Bush Administration, as it was before it.
No matter the election result.
No matter if the next President will be a black or white, a woman or a man, a pilot or a preacher (the last one is now unexpected).
And it's going to remain STRONG, because it is: UNITED.
P.S. SNP: The Bush Administration has done a GREAT, PERFECT job respecting all the Globe, but also human ideas and... (the most important) justice!
I am sure, the same way will do the next President.
So, AMIGO, Buenos notches acronyms, or we will LOL@U.
So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish.
Eddie in Spain writes:
Dear Tara,
Thank you very much for your articles. Everything related to international and diplomatic issues is very well explained, especially your posts about Saudi Arabia.
Best regards from Spain
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
What the world needs right now is lower cost crude oil.
In view of the economic war conducted by OPEC against the West, and the inability of the federal government to counter their economic attack, what steps has the federal government taken to reduce non-essential travel by federal officials, a reduction of frivolous missions, and restrictions on vehicular use?
DipNote Blogger Tara Foley writes:
@ the group:
Guys can we lay off the personal attacks? Im aware of some of SNPs more, ahem, provocative posts, and I dont defend them. But in this case s/he is simply expressing appreciation for the education s/he received. Thats a good thing. I put myself out there on this post talking about some things that are pretty personal to me, and some of these responses are just distasteful. I, too, believe in Americas greatness, and there is no place I would be happier or more proud to call home, to call my country. But lets defend freedom a bit more eloquently, shall we? Lets remember that when we speak to the world (and that is what were doing here, isnt it?), we have an opportunity to showcase not only Americas strength and vigor, but her generosity, compassion, and fair-mindedness as well. Id really love to hear more of what everyone has to say about the substance of this or other posts.
@ Dear Ms. Foley writer:
First of all, congratulations on your citizenship! I know thats an incredibly exciting and fulfilling experience for many people. I attended a citizenship swearing-in for the first time last fall, and it was really touching! Im excited to hear, too, that youre interested in a career with the State Department.
As it seems like you already know, there are two main career tracks in the Department: foreign service and civil service. Foreign service officers spend the majority of their careers working overseas at U.S. embassies around the world, but also spend some time working at the State Department headquarters here in DC. The way to become an FSO is to take the Foreign Service Exam, comprised of first a written exam and then (if you pass the written) a day-long oral exam process.
Civil service employees, such as myself, are based at the State Department headquarters here in DC the majority of the time, and often have the opportunity for business trips or temporary assignments overseas. The path to a civil service career at State is a little more varied. I am a part of the Presidential Management Fellows, which is a program I applied to when I was in graduate school (you have to be a current graduate student planning to finish your degree the year you apply). Ive had a fantastic PMF experience and would recommend it to anyone currently in, or contemplating, graduate school. Applications open in the fall each year. There are other programs you can check out, too, such as the Career Entry Program (CEP), which, to my understanding, is open to anyone with a college degree, including professionals and students. There are several other programs as well that you can research on the Departments Careers website. (PMF, CEP, and the others are listed on the website linked above.) Im not as familiar with the others, but have heard great things about them. In my personal experience, applying through one of these specialized programs is a great way to apply for the civil service track at State.
Keep in mind, too, that sometimes it takes awhile to find the right match, so consider applying elsewhere in government and elsewhere in Washington at the same time (think tanks, consulting firms, NGOs, etc.). If you dont find a spot at State right off the bat, youll gain experience in international affairs and start to learn how the Washington machine works, which will be invaluable tools once you do wind up where you want to be.
Cheers to you, and good luck
NB in Pakistan writes:
Well said Ms. Foley! There's a lot more goodness in America than critics notice. They should open up the eye of their reasoning minds.
John in Greece writes:
@ Ms. Foley -- I agree with you concerning the philosophy of the forum ("we have an opportunity to showcase not only Americas strength and vigor, but her generosity, compassion, and fair-mindedness as well"), but this happens -- AUTOMATICALLY, since it exists.
Nevertheless, I think it's logical and healthy for you to have to face "attacking" in a blog we would all love to see it very popular.
I also agree with you concerning the "personal attacks." It's not nice to see!
But how can we blog otherwise?
No debating (exchanging "attacks," on the basis of a welcomed discussion), No Blogging. Otherwise the Blog will become a newspaper that anyone writes whatever he wants, but it won't be a Blog, and I am not sure about the unique hits per page anymore. Why someone to visit this blog instead of reading the USA Today or let's say the Washington Post? On the other hand, I understand that no one would like this blog to become a chat room. However, why don't you guys think of that too? You could also add a chat room inside the Blog. In fact, you ask a very difficult question about the platform. And you are right, concerning THE HOW THIS SHOULD BE.
