text:
Mandela's death is mourned throughout the world, but South Africa is feeling a national sense of loss.
JOHANNESBURG — The nation was in mourning Thursday for Nelson Mandela, a towering figure here for his fight to end apartheid and reconcile his country to democratic rule.
Mandela, 95, died Thursday at his home in Johannesburg. He had been hospitalized four times since last December, most recently earlier this summer when he was readmitted for a lung infection.
The news of his death, which locals had braced for since late last year, has left much of the country acting as if it no longer has a compass. He was seen as a national hero and the only figure who could successfully address the severe problems facing the country – crime, poverty, corruption and unemployment.
"Our nation has lost its greatest son," South African president Jacob Zuma said. "He is now resting. He is now at peace."
From national leaders to laborers, the nation stopped what it was doing and many said they were unsure how the country would go forward.
"We depend on him," said Maxwell Mlilo, 36, a gas-station attendant. "We appreciate everything he has done for us. We say thank you and let him go in peace."
Former leaders said that Mandela's role as a leader in the pursuit of freedom should not be forgotten.
"President Mandela ... and his generation of freedom fighters walked their long walk and made enormous sacrifices which eventually led to our freedom in 1994," said the nation's former president, Thabo Mbeki. "His passing signals the end of an historic era represented by the heroic deeds of his generation.
Outside Mandela's house, hundreds of people gathered on the streets in silence.
"We just lost an icon," Fatima Joosub, a neighbor of Mandela said, before falling silent again.
Across the nation, people were in a state of shock and sadness. President Jacob Zuma announced on national television at 11:40 Thursday evening that Tata, as Mandela was locally know, had passed.
Mandela became involved in political opposition as a young law student and joined the African National Congress in 1942. Two years later he founded the ANC's Youth League, known for civil disobedience and strikes in protest at the hundreds of laws associated with the new apartheid system of racial segregation.
Arrested in 1962 for inciting workers' strikes and leaving the country without permission, Mandela spent 27 years in prison. He had been particularly vulnerable to respiratory problems since contracting tuberculosis during his captivity.
South Africans say Mandela's role in helping his country cannot be exaggerated.
"Mandela played a crucial role in averting a racial war and preventing white flight," said professor Daryl Glaser, head of political studies at the University of Witwatersrand. "Either of which on its own could have brought immediate economic collapse and quite possibly state failure."
Mandela is survived by three daughters, 18 grandchildren, nine great-grandchildren and three step-grandchildren as well as four step-children via marriage to Graca Machel.


text:
In it together
Robin Brownlee
January 21 2009 12:07PM
They're in it together now. If for no other reason than that, I like the Edmonton Oilers' chances of making the playoffs a lot more today than I did when this season began.
It's not so much because the Oilers hit the NHL all-star break with three straight wins and are sitting in a playoff position after Tuesday's 4-3 victory over Columbus -- two of the three wins came on the back of Ales Hemsky, who has been magnificent since his head stopped spinning two games ago.
What I see when I look at the Oilers and what I hear when I talk with players is a team that's, well, a team after spending the better part of half the season as a bunch of individuals wearing the same jerseys.
The Oilers are 5–1 since they held a players-only meeting after a 4–1 loss to San Jose Jan. 9. I'm not offering this as a news bulletin because it's been written about here and in the local dailies and discussed on the radio, but it was a heart-to-heart that had to happen, and one that's been the catalyst for a fresh dynamic in the dressing room and a better team out on the ice, where the proof is always in the pudding.
They have a chance now.
Bridging the gap
"It's up to the guys who've been down this road before to show a little leadership and a little experience," said Sheldon Souray, a key cog in a veteran core that was being questioned 20 games into the season. "If you do that, every one else will follow."
Anybody who's been paying attention heard the talk of a "rift" in the room as the Oilers struggled in the first 40 games. To be fair, characterizing the situation as a rift was an overstatement.
It was more of a disconnect, a failure to communicate, between the 30-something veterans -- Souray, captain Ethan Moreau, Shawn Horcoff and Steve Staios, to name just four players -- and youngsters like Sam Gagner, Andrew Cogliano, Robert Nilsson, Marc Pouliot and Ladislav Smid.
By any name, the lack of cohesiveness was apparent to anybody who spent much time in the room. Having looked and listened for awhile -- and having people I trust tell me about circumstances I hadn't actually seen first-hand -- I referred to it as "the mix" during the pre-season.
Whatever was said during that players only meeting -- I haven't been told specifics -- talking the talk has translated into walking the walk. Not to get all cornpone about it, playing for the guy next to you and not just for yourself means something now. This is a team everybody, regardless of age, is taking ownership in. The difference is noticeable.
Down the road
Now, before anybody accuses me of hopping on the bandwagon with 36 games to play, I'm still not sold that this is a playoff team. Climbing into a post-season position at the 46-game mark is one thing. Holding onto it is quite another.
This is a team with flaws and question marks:
- The penalty killing remains a weakness.
- How long can coach Craig MacTavish ride red-hot but old-as-dirt Dwayne Roloson?
- Can GM Steve Tambellini find a shutdown defenceman (we just saw one wearing Columbus silks in former Oiler Jan Hejda)?
- Where does Gilbert Brule, assigned to Springfield today with Liam Reddox, fit in the mix?
- Will Erik Cole and Dustin Penner be better in the final 36 games than they were in the first 46? I'd say yes on Cole and I-don't-know on Penner.
- Will Souray and Hemsky stay healthy and be as prolific the rest of the way as they have been?
For all the questions, though, know this: if the Oilers come up short, they'll do it together. If they go down, it'll be swinging. They're in it together.
That wasn't always the case.
January 21 2009, 09:04PM
Wanye Gretz wrote:
Our anti bandwagon jumping police chief has returned in the nick of time. Think - when he left on Vay-Cay this site was positively rocking with rage at MacT. Every Oiler was a bum and Hemsky was on his way out the door. Now look. I love being an Oiler fan. Also, can I get in on this ham sandwich bet you and Swany have going? MMMMM Ham Sandwich
I love this fickle mob that is the Nation! It's like ancient Rome.
I have it on good authority that the Fire MacT Bandwagon (tm) is currently up on blocks in baggedmilk's front yard and is currently being used as a breeding ground for a pack of ferrel cats.
The Towel Boy wrote:
I love this fickle mob that is the Nation! It's like ancient Rome. I have it on good authority that the Fire MacT Bandwagon ™ is currently up on blocks in baggedmilk's front yard and is currently being used as a breeding ground for a pack of ferrel cats.
Let the Oilers drop three out of four after the break and that'll change. The panic level around here is roughly equivalent to that of a clerk working the graveyard shift at a 7-Eleven on the wrong side of town when seven gangstas wearing hoodies and packing spray bombs roll into the parking lot. One eye on the door, the other on the panic button.
RB: I don't think I've read your take on the Garon move but considering your view on the likelihood of Roli being able to carry the mail on such a demanding route, I think I have a pretty good idea what you'll say.
And I don't think DB expects the PK to keep running at 87% but I'll get on board with him that it's taken a turn for the better. And this is from a guy that was hard to convince of that possibility. The biggest difference I've seen is that now the PK's creating chances which obviously tells us they're no longer sagging at the blueline and letting the other teams enter willy-nilly and/or they're being more aggressive in the other end.
I'm hoping things might even cement more positively when 34 returns and the Oilers have five PK forwards to run with; ideally they'd run a 34-13 or 34-78 combo and then we'd have six PK forwards and thus could sustain a high tempo kill-throughout.
@ Dennis: Yes, it has taken a turn for the better, but the initial suggestion that the PK will continue to operate at the 87 per cent its been at in the short-term for the next 36 games is optimistic in the extreme.
The Oilers have been at 84.6 and 84.7 the past two seaons. Given that this group spent much of the first half at 72 per cent, I'll stick with my suggestion that they'll be at 78-80 per cent over the final 36 games. If they can end up at that 78-80 per cent mark overall, that's pretty good with the horrible start they had.
And you'd best re-think that 34-13 combination. Who wins the face-offs?
RobinB wrote:
Gord wrote: The daughter of one of my former co-workers was the teacher of Peca's son. Peca's wife was always complaining to the teacher about how much she didn't like the community and didn't feel welcome. What you say jibes with what I heard from several people close to the team during Peca's stay here.
I see to remember the basis for all of that was for some reason an Oiler staffer convinced them to live in Ardrosson, and she hated the distance from the city, and how small Ardrosson is.
Am I wrong on this?
Rob wrote:
I see NO point in re-visiting or re-aquiring tweener players like Reasoner who are quite soft and are used in questionable situations by the coach. Like when Reasoner was last here being out on the ice in the final seconds of a critical game when offensive players are sitting on the bench.
I am so tired of comments like these on Reasoner and the coach. He is put out in situations like this to WIN THE FACEOFF. He often went out, won the draw, then went immediately to the bench for a change.
January 22 2009, 08:40AM
@ Malc: Well-stated.
@ Malc:
And he and other similar type players have also been put out on the PP or as an extra attacker to tie a game late.
@ rindog: You guys are right. While MacT's comparison to Joe Sakic was the epitome of overstatement, there's no question Reasoner was a handy guy to have around.
He was well-rounded, solid on face-offs, defensively reliable and had a history as an offensive player when drafted.
@ RobinB:
I just don't think he was handy enough to play on the first line for large chunk of games (splitting with Stoll) down the stretch last year (when Horcoff got hurt).
However, in MacT's defense (did I just say that?), I know we didn't have many other options (with the roster declaration) but we had to have someone else....didn't we?
RB: There would be no reason to let that 13-34 tandem take face-offs.
RobinB wrote:
@ Wanye Gretz: Swany already bailed on his 87 per cent theory and tried to slip in top-10 (82-83 per cent) in its place. That's still a bet I'll take over the final 36 games. As for you, you're on. But let's go with the "bologna sandwich" you made so popular at the Remand Centre on Friday nights.
Robin I just went back though the thread and I said why can't they keep up that pace, I didn't know it was 92%, but I feel they will be in the top 10 between 82-87% for the rest of the year. A ham sandwich and a signed Gagner stick for my 10 year old son. If they don't name your price.
@ swany:
Regardless of the PK outcome, if you want, I'll see if I can get you and your son into an Oilers practice before the end of the season and you can meet Sam G. Send me a message on Facebook with your real name and we can try to pick a date.
RobinB wrote:
And you'd best re-think that 34-13 combination. Who wins the face-offs?
Why do they need to be on the ice for faceoffs, if that is a concern?
@ speeds: Is there some question 13-34 would be a concern? Have you looked at their face-off percentages?
I'd like to see more of Cogliano on the PK because his speed poses the threat of a counter-attack, but relying on changing on the fly to keep 13-34 on the ice together but out of the face-off circle when you're already a man down can be tricky.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Learning Center Search Results
Showing 1-3 of 3 results
Finding your Ancestors in Vital Records
Learn why, where, and when vital records were created in the United States and how to find them.
Pennsylvania Research: An Overview
Learn what records are available in Pennsylvania and where to find them. This class is helpful if you need more information about census, vital, church, land, and probate records in the Mid-Atlantic area. The class also covers county histories. The next lesson in this series is Pennsylvania Research: Vital and Church Records.
We will learn why we should use church records, how to find them, types of church records and information found in them, and ways to determine an ancestor's religion


