text:
framing nailer identification
and sorry i don't have a picture right now.
i am hoping someone can help me out.
i bought a coil fed framing nailer from a yard sale for $15. i have used my dads bostitch N80CB before and it looks to the t exactly the same. the only difference is that the label was almost completely off and its blue (even under labels and under screw heads. (most of the paint is off anyway). did Stanley bostitch ever make blue nailers?
i can make out the first two letters of the label; they are "ST" (i was thinking Stanley) and the patent numbers on the plastic magazine belong to Stanley bostitch (after a google search). also it does not work so i am rebuilding it and the parts inside match the N80CB diagram EXCEPT for 1 little part. that is why i am asking. its part of the main hammer chamber and its unaccounted for in the diagram. could it be another manufacturer?
Sounds like an old HF model...
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:55 AM.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


text:
To compile resources you should use the Wine Resource Compiler, wrc for short, which produces a binary .res file. This resource file is then used by winebuild when compiling the spec file (see The Spec file).
Again the makefiles generated by winemaker take care of this for you. But if you were to write your own makefile you would put something like the following:
WRC=$(WINE_DIR)/tools/wrc/wrc WINELIB_FLAGS = -I$(WINE_DIR)/include -DWINELIB -D_REENTRANT WRCFLAGS = -r -L .SUFFIXES: .rc .res .rc.res: $(WRC) $(WRCFLAGS) $(WINELIB_FLAGS) -o $@ $<
There are two issues you are likely to encounter with resource files.
The first problem is with the C library headers. wrc does not know where these headers are located. So if an RC file, of a file it includes, references such a header you will get a 'file not found' error. Here are a few ways to deal with this:
The solution traditionally used by the Winelib headers is to
enclose the offending include statement in an
#ifndef RC_INVOKED statement where
RC_INVOKED is a macro name which is
automatically defined by wrc.
Alternately you can add one or more
-I directive
to your wrc command so that it finds you system files. For
instance you may add -I/usr/include
-I/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-linux/2.95.2/include to cater
to both C and C++ headers. But this supposes that you know where
these header files reside which decreases the portability of your
makefiles to other platforms.
Or you could use the C/C++ compiler to perform the preprocessing. To do so, simply modify your makefile as follows:
.rc.res: $(CC) $(CC_OPTS) -DRC_INVOKED -E -x c $< | $(WRC) -N $(WRCFLAGS) $(WINELIB_FLAGS) -o $@
The second problem is that the headers may contain constructs that wrc fails to understand. A typical example is a function which return a const type. wrc expects a function to be two identifiers followed by an opening parenthesis. With the const this is three identifiers followed by a parenthesis and thus wrc is confused (note: it should in fact ignore all this like the windows resource compiler does). The current work-around is to enclose offending statement(s) in a #ifndef RC_INVOKED.
Using GIF files in resources is problematic. For best results, convert them to BMP and change your .res file.
If you use common controls/dialogs in your resource files, you will need to add #include <commctrl.h> after the #include <windows.h> line, so that wrc knows the values of control specific flags.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Appellant Jill L. Davenport and respondent Ken L. Davenport were married in 1948, a marriage that would produce three daughters and a vast estate. Jill
In May 2008 Jill filed a motion under Family Code section 271
Jill appeals, asserting procedural and substantive arguments, the former essentially contending that Judge Wong ignored the law, including the law of evidence, and the latter essentially contending there is no substantial evidence supporting the award. We conclude that none of Jill's arguments has merit, and we affirm.
The Community and the Dissolution
As noted, Jill and Ken were married in 1948. As Jill's attorney would describe it, she "supported Ken during the marriage by raising their three daughters and managing the household. Jill supported Ken in the business ventures. Among other notable achievements, Ken became the youngest Ford dealer in the nation at age 23."
Sometime around late 1969 or early 1970 Ken began to develop an industrial park in Santa Rosa known as Industry West, which came to include some 500,000 square feet of factory and warehouse space. In addition to Industry West, Jill and Ken acquired numerous other properties, including a large ranch in Montana, land in Idaho, and various properties in and around Santa Rosa. While the final accounting has not yet been completed, according to correspondence from the parties the value of the community estate is in the range of $57 million.
Jill and Ken separated in 1990, and remained in that state until March 2006, when a petition for dissolution was filed. During the separation, Ken apparently continued to manage the couple's financial affairs. While the relationship between Jill and Ken during this period is not germane to the issue before us, we do note there was evidence of agreement and cooperation, including their participation in joint estate planning favorable to Jill, and agreement to sell off many of the Industry West properties.
There is, by contrast, also evidence of incompatibility, at least toward the end of the separation period, as illustrated by a letter from Jill dated February 3, 2006, which begins as follows:
"Dear Ken:
"I received your letter of 1/10/06.
"I am disappointed that you are not able to grasp what the problem is here, and disappointed too that you will not allow me to talk to you about it.
"I must tell you that I was really frightened by your manic raging at me at your house. It felt just like the old days. I felt so threatened. I will never allow you to do that to me again.
"As for your letter, you really missed the mark. To mention just one thing in your letter: Why would I stand around and wait for your house to sell?
Jill's letter goes on to make certain requests, including for increased monthly payments from Ken and copies of financial records. And the letter ends with this:
"Once I have had the opportunity to review our financial records (which I have never done for the duration of our marriage) in addition to the $20,000 per month, I would like to agree to a specified lump sum of money to provide me with a liquid sum to give me protection in the event that I need more than my monthly income, for whatever purpose. By lump sum, I mean a substantial sum to be determined after my review of our financial records. I do not want to worry about my ability to enjoy the fruits of our labor over all of these years, nor do I want to worry in case of catastrophic events over which neither of us have control.
"This is something we can do very simply and with no legal fees or time involved. If we have to hire attorneys, we will spend what would probably amount to a lot of legal fees and charges. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.
"Please respond on or before February 10, 2006."
"(s/ Jill)
"[V]ery simply and with no legal fees," Jill implored. It was not to be.
Ken responded on February 7, 2006, indicating he would do his best to comply, but that he would "need to discuss the large cash payment you would like. This will require some time." The next thing in the record is Jill's petition for dissolution of marriage, filed days later, on March 1, 2006. Jill was 75 years old at the time, Ken 78.
The Attorneys
The petition for dissolution was filed by the firm of O'Brien Watters & Davis, LLP, with Michael G. Watters, CSB (California State Bar) No. 63140, listed as the individual attorney. From all indications, Michael Watters played
Ken was represented over time by three attorneys. The first was Michael Merrill, CSB No. 40963, of Merrill, Arnone & Jones, LLP. In January 2007, James Benoit, CSB No. 41741—described by Andrew Watters at one point as the "dean of the local Family Law Bar"—substituted in. Mr. Benoit represented Ken until March 2008, when he was replaced by John E. Johnson, CSB No. 114902, of Perry, Johnson, Anderson, Miller & Moskowitz LLP. Mr. Johnson was Ken's attorney in the proceeding below, and his firm represents Ken on appeal.
The Judge
The first few matters in the dissolution proceeding were held before the Honorable Gary Nadler, and his involvement is not pertinent here save in one respect: his ruling and admonition in an early (July 20, 2006) motion filed by Jill seeking to compel further responses to form interrogatories. Granting the motion but denying sanctions, Judge Nadler noted as follows:
"1. Counsel for Petitioner/Wife made an unreasonable attempt to meet and confer before filing Petitioner/Wife's Motion to Compel further responses to her Form Interrogatories (Family Law Set One) on 7/20/06. Specifically, counsel wrote a single meet and confer letter dated 5/18/06 and failed to respond to Respondent/Husband's reply letter dated 5/25/06. In fact, counsel for Petitioner/Wife failed to discuss the matter further with counsel for Respondent/Husband in any manner at any time thereafter. [¶] ... [¶]
"6. Counsel for both parties are admonished to change their meet and confer practices so that meeting and conferring is meaningful and not just a token gesture."
Sadly, it would turn out, Judge Nadler's admonition was not heeded.
By early 2007 the Honorable Cerena Wong had become involved, and handled all matters thereafter, including the hearing that led to the order from which Jill appeals. Judge Wong is an experienced jurist, having been appointed to the court in 1985. More significantly, she presided over a family law department for eight years,
The Proceedings in the Dissolution
The numerous proceedings in the dissolution proceeding are not individually germane to the issue before us, and we do not set them out in detail. A few general observations are appropriate, however, beginning with the fact that the proceeding generated 19 volumes of court files which, Judge Wong noted, is "outrageous" for a family law case. The register of actions is 35 pages long and refers to numerous matters that can fairly be said to be unrelated to the substance of the dissolution proceeding, including, for example, no fewer than eight motions related to discovery filed by Jill, many of which were never resolved on the merits. Such matters also include no fewer than three orders to show cause regarding contempt directed to Ken (and, in one case, his and Jill's daughter), one of which is pertinent here, especially as Judge Wong would comment on the incident underlying it—and unfavorably to Ken. The incident was discussed in Jill's August 4, 2006 order to show cause and affidavit for contempt, the essence of which was that a "4-way" meet and confer had been arranged and ordered by the court, and Ken "refused to meet and confer if attorney Andrew G. Watters was present in the room."
Also of significance is that on March 2, 2007, the parties stipulated that Judge Wong would act as case manager pursuant to section 2450, which
The Section 271 Motion
On May 23, 2008, Jill filed and served two motions.
Before describing Jill's motion in detail, we digress briefly to discuss the timing of a section 271 motion, as that would become an issue below. The leading family law treatise describes the law this way: "
Jill's motion was on a family law standard form pleading, and styled "Sanctions under Family Code sec 2107." The supporting affidavits checked on that form were completed income and expense declaration; points and authorities; and, under "Other," Declaration of Andrew G. Watters, and Declaration of Albert E. Hickey, MAI. In paragraph 5 of the form, "Attorney Fees and Costs," the motion sought fees of $600,861 and costs of $332,933. And in paragraph 9, "Other Relief," it sought "an order under Family Code sec. 271 awarding attorney fees payable by husband to wife. For an order awarding sanctions payable by Husband to Wife under Family Code sec. 2107(c) and the [In re Marriage of] Feldman case."
The accompanying papers included a 52-page declaration from Andrew Watters which, according to Jill's opening brief, attached 1,250 pages of exhibits. Much of the declaration was inappropriate, asserting hearsay, argument, opinion, and conclusion, and was improper on several bases. An early passage in the declaration illustrates some of this, where Andrew Watters purports to describe Jill's description of Ken's "negotiating tactics, habits, and personality traits," which he labeled "Deal in the pocket," "Poor mouth," and "Artificial crisis," and each of which he claimed to illustrate. With that by way of introduction, Andrew Watters went on to "testify" as follows:
"6. At the time Jill was working on her Declaration, I had not seen these tactics used or been on the receiving end of any of them. I was skeptical at that early stage in this case that someone could really use these tactics effectively outside of a car dealership. (Ken was reportedly the youngest Ford dealer in the county at age 23, with the opening of Davenport Motor Sales, Big Timber, Montana.) However, throughout our dealings with Ken in this matter, I have personally observed Ken use each of the aforementioned tactics. I've seen first hand that Ken can be a very persuasive person, and that Ken seems to use all of his abilities and skill to get the best deals possible for himself. Unfortunately, we've learned that Ken has also used this great skill and ability to take advantage of his wife.
"7. During the pendency of this proceeding, despite all the warning, OSC; re contempt, court orders, motions, depositions, emails, and tens of thousands
The declaration did go on to assert as facts several claimed derelictions or misrepresentations by Ken, including that he (1) omitted entirely two major assets on his April 4, 2006 schedule of assets and debts (3635 and 3645 Standish Avenue, total estimated value $3.1 million); (2) produced "a chart of net worth signed 4/9/06 and dated retrospectively to November 30, 2005" that shows "total assets of $30.5 million" or "less than half of the net worth stated" in a December 2005 financial statement given to a loan officer; (3) submitted an April 4, 2006 schedule of assets and debts which did not state the values for almost all items; and (4) engaged in various discovery abuses in 2006 and 2007, such as delaying his deposition for 10 months.
The accompanying papers also included a 13-page memorandum of points and authorities, citing only one case: In re Marriage of Feldman (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1470 [64 Cal.Rptr.3d 29] (Feldman). And as to it, the memorandum said this: "Here, the Davenport matter might as well be called In re Marriage of Feldman—The Sequel. If ever a dissolution of marriage action in Sonoma County warranted the imposition of sanctions on a party, this is the case." Or, as Andrew Watters would later describe it, "[T]he course of conduct described in Feldman is virtually identical to the course of conduct involved in this case"—indeed, "this case is worse than what happened in Feldman."
As Feldman would become Jill's short-hand description of all that was claimed to be wrong with Ken's conduct, we digress from the chronology to discuss the facts of that case, which involved a 34-year marriage during which the husband created a large number of privately held companies (called by the court the Sunroad entities), devoted to investing in, and developing, real estate and in owning auto dealerships. According to the husband, his assets were worth over $50 million, and the characterization of the Sunroad entities as separate or community property was a significant issue in the dissolution proceeding. (Feldman, supra, 153 Cal.App.4th at p. 1474.)
As part of its ruling, the trial court found that the husband intentionally had sought to circumvent the disclosure process and that his conduct had frustrated the policy of promoting settlement, including that the husband failed to disclose untold millions of dollars in assets, which the Court of Appeal repeatedly referred to as showing a "pattern of nondisclosure." (Feldman, supra, 153 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1485, 1486, 1488 & fn. 14.) These undisclosed assets included a $1 million Israeli bond the husband had purchased from the Israeli government; a $5,797,500 home that became his personal residence (id. at pp. 1483-1484); a 401(k) account (id. at p. 1487); "several" new Sunroad entities (id. at pp. 1488-1489), including one formed to own land for an auto dealership in Mexico City obtained with a $2.52 million loan (id. at p. 1489); and "several," perhaps as many as "nine," new entities, some associated with automobile dealerships in Mexico, some which owned real property in Chula Vista, and one which owned land in San Diego (id. at p. 1490). Those were the nondisclosures in Feldman.
Feldman, Feldman, Feldman, Jill repeated below, both as to the substance of her motion and its timing, illustrated by the court session at which Judge Wong set Jill's motion for hearing. There, Andrew Watters represented that "the Feldman case is nearly on point" and "provides guidance. We want [the motion] heard before trial." This prompted the following colloquy:
"THE COURT: Okay. So in the motion that you filed ..., you are saying that the facts in this Davenport case are very similar, if not identical, to the facts of the Feldman case, which, of course, is an extremely egregious set of facts involving one party who is in charge of almost everything and stonewalled all efforts to cooperate, so therefore the court was duty-bound to give a hearing prior to [trial]. So you're saying that if this court gives you this hearing, the court is going to be brought up to speed to a set of facts that are as shocking and as egregious as the Feldman case. Is that what you're telling me?
"MR. WATTERS: Yes, Your Honor.
"MR. WATTERS: Some of the conduct in Feldman is nearly identical. If the court reviews my declaration, the court will see evidence, in Mr. Davenport's own handwriting, that contradicts the Schedule of Assets and Debts. I suggest that is exactly what Feldman was designed to rectify."
As will be seen, Judge Wong would determine that Jill's proof fell short of her counsel's exuberant advocacy.
On June 19, 2008, Ken filed his opposition to Jill's motions. The opposition included Ken's declaration; those of his attorneys, Merrill, Benoit, and Johnson; and that of an expert witness, Attorney Thomas Wolfrum. The opposition also included a document entitled "Evidence of Opposing Counsel's Lack of Cooperation and Lack of Conduct Promoting Settlement."
On October 6, 2008, Ken filed a "Notice of Intention to Request Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant to Family Code Section 271," accompanied by the "First Supplemental Declaration of John E. Johnson."
On October 16, 2008, Jill filed opposition to Ken's request under section 271. The opposition consisted of a memorandum of points and authorities and Andrew Watters's declaration. The memorandum argued first, in a short, 20-line argument, that Ken's "271 `request' is technically defective." The second argument was that Ken's requested fees "have little or no connection to alleged `sanctionable' conduct of Jill."
On October 27, 2008, Jill filed eight separate statements of evidentiary objections, objecting to the declarations (or supplemental declarations) filed on behalf of Ken, including those of his expert witness Wolfram, and his attorneys, Johnson, Benoit, and Merrill. Jill also filed a separate statement of objections to Ken's "Evidence of Lack of Cooperation" by Jill. All told, Jill's objections were over 40 pages.
The Hearing on the Section 271 Motions
Judge Wong had ruled that each side could have a day and a half for its presentation, a total of eight hours. The hearing began on October 29, 2008, with differences between counsel as to just how the matter was to proceed, with Mr. Johnson urging that Judge Wong hear live testimony. Judge Wong, who had spent two days reviewing the papers in preparation for the hearing, disagreed, and ruled that the motions were "dependent on declarations and exhibits." Those exhibits, those documents, Judge Wong said, were "putting on your evidence." Thus ensued a lengthy hearing, extending over a period of five days, ending on November 18, 2008.
Both sides had filed extensive declarations, which had numerous exhibits attached by way of electronic storage disks. And counsels' presentations essentially consisted of, as Andrew Watters would describe it, "highlighting the key parts ... in the evidence," the attorneys pointing to various exhibits they claimed supported their positions, much of which involved correspondence and interactions between counsel. Both sides objected from time to time, almost always to no avail, as Judge Wong made it abundantly clear that she could separate the wheat from the chaff. This early colloquy illustrates the point:
"MR. WATTERS: Actually, there was one more thing. There are evidentiary objections, a number of them, that wife has filed to respondent's declarations filed in opposition in support of his own 271 request. So I was wondering if now would be the appropriate time to review the evidentiary objections, or obtain a ruling, or is there some later time that Your Honor would prefer?
"THE COURT: We'll deal with your objections to the presentation of Mr. Johnson after you're done.
"MR. WATTERS: Okay.
"MR. JOHNSON: Your Honor, I agree with that. We had objections to counsel's declaration as well, but I'm willing to reserve that until the end and let the court make a decision on all of it.... Notwithstanding the fact there might be improper argument, aspersions, declarations, the court can sift through that and get to the meat of it without us wasting two or three hours going over every line item that may be objectionable.
"THE COURT: That was my general feeling. I have never been given such a microscope of the workings of lawyers as I have with this. This is my eighth year in Family Law, and I have never been showered with the amount
"MR. WATTERS: I understand, Your Honor. I just wanted to make sure that those would be considered—our objections. I'm sure that Your Honor will consider them, so I'm sorry for mentioning that.
"THE COURT: Okay."
And so it proceeded over the five days, with some of the last day devoted to the attorneys' argument, their summations of their positions.
Though no statement of decision is required on a section 271 motion (Feldman, supra, 153 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1496-1497), both sides indicated they wanted one, and Judge Wong agreed to issue one. Both sides filed proposed tentative decisions, and on February 24, 2009, Judge Wong filed her "Statement of Decision re Respondent's Motion for Attorney Fees, Costs, and Sanctions (Tentative)." On March 11, 2009, Jill filed a "Specification of Controverted Issues and Proposals for Statement of Decision" and "General Objections re Tentative Decision."
Judge Wong's Decision
On May 19, 2009, Judge Wong filed her final statement of decision. It was a comprehensive 31 pages, and in it Judge Wong made 15 specific findings, all of which were followed by detailed facts supporting those findings. Because Jill contends that Judge Wong's order is not supported by substantial evidence, we will discuss the evidence in more detail in connection with that issue. Suffice it to say here that among other things Judge Wong found that Jill's counsel's "failure to meet and confer is sanctionable conduct"; that the facts in Jill's moving papers "do not rise to the level [of Feldman] such that [Jill's] motion on attorney fees and sanctions needed to be heard before trial"; that "no valid evidence or support for an expedited hearing was presented"; that Jill's "entire accounting motion was unnecessary and founded on inaccurate representations by [Jill's] counsel"; that "[Jill's] counsel's hostile and disrespectful correspondence is sanctionable"; that "[Jill's] counsel made many references to what was presented and said in mediation in violation of Evidence Code § 1119"; that "[Jill's] counsel's conduct regarding surreptitious conduct with both computer consultants in relation to extracting computer data that what was believed to include highly sensitive and privileged
Judge Wong's statement of decision ends with this:
"GOOD CAUSE SHOWN: the Court finds and orders:
"1. Petitioner's request that the Court find that Respondent Ken Davenport and his attorneys engaged in a course of conduct that was sanctionable in violation of Family Code 271, 2107 and the case of Feldman (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1470 is DENIED. There has been a failure of proof sufficient to penalize husband and his attorneys Merrill, Arnone, Benoit or Johnson.
"2. Respondent's request that the Court find that Petitioner through her attorney(s) from the firm of O'Brian, Watters & Davis engaged in a course of conduct that was sanctionable in violation of Family Code 271 is GRANTED. The evidence presented was clear and convincing that uncivil, rude, aggressive, and unprofessional conduct has marred this case from the very beginning from counsel Watters. The Court questions the wisdom of such a large firm as O'Brien, Watters to choose to `educate' a newly admitted lawyer with a case that involved millions of dollars of varied assets in California and other states, with a long term marriage and complicated trust holdings. With no background in either civil or family law litigation, Mr. Andrew Watters admitted to the Court that he was taught to litigate this case with unbridled aggression. These uncooperative and uncivil courses of action have caused Mrs. Davenport unnecessary delays and unnecessary attorney fees and costs. Both Mr. and Mrs. Davenport deserve justice and fairness in the Court. The Court will note that Mr. Davenport's conduct in the beginning of the case to refuse to discuss the case if Mr. Andrew Watters was in the room was inexcusably rude and uncalled for. Respondent's arrogance must have hit a sensitive nerve in counsel because Petitioner's case became a case that rapidly deteriorated into unprofessionally rude conduct and speech after that.
"3. The Requests of Wife for payment of $933.000 [sic] in attorneys fees in the form of sanctions is unreasonable and not supported by the evidence.
"4. The Court finds that this hearing prior to any trial based on Mr. Watters' representations was unnecessary and unfortunately unreasonably expensive to the parties and to the Court's limited resources.
Following various motions by Jill, Judge Wong entered findings and order after hearing on May 29, 2009, from which Jill filed a timely notice of appeal.
Jill's opening brief begins with a dramatic "preamble," which reads as follows:
"This appeal is brought to overturn a miscarriage of justice because the trial court refused to follow the law in this Family Law case. In the words of the trial court: [¶] `
The drama is misplaced. This isolated comment from a 564-page reporter's transcript hardly described what occurred here.
Section 271 and the Standard of Review
Section 271 provides in pertinent part as follows: "(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this code, the court may base an award of attorney's fees and costs on the extent to which the conduct of each party or attorney furthers or frustrates the policy of the law to promote settlement of litigation and, where possible, to reduce the cost of litigation by encouraging cooperation between the parties and attorneys. An award of attorney's fees and costs pursuant to this section is in the nature of a sanction...."
Sanctions under section 271 are committed to the discretion of the trial court, and will be reversed on appeal only on a showing of abuse of that discretion, that is "only if, considering all of the evidence viewed more favorably in its support and indulging all reasonable inferences in its favor, no judge could reasonably make the order." (In re Marriage of Corona, supra, 172 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1225-1226; see Feldman, supra, 153 Cal.App.4th at p. 1478.)
Summary of Jill's Arguments
Jill's arguments on appeal are both procedural and factual. The procedural argument contends that Judge Wong "refused to follow the law, including the rules of evidence and the Code of Civil Procedure," which argument contains four subparts: (1) Judge Wong "Committed Reversible Error By Failing to Abide by the Rule of Law"; (2) Ken's "Declarations and Exhibits Lacked Foundation and Were Replete with Inadmissible Hearsay and Improper Opinions"; (3) Judge Wong "Was Overwhelmed by the Volume of Documents Provided and Did Not Conduct a Full and Fair Hearing"; and (4) "Ken's `Request' for Family Code §271 Sanctions and Attorney's Fees is Fatally Flawed and Violates Jill's Due Process Rights."
Jill's first factual argument is that Judge Wong abused her discretion "in finding that the conduct of Jill's counsel warranted sanctions," followed by an essentially ancillary argument that "there is no evidence that Jill or her attorneys frustrated settlement or unreasonably increased the costs of litigation."
Jill's Procedural Arguments Have No Merit
Jill's procedural argument asserts in its first three subparts that Judge Wong failed to abide by the rule of law, an argument fundamentally premised on the preamble quotation set forth above. After repeating that quotation, Jill continues as follows: "So declared the trial court at the hearing on the 271 Motion. [Citation.] Our system of justice is premised on the `Rule of Law.' America has depended for centuries on an independent judiciary to safeguard its rights. America's very existence can be attributed to a thirst for justice and truth based on the Rule of Law. It is every trial court's sacred obligation and sworn duty to follow the Rule of Law. If the trial court won't follow the law, then who will? [¶] However, the trial court ignored the law and relied on inadmissible evidence, while at the same time ignoring admissible evidence." (Fn. omitted.)
Jill's reply brief goes so far as to assert that "While it is understandable that a Family Law Court, faced with too heavy a calendar, would be tempted to short-cut the process when faced with a time-consuming contest between a wealthy couple, a court is never permitted to toss out the Evidence Code in the interest of saving time or effort. The court must carry out its sworn duties even when it is difficult to do so." With sweeping assertions such as that
These presumptions are based on the difference between lay jurors and judges: "`The juror does not possess that trained and disciplined mind which enables him ... to discriminate between that which he is permitted to consider and that which he is not. Because of this lack of training, he is unable to draw conclusions entirely uninfluenced by the irrelevant prejudicial matters within his knowledge.'" (People v. Albertson (1944) 23 Cal.2d 550, 577 [145 P.2d 7]; accord, People v. Williams (1970) 11 Cal.App.3d 970, 977-978 [90 Cal.Rptr. 292]; People v. Adamson (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 74, 77 [36 Cal.Rptr. 894]; People v. Channell (1955) 136 Cal.App.2d 99, 111 [288 P.2d 326].) Only proof that the evidence actually figured in the court's decision will overcome these presumptions. (White v. White (1890) 82 Cal. 427, 452 [23 P. 276]; Claremont Press Pub. Co. v. Barksdale (1960) 187 Cal.App.2d 813, 818 [10 Cal.Rptr. 214]; Joint Highway Dist. No. 9 v. Railroad Co. (1933) 128 Cal.App. 743, 765 [18 P.2d 413]; Stewart v. Douglass (1909) 9 Cal.App. 712, 715 [100 P. 711].) Clearly, the mere fact that the court heard or read the evidence is not sufficient to overcome the presumptions. (See, e.g., People v. Tang (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 669, 677-678, 683 [62 Cal.Rptr.2d 876]; People v. Bustamente (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 722, 726-727 [9 Cal.Rptr.2d 244]; Paulin v. Paulin (1940) 39 Cal.App.2d 180, 184 [102 P.2d 809].)
To begin with, Jill has not identified any claimed inadmissible evidence Judge Wong relied on in support of her statement of decision.
To the extent that Jill's brief alludes to objections made below that were "en masse" overruled, it is true that Judge Wong at one early point indicated that she would overrule both side's objections, leading to what Jill describes as the "futility of making further objections." Despite that, however, both sides continued to make objections, which Judge Wong ruled on as they arose.
Beyond that, Judge Wong based her order on much more than Andrew Watters's "communications." She found, for example, a failure to meet and confer; lack of settlement offers; and a failure to demonstrate the reason for the lengthy—and expensive—expedited hearing Andrew Watters claimed was
Finally, even if Jill had shown that some evidence was improperly admitted—which she has not—she has not shown how the result would have been different. In Evidence Code terms, Jill has not shown that the "errors complained of resulted in a miscarriage of justice." (Evid. Code, § 353, subd. (b).)
The third subpart of Jill's first procedural argument, set forth in two short pages, is that Judge Wong was "overwhelmed by the volume of documents provided and did not conduct a full and fair hearing." Seizing on two isolated comments in the lengthy transcript,
Jill's other procedural argument is that Ken's request for sanctions was improper because it was not on the Judicial Council form, failed to give notice of what Ken was seeking, and did not set forth the precise amount he was seeking. This argument, too, lacks merit.
Preliminarily, we note that Jill's argument as to the Judicial Council form was not made below, and thus is waived or forfeited. (Amato v. Mercury Casualty Co. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 1784, 1794 [23 Cal.Rptr.2d 73] ["It must appear from the record that the issue argued on appeal was raised in the trial court. If not, the issue is waived."]; City of San Diego v. D.R. Horton San Diego Holding Co., Inc. (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 668, 685 [24 Cal.Rptr.3d 338]
As noted above, on October 6, 2008, Ken served on Jill a notice entitled "Respondent's Notice of Intention to Request Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant to Family Code Section 271; And First Supplemental Declaration of John E. Johnson." It is obvious from the title of the notice that Ken was requesting attorney fees under section 271. This is sufficient. (Levy v. Blum (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 625, 638 [112 Cal.Rptr.2d 144] [notice must specify the code section or court rule relied on].)
The notice must also advise of the specific grounds and conduct for which the fees or sanctions are sought, and must be directed to the specific person against whom they are sought. (In re Marriage of Quinlan, supra, 209 Cal.App.3d at pp. 1421-1422.) Again, Ken's notice here was sufficient, as it and the first supplemental declaration set forth in abundant detail the grounds on which the request was based.
