text:
Posts Tagged As: Wolf v Walker
August 27th, 2014
Yesterday, a three judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in two marriage cases, Wisconsin's Wolf v. Walker and Indiana's Baskin v. Bogan. Now we've all enjoyed Dustin Lance Black's rendering of the 2009 Prop 8 trials for his as-yet unproduced play "8," but the audio of these two cases are, in my view, far more entertaining than anything that any Hollywood screenwriter can conjure. Rob and Timothy have recommended that you listen to them both with and without Vicodin. I think this one is equally entertaining whatever your medicinal state may be.
You'll need about a half-hour for each case to hear the good parts, and that's if you skip all of the boring parts. But in case you don't have the time to spare — and you really should try to make the time to do it — I've transcribed the good parts. So let's do this thing Buzzfeed listicle style.
1. These three judges are awesome!
The Seventh Circuit has an unusual practice: they don't announce the judge's name until the day of oral arguments. I can imagine this having one important function, in that it prevents the litigants from tailoring their preparations for what they believe the particular judges will be interested in. For the marriage ban proponents, that apparently meant that if they couldn't tailor their preparations, they just wouldn't bother to prepare at all. You'll see why later. But first, let's meet the judges, who were announced just a half hour before the case began.
Judge Ann Claire Williams, is a Clinton-appointee, a former U.S. Assistant Attorney from Chicago, and a former Detroit elementary school teacher. She was appointed to the Federal Bench in 1985 by President Ronald Reagan, and unanimously confirmed by the Senate when she was nominated to the Seventh Circuit in 1999.
Judge David Hamilton was nominated for the Federal bench by Clinton in 1994. He drew the ire of social conservatives in 2005 when he ruled that the Indiana legislature violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment when it opened its sessions with prayers asking for conversion to the Christian faith or representing Christianity as the only true religion. So when Obama nominated him to the Seventh Circuit, several Senators threatened a filibuster. The Senate voted 70-29 to end the filibuster (Democrats and Independents held a 60-vote supermajority by then), and approved his nomination 59-39.
Judge Richard Posner was nominated by Ronald Reagan to the Seventh Circuit in 1981. An economist and respected legal scholar, he worked with Robert Bork — yes, that Robert Bork — to help shape anti-trust policy changes in the 1970s. The New York Times called him "one of the most important antitrust scholars of the past half-century." He is also on record as thinking that privacy arguments are over-stated. "I'm exaggerating a little, but I think privacy is primarily wanted by people because they want to conceal information to fool others." As Timothy already mentioned, "Not only is he the most cited legal scholar of the 20th century, but he was the judge that sided in favor of anti-gay students in one of the t-shirt wars." You might think he'd be the troublemaker for marriage equality supporters. He wasn't. In fact, he was the star of this entire show.
2. You read that right: the conservative, anti-gay-student backing, Bork-working-with judge was the star of the show.
This became obvious just eight seconds into Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher's presentation, when Judge Posner interrupted him to cite some statistics on the number of children who were adopted in the United States:
Posner: This figure I gave, about 250,000, is the number of children who have been adopted by homosexuals, including the three thousand plus in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better for these adopted children if their same-sex parents were married?
Fisher: Whether it would or not ….
Posner: Well answer my question.
Fisher: I don't know the answer….
Posner: Well you don't know the answer. Let's think about it the answer. Think back to when you were six. Suppose you come home, suppose you've been adopted by same-sex parents. You come home one day from school. And you say, you know all the other kids in my class, they have a mom and a dad. I just have two dads or two moms. And, you know, what's that about? And suppose the parents say, well you know, in our society an adult can marry a person of the opposite sex or a person of the same sex. But you know it's marriage in both cases, so your classmates kids, their parents are married, your parents are married so there's nothing to worry about.
Now contrast that with a situation where the parents say to the child, well you know, we're your parents, but we're not allowed to be married. So it's just a difference. Now which do you think is better for the psychological health or the welfare of this child? To have the married same-sex couple, or the unmarried?
Fisher: Your honor, I don't feel like it's my job to answer that question. That is for the Indiana legislature….
Posner: Well no, I'm just asking you, do you have an opinion…
Fisher: No.
Posner: …It's a matter of indifference to you.
3. If you're going to make it about the children, then let's really make it about the children.
And for the next twenty minutes, Judges Williams, Hamilton, and, especially, Posner did just that:
Posner: Now it turns out of course that Indiana provides, and the Federal government is dragged along with it, very substantial, tangible benefits to a married couple. Don't the children of a married couple, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, don't they benefit? The married parents are better off. They have all sorts of benefits — survivor benefits, spousal security, tax exempt… all sorts of things in federal and state. Doesn't that make the kids better off?
Fisher: Undoubtedly, but … may I continue?
Posner: Undoubtedly! Now you're saying … I'm going to interrupt you, so you just have to be patient. But I'm not going to limit your time. You have plenty of time. You are concerned with the unfortunate children produced by accidental births. I'm saying many of these are adopted by same-sex couples, and these children would be better off if their parents can marry. No? Isn't that obvious?
Fisher: Well… If we're going to link marriage rights to parental rights, that does not limit it to two people. We have instances where there are more than two recognized parents. This is a possibility. So what we're looking at here is….
Posner: Wait. What? Someone has three parents? Five parents?
Fisher: Yes. It happens. We cite cases in our briefs where three people with parental rights have been recognized. So if parental rights…
Posner: This is worrying you or what?
Fisher: I'm sorry?
Posner: This is worrying you?
Fisher: Yes! It's worrying me.
Posner: The three parents? (chuckles)
4. The "We-need-to-ban-gay-marriage-because-straight-people-are-irresponsible-sex-crazed-maniacs" argument doesn't work very well:
Perhaps sensing that the polygamy threat isn't going to go very well, Fisher tries to pivot to what he thought would be a stronger argument:
Fisher: …If parental rights trigger marriage rights that in circumstances where more than two people have parental rights, they would also have marriage rights among themselves. That's the logic of the view that parental rights and marriage rights follow hand in hand. And the position that we're making, pointing out here, is that this is really about looking at the… issue of what happens… how do we deal with the consequences of heterosexual intercourse which don't occur with respect to same-sex couples, the consequence being babies …
Hamilton: … But I'd like to follow up on this question about intent, of unintended pregnancies. You said in your brief that "marriage attracts and regulates couples whose sexual conduct may create children in order to ameliorate the burden society ultimately bears when unintended children are not properly cared for." My question is why is that interest limited to unintended children?
Fisher: Well, it's only, I think, with respect to where does the legislature identify the issue. In other words…
Hamilton: Well, when we talk about intended pregnancies, when the CDC looks at that — they have ways of doing surveys and so on in asking, typically, the mother whether their pregnancy was intended at the time of conception. That may be a fleeting intent. I would think that the state's interest is equal regardless of whether the children are intended or unintended.
Fisher: I think we have to look at it at the standpoint of, again, if we don't have marriage, what is the issue we're dealing with. We're dealing with widespread heterosexual activity that creates babies. There has to be a mechanism to deal with that. The mechanism is, let's channel potentially procreative couples into relationships that are durable and longstanding and will remain together for the sake of the child. Now if it could be assumed that all parents would intentionally procreate, intentionally go about the process of becoming parents with that specific idea in mind and otherwise…
Hamilton: People change their minds… I mean, the intent at the time of conception is fleeting and changeable and the issues are the same, the issues of support, the kinds of issues that you've developed, are the same regardless of whether the child was intended or not.
Fisher: I think the issue here is to deal with what may be a fleeting moment of passion that leads to a child that nobody contemplated, and how do we deal with that? And the idea with marriage is to channel that behavior into a specific….
Posner: Do you criminalize fornication?
Fisher: I'm sorry, what?
Posner: Do you criminalize fornication?
Fisher: No, no longer.
Posner: Would you like to?
Fisher: I don't…. No! It's not an issue here. The Legislature hasn't done this in a long time….
Posner: Well it sounds like a way of dealing with these unintended childbirths.
5. When you ask why kids of gay parents should be worse off than kids of straight parents, they have no answer.
Of course, we've always known that:
Posner: So why do you prefer heterosexual adoption over homosexual adoption?
Fisher: We don't.
Williams: Well of course you do! You give all sorts of benefits to the heterosexual adoptive parents and no benefits to the homosexual adoptive parents. You must have a reason for that.
Fisher: Well, the benefits that you are talking about are not triggered based on sexuality. They're based, of course, on marital status.
Williams: Yes, well come on now! You're going in circles! The question is, why do you want the children who are adopted by same-sex couples, of whom there are a couple hundred thousand, why do you want them to be worse off because they don't have these financial and psychological benefits to having married parents?
Fisher: It's not a matter of wanting them to be worse off. It's a matter of what is the starting point for the marriage….
Posner: Why don't you want them to be as well off as children…. You allow the homosexual couples to adopt. Why don't you want their children to have the same advantages as children adopted by heterosexual couples?
Fisher: The question is, what can we do to nudge heterosexual couples who may produce children unintentionally, to plan for this, to plan for the consequences and to appreciate the consequences of sexual behavior. Those consequences don't arise with same-sex couples. It's not in the context of adoption that marriage is….
Posner: But you're not answering my question! You've got millions of adopted children. And a lot of them, 200,000 or more, are adopted by same-sex couples. Why don't you want their children to be as well off as the adopted children of heterosexual couples?
Fisher: Of course we do. But may I ….
Posner: … because their parents happen to be homosexuals?
After about another minute of this:
Williams: I don't think you're going to answer Judge Posner's questions. (Laughter)
6. Marriage is actually a kind of an affirmative-action program to help level the playing field for straight couples because they're hopelessly irresponsible when compared than gay couples.
Judge Williams tries again after the laughter dies down.
Williams: …So let me see if I can put it a little bit differently. Wouldn't you agree that marriage is not just about having having children but about raising children? Do you agree there are two components?
Fisher: Oh, yes.
Williams: Okay. Then are you saying same-sex couples cannot successfully raise children?
Fisher: Absolutely not.
Williams: Well if Indiana's laws are about successfully raising children, and you agree that same-sex couples can successfully raise children, why shouldn't the ban be lifted as to them?
Fisher: I think the assumption is that with opposite-sex couples, there is very little thought given during the sexual act sometimes to whether babies may be a consequence.
Williams: So because gay and homosexual couples actually choose to be parents, choose to take on that obligation, that difference of choice … you're setting that up differently than an accidental … So I mean here are people who actually want to have children, know they want to have children, it is not accidental, they make that committment to raise the children, I just don't get that. That is another aspect of what Judge Posner is raising.
Fisher: And I think the working assumption there, your honor, is that in that circumstance the state doesn't need to nudge those couples to stay together. There already is that working understanding. With opposite sex couples, it may be a fleeting moment of passion which leads to a child. And that's what we're trying to address.
7. Right. Posner's still not buying it.
Posner: Sure. But you're forgetting everything else. Look, there are 400,000 kids in foster care in the United States. Ten thousand in Indiana. Isn't there a strong interest in trying to get them adopted?
Fisher: Of course.
Posner: Isn't it much better for the kids to be adopted?
Fisher: Of course.
Posner: Yes, but if you allow same-sex marriage, you're going to have more adopters, right?
Fisher: I don't know that that's true.
Posner: Well it's much cheaper to adopt a child if you're married because you get all these benefits from the state and the federal government. You should be wanting to enlist people as adopters so you can minimize… That is pathetic — ten thousand foster care children in Indiana. Don't you want to get them adopted?
Fisher: Of course, but now you're talking about…
Posner: What are you doing to get them adopted?
Fisher: You're talking about prioritizing competing issues. And that's the legislature's job. … The legislature has an understanding of marriage that it has decided to preserve, and it's based on…
Posner: But it's arbitrary. It doesn't serve any public… You allow all these sterile people to get married. Why are you doing that if you're so concerned procreation, why do you let them get married?
8. If you link to a Buzzfeed-style listicle from inside a Buzzfeed-style listicle, will the universe double back onto itself and collapse into an infinitesimally small singularity?
Let's try it and see: Seven moments that will make you want to gay-marry Judge Richard Posner.
9. Indiana's case didn't go well. Wisconsin's was worse.
Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Timothy Samuelson started off on the wrong foot when he didn't know the answer to four of the judges' first five questions:
Posner: Why doesn't Wisconsin permit adoption by same-sex couples?