text:
Or choose a city:
Check out your latest favorites below:
Find Some Favorites:
You Have
Print, email, edit and share your collection of Favorites
Login so you can see your Favorites on mobile devices and share with friends
Budget Minded
King Room Fairfield Inn amp; Suites Jacksonville
Get away to a Jacksonville, Florida, hotel located just two miles from JAX and convenient to I-95 & I-295. The Fairfield Inn & Suites Jacksonville Airport offers comfortable accommodations featuring spacious guest rooms, home-like amenities and Marriott service. If you're looking for a hotel near Jacksonville Port for your pre- or post-cruise vacation - or you're traveling for business and need a hotel near the Jacksonville, Florida, airport - Fairfield Inn & Suites' recently renovated accommodations offer luxurious bedding, in-room coffee service, a heated outdoor pool, 24-hour fitness center, complimentary deluxe continental breakfast and free 24-hour airport shuttle service. Guests can also enjoy dining and shopping with our complimentary shuttle to nearby restaurants and stores. We're also minutes from Jacksonville Zoo, River City Marketplace, colleges and universities, the Veteran's Memorial Area, Jacksonville Municipal Stadium and downtown.
1300 Airport Rd. Jacksonville, FL 32218
*Prices in US dollars (USD). Prices reflect lowest average nightly rates. Wemake every attempt to get accurate prices, however prices are not guaranteed. N/A = Not Available
Related to Fairfield Inn & Suites, Jacksonville Airport
Choose the Florida experiences you're interested in, and we'll send you specialized eNewsletter editions about them. Take your pick or just click submit:
Attractions, Family & Kids
Boating & Fishing
Florida Resident
Luxury & Shopping
Outdoors & Nature
Romance & Weddings
History & Culture
VISIT FLORIDA © will not share your email address or
personal information with any other party for any reason.View our Privacy


text:
(April 20) Today we're celebrating . . . The Sign of Taurus
April 20th – May 20th. The second sign of the zodiac.
Individuals born under this sign are thought to have a calm, patient, reliable, loyal, affectionate, sensuous, ambitious, and determined character, but one which is also prone to hedonism, laziness, inflexibility, jealousy, and antipathy. In terms of anatomy, Taurus is said to rule the vocal chords, tonsils, palate, throat, neck, ears, and lower jaw. Generally, there is something distinctly sensual about the appearance*
*source: wikipedia - Taurus


text:
Invaluable cannot guarantee the accuracy of translations through Google Translate and disclaims any responsibility for inaccurate translations.
Show translation options
Lot 202E: 19th/20th C Chinese porcelain vase mounted as lamp.
Antique auction with Chinese collection
by Estate Galleries Auction
May 2, 2013
Pompano Beach, FL, USALive Auction
Looking for the realized and estimated price?
Description: 19th/20th C Chinese porcelain vase mounted as lamp. Vase H:17.5"
Browse more items


text:
News Home
Saturday, November 03, 2012
Shoreline Community College Men's Soccer Ends Season on Loss to Skagit Valley College
Shoreline Community College Men's Soccer had a tough end to their season against Skagit Valley College at Dolphin Field today. The Dolphins suffered a 8-1 loss. Through watching the game you would have never known there was such a large differential in the score as both teams continued to push hard.
Playing on a muddy field proved to be difficult and it took both teams sown time to get used to the difference in how the ball traveled. In the 28th minute Skagit Valley College found their spot and Bradley Diaz scored the first goal of the game on Dolphin goalie Marco Martinez. Shoreline's Tsupasa Takahashi converted on a penalty kick shot in th 42nd minute to tie the game up 1-1.
Skagit Valley score six of their eight goals in the in second half of the game. Without much pressure from the Dolphin forwards in the second half Skagit Valley players pushed up significantly. This gave opportunity for defenders like Sten Mejlander to score. SVC was playing well as a team and had eight different players scoring goals.
This will end the season for both Shoreline and Skagit Valley. Neither of these teams will be moving on to playoffs. The teams have a season to be proud of. They both ended today on a high note in leaving everything on the field during this very high energy and passionate game.
Posted At 9:16 PM •
Comments are locked for this post.
Check here for updates on Shoreline Community College Men's Soccer
Latest Stories
SCC Men's And Women's Soccer Open Season On Tuesday
SCC Summer Camps Begin June 24 - 2 Soccer Camps Scheduled
SCC Names Aaron Howe As Men's Soccer Coach
Tsubasa Takahashi Named Final Men's Soccer Player of the Week
Shoreline Community College Men's Soccer Ends Season on Loss to Skagit Valley College
Tsubasa Takahashi Named SCC Men's Soccer Player of the Week
SCC Names Samuel Kangala as SCC Men's Soccer Player of the Week!
Shoreline Community College Men's Soccer Claims First Region Tie Against Whatcom Community College
SCC Men's Soccer Vs Everett CC Now On YouTube
SCC Men's Soccer Battles Hard But Drops 1-0 Match To Everett CC:
August, 2013
July, 2013
June, 2013
May, 2013
April, 2013
March, 2013
February, 2013
January, 2013
December, 2012
November, 2012
October, 2012
September, 2012
August, 2012
July, 2012
June, 2012
May, 2012
April, 2012
March, 2012
February, 2012
January, 2012
December, 2011
November, 2011
October, 2011
September, 2011
August, 2011
July, 2011
June, 2011
May, 2011
April, 2011
March, 2011
February, 2011
January, 2011
December, 2010
November, 2010
October, 2010
September, 2010
August, 2010
July, 2010
June, 2010
Academic Calendar
(What is this?)
Powered By


text:
Business, Careers, Management & MarketingFollow
Inspiring True Performance means truly taking action and making positive change in your life. In this show, hosts Kevin Miller and Tom Ziglar take the most powerful messages from Zig Ziglar and today's top world changers and break them down to the nitty gritty so we can all understand, digest and take real steps forward in our lives, loves, vocations and legacies. Zig Ziglar is widely recognized as the world leader in Motivation & Inspiration (the fuel for all we do!) and has reached and influenced over 250 million people through his best selling books, legendary presentations and timeless messages. He is one of the most quoted leaders of all time.
August 31st, 2012
Episode 277 of 492 episodes
Let Zig Ziglar be your Sunday school teacher! Zig Ziglar teaches you Biblical references for how to live your life with excellence.
You'll need to sign in to write a comment.
Welcome to the daily audio workout for your head.


text:
Bansley and Maloney finish at 17th in season debut on World Tour
Redmann and Saxton advance to men's main draw with two wins
BRASILIA – Heather Bansley and Elizabeth Maloney of Toronto were eliminated in the third round of the women's main draw on Wednesday at the opening stop on the FIVB beach volleyball circuit.
Madelein Meppelink and Sophie Van Gestel of the Netherlands defeated the top Canadian pair 19-21, 25-23, 15-8. Bansley and Maloney, currently chasing an Olympic berth on the circuit, will receive a 17th place ranking.
After a bye to the main draw, the Canadians won their first round match on Tuesday then lost a few hours later to Olympic champions Misty May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh of the U.S.
In Wednesday's third round, Bansley and Maloney played one of the longest sets in the tournament in the second and the Dutch seemed to feed off that dramatic win to close the match handily.
Meanwhile in men's qualifying, Christian Redmann of Toronto and Ben Saxton of Calgary won their two qualifying matches Wednesday to advance to the main draw..
Redmann and Saxton defeated Shun Zhou and Jian Li of China in the final round of qualifying 21-19, 21-14 to grab one of the eight available spots for the main draw which starts Thursday.
Josh Binstock of Toronto and Martin Reader of Comox, B.C., as well as Maverick Hatch of Comox and Sam Schachter of Toronto were just one win from joining Redmann and Saxton but lost their final qualifying matches.
Matt Zbyszewski of Toronto and Chaim Schalk of Red Deer, Alta., dropped their opening match.
More information: www.fivb.org


text:
Clinical Research Associate
Our free drug reference with brand, generic, and OTC medicines, drug interaction check and pill ID. Epocrates Rx for Apple iOS also includes our Mobile Resource Centers as well as number of extra features designed specifically for the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad.
This all-in-one clinical reference suite provides you with drug & disease monographs and diagnostic tools. The evidence-based disease content distinguishes this suite from Epocrates Rx, including access to treatment guidelines. Plus, access lab tests and panels with reference ranges, tables, approximate test costs, and commonly associated ICD-9s right from your iPhone or iPad.
Pocket Medical Spanish allows you to communicate with, diagnose, and treat Spanish-speaking patients more effectively with over 400 visual, text, and audio pronunciations of key questions.
View examples of normal and abnormal echocardiograms with the Echocardiography Atlas. Access 250 annotated images and 189 videos encompassing a wide range of cardiac pathology. Zoom and pan echocardiograms, and search for specific diseases, without the need for a network connection.