Imagine if someone is reading JUST this conversation of the two of us. S/He may think that we have a personal attack. However, we have an extremely pure and healthy debate only for a GOOD purpose! And, of course, I really thank you for this, because it's not very usual for common people like me to have the chance to talk to any Diplomat. Moreover an American one.
That's why, for this chance you provide us with, the Blog is automatically PERFECT and according to my opinion, it has nothing more to prove, except to keep on existing.
Again, congratulations for your posts.
You made us talk!
DipNote Blogger Tara Foley writes:
@ John:
Thanks for writing, and please do keep posting! I completely agree with you that the blog should be a forum for open debate, and the exchange of diverse and sometimes conflicting opinions. Thats why I like the blog too! I want to see and be a part of strong debate based on an honest examination of the issues. What I mean by personal attacks are the posts that use derogatory language targeted at a specific individual, that have nothing to do with the ideas or arguments being discussed, but are written purely to insult another person. I think that gets in the way of the real debate.
John in Greece writes:
You are absolutely right and very clear Ms. Foley!!!
Your "intervention" suggestion armors the quality of the Blog.
I am looking forward to read more posts from you in the near future.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Dear Tara,
@ SNP in Syria -- SNP in Syria writes:
"One would expect that with all the known evidences now available on the internet about 911, Eric will be quite and act like the rest of the 300 million Baaaaa in America. But he rubs it in the nose and irritates people like SNP rather than repent by publishing a book telling it all as it is, the plain truth. I guess he can not, for legal reason, and wants others to expose the facts globally, that is why he keeps rubbing it in public"
I'm sorry if you find my response to this personal attack to be in poor taste, but I for one cannot offer benefit of the doubt after several months of witnessing a consistent pattern of interaction directed at many forum members that speak in solidarity with U.S. policy, personal attacks on individual's character in violation of the rules of discussion over a long period.
And while animal rights activists of the four legged and two legged variety may understand my response, I'd appreciate it if more moderation of discussion were going on so I don't feel the need to take an internet bully head on with my somewhat unique brand of American humor.
Thank you very much.
...DipNote Bloggers write:
@ Eric in New Mexico -- We hear you Eric. We expressed similar sentiments to SNP yesterday. The strength of any forum is its mutual respect for its participants and its ability to adhere to the topics at hand ...as outlined in DipNote's comment policy.
Wang in Taiwan writes:
The world person wants peace the life
Eric in New Mexico writes:
"The strength of any forum is its mutual respect for its participants and its ability to adhere to the topics at hand ."
-Dipnote Bloggers
Indeed, and a good debate is found in it's strength to go out on a limb of the particular, yet remaining relevant to the issue at hand.
So then where was I before being so rudely interrupted by insult? Ah yes, I believe I was attempting to inspire those wishing to make a difference in the world that a government that serves the people actually depends on them to interact with it, inspire its policies, and promote a coherent vision for a nation's future.
So then if I am now speaking to the world as Tara suggested, I would simply suggest to billions of individuals out there to be the best you can be....a think tank of one.
Not to be lemmings following blind ideology over oblivion's cliff, for I believe the human species to be better than that.
Celebrate global diversity as a strength of mankind rather than soak the ground with each other's blood because of ethnicity or for an interpretation of God.
I cannot tread lightly by any means, nor can I be anything but honest in my assessment of the subject, too much is at stake. Every living thing on this planet to be exact.
Anyone who has witnessed the birth of one's child can tell you that yes indeed you create your own reality, the question is what do we wish to create for ourselves as reality on this planet, now and for our children's and their children's future? Not just in my country, but the world as a whole, as an international vision.
Inherently, change is viewed with suspicion, as a threat to culture and ways of tradition and ethical belief systems. As it applies to developing countries in this nuclear age, the post-cold war aftermath presents a vast paradox that present no easy solutions, and has culminated in the reality of the war on terrorism as it exists today.
The solution involves individuals standing up and giving voice to their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, creating the public happiness of having a say in one's future.
We in America share a concept, united we stand, divided we fall. 9/11 has forced the world to grasp this concept, ready or not, globalization is at hand.
We have an opportunity to showcase not only America's strength and vigor, her generosity, compassion, and fair-mindedness, but here on this blog, the world has the opportunity to showcase itself as being capable of all this and more than the sum of its parts in the process.
Whoever said, "There are no Philosophers in Foreign Affairs.", I'd like to thank for inspiring me to become one....(chuckle).
NB in Pakistan writes:
Ms. Foley:
Happy Easter to you and all bloggers.
And yes, Eric in New Mexico is definitely a very good writer. I can sincerely say that I really enjoy his postings.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ Wang in Taiwan - Wang in Taiwan writes:
"The world person wants peace the life"
Wang's got it right.
And he's a far better writer than me in my opinion NB, but thanks!
I mean let's face it, he's nailed the human condition down to seven words.
That's Pulizer material if you ask me.