Samuelson: Respectfully, your honor, that's a question for the legislature. I don't have a …
Posner: You have no idea, okay.
Samuelson: I do know that Wisconsin recognizes both couples in a same-sex relationship to petition the court to be recognized as a de-facto parent.
Posner: What's a de-facto parent?
Samuelson: someone who would have the same or similar responsibilities and obligations as a parent. And there's a case from 1995 that the Wisconsin Supreme Court…
Hamilton: Does that open up the possibility that a child may have three parents?
Samuelson: I don't know. I think what may trigger that circumstance involving three parents would be the presumption of paternity, and that's something that we've discussed in our papers.
Hamilton: I was thinking more of, for example, a child of an opposite-sex couple who divorced, on of the members then joins a new partner of the same sex who then is recognized as a de facto parent. You have three parents.
Samuelson: I don't know the answer to that, but based on the Holtzman (?) case, the '95 Wisconsin Supreme Court case, the court discussed equity, recognizing that de-facto parent. So there is the potential for that. I just can't answer that. That would be a question for the courts.
Williams: Let me get back to this de-facto parent. So do all the rights and benefits accrue to that child from its de facto parent in terms of inheritance rights and all the other rights?
Samuelson: I don't know the answer to that question, and frankly I haven't looked into that. However, those rights can be subject to contract rights. Parties can petition the court for those types of recognitions, but I can't say that, to your honor, whether or not…
10. Rational basis! What's the Rational Basis?
One of the tenets of constitutional law is that if you're going to have a law, you have to have a halfway decent reason for it. So, for example, why does Wisconsin make it so hard for gay people to adopt?
Posner: Why are those, why are all those obstacles strewn in the path of these people?
Samuelson: That's a legislative decision…
Posner: You mean, you can't think of any reason for it?
Samuelson: Well, the statute is written towards the general rule, not the exception. The general rule is for opposite-sex couples.
Posner: Why is that?
Samuelson: Because that is what the legislature has said.
Posner: Why? Does it have a reason? It doesn't need a reason? What?
Samuelson: There are several reasons. I think tradition is one of the reasons.
11. Tradition is not a good reason.
Posner: Well how can tradition be a reason for anything? I don't get that. That's, again, the Loving case, right? The tradition of forbidding interracial marriage went back to colonial times. It's two hundred years old by the time Loving came along…
Samuelson: I think Loving was a deviation from the common law rather than the codifying….
Posner: (Scoffs)
Hamilton: (Incredulous) What?
Posner: (Scoffs again.) What's he trying? Look, interracial marriage had been forbidden in the colonies and in many, many states, not just southern but western for literally… well… more than a hundred years. So why wasn't that a tradition?
Samuelson: It's distinguishable. It's a different tradition…
Posner: Well of course it's a different tradition! So in other words, tradition per se is not a ground for, you know, continuing, "we've been doing this stupid thing for a hundred years, a thousand years, we'll keep doing it because it's tradition." You wouldn't make that argument.
Samuelson: We're not making that argument.
Posner: Don't you have to have some empirical or some practical or common sense basis for barring these marriages? I didn't get anything out of your brief that sounded like a reason for doing this.
Samuelson: Our position is tradition is based on experience, that's collective experience…
Posner: But Loving, tradition, tradition, for hundreds of years, no interracial marriage. They'd make the same arguments you would make. It's tradition. We don't want to change it because we don't know what'll happen, right? Change a tradition? It's terrible! What if men stopped shaking hands, right? It'd be the end of the nation.
12. The judges appear to have already descided that marriage equality as an equal protection issue is a no-brainer.
That became obvious when they were quizzing marriage equality supporters in the Indiana case after having eviscerated Fisher. It also appeared to be a foregone conclusion here.
Williams: And see, I think Loving threw out this positive/negative distinction of the Fourteenth Amendment that you try to rest on because … I just don't see how you get around Loving because I think that killed that argument you're making.
Samuelson: But Loving is primarily an equal protection case. …
Posner: This is an equal protection case.
Hamilton: Sure, but it has the last paragraph that is substantive due process all the way, right?
Williams: Right. In the very last paragraph…
Hamilton: Should we ignore that?
13. Deference to the democratic process isn't a good reason either.
Posner asked Samuelson if he had any other reasons for Wisconsin's marriage ban, besides tradition:
Samuelson: Well, deference to the democratic process. And one of the reasons that…
Posner: Well that argument doesn't get you very far. You're really saying there shouldn't be any constitutional invalidation ever of a state or federal statute because that's anti-democratic.
Samuelson: But, we're not saying that…
Posner: What would be an example of a statute passed by a democratically-elected legislature that you would consider…
Samuelson: If Wisconsin passed a statute or a constitutional amendment forbidding interracial marriage, that would clearly be unconstitutional.
Posner: Why? It would be the democratic choice of the people of Wisconsin.
Samuelson: Well at the very least Loving says so.
Posner: I know, but the whole question here is not whether democracy insulates. You argue that democracy insulates legislation from constitutional invalidation. Now you have to have something better. You have to say why is your law less… you accept Loving as governing precedent, why isn't this rather similar, right? People want to get married, and you don't seem to have any reasons.
14. And trotting out Edmund Burke won't work.
Samuelson: We're not making that argument. Frankly, we're agnostic. We just don't know.
Posner: What concrete, factual arguments do you have against homosexual marriage?
Samuelson: We have the Burkean argument that it's reasonable and rational…
Posner: (Scoffs) That's a tradition argument. It's feeble. Look, they could have trotted out Edmund Burke in the Loving case. What's the difference?
Samuelson: Frankly, your honor…
Posner: It was a tradition not allowing blacks and whites and other interracial couples from marrying, right? It's a tradition that got swept aside. Why is this tradition better?
Samuelson: Well, the tradition is based on experience, and it's the tradition of western culture…
15. And hate is DEFINITELY not a reason.
Posner: What experience? It's based on hate, isn't it?
Samuelson: No! Not at all, your honor!
Posner: No? You don't think there's a history of rather savage discrimination against homosexuals in the states and the rest of the world?
Samuelson: I won't disagree that historically homosexual persons have been the targets of discrimination. However, I won't agree that that's the basis for Wisconsin's laws.
Posner: …Including governmental discrimination, not just private?
16. If you want to get on a judge's good side, you should really try answering at least one of his questions.
Posner: So why are you drawing the line at marriage?
Samuelson: Um. Because that's a legislative decision.
Posner: (scoffs) But you're back to this notion that legislative decisions are sacred, right? But very time a statute is invalidated as unconstitutional, the democratic process is overridden. So give me a reason why — not that is a legislative choice — what is the rational basis for a legislative choice denying same-sex marriage? We know that these people want to get married. We think, or at least I think, it's good for the kids. So what's the offsetting harm?
Samuelson: Well, respectfully, your honor, I think that flips the inquiry on its head rather than asking what the rational basis is for the law…
Posner: Come on! What is the offsetting… These people and their children, their adoptive children, are harmed by your law. Now the question is, what is the offsetting benefit of your law? Who's being helped by it?
Samuelson: Your honor, respectfully, that turns the analysis on its head. …
Posner: (raises his voice) Look! Answer my question! Who is being helped by this law, if anyone?
17. Regnerus is toast.
Samuelson tried to suggest that society was being "helped" by prohibiting gay people from marrying. He quickly aborted that argument:
Posner: How? How is society being helped?
Samuelson: As Mr. Fisher discussed, marriage is an institution that provides for a…
Posner: (sounding frustrated) I know, but how is it being… You're not trying to force homosexuals into heterosexual marriage.
Samuelson: No we're not.
Posner: So what is the harm of allowing these people to marry? Does it hurt heterosexual marriage? Does it hurt children? What is the harm?
Samuelson: Frankly, at this point we don't know if there is a harm, if any.
18. I didn't think it was possible, but right about now I was really starting to feel sorry for Samuelson.
Throughout the proceedings, you could have heard Samuelson squirming all the way from Mars. All of those questions, one after another, questions piling upon questions, and Samuelson had no answers for any of them. After fifteen minutes of this — which surely must have seemed like an eternity to him as it did for me — Samuelson saw a light, and he hoped that it might save him:
Posner: …you can say with Loving, you can say look, you're not giving a good reason for banning interracial marriage, but it's been like two hundred years and we're afraid to overrule because we don't know what'll happen. Right? You could say that for every constitutional case. We don't know what'll happen. Let women have access to contraception? Connecticut in 1964? We don't know what's going to happen. Society may collapse. Why isn't that always a problem?
Samuelson: First off, the yellow light's on. May I respond your honor?
Posner: Yes, because the yellow light, it just tells you …
Williams: It won't save you. (courtroom erupts in laughter.)
Samuelson: It was worth a shot, wasn't it? (more laughter)
Williams: Yes.
Hamilton: It's been tried before.
Williams: It has. Nobody's ever won that one though.
19. Rational basis again! Also, Regnerus is still toast!
Williams: So you have no, you can't give us any rational… you can't give us the harm. Harm, of course, is tied into a rational basis. Some basis for the gov… some legitimate government interest has to be at stake, and you don't have any to give us.
Samuelson: I would say we defer to Mr. Fisher's arguments, but we also believe that marriage provides a mechanism for tying unplanned children to their biological parents.
Posner: Of course not! We give them up, right? There are these hundreds of thousands of people in foster care.
Samuelson: Frankly, I reject that premise.
Posner: Isn't there hundreds of thousands of children in foster care…
Samuelson: Oh, I don't doubt that.
Posner: Hundreds of thousands being brought up by same-sex couples?
Samuelson: Oh I don't doubt that either.
Posner: Do you think it's harmful to them?
Samuelson: That, I don't have a position. I don't know. I am not aware of any information or data or argument relating to it.
Posner: Really?
Samuelson: It certainly hasn't been briefed.
20. Gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry because NO FAULT DIVORCE!
If it hasn't always been obvious, it should be by now: Whenever same-sex marriage opponents are forced to step outside of their hermetically-sealed bubbles and explain rationally why they oppose marriage equality, they are utterly incapable of doing so. It just goes to show how staying in that bubble where your arguments are never challenged leaves you completely unprepared to deal effectively with other people's arguments. And so after being pressed by Posner for several minutes to try to think of just one rational basis for denying marriage equality to same-sex couples, Samuelson reached back into that bubble and dragged out something that was utterly unrelated:
Samuelson: Well, what Justice Alito said, there's no consensus among experts, philosophers, etc. An example is no fault divorce, after no fault laws were passed, divorce skyrocketed.
Posner: Look, with no fault divorce, you could certainly say look there are problems here. No fault divorce, marriage is going to be destabilized — you could speculate, right? So I'm asking you to speculate, what is it that we might want to… what would slow us down because something bad might happen because of homosexual marriage in Wisconsin. What are the possibilities?
Samuelson: The possibilities are we don't know. There could be an unanticipated consequence…
Posner: You can't guess?
Samuelson: The only example I can give is the no-fault divorce and to the extent that that had an adverse effect…
Posner: But we can see why…
Hamilton: That's fewer marriages, not more marriages, right?
Samuelson: I'm sorry your honor?
Hamilton: That's fewer marriages, not more marriages, right?
Samuelson: Yes, but the… the argument there is that it had an adverse effect on the institution of marriage.
Posner: But that was discussed when no-fault divorce was being debated.
21. Samuelson is not smarter than a fifth grader.
While Posner drilled Fisher for twenty minutes about children, he drilled Samuelson for thirty minutes trying to get Samuelson to come up with just one example of a rational basis for denying marriage to same-sex couples. It's like a teacher trying to teach student about reptiles and then asking the student to come up with one example — just one example — of a reptile. This is Posner trying to work with that child.
Posner: What are the concerns that bother people about the future of homosexual marriage? There are nineteen states have it. Suppose fifty states have it. What happens? What could happen?
Samuelson: Just like Justice Alito said, there's not consensus…
Posner: You have no idea! I'm not talking about consensus. I'm talking about… what speculatively might happen that we should worry about?
Samuelson: The only answer I can give is no-fault divorce. There might be similar…
Posner: Okay, what might be similar? Give me an example of similar?
Samuelson: It would, uh, potentially, devalue the institution of marriage and maybe fewer people would likely enter into it.
Posner: Why would fewer heterosexuals marry because homosexuals marry?
Samuelson: Uh, your honor, I haven't anticipated this. I'd be happy to brief it…
Posner: How can you brief when you don't know anything?
And the child gets an "F."
22. The policy to promote childbirths in marriage is broken.
And another argument against same-sex marriage falls:
Hamilton: If I could follow up a little bit, both you and Indiana have argued that what you really want to do is promote childbirths in marriage. Right?
Samuelson: Right.
Hamilton: And encourage parents to stick together and raise those children. Right?
Samuelson: Correct.
It's sad to hear how relieved Samuelson sounds right now. That didn't last long:
Hamilton: I assume you're familiar with how that's been working out in practice over the last twenty-five or thirty years. I checked. From, let's see, over a twenty-year period, from 1990 to 2009, the proportion of births to unmarried mothers increased by 53% in Wisconsin, by 68% in Indiana. And obviously with the Wisconsin figure it was 37% nonmarital births in 2009. If we break that down by age, race, ethnicity, and education levels, we find some groups of women who under the current state policies have more than 80%, some even more than 90% of their births outside marriage. It's a little hard to see, if that's as important as you're telling us it is as a policy goal in the state, it's a little hard to see how significant it is with the rest of the state's family policies, given those results.
Samuelson: First of all, I'm not aware of those results until just hearing them now.
Hamilton: Those are CDC… I mean, these are unimpeachable government statistics.
Samuelson: I'm not quarrelling with that.
Hamilton: Surely you're aware of the dramatic rise in births outside marriage.
Samuelson: I had not been specifically until just now. But my response to that your honor, would be under Dandridge (?), the state may rule incrementally that the state….
Hamilton: It's sort of like trying to focus on the mote in someone else's eye while ignoring the beam in one's own. If what you're really trying to do, as we're being told here, is define marriage strictly in terms of opposite-sex couples so as to channel births into marriage, it's a pretty unsuccessful policy.
23. The procreation rationale is "a reversed-engineered theory."
This is one of my favorite statements in the entire proceedings, because it captures in just one short sentence the logic behind the narrow laser-beam focused emphasis on procreation, to the exclusion of all the other reasons for why marriage is a good thing for individuals, families and society:
Hamilton: What it is, is a reverse-engineered theory to explain marriage in such a way that you avoid the logic of Lawrence and ignore a good deal of history about the institution of marriage, and provide this very narrow artificial rationale for it.
24. Wait a minute! I cry fowl! How can you do a Buzzfeed-style listical without any sponsored content?
Hi There,
My name is Jori Stevian, and I am the webmaster for drugnews.net. I happened across boxturtlebulletin.com, and after reading through your content, I would like to see if you would be open to collaborating. Since we target similar niches, I think we would be a good fit, and I would love to contribute an article or blog post.
Of course, if you are looking for something specific at this time, we would be happy to cater our submission to fit your current requirements.
Please let me know if this sounds like a beneficial opportunity for you, and I will send something over shortly.
No thanks, Jori. I get at least a half a dozen of these every day.
And so let's review:
I don't think I'm going out on a limb very much when I predict this will be a 3-0 decision in favor of marriage equality. And I am so looking forward to reading the opinion once it's released.
June 16th, 2014
Federal District Juidge Barbara Crabb, who earlier had ruled that Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriages violated the U.S. Constitution, has issued her injunction on Friday which also includes a stay.
Judge Crabb's earlier ruling was unusual in that, unlike other rulings, hers did not include an injunction compelling the state to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Instead, Judge Crabb asked the parties to submit proposed language for an injunction that would follow in a couple of weeks. The original deadline for those proposals was today,but when Dane and Milwaukee Counties decided to begin issuing marriage licenses even in the absence of an injunction, Judge Crab accelerated her timetable. By the time she issued her injunction and stay on Friday, some five out of every six Wisconsin counties were issuing licenses. Judge Crabb's injunction does order state and county officials to issue marriage licenses, but she also accompanied that order with a stay pending appeal:
After seeing the expressions of joy on the faces of so many newly wedded couples featured in media reports, I find it difficult to impose a stay on the event that is responsible for eliciting that emotion, even if the stay is only temporary. Same-sex couples have waited many years to receive equal treatment under the law, so it is understandable that they do not want to wait any longer. However, a federal district court is required to follow the guidance provided by the Supreme Court. Because I see no way to distinguish this case from Herbert, I conclude that I must stay any injunctive relief pending appeal.
The remaining question is whether the stay should include all relief, including the declaration, rather than just the injunction. Although I remain dubious that it is necessary to "stay" declaratory relief, I understand that there has been much confusion among county clerks regarding the legal effect of the declaration. To avoid further confusion among theclerks, I will issue a stay of all relief.
June 6th, 2014
It wasn't clear whether Crabb's 88-page ruling cleared the way for same-sex marriages to begin immediately, but Milwaukee and Dane county officials began issuing licenses and officiants were at the clerk's office ready to go in Dane County. Both counties were keeping clerk's office open past regular closing hours Friday.
Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen says he will seek an emergency federal court order to stop the marriages in light of clerks going ahead with marriages.
Dane County (Madison) and Milwaukee County will stay open until 9:00 tonight. Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele says he will personally pay for the overtime costs associate with keeping his courthouse open. But Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said current law is still in force:
"In light of the decision of some county clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, I will be filing emergency motions in the federal courts to stay Judge Crabb's order," he wrote. "The United States Supreme Court, after a referral from Justice Sotomayor, stayed a lower court's decision striking down Utah's ban on same-sex marriage. There is no reason to believe the Supreme Court would treat Wisconsin's ban any differently."
June 6th, 2014
Wisconsin! (PDF: 439KB/88 pages)
It is DECLARED that art. XIII, § 13 of the Wisconsin Constitution violates plaintiffs' fundamental right to marry and their right to equal protection of laws under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Any Wisconsin statutory provisions, including those in Wisconsin Statutes chapter 765, that limit marriages to a "husband" and a "wife," are unconstitutional as applied to same-sex couples.
But marriages aren't available in the Badger State just yet:
Plaintiffs may have until June 16, 2014, to submit a proposed injunction that complies with the requirement in Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)(1)(C) to "describe in reasonable detail . . . the act or acts restrained or required." In particular, plaintiffs should identify what they want each named defendant to do or be enjoined from doing. Defendants may have one week from the date plaintiffs file their proposed injunction to file an opposition. If defendants file an opposition, plaintiffs may have one week from that date to file a reply in support of their proposed injunction.
I will address defendants' pending motion to stay the injunction after the parties have had an opportunity to file materials related to the proposed injunction. If the parties wish, they may have until June 16, 2014, to supplement their materials related to that motion in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Geiger v. Kitzhaber not to grant a stay in that case.
(UPDATE: It looks like some counties aren't waiting until the 16th to begin issuing licenses. But without an injunction in place, is that legal? Any lawyers in the bunch, please weigh in with your comments.)
This ruling by Federal District Judge Barbara B. Crabb is the twentieth in a string of rulings which have all found that all or portions of several states' marriage equality bans are unconstitutional. The unanimity of these rulings since the Windsor ruling last summer is breathtaking. It's hard to image at this point, regardless of which of the dozens of appeals making their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, how that court can rule that all twenty judges from across the country were somehow reading the law wrong.
The case was brought by the ACLU on behalf of eight Wisconsin same-sex couples. Two of the couples had married out of state — one in Minnesota, and one in Canada.
Judge Crab opened her decision by delineating exactly what the case was all about. In doing so, she issued two notable shout-outs: longtime marriage equality foe Maggie Gallagher, and longtime marriage equality advocate Andrew Sullivan:
In reaching this decision, I do not mean to disparage the legislators and citizens who voted in good conscience for the marriage amendment. To decide this case in favor of plaintiffs, it is not necessary, as some have suggested, to "cast all those who cling to traditional beliefs about the nature of marriage in the role of bigots or superstitious fools," United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2717-18 (2013) (Alito, J., dissenting), or "adjudg[e] those who oppose [same-sex marriage] . . . enemies of the human race." Id. at 2709 (Scalia, J., dissenting). Rather, it is necessary to conclude only that the state may not intrude without adequate justification on certain fundamental decisions made by individuals and that, when the state does impose restrictions on these important matters, it must do so in an even-handed manner.
This case is not about whether marriages between same-sex couples are consistent or inconsistent with the teachings of a particular religion, whether such marriages are moral or immoral or whether they are something that should be encouraged or discouraged. It is not even about whether the plaintiffs in this case are as capable as opposite-sex couples of maintaining a committed and loving relationship or raising a family together. Quite simply, this case is about liberty and equality, the two cornerstones of the rights protected by the United States Constitution.
Although the parties in this case disagree about many issues, they do agree about at least one thing, which is the central role that marriage plays in American society. It is a defining rite of passage and one of the most important events in the lives of millions of people, if not the most important for some. Of course, countless government benefits are tied to marriage, as are many responsibilities, but these practical concerns are only one part of the reason that marriage is exalted as a privileged civic status. Marriage is tied to our sense of self, personal autonomy and public dignity. And perhaps more than any other endeavor, we view marriage as essential to the pursuit of happiness, one of the inalienable rights in our Declaration of Independence. Linda Waite and Maggie Gallagher, Case for Marriage 2 (Broadway Books 2000) (stating that 93% of Americans rate "having a happy marriage" as one of their most important goals, an ever higher percentage than "being in good health"). For these reasons and many others, "marriage is not merely an accumulation of benefits. It is a fundamental mark of citizenship." Andrew Sullivan, "State of the Union," New Republic (May 8, 2000). Thus, by refusing to extend marriage to the plaintiffs in this case, defendants are not only withholding benefits such as tax credits and marital property rights, but also denying equal citizenship to plaintiffs.
Judge Crabb also found one of the state's arguments for supporting the marriage ban an odd one:
What is perhaps defendants' oddest argument relies on a distinction between what defendants call "positive rights" and "negative rights." In other words, the Constitution protects the rights of individuals to be free from government interference ("negative rights"), but it does not give them a right to receive government benefits ("positive rights"). … Thus, defendants say, although the due process clause may protect the right of individuals to engage in certain intimate conduct (a "negative right"), it "does not preclude a state from choosing not to give same-sex couples the positive right to enter the legal status of civil marriage under state law.
Defendants' argument has two problems. First, the Supreme Court has held on numerous occasions that marriage is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. E.g., Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987); Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-640 (1974); Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967). Thus, even if marriage is a "positive right" as defendants understand that term, marriage stands as an exception to the general rule.
Second, even if I assume that the state would be free to abolish the institution of marriage if it wished, the fact is that Wisconsin obviously has not abolished marriage; rather, it has limited the class of people who are entitled to marry. The question in this case is not whether the state is required to issue marriage licences as a general matter, but whether it may discriminate against same-sex couples in doing so. Even in cases in which an individual does not have a substantive right to a particular benefit or privilege, once the state extends that benefit to some of its citizens, it is not free to deny the benefit to other citizens for any or no reason on the ground that a "positive right" is at issue. In fact, under the equal protection clause, "the right to equal treatment . . . is not co-extensive with any substantive rights to the benefits denied the party discriminated against." Heckler v. Mathews, 465 U.S. 728, 739, 646 (1984). Therefore, "[t]he State may not . . . selectively deny its protective services to certain disfavored minorities without violating the Equal Protection Clause." DeShaney, 489 U.S. at 197 n.3.
Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, a Republican who is seeking re-election in November, has vowed to appeal the ruling to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and will seek a stay of the ruling on the 16th. A spokesman for Gov. Scott Walker has issued a statement supporting Van Hollen's appeal.
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for "cross-gender disturbance" in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation's embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that "[Paul] Cameron's 'science' echoes Nazi Germany." What the SPLC didn"t know was Cameron doesn't just "echo" Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution's architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a "plausible idea" in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day "Love Won Out" ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To "Love Won Out"
Part 1: What's Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With "No Exceptions"
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don't miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the "Dutch Study" to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins' Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family "Research" Council.
The FBI's annual Hate Crime Statistics aren't as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.