text:
Explore Doha's historic and modern attractions. Go dune bashing in the desert and stop for a swim in the attractive Inland Sea. Take in the lively night lights of Doha as you dine aboard a traditional Arabian dhow. Let your imagination take you away.
You can now book your tour/activity in Qatar online.
Doha Bus Hop on Hop off City Tour
Doha Bus fleet of open-top buses grant you the perfect vantage point to see this beautiful city. Your guide will be provided by a digital state of the art commentary system. Not just a voice telling you some info, but a full production complete with colorful background effects and music that is relative to your current location. Guides are provided in English, Arabic, German, Chinese, Japanese, Portuguese and Korean. The hop on and off services allows you to discover the city at your pace. Take all the time you need and simply get back on and continue the tour.
Dunes Discovery Tour (no meals)
A comfortable 4-wheel drive vehicle will take you from Doha, south along the coastal route to the Sealine Beach Resort, where your vehicle will be prepared for the exciting desert journey ahead. Your desert adventure over the soft sand of the magnificent dunes is as memorable, as is exciting. This tour offers the visitor ideal photo opportunities; allowing you to capture the stunning panoramic views of spectacular sand dunes and the Inland Sea, while enjoying the excitement of a roller-coaster ride of the dunes. If you have limited time this tour gives you the opportunity to get a taste of the desert and a chance to enjoy and experience the unique scenery, only an Arabian desert
Doha City Tour
Doha, is the capital of Qatar with the ever changing skyline situated around a wide crescent shaped bay overlooking the dazzling Gulf. Experience Doha, the commercial hub and the cultural heart of the country with our guided city tour in an air-conditioned vehicle which will take you to: The Museum of Islamic Art - Corniche and passing by Dhow Harbour - Souq Waqif and Falcon Shops followed by a visit to the Pearl-Qatar / Porto Arabia Boardwalk and Marina.
Inland Sea Safari (with meal)
Experience the quiet of the desert, far from the rush and noise of the city life, with no sound but the breeze and the shifting sand. This tour combines the thrill of 'dune bashing' – a rollercoaster ride over massive dunes with our experienced drivers – with the beauty of the Inland Sea which separates Qatar from Saudi Arabia.
Khor Al Udeid (The Inland Sea) is considered the marvel of Qatar's desert. When the tide rises it forms this unique inland sea transforming the area magically to resemble a resort by the shores of a lake. The surrounding sand dunes rise to over 40 metres in height.
Our highly experienced drivers will take you in comfortable 4-wheel drive vehicles on an exciting and unforgettable roller coaster ride over the magnificent sand dunes. Then have lunch and relax Bedouin-style at our Desert Camp, complete with tent, carpets and cushions and enjoy our famous Arabic hospitality.
Take a swim in the tranquil Gulf waters or scramble up the sand dunes on foot. Or, for the more adventurous, try sand-boarding - a cinch for those experienced on snow, and a soft landing for those who are trying it for the first time!
If taking the afternoon trip you will watch the spectacular sunset then enjoy a delicious traditional barbecue dinner around the camp fire before returning back to your hotel by late evening.
Qatar Explorer Tour (with Lunch)
Good Evening Doha (with Dinner)
This evening tour in a fully air-conditioned vehicle winds its way through the center of the city with its traditional brightly lit souqs and shopping areas ablaze with colour and lights. The tour is a quick introduction to the heart of Doha Visits to the Corniche, Downtown, Souq Waqif & Gold Market. Dinner is at a traditional restaurant to experience Arabic food & beverages, then return back to hotel or airport at the departure time.
Full Day Doha Sightseeing Tour (with Lunch)
USD 75 per person - minimum 2 adults
Timing: 09:00 - 18:00. (Daily)
This full day Tour takes you around the buzzing city of Doha with drive by The Pearl Qatar, Education City, Aspire Zone which includes the Khalifa Stadium & Aspire Academy. Stop by the Equestrian club just before lunch.
Continue with the tour by visiting the Museum of Islamic Art designed by world renowned architect, I.M. Pei and drive by the Corniche and the Dhow Harbor while ending your day at the traditional Souq Waqif and the Falcon Shops
Arabian Night Safari (Overnight safari with dinner)
USD 150 per person - minimum 2 adults
Timing: 14:00 - 09:00 next day. Daily
Get away from the hustle and bustle of the city for this ultimate and unforgettable Arabian adventure. Experience the excitement and thrill of driving over shifting sand. From the luxury of a four-wheel drive vehicle, you'll race up and over sun-glittering dunes. The excitement and thrill of driving over shifting sand will remain with you long after your holiday is over.
At our campsite, enjoy swimming in the sparkling waters of the Gulf or relaxing on the warm white sands of the shoreline. After dark, delight in a sumptuous Middle Eastern meal around the campfire while the intoxicating beat of traditional Arabian music fills the air.
The next morning, wake up early to witness a spectacular desert sunrise before breakfast. Finally, take a walk along the shore, go for a swim, or try sandboarding before heading back to your hotel.


text:
Calendar Of Events Dance
Written by Miami Today on April 5, 2012
Friday 3/30
The Miami City Ballet performs "Coppélia," an 1870s Parisian dance telling of Franz, who loves Swanilda; except when he has eyes for Coppélia, who turns out to be a mechanical doll. 8 p.m. Additional performances through April 1. Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, 1300 Biscayne Blvd., Ziff Ballet Opera House, Miami. $19-$169. Details: (305) 949-6722 or www.arshtcenter.org.
Saturday 3/31
Dance NOW! directors Diego Salterini and Hannah Baumgarten present the murder mystery ballet "Six Characters" for their spring concert. Performed with live music and original score from Miami Guitar Trio Director Federico Bonacossa, this theatrical ballet based on the famous Modernist play by Italian Luigi Pirandello. The libretto is presented in non-chronological order, challenging the audience to piece together the story while trying to figure out who is the real villain. 8 p.m. 3 p.m. April 1. Colony Theater, 1040 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach. $15 students and seniors. $30 advance sales, $35 day of. Details: (800) 745-3000 or www.dancenowmiami.org.


text:
Quality CareFind out why Mayo Clinic is the right place for your health care. Make an appointment.
Meet the StaffFind a directory of doctors and departments at all Mayo Clinic campuses. Visit now.
Research and Clinical TrialsSee how Mayo Clinic research and clinical trials advance the science of medicine and improve patient care. Explore now.
Visit Our SchoolsEducators at Mayo Clinic train tomorrow's leaders to deliver compassionate, high-value, safe patient care. Choose a degree.
Professional ServicesExplore Mayo Clinic's many resources and see jobs available for medical professionals. Get updates.
Give to Mayo ClinicHelp set a new world standard in care for people everywhere. Give now.
Mayo Clinic offers appointments in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota and at Mayo Clinic Health System locations.
Subscribe to Housecall
Our general interest e-newsletter keeps you up to date on a wide variety of health topics.
If the stress in your life is more than you can cope with, get help right away.
It's obvious that men and women respond differently to stress. The roots may lie in our genes and in our past.
Historically as humans developed, the male was the hunter, often under dangerous conditions. When faced with adversity, such as a lion or a tiger, the male would experience the "fight or flight" response. The pulse quickens. The pupils dilate. The blood pressure increases and blood is forced into the muscles for strength.
On the other hand, the female was the protector who stayed with and cared for the children. Typically, the female would have a "tend and befriend" response — a less aggressive response to stress.
We now understand that a single gene, a piece of chromosome, may account for these differences. The SRY protein located on the Y chromosome, which determines maleness, seems to be a factor in regulating the release of chemicals and hormones directly related to the response to stress. So, the way we behave under stress may reflect some genetic differences.
An experience I had this morning drove the point home to me. I was caught in traffic and noticed that the two adolescent males in cars next to me were not happy campers. They looked frustrated and they were not demonstrating mature coping skills. On the other hand, the women drivers around me didn't exhibit that sort of behavior. They seemed calm and even accepting, as if acknowledging that this is just the way it is.
Perhaps this explains why women outlive men by an average of 8 to 10 years. What do you think? Are these differences real? What can we learn from them?
Edward T. Creagan, M.D.
Follow on Twitter:
Join the discussion at #Stress.
Selecting "Submit" signifies that you have read and agree to our posting guidelines.
Without any real medical training behind me other than being a frequent flyer for my own medical issues. This lets say "medical discovery", brings up a couple questions in this laymen's mind. Since "Typically, the female would have a "tend and befriend" response — a less aggressive response to stress." They have approved recently allowing women into more combat roles. With that said will they be aggressive enough to with stand the stress of combat? Then on the men's side since the "Y" chromosome hold this so called key, in the males aggressiveness can they then develop some kind of shot or pill that will help everyone with PTSD? This would not only be helpful for men but also women who have their own share of PTSD caused by a number of things but primarily rape victims.
yea, i also support this theory, because i studied that....In stressful situations, men respond more aggressively than women, and the reaction is controlled by Y-chromosome gene, Australian scientists say.The scientists believe the SRY gene, which directs male development, may promote aggression and other traditionally male behavioural traits resulting in the fight-or-flight reaction to stress.
Research has shown how the body reacts to stress by activating the adrenal glands, which secrete catecholamine hormones into the bloodstream and trigger the aggressive fight-or-flight response.
Thank you for this very interesting article. I am in awe of the science that can now explain the "how" of our behaviors. I think these genetic factors are equally or more important than learned behaviors and that this will become more evident with future discoveries. Perhaps this knowledge of the genetics of aggression will someday greatly benefit us, like in preventing diseases or reducing violent crimes, even wars! Okay, maybe I'm getting overly optimistic here...but maybe not.
I agree with your theory of inherited male response to stress or threat. The mature male response to anger or frustration of many kinds is, I believe, a learned response through maturity. As Thomas Jefferson said, "If you're angry count to 10. If you're very angry, count to 100. We have to take time to cool down and handle our anger responsibly.
I;m always really cautious when leaning too much upon evolution and our natural tendencies. Surely SOME are there but times have changed and so has our context as human beings.
While I know you don't mean that women have NO fight or flight, I feel like you are too quick to say that women go for "tend and befriend." I could probably use myself as an example! I actually have an anxiety disorder so waiting around (traffic), and stressors be them mild irritations or major life events cause a huge fight or flight response in me. I most certainly act more with aggression than with "tend and befriend."
Going back to evolution, I think the change in context makes this a completely different problem. Response to a stressor seems to me to depend more on context than chromosomal differences.
I think hormones DO have something to do with women living longer but I don't think stress response is necessarily the reason.
Is there ANYTHING that men do not respond to more aggressively than women?
This is a lot of noise about something that doesn't take science to reveal.
It appears like you had a different reaction to being caught in traffic than the other two examples. You were more the observer who used the situation as a learning experience. I suppose your longevity of life would be somewhere in the middle for being able to put yourself outside the situation.
Mayo Clinic does not endorse companies or products. Advertising revenue supports our not-for-profit mission.
Check out these best-sellers and special offers on books and newsletters from Mayo Clinic.
Any use of this site constitutes your agreement to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy linked below.
A single copy of these materials may be reprinted for noncommercial personal use only. "Mayo," "Mayo Clinic," "MayoClinic.org," "Mayo Clinic Healthy Living," and the triple-shield Mayo Clinic logo are trademarks of Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.
We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.


