text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guests: Julia Boorstin, Chuck Todd, Mary Landrieu, Billy Nungesser, Nick Rahall, Steve Scalise,
Chris Cillizza, Joe Solmonese, Aubrey Sarvis
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: The gulf of British Petroleum.
Let's play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews in Washington. Leading off tonight: "Plug the damn hole." That's what a frustrated President Obama allegedly said at a staff meeting. Whatever happened, by the way, to "Failure is not an option"? Whatever happened to our Apollo 13 can-do attitude? I'm not sure the president ought to be traveling to California tonight, for example, for a Democratic fundraiser. What he needs is a bullhorn moment right now in this country. Our first guest tonight says that what we're suffering from is a failure of national imagination.
Then there's this story from "The New York Times" today. A yet-to-be released inspector general's report from inside the government documents the cozy relationship between the oil industry and government regulators. One charge—catch this, and never forget it—that regulators allowed industry officials from the oil companies to fill out their own inspection reports in pencil and allowed the government regulators to simply trace over their findings in pen.
Think about that—the pencil written by the industry, and then the government regulators, so-called, covering it over in ink to make it look like they're doing their jobs, when they're just doing literally the bidding of the oil industry.
Also, happy days may not be here again, but Democrats are beginning to see a glimmer of hope this November in the elections. Why? It may be because the tea partiers are slowly becoming the face of the Republican Party. Let's figure that one out tonight.
And if you close your eyes and listen to this one, this GOP candidate's campaign speech, you might think you're listening to Barack Obama 2004 Democratic convention. That's because, simply put, this Idaho Republican stole his words verbatim. Check out the "Sideshow" tonight.
And "Let Me Finish" tonight with this question. Why aren't all the oil companies being told—not being asked, told—to go to the gulf and clean it up now?
We start with the mess in the gulf. Senator Mary Landrieu is a Democrat of Louisiana. She's a member of the Energy—or Natural Resource Committee. And Billy Nungesser is president of Plaquemines parish down in Louisiana.
Billy, I want you to start. Let me ask you this. Why aren't all the oil companies involved in this? Why just BP? Why isn't everybody involved in this country in the oil business trying to clean up this mess?
BILLY NUNGESSER, PRESIDENT, PLAQUEMINES PARISH, LA: That's a good question. When the head of the Coast Guard said, We have no other option than BP, who else, the first one we thought of. We've got good companies like Shell, Chevron, Conoco Phillips that have been very responsive in similar smaller instances throughout the country. And why not bring some of their expertise to the plate and task them with different aspects of this clean-up and recovery? Because obviously, BP can't handle it.
MATTHEWS: Do you have any sense that there's a national effort going on right now? I just keep thinking this is a BP business challenge we're looking at now being met, rather than a national challenge that's going to affect our lives for years and years to come in that part of the—the "redneck Riviera" is going to be a tar pit. The eastern—the western coast of—we don't even know what's going to happen to Florida at some point. I mean, all the states down there getting killed by this. And yet you have the president sitting there, watching, like The Thinker, like Rodin's "Thinker," watching BP do its business. That's what it looks like from up here. Your thoughts. You're down there, you're feeling it.
NUNGESSER: Well, let me tell you, BP points the finger at the Coast Guard. And you've heard the head of the Coast Guard, when he's asked, Are you doing absolutely everything possible you can, he says not yes, not no—he says, BP—BP's responsibility. You ask BP, they say the Coast Guard is in charge. It's like a couple of 7th graders pointing the finger at each other. It's absolutely ridiculous.
And we're hoping the president will come down this Friday and put his foot down because we've got to have somebody in charge. We have no leadership.
MATTHEWS: You're going to be down there with the president late this week after he's done with the fundraiser in California. What are you going to tell him to do, Billy?
NUNGESSER: Well, let me tell you, I hope he steps up to the plate. Last visit, the Coast Guard didn't want to put the jack-up (ph) boats out there. He said, Make it happen. It happened. Hopefully, he'll hear our plea for our coastal plan, our plan to clean up the marsh. We do have a plan. The governor of Louisiana, all the parish leaders, we've put together a plan. All these people you're talking to with ideas and products, there should be a line—good ones go to the left, bad ones go to the right.
There's an opportunity to use some of these products. Some of these products can make a real difference in saving our marsh. But we're spraying one chemical that's absolutely ridiculous, unacceptable. You know, there's many products out there that could be used that are safe to use, and we're not even considering them.
MATTHEWS: Senator Landrieu, you get in here. The president of the United States is coming down there late this week, after his fundraising in California. What are you going to tell him to do?
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D), LOUISIANA: Well, we have a lot to do. The president was down about a little over a week ago. He's coming down Friday, I understand. And he couldn't come down often enough, Chris, for us because everyone on the Gulf Coast is very worried. I know the number one object is to get this well shut in.
And I want you to know, even though it doesn't seem this way, and I understand why it doesn't—but every scientist available in this government is on this job of closing this well. It is heartbreaking and aggravating that they haven't gotten it closed yet, but if they do it wrong, it could explode and cause even more oil to spill, which is why I understand it's taking some time. And it's very frustrating.
MATTHEWS: What do you make of the decision today to postpone the top kill?
LANDRIEU: I think it's a technology problem. I think that they've got scientists—I know—I don't think, I know they have scientists from our labs. They have one of the best scientists in the government in that office with BP. And I think they're going through a series of testing of the pressures on this pipe. As you know, this kind of accident has never happened in the offshore this deep. So they're testing all sorts of new ways to do it because if they do it wrong, this well could flow more than the 5,000 or 10,000 or 15,000 barrels it's flowing every day.
MATTHEWS: Does it strike you as a serious, perhaps—well, I'm not sure it's criminal—it's a business decision—when they decided not to put drill mud into that well as they were drilling it, instead putting seawater in, which is only half as heavy, therefore not providing a counter-force to all the oil coming up. And that's apparently what caused the explosion, according to the Bob Bee (ph), the expert out in Berkeley. Do you think that was a decision which was negligence? How would you describe that decision to save money and time, rather than safety?
LANDRIEU: Well, first of all, I have a lot of respect for Professor Bee, I met with him myself yesterday. He was a great help—or a couple of days ago. He was a great help to us in Katrina. But there will be investigation and lawsuits and lawsuits. We will, at one time, at one point, figure out what exactly happened, and it's not going to be pretty, no matter what the details are.
But right now, we have our eyes on protecting this coast, and we've got to do a better job of coordinating between BP and the government about how to get protection out there, whether it's rocks or sand or the curtain thing, you know, idea that I just thought—you know, heard, or whether it's Kevin Costner's idea that he's got on the centrifuge system that he's developed, $24 million of, you know, his money that he's invested. And there are hundreds of companies that we've heard from.
So we've got to do a better job of that. And BP has got to step up to the plate and expedite these claims to these fishermen and businesspeople.
MATTHEWS: OK. Who is in charge, if anybody, Senator, of bringing all the oil companies in America into this process and not just BP? Or is it just a BP challenge? I'm wondering, we've got all these oil companies that do business in this country. They have the tankers. If there's any technology out there, they have it. Maybe they're competitive in their technology. Is there anybody in the world that can come in and collect petroleum that's out there in the gulf right now? Anybody that can collect it?
LANDRIEU: OK. Well, first of all, Chris, let me say this. If a Delta Airlines plane goes down, I don't think we necessarily call all the airlines to come in and help in a very specific way.
Now, I will tell you that all the oil companies have been helping since day one informally. They've sent people to the BP office. I've asked because I've personally asked them and they've done it, and so has the president, I understand. So they're trying to do what they can. But BP has to pay for this, but the government needs to make sure—the federal government needs to make sure that BP is doing what they're supposed to do every day, from keeping this oil off of our shore, and we've got to push the Coast Guard and the Corps of Engineers to do more, as well.
MATTHEWS: Well, I'm asking you if this is a four-alarm fire or not. My question is, why do you limit it to the one locality, the one BP? Here's the—I guess you don't have the answer because I'm not anybody does. Maybe it's not a fair question. Is there technology to collect the oil in the water?
LANDRIEU: There is technology...
MATTHEWS: The senator first.
LANDRIEU: There is technology to collect the water—I mean, to collect the oil in the water. As I said, I've been given some information, as has Billy Nungesser, who is sure right there—and he's doing a fabulous job right on the battle lines. But there are many small and emerging companies that are coming forward with this technology.
I'm going to hold a hearing to try to highlight it. I hope the Commerce Committee can do that, as well. We've got to get some new technology out in the gulf because we believe it exists, but it hasn't been purchased yet by BP or the Coast Guard. And that's what we need to do.
MATTHEWS: OK, let me take those two questions to Billy Nungesser.
Billy, my question to you, is there technology...
NUNGESSER: Chris, there's technology...
MATTHEWS: ... to collect the oil? And why don't we bring all the oil companies in the country involved? They do business with the government. They do business in this country.
NUNGESSER: Well...
MATTHEWS: You know, when you have a fire in a locality, all the surrounding areas come to their help, not just the locality. That's called a four-alarm fire. They go all—they get drawn into this. I don't know what the legality is, but the president of the United States has got this challenge, not BP. BP's got a business challenge. We have a national challenge. North America, that we inherited and would like to pass on to our future generations, is in big trouble. Go ahead. Your thoughts.
NUNGESSER: Absolutely. Chris, first off, we were told that the dispersants would sink it to the bottom and break it up so small that it would be eaten offshore. That was a straight lie. There was absolutely no facts that proved that would happen, and we see the oil continue to come ashore.
Secondly, we have a company right here in Plaquemines parish, Versabol (ph), that has a plan to put an upside-down barge over the oil, when it fills up, move it aside, put another one, lift that barge up. They have the equipment. They have the ability. My beliefs is this company wants to do it. They want to put that technology, and that would capture the oil.
My belief is, they don't want to do that because then we'd know exactly how much oil is in that barge as we lift it up and pump it into a tanker. They've presented it to BP. It's been squashed at highest level. Why wouldn't they use that opportunity, and we wouldn't have any oil leaking? That company has 60 specialists...
MATTHEWS: Why wouldn't BP want—why wouldn't—why would someone want to keep secret the amount of oil that's in the gulf right now and coming into the gulf every second?
LANDRIEU: Chris...
NUNGESSER: Well—well...
LANDRIEU: Chris, can I—go ahead, Billy.
NUNGESSER: ... this company—this company has agreed...
MATTHEWS: Go ahead, Senator. You want to get in here, go ahead.
NUNGESSER: ... if it didn't work...
MATTHEWS: The senator wants to get in here. Let me get the senator in here.
NUNGESSER: Go ahead.
MATTHEWS: Senator, your thoughts?
LANDRIEU: Chris, as mad as I am at BP, I don't think they're trying to be secret about the oil that's in there. I think they're trying to focus on plugging this well, and that's what the need to be focused on right now. And they haven't done it yet, and they need to do it.
LANDRIEU: And so we will know how much oil has gone into the water, and there are technologies that we think will work. But right now, there are some things that we can do. The president needs to get down there. Ken Salazar is on the job. He's with BP almost every day personally—the secretary of the interior. And he's working with them to try to plug this well. And then there'll be ways that we can clean up this coast.
And Chris, our entire coast is not shut down for business. We don't want that word to get out because that will hurt us even almost more than the oil. We have some areas closed down. We have lots of tar on the beach and oil on the beach. We need to clean it up. But south Louisiana's open for business, and we're going to fight this and keep our industries going as well as we can.
MATTHEWS: OK. Thank you, Senator Landrieu, and thank you, Billy Nungesser.
LANDRIEU: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: Coming up: The regulators were not...
NUNGESSER: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: ... regulating. Is the government partly to blame for the oil spill disaster? The government. We'll get two representatives on the spot to talk about that brand-new "New York Times" report just out today that, apparently, the so-called regulators were simply writing pen marks over the pencil marks put there by the oil companies. In other words, they were working for the oil companies.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Quote, "If you vote for that stimulus package, I'm going to kill you. Simple as that." Well, that's just one of many threats against lawmakers recorded in the first few months of this year, according to FBI documents provided to Politico. The Senate sergeant at arms says threats are up 300 percent this year, and the Capitol Police say they've had to dramatically increase their security efforts. The FBI documents reveal that those arrested for threatening violence are mostly men who own guns, and several have been treated for mental illness. We'll be right back.
MATTHEWS: Back to HARDBALL. President Obama will go to the gulf, as we said, down to Louisiana, on Friday to see firsthand the devastation from the oil spill. We got more insight into this frustration from "The Washington Post" today. Just one week after the oil rig explosion, he told aides, the president, "Plug the damn hole."
Well, we're in the fifth week since the explosion now, and Congressman Nick Rahall of West Virginia is chairman of the National Resources Committee and Congressman Steve Scalise of Louisiana—he's on the Energy and Commerce Committee, as well—he's in a district that's been affected most by the disaster.
Congressman Rahall, first I want you to look at the highlights from a new report from—about the MMS, the Minerals Management Service, which supposedly regulates the oil industry and its safety. Number one item, industry officials filled out their own inspection reports in pencil, and then the regulators traced in their pen—using their pen before submitting them as inspectors.
Number two, inspectors accepted meals, tickets and gifts from at least one oil company while overseeing the industry. And the agency supposedly regulating the oil industry conducted four inspections while negotiating for a job, one of these guys did, with the drilling company.
Congressman Rahall, what do you make of that report? Do you buy it? It's in "The New York Times" today, inspector general's report, not yet publicized.
REP. NICK RAHALL (D-WV), CHAIR, NATURAL RESOURCES CMTE.: I'm aware of this IG report, Chris. It does follow up on previous inspector general reports about ethical lapses at the MMS office in Denver. This one is more recent, although it did occur under the previous administration.
But I think one thing is perfectly clear here, Chris, and that is the MMS is a deeply dysfunctional agency. If this Deepwater Horizon crisis is a game-changer in terms of the way in which we manage our offshore energy resources, then this inspector general's report about alleged misbehavior at MMS has put MMS in the penalty box indefinitely. And it's our duty now to help pull MMS out of this penalty box, to try to sort out just what went wrong not only in this disaster, going up to it, in the policing functions of MMS, but as far as the American people, as well. They, after all, are the true owners of these energy resources, and it's important for us to determine whether what we have here is the Wall Street of the ocean that is privatizing profit at the expense of the American people.
MATTHEWS: Well, who are these regulators? I've gotten a little whiff of this. Apparently, there's a lot of revolving door stuff going on in that agency, a lot of industry oil people. What's your—you've got oversight over this. Who's—who works in that agency?
RAHALL: Yes, our Committee on Natural Resources, of which I am chair, has had hearing after hearing, investigation after investigation, about these problems that conflict MMS. As I say, you have it, on the one hand, supposedly collecting royalties from the oil industry that go to the American taxpayer. And on the other hand, they're responsible in the same office for the environmental and safety concerns that afflict these leases.
So it's—in our committee, we've passed numerous reform efforts in the past, only to see it go nowhere. It passed out (ph) to the full House of Representatives as soon as the Democrats took control in HR-6, the Clean Energy Act.
MATTHEWS: Well, what is it, the on deck circle for jobs in the oil industry? I mean, do you work on the MMS so you can prep yourself and get free tickets and sports tickets and meals (INAUDIBLE) so you can then move on and apply for a job with the oil industry? In other words, you're there to suck up to those guys on your way to a nice job. That's what it looks like.
RAHALL: There's—well, there's no doubt there's been a cozy relationship that exists here between the MMS and the oil and gas industry.
Unfortunately, that has occurred in other in...
MATTHEWS: Well, why couldn't you crack it, as Oversight Committee?
Why couldn't you crack it, break this system?
RAHALL: We have tried is what I'm saying. We're aware of it. We have been aware of it, Chris, through the inspector general's report.
But, unfortunately, we find this—that goes on in too many agencies responsible for worker safety, where they're also perhaps looking for a job in their own futures with the same industry they regulate.
MATTHEWS: I know.
RAHALL: So, this is something we have to do our best efforts to try to eliminate.
Now, can we legislate 100 percent purity? Heavens no, we can't.
We know that. We don't live in a perfect world.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
RAHALL: But it's still important to make the best effort we can and expose these types of conflicts.
MATTHEWS: OK. Let me go to—let me go to...
RAHALL: Unfortunately, it takes a disaster of this nature to expose it.
MATTHEWS: Let me go to Congressman Scalise.
What do you think of this mess? I mean, I—it is—I'm like everybody else, watching our North American continent get destroyed. You want to call it the Dead Sea, you call it anything you want, it's not funny. I think this is a bigger than anything that's happened in American politics for years.
We have got a government that looks impotent in the face of the oil industry. It looks like BP has a business challenge, and the American people are watching it meet its business challenge while they're destroying our continent. Your thoughts, Congressman?
REP. STEVE SCALISE ®, LOUISIANA: I'm angry, Chris.
You know, if you look at the Gulf Coast of Louisiana, this is America's energy coast. But it's also a living, working coast for so many fishermen, people who make their livelihoods right there. And their livelihoods are in jeopardy.
Many of them can't work today. They haven't been able to work for weeks. What we have been saying for weeks now, though, is that we have needed approval from the federal government to go and put a barrier plan in place to try to protect our marsh. This is a plan that was put forward by our governor and our local leaders and our responders on the ground. They put that plan on the president's desk.
MATTHEWS: Well, what's stopping you from putting up a defense against you—of this oil spill into your territory? What's stopping you from doing it?
SCALISE: The thing that's stopping us from doing it is the federal government. We need permits from the Corps of Engineers. In fact, two weeks ago, our governor asked for that approval to the Corps of Engineers. We heard nothing for 10 days.
Last week, I led a delegation. Our entire congressional delegation, all nine members, sent a letter saying we need to get this acted on immediately. I actually forwarded that up to the president last week. We have still yet to hear from the president on this. He could do this today. He could make this happen today. Instead, two weeks have gone by with not a single word from the president about this plan.
MATTHEWS: OK. Let me ask you an engineering question. Can you put up a berm, can you put up a barrier by mankind effort, by men's efforts, can you build a barrier that keeps the oil from the side—from the beach?
RAHALL: What you can do is, you can get dredges out to start dredging the sand and putting a barrier in place in front of the oil in front of the marsh, so that you can keep—at least you can defend it if it's in front of a sand barrier before it gets into the marsh. Once it gets into the marsh, it's a whole lot more destructive and maybe even long-term damage has been done.
MATTHEWS: So, there's enough sand out there to create these manmade dunes? There's enough sand out there to do it?
SCALISE: There's sand.
And, in fact, the governor's office identified a number of borrow pits where they can go get that sand. But it's got to—we have got to get that permit approved. And, in fact, I think the governor said he got tired of waiting, and so we're just going to go do it.
The problem is, we lost two weeks, Chris, two vital weeks, where, two weeks ago, there was no oil in our marsh, and today the oil is permeating through the marsh.
SCALISE: And we lost valuable time because of government's inaction.
MATTHEWS: Let me go back to Congressman Rahall, and I will be back to you in a minute.
Final thoughts here. It seems to me there's two challenges here, Congressman Rahall. Number one is to cap this well, to cap it. I don't know. It looks like they have given up on this plan, the short-term plan for a kill, a top kill. They apparently can't put that together in the short run.
They have got a two-month outline of planning to get another well dug down there, another outlet for the well they can regulate. Then we have the cleanup of what looks to be between seven million and 70 million gallons of oil in the Gulf. What's the federal government role in both of those jobs, Congressman Rahall?
RAHALL: Well, I was—I was briefed today, Chris, by BP on these various alternatives that they're going to try as a last-ditch effort.
It's also very clear here, that we have a responsibility on our Natural Resources Committee to find out what happened here. We're going to do that in a series of hearings starting tomorrow morning.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist, Chris, to figure out that something went wrong here. But it may very well take a rocket scientist to help us cap this well.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
RAHALL: And it's important that we work together on this, both the government and BP.
MATTHEWS: What's the federal government responsibility for capping and cleaning up both? Congressman, one more try.
Congressman Rahall, what is the government's responsibility? What
or is it just waiting for BP—BP to do it?
RAHALL: No, no, it's not just waiting. The government has a responsibility to help here, where they can offer help to BP and all the parties that are liable. They have been doing that.