text:
What More UK – Trading not halted by Brexit negotiations
With international sales higher than ever before, What More UK are not phased by Brexit negotiations. As the largest supplier and brand leader of plastic housewares in the UK they are leading the way with innovation and quality.
Tony Grimshaw, director of What More UK said:
"We inadvertently began making provision for Brexit, 5 years before the referendum. We looked at our export business and decided it had too much emphasis on Europe. We decided to spread our search for new retail partners into new areas such as the USA, South America, Canada, Eastern Europe and Africa. In all these areas we have had significant successes."
What more UK send their products to 72 countries worldwide and are continuing to seek word wide retail opportunities. As a member of The Made in Britain Campaign, What More UK are proud to support and promote British manufacturing.
Tony continues:
"Business is business and politics are politics. No matter which Brexit is decided, trade will continue, British products are recognised all over the world as quality. The right products of the right quality at the right price, backed up with the right service will always be accepted.
Whatever politicians decide or don't decide. It is a big world out there and our quality Wham products are ready, willing and able to fill the shelves of any retailer, no matter where in the world they are."
Over the last two years What More UK have replaced all 52 of their injection moulding machines. Ensuring they have the most up-to-date equipment on offer from Germany and Italy. A huge investment is a sign of their confidence and ability for the future.
John Monk Trading Company, one of New Zealand's largest importers of houseware and giftware have been working with What More UK for over 10 years and are confident the relationship will continue to flourish.
John Monk, owner of John Monk Trading company said:
"We like the way What More UK conduct business, with their straight up attitude and flair for developing new innovative products. We have seen this company grow and develop into a worldwide recognised brand with quality product. Made in England is a very strong selling point for us in New Zealand and our major retailer Briscoes has grasped this, the What More UK range had grown to be a category winner. Through the years we have experienced turbulent times with currency fluctuations, raw material costs, more recently Brexit uncertainty and shipping costs , however What More sales have still been maintained."
GeeTee's are independent retailer's, local to What More UK, with numerous stores in the NorthWest of England have been trading with What More UK for almost 20 years.
Jonathan Twist, managing director of GeeTee's said:
"What More UK have been our number one supplier of plastic housewares and now bakeware since we started trading with them in 1999. The Wham name and their various brands continue to be synonymous with high quality and top value, traits that we too are identified with and that our customers depend on".