text:
Strombabble: "You'd Be Surprised About the Number of Teams That Have Inquired About Our Goalies"
Thomas Drance
February 12 2013 12:41PM
On Tuesday it was announced that Rogers Sportsnet and the Canucks have agreed to a mammoth, ten year extension of their multi-platform broadcast agreement (you can read the press release from Sportsnet here). To talk about the deal and provide grist for the mill, Mike Gillis appeared on the HockeyCentral radio and television program with Nick Kypreos and Doug MacLean and discussed, among other things: John Garrett's fondness for chicken wings, the evolution of Roberto Luongo, compliance buyouts and of course: the Canucks' goaltending situation.
Read on past the jump.
The interview began with Mike Gillis making fun of John Garrett for eating all of the Chicken Wings on the club's charter flights, while also expressing his fondness for the Sportsnet team in Vancouver. Asked pointedly if he had a similar fondness for the Sportsnet team in Toronto, Gillis deadpanned "I love hearing opinions out of Toronto." Absolute gold.
Once pleasantries were briefly exchanged, Mike Gillis was promptly asked for an update on the club's goaltending situation. Mostly he did the typical Mike Gillis thing, which for those of you unfamiliar with the General Manager's stylings, is characterized by Vancouver's General Manager saying nothing substantive in a totally fascinating way. Here's some choice transcribed quotes:
On the luxury of having two elite goaltenders:
"The discussion about the goaltending is interesting... When you know the character of the two guys involved, the decisions for us are made much easier. No one gave these guys enough credit for the people they are, how hard they work, how much they support each other. We knew going in that if there wasn't a deal that makes sense, we were going to keep both of them in a shortened season and see how things played out.
When you can put a guy in net every night that gives you a chance to win every game, it's a luxury that gets pretty hard to give up. You get used to it after a while... We knew those two guys if they got off to a good start would keep us in games we might otherwise not be in because of injuries... "
So it sounds like Mike Gillis is well aware that the Canucks have been dependent on their goaltending in the early going. He also makes sure to point out that having both Cory Schneider and Roberto Luongo on the roster is an advantage for the Canucks, not a distraction (as some dummies seemed to think it might be).
On whether or not the descending salary cap impacts his team's ability to pay two goaltenders 9.3 million (against the cap) going forward:
I think to do the right thing by these guys changes if we move into the offseason. You now we do a lot of cap planning well in advance, and have multiple scenarios we could use to keep both of them, but I really think there will come a time where the right thing for both of them is to only have one, and to develop another young goalie. It'll be the right thing for us and it's going be the right thing for them. So I think that's at the forefront of our thought process.
We've managed to work out the money in the past under a cap scenario and we can do it in the future. That's not the pressure for me, the pressure is that we always do the right thing for our players. If we get to the summer with both of them here and we have the success that we hope to have I think then it'll be time to do something."
Now, on the one hand, if you're being cynical you probably laugh at this "I worry more about doing the right thing for my players as people, than the salary cap" quote and disregard it as complete nonsense. I tend to be cynical, but I actually think this quote was one of the more candid things that Mike Gillis said during the entire Hockey Central radio spot.
The essential context is understanding the "covenant" between the Canucks and their players, and also being aware of the extent to which Cory Schneider and Roberto Luongo have both personally enabled Mike Gillis to take his time, and seek to properly maximize the return in any potential Roberto Luongo trade.
By signing an extension - even after Mike Gillis held onto Roberto Luongo at the 2012 NHL Draft - without testing the market as a restricted free-agent, Cory Schneider showed the Canucks organization extraordinary loyalty. Roberto Luongo has done the same. He's never gone on the record and criticized the organization for their handling of him this past summer, he never tied Mike Gillis' hands by saying he'd only accept a trade to Florida, and he's been a good soldier on and off the ice throughout this entire ordeal.
I'm pretty convinced that part of the reason the Canucks have managed to retain their core players, most of them for significantly less than market vaue, is that they value this sort of thing. As well they should. Though maybe this comment just indicates that Mike Gillis employs Laurence Gilman, so the cap is never quite the concern that it might be for less savvy management teams.
Moving on, Mike Gillis was asked briefly about the prospect of buying out Roberto Luongo's contract. His answer will probably not surprise you in the slightest:
Absolutely not. We've never even had the discussion. It's never even entered into his thought process.
The Roberto Luongo buyout nonsense isn't something we've ever found compelling...
Finally, Mike Gillis talked about whether negotiations concerning Roberto Luongo were ongoing, emphasized the lack of urgency for Vancouver on this front, and dropped a mini-bomb (that isn't actually much of anything at all):
"In this business, and Doug can attest to this, you talk to other General Managers all the time - you talk about different possiblities all the time. One out of every two-hundred might actually get some traction and actually work out. In this case, there are teams that have consistently called us to talk about this situation and you know we're listening. Right now everythings going great to us, and I'm not sure I see the need to upset something unless we have a legitimate opportunity to improve our team in another way."
"So is that mystery team still involved."
"You'd be surprised about the number of teams that have inquired about our goalies."
As Nick Kypreos and Doug MacLean were quick to note, "our goalies" is potentially a sexy quote. Except it's pretty consistent with what Mike Gillis has been saying all along for the past seven months, and it was only a week ago that Mike Gillis publicly affirmed the Canucks' "commitment" to Cory Schneider going forward. Schneider remains the younger of the two goaltenders, and is arguably the more technically sound as well. Frankly, I don't think there's really much of anything to see here (at least in terms of the "our goalies" nugget).
Listen to the full interview here .
1. Important question? Would Canucks retain part of Lui's salary to get deal for the assets they want/need?IMO this opens the door to more teams?
2. This notion some media & the team is floating that Cory is the better technical goalie is a red herring. Goaltending IS NOT brain surgery. Using this criteria Hasek would have never made NHL. Nether would have Timmy T. & even Marty is not know for his mechanics.
In addition, Lui as the 'inferior' technical goaltender, has put up on of the best es% in last 10 years. Take the bet right now that Cory's 'technical prowess' doesn't amount to him surpassing this. In addition, if Cory was better than Lui he would have been in the NHL in his early 20's playing 70 games like Lu. The fact is Cory has had a psychological issue to deal with and he has had to improve his technique because his instincts weren't as good as other 'elite' goalies. In the end goalies are paid for one reason to stop the puck. It doesn't matter how.
My guess is this is another code word by the media because deep down they 'like' Cory. he's a great guy. He's an underdog type. Lui is a rock star. An alpha male. There has been an obvious envy/bias from media towards his incredible talent.
I'm sure a lot of teams have called about Schneider, but I'm sure these were also very short phone conversations.
Gillis: "Hello Mike here."
Talon: "Hi Mike it's Dale from Florida I'm calling about Cor..."
Gillis' phone: DING! ******ringtone********
@Thomas I don't know, saying "I really think there will come a time where the right thing for both of them is to only have one, and to develop another young goalie"--sounds to me like he might be re-orienting his rhetoric. Maybe a trade of Schneider is becoming the more realistic possibility (although I'm not sure it's a good idea).
On the Schneider - Luongo comparison: I think Luongo reads the play as well as anyone in the game.
@ dan: I haven't seen any evidence that Schneider has psychological issues...he was drafted by a team that had Luongo. It would take a while to win the starter's job.
@antro It is an interesting thought, particularly with Gillis pluralizing the word goaltender today and Mike Liut's comments to the media last weekend. He wouldn't be a good GM if he wasn't listening to offers on both of them so he could be very quietly repositioning his stance on trading Schneider. It would be a lot easier to get fair value for him due to his contract, and if Gillis got an offer he couldn't refuse then who knows what would happen?
I still think it's Lu who goes, but if Gallagher starts writing articles about Schneider's playing time I'll be concerned...
February 12 2013, 03:02PM
@antro Schneider was drafted in 2004, after the Canucks ended their season with a 7-game playoff stint where they used three goalies.
Excellent article as always, but this is really starting to bug me:
Why do you route all of your internal links through Google? Why, when you link to a story, do you use ? I don't know why it bugs me, but it does.
Alright, lol, that above comment got formatted strangely. I had some bare html in there that got commented. You might want to take a look at that and make sure there's no XSS vulnerabilities, there. Anyway, I was basically just wondering why you link to google to get to internal links instead of doing it directly.
February 12 2013, 03:10PM
@ Cam
Yeah, I know, I should have written that Schneider was drafted by the team that *would get* Luongo before long.
@antro Schneider was drafted in 2004, after the Canucks ended their season with a 7-game playoff stint where they used three goalies.
I'm remembering that series.
Always good when you go from the starter (Cloutier) to the backup (Hedberg?) and then to a promising rookie to be your saviour (Auld), all over the course of a seven game series.
Back then, we had a goalie problem. Now, we have a goalie surplus. :-)
I truly do think that Schneider's technique is modestly better. Luongo himself has said he's adopted a whole bunch of it this past summer and added it to his game. Wasn't a shot at Luongo at all, who I agree: is a total rock star.
It doesn't matter that his technique is better. And, IF he was a can't miss guy from age 20 teams would have offered MG the moon for him. The team could have strengthened the team & hypothetically won a cup. The fact they didn't tells us that a) Cory has developed late, b) Other teams don't hold Cory in as high esteem as Vancouver media does.
Would Luongo want to stay, assuming we traded Schneider? He's been waiting to leave for almost a year.
3 way with the Avs and ? for O'Reilly. Both want a roster player and prospect.
@Cam Charron
and @Thomas Drance.
If the Canucks were to retain part of Lui's salary in a trade do you know how this would affect the cap going forward? Have you guys (or anybody else) written about this yet?