Finally, although the amount of attorney fees ultimately awarded was greater than the amount in the billings attached to Mr. Johnson's first supplemental declaration, the amount awarded is supported in the record. Specifically, Ken's request was "based on the conduct of Petitioner/Wife as documented in the Declaration of John E. Johnson in Opposition to [Jill's] Motion for Sanctions, previously provided to the court and [Jill] on June 19, 2008; and in the First Supplemental Declaration of John E. Johnson filed herewith, together with the complete files and records in this action, and on such evidence as may be presented at the hearing of this motion." (Italics added.) That hearing occurred, of course, and the last page of the transcript reveals how that hearing ended, which was as follows:
"THE COURT: Well, it's up to you.
"MR. WATTERS: Object to those because we haven't seen them.
"MR. JOHNSON: We have a copy for everybody. They're up to present, essentially.
"THE COURT: Okay.
"MR. WATTERS: In that case, can they provide the missing billing statements from January 31 to June 2008?
"THE COURT: Yes, counsel. All right."
It is not clear from the above whether the updated attorney fee statements were presented that day or not. But there is no doubt they were presented, as on January 9, 2009, Mr. Johnson filed an "Updated Attorney Fee Declaration." It was "an update regarding fees incurred that [Ken] is requesting ... since [Mr. Johnson's] last declaration of fees filed October 6, 2008 and last summary of fees on November 14, 2008." The declaration attached many pages of billing statements, and then summed up: "Attached as Exhibit `B' is a duplicate of the billings submitted at the sanctions hearing on November 18, 2008, copies of which were provided to the Court and [Jill's] counsel, Andrew Watters. The total fees incurred relating to [Ken's] sanction request as of November 14, 2008 were $261,392. Therefore, the grand total of fees [Ken] has incurred to date regarding this motion is equal to $304,387. In addition, [Ken] is asking this court to order an additional $250,000 in sanctions to deter future misconduct and impropriety by counsel." The fees awarded Ken are fully supported in the record.
Substantial Evidence Supports Judge Wong's Award of Sanctions Against Jill
Jill's factual argument, contained in an argument heading that Judge Wong abused her discretion, is that there was no substantial evidence of any sanctionable conduct by Andrew Watters. Or, as Jill's reply brief puts it, there was no evidence that Andrew Watters frustrated settlement or increased costs of litigation, and no nexus between his conduct and any delay. In claimed support of this argument, Jill proceeds to recite the evidence in a fashion
California Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(2)(C) provides that an appellant's opening brief shall "[p]rovide a summary of the significant facts...." And the leading California appellate practice guide instructs about this: "Before addressing the legal issues, your brief should accurately and fairly state the critical facts (including the evidence), free of bias; and likewise as to the applicable law. [¶] Misstatements, misrepresentations and/or material omissions of the relevant facts or law can instantly `undo' an otherwise effective brief, waiving issues and arguments; it will certainly cast doubt on your credibility, may draw sanctions [citation], and may well cause you to lose the case!" (Eisenberg et al., Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Appeals and Writs (The Rutter Group 2010) ¶ 9:27, p. 9-8 (rev. # 1, 2010), italics omitted.) Jill's brief does ignores such instruction.
Jill's brief also ignores the precept that all evidence must be viewed most favorably to Ken and in support of the order. (Nestle v. City of Santa Monica (1972) 6 Cal.3d 920, 925-926 [101 Cal.Rptr. 568, 496 P.2d 480]; Foreman & Clark Corp. v. Fallon (1971) 3 Cal.3d 875, 881 [92 Cal.Rptr. 162, 479 P.2d 362].) This precept is equally applicable here, where Judge Wong issued a statement of decision: "Where statement of decision sets forth the factual and legal basis for the decision, any conflict in the evidence or reasonable inferences to be drawn from the facts will be resolved in support of the determination of the trial court decision." (In re Marriage of Hoffmeister (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 351, 358 [236 Cal.Rptr. 543].)
What Jill attempts here is merely to reargue the "facts" as she would have them, an argumentative presentation that not only violates the rules noted above, but also disregards the admonition that she is not to "merely reassert [her] position at ... trial." (Conderback, Inc. v. Standard Oil Co. (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 664, 687 [48 Cal.Rptr. 901]; accord, Albaugh v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp. (1937) 9 Cal.2d 751, 773 [73 P.2d 217].) In sum, Jill's brief manifests a treatment of the record that disregards the most fundamental rules of appellate review. (See 9 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Appeal, §§ 365, 368, pp. 421-424, 425-426.) As Justice Mosk well put it, such "factual presentation is but an attempt to reargue on appeal those factual issues decided adversely to it at the trial level, contrary to established precepts of appellate review. As such, it is doomed to fail." (Hasson v. Ford Motor Co. (1982) 32 Cal.3d 388, 398-399 [185 Cal.Rptr. 654, 650 P.2d 1171].)
Evidence of conduct that increased the cost of litigation included how Andrew Watters dealt with the issue of experts' appraisals, where he contended that Jill would not have obtained independent appraisals of community real properties if Ken had only cooperated and given them his opinion of the property values. Based on this contention, Jill sought to compel Ken to pay for all of the costs of the appraisals she obtained. Ken was forced to hire an expert family law attorney, Thomas Wolfrum, to establish that as a matter of good practice Jill should get her own appraisals, a position with which Judge Wong agreed. In short, Ken was forced to incur substantial attorney fees to establish the simple proposition that Jill would need to obtain independent appraisals of the properties.
There was also evidence that Andrew Watters violated the mediation privilege in Evidence Code section 1119, which evidence included that his May 23, 2008 declaration attached mediation-related documents, set forth what was done and purportedly said in mediation, and referred to agreements reached in mediation. Ken, of course, incurred expenses in addressing these improper revelations.
There was also evidence of Andrew Watters's conduct in connection with the sensitive issue regarding the Industry West computer. Specifically, in late 2007, both counsel had agreed to use Jill's counsel's local computer expert (Kevin Frick) to extract certain information from the Industry West computer, and agreed to protocols relating to that effort. However, in May 2008—and unbeknownst to Mr. Johnson—Jill's counsel fired Mr. Frick and hired one Tessa Swift.
Mr. Johnson learned of this at a June 4, 2008 meeting and, understandingly concerned, wrote to senior partner Michael Watters, expressing his concerns about the computer extraction process, as follows: "Would you please include me on any e-mails that you send to this individual because I do not want any mistakes to be made on that. There is ultra sensitive material, as you're aware, on those disks, and they are of a confidential nature. Highly privileged. You know, it's extraordinary for that broad of an opportunity to be had for disks to be copies in whole.... [L]et's be really careful what this individual transmits, and that he or she is acutely and completely aware of the sensitivity involved and the data that he or she is dealing with. Okay? This is really critical."
Apparently that same evening, Mr. Johnson wrote, asking for the name of the IT person, his or her contact information, and all communications counsel had with that individual. A few days later he reiterated his request for the identity of the new computer person, and again expressed his concern regarding the sensitivity of the computer data. Andrew Watters responded, but not by providing the name of the IT person. Rather, he said to Mr. Johnson, "I would go on about professional courtesy, but as you said at the 4-way on 6/4/08, you don't even know the meaning of the term."
On June 18 Mr. Johnson again wrote to Andrew Watters, that "Your letter does not identify who your new IT person is, nor does it provide me all communications you have had with him or her. Your continued failure to provide me with the name of the computer person you communicated with causes me concern. Would you please provide me his or her name and all correspondence you have had with that person." Still, no response.
Meanwhile, it developed that over the next 48 hours Andrew Watters had at least four e-mails with Ms. Swift, who advised him that the disks would be delivered June 20, 2008. On June 20, a courier service picked up the duplicate computer hard drives from Ms. Swift and delivered them to Mr. Johnson's law firm without any cover letter and without any descriptive information of what was in the package.
In short, during the time Mr. Johnson was asking for the name of, and communications with, the new IT person—all the while emphasizing his concern about the sensitivity of the data involved—Andrew Watters was having numerous communications with that individual. Indeed, it was not until after Andrew Watters had obtained a copy of the hard drive, apparently obtained through a breach of the agreed-upon protocol, that he provided Mr. Johnson with the contact information for Ms. Swift—who, it developed, Andrew Watters had met in a karaoke bar.
The record is replete with correspondence from Andrew Watters to Ken's attorneys that contained abusive, rude, hostile, and/or disrespectful language, correspondence that Andrew Watters himself acknowledged was substantial evidence, when in the course of his closing argument he stated that: "Perhaps some unpleasant letters that could offend someone did substantially increase the cost of litigation." Perhaps it did indeed. A few illustrations should suffice:
—his November 22, 2006 letter to Mr. Merrill referring to Ken's nonappearance for deposition, which letter provided in pertinent part as follows: "Regarding your client's failure to appear once again for his continued deposition, we too regret that your client chose not to appear. As you know, we duly noticed his continued deposition for 11/20/06-11/22/06. Once again, you offer the same tired, old, and shopworn excuse. Your continued blustering about mutually agreeable dates, efficiency and promptness, and convenience is pathetic when your client's actions negate any semblance of cooperation. Talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words. Your credibility is at stake here."
—his March 13, 2007 letter to Mr. Benoit included remarks that were rude, including "Enough already with the delays." Worse, his letter indicated that he did not believe Mr. Benoit—the person he described as "the dean of the
—his September 11, 2008 letter to Mr. Johnson which, bad enough, insinuated untruthfulness: "We've noticed that, in the past, you have had some trouble keeping things straight. We also noticed that you tend to stretch things somewhat too far in the name of appearances." Worse, it accused Mr. Johnson of unethical conduct: "It's no surprise, then, that your letter of 8/7/08 appears to be an attempt to create a false and misleading exhibit for use at a later law and motion hearing so that your client can sit in court with a halo over his head, and so you can say `look how many times Ken offered to settle!' That wouldn't surprise us at all, given your practice of attaching a large pile of exhibits to your declarations without any testimony from you concerning their truth."
Confronted with such correspondence, Andrew Watters's response below was hardly apologetic. As he indicated at one point, it might have been "unfortunate," but that was it. In his words, "So I should note if I caused undue emotional pain on the other side in terms of writing unpleasant letters, if I offended anyone, then that's unfortunate and certainly a learning process for me, but the fact is I am not on trial here. And, in any event, the attorneys on the other side—I'm sure they can handle it. Mr. Mike Merrill, I think, is a 35-year attorney, former Marine officer in Vietnam, has seen it all. Mr. Benoit is a 35- or 40-year family law lawyer. He's seen it all. Mr. Johnson was in the Navy, I believe. These are not attorneys not able to do lawyering because of unpleasant letters from a baby lawyer on the other side."
Jill's position on appeal is equally unrepentant where, referring to "the tone of some of [Andrew Watters's] written communications," she describes it as "the expressions (sometimes intemperate) of a young lawyer frustrated that Ken was systematically obstructing the search for the truth by his actions in resisting routine discovery, which is supposed to be self-executing. Ken and his attorneys then created a smokescreen that prevented the trial court from seeing the substance of the communications in context."
We do not understand such an assertion, as what we have is a thorough and conscientious order made under section 271, which provides that "the court may base an award ... on the extent to which the conduct of each ... attorney furthers or frustrates the policy of the law to promote settlement ... and ... to reduce the cost of litigation by encouraging cooperation between the parties and attorneys." (Id., subd. (a).) Section 271 says what it says. Judge Wong applied it. And we affirm her order under it.
Beyond that, we observe that while it is a family law statute that was the basis of Judge Wong's order, the impropriety of much of the conduct involved here extends beyond family law. Put conversely, we do not understand that family law practitioners are exempt from general notions of what is appropriate advocacy.
We close this discussion with a reminder to counsel—all counsel, regardless of practice, regardless of age—that zealous advocacy does not equate with "attack dog" or "scorched earth"; nor does it mean lack of civility. (See, e.g., McGuire, Reflections of a Recovering Litigator: Adversarial Excess in Civil Proceedings (1996) 164 F.R.D. 283; Yablon, Stupid Lawyer Tricks: An Essay on Discovery Abuse (1996) 96 Colum. L.Rev. 1618, 1619 [describing the litigation climate as one "where over-aggressiveness is equated with zealous advocacy, and attorneys are expected to win at all costs"]; and Garth, From Civil Litigation to Private Justice: Legal Practice at War With the Profession and Its Values (1993) 59 Brook. L.Rev. 931.) Zeal and vigor in the representation of clients are commendable. So are civility, courtesy, and cooperation. They are not mutually exclusive.
Jill Did Not Demonstrate That Ken's Conduct Warranted Sanctions
Jill has a final argument, however brief, that Ken's conduct was sanctionable pursuant to section 271. Again selectively setting forth facts that might favor her side, Jill apparently argues that Judge Wong had to find Ken's conduct sanctionable under section 271, that there was no evidence supporting a conclusion that Ken did not act in such a way as to trigger section 271. The record is otherwise.
Ken's presentation included a paragraph-by-paragraph refutation of Jill's fundamental claim that he failed to disclose properties. Moreover, and as Jill is forced to acknowledge, Ken agreed to no fewer than 10 stipulations between May 2006 and March 2008. As Jill's brief puts it, the first stipulation was in May 2006, followed by at least nine more: "In September 2006 and January 2007, Ken's first attorney, Michael Merrill, participated in two agreements by `Stipulation and Order,' to sell millions of dollars of particular community assets and split the proceeds. [Citation.] [¶] Ken's second attorney, James Benoit, cooperated in seven separate stipulations regarding partial distribution or sale of specific community assets during his tenure—from January 2007 to March 2008. [Citation.] In March 2008, Ken's third attorney participated in two stipulations regarding the sale of two small community assets."
These stipulations, of course, concerned a great part of the community estate, as Jill recognized in her filing entitled specification of contested issues:
The order awarding sanctions and attorney fees is affirmed. Ken shall recover his costs on appeal.
Kline, P. J., and Lambden, J., concurred.
"THE COURT: ... I am probably committing reversible error or something, but I feel that mostly you are arguing about letters, emails, all manner of documents that competent counsel use in discussion and settlement efforts, things of that sort, and they might not necessarily stand up in a very strict evidence code scrutiny, but this is an OSC, and this is family law, and the judge should have as much evidence as possible to get as much information, so I am usually very, very liberal on OSC, and I don't know why I wouldn't be liberal on this OSC."
"MR. WATTERS: I understand.
"THE COURT: You haven't appeared on the OSC calendar, as Mr. Johnson, but I deal with exhibits that are written on towels. I get things on Kleenex. I mean, I deal with so many self-represented people, they have no idea what evidence is. I just let it all in. It goes contrary to my previous training as a zealous DA hanging onto the evidence code, but I threw it out the window when I started doing family law." (Italics added.)
To the extent that this asserts that Jill should not be responsible for the conduct of Andrew Watters, the law is otherwise. As King and Hogoboom distill it, "