Secretary Salazar has been on the scene. We have seen equipment offered by the government...
MATTHEWS: Yes.
RAHALL: ... and government equipment put to work here. So, the government is not standing idly by. But we're beginning to lose a little patience with BP, as—as everybody is, the fact that it's not yet been capped.
RAHALL: But let's bring in all the experts we can,. engineers, everybody, scientists. NOAA is on the scene. The federal government is on the scene. I had staff members down there immediately after this disaster occurred. They have reported back.
Congressional committees have been investigating. You will see more of this. Is it too much? No, it's not too much, because we don't have any answers yet. And so, the more hearings we have, the better.
MATTHEWS: OK. Let me go to Congressman—OK. Let me go to Congressman Scalise.
Again to you, the two questions: What's the government's role, to clean up and stop?
SCALISE: If you look at the actual law, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 governs what happens during an oil spill.
And the law says the president shall mitigate this disaster, not BP. Unfortunately, the president has ceded this responsibility to BP, and they have proven that they can't get the job done. We thought, after day three, that the White House should have taken over and said, BP, you're not capable of handling this. You're going to have to pay for it.
And we all agree BP pays for this mess.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
SCALISE: But, in the meantime, we have got to get somebody in there that can actually get something done.
SCALISE: And they're not doing it right now.
Congressman, you're talking like an American, not a Republican, in this case. I will tell you, this is a public solution to a private problem created by the private sector. The public has to deal with it. I agree with you completely in this regard.
Thank you, Congressman Rahall.
And, thank you—thank you, Congressman Scalise.
SCALISE: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: Up next: A Republican House candidate is caught plagiarizing from a speech by Barack Obama. Get this: House Republican plagiarized verbatim from Barack Obama's big speech in 2004. That's in the "Sideshow." Unfortunately, this guy is not in the sideshow.
This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Back to HARDBALL. Now to the "Sideshow."
First: tale of the tape. Idaho Republican House candidate Vaughn Ward may be running against Barack Obama's policies, but it turns out he's running with his speeches. An Idaho blogger posted this side-by-side of Obama's 2004 convention address and a Ward campaign speech from this January.
Notice anything?
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D) ILLINOIS: Stand on the crossroads of history.
VAUGHN WARD ®, IDAHO CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: And we stand on the crossroads of history.
OBAMA: We can make the right choices and meet the challenges that face us.
WARD: I know we can make the right choices and meet the challenges that lay before us.
OBAMA: If you feel the same urgency that I do, if you feel the same passion that I do...
WARD: If you feel the same urgency and the same passion that I do...
OBAMA: ... then I have no doubt...
WARD: ... then I have no doubt...
OBAMA: ... the people will rise up in November.
WARD: ... that our voices will be heard in November.
MATTHEWS: That's one way to save on speechwriters. It goes on like that. Check it out on line.
Here you have got a Republican critic of the president lip-synching President Obama's words verbatim. Does this guy know he's a joke?
Next up: eating their own. North Carolina's Republican chairman has declared a Republican House candidate, Tim D'Annunzio—quote—
"unfit for public office at any level."
What does it take to earn that kind of talk from your own party? Republican officials actually leaked D'Annunzio's divorce papers, which show him to be—quote—"a self-described religious zealot who smoked marijuana almost daily and told his wife he found the Ark of the Covenant in Arizona."
And this is the guy who won that primary, and therefore has a chance in the runoff. I wonder what the losers feel like.
On to Minnesota, a tempest within the Tea Party. Regular watchers of this show know Congresswoman Michele Bachmann—there she is—isn't one to shy away from controversy. After all, she made her name on this show by issuing a fatwa against what she called anti-American Democrats in Congress.
Well, what is one topic Bachmann won't touch these days? Fellow Tea Party darling Rand Paul and his personal views on the civil rights bill. She told a group of reporters yesterday—quote—"I'm not commenting on Rand Paul. I have got to focus on my race."
Cat got your tongue, Congresswoman?
For tonight's "Big Number," a sign of the times. In August of 2008, 52 percent of Americans said they strongly favor increased drilling for oil off American shores. Now, amid the horror in the Gulf, a gushing oil leak that has no end in sight, how many Americans strongly favor more offshore drilling, according to a new CNN poll? Twenty-seven percent, half of what it was two years ago.
Just 27 percent of Americans still strongly back offshore drilling
tonight's big bad number.
Up next: Are Democrats about to go on offense to defend their majorities in the House and the Senate?
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
JULIA BOORSTIN, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I'm Julia Boorstin with your CNBC "Market Wrap."
Stocks clawing back from early losses to finish only slightly lower, the Dow Jones industrials losing 22 points after being down nearly 300 points this morning, the late rally pushing the S&P 500 to a fractional gain, and the Nasdaq slipping 2.5 points.
This morning's drop coming on the heels of a sharp decline on the Asian markets. Investors there are concerned about geopolitical friction in the Koreas. A weak euro wasn't helping. It feel to a four-year low against the dollar, before bouncing back to finish just about where it started.
Consumer confidence rose for the third straight month in May to its highest point in two years. A breakdown shows consumers feeling slightly better about the jobs market in particular.
And housing prices fell in March, despite a last-ditch push by buyers to take advantage of federal tax breaks.
That's it from CNBC, first in business worldwide—now back to
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
The Democratic victory in the Pennsylvania special congressional election and Rand Paul's high-profile stumbles have raised the Democrats' hopes of surviving in November. But can the party overcome one big looming threat, anti-incumbency fever?
Chuck Todd is NBC News chief White House correspondent and political director. There he is at the White House much. And "The Washington Post"'s Chris Cillizza is managing editor of the postpolitics.com and editor of "The Fix."
Gentlemen, great respect for both of you. Let's go into this thing.
Do you have any reason to worry if you're a Democrat right now less than you would have say a month ago about the fall and the possibility of a tsunami against you?
First of all, let's start with Chuck.
CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, I would say this.
I think the lesson that lot of Democratic incumbents took out of Pennsylvania 12 is that there is a way—a couple of things. I think what they have learned is that Democratic enthusiasm, while there's an enthusiasm gap in the polls, it's not demoralized this Democratic base. It's just not engaged.
And the lesson out of Pennsylvania 12 and maybe in a couple of these other special elections that took place in New York, at least that Democratic incumbents are taking away, is, if you engage the Democratic base, they will come out, and you can—you can be competitive. This isn't going to be what happened to Republicans in 2006 and Democrats in 1994, where there was a depressed, demoralizing base for the two incumbent parties.
The evidence about that isn't there yet. There's an enthusiasm gap, but the demoralization issue isn't there. And that's something that some Democrats are taking heart in.
MATTHEWS: That is very psychological.
Do you look at it, Chris—I'm just still looking at the prospect for Delaware going Republican, Illinois going Republican, North Dakota going Republican, Arkansas going Republican. States like Connecticut I never thought could possibly go Republican could possibly go Republican.
MATTHEWS: Even—I think about all that. And then I put that up against this macro political thing that Chuck talks about. Aren't there still obvious defeats coming the Democrats' way this fall?
CHRIS CILLIZZA, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Yes. Chris, yes.
And, Chuck, you and I all know this. Midterm election, first midterm of a president, since World War II, the only time the president's party hasn't lost seats in the House and Senate was 2002. Obviously, that was kind of feeling the effects of September 11, 2001.
But you mentioned psychological, and I think that that's important in terms of the impact. Look, I think, before Pennsylvania 12, there were lots of Democrats who thought there's no path. The president is not particularly popular in a lot of these swing districts and swing states. I can't talk about what I have done for the district or the state because people don't like that. We have seen appropriators like Bob Bennett in Utah, Alan Mollohan in West Virginia lose.
And they thought, what can I tell people that will help me get either elected or reelected?
MATTHEWS: Yes.
CILLIZZA: I think that Pennsylvania 12 win says, you know what, talk about local stuff. Talk about creating jobs. Talk about the stuff that matters in the district. And that worked in that district. Remember, that was one House election on one day. November, we're going to have a lot more...
CILLIZZA: ... might not work.
MATTHEWS: Let's look at that race. Let's look at what Critz did over that race.
He won. This is the Democrat who won last week in Pennsylvania in that race out in Western Pennsylvania for Jack Murtha's seat. He ran by running with guns, with life, against the pro-choice people, against cap and trade, against health care.
On every issue that signals where you stand politically, he's a Republican, even though he's a bread-and-butter Democrat. Is that what you have to do, Chuck, to survive this possible tsunami, is to turn tail?
TODD: Look, this is not new among some of these Democratic House candidates. You know, Rahm Emanuel, when he was over at the DCCC, at the Democratic Campaign Committee in 2006, was recruiting guys like Heath Schuler, like Jason Altmeyer, like Joe Sestak, who were supposed to run locally, not to be running as national Democrats, but, quote, fit the district.
So this isn't new. And so what Pennsylvania 12 tells you is that Democrats can still win a fit the district model here. And what Republicans—the question is, you picked out some Senate races. Mike Castle fits the district, or in this case fits the state when it comes to winning there. Mark Kirk in Illinois fits the state.
We really don't know yet about Linda McMahon, whether she fits the state in Connecticut, but clearly she's trying to run a little more as a moderate Republican. In those cases, that's where the enthusiasm gap that's there could really benefit the Republicans. The question is what about these places where maybe they're nominating candidates that don't fit the state or fit the district?
MATTHEWS: Chris, one of the interesting things you've set up here is the probability—I think it makes sense—that to survive as a majority party, the Democrats have to re-elect people who are moderate to even conservative on certain issues like cap and trade or health care. And this is what drives the net roots crazy, and SEIU labor types. It drives the progressives, if you will, crazy, the fact that the Democratic National Committee and the DCCC and the others, the Senate Campaign Committee, are out there shopping for guys and women who don't make the Obama dream.
CILLIZZA: Chris, there's no question about that. I think, you know, the bases of both parties would like to elect people that are ideologically pure. The center and the establishment of both parties say—you know, it's the Ronald Reagan, my 80 percent friend isn't my 20 percent enemy. That said, there's probably an argument to be made that President Obama might benefit from a smaller majority—and they wouldn't say this—but maybe not even a majority in the House. He might be able to get more done. He'd also, frankly, be able to create a foil.
Remember, Bill Clinton setback in 1994 runs against Washington and Newt Gingrich in 1996 and gets reelected. There's a case to be made that losses in the House and in the Senate actually may accrue to President Obama's benefit.
MATTHEWS: What are you saying? it's better to lose the moderate seats or hold them?
CILLIZZA: I think it's probably better for President Obama to lose some of them, in truth. He's going to lose—
MATTHEWS: Doesn't want—you buy that? Chuck, do you buy that culling the herd theory? It's better to cull the herd, left with the core? Kind of sounds like Benedict XVI in the Catholic Church, cull the herd down to the true believers and then fight from the phalanx, if you will.
TODD: I'll tell you what they don't want to do is they don't want to lose majorities for two simple words, subpoena power. That's what they don't want. I've talked to some Democrats about this, you know, this idea that somehow maybe, like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama for '12 would like the Republicans to own a piece of governing. Maybe it's controlling the House or the Senate or both.
But I tell you this, they say, guess what that got Bill Clinton? A lot of subpoenas, a lot of what they believe was a lot of wasted time. He couldn't do what he wanted to do in his presidency?
MATTHEWS: Did you learn that from me? That was one of my—I had forgotten my old religion, which was—I learned this back in the '72 race, watching Nixon, in the middle of the night, when had just won 60 percent of the country, said, yes, but we lost subpoena power again. What brought him down? Subpoena power. It's everything in politics.
Thank you for reminding me. I will now repeat that again and again for the rest of the season, because Chuck is so right, as he often is. Chris, you must remember this, you don't want to loss by a single vote, because you can give up the airplanes, you can give up the committee chairs, you can give up all the perks, give up the staff proportions, but if you lose subpoena power, the other guy's got it. And he goes to town on you. Boy, it's powerful stuff.
CILLIZZA: But can you get anything done anyway in an election year? That's the only question. In 2011, 2012, would you get anything done, anyway. But I make it a point to never disagree with you or Chuck.
MATTHEWS: I think if Darrell Issa gets ahold of the subpoena power, and that's all he has, that's a lot. That guy doesn't have it and look at the noise he's making. Thank you very much, Chuck Todd. Thank you, Chris Cillizza. I just gave him a reelection point.
Up next, the White House, the Pentagon and Congress find a compromise on repealing—this is going to be interesting—Don't Ask Don't Tell has a sliver of a chance to go right away. It may go in December. It may go now. We're going to talk about it with some experts who care deeply. This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: We're back. Congressional leaders reached a compromise of sorts on Monday night—that's last night—with the White House and the Pentagon on how to end the military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. Under the deal, the House and the Senate will move this week on votes to repeal the policy. But if those votes succeed—or even if they do succeed, the repeal would not go into affect until after the Pentagon completes its review this December 1st, and after President Obama and the Joint Chief of Staff, and the secretary of Defense, if they do, certify that a repeal wouldn't hurt military readiness.
The big question right now, do Democrats have the votes? Aubrey Sarvis is the executive director of the Servicemen's Legal Defense Network and Joe Solmonese is the president of the great Human Rights Campaign.
Aubrey, you first, where do you actually stand now? Do you have a chance to end this before December? Or do you have to wait for the military to decide?
AUBREY SARVIS, SERVICEMEN'S LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK: First we have to get the vote in the next day or two in the Senate Armed Services Committee, Chris. And that vote is very tight. Tonight, we're probably one vote short. So everyone needs to weigh in right now.
MATTHEWS: Who you after? Can you tell me?
SARVIS: Sure. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, and we haven't given up yet on Scott Brown.
MATTHEWS: Those first two are real hipsters. They're not exactly state of the art on these things, I wouldn't say.
SARVIS: They vote, Chris, and we need their votes.
MATTHEWS: I know. I'm watching Scott Brown from Massachusetts, who certainly is the most politically quick guy around. He's watching you guys. Joe, what do you think is happening? You going to get these votes?
JOE SOLMONESE, HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN: I think we will. Aubrey's right. We have to direct the full resources of this community to getting this done towards the end of the week. We have a House vote that I think is in good shape. But we'll also be close.
Aubrey's right. The targets are Ben Nelson, Robert Byrd. I do think Scott Brown is an interesting situation. He said no; 80 percent of the people in Massachusetts think he ought to—
MATTHEWS: look at this poll. This is the key thing that must hearten anybody who wants liberalization on all fronts; eight out of ten Americans now support openly gay service in the military. That is one area. Marriage is still an issue in this country, a debating point. Joe, it seems like people have really moved on open service.
SOLMONESE: Absolutely, they've moved significantly.
MATTHEWS: What do you think has moved the public so rapidly on that one question, on gay rights?
SOLMONESE: I think on any measure of gay rights, we move when people feel comfortable being out and open about who they are.
MATTHEWS: Why the military issue more than marriage? Why has it moved so much further so much faster?
SARVIS: Chris, I think it's because the American people aren't comfortable with the reality that gays and lesbians have to serve in silence. Everyday—
MATTHEWS: They think it's fraudulent.
SARVIS: They think it's fraudulent. Every day, these people put their lives on the line for this country. And the American people have said enough. Enough of 14,000 service members discharged just because of their sexual orientation. This is a huge loss for our country, a huge loss for our military. And the Senate Armed Services Committee can fix it this week.
MATTHEWS: Who do you trust in the executive branch? The president? Do you think he's leading well enough, Joe?
SOLMONESE: I think this has been a complicated situation. I think he had to resolve two issues, the commitment he made to the community to get this done against, you know, the desire by the secretary of defense and others to go through—
MATTHEWS: Do you think the secretary of defense is out there in good faith, Robert Gates? Is he really trying to get this done?
SARVIS: Today, Chris, the headline was "Secretary Gates Gives a Nod to Repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell." A nod is not good enough. The secretary is a part of this administration. The reality is we need to hear from everyone tonight and tomorrow, including the White House. The White House needs to be weighing—
MATTHEWS: Do you have a fear—I think you do. I'm just guessing. My intuition tells me the Marine commandant, for example, the most resistant I would guess.
SARVIS: He is, indeed.
MATTHEWS: Will he stand up and stop the service heads from doing this, Joe? You're in the military. You were in the military.
SARVIS: I was in the military, Joe—Chris. The reality is, if I'd like to go back, only the chairman of the Joint Chiefs has to certify here, with the secretary of defense and with the—
MATTHEWS: You don't need the Marines?
SARVIS: We don't need all of the Joint Chiefs. The policy people here are the service secretaries, Secretary Gates, and Admiral Mullen, and the president. They certify. This can happen with a successful vote in the Senate Armed Services Committee. And we can have open service by the end of first quarter of next year.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you, Joe, about the gay community generally, which is politically involved here. You know them all. Are they happy with this president's leadership on this issue?
SOLMONESE: I think, on any measure, we would like to see things happen faster than they have. And we've seen—
MATTHEWS: has he been true to his word or not? Yes or no?
SOLMONESE: He said he would work with Congress to overturn Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
MATTHEWS: Is he?
SOLMONESE: He's working with Congress to overturn Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
MATTHEWS: With this proviso. With the proviso of waiting to hear from the military.
SOLMONESE: Right.
MATTHEWS: If Harry Truman waited to hear from the military on equal opportunity service in the military for African-Americans, what would he have gotten? I hate to be tough here. Are you confident you're going to get a yes from the military and from the services?
SOLMONESE: Oh, yeah. I mean, Aubrey's right. There's a path here and it does require chairman of Joint Chiefs and the secretary of defense and the president to sign up. I'm confidant that will happen.
MATTHEWS: What do you think of General Shalikashvilli writing that editorial this weekend?
SARVIS: It's remarkable. Extraordinary.
MATTHEWS: He's all for it right now.
SARVIS: He's all for it right now. The reality is the president will not meet his commitment on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell until repeal has been signed into law. Joe's right. He's working on it now, but we have to keep working harder.
MATTHEWS: OK, gentlemen, thank you.
SARVIS: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: Aubrey, thank you. Joe, as always, the Human Rights Committee, a great organization. I've known this guy for 40 years.
When we return, why aren't all the oil companies being told, not asked, told to go to the Gulf and help clean it up. This is a national effort, not a business proposition. You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with the situation we face. The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is an on-going catastrophe. The president of the United States is the one person with the authority to act on the two fronts on which this horror must be confronted.
First, he needs to enlist all vessels and all the available technology to begin minimizing the damage. That means collecting the oil from the Gulf with whatever means all the oil companies possess, not just BP, but all the petroleum companies that wish to do business in this country. We can't wait for the disaster to end before beginning the Promethean effort of sucking this oil aboard tankers and getting it out of our water.
I think about Winston Churchill called all the boat owners of England to get the men of those beaches in Dunkirk. This is a continental horror, not a BP business challenge. Why are the other oil companies not sending tankers into the Gulf to forge a wide-ranging effort to collect the oil? Why hasn't the technology of the private sector, all that can be utilized, not been drafted into the service of the country?
Jack Kennedy once said at American University, right across the street from here, the problems of man are manmade; they can be solved by man. Does our president believe this or does he believe the problems of BP can be solved by BP?
BP has a terrible record in safety. Seriously, why are we trusting this company or its supposed regulators? We just learned that the Minerals Management Service, that's supposed to be regulating safety in the oil industry, has been letting the oil companies, like BP, fill in their own inspection forms in pencil, so that the government regulators, after they get their fat meals and free tickets to sports events from the oil companies, could then trace over with their pens what the oil companies wrote in pencil on those supposed inspection forms.
That's from the government's own inspector general's report that just came out, the latest evidence of what we get when government counts on the oil industry is do its thing. It's time for the country to act like a country, before we have to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of British Petroleum.
That's HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us. Right now it's for "THE ED SHOW" with Ed Schultz.
RESERVED. Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
RESERVED. Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are
protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced,
distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the
prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any
trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>