text: Microsoft has reportedly sent automated Digital Millennium Copyright Act-violation notices to Google and several other high-profile sites, telling them to remove several URLs that didn't violate copyright law from its search results. Microsoft claims pages within the offending sites facilitated the distribution of illegal copies of Windows 8. In addition to Google, those served with notices include Wikipedia, the BBC, CNN, TechCrunch, and several US government websites. Even Microsoft's own Bing didn't escape notice. Microsoft sent notices to itself regarding Bing violating the DMCA. According to CNET, in the past month, Microsoft has requested Google take down more than 444,000 URLs. (SlashDot)(TorrentFreak)(Mashable)(Boing Boing)


text:
Over at Think Christian, I reflect on an "authentically Christian" view of work, which takes into account its limitations, failings, and travails, as well as its promises, prospects, and providential foundations.
The TC piece is in response to a post by Simon Critchley and Jamieson Webster, in which they juxtapose the pscyhologizing of work as subjectively authentic self-expression with their own preferred view of work as something done simply "for the sake of sustenance."
Critchley and Webster are right to point to the dangers of unchecked subjectivism, but are wrong in devaluing work as merely instrumental. David F. Wells of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary penned a monumental indictment of the inroads radical subjectivism has made in Christian, and particularly evangelical, circles in his 1994 book, God in the Wasteland: The Reality of Truth in a World of Fading Dreams. As Wells puts it, the difference between the objective and subjective points of departure for our knowledge amount to two different ways of seeing the world; one is biblical, the other is worldly. "The one belongs to those who have narrowed their perception solely to what is natural; the other belongs to those whose understanding is framed by the supernatural. The one takes in no more than what the sense can glean; the other allows this accumulation of information to be informed by the reality of the transcendent," writes Wells.
More recently, Carl Trueman of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia analyzed the shift from objective measures of oppression to subjective psychologizing in the context of political ideology. "Supplementing the economic categories of Marx with the psychoanalytic categories of Freud, Marcuse and his followers effectively broadened the whole notion of oppression to include the psychological realm. Such a move is dramatic in the implications it has for the way one views politics. Simply put, oppression ceases to be something that can be assessed empirically in terms of external economic conditions and relations, and becomes something rather more difficult to see, i.e., a matter of the psychology of social relations," writes Trueman. (more…)


text:
Topic: Rich Internet Applications : Rails vs. Flex
I've recently been bombarded with quite a bit of Flex2 propaganda. Would someone be willing to lay it out for me?
I'm developing a record keeping system for a specific teaching methodology. It will run on a LAN in a secure environment. I'm talking calendar functions, class organization and management, and administrative functions. Some well-intentioned associates have been pushing Flex2 on me to produce this. I'm concerned they (users, not programmers) have been wowed by some 'flashy' (pun intended) Flex apps with their amazing charting capabilities.
Is it really worth my time to learn Flex when I can code something that is definitely viable with Rails, just to add a little 'flash'iness? Can someone here convince me to move to Flex? Or better yet ... not to? I'm looking for some excellent arguments that are pro-Rails.