text:
Backyard Pro Overall Customer Rating:
Backyard Pro is a relative newcomer to the foodservice industry, offering a catalog full of outstanding products all designed for outdoor use. Backyard Pro's dedication to quality and customer service has made them a fast up-and-comer in the recent years, gradually growing the brand. Read more
Backyard Pro not only offers outdoor cooking equipment, but also the parts and accessories that go along with them. These include everything from outdoor smokehouses to grill attachments, ensuring that you can find the perfect products to maximize the efficiency and output of your cooking equipment.
Backyard Pro grill fuel accessories include connector hoses that are intended to give you the most efficiency out of your liquid propane fuel source.
Backyard Pro cooking / grilling accessories offer premium parts and components that are all made to increase the efficiency of your outdoor grilling equipment.
Backyard Pro portable outdoor grills cover a wide variety of different products that are all made to help you cook your signature dishes quickly and efficiently without compromising taste, texture, or presentation.
Backyard Pro outdoor turkey / fish fryers & outdoor gas stoves provide the equipment you need to deep fry foods as small as fish or as large as a whole turkey.


text:
Actor Hrithik Roshan whose array of hit films has put him nearly on par with the leading stars of the industry (read Shahrukh, Aamir and Salman) is now looking forward to his next big release in Karan Johar's 'Agneepath'. The action-packed flick that sees him sketching a vengeful character (borrowed heavily from Amitabh's Vijay Deenanath Chauhan) is all set to hit theatres on 26th January, 2012.
As the clock ticks on towards that impending date, Hrithik is doing his bid to generate interest amongst the masses. There's a lot of speculation about the heart-pumping action sequences shot for this flick with a lot of bloodbath involved. Why, even the posters & promos feature the green-eyed actor in a bloodied face.
Talking of the action sequences, Hrithik has gone on air to reveal that he found doing the action scenes quite challenging. That, coming from an actor of his caliber, is a big statement and certainly goes on to show the magnitude of action the director has attained with Agneepath.
Hrithik has also revealed that the film's climax is a highly daunting affair and a scene which he describes as the most difficult one of his entire career so far. But, like a true marketer, he has refused to give finer details of the scene and asks his fans to go out and watch the film to find out. Like a magician, Hrithik has craftily set up a stage and conjured a crowd but is keeping the ace up his sleeves.
And if you didn't know, his nemesis is none other than Sanjay Dutt who has acquired a hideous, menacing look for his villainous character. He has not just shaved off his head but also his eyebrows and it will be a pure delight to watch a hunky, muscular, vengeful Hrithik wage war with a lethal looking Sanjay Dutt. So, what are you waiting for? Make a date with them this Republic.
Reader's opinion: Will you watch Agneepath? Why or why not?