text:
HELPER- Clifford Hreinson Bergera of proud Icelandic-Italian decent died on Friday, September 27, 2013 at the age of 69. He was born in Price, Utah to Grace Hreinson and James Joseph (Chokey) Bergera on March 2, 1944.
Funeral service, Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2013, 11 a.m., Mitchell Funeral Home (233 East Main Street) in Price. Family was at Mitchell's Monday evening from 6-7 p.m. and Tuesday one hour prior to services. Interment, Mt. View Cemetery, Helper. Arrangements entrusted to Mitchell Funeral Home of Price where friends are always welcome daily and may share memories of Cliff online at www.mitchellfuneralhome.net.
In lieu of flowers, the family suggests memorial contributions to the Lupus Foundation. http://www.lupus.org/action/join-the-fight.


text:
Skip to comments.Marbury v. Madison and the Supremes
Posted on 04/02/2012 3:36:22 PM PDT by MsLady
I've been talking to some people on fb and someone mentioned Marbury v. Madison. I know nothing about it. But, what I'm hearing is this. Marbury v. Madison was a huge fight where the concept of judicial review was established for the first time. Jefferson and Madison were apoplectic at the thought that the Supreme Court could be able to strike down laws as unconstitutional.
So is this what Obama is going to try to use? It doesn't make sense to me. If the Supremes can't strike down an unconstitutional law, what good are they? They can't keep a run away congress, President in check. Doesn't make sense to me.
If someone explains this, please be gentle, I am a lay person. ;)
I suggest you listen to Mark Levin. If he hasn't covered this yet I'm sure he will before it is over.
Obama will simply use his executive "pen" to dictate.
Obama will simply use his executive "pen" to dictate.
Link to Marbury vs Madison
Yes, the Founders really did not think about the possibility that the S.Ct. might throw out a law as unconstitutional. Marbury v. Madison established that point, and also established the point that it's the S.Ct. that has the final say on issues of Constitutionality.
I would not say though that it seems clear. The Constitution itself does not say that, and a whole lot of mischief has been done with that principle over the years. Since it's a well-established part of US law, though, there is no one who can legitimately claim that the S.Ct. does not have the power to declare it unConstitutional. And I don't think that Obama is challenging it on those grounds.
Yet there is a problem with Marbury v. Madison, and that is that it depends upon the willingness of the President and the Congress to accede to the Court's ruling. If both of them refused to go along, it would probably cause a Constitutional crisis.
Thanks for the link. Just in case I don't answer back anymore, my internet access has been slow and spotty the past few days. I hate hughes net :(
Facts of the Case
The case began on March 2, 1801, when an obscure Federalist, William Marbury, was designated as a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia. Marbury and several others were appointed to government posts created by Congress in the last days of John Adams's presidency, but these last-minute appointments were never fully finalized. The disgruntled appointees invoked an act of Congress and sued for their jobs in the Supreme Court. (Justices William Cushing and Alfred Moore did not participate.)
Is Marbury entitled to his appointment? Is his lawsuit the correct way to get it? And, is the Supreme Court the place for Marbury to get the relief he requests?
Decision: 6 votes for Madison, 0 vote(s) against Legal provision: Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 Yes; yes; and it depends. The justices held, through Marshall's forceful argument, that on the last issue the Constitution was "the fundamental and paramount law of the nation" and that "an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void." In other words, when the Constitution--the nation's highest law--conflicts with an act of the legislature, that act is invalid. This case establishes the Supreme Court's power of judicial review.
1. Where the constitution and a statute are in conflict, one or the other has to control the outcome. CJ Marshall said the Constitution had to prevail in such a case.
2. The constitution gives SCOTUS certain original jurisdiction. SCOTUS can only take an original dispute, if it is one of the categories enumerated in the constitution. This issue was not in one of the areas that the constitution provides SCOTUS with jurisdiction. Lacking jurisdiction, the court could not hear or decide the case.
Marbury v. Madison is about the LIMITED power of the Court.
But, as is their wont, subsequent and lower courts have bastardized what the case really stands for, in order to flip it on its head and make it stand for the proposition that the court is all powerful and the final say. Neither those propositions is true, either. SCOTUS is not all powerful, and it does not have the final say.
Well, we all know obama will do whatever it is he wants to do and to heck with the constitution and everyone else, cause it's just all about him.
I'm an atty (retired) and argued many a Constitutional issue before SCOTUS and other appellate courts. Marbury v. Madison is, perhaps, the must fundamental case in American Jurisprudence. And, yes, MANY, including Jefferson, were apoplectic that the Court decided that it's job was to determine the Constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. While judicial review had been around for centuries, this was the first time SCOTUS dealt with the concept.
But Marbury is SO well settled that it is without issue. Regardless of who wants to do what, SCOTUS will get the final say or you have a major Constitutional crisis. We almost had one with the Nixon tapes but Nixon relented.
Obama railing against SCOTUS is meaningless. It would have to be he (the Executive Branch) refusing to follow the ruling. That has just never happened and it won't now.
Well, we all know obama will do whatever it is he wants to do and to heck with the constitution and everyone else, cause it's just all about him.
I just got Wildblue exede. We went without internet for six months at home while I did a lot of hand wringing about satellite (no dsl or cable here).
We just picked it up in mid march. the new satellite. It absolutely flies. 'Couse there is a 12 gig a month limit, but so far we're way under our limit. We don't stream movies or anything.
It's a bit more expensive than cable, but so far I'm very pleased. We'll see how I feel in a year.
I am certain others can explain this better than I . But I have a copy of Marbury v.Madison from constitution.org @www.constitution.org/ussc/005-137a.htm And a copy of the US Constitution-Article III of which describes the general powers of the Judicial branch . The Federalist Papers , Madison, Hamilton,and Jay,Penguin Classic has several articles where the Judiciary was discussed. It was intended to be as Montesquieu described the Judicial branch "the weakest branch—having no power to enforce law-and no power to make law. And there is that excellent letter written by Thomas Jefferson to Justice William Johnson June 12,1823—
Thomas Jefferson Writings Library of America Merrill D.Peterson Editor, p.1469 1477. In short—best as I can tell
the big fight was between the Federalists and the anti-Federalists. Madison was a Federalist. Jefferson and anti-Federalist.John Marshall was appointed Chief Justice by John Adams John Marshall was a Federalist. Now before he left Office —after Jefferson was elected but before he was sworn in.... Adams made an appointment and expected Jefferson honor it. Jefferson believed the Constitution prohibits writs of mandamus.(as it seems do) and Marshall in writing
Marbury v. Madison was very clever. Had Marbury v. Madison been given the consideration it ought to have received Marbury v. Madison ought to have been overturned. But the Federalist had the power/support and the Courts have enjoyed the power of Judicial review since 1803 because nobody with any power wanted it overturned. I hope I didn't mess it up for anybody.
The Court never laid claim to any legitimate power to overturn laws, or amend constitutions, or make laws.
They simply asserted, rightfully, that they had a sworn obligation to follow the Constitution, just like those who are officers in the other branches, and to make their decisions accordingly. That's it.
Why otherwise does it direct the judges to take an oath to support it? This oath certainly applies, in an especial manner, to their conduct in their official character. How immoral to impose it on them, if they were to be used as the instruments, and the knowing instruments, for violating what they swear to support! The oath of office, too, imposed by the legislature, is completely demonstrative of the legislative opinion on this subject. It is in these words: 'I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich; and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent on me as according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States.' Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him and cannot be inspected by him. If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime. It is also not entirely unworthy of observation, that in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the constitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the constitution, have that rank. Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument."
"From these and many other selections which might be made, it is apparent, that the framers of the constitution contemplated that instrument as a rule for the government of courts, as well as of the legislature.
Why otherwise does it direct the judges to take an oath to support it? This oath certainly applies, in an especial manner, to their conduct in their official character. How immoral to impose it on them, if they were to be used as the instruments, and the knowing instruments, for violating what they swear to support!
The oath of office, too, imposed by the legislature, is completely demonstrative of the legislative opinion on this subject. It is in these words: 'I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich; and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent on me as according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States.'
Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him and cannot be inspected by him.
If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime.
It is also not entirely unworthy of observation, that in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the constitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the constitution, have that rank.
Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument."
Thank you so much for your input. I was starting to get worried. So you don't think we could end up with a Constitutional crisis over this? I wouldn't put anything past Obama.
Thank you so much for your input. I was starting to get worried. So you don't think we could end up with a Constitutional crisis over this? I wouldn't put anything past Obama.
The USSC was empowered to hear disputes between different states,case with foreign nations,and to review appeals from lower federal courts. Judicial review was something John Marshall pulled out of his a*s.
And the problem is, to paraphrase, Orwell, Marsall made one branch of government more equal than others.
There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.
Here is a good article from the Claremont Review of Books
Sometimes SCOTUS is the last word - or their interpretation of the limits of federal government power is the last word. But, depending on the case, Congress can step up and do its job (fat chance, I know), and overrule a SCOTUS decision. I think early wiretapping laws and phone privacy are Congressional constructs, in light of SCOTUS allowing warrantless wiretapping shortly after phones had been invented, just to pick an example.
As an academic point, there is also the remedy of impeachment, for judges who credibly stray outside of constitutional boundaries. Congress will never use that.
-- I feel that we Conservatives have rolled over for the black robes of many courts and THAT is why we are in a slow boat to Socialist China in our own current government! --
Courts and Congress working in cahoots. Powerful forces at work. There's a sort of Gordian knot, and the people are none too concerned over having a federal government that is radically outside of its boundaries.
We also live way out in no where so it's either dial up or satellite. We went with hughes net because at the time we couldn't get Wildblue. They were all filled up, I'm guessing they can only have so many people hooked up per satellite. Since then they launched another satellite so when our contract with hughes net runs out we can switch. And if they don't fix this thing, we will most certainly be switching.
The 4 liberal justices won't care. The question is, will Kennedy care?
Good summary and I agree that the precedent is clear beyond cavil that USSCt has final authority over constitutionality of acts of Congress, BUT Obama styles himself as a law professor (lie) and feels he is equally qualified to determine the constituionality of legislation. Today he said that Congrees agreed with him that it was Constitutional, and he said it was not up to a "group of unelected individuals" to say otherwise. He has already called out the court and scolded them to their face in the State of the Union address where they sat as guest stooges with a salavating media trying to read the expressions on their faces or their lips (Alito). He is a true gutter street punk, in your face, without class or pedegree. A constitutional crisis looming. He's made recess appointments with no guts from Congress to stop or challenge him. Everyone is afraid of him. The Court may well say to hell with it and just let him have his way rather than risk incurring his wrath. Hope not. One thing backing ghe court through the years was free press. No more. The media herd is already saying if they strike down the law then they are guilty of judicial activism and legislating from the bench.
Greta has a couple of posts up about it.
It is the Supremes' job on the constitionality or unconstitutionality of laws.
So of course Obama want's us to believe otherwise. That's what I supsect he 'professed' while he was a Constitutional 'scholar' as some called him...
And I shall. But, not all that long ago, even we lay people were taught about Marbury vs. Madison in elementary school. It was considered important.
At least you've found a place where you'd hear about it eventually and grasp its importance.
The courts have overturned cases before, you just haven't heard about it...
Chapter 4 of the TRUTH!
The TRUTH About Income!
In the last chapter we learned the truth about income tax. In this chapter we will learn the truth about the real definition of income itself! Nowhere in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) is income defined.
So the big question becomes, what IS income? And did you have any that was taxable?
The word "income" is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code, as the court stated in U.S. v. Ballard 535 F.2d 400 at 404, but the Supreme Court has defined it for us in numerous cases.
Stratton's Independence v. Howbert 231 U.S. 399 (1913) "As has been repeatedly remarked, the corporation tax act of 1909 was not intended to be and is not, in any proper sense, an income tax law. This court has decided in the Pollock Case that the income tax of 1894 amounted in effect to a direct tax upon property, and was invalid because not apportioned according to population, as prescribed by the Constitution. The act of 1909 avoided this difficulty by imposing not an income tax, but an excise tax upon the conduct of business in a corporate capacity, measuring, however, the amount of tax by the income of the corporation, . . ."
"As to what should be deemed "income" within the meaning of Sec. 38, it of course need not be such an income as would have been taxable as such, for at that time (the 16th amendment not having been as yet ratified) income was not taxable as such by Congress without apportionment according to population, and this tax was not apportioned. Evidently Congress adopted the income as the measure of the tax to be imposed with the respect to the doing of business in corporate form because it desired that the excise should be imposed, approximately at least, with regard to the amount of benefit presumably derived by such corporations from the current operations of the government."