text:
So a quick Frozen recap and because I haven't seen it I asked IMdb:
Fearless optimist Anna teams up with Kristoff in an epic journey, encountering Everest-like conditions, and a hilarious snowman named Olaf in a race to find Anna's sister Elsa, whose icy powers have trapped the kingdom in eternal winter.
OK then.
The movie depicts a horse with a decorative mane. I didn't notice the horse at all however I've seen a few pages where images were posted of the actual horse after which Pixar patterned Anna's.
Pixar's horse:
|I got this picture here
Actual horse:
|I got this photo of a well dressed Fjord here
|Look at that face!!!
Unless otherwise cited, photos come from here
This beautiful horse is called a Norwegian Fjord. It has a two toned mane with a dark stripe in the centre between two blonde stripes. As someone said here, sort of like a two toned Mohawk and who wouldn't want that in a horse? Or any four legged family member?
Of course they don't go around their daily routine all decked out. Here is the natural look, although Pixar's horse's mane is still trimmed:
|Natural N-fjord mane
Check out this page for more images of Norwegian Fjord's of all ages.
When grooming the mane, artistic Norwegian horse owners will snip patterns into the mane because: why not? Horse.
And voila:
Also, from the comments, check out this farm where I plan to visit the next time I'm in Idaho!
Here is the Wiki page describing Norwegian Fjords. They're small, strong, good natured, hard working and pretty much all the same colour in five varying shades of dun. So kinda nice they got that black stripe in the mane.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
About Dreamscape
Founded in 2010, Dreamscape Media is a publisher and distributor of high quality and award-winning content. We are determined to bring the best in entertainment to audiences of all ages.
Dreamscape Media offers distribution, marketing, and production services for audiobooks, eBooks, film, and documentaries. We provide content both physically and digitally to customers, partners, and platforms around the world. Our deal structures have no hidden fees or costs and we practice complete transparency with our partners. Many notable publishers and content creators collaborate with us to grow their audiences.
Dreamscape Media's extensive collection of children's videos is educational, interactive, and enchanting. We have earned five Parents' Choice Awards and eleven ALSC Children's Notable recognitions. In 2017, Drum Dream Girl: How One Girl's Courage Changed Music won the Carnegie Medal for Excellence in Children's Video. Along with our children's collection, we distribute award-winning independent films from an array of filmmakers to ensure a broad range of entertainment.
Dreamscape Media has published hundreds of bestselling audiobooks that range from motivational self-help to suspenseful mysteries. Riveting and beautifully produced, our audio titles have earned a dozen Audie Award nominations and more than fifty AudioFile Earphones Awards. In 2018, our historical biography Loving Vs. Virginia won a prestigious Audie Award.
Dreamscape Media prides itself on offering high quality and accessible entertainment for the entire family. We are passionate about our content and continuously strive for excellence.
If you are interested in partnering with Dreamscape Media, or would like to learn more, please contact us at email@example.com.