text:
^A mere formality .... ;)
Printable View
^A mere formality .... ;)
I understand that. But looking at the urban landscapes ...
my cts has been sittin on a hoist for 5 days now... still waiting on parts to do the timing belt... bike week has been extended, at best ill have it by wednesday.
But what about the "Big Three"? They also left the city?
Any Edmontonians out there?
Is it true that scrapping off the ceramic material on the return Wire on a HID bulb allows the bulb to burn brighter?
and now its time for a GhEtTo MiKe UpDaTe!!!
-1st day back from vacation, swamped with emails... i was suppose to be back yesterday but had something i wanted to do and someone else wanted a diferent day off, made a shift trade.
- got a phone call offering me a new contract, with a new company, for much more money, more responsibility and more fun!
here is where it gets funny... i work for 1 contract company under a much larger company. now i going to be working for a different larger and more important company, still under the same larger company.. (basically i get to keep my parkingspot lol.
much better, tougher job and obviously more $.... ide celebrate but ive got to go to bed and wake up for my crappy job tomorrow... 5 more shifts....
then i start as the day after as the new manager, for a few people im friends with lol.
current bosses wernt happy to see me go but i told them its strictly because of the money and i felt like i was capped for my position.... which i was.
so, i quit my job, signed on with a new company!!
then i get my |CTS back finally. every part that could possibly be changed for the timing belt was done. waterpump, pulleys... everything.
runnung great.
besides, you really need brighter HID's?
im my experience using 3000, 4300, 5000, 6000, 8000 and i believe 12000k HID's the 5000's with 35 watt ballasts seem to have the whitest and highest light output.
i do however like the 6000k because i find they are better for visibility in the rain, they seem to make the white lines glow a little nicer at night.
Well my dad is selling his boat.
Located in Somerset, KY
After mickmosh got his camaro ss selected to be put in a halloween commercial, I was thinking. Looks like the caddy's been fairly popular as well haha.
I plan on putting a chick and a photographer in front of the car the 18th... but for now... this is what i got. lol contrast edited to make it all pop a bit more.
interesting color
after riding my bike for almost 2 weeks straight my cts feels slow as crap.. i almost pulled over and bought a vette it felt soo slow..
im now thinking about doing a elcamino build in the next couple years with a big v8..dont know much about the elcamino except its awesome.
CRUSH YOUR ENEMIES, SEE THEM DRIVEN BEFORE YOU, AND HEAR THE LAMENTATION OF THEIR WOMEN!- Teddy Roosevelt