The Supreme Court defines "income tax", as an excise tax "imposed with respect to the doing of business in corporate form". If you are not engaged in any corporate activities then you are not liable for an "excise income tax." This Supreme Court decision also states that Congress cannot tax an individual's income directly. All direct taxes must be imposed on the states with apportionment. U.S. Constitution Art. 1 Sect 2. Cl. 3 and Sect 9 Cl. 4.
The above case applies to corporations, so if you are not a corporation, then the Corporation Excise tax does not apply to you. The important thing here is the clarification that the income tax is an excise tax, imposed upon the doing of business in corporate form. An the tax is determined by how much income is received. But WHAT is income? The Supreme Court again tells us:
Eisner vs. Macomber 252 U.S. 189 pg 205 (1920) The Sixteenth Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted. In Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust it was held that taxes upon rents and profits of real estate and upon returns from investments of personal property were in effect direct taxes upon the property from which the income arose, imposed by reason of ownership; and that Congress could not impose such taxes without apportioning them among the states according to population, as required by Art 1 Sect. 2 Cl. 3 and Sect. 9 Cl. 4 of the original Constitution.
Afterwards, and evidently in recognition of the limitations upon the taxing power of Congress thus determined, the Sixteenth Amendment was adopted: . . . As repeatedly held, this did not extend the taxing power to new subjects, but merely removed the necessity which might otherwise exist for an apportionment among the states of taxes laid on income. . . . it becomes essential to distinguish between what is and what is not "income', as the term is there used;
After examining dictionaries in common use we find little to add to the succinct definition adopted in two cases arising under the Corporation (Excise) Tax Act of 1909 (Stratton's Independence v. Howbert 231 US 399, 415; Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co. 247 US 179, 185)
"Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined", provided it be understood to include profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets, to which it was applied in the Doyle case pp. 183, 185.
"Derived — from — capital"; — "the gain — derived — from — capital," etc. Here we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital, not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value proceeding from the property, severed from the capital however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived," that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the Taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal; — that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description.
That Congress has power to tax stockholders upon their property interests in the stock of corporations is beyond question; and that such interests might be valued in view of the condition of the company, including its accumulated and undivided profits, is equally clear. But this would be taxation of property because of ownership, and hence would require apportionment under the provisions of the Constitution, is settled beyond peradventure by previous decisions of this court.
Clearly, the definition of corporate income means a gain or profit received from an excise taxed activity. But does this same definition apply to individual income tax? To the Supreme Court again:
Merchants' Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka 255 U.S. 509 (1921) "It is obvious that these decisions in principle rule the case at bar if the word "income" has the same meaning in the Income Tax Act of 1913 that it had in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909, and that it has the same scope of meaning was in effect decided in Southern Pacific Co. v. Lowe 247 U.S. 330, 335, where it was assumed for the purposes of decision that there was no difference in its meaning as used in the act of 1909 and in the Income Tax Act of 1913. There can be no doubt that the word must be given the same meaning and content in the Income Tax Acts of 1916 and 1917 that it had in the act of 1913. When to this we add that in Eisner v. Macomber, supra, a case arising under the same Income Tax Act of 1916 which is here involved, the definition of "income" which was applied was adopted from Strattons' Independence v. Howbert, arising under the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909, with the addition that it should include "profit gained through sale or conversion of capital assets," there would seem to be no room to doubt that the word must be given the same meaning in all the Income Tax Acts of Congress that was given to it in the Corporation Excise Tax Act, and that what that meaning is has now become definitely settled by decisions of this Court."
The word "income" has the same meaning in ALL the income tax acts of Congress. That meaning has been declared to be corporate profits and gains and has been definitely settled by the Supreme Court. So, did you have income that is taxable? Did you have a gain or profit from a corporate activity? Remember that the income tax is an excise tax on the doing of business in a corporate capacity. That is the ONLY way that you can receive taxable income, as legally defined by the Supreme Court.
If you relied on these never overturned Supreme Court rulings in your beliefs, does your reliance on these plain rulings constitute a frivolous position? The IRS says it does!
So, if you had NO corporate income tax liability for this year, you had zero "income" as legally defined by the U.S. Supreme Court. A corporation is NOT taxed on ALL its income, from whatever source. It is only taxed on it's profit. If that is the case then why are YOU taxed on ALL your income from whatever source? You are also allowed to deduct SOME expenses. Does that mean that if you work for a corporation and you exchange 40 hours of your labor for $600, that you had $600 of profit, minus deductions? If a corporation exchanges $600 for 40 hours of your labor, did they also have a profit? NO! They can claim ALL your labor as a deductible operating expense. So why is it that why you exchange one property (your labor) for another property ($600) that in that exchange, you had a profit and the corporation had a deduction? Why is it a profit for you but not for the corporation? The answer is that it is not a profit for EITHER of you! And therefore it is not taxable income, as defined by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has ruled:
Eisner vs. Macomber 252 U.S. 189 pg 205 (1920): " The Sixteenth Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted. . . .taxes upon rents and profits of real estate and upon returns from investments of personal property (labor) were in effect direct taxes upon the property from which the income arose, . . . that Congress could not impose such taxes without apportioning them among the states"
The Supreme Court has plainly stated that an individual's income cannot be taxed directly: But an individual's income CAN be taxed with an excise tax, IF it was received in a corporate activity. More on this later.
Stratton's Independence v. Howbert 231 U.S. 399 (1913) "As has been repeatedly remarked, the corporation tax act of 1909 was not intended to be and is not, in any proper sense, an income tax law.
Corporate "income" (profits and gains) CAN be taxed with an excise tax, but the income itself is not taxed because it is property. Therefore income tax is not on income, it is on profits. It is not an income tax law, it is a profits tax law. Are you engaged in, or did you receive income in connection with, any corporate activities? Receipts received from labor or private investments are not corporate "income" and therefore do not fall within the legal definition of "income" as defined by the Supreme Court.
"Income" is legally defined as a corporate gain of profit in the Internal Revenue Code. Nowhere is there any different definition.
The definition of income used in the Corporate Excise Tax Act of 1909 is the same definition used in ALL the income tax statutes.
"Gross income" would then be the total income of a corporation, from all sources.
"Taxable income" would therefore be corporate gross income, minus allowable deductions. Also known as profit. If a corporation had no profit, then it had no taxable income. If you are an officer of a corporation, then you had individual income that is taxable.
Anytime the Internal Revenue Code mentions the word "income" it is talking about corporate income.
More info on this is in the chapter on the 16th Amendment.
If a case of the types you mention comes before the Court in the ordinary course of its business, and the Court is faced with a conflict between a federal law and the Constitution, it obviously must decide which of the two should be enforced. Equally obviously, it should be the Constitution.
Do you think otherwise?
Judicial review has obviously been wildly overused and misused, but the principal itself is implicit in the Constitution.
The most egregious examples of Court abuse of its powers, such as Roe v Wade, have little or nothing to do with judicial review as such. The Court in these cases isn't settling a conflict between the Constitution and a law, it's making things up and then claiming they were in the Constitution all along.
"...someone mentioned Marbury v. Madison. I know nothing about it. But, what I'm hearing is this. - Marbury v. Madison was a huge fight where the concept of judicial review was established for the first time. - Jefferson and Madison were apoplectic at the thought that the Supreme Court could be able to strike down laws as unconstitutional.
So is this what zer0 is going to try to use? It doesn't make sense to me. If the Supremes can't strike down an unconstitutional law, what good are they? - They can't keep a run away congress, (and/ or) _resident in check. Doesn't make sense to me.
Article and # 29.
. . . . See # 17, also.
Thanks, know-the-law.
Sorry. The enumerated powers of the Supreme Court don't include judicial review. And the concept of an "implicit"power is right up there with the Constitution as "living document".
Exactly. In Roe v. Wade the Court implicitly inserted a right to privacy into the Constitution.
In other cases, such as Gideon v. Wainwright, the Court extrapolated language that was already in the Constitution and interpreted that it meant indigent persons were to be provided the assistance of counsel by the state. This was a correct interpretation, IMHO.
Still further, the Court has also taken the EXACT words of the Constitution and applied what it believes the Founders' intent was when drafting the Constitution - as in District of Columbia v. Heller [right to bear arms].
ALL of these opinions stem from Marbury v. Madison, where the Court asserted the right to judicial review. And it is this case that forms the bedrock of moral authority the Court enjoys as a check on the other two branches of Government ...
One of the ultimate forms of legal checks-and-balances has been pretty much ignored.
Article III "The trial of ALL CRIMES shall be IN THE STATE..."
This was slightly amended by the sixth amendment, The trial of all crimes shall be in the state or the district where committed... but the sixth amendment DID NOTHING TO EXPAND THE FEDERAL DISTRICT BEYOND IT'S ORIGINAL MEANING!!!
The FEDERAL DISTRICT IS THE TEN SQUARE MILES CEDED FOR THE PLACE OF GOVERNMENT, FORTS, DOCKS, PORTS OF ENTRY, AND ANY LAND LAWFULLY CEDED TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!!
So if some alphabet agency busts down your door for not having a low flow toilet, they are supposed to get charges filed against you IN THE STATE!!! IN A STATE COURT and let things go from there!!!!
The states NEVER, either before or after the ratification, gave the federal government ANY KIND OF GENERAL POLICE POWER!! NEVER!
That's just about the ultimate power of sovereignty, and they just did not give it up. Plain and simple.
this is a good thread. Excellent remarks, both lay and expert.
I especially like the added oomph! provided by the double postings.
Ok, got my tin foil hat on. Why did homeland security just purchase 450,000(or was that 450 million?)rounds of hollow point bullets? Taking tin foil hat off.
This is true. At least for now anyway. It might have been taught in school, but, I've been out of school for many, many, many....well you get the picture ;)
"...but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights..." (Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29.)Interesting, isn't it, that we hear all this crap about the sportsman and the 2nd Amendment from those politicians who are the most eager to exert supreme national power over every aspect of the citizens' lives? No, the 2nd Amendment is for the people to protect themselves from those politicians who overstep the Constitutional bounds of their elected office.
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. . . Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46.)
"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." (Tench Coxe in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution' under the Pseudonym `A Pennsylvanian' in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1)
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people" (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press,1975)..)
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good" (George Washington)
Your right they weren't hollow point. It's a scary thought of why they might need this much ammo. What are they expecting? Is it overreacting of paranoid government officials? Are they trying to corner all the ammo so there is a shortage? I can bet you it isn't for the occupy crowd. If Occupy had done to the government what they have done to businesses and local communities the government would not have been so generous.
And yet, they want to disarm our missiles, nukes ect. so we can become equal to the rest of the world. And disarm law abiding citizens. Yet Homeland Security has the need for 450 million rounds of ammo???? That's more than one bullet for every man, woman and child in America.
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:
o ok thanks for the info and have a happy new years
o ok thanks for the info and have a happy new years
OMG! There's no manga this week? The agony!
Translation from naruto-xx.blogspot.com.
The brothers' different paths
Page 3:
Sasuke: Urgh!!
Page 4:
Sasuke: Urgh!
Page 6:
Sasuke: Uwah!
Page 7:
Sasuke: Chidori…
Page 8:
Sasuke: Chidori Nagashi
Page 11:
Itachi: You have become stronger
Sasuke: When this is over…Itachi…I have a question for you
Page 13:
Sasuke: It's just like before, the same words and crows…
Sasuke: Using your speciality genjutsu to create imitations…
Itachi: You have become stronger… (in the flashback at the background)
Itachi: What do you wish to ask?
Itachi: Even though it's not the end you can still ask me your question.
Sasuke: I will say this again.
Page 15:
Itachi: Ugwoh!
Page 16:
Itachi: Genjutsu…
Sasuke: When this is over, I have a question for you
Sasuke: That was exactly what I have said you bastard.
Words on the left:
Sasuke's startling growth, it's overwhelming!!
^Birthday Sig & Ava from Mikessc88 <3 v Birthday Sig from Imotochan <3Lords of the Boredom Zone: Arhazivory Redsquirrel and Crossx21
whoever thinks that itachi is gonna die so quick and easily are fooling themselves. to tell you the truth i dont expect a battle to the death/end from this. there is going to be conversation between these two and i think the fight will be a to be continued or it wont happen ever again.
come on guys...itachi is the true successer of Uchiha clan...sasuke is NOTHING...
Also, keep in mind more then likely they will switch again. They have been doing it too; 385 will probably have the Tobi ((Madara)) against Naruto and friends fight.
here's another pic i colored it
poor sasuke
like itachi would fall for the trick of forcing the enemy to jump in the air(can't dodge) and stabbing him....even naruto didn't fall for that with kakashi
Recommendations : GOTH / Kara No Kyoukai
Asian Movies Requests / MPD Psycho
[Nigihana.com] / [Cyber12.com]
Oh Yes...! There Will Be Blood