text:
When debut album Miracle Kicker announced the arrival of Dark Captain (then clunkily named Dark Captain, Light Captain) to the world, it launched the band to the lofty heights of thirty-third on the Guardian's top albums of 2008 - beating The Last Shadow Puppets, Ladyhawke and Justice. However, despite this praise, being a well reputed live act and ex-member Neil Kleiner's collaboration with Kieran Hebden, Dark Captain have always seemed to remain in the, erm, dark.
Regardless of that, they're a committed band. Over the last few years, they've evolved from their original two man/one laptop live set-up to a more fully rounded five person set up, vocalist and guitarist Dan Carney still very much at their core.
Fast forward three years later to Dead Legs & Alibis and it's apparent that such an evolution isn't just rooted to their live act. 'Fade' is the closest in tone to the sullen Miracle Kicker – a limbo of tear dropping guitars dripping amongst languished Simon and Garfunkel like vocal harmonies. Don't call them folk though. They might just kick your arse as we discovered when we spoke to them.
But drifting away from that dynamic, Dead Legs… is a much more upbeat effort. Themes of 1984-esque dystopian futures are offset by less chaotic narratives as Carney whispers: "On our paved road / You make your way / I will find you now" before a mish-mash of tribal drumbeats take over during 'Long Distance Driver'. Meanwhilst the 'Right Way Round' nods to Madchester, its swaggering bass line closely matching the funky attitude of Ian Brown's Golden Greats. There's even moments during '3 Years to Go' where the atmospheric haze of Massive Attack's 'Teardrop' is invoked then transformed into a relaxing natural mist. Warming and ambient, it provides one of the most calming moments on the record.
Expanding into new territories, closing track 'Flickering Light' is Dead Legs…'s most captivating moment. Whilst bearing the melancholy of Miracle Kicker and isolated by the same dejectedness of Elliot Smith, an alluring guitar lead erupts from an unforeseen climax which would surprise even the most diehard Dark Captain fan.
It's a shame that such an explosive moment arrives so late because, well, it makes everything else before sound a little tame. It begs the question: why didn't such a moment appear more frequently? Then there's the tiny niggle that the more upbeat tracks don't quite hit the same spot as the otherwise sombre, Miracle Kicker type moments. Such points however, don't stop Dead Legs & Alibis being Dark Captain's strongest record to date.
7Alex Yau's Score


text:
2 tbsp cornflour + 1 tbsp cold water+ 1 tbsp soy sauce,mix well with sliced pork
2 tbsp soy sauce
Pork can replaced by chicken ,beef or shrimp
I have no dinner today and you made me hungry!
i'm going to buy the ingredients for this dish now. thanks for reminding me of my childhood life when my mum cook this dish quite often.
姜葱肉片.... hmmm.....this is good with some steamed rice.
hahaha!! why no dinner,diet? you're funny!!
u welcome!! glad to bring back your childhood memories back:) looking forward your posting soon:)
thanks for dropping by:) yes it's:))
That pork looks really tasty!
I tweaked this recipe to fit my pantry, and OMG! It was delicious! I even posted about it. Thank You!


text:
There are loads of opportunities to place Online Dating Ads on the Internet – for free! I'm amazed myself at how many millions of single people are running ads all over the Internet – without paying a dime. And you can too!
Here's some Online Dating Advice to get your Internet Romance going in style!
Let's start with an Internet search using the popular search engine from Google. Search on Google under the term "free online personals" (without the quotes) and take a look at the variety you're presented with. Over a million websites show up on my search!
The trick is not to be so consumed with all the possibilities that you lose track of your objective – which is to meet Real-Live-People!
After your Google Search – and I've searched under the keywords Free Online Personals – you might want to continue your advertising strategy by choosing, from among the thousands of Free Online Dating Services, those who have members which are closest to home.
Step one: Decide where you'd like to meet someone. Are you open to meeting singles from all across the country? Or would you prefer to meet someone closer to home? If you'll consider starting a long-distance romance (and there may be good reasons why it's even better if it's long distance!) then write that down on your Online Dating planning sheet.
Step two: Once you've decided where your future dating partners can live, then look at your "Free Online Personals" Search Engine Results (Google, Yahoo, or MSN would be good places to start) and bookmark all of the free Online Dating Sites which include members in your target areas.
Step three: By now you should have at least 10 to 20 free online dating sites on your list. Prepare yourself to start advertising by getting some photos of yourself – and preferably flattering ones – which you can post on each dating site you choose. I advise you not to use very old photos – and any pictures more than five years old count as "old" ones in my book. Use flattering photos, yes – but misleading photos – no! Subscribe to the notion of "Truth in Advertising." There's nothing worse than meeting someone after months of correspondence only to realize that your pen pal has aged by more than 10 years – and has grown a huge donut around their waistline too!
Step four: Decide upon your criteria for match selection. How old can your dating partners be – i.e., what age range will you accept? This is entirely a personal decision, but keep in mind that some people deduct five to ten years from their true age when writing their online dating profiles! I don't recommend that you do this too, but let your conscience be your guide. When you make contact with people for online dating, be sure to confirm their true age as one of your very first questions!
Other criteria you may consider are your future partner's location, level of education, if they're a smoker or drinker, if they have kids and if so how many, their occupations (and are they even employed?) and perhaps even their hobbies and other interests too. As a side note, be on the lookout for emails from foreign countries – you might not want to sponsor someone to come here and get a Green Card at your expense. (Or you may – just think about it – that's all!).
There are some who will advise you to construct a very long list of your match criteria, with the reasoning that the more specific you are in visualizing who you want, the better your chances will be of actually meeting someone who fits the bill. For whatever it's worth, my opinion is to do just the opposite! People with long lists of requirements often stay single for a very, very long time. Better to use just a short list of prerequisites, and let your heart be your guide from there!
Step five: Start writing your online dating ads. I've been writing Online Personals for more than 15 years and I've written (and read) thousands of them! My advice – based on experience – is to be creative, have fun, and don't come across as demanding. Longer ads work better in my experience than shorter ones. And by "longer" I'm talking about a 300 to 500 word ad – as opposed to a 15 to 30 word ad. If you don't think it's possible to write such a long ad – and especially if you believe that no one will even read an ad that long – believe me, I can tell you from experience that it just isn't so. Anyone who is single and interested in you will read almost anything you write (short of a novel the size of War and Peace!).
Step six: Write a handful of "Reply Letters" which you'll send to anyone who writes to you. I don't advocate using Form Letters only, but having some standard paragraphs at your disposal will provide a nice starting point for many of your replies. Naturally, you should personalize them quite a bit too. If you get a fair number of replies to your ads (and I've received more than two thousand letters from some of mine) then you'll be glad you took the time to produce a few carefully written templates.
Step seven: Put a chart together of (1) the websites you submitted your ads to (2) when your ads ran (3) which ad or ads you published and (4) keep a folder on your computer of all of your replies – including the photos you received from your respondents too!
The Internet Dating Strategy I've just outlined for you is a practical and effective way to get started. If you take your Online Dating campaign seriously, you'll find that you'll have plenty of men or women to choose from!