text:
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
This is a discussion on Just a few tips for noobs within the General Talk forums, part of the General Discussion category; Your campfire smoke will attract hungry zombs from miles around- Draw your money out of the bank to buy food before the government closes all ...
Your campfire smoke will attract hungry zombs from miles around-
Draw your money out of the bank to buy food before the government closes all banks in a time of 'National Emergency', or if the bank decides to close for whatever reason like here-
Use good equipment-
Avoid bad areas-
Keep metal (especially magnets) away from your compass or you could end up going to the store and ending up in the jungle like Richard Widmark in 'Run for the Sun' when a magnetic item in his ladyfriends purse threw his planes compass off-
Make sure your body armour covers weak spots-
Make sure you can trust your neighbour not to bulldoze your spring-
Don't let on to your neighbours that you've got a basement bunker or they'll try to smash in when it hits the fan like in this Twilight Zone episode entitled 'The Shelter'-
1-a jolly neighbourhood party, what could possibly go wrong?
2- Radio announcer-"Incoming missiles, get into your bunkers!"
3- "Lemme in, I'm your mate!"....."Get away, f*** off!"
4- "Let us in!"
5- "We're in!"....Radio announcer-"False alarm, there are no missiles!"
6- "Get out of my house you s.o.b's!"
Think twice before using your radio and giving away your position-
Don't leave your prep shopping too late-
Stock up with plenty of food, you can't eat money-
Last edited by Lucky Jim; 01-18-2013 at 08:24 PM.
don't piss in fresh water.
The only thing that separates man from animal is our affinity for toilet paper.
Once we as a society lose that affinity we begin to descend back into the animal kingdom, and after three or more days you will find the food chain beginning to invert on itself.
I am more prepared than any of you can ever be.
Always remember- there's a wealth around you
My family used to communicate with smoken signals, where you see smoke,beware of the fire upon you.
A lot of folks spend a lifetime preparing. They are really just well provisioned victims. -Clang
Site your cabin so as not to be seen-
Don't give away your location-
Don't feel guilty about prepping, You'll be whooping it up with food, drink, warmth, light..
But the unprepared shmuks won't-
Protect your pets-
Don't touch any suspicious junk-
Keep away from strange creatures-
Bug out when you have to-
lololol "Right...let's bugger off"
Always remember- there's a wealth around you
Find a nice location-
"Thank god that voyage is over, i was puking my guts up all the way across the Atlantic"..
Try to get on well with the family next door-
Preppers don't rely on luck, they make their own luck, right Kid?
Give your group the strong leadership it needs-
Be careful about accepting new members-
Watch your back-
Avoid needlessly putting your neck on the line-
Last edited by Lucky Jim; 01-18-2013 at 08:31 PM.


text:
Distances are calculated in a straight line and may not reflect actual travel distance.
This stunning two bedroom two bathroom apartment with porter and lift offers excellent natural light and a balcony. The property is modern and offered furnished.
2 Bedrooms
2 Bathrooms
Air Conditioning
On-site Management Office
Parking by Negotiation
Parking by Negotiation
Contact branch for relevant Energy Performance Certificate


text:
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Non-converging integral with linear transformation?!
I have a question regarding the Integral over the product of the two functions AiryAi and AiryAiPrime. Lets look at the following integrals:
f[x_] = AiryAi[-1 + 10^5 x] AiryAiPrime[-500 + 10^5 x]
NIntegrate[f[x], {x, 0, Infinity}]
10^-5*NIntegrate[f[x] /. x -> (10^-5 x), {x, 0, Infinity}]
Mathematica 6 seems to be unable to evaluate the first one; the result is 0 and a warning about to slow convergence is issued.
The second one is - as far as I know - the same as the first one but with a linear variable transformation applied -> this time the result is given without any warning.
So basically my question is: what is going on there? Am I doing something wrong?
thanks in advance for any hints ;)


text:
Canada last night. Learn more about Pierre and his own time as Prime Minister.
Pierre Elliott Trudeau, former Prime Minister of Canada, will have his son following in his footsteps. Justin Trudeau was elected Prime Minister last night.
Justin Trudeau was named the next Canadian Prime Minister last night, following in the footsteps of his father. Learn more about his family life with wife Sophie Gregoire.
Sophie Gregoire, wife to Canadian Prime Minister-elect, Justin Tredeau, has a lot going on besides being the First Lady. Read about her inspiring life here.
The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have warned military to 'scrub' their social media after reports of ISIS using Facebook to target soldiers.
The Keystone XL pipeline has just been approved by the House, and will now move to the Senate. Here are the facts, maps, pros, and cons you need to know.
Here are 10 facts you need to know about Justin Trudeau, the new Liberal Party of Canada leader.
Embattled Tory senator Patrick Brazeau caused a stir late Monday night after he tweeted that he'd be stepping down from his position in the Canadian senate.
The House of Commons has passed a bill, with the support of 18 Conservatives, that makes it illegal to discriminate against transgender Canadians.
A run-in between storeowner David Chen and a shoplifter has inspired the creation of Canada's Citizen's Arrest and Self-Defence Act.
Toronto's Mayor Ford has a unique talent for saying and doing the absolute wrong thing at the wrong time.
The "my black daughter told me to" excuse isn't winning her any fans.
With the news of the Queen of England's recent stomach problems and hospitalization, Canadians are wondering if the monarchy is really worth keeping.
Tom Flanagan, a former advisor to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, was caught on camera defending child pornography.
Suspended Senator Patrick Brazeau formally pleads not guilty to charges of sexual assault and assault.


text:
Puzzle DIY
Par Marco Ng
Ouvrez le Mac App Store pour acheter et télécharger des apps.
Puzzle DIY is a simple but fun app for kids and parents. You take snapshots during vacation and trips then simply load them into the app when you back home. Select a photo and you are ready to play! Drag and drop the puzzle, move them around. Just use your imaginations and have fun!
- Play it on any images you have on the Mac
You can select any images available on your Mac and play.
- Show Tips
Too lazy to think? No problem, click it and you will know what to do next.
- Auto Move
Don't let your Mac idle. Lets the robot completes the puzzle for you. Sit back and relax.
- Click Select Images/Folder button on left side of the Main UI to load images. You can select single image file or a folder contains images.
- Click Show Original Image button when you want to view the full size of the original image, that is without puzzle. Click Continue playing button to resume the game.
- Click Preferences under top Menu PizzleDIY to change game settings.
Nouveautés de la version 1.2
- Enhanced drag and drop of puzzles, added green grid when one is being moved.
- Removed count down timer. Added Total time played counter.
- Bug fixed wrong image may be loaded from the selected folder in rare cases.
Changes in Version 1.1
- User can now select a single image or folder to play.
- Puzzle Game will start immediately if you select a single image at the beginning.
- Try Auto Move button will turn to Stop Auto Move button once it is clicked and vice versa.
- Try Auto Move mode can be stopped now by clicking on Stop Auto Move button.
- Added playing tips to first page of Main UI.
- Improved stability and user experience.
Captures d'écran
Avis des utilisateurs
Ne fonctionne pas ou je capte pas...
Après avoir chargé une image, pas de pièces...
- Gratuit
- Catégorie : Jeux
- Mise à jour : 17 févr. 2012
- Version : 1.2
- Taille : 1.1 Mo
- Langue : Anglais
- Éditeur : Wai Hung Ng
- © 2012 Marco Ng
Compatibilité : OS X 10.6 ou une version ultérieure, un processeur 64 bits


text:
North Carolina will face off with East Atlantic Gymnastics League rival George Washington and William and Mary for the second time this season on Feb. 11 at 7 p.m.
The Tar Heels hosted the last meet in which these three teams met. UNC topped the competition with a 194.500 as the Tribe (1-5) came in second with a 192.925, and the Colonials (4-5) were a close third with 192.475.
Carolina, now 6-2, is coming off a big victory over another EAGL rival No. 17 Maryland. According to head coach Derek Galvin, the Tar Heels were able to put together their first full meet last week and will be looking to replicate the performance.
"We need to go in with the same focus and intensity as last week," said Galvin. "Their confidence level, after what they achieved last weekend, is higher, and with that confidence comes composure."
The Tar Heels will meet N.C. State and Pittsburgh in Raleigh Saturday, Feb. 16 at 7 p.m.