subset: commoncrawl


text:
What are MIDI Files?
Edit and Convert MIDI Files
You might be surprised to know MIDI Files Backing Tracks (also referred to as MIDIfiles) contain no music at all. "M.I.D.I. (or MIDI) is short for Musical Instrument Digital Interface, a protocol developed in the 1980's to enable music electronic devices like synthesisers, drum machines, sequencing software and other digital musical devices to communicate with each other. MIDI Files are also known as backing tracks, especially among singers and musicians performing solo, in duos/trio's and even bands. Through the use of MIDI Files, music can be created in one program or app, edited in another, formatted to print sheet music, used in Karaoke and backing tracks and sent to other devices for playback.
The MIDI Standard
During the period before 1983, manufacturers incorporating MIDI in their musical devices used MIDI as an exclusive component for their devices. This occurred because in the early 1980's, a 'MIDI Standard' didn't exist. Musicians using two or more MIDI devices as part of a single composition tool were forced to purchase multiple devices by the same manufacturer. This was not an ideal situation, especially in a creative environment like music which often relies on collaboration.
Today's MIDI Standard ensures MIDI devices communicate seamlessly from one manufacturers device to another. Modern music producers, musicians, performers and stage technicians owe a debt of gratitude to visionaries Dave Smith from Sequential Circuits, Chet Wood and Ikutaru Kakehashi from the Roland Corporation. Both Dave Smith and Ikutaru Kakehashi understood the need to create a MIDI Standard where electronic music instruments from all manufactures seamlessly communicate with each other. Thankfully, the original MIDI Standard proposed by Smith, Wood and Kakehashi led to General MIDI, a definitive MIDI specification that standardised the rules to create MIDI Files.
Using MIDI files for Live Performance
Solo artists, Duo's Trios and even bands use MIDI Files. The MIDI format exposes artists to a wider variety of venues, specially those venues where room sizes are smaller and volume is a consideration. In these environments, performers can setup their gear easily, usually on compact stages or on the floor. Sound checks are often not necessary or can be done relatively quickly prior to or even during the performance. This is possible because MIDI File backing tracks are not as suspectable to room acoustics as live drums and other instruments.
Even Famous Bands Use MIDI Files
You might be surprised to know that major touring and recording bands often supplement their sound and stage functions using MIDI Files. It's not uncommon for bands to include MIDI File generated drum parts, percussion and effects, synth and keyboard sounds, orchestral and brass sections. Off stage, lighting, smoke machines, stage effects can also be controlled via MIDI in real time or by a MIDI File.
MIDI Files are created on a MIDI Sequencer
A MIDI File, sometimes referred to as MIDI Files and MIDI, does not make sound. It is a data file containing messages like note on, note off, note/length, note/pitch, pitch bend, channel volume, channel reverb and so on played or recorded digitally on a MIDI sequencer. It is the playback device that interprets and transcribes MIDI data into musical sounds.
To create a MIDI File you need an input device (MIDI keyboard or controller), a recording device/software (MIDI Sequencer) and a playback device (MIDI sound module or VST [Virtual Studio Technology] instruments). A typical MIDI input device might be MIDI keyboard, MIDI synthesiser/DAW, MIDI Guitar, a dedicated MIDI File backing track player and even wind devices like a MIDI Oboe.
MIDI Files Playback Device
MIDI Files require a dedicated playback device to achieve full sonic potential. Remember, MIDI Files do not have any sounds. The MIDI File is a data file that sends on-off and controller variant commands to a receiving device or app. It is the receiving device or app which interprets the MIDI data to generate the sounds you hear. Popular devices include the MERISH Series made by M-Live Italy, Roland Sound Canvas and Yamaha Motif among others.
Popular MIDI apps
Popular MIDI recording software include Logic, Cubase, Pro tools, Sonar, Cakewalk and GarageBand. Most MIDI keyboard synths/DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) include an internal MIDI sequencer. Devices like Yamaha MIDI Files and Roland MIDI Files are standard MIDI Files with a brand name.
A MIDI File has 16 channels. Each channel controls the playback of a instrument sound (often called a 'patch'). A typical MIDI File may look like this ('Ch' = MIDI Channel').
Ch 1 Piano
Ch 2 Bass *
Ch 3 Steel String Acoustic Guitar
Ch 4 Tenor Saxophone (Melody Guide) *
Ch 5 Vocal Synth (Harmonies Guide) *
Ch 6 Electric Guitar
Ch 7 Overdrive Guitar
Ch 8 Steel String Acoustic Guitar
Ch 9 Nylon String Acoustic Guitar
Ch 10 Drums *
Note I highlighted four MIDI channels with * . General MIDI (GM) protocol dedicates those channels for a specific purpose. Channel 2 is devoted to bass. Channel 4 is the melody guide, channel 5 for vocal harmony guide and channel 10 is the dedicated drum channel.
Think of a MIDI File as a television, only unlike a television where only one channel at a time can be viewed, you can 'hear' up to 16 channels through MIDI. There are major advantages in using a MIDI File over audio file backing tracks like MP3, WAV and CD+G files, including:
- Non destructive editing
- No sonic loss, ever
- Perpetual editing
- Can export/render to any audio format
- Perpetual life
- Compatible across all digital platforms
- Flexible, easily customised
- Small file size, typically just 40 to 70kb
- Print music score
- Unlimited transpose/time shift without affecting quality
MIDI Files are used around the world by singers, entertainers and musicians performing solo and in small/large bands as backing tracks or to add additional instrumentation to a live band.
Related Links
General MIDI
General MIDI Files
MIDI Files with scrolling lyrics
What is a MIDI File?
Blog by John Ialuna
Logic Pro X
Sequencing software for MAC
Sequencing software MAC/PC
Pro Tools
Sequencing software MAC/PC
Sequencing software PC