text:
This former A list tweener turned B+ list mostly movie actor is even in worse shape than he was previously
. He has been introduced to a drug he never used to take and unless he goes to rehab his friends know this drug will end up killing him.
Easy peasyReplyCancel
Enron. This is so sad.ReplyCancel
Cant stand him—I like Lilo better if I had to choose washed-up tweakers I mean tweenersReplyCancel
So pussy juice is a drug now?? Somebody better lock up Michelle Rodriguez:)ReplyCancel
Even with all the gay rumors I'm sure he has had some of that drug before- maybe VHud.ReplyCancel
I would never wish ill on another, even if I don't like his work. I suppose that's the most frustrating aspect of 'star gazing' you can see the potential in them that they can't, but we are given first row seats to the impending doom.ReplyCancel
Thank god he is on smack. Now maybe he will do the world a favor and OD.ReplyCancel
@TigerLilly: That is because those close to him have realized he jumped the shark and are now selling whatever stories they can to make some $$, cause the gravy train is grinding to a halt.
Wait till addiction gets the best of Beiber. All his close payroll pals will start dishing like crazy.ReplyCancel
Dude looks pretty ripped and fit to be half the junkie that they claim him to be on here. Seems like he'd look a lot worse if he was wasted 24/7 like you claim. Seems more like he's been making idiot career choices more than anything.ReplyCancel
i thought Zac got really good reviews for that Neighbours film?
Admittedly my only frames of reference for heroin addicts are Cory Monteith and PSH but neither of them looked anything like as healthy and fit as Zac does these days. Shooting up in between gym visits and horse riding i suppose.ReplyCancel
Count- unfortunately he is one of those lucky fools that came on the scene at the right time and has amassed a $200million net worth and makes millions a year (don't ask me how he is still earning) so even a fool like him can't run out of $$$.ReplyCancel
Dena – hopefully not because of the consistency:)ReplyCancel
Cubby BoltonReplyCancel
Yayyyy. A diff guess! (I don't know who the person is, I hope it's not a character Efron played. Lol)ReplyCancel
@Texas: Tell that to Iverson and Kanye. Anyone can go broke.ReplyCancel
I hear you Count but contrary to the gossip Kanye is loaded- $120million net worth and made $30mill last year (Forbes). He will never go broke. Most athletes that go broke never get their net worth high enough to amass a fortune large enough (except smart ones or those that make hundreds of millions-Tiger ect) because they are fools like iverson and spend it as fast as they make it or don't save enough.ReplyCancel
Not trying to argue or defend these fools, it is just that when you talk these types of numbers and you are not leveraged only the biggest fool in the world could lose it- I guess I just made your argument:)ReplyCancel
Those reported numbers are gross, and grossly over rated. Kanye's tour was way too expensive for a road show but he insisted on every aspect of his 'artistic' vision be maintained. No one can tell me that the over runs didn't come out of his own pocket. And when the venues didn't sell out, he got screwed. Hard.
The house that got ripped apart but never finished, had a skeletal crew, not the amount of people needed to complete the house. That's a red flag of money issues. He married into the K-Klan for business only. He needs money. Even the paltry (in comparison to others he hangs with) amounts that Kim may have. Their annual incomes are highly inflated as well.
Count is right. Kanye be broke as a joke.ReplyCancel
Dingle Barry – you may well be right you seem to have an extensive knowledge of his financial distress but don't take it personal if I stick with Forbes as a better source of financial information.ReplyCancel
Maybe it isn't heroin maybe its oxys.ReplyCancel
@sandy: that is splitting hairs. Like "i'm not a wino cause I swill gin, not wine."ReplyCancel
No I'm just saying he may not look like a heroin addict because its something else like oxys.ReplyCancel
Sorry, I can't see Kanye as anywhere near broke, for the simple reason PMK was so bent on him marrying her prize. The guy has NOTHING else to recommend him, no personality, no looks, no talent, ginormous ego. He is very much the dud, so he has to have a lot of money somewhere. PMK would have for sure had an assessment of his wealth done.ReplyCancel
if zac,whats the drug?ReplyCancel
Heroin. Has to be.ReplyCancel
Zac and heroin. What a shame, the guy used to be so sweet and fresh faced looking. It did bother me though how Perez Hilton used to drool over him and really ham up the pictures, how attracted to him he was, etc. I don't care that he's gay, just want him to get some help. Come out and get help I say. I'm hoping he pulls through!ReplyCancel
Heroin users come from all walks of life. I recently went to Long Beach to see an old HS friend who I stopped hanging out with 13 years ago due to her drug use. She is clean two years now but was a more or less "functional" heroin addict who worked as a nurse…
Get it together, Zac. No one wants to see a High School Funeral…
Happy Saturday everyone!
If it is heroin, he better be damn careful. Monteith, Hoffman and Peaches Geldof died after quitting for awhile, then started using again at their same old level which killed them. Have there been rumours about Mich Rod chasing the dragon? I thought booze was her thing. If so, it must be someone in that rich guys circle who got him on it. (And BTW, rich dude isn't bad looking. Saw some nice looking pics. Not sure if he is paying Zac, or it is just mutual attraction. Probably paying, but who knows)
As for Oxy's. If you mix them with other stuff (coke, booze, Klonopin etc) you could OD, but it takes longer and would be easier for someone to find him and get him to ER. So if his friends are worried about him dying, it's probably heroin. Stop it Zac!!!! I'm serious.ReplyCancel
Big fools can lose big money with just one bad investment. Make it multiple bad investments, bad money management, spending like a crazy man and/or shysters managers and accountants, you can lose it all.
If Kanye is doing so well why did Jay-Z have to bail him out?ReplyCancel
Erfon sounds good, but it states goes to rehab not return to rehab so my guess is Pattinson. Who knows what stuff KStew introduced him too. KStew is a known junkie so Pattinson probably became one.ReplyCancel