text:
Siebert 800-872-0444
Live Chat Live Chat Offline
Electronic trading poses risk to investors due to system response, trade executions and account access availability that may vary due to a variety of factors, including trading volumes, market conditions, system performance, market data delays and other factors. All investments involve risk, and the past performance of a security, industry, sector, market, or financial product does not guarantee future results or returns. Rates, commissions and fees listed here are subject to change at any time. Testimonials may not be representative of the experience of other clients and are no
guarantee of future performance or success.
Muriel Siebert & Co., Inc.
Member NYSE, FINRA and SIPC. Est. 1967. Nasdaq symbol SIEB.
Check the background of this firm on FINRA's BrokerCheck
Market Data powered by QuoteMedia. Terms of Use.
Copyright 2019 Siebert All rights reserved.


text:
Chloé Socks
Founded by Egyptian/French designer Gaby Aghion in 1952, Chloé rejects the stiff nature of fashion, producing bohemian-inspired, body conscious pieces made from premium fabrics. Chloé is inspired by soft femininity, tailoring pieces that reflect the youthful modernity of Aghion's hometown of Paris. The romantic nature of Aghion's vision lives on today.
There are currently no products available for Chloé Socks.
Please select another designer or sign up below to receive email updates on new product arrivals, special offers and exclusive events.


text:
Defending Big West Champion Cal Poly (14-17, 3-2) secured its first conference series victory of the season and picked up a pair of Blue-Green Rivalry points with a doubleheader sweep of UCSB (9-27, 0-5) on Saturday at Campus Diamond.
Despite leaving a total of 21 runners stranded across the two games, the Mustangs came out on top by way of 7-2 and 5-0 scores.
Blue–Green Rivalry
The athletics rivalry between UC Santa Barbara and Cal Poly has grown in recent years, and now the schools plan to put their competition to good use.
As the Gauchos and Mustangs battle it out on the field, diamond, court, and in the pool, the Big West rivals will seek to make fans and students aware of their campuses' recycling and sustainability efforts. The eco-slant to the rivalry fits the colors of sustainability (blue and green) as well as those of UCSB (blue) and Cal Poly (green).
The Blue-Green Rivalry is based on the results of the 16 common sports that the schools compete in. To see the points system and updated rivalry standings, click here.
The creative angle of using games to promote the campuses' sustainability and recycling efforts is the first of its kind in college athletics. To learn more about sustainability efforts at UCSB, click here.
Cal Poly scored first in game one when Dana Perez hit a two-out RBI single to center field driving Kendal Hennings home. The Mustangs stretched their lead in the second with another two-out rally. After Whitley Gerhart walked, then advanced to second on a base hit by Hennings, Nora Sobczak hit a single to center driving Gerhart home to give Cal Poly the 2-0 advantage.
In the third, Jessica Ziegler led off with a bunt single, moved to second on a single by Jamie Adishian and then reached third after a ground out. McWhirter grounded out to second base on the next play, driving home the first Gaucho run.
UCSB then tied the game in the bottom of the fourth when single up the middle by Ziegler sent Keilani Jennings home.
The game remained deadlocked until the top of the sixth when Hennings led off with a solo homer over the center field fence. Sobczak followed with an infield base hit and Krysten Cary reached on a Gaucho fielding error in the outfield to put two Mustangs on with no outs. Back-to-back walks by Stephanie Correia and Trista Thomas overloaded the bases and stretched the Cal Poly lead to two. Lindsey Correa came in to relieve MeLinda Matsumoto in the circle, but was unable to stop the Mustang's onslaught as she gave up a three-RBI double to Shea Williams on her first pitch.
UCSB was unable to rally back from the deficit, falling 7-2 to Cal Poly.
In the loss, UCSB tied the Mustangs with 11 runners stranded and outhit its foe, 10-8.
Matsumoto (4-10) suffered the loss after tossing 5.2 innings. She allowed seven hits and all seven runs were credited to her, though just three were earned. She walked seven and fanned two. Correa pitched 1.1 innings and allowed just one hit.
At the plate, Ziegler led the way going 3-for-4 with a run and an RBI. Allison Taylor and Beristianos each tallied a pair of hits.
During the second game of the twin bill, the Mustangs started their ace, Anna Cahn, in the circle. Cahn went the distance, tossing a complete game two-hitter with no walks and five strikeouts.
The Gauchos' lone hits of the game were a two-out single to the shortstop by Brooke Putich in the first and an infield single by Tiffany Corder in the sixth.
Correa earned the start for the Gauchos and was able to keep the Mustangs off the scoreboard through the first three innings.
At the top of the fourth, Cal Poly's offense finally broke through when Hennings hit a two-run homer over the left field fence. One out later, Cary belted one of her own to left center, putting the Mustangs ahead, 3-0.
Correa bounced back and earned the third out of the inning a walk later. The senior proceeded to retire the next six batters in order.
After Cary led-off with a walk at the top of the seventh, Krista Cobb came in to relieve Correa. The sophomore struggled though, walking Cahn before giving up a base-loading single to left field to Sarah Kryza. A double down the left field line by Capri Ruiz scored two more Mustang runs and put Cal Poly ahead, 5-0. It was the last hit of the game as Cobb earned three consecutive outs to escape the inning.
Correa (3-9) suffered the loss after allowing four earned runs on seven hits while walking four.
The Gauchos will look to capture their first conference win on Sunday as the series with Cal Poly concludes at noon at Campus Diamond.


text:
ple piercing at Extremus
About two years ago, I began to pursue and develope my interest in
bondage, s/m and piercing. For a long time I have been in denial about what I enjoy and who I am personally and sexually. For a long time, I've dreamed about piercings and wondered if they highlight sensations or actually deadened the senses. I have always wanted to have a PA and at least one nipple pierced.
For the last year, I have become involved with a lover who knew that I
was considering being pierced. We often talked about him piercing me as part of a scene. Since he has a medical background, I considered it. We have ordered catalogs and talked to many different people about what piercing consisted of. The only problem was for me to make a commitment to have it done.
Finally, I decided to do it and we went in to Extremus in Kansas City.
We looked over jewlry and asked a lot of questions. To be honest, I began to feel real comfortable with the person we were talking to. He had mulitple piercings himself and was very personable. After much thought, I decided to have both of my nipples pierced.
We sellected a set of large hoops to be inserted and I asked for them to
placed rather deeply into my chest. Several people that I talked to discussed how they had rings pulled out as they were involved in a scene. The gentleman who did the piercing was professional and knew what he was doing. My partner now admits that if he had done the piercing, it would not have been as deep or as well done as what he did.
I went into the room while preparations were made for the piercing. I
was marked and great care was taken to make everything as antiseptic as possible. It was decided that I would have my right nipple pierced first.
As the forcepts were applied, I was surprised by how they didn't hurt. My bigest fear was dealing with the clamps but they were relatively painless.
When the needle was inserted however, it was all I could do to hold still.
The needle went in and I felt every nerve in my breast light up. There was some bleeding but it didn't last for long. I did have to wait for about 30 minutes to work up my resolve to have the other one done.
I knew that if I didn't have both of them done, I would regret it. As
much as it hurt, I liked how the piercing adorned my body and wanted the other one to be as symetric as possible. So I agreed to having the second one done as well. Again, when the clamp was applied, it was painless but the second piercing hurt three times more than the first. The person doing the piercing said that this was because my endorphines had dropped from the first piercing. Regardless, I nearly went through the roof when the peircing was done.
My lover was there by my side all of the time and held me after the
piercing was complete. Once again, the gentleman who did my peircing was great. He understood the situation and was great to work with. Out of all piercings, he said the nipples have the most pain because of the nerves.
It has now been over a month and the piercings are still healing very
well. I have had no complications and have been taking care of them per the instructions given. My nipples are much more sensitive and the slightest touch is very erotic and soothing. The rings constantly remind me of my sexuality and are always present. They are symbolic of my relationship with my partner and bring much pleasure. It will still be awhile before we do any heavy play with them, but for now they give great pleasure and are healing nicely.
Return to nipple piercing
submitted by: Anonymous
on: 01 Jan. 1997
in Nipple Piercing
Artist: +
Studio: +
Location: +