text:
Court Decision Stings SiriusXM
A Federal judge has ruled in favor of the Turtles in a lawsuit about royalties that may mean that the Turtles and Sirius XM are not "Happy Together". In addition, the ruling may pave the way for royalty payments to many other artists who's songs predate 1972. The copyright laws in the United States deal with royalties post 1972 and leave the issue of pre-1972 recordings up to each state. The Turtles filed their case in California.
The decision by the judge will also be ammunition in a Sound Exchange suit against SiriusXM for its exclusion of pre-1972 air plays from standard royalty payments. While this issue of pre-1972 will not really endanger the SiriusXM business model, it will carry some minor impacts to the cash position and how the company conducts its business. SiriusXM has several channels dedicated to decades that pre-date 1972. The bigger issue is that the Turtles are seeking $100 million and a class action status that could really put a dent in the cash position of the company. The ruling this week means that investors need to consider the possibility of ultimately getting an unfavorable result from the suit. Part of the ruling stated this:
"While Sirius XM's statement of the rule of statutory construction is accurate, it is inapplicable here because there is no pre-1982 (or post-1982) body of California common law denying sound recording owners the exclusive right to publicly perform their recordings. Sirius XM cannot point to a single case in which a judge considered facts implicating this right or even theorized on the right then decided that the right of public performance does not attach to ownership of sound recordings in California. The Court cannot extrapolate a common law rule regarding public performance rights in sound recordings if the facts that would prompt a court to rule on the issue have simply never been presented in a California court. In this judicial void,the rule of statutory construction requiring express statements to alter the common law does not apply because, when the legislature passed § 980(a)(2), there was no common law rule in California rejecting public performance rights in sound recording ownership…"
IV. Conclusion
For the reasons above, Flo & Eddie's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED on all
causes of action, but only so far as the claims are premised on Sirius XM's public performance
of Flo & Eddie's recordings, not its alleged reproductions.
This issue is not going to go away. Royalties have been an issue surrounding services like SiriusXM and Pandora for quite some time. In fact, until there is more clear and concise laws on the books, there will always be instances where one side or the other can assert one stance or another. With a lot of ambiguity still at play, there is potential that other artists begin trying to file their own suits in any number of states. Stay Tuned!


text:
"It seems like an alien world, but when I'm imagining where they are in the book, I'm like, 'Oh yeah, I know that curve of rock around the edge of the island.' It's interesting to think about the different forms one place can take." At Pitchfork, Phil Elverum and Brandon Stosuy talked about all kinds of things.
Of note: both this Malcolm Cowley letter on writing and Helen DeWitt's response to it in the comments.
Mark O'Connell on David Rees's book on sharpening pencils (and much more).
Scott Esposito and Benjamin Moser talked about Clarice Lispector.
Jim Guthrie: member of Human Highway, kickass songwriter, and video game soundtracker.
Follow Vol. 1 Brooklyn on Twitter, Facebook, Google + and our Tumblr.


text:
June 5, 2011
Don't want to rag on your work, but the 1-3 means that you get another event or treasure on a D6 roll of 1-3, not the number of events or treasure cards given if there is one.
It should be a third option i.e. Yes, No, 1-3 there is.
Other than that, awesome stuff!
Comment by SERogar — February 5, 2014 @ 8:29 pm
RSS feed for comments on this post.
My curriculum vitae and a wealth of other facts about me.
Handy tools for creating the various cards the game uses, dungeon, magic, event and treasure
Create your own unexpected event cards
Create your own monster event cards
Create your own treasure cards
Powered by WordPress


text:
Enter search terms
Enter search terms
Legislature Home
House of Representatives
Find Your District
Find Your District
Laws & Agency Rules
Bill Information
Agendas, Schedules, and Calendars
Legislative Committees
Coming to the Legislature
Civic Education
Legislative Agencies
Legislative Information Center
Email Updates (GovDelivery)
View All Links
Main Sections
Legislature Home
House of Representatives
Find Your District
Find Your District
Laws & Agency Rules
Bill Information
Agendas, Schedules, & Calendars
Legislative Committees
Legislative Agencies
Legislative Information Center
Email Updates (GovDelivery)
View all links
Title 296
Chapter 296-24
Section 296-24-59212
HTML has links - PDF has Authentication
Print This Page
<< 296-24-59212 >>
Agency filings affecting this section
Hydrostatic testing.
(1) You must ensure that an internal examination of cylinders and shells to be tested is made prior to the hydrostatic tests in addition to an external visual examination.
(2) You must ensure that portable fire extinguishers are hydrostatically tested whenever they show new evidence of corrosion or mechanical injury.
(3) You must ensure that hydrostatic tests are performed on extinguisher hose assemblies which are equipped with a shut-off nozzle at the discharge end of the hose. The test interval shall be the same as specified for the extinguisher on which the hose is installed.
(4) You must ensure that carbon dioxide hose assemblies with a shut-off nozzle are hydrostatically tested at 1,250 psi (8,620 kPa).
(5) You must ensure that dry chemical and dry powder hose assemblies with a shut-off nozzle are hydrostatically tested at 300 psi (2,070 kPa).
(6) Hose assemblies passing a hydrostatic test do not require any type of recording or stamping.
(7) You must ensure that hose assemblies for carbon dioxide extinguishers that require a hydrostatic test are tested within a protective cage device.
(8) You must ensure that carbon dioxide extinguishers and nitrogen or carbon dioxide cylinders used with wheeled extinguishers are tested every five years at 5/3 of the service pressure as stamped into the cylinder. Nitrogen cylinders which comply with 29 C.F.R. 173.34 (e)(15) may be hydrostatically tested every ten years.
(9) You must ensure that all stored pressure and Halon 1211 types of extinguishers are hydrostatically tested at the factory test pressure not to exceed two times the service pressure.
(10) You must ensure that acceptable self-generating type soda acid and foam extinguishers are tested at 350 psi (2,410 kPa).
(11) You must not use air or gas pressure for hydrostatic testing.
(12) You must remove from service and from the workplace extinguisher shells, cylinders, or cartridges which fail a hydrostatic pressure test, or which are not fit for testing.
(13) You must meet the following requirements for gas cylinders:
(a) The equipment for testing compressed gas type cylinders must be of the water-jacket type. The equipment must be provided with an expansion indicator which operates with an accuracy within 1% of the total expansion or 0.1 cc (.1 mL) of liquid.
(b) The equipment for testing noncompressed gas type cylinders must consist of the following:
(i) A hydrostatic test pump, hand or power operated, capable of producing not less than 150% of the test pressure, which must include appropriate check valves and fittings;
(ii) A flexible connection for attachment to fittings to test through the extinguisher nozzle, test bonnet, or hose outlet, as is applicable; and
(iii) A protective cage or barrier for personal protection of the tester, designed to provide visual observation of the extinguisher under test.
[Statutory Authority: RCW
, and
. WSR 15-24-100, § 296-24-59212, filed 12/1/15, effective 1/5/16. Statutory Authority: RCW
, [49.17].040, and [49.17].050. WSR 01-11-038, § 296-24-59212, filed 5/9/01, effective 9/1/01.]
Site Contents
Selected content listed in alphabetical order under each group
Let Your Voice Be Heard
Contact Your Legislators
Comment on a Bill
Participate in Committee Hearings
Committee Meeting Schedules & Agendas
District & Legislators
Laws & Rules
Member Information / Rosters
Video & Audio on TVW
About the Legislature
House of Representatives
Legislative Agencies
Legislative Information Center
Legislature Home
Track Legislation
Email Updates (GovDelivery)
RSS Feeds
Web Services
Additional Information
Accessibility Information
Civic Education
Comments about this site
Contact Us
Employment Opportunities
Gift Center
Glossary of Terms
History of the State Legislature
Privacy Notice
Reports to the Legislature
Outside the Legislature
Contact Congress - the Other Washington
Governor's Website
OFM Fiscal Note Website
Washington Courts