text:
Superbowl Weekend Begins
There are concerts, the NFL Experience, the Super Bowl Village - all of it designed to get thousands of fans excited about the big day.
No sign of the Indianapolis Colts at Lucas Oil Stadium - it's being transformed with 254 new seats, and the stage for Madonna's half-tim show. "It's a midwestern girl's dream," says the pop star.
But Madonna is giving few hints on what to expect. "I want people to be knocked of their seats beginning to end so I don't want to blow that surprise."
"I just hope she keeps her clothes on. No wardrobe malfunction," said the New York Giants' Mitch Petrus. But you can stock your own wardrobe at the NFL Experience. There plenty to buy here - but the Hoosier hospitality is free. "Doesn't matter what you do outside of this in your day job, everybody, when we get this scarf on, we're on the same team," said Mike Dilts of the Super Bowl Host Committee. What's not free is parking. Prices are as high as $20.00 to $60.00 NOW, but they'll likely be $60 - plus on game day.
Linda and Herb Floyd think they can squeeze 17 cars in their tiny lot nearby. "We're not trying to get rich, but you're going to have to park here," Herb Floyd, Indianapolis Resident. The city has been planning this for 5 years. "Our intention is to build a new urban model for all Super Bowl host cities that we hope will be appealing to all visitors," said the Chairman of the Indianapolis Super Bowl Host Committee, Mark Miles.
What's really appealing right now is the weather. There's no snow or ice like Dallas last year. It's actually been unusually warm here this week.
Apparently, even Mother Nature enjoys a good game!
More Stories
Joeseph Wapner, best known as the original judge on "The…
Bill Paxton, 61, died yesterday from complications following surgery.
"This bill essentially requires the Bureau of Land Management…
Latest News
Texoma's Home Page
KFDX 3 Weather
KFDX 3 Sports
TexomasHomepage.com,Follow @texomashomepage
KFDX 3 WeatherFollow @kfdx3wx


text:
We've looked at tons of new styles from some of the world's best designers, their models, and their families over the last fourteen days, thanks to a jam-packed Fashion Week in New York. Now let's turn our attention to those other trendsetters: NYFW attendees. Check out California-based, nineteen-year-old fashionista and style site owner Olivia Lopez in her head-to-toe mints and nudes. We knew colored denim was gonna be huge this year, but WOW, this is awesome! Stick with the nude accessories and you can get this look using any color your heart desires (especially now that we've shown you that you can get almost any color of jeans for twenty bucks at H&M…) Now, get it!
Get the look:
Free People The Cropped Colored Skinny Jean in Spearmint ($88) — buy it at KarmaLoop
Acne Shore oversized chunky-knit cotton sweater ($320) — buy it at Net-A-Porter
Chloé Platform Wedge shoe ($287) — buy it at FarFetch
Randolph Aviator in gold ($109) — buy it at Randolph.com
Forever 21 Horn collar necklace ($12.80) — buy it at Forever21.com
H&M Leatherette Bag in gray-brown ($24.95) — buy it at your local H&M
—Sarah Greene
Tags: acne sweater, colored denim outfit, free people jeans, green denim, how to wear colored jeans, mint green jeans, nude accessories, nyfw street style


text:
As many of you know, Amy will be leaving as library director. She is staying to help during the transition, but as she has already started her new job, we will not have staffing for all regular library hours until a replacement is hired.
There will be some temporary changes to library hours during the month of December. We will be closed Tuesday the 13th and open on Monday the 12th from 10-2 instead. There will be shortened hours on Friday the 16th (10-2) and extended hours on Thursday the 15th (11-7) and Saturday the 17th (10-3). Our regular weekly story hours and movie showings will move to Thursdays for the remainder of the month. Any further changes will be posted here and in the library.
We appreciate your patience during this transition and hope to have a new library director in place soon.


text:
Rangers off to Tannadice in cup
Rangers have been drawn away against Dundee United in the fifth round of the William Hill Scottish Cup.
- Related Content
United knocked Rangers out of last season's tournament, days before the Ibrox oldco club went into administration.
Rangers face playing their clash at Tannadice with a much-diminished away backing after one of their main supporters groups called for an organised boycott.
The Rangers Supporters Assembly urged fans to participate in a "full boycott".
A statement from the group read: "The Rangers support has waited patiently for the opportunity to send a clear message to those that tried to destroy our club - starve them of their much-needed cash by boycotting this game.
"It must also be remembered the disregard this club had for Rangers supporters when it unashamedly refused to offer refunds to supporters for a game abandoned due to a waterlogged pitch in 2009.
"We also understand the desire to support the team - the fans have demonstrated this to unbelievable lengths of loyalty - but we ask that on this occasion in a one-off display of fan power we show that we have not been beaten or broken."
Celtic face a trip to Raith Rovers, the team that shocked them in the 1994-95 League Cup final, should they get past Arbroath in a fourth-round replay.
Raith midfielder Simon Mensing, who played in a 4-1 Parkhead defeat in the League Cup in September, said: "If Celtic were to progress it's massive for the club.
"It's a home game too. We put on a decent performance at Parkhead so hopefully we can take the positives out of that.
"We got a goal and passed the ball about a bit. we know what they are about.
"We have a decent record at home and hopefully show what we can do.
"When I was at Hamilton we drew with Celtic at New Douglas Park. When you are playing Celtic, you seem to fare better at home rather than away."
Hibernian's reward for their derby win over holders Hearts is another home tie against SPL opposition in the form of Aberdeen or Motherwell, who drew 1-1 at Pittodrie on Saturday.
Another top-flight tie will see Kilmarnock host the winners of the Highland derby replay between Inverness and Ross County.
St Mirren are at home again following their win over Brechin, facing the winners of Tuesday night's rearranged clash between Cowdenbeath and St Johnstone.
Dundee are at home against Turriff United or Morton. The Highland League side held Allan Moore's team to a 1-1 home draw on Saturday.
Dunfermline are at home to the winners of the postponed clash between Dumbarton and Hamilton, while Falkirk will host Forfar.
The ties will be played on the weekend of February 2 and 3 next year.
Click here for completely free £10 bet with Sky Bet & £5 free every week