text:
With locations in Memorial and Upper Kirby, Eddie V's Prime Seafood showcases surf and turf in posh surroundings set to live jazz. The raw bar turns out oysters, sashimi and shellfish, served alongside prime cuts of beef and changing fresh seafood from swordfish to lobster. A handsome bar pours from a global wine collection of over 400 bottles.
2800 Kirby Drive
Houston, TX 77098


text: While many architecture firms curtail the residential side of their practices to take on more commercial and institutional commissions, AD100 stalwart Robert A.M. Stern Architects (RAMSA) has maintained an enduring commitment to houses. The new book Designs for Living (The Monacelli Press, $75) affirms that dedication with striking images of 15 distinctive homes created over the past decade by RAMSA talents Gary Brewer, Randy Correll, Grant Marani, and Roger Seifter. From a Malibu compound modeled on a Mediterranean hill town to a Shingle Style manse in the Hamptons, their work displays not only a mastery of historical styles but also real dexterity in marshaling traditional idioms to the beat of the contemporary world.


text:
horny babe banged hard busty movie 1
Horny babe gets her both holes banged hard
Horny babe banged hard by a massive white tool
Ryo Hirase Asian babe gets banged hard by horny guy
Horny pretty 18 year old babe Brooke Shield has her shaved tight snatch banged hard by a lucky dude next door
Horny sweetheart banged hard
horny brunette banged hard
Horny cutie banged hard
Horny amateur bitch banged hard
Horny teen gets banged hard
TrafficHolder.com - Buy and Sell Adult Traffic|Trafficshop.com - Let your business grow|Contact Us|Webmaster
All content, including images, text, graphics, video and audio content contained in the website is protected under the laws of copyright, owned or under license to company or its designees,and represents proprietary and valuable intellectual property.
Contact Webmaster 18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement
Powered by Stream Rotator


text:
UConn Leads The Country In First Rounders
UConn has had 15 first round draft picks since 2014.
Larin Selected as MLS Rookie of the Year
The former UConn striker compiled 17 goals in his first season for Orlando City
Four UConn Players Take Home Major Conference Awards On Thursday
The Connecticut coaching staff was also recognized by the American Athletic Conference
Awuah And Larin Push UConn Past Tulsa, 2-0
Connecticut held its opponent to just five shots for the second straight match
Nerwinski, Coly Earn Weekly Conference Honors
Goalkeeper Jacob Wagmeister was also named to the Honor Roll
UConn vs SMU
UConn vs SMU Men's Soccer
UConn vs Tulsa
UConn v Tulsa Men's Soccer
UConn vs Stony Brook
UConn vs Stony Brook Men's Soccer
UConn vs Quinnipiac
UConn vs Quinnipiac Men's Soccer
UConn vs Quinnipiac
UConn vs Quinnipiac Men's Soccer NCAA
AS A SOPHOMORE (2014): Appeared in 16 games (started 15), finishing with a team-leading 21 points and nine goals... Named the American Athletic Conference Offensive Player of the Year after ending the season first in the league in game-winning goals (3), goals per game (0.56) and points per game (1.31)... Earned All-Conference First Team honors and also tallied three assists in 2014... His points per game ranked 29th nationally and his nine goals were the 40th-best mark among Division I players... Was named to the 2014 MAC Hermann Watch List in August... Matched a career-high with two goals in UConn's 5-0 win over Temple in the American Athletic Conference quarterfinal round... Earned a spot on the Conference All-Preseason Team... Finished the year with 63 shots and 28 shots on goal... Scored a goal in each of UConn's first four games of the season.
AS A FRESHMAN (2013): Started 22 of 23 games for UConn, logging 1,721 minutes of action... Named the American Athletic Conference Rookie of the Year after leading the Huskies with 14 goals... Earned a spot on the NSCAA All-Northeast Second Team and the Soccer America All-Freshman First Team... His 14 goals were the sixth highest total for any player in the NCAA and his 0.61 goals per game was the 17th-best mark in the country... Named the TopDrawerSoccer.com Freshman of the Year... Earned Conference All-Rookie Team honors... Named the Conference Rookie of the Week Three Times and was on the Honor Roll once after scoring a goal against Central Florida (Oct. 5)... Finished the year with five game-winners and three assists.
PRIOR TO UCONN: Competed for St. Edmund Campion High School in Brampton, Ontario ... Helped the team to three OFSAA Championship while scoring the most goals on his team during his final three seasons ... Named team captain of Brampton High.
PERSONAL: An exploratory major ... Born April 17, 1995


text:
There was a time when I paid a lot of attention to the anti-government groups around me. In 2002, the Aryan Nations was establishing an outpost on a grassy property on the New York-Pennsylvania border, and I visited as a newspaper reporter.
The group bore watching, although at the time, I couldn't have said precisely why. The deadly bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City had been fairly recent, but these odd people were simply holding rallies to denounce hated groups -- Jews, blacks, federal agents -- and drink beer.
I was reminded of my long-ago apprehension last week, when a Bonnie and Clyde-like white supremacist couple shot two young Las Vegas police officers in the back and the neck, killing them. Jerad Miller, 31, and his wife, Amanda, 22, draped one body with a swastika and a yellow Gadsden flag, which depicts a coiled snake and the words, "Don't Tread on Me."
The Millers proclaimed the "beginning of the revolution" in a pizza parlor booth, with the murders of officers Alyn Beck, 41, and Igor Soldo, 31 -- purported agents of a tyrannical government.
Some will claim the Millers acted alone, but the duo was abetted by a twisted subspecies of American life that nurses paranoid fantasies. The Southern Poverty Law Center tracks 939 hate groups operating across the country, an alienated population that we on the East Coast often ignore as "out there" in Idaho or Nevada.
But we have strands of these beliefs among us: in the tea party movement, among gun rights advocates and within survivalist groups training for the post-apocalypse.
Clearly, it's legitimate to argue about the national debt, the federal deficit and government overreach, as well as to stand up for free speech and Second Amendment rights. But these groups also give cover to dangerous people like the Millers.
And just as with Muslims confronted with terrorists in their midst, the sane people in the anti-government wing need to identify, expel and denounce those who take their creeds to the extreme. The tea party and the National Rifle Association lose legitimacy when they allow the Millers to parade their arguments and symbols without comment. When anti-government rants fill the echo chamber on and on, the unbalanced take it as permission, and perhaps even as a duty. The average cop or bystander begins to look like the enemy.
After killing the cops, the Millers armed themselves with their badges and weapons and strode across the street to a Walmart. A customer returning a modem heard gunfire and ran toward it. Joseph Wilcox, 31, grabbed his legal, concealed gun to help make sure nobody got hurt, and police said Amanda Miller shot him in the back.
So much for the NRA's argument that a good guy with a gun can stop evil. Hours later, after a shootout in the store with police, both Millers were dead.
When I was reporting on white supremacists in Pennsylvania, one phone call led me to a college professor who thought the Aryan Nations and its fellows had a realistic claim that the government was out to get them. "Read up on it before you write about it," he urged me. I dutifully learned about Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and Waco, Texas, where Americans were killed by federal agents.
The Millers probably thought they were claiming their place in this line of martyrs to government tyranny. But those who display these stories like badges of victimhood, without moderation, must answer to the families of the three innocent dead people in Las Vegas.
Anne Michaud is interactive editor for Newsday Opinion and a member of the Newsday editorial board. Readers may send her email at email@example.com.
Should have checked beyond the hate site unequalizer. the Washington Post says it was a 49 year old man,your story has him 59,with a different first name. Sorry to rain on you,but I've told you to do your own research. Maybe an apology,since you says Tea Partiers never admit they are wrong why not show how you are above that? I'll be waiting..............
More about why the SPLC is so important to this country.
I wonder if Obama pays taxes on his offshore accounts?
Just for fun,and you know this is far from over!
Black Panthers?
ACLU anyone?
Referring to The Southern Poverty Law Center as a "left wing radical extremist group" strongly suggests you support the KKK, skin heads, white supremists who don't believe everyone is equal as in the Constitution. . . .
Interesting that the left wing radical extremist group The Southern Poverty Law Center tracks other so called extremist groups. I guess it is coming down to this, those that believe in the rule of law enumerated in our constitution, in freedom and liberty, or anyone not agreeing with the left wing radical extremist progressive socialist marxists are consider radical.
The extremists are part of the corporatist controlled GOP voting base, some of the same folks who are climate change deniers...
So here's a big chance for the fright wing, bible thumping extremists to win some 'easy' money. . .


text:
Spi aftermarket throttle body. Where to buy?
I've been looking for places to find a 60mm or larger throttle body for my 01 focus with the spi engine. I've looked all over, even at central Florida motorsports where they used to sell but can't find anything as I think they've discontinued so if you know someone who's selling or know where to buy. Comment and let me know! Thank you!
you can use a 96-02 65mm mustang TB from from the 4.6L.
sorry to be the bearer of bad news but they've been discontiuned for years now...
when i was doing my build it took me a year to track one down...
you can find one or two out there but they are hard to find you just have to keep at it...
btw if you search through my old posts you can probably see who i sold mine to... i dont recall their username off the top my head...
also i think islandfocus had one at one time too
the simplest (probably available at your local pull a part) and quickest method would be to modify a mustang tb like previously stated...
out of curiosity i did a quick ebay search for the mustang tb and easily came up with a dozen on the first page.
you have to be careful though because a lot of the stuff that pops up is not what you are looking for.
but like jrdy said, try the junk yards first, they should be cheaper there if you can find one.
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:54 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


text:
Skin discoloration and nodules after mesotherapy, should I be concerned?
Please any advise. Two month ago I had mesotherapy on my inner thighs. I still have nodgules and in area of ingections where are nodgules are I have some skin discoloration. Skin looks spoty blue. Please please any advise. Thank you. Natalia


text:
Spending a Shabbat (or Holiday) in Safed
- The Ascent institute offers seminars, hostel-accommodations and a full Shabbat experience, including home hospitality, for Shabbat visitors. You can also arrange for Shabbat hospitality at the Carlebach-House of Love and Prayer. Individual visitors can stay in any of the hotels or guesthouses that operate throughout Safed and order their meals at either the Rimonim hotel or the Ron hotel. There are also many catering services on Jerusalem Street (Tzfat's main street) where visitors can pick up catered food on Friday morning to eat in their tzimmer/guestroom.
- There are Shabbat services at synagogues throughout Tzfat, including dozens in the Old City/Artist Quarter. The Carlebach synagogues (Beirav and House of Love and Prayer) feature musical havdallah services as well (Sat. night, after Shabbat ends).