text:
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Printcopia Winner
26 comments:
Thats super that they won your picture....can you imagine all the present their gonna get under their tree...wow!!!ReplyDelete
stella rose
Congratss to Pug Possesed. What a crew of furry funness.ReplyDelete
Congratulations on the winners. Well done. Have a terrific Thursday.ReplyDelete
Best wishes Molly
We are SO excited to win!!!! I was just organizing my photos to do some canvas prints and this is FABULOUS!!!!! Thanks for having the give-away.ReplyDelete
Whoa, that's a lot of pugs! Congrrats!ReplyDelete
Congrat's to the winner! What a great prize.ReplyDelete
Lily Belle & Muffin
YAY ... congratulations to Punchy and her crew!ReplyDelete
YAY ... congratulations to Punchy and her crew!ReplyDelete
Wow! That's a whole lot of Pugs!ReplyDelete
Play bows,
CONGRATULATIONS to the Very MUCH lucky WINNER(s). THAT is super cool.ReplyDelete
Congrats to the winners and a big pat on the back for you because you do such cool contests.ReplyDelete
Congrats to the pack at Pugs Possessed.ReplyDelete
Great giveaway too Benny and Lily
Hugs Madi
Congratulations to the winners!ReplyDelete
Cool, that's a lot of Pugs!ReplyDelete
Hooray for the winners! Well done Puggies :)ReplyDelete
Dip Bridge and Elliot x
Congratulations to the winners!!!ReplyDelete
XXXOOO Daisy, Bella & Roxy
Congrats to the pug possey!!ReplyDelete
Congrats to such wonderful winners!ReplyDelete
Your friends,
Murphy & Stanley
Congrats to the winners!! :)ReplyDelete
Wags to all
Your pal Snoopy :)
Congratulations to the Puggies!ReplyDelete
Love ya lots,
Mitch and Molly
Wow, that's great. They are quite the family!ReplyDelete
Oink oink,
Katie and Coccolino the mini pig
Wow congratulations to Chloe, Zoey, Rosie, Marty, Kiki & Stewie and the whole family.ReplyDelete
I know they will love this!
WooHoo! Congrats to the winners!!!ReplyDelete
Big congrats to the winners!!!ReplyDelete
xo, Katie & Glogirly
Congratulations to your winners!!! Great Giveaway!ReplyDelete
xoxo Chloe and LadyBug
That is pawsome, congratulations to the winners! You guys rock!ReplyDelete
(((hugs)) your friends
Oskar & Schatzi


text:
GreenValley Tea
Earl Grey
Earl Grey tea is a tea blend with a distinctive flavour and aroma derived from the addition of oil extracted from the rind of the bergamot orange, a fragrant citrus fruit. Bergamot is a small acidic orange. The latest research indicates that the Bergamot orange is a cross between the sweet or pear lemon (Citrus Limetta) and the Seville or sour orange (Citrus Aurantium). The sour orange is native to southern Vietnam, hence the Chinese connection. Our Earl Grey starts with a great quality, large leaf, sweet black tea from China. We add just a hint of pure bergamot oil to create the famous Earl Grey taste.
Brewing Method: 2 tsp / 3g Tea per 355ml @ 100℃
Steeping time: 3 - 5 mins
FREE SHIPPING for any purchase. Once order is placed, it will take approx. 3-5 working days to arrived at your door step.


text: Last year, we unveiled 5 years of Securly's student safety evolution. Securly has grown exponentially since launching its flagship Filter product in 2013. In the years since, the company has expanded its offerings to present a comprehensive online safety solution to districts, as well as expanding into device management solutions for parents at home. In 2019, Securly acquired TechPilot Labs, a provider of classroom and mobile device management solutions to K-12 districts, and further expanded its student safety suite by launching SecurlyGo and Auditor Plus. Presenting…6 years of Securly's evolution!


text:
|Shu-Li Huang, Graduate Institute of Urban Planning, National Taipei University, Taipei, Taiwan
|Funding Source
|Grant No. NSC 96-2415-H-305-012-MY3 of the National Science Council in Taiwan
|Project Website
Global environmental change has prompted concerns over the role of urban areas in global systems. Peri-urbanization, both as a social phenomenon and a physical transformation of landscapes, can be regarded as an impetus for global environmental changes. Peri-urban areas are frequently characterized by valuable natural environments and resource bases, and can provide essential life-support functions for urban residents. The land use and land cover change in peri-urban areas resulting from urban sprawl, and consequent transformations in the biophysical and socioeconomic systems, are often ignored by urban planning professionals and urban and rural land administrators.
The natural environment of Taiwan is characterized by active geomorphic processes with steep topography and unstable hydrologic processes, which are highly sensitive to extreme climatic events such as typhoon. The rapid economic growth of Taiwan from 1970–2000 transformed the island from a rural economy to an industrialized one. Almost 80% of Taiwan's people currently live in urban areas, making it an urbanized nation, and approximately 90% of the entire population reside on the western coastal plain, where peri–urbanization is increasing environmental pressure and already threatens the cities' life-supporting environments.
The issue of environmental change in peri-urban areas was also examined by the Peri-Urban Environmental Change Project (PU-ECH) of SCOPE. Land use change and ecosystem service in peri-urban areas should be seen and valued differently. The PU-GEC project proposes studying the effect of global environmental change and land use change on ecosystem services in peri-urban areas, using the Taipei-Taoyuan area as a case study.
Objectives to be achieved by this project:
- To study the influence of globalization on land use and land cover change in the Taipei-Taoyuan peri-urban area.
- To study changes in ecosystem service in the case study peri-urban area as a result of land use and land cover change.
- To study interactions among global environmental change, peri-urbanization, and ecosystem resilience in Taipei-Taoyuan area.
PU-GEC started on August 1 2007 and will run until July 31 2010.
The project involves 5 collaborators from Singapore, China, USA, and Canada.


text:
Wind Power
Wind power systems harness the power of nature to enhance our present lives and conserve our future energy. Wind power doesn't contribute to the issue of global warming, nor does it release pollution into the air. A sustainable form of fuel, wind power is one of the most rapidly growing natural energy sources in the world.
Advantages of Wind Turbines
Wind turbines (once called windmills) generate power when wind blows against the vertical, propeller-like blades. The blades are connected to a rotor, which is in turn connected to the shaft. The shaft turns an electricity-creating generator.
The potential of wind-generated energy has been increasing steadily over the last decade. According to Energy.gov, the cumulative wind power capacity in the U.S. has increased around 30% per year, generating more wind energy than any other country except for China. Simply by working with the power of the wind over the next three decades, the U.S. can potentially avoid the emission of a considerable amount of greenhouse gases and about 260 gallons of water, reports the Department of Energy. Clearly, residential wind power and off grid wind power systems are the way of the future.
Cost Effectiveness
Home wind energy costs an estimated four to six cents per kilowatt hour; in most cases, a wind turbine will often pay for itself within a few years' time. After it pays for itself, you can effectively reap the considerable benefits of free wind power. Small residential wind turbine systems may be able to cut over 50% off of household utility bills.


text:
- Home
- Visitors
Just north of the city of Yonkers, on the east bank of the Hudson River, under 20 miles from Times Square, lie the Rivertowns of Hastings on Hudson, Dobbs Ferry, Irvington, Tarrytown, and Sleepy Hollow. Dominated by the Palisades cliffs across the Hudson River, the villages are clustered at the base of a ridge of heavily wooded hills rising up over 400 feet above the river. It's a land once inhabited by Native Americans and early American settlers, the home of the legendary Washington Irving, and also of some of America's best-known industrialists and celebrities. The villages are connected by the Old Croton Aqueduct, which provides a unique opportunity for walkers and bicyclists to explore multiple villages, scenic areas, and historic sites. You can also enjoy the South County Bike Trail, built over the Old Putnam line and easily accessible from the Saw Mill River Parkway.
The Rivertowns Tourism Board invites you to discover this special, short escape from New York City, ideal for New Yorkers, or visitors from other parts of the region, country, or world who seek a quick taste of the Hudson Valley, the region's history, and what it's like to live on the quieter side of the capital of the world. It's a destination you can enjoy year-round, accessible by Metro North Railroad and Amtrak without need for a car.
What to Do in the Rivertowns
If you're looking for some great hiking and biking tours through the historic Rivertowns, then take a look at the River Towns website on the web or on Facebook. You'll find something fun and exciting for all ages!
For even more information about the Hudson Valley, visit the Historic Hudson River Towns web site or on River Towns Facebook.
For even more information about the Hudson Valley, visit the Historic Hudson River Towns web site or on River Towns Facebook.