text:
Use common sense
To the Editor:
When our elected officials need to spend our money, they award a bid to the low (price) provider. These low bids (low price) represent the price of a project or item.
Low cost, on the other hand, represents the price plus the effect of added value. Value is added when profit is increased to local businesses and employees are added to these businesses. This potential added value is lost when bids are awarded to non-local businesses.
Common sense says we should let bids for low cost, not low price. Call your elected officials and tell them to use common sense when they spend our money.
Ron Strom


text:
features the most sexy big boob amateurs and porn stars we could find in the whole Czech Republic. This is the place to go for you if you are into big tit girls that love to have fun with themselves and their boobies. AllThoseBoobs.com updates a new episode twice a week with HD video and 100 high resolution pics!
features the hottest and horniest girls that are ready to prove their sexual skills on camera. Fresh faces that enjoy every second of it. Every episode features HD and SD video and 200 high resolution pictures, FuckThoseChicks.com updates once a week with a new episode.
features a vast picture and video library of Czech amateur models, teen models and porn starlets, fresh faces showing all their goods ready for your approval. Episodes feature HD and SD video and 100 high resolution pictures. AllThoseGirls.com updates four times a week with a new episode.
features all the horny MILFS we were able to talk into having sex in front of the camera, most of them are true moms and no porn professionals. Every episode features HD and SD video and 200 high resolution pictures, FuckThoseMoms.com updates every week with a new episode.
features hundreds of lovely older ladies that are still horny and perverted enough to live their sexuality right in front of our camera. And we have them all - from 30+ Milfs to 60+ Grannies! AllThoseMoms.com updates once a week with a new episode in HD video with matching HI-Res Pictures.


text:
From birth through age eight, children are spending more time with digital media such as computers, video games, cell phones and video iPods, concludes a study by Common Sense Media, a San Francisco nonprofit. However, most screen time still is devoted to watching TV.
Half of children from babies to 8-year-olds have access to a smart phone, video iPod, iPad or other tablet device. Some 47 percent of higher-income parents have downloaded apps for their children, compared to 14 percent of lower-income children, leading to warnings of an "app gap."
Half of low-income families with young children have a computer at home compared to 91 percent of higher-income families.
Computer use is pervasive among very young children, with half (53%) of all 2- to 4-year- olds having ever used a computer, and nine out of ten (90%) 5- to 8-year-olds having done so. . . . Among all children who have used a computer, the average age at first use was just 3 ½ years old.
However, TV is still king of the toddlers' jungle. In a typical day, nearly half of babies and toddlers watch TV or DVDs for an average of nearly two hours. For all children in their first year, the average is 53 minutes of TV time versus 23 minutes being read to.
Two-thirds (65%) of 0- to 8-year-olds watch TV at least once every day (ranging from 37% of 0-1 year- olds, to 73% of 2- to 4-year-olds and 72% of 5- to 8-year-olds). Forty-two percent have a TV in their bedroom, and 39% live in a home where the TV is left on all (10%) or most (29%) of the time, whether anyone is watching it or not. Children this age spend an average of 1:44 watching TV or videos in a typical day, compared to :29 reading, :29 listening to music, and :25 playing computer or video games.
Black and Hispanic children and lower-income children spend much more time with media than whites and children with educated parents. Sixty-four percent of low-income children have a TV in their bedroom, compared to 20 percent of children in affluent homes.
Smart phones and iPads are becoming baby toys, notes the New York Times.
Jeannie Crowley, who helps faculty members at the Bank Street College of Education integrate technology into teaching, got rid of television at home because of the ads and branding.
But Ms. Crowley hands her iPad over to her 19-month-old daughter, Maggie, to play with the Smule piano app. And at bedtime, the family often watches "30 Rock" on the computer, Maggie dancing to the opening music. The toddler also loves YouTube videos of barking dogs.
And she is also adept with her mother's smartphone.
"She learned how to unlock it, observationally, about two months ago." Ms Crowley said. "About two weeks ago, she was on the train with me, and she popped the slide bar."
. . . Most of all, Maggie likes to watch the cellphone videos her parents take of her stomping on leaves, getting sticky sap on her hands or wearing her new pink polka dot pajamas.
My step-granddaughter, two-year-old Julia learned to access the ring tones on my old cell phone. She presses a button, the tune plays, we dance.


text:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Hi, I am going to try the waz recipe. I live in Columbus and worked for my brother at "The Pizza Shop" here for many years. Made it all. He and my other brothers worked for Grote when he started on Thurman Ave. in Columbus in the 60's. Another brother has a shop too here but the one I worked at is gone since he is now in politics. Someday I will get my 614pizza site going since it is supposed to be the pizza capital with most shops per capita.Anyway, I remember some things and I know the dough I made was similar since thats where my brother learned it. It was not the same though. Eggs....dry milk...yeast..flour...oil...water. I cant remember more now but it all went in a big mixer and then after a few hours in went in a big plastic trash can. It would rise and you punch it down a few times and it was ready. Rolled on a 2 step roller, put the pan upside down on the dough, cut the dough, flip pan, put on cornmeal, flip dough. Go put on sauce, etc. oh....Winchester Farms Sausage with hot pepper "bird seed" was the same. We put more hot in it.But....now that I think about it maybe you are now talking about MacDonatos. Someday I will write to Grote. It has changed so much. The original sub bun is gone too. That is a story in itself. That was the best. Can't eat the current pizza without heartburn. But I can eat other shops. Now its a disc made somewhere else brought to the shop put in a mchine to rejuvenate it. Like a space cracker.So there is "original" and "MacDonatos"which are you going for? Maybe some of the things I remember help.Joe
Hey,If you got some pizza in Columbus worth checking out - lay it on me...
For Columbus, Ohio-based Donatos Pizza, pepperoni pizza is a signature item prominently featured in the marketing and advertising materials for this 180-unit business. "Donatos originated the 'Edge to Edge' pizza, which doesn't have a rim of dough," says company spokesman Tom Santor. "As a result, we can put at least 100 pieces of pepperoni on each large 14-inch pepperoni pizza. The pepperoni goes on top of a layer of aged smoked provolone - we don't use mozzarella cheese - so it can cook properly and so the flavors blend well."Of all our pizzas, pepperoni is the most popular. Thanks to the proprietary formula for our pepperoni, which is about 25 percent leaner than most, the finished pizza has 'edge-to-edge' coverage without excessive oil. Based on how many pepperoni pizzas Donatos has sold since Jim Grote started the company 43 years ago, I'd say people have a love affair going with our pepperoni.""Although all our pizzas are covered 'edge to edge'," Santor continues, "when pepperoni is part of a combo pizza, we try for a good balance of flavors. For example, we wouldn't use as much pepperoni on a large Classic Trio, with pepperoni, mushrooms and sausage. Instead, we take time and effort to get the right combination of ingredients, then apply all the toppings, which are scaled to one one-hundreth of a pound for consistent quality."
McDonalds also freed Grote to focus on food, which he calls his strong suit. When asked whether Donatos pizza was changed while under McDonalds as many long-time Donatos customers insist it was - he chuckled."Its horse hockey," he said. "Thats what I was most nervous about after the acquisition, especially with our classic thin crust. The only thing we did was developed a proofing system that proofed it longer and gave it a little more flavor. Weve got the same dough recipe, the same sauce, the same pepperoni - those specs are tied in as tight as you can tie them."


text:
Administrators' Roundtable
Location: Doubletree San Jose, 2050 Gateway Place, San Jose, CA 95110; 1-408-453-4000
8:30-9am Breakfast
9am - 3:30pm Roundtable
Buffet breakfast and lunch will be provided. The meeting agenda and any other materials will be posted on the Roundtable Agendas page (must log in for access).
Hotel & Travel: Discounted room rate of $135/night available at the Doubletree. Log in and visit the Roundtable Agendas page for the group discount code. Self-parking is available at the hotel for a discounted rate of $10/day. CALAPRS will validate on-site. San Jose International (SJC) is the closest airport. There is a courtesy shuttle to and from the hotel every 10-15 minutes.
Program Cost: $100 per attendee will be billed to the retirement system after the program.
- Login to post comments


text:
Parker pleads guilty to 3 counts
ROGERS CITY – A Millersburg man pleaded guilty to 10 charges of child sexually abusive activity and criminal sexual conduct, and could serve up to 20 years in prison.
On Monday, David Wayne Parker told 53rd Circuit Court he had taken pictures of two childrens' genitals and the exposed backside of a third. On three occasions he took pictures of himself touching one of the children. Two of the victims were seven years old, with one aged eight. Parker, 56, said he took the pictures in Millersburg and Cheboygan, taking one while visiting friends outside the county.
Originally charged with 15 felonies in Nov. 21, Parker will plead guilty to three counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct and seven counts of child sexually abusive activity. Four counts of sexually abusive activity and one count of using a computer to commit a crime will be dismissed, Judge Scott Pavlich said.
As part of the plea agreement, Parker's sentence will be concurrent and will not exceed sentencing guidelines, Pavlich said. He faces up to 20 years in prison, a $100,000 fine or both, and would be subject to lifetime monitoring as a sex offender.
Parker's sentencing is set for Feb. 11, Pavlich said.
Jordan Travis can be reached via email at firstname.lastname@example.com or by phone at 358-5688.