text:
home > archive > 2001 > this article
Michigan's diversity defense
By Jay Bergman
On March 29, 2001, after a federal district judge in Detroit declared unconstitutional the use of racial preferences in admissions to the law school of the University of Michigan, Lee Bollinger, the President of the University, decried the court's decision as "an American tragedy."
It is a far greater tragedy that the President of the University of Michigan advocates racial discrimination in the evaluation of applicants to the law school and to every other division of the university.
One can infer from Bollinger's support for racial preferences that he actually believes that white and Asian-American applicants who are rejected because of their skin color are not entitled to equal protection under the law. In fact, he seems oblivious to the injury these applicants have suffered because of an external characteristic they cannot change.
Racial preferences are inherently discriminatory. For every black applicant who is admitted to universities on the basis of race, there is another applicant like the plaintiff in the case, Barbara Grutter, who is white, who is rejected on the basis of race.
Racial preferences hurt people. Sometimes they hurt people badly.
Bollinger and nearly every other university president around the country defend racial preferences on the grounds that they are necessary to achieve "diversity," which, in the absence of credible evidence, they claim enhances student learning. But these same university presidents don't give preference in either student admissions or faculty hiring to applicants who are conservative or Republican, both of which are woefully underrepresented on college campuses. Surely their presence in numbers approximating their percentage of the general population would diversify the intellectual climate at universities far more than the recruitment of students who are told on their arrival on campus that American society is irredeemably racist and sexist and that those of them who are white are oppressors of those who are black.
The dirty secret in academia is that advocates of "diversity" really don't want intellectual diversity at all. Instead, they seek a student body and faculty that are racially heterogeneous but on political issues believe the same things, including and especially that racial preferences and racial diversity are socially useful and morally just.
By itself, racial diversity does not create diversity of opinion. Contrary to what the mavens of diversity assume, black Americans do not think the same things, nor do they think what they think because of their race. There is no distinctively "black" perspective on Darwinian evolution, the origins of the universe, euthanasia, animal-rights, capital punishment, global warming, and other issues discussed in universities. Nor is there any uniformly or uniquely black position on preferences themselves. In California fully one-fourth of the black electorate there voted to ban them in 1996.
Given the undeniable cost that Bollinger's fraudulent "diversity" exacts on white and Asian-American applicants to his university who are rejected because of their race, one wonders why, in the name of fairness, Bollinger hasn't resigned from his position as President so that the University can replace him with a member of an "underrepresented" minority.
Shouldn't there be "diversity" in the Presidency of the University of Michigan as well as in its faculty and student body?
Perhaps it is churlish to expect academics, and university presidents in particular, to practice what they preach. But it would be refreshing if at least a few had the courage and integrity to endure the hardships they so blithely inflict on others.
Regrettably, these university presidents and their allies in the media and elsewhere may succeed in postponing the day when racial preferences are finally gone.
In the end, however, racial preferences will be abolished. Racial preferences contradict the plain language of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. They are contrary to fundamental concepts of fairness and justice that have been an integral part of Western Civilization since the Enlightenment. The American people disapprove of them overwhelmingly.
Eventually, America will redeem the noble vision of the original civil rights movement as a place where everyone enjoys the dignity to which all human beings are entitled, where individuals are judged without regard to their race and ethnicity, and where a person's uniqueness is acknowledged as having nothing to do with his membership in any larger collective entity or group.
No amount of posturing about the benefits of "diversity" can prevent this.
Mr. Bergman is a professor of history at Central Connecticut State University. Readers may e-mail him at firstname.lastname@example.com. © 2001 by FrontPageMagazine.com
Other related articles: (open in a new window)
© 1996-2020, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.


text:
Winterhawks edge London to advance to Memorial Cup final
SASKATOON — The two top-ranked teams are headed to the 2013 MasterCard Memorial Cup final.
The Western Hockey League champion Portland Winterhawks, ranked No. 2 in the Canadian Hockey League, will play the No. 1 seed Halifax Mooseheads from the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League Sunday.
The Winterhawks advance following a 2-1 victory over the Ontario Hockey League champion London Knights before an announced crowd of 9,161 fans at the Credit Union Centre in Saskatoon.
Ty Rattie scored the game-winner at 8:32 of the third period, snapping a shot that found the top corner on goalie Jake Patterson's blocker side.
London scored first, on the power play at 12:43 of the opening period. Max Domi whiffed on his first attempt and then connected on his second crack to beat goalie Mac Carruth. It was Domi's first goal of the tournament.
The Winterhawks answered at 14:51. Tyler Wotherspoon was credited with the goal as the puck trickled by Patterson.
The teams played to a scoreless first period in which London held a 14-9 edge in shots.
No penalty was called until 11:58 of the second period when Brendan Leipsic was hauled off for checking from behind.
Portland did not have a power play until 2:58 into the third.
London scored on its lone power play. Portland was 0-for-1.
Shots on net were 35-34 for the Knights.
The Knights pulled their goalie for an extra attacker but, despite a handful of chances, could not find the equalizer.
Halifax posted a 58-6-3-1 record, while Portland was 57-12-1-2 in the WHL this season.
"It's going to be a hard-fought game," Mooseheads goalie Zach Fucale said Friday. "We're going to have to commit ourselves defensively as well. We're going to have to put together our best 60 minutes to come out with the win."
© Copyright (c) Postmedia Network Inc.


text:
CruzHomes necesitaba un nuevo diseño de página web y lanzó un concurso de diseño en 99designs.
Un ganador ha sido elegido entre 111 diseños de 35 diseñadores freelance.
Cruz Custom Homes
We are starting a new custom luxury home builder focusing on infill's in the trendy areas of Calgary. Homes range from 750,000 to about 1,500,000 in range. We do build on average 4-6 spec homes a year and also have the ability for custom homes. Our homes feature high end finishing, custom woodwork, granite, heat bathroom floors, etc.
Our average consumer is younger professionals 33-40 or older couples 50+. We do 95% of our work in the communities surrounding the downtown core and most of our customer work downtown or do not enjoy living in the suburbs.
Looking for something clean, easy to navigate that should showcase design, quality and luxury. The site will need a few tabs or links
About Us
Current Projects
Past project
Content of the site is still being finalized. We are looking for an overall feel and flow to the site


text:
- Track Order
- Shipping flat rate of only $9.99
CHECKOUT 0 Items $0.00
... loading ...
Australia's BIGGEST Weddings & Party Sale STARTS NOW! Hurry, while stock lasts! >Shop Now
Deep Lime Green Latex Party Balloons (Pack of 25)
Our Price $4.99 Normally: $12.75 (Save 61%)
Have you checked out our personalised wedding & party supplies? Make it special with the gorgeous customised invitations, decorations & favours. Shop here.
Deep Lime Green Latex Balloons 30cm Pack of 25


text:
A blessed Lent to all!
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
So I'm Catholic-ish. Somewhere between Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox. A limbo of sorts.Hope that helps.
The biggest hurdle I would ever have in converting is the fact that the Orthodox are much less "dogmatic" about many areas of the faith than are Catholics. Is this legalism? In a way, yes. But I find the less structured aspects of Orthodoxy personally disturbing.
But the Conciliar Catholic Church also has many disturbing aspects since it seems that nothing is absolute anymore. Since I attend Mass at a so-called "independent" Catholic chapel, I have to question under what jursidiction I am under. For the traditional Catholic, these are confusing times.
What is a traditional Catholic, do you think? I was born a post-Vatican II baby, so the whole Latin Mass thing I do not really understood too well.
Depends on the person. Some believe a traditional RC is someone who attends a Latin Mass, while others will say a traditional RC is someone who disagrees with or even condemns Vatican II. And of course, there is a whole area in between that. Some see them as a natural part of the RCC, others view al traditionalists as schismatics.I was born post-Vatican II too, but besides when I went to a N.O. Italian mass with family, I would always try to go to a Latin mass.
Page created in 0.157 seconds with 25 queries.


text:
Create a quick profile, add photos and be as detailed as possible on who you are looking to hookup with.
Use our advanced search tool to find members near you who are interested in NSA fun!
Show interest in the members you like, start chatting, and then meet for some NSA fun.
Never miss a message even if at work. xTonight has an advanced mobile and tablet interface that makes it easy to stay connected with your matches so you can plan your hookup even while on the road.


text:
Boxing's inconsistent drug policies have thus far deprived us of the fight everyone wants. But a German TV station has taken the initiative and mandated that all of its fights will use the strictest testing standards. Could this work here?
ARD, Germany's public television network, signed a five year deal with Sauerland Boxing, one of the largest promoters in the country. As part of the deal, all fighters will undergo Olympic style drug testing before and after every bout. It's a brilliantly simple concept: boxing can't survive without someone broadcasting the fights, so the media can dictate a standard the sport would never impose on itself.
Unfortunately, it would never fly here. Never mind that nationwide standards are impossible to enforce across the board, when every state has its own boxing commission. The labyrinthine tangle of contracts among fighters, promoters and networks ensures that Pacquiao and Mayweather are going to have to come to a compromise on their own.
First off, it's not so simple as a promoter having a contract with a TV network, as it is in Germany. Sure, Top Rank had weekly fights on ESPN for so long, and sure, Bob Arum does most of his big deals with HBO; but those deals were never exclusive. The contracts are most often for single matches. Last night's fight was on HBO PPV, but if HBO instituted a drug testing standard, there's nothing to stop Arum from taking his business elsewhere.
That second problem is the most intractable. ARD is a public station, with a nationwide monopoly. Our television doesn't work that way. Most fights are on Showtime and HBO, private companies. They're not beholden to any common good, and they're in direct competition with one another.
Let's say HBO did require Olympic drug testing for its fighters. And let's say, for whatever reason, Manny Pacquiao balked. Showtime would swoop in, offering the same deal minus the stringent testing standards, and HBO gets nothing. That's not a sound business decision, and HBO would never do it.
It's the blessing and curse of the free market. The people want their megafights more than they want to be sure their boxers are clean. If one outlet can't promise that, another will. TV can't force reform, and boxing won't. Nothing will change until public opinion demands Olympic testing, and the laws themselves are changed.
German TV, promoter lead way for a new era in drug testing for boxing [NYDN]


text:
Go to Google Scholar (http:/
Go to Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/) and click on the wheel symbol/ settings link in the top right corner of the page. Scroll down to the bottom of the Settings page to Bibliography Manager and use the drop down menu to Show links to import citations into EndNote. Click on the Save button (bottom of page).
Now whenever you do a search, you will see under each search result a link that says Import into EndNote. Click on this link and select Open or Open with EndNote from the File Download window. EndNote will open and you will be asked to choose a reference library to import the reference into.
Macintosh users are strongly recommended to use Firefox as your browser for this process. You may have problems if you use Safari or Internet Explorer.


text:
The caller threatened unspecified consequences if Bahari continued to speak out on behalf of his imprisoned colleagues. Bahari, who also serves as a consultant to a campaign calling for the release of imprisoned Iranian journalists and writers, has made numerous statements and appearances advocating for the many Iranian journalists who remain imprisoned and continue to face baseless criminal charges.
"Tell Maziar that he shouldn't think we don't have access to him because he is not in Iran," said the male caller, who did not identify himself by name. "The situation is getting dangerous now. Anything can happen without advance notice."
CPJ denounced the threat. "The Iranian authorities continue to resort to harassment and violence to silence critical voices, as evidenced by this latest threat made against our colleague Maziar Bahari," said CPJ Executive Director, Joel Simon. "We call on Tehran to abandon its intimidation tactics against critical journalists."
Bahari told CPJ that this is the first time such threats have been expressed to family members. He said that he had previously been contacted through intermediaries in an effort to convince him to keep quiet. He also stated that during his incarceration, he was told that the Revolutionary Guard has "foreign branches that can bring you back in a bag."
Bahari added that these threats "just show that the regime is insecure and doesn't want a mirror held up to its face. These tactics are not only futile, but ultimately counterproductive. The regime has to reverse course and have a dialogue with its critics."


text:
Open Acres
Weekly Ad >>
Selected 7-8 oz. Chunks or Shreds
Find the perfect mix of quality and convenience!
Find the best local produce at peak freshness!
Inspire your kitchen creativity with our delicious recipes!
Sign up to receive weekly ad notifications & special coupons!
Bi-Rite Supermarkets proudly serve their communities across northern Ohio. You'll get fresh local produce and quality meat – plus a convenient deli and bakery. We look forward to providing you and your family quality, affordable products
Looking for Sapell's? They've moved to a new site at www.sapells.com!
©2012-2020 Bi-Rite Supermarkets. All rights reserved.
Powered by: SpartanNash Digital Services
Use the search option below to locate a store near you.
4127 East 131st Street, Cleveland, OH 44105
1314 West 117th Street, Lakewood, OH 44107
12901 Shaw Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44108


text:
We use own and third party cookies to improve the browsing experience, collect statistical data and offer contents adjusted to user's interests.
When continuing browsing accept our Cookies Policy.
Choose the perfect gift from among our recommendations, buy it and receive it via e-mail. You can also design your own personalised gift token, choosing what you want from our services in order to create the ideal gift set, and request it by phoning +34 983 600 816. It will be sent via e-mail or normal post to the address indicated by you.
You can combinate all gift vouchers with meals, dinners, romantic or family stays, winery visits, etc. at any of our thermal hotels.
More than 100 different experiences. A very safe bet!


text:
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2012, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Unrestricted free agent forward Josh Howard has sincere interest in re-signing with the Jazz, a league source told The Salt Lake Tribune on Sunday.
Utah and seven other teams have expressed initial interest in Howard, the source said.
Yahoo! Sports reported Saturday that Dallas, Boston, San Antonio, New Jersey, the Jazz and the Los Angeles Lakers have interest in Howard.
The 32-year-old Howard played 43 games (18 starts) for Utah in 2011-12. He averaged 8.7 points and 3.7 rebounds in 23 minutes, shooting 39.9 percent from the floor and 77.3 percent from the free-throw line.
The nine-year veteran cracked the Jazz's starting lineup March 5, then returned from arthroscopic left knee surgery to start for Utah during a first-round playoff series against San Antonio.
After proving himself with the Jazz last season, Howard will seek a multiyear deal in a market that's already been inflated by big-money offers to free agents such as Roy Hibbert and Gerald Wallace.
Utah remains a strong option for Howard, though. He feels loyal to the Jazz after they stood by him in 2011-12, and negotiations between the sides are expected to begin later today.
- Two agents with clients on the 2011-12 Jazz recently told The Tribune they're open to a sign-and-trade if their players don't re-sign with Utah this summer.
- Jazz forward Paul Millsap is expected to seek a new contract worth as much or more than the four-year, $40 million deal Wallace has reportedly agreed to.
Utah General Manager Kevin O'Connor declined comment earlier this week when asked how the Jazz plan to handle Millsap's desire for an extension.
- The Jazz's recent addition of veteran Mo Williams and the fact Utah has four proven point guards on its roster has left some agents wondering what the Jazz's long-term plan and vision is.
While all felt the addition of Williams was an upgrade, they also believe Utah likely has another major move to make before its roster is finalized.
In addition, several agents wondered how the Jazz who are over the salary cap but below the luxury tax plan to use Gordon Hayward in the future. The talented 22-year-old has yet to be cemented at either shooting guard or small forward and bounced between both positions last season. With the Jazz initially targeting the wing position during free agency and having the full $5 million mid-level exception at their disposal, Hayward's future long-term position could sway or deter potential free agent signings.
Brian T. Smith
Twitter: @tribjazz


text:
Now showing items 1-10 of 14
Word⇔initial and word⇔final ngram frequencies
(Journal of Literacy Research, 1978-01-01)
Every word-initial and word-final letter cluster, or ngram, that occurred in 30 or more different words in one million words of running text is listed along with the number of different words and the total number of words ...
A simple method for producing figures for publication
(Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 1976)
The subjective estimation of relative syllable frequency
(Perception & Psychophysics, 1974-01-01)
Ss are able to judge the relative frequency of occurrence in English of nonmorphemic syllables independent of phoneme frequency. The results support a theory of speech perception based on the syllable as a unit as opposed ...
On measuring fuzziness: a comment on "A fuzzy set approach to modifiers and vagueness in natural language".
(Journal of experimental psychology. General, 1979-12)
Hersh and Caramazza's application of fuzzy set theory to vagueness in natural language is criticized for including in their measures of fuzziness response variability due to experimental and statistical procedures.
A halo visual illusion.
(Perception, 1977-01)
A visual illusion consisting of transparent halos extending beyond the boundaries of rotating discs is reported. The effect can be obtained by rotating a variety of black-and-white discs at moderate speeds. It is not due ...
A unit analysis of prose memory
(Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1978-01-01)
Four stories were divided into function word units. These units were assigned dependent variable values determined by the scoring of subjects' recalls and independent variable values determined by measures of gist, imagery, ...
Applying psychometric methods in linguistic research: Some recent advances
(Linguistics, 1976-01-01)
Within word structure in the tip-of-the-tongue phenomenon
(Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1975-01-01)
Definitions of four rare words were read to 259 undergradua tes. Those subjects who were in the tip-of-the-tongue (TOT) state recorded all the letters they knew. The within-word structure of the resulting 101 partial recalls ...
A simple design for an impossible triangle.
(Perception, 1979-01)
Frequency of occurrence as a psychophysical continuum: Weber's fraction, Ekman's fraction, range effects, and the phi-gamma hypothesis
(Perception & Psychophysics, 1976-09-01)
Using the continuum of frequency of occurrence of words in English, it was found that: (1) errors in judgment are distributed lognormally rather than normally, and therefore the standard method of calculating Weber's fraction ...