text: 2015 How Florida Compares: Taxes Monday, April 27, 2015 / Categories: Research, Taxes, Taxpayer Guide Florida has always had the reputation of being a low tax state. While this common perception is borne out by the newest available data contained in this report, the full picture is more complicated. This report provides detailed tax ranking information for Florida as compared to the rest of the nation. Read more


text:
Posted On: 11th Jun 2019
A group of young carers in Andover
Help Us Help Them
David Slack
Growing up with caring responsibilities can be incredibly challenging.
A group of young carers from Andover are using their experiences to try and improve support in schools.
The young people feature in a video created to highlight the challenges carers face and the impact these can have on their education.
Eighteen-year-old Kieran explained: 'We're all different with different needs. It's a big job caring for your parents. It's not easy and at times can be very demanding.
'Being a carer has affected me physically and mentally.'
Kieran started caring for his parents when he was 11. They both suffered from mental health problems, and his father later passed away.
On some days he found it hard to get to school on time, and he wouldn't always be in the correct uniform.
His teachers didn't understand and he was regularly put in to isolation for not doing his homework, being late or for being in the wrong clothes.
Sixteen-year-old Nikita Smith, who has been caring for her father and sisters, added: 'My friends don't really understand why I can't do normal things that young people do at my age but I'm happy knowing that my dad and sisters are ok.
'I want teachers to notice the challenges young carers face. There is nothing worse than knowing about the problem and not providing the support needed.'
Kieran and Nikita are not alone in their struggles. There are estimated to be 376,000 carers aged between 16 and 24 in the UK and only half of these have someone in school who recognises they are a carer and offers to help.
This means there are 188,000 young carers unsupported in school.
Many are bullied and after leaving school they are twice as likely to not be in education, employment or training (NEET).
David Slack, 18, was supported well at school and wants the same level of help to be offered to others.
'Teachers need to see the signs and understand why some young carers are reluctant to speak out,' he said.
This project was funded by the Gerald Micklem Charitable Trust.
To find other resources on this topic, and watch Fixers films, click on the image below.
This film is based on a real life story about how anxiety affects pupils in the classroom.
Emily hopes her film will help people understand Alzheimer's and support families more.
Students are educating their peers about the prevalence of food poverty in the UK.
Sam used to be homeless and hopeless. He's turned his life around and wants others to know they can too.
Ciarán wants students to keep a lookout for vulnerable people in their midst on campus.
A group of aspiring actors are calling for better roles for black and Asian people.
Care leaver Julia is raising the aspirations of teenagers growing up in foster homes.
Ben Simms and his group from Watford FC are encouraging those with disabilities to work in sport.
Layne wants people to shun celebrities and choose real people as role models.
Welsh students want to reduce the stigma surrounding free school meal provisions.
A group of students from Worcester Uni have made wristbands promoting mental wellbeing.
Sarah wants to turn her driving test failures into motivation for disheartened learners.


text:
|You just Googled "Pompous Mailbox" didn't you?
[Remember, keep sending in your questions to firstname.lastname@example.com with the subject line "W.A.W. Mailbox" and I will answer a couple each week. I have a LOT of backlogged questions right now, but I will try to eventually get to all of them. I will use your first name ONLY unless you tell me explicitly that you'd like me to use your full name or you would prefer to remain anonymous. My comment policy also may mean one of your comments ends up in the mailbox. Don't be afraid to get me to answer what is clearly your homework because by the time I answer it, you'll have graduated.]
Anonymous writes:
(this question is approximately 25% trolling, and 75% sincere curiosity. and anonymous because I don't want to admit I don't already know.)
writing prompt - re-word the following quote into modern American English, and then explain what the hell it means (just in case it doesn't make sense in plain English)... and then if you want, talk about why old-timey writing always sounds so pompous.
"Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well-warmed, and well-fed."
-- Herman Melville
feeling dumb
My reply:
I'll answer this, but if we end up together as the Doctor's companions, and go back in time, remind me to explain to you about the moving target of social conventions and the beauty industry of the 20th century before you go popping off about some aristocrat's body odor or some baroness's body hair or something.
"Old timey" writing didn't sound pompous when it was being written. It had a continuum of formal or informal the same way modern writing does. A style as vocabulous and thick as Melville's, at the time, would probably read like Danielewski, Eco, or Marquez does to us today: lush and rotten with big words but hardly indecipherable. It just sounds a little bit pompous to us here in the 21st century because we have a century and a half of linguistic drift. Language changes and evolves, so you're kind of reading something that's about 15-20% of the way to needing a translation the way Chaucer does today.
Let's be clear, Melville was definitely on the wordy side, even for the 19th century Thesaurus Rex writers of the time. He also tried hard to be baroque, modeling himself quite deliberately after the Bible (which even when it updates, always goes with the most anachronistic English that is still readable in order to get that "Ye Olde Verily" feel going on) as well as Shakespeare and Milton. (That's the prose, I'm guessing, not the dick and fart jokes.) However, Melville was also incredibly unconventional and used so many unorthodox compound adjectives and so much onomatopoeia that many of his contemporaries and critics thought he was insane. (And I don't mean "Oh that craaaaaaazy Herm! He's a wild one!" insane.)
The reason old timey writing SOUNDS pompous today is because of who's still talking and writing that way, and even more who's running around trying to make sure everyone else sounds that way. Usually pompous people. Language shifts over time as new words are adopted, old words become archaic, and even grammar rules change, and the people who have a stick up their ass about that fact are (usually) stuck about a hundred years in the past when it comes to how they think English ought to look and sound.
And I mean I love me some Shakespeare, but he did the same shit. All that thee and thou shit that drove you bonkers in high school was pretty much on the way out by the time he was writing, but he was interested in writing upper class snobs as upper-class sounding, and during the 13th century all the aristocrats liked the French influence of a formal and informal "you."
There was also a pretty profound shift in literature in the thirties, forties, and fifties. It would take at least an hour of lecture to get into all the specifics of how and why, but the short version is that Hemingway was probably a bigger deal than you've been told. In the same way that the minimalism of the late 20th century can be largely attributed to Raymond Carver (who, by the way, was working off of Hemingway), the influence even today of the powerful "short declarative sentence" came largely from Hemingway and it was a huge shift away from the popularity of the more languid prose of prior.
Let's look at your quote though. "Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well-warmed, and well-fed."
Or in other words:
"Of all the shit beliefs people have about other people nothing is more shitacular than some rich asshole telling a poor person what they're doing wrong in life."
You know how rich people tell poor people they should just go to school or get a job and they sort of don't realize that the poor person does have a job but it doesn't pay the bills or that they can't just go to school because they need to work 60 hours a week because the first job doesn't pay the bills. Or the rich people criticize that the poor haven't invested well in a retirement portfolio so they could stop working eventually and the poor person is making choices like Pay Rent vs. Eat Food for the month. Or they give some fuckass bullshit advice like "Don't take that crap from your boss! Stand up to them!" without realizing that losing a job to a capricious boss can put someone out of food or a home.
My personal favorite (and I'm using that word with sneering sarcasm if it isn't oozing off the page): If I Were Poor Black Kid. Which, quite appropriately got its ass completely handed to it, often by actual poor Black kids. (Why yes. Each one of those words IS its own response article.)
Probably the worst criticism rich people give to poor people is about risk assessment. Telling poor folks that their problem is that they don't take chances. It's fine and well to take chances when you have a safety net (be it money in the bank, parents who won't let you starve, or just some Tony Jacklin golf clubs you can sell in a pinch). However, to tell someone who is trying to figure out which bill it'll be okay to not pay this month that the reason they're poor is because they haven't just quit their job to go into alpaca farming is particularly lacking in decency, empathy, and compassion.
That's probably more answer than you were hoping for Anon, but I got your back. Even if it takes me like three months to get around to it.


text:
Spectral Announces Second Quarter 2013 Results
Complete the form below to unlock access to ALL audio articles.
Spectral Diagnostics Inc. has announced its unaudited financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2013.
Second Quarter Highlights:
• Enrolled patients into the Company's Phase III EUPHRATES trial at an accelerated rate compared to the prior year. Directed by the Company's Endotoxin Activity Assay (EAA™), which is the only FDA-cleared diagnostic for the risk of developing sepsis, Spectral's EUPHRATES trial is targeted to enroll 306 evaluable patients. Contingent on maintaining current enrollment rates and timely site start ups, the trial should be fully enrolled in the second half of 2014. As of August 12, 2013, 159 patients have been randomized into Spectral's EUPHRATES trial.
• Announced the appointment of Dr. Gualtiero Guadagni as the Company's Vice President, Sales and Marketing. Dr. Guadagni will primarily be responsible for the development and expansion of commercial activities and market preparation plans for Toraymyxin and Spectral's Endotoxin Activity Assay (EAA™) in Canada, the United