text:
A BRAZEN bird has snatched a video camera that was recording crocodiles in WA and captured fascinating footage of its 110km journey across the Kimberley.
Wildlife rangers released video that reveals the sea eagle's caper. The bird's flapping wings can be seen as it grabs the device and takes off, and the eagle later poses for a selfie, poking its face into the camera lens.
Rangers set up the motion-sensor camera along the Margaret River in May, hoping to record images of crocodiles. The camera, which is about 10cm to 15cm long and 5cm wide, disappeared soon after and the rangers figured it had fallen into the water.
The rangers recently found out that the device had been found near the Mary River, about 110 km away, ranger Roneil Skeen told the ABC. When they examined the video inside, the real culprit was revealed.
The rangers plan to bolt down their cameras from now on, Mr Skeen said.


text:
Specialty Communications Infrastructure Services Information
Specialty communications infrastructure services provide specialty or proprietary services related to the development and maintenance of communications infrastructures. They specialize in computer networks, telecommunications, Web-based services, communication applications development, and content management. Specialty communications infrastructure services are located across North America and around the world. They meet a variety of regulatory requirements and conform to various quality standards. Selecting a specialty communications infrastructure service requires an analysis of both cost and capabilities.
Specialty communications infrastructure services develop a company's communications infrastructure, customizing the system architecture to suit user requirements. Most communications systems require scheduled maintenance as part of post-deployment activities. Instant and effective communications within an organization can be accomplished in a number of ways. Telecommunications infrastructure providers implement technologies such as voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP), broadband exchange, and integrated services digital networks (ISDNs) to facilitate real-time voice, data, and video communications over great distances. These specialty communications infrastructure services may also provide streaming video, network or Internet-platform meeting applications, and software demonstration packages. Web-based plug-in technologies include Macromedia Flash, Shockwave, and multimedia players. Communications can also be implemented through a wireless infrastructure that permits e-mail, voice, and data communications. For example, users in different areas of a building or worksite can access broadband wireless services to speak with one another via portable, handheld devices that use radio frequency (RF) or satellite communication technologies.
The communications that support an IT infrastructure are an important part of any organization that uses technical services. Specialty communications infrastructure services are critical to helping IT managers, analysts, and specialists answer technical questions and provide troubleshooting and solutions support for user groups within a network. Application infrastructure providers can also develop online knowledge bases, Web-based trouble ticket systems, and product request forms to extend the communications infrastructure of IT departments so support improvements can be implemented through problem analysis and documentation. Specialty communications infrastructure services may also offer hosting services, which provide servers, server-side applications, and scripting to deliver a variety of communications infrastructure technologies.


text:
What's in the bottle?
"Nobody has really figured out why, but I think the hair care products are part of that story," Zota says.
Other ingredients that are commonly found in beauty products that are known to be harmful include coal tar, a substance found in most hair dyes that have been known to cause cancer and zinc oxide, a carcinogen found in sunscreens.
To better protect yourself from possibly harming your health for the look or feel of your hair, start paying close attention to the ingredients in your products before you buy them. A lot of products claim to be all natural or organic, but with a quick look the ingredient list on the back of your product, you can see whether the claim is true. If you are unsure what an ingredient is, research it first.
CosmeticsDatabase.com has a printable shopping guide that highlights the unsafe ingredients list found in many products, including hair dyes, sunscreens and children's products.
McCormick, who decided to go natural shortly after getting her diagnosis, has now decided to make her own beauty products for the sake of her health.
"I never thought being adventurous with my hair would harm my health," McCormick said, "but now I'm taking every precaution I can to ensure that my hair products won't be a factor in any future health problems that, God forbid, may arise."


text:
- Sign in
- Join
- Manage your booking
- Find a rental
- Traveler Inbox
- How to book
- Traveler Help Center
- Write a review
I'm 29 years old. My business partner and I both live in Toronto and have a few properties that we rent throughout the year. I have been working in the real estate industry for over 6 years and my partner over 10 years. We take pride in our properties and have furnished our units to give you the comfort of home! We both love to travel around the world and our choice of accommodation is always a vacation rental. It's so nice to be on vacation, a business trip or in town for a special event or whatever the reason may be, and to have a place that feels like home away from home.


text:
The NRA should be ashamed. They have blackmailed our elected officials with threats of reprisals at the ballot box into doing nothing about limiting assault weapons and clips of ammunition that are only suitable for killing humans. Certainly hunters don't use these when they are killing animals for food. But now we have people using these assault weapons to kill small children in our schools.
What is the NRA's response after four days of silence? Arm the teachers! Make the teachers get six years of college, and oh, by the way, you will need a certificate that you know how to use a gun to teach. Knowing the schools, they will ask the teachers to provide their own guns.
As a retired 40-year teacher, I don't think this is what we want for our schools. It is time society really does what it talks about and values our children. Let's limit access to assault weapons and their deadly ammunition. And let's pay the taxes to get a police presence in all our schools.
Polly Tucker, Kent
The 2nd amendment is very clear. It gives the citizens the right to bear arms and does not limit the type of arms. The reason it was made was to allow the citizen to defend themselves against a government that wants to take away the peoples rights, as we did in the revolution.. It did not mean that the citizens would be limited to black powder muskets,or to weapons used only for hunting. It plainly said their right shall not be infringed upon.
However, that is not the point I was trying to make. I was trying to show that our government has used crisis to further its agenda. They are not interested in finding the root cause of the problem only in using it to gain its agenda. The plane hitting the building was no more at fault than the gun used at Sandy Hook. It was the people controlling them that was the cause. The same is true for all the examples I gave. We need to understand that all of these people that committed the horrible crimes were mentally ill. Let us concentrate on identifying and stopping them instead of focusing on the inanimate object used.
Typical of a liberal is the belief that every time that the government falls short of being God it is because they haven't taken away enough rights.
The simple fact of the matter is that Alan Lanza had no reason to be in that school but was given admittance anyway! So now every liberal will blame the failure to secure the school building on those not responsible for it. After all, if you can't punish the innocent, who can you punish?
DoWhatsRight, if you want to argue the 2nd amendment, I will, but do not compare guns with planes and doctors, it's a idiotic stance. On one needs a clip that holds more than 10 rounds. I agree with helping the mentally ill, but its not as easy as just institutionalizing people because they don't do it anymore.
Let me see, planes flew into the towers and killed three thousand people. BAN THE PLANES.
A man in China went into their schools and chopped up a number of their children. BAN THE KNIVES.
Cars kill hundred of people every day. BAN THE CARS.
Medical mistakes kill thousands a year. BAN DOCKTORS AND HOSPITALS.
A chemical plant in India poisoned hundreds. BAN CHEMICALS.
This sound kind of silly doesnt it. Well it is no sillier than banning guns because some nut job did not take his medicine. Yes Alan Lanza was on medication and his mother told friends she could not control him. I say BAN THE NUT JOBS.
In the case of cars killing, medical mistakes killing, chemical plants killings and even the case in China, the person was held responsible not the item used to do the killing.
Dian Sawyer reported last evening that numerous parents have tweeter her. The parents are afraid that they have the next Alan Lanza. They say time and again that there kids have mental issues and the parents can not control the children. We use to institutionalize these people, but the mental health people let them run loose in our society. The Mental Health people make millions every year in dispensing the medicine to these people. The Mental health people say they can function normally if the take their medicine, but then the Mental Health people will say, under their breath, that they can not make them take the medicine. Maybe we should BAN THE MENTAL HEALTH PEOPLE and put these people back into institutions where they can be watched and protected and made to take their medication.
Congress cannot limit arms in any way whatsoever. The Bill of Rights specifically keeps the Feds from rstricting arms. The States however, are free to pass any laws they desire. The falicy is thinking a criminal gives a darn about breaking the laws. Myabe what we really need is for all liberals to post a sign in their yard stating that this house is a gun free zone!


text:
Welcome to E-Books Directory
This is a freely downloadable e-book.
Concepts in Electric Circuits
Read this book online or download it here for free
Custom Search
Concepts in Electric Circuits
by Wasif Naeem
Publisher: BookBoon 2009
Number of pages: 87
This book covers fundamental aspects of electric circuits that form the core of many engineering disciplines. Techniques to analyze and solve electric circuits are explained in a simple manner and examples are shown to demonstrate each strategy. DC as well as AC circuit analysis is provided with a brief account of filters in the end. Difficult electric circuit concepts such as sinusoids and phasors are explicated in an effective way so that basic understanding can be properly achieved.
More Sites Like This
|Science Books Online
|Books Fairy
|Maths e-Books
|Programming Books


text:
Product Description
This title was designed by top professional educators and linguistics to expand vocabulary and assist kids in improving their English skills in a fun and systematic way. Each game introduces the player to a new set of words in English. In particular, the emphasis is on words that describe animals, nature, seasons, professions, time, transportation, musical instruments, and much more. Improve your English language skills! Play games to build extensive vocabulary! Have a great time exercising new expressions.
Key Features
- Over 100 words
- Essential phrases
- Quick thinking
- Multiple levels of play
System Requirements
Pentium, 16MB RAM, 4X CD ROM, Windows Vista XP/98/Me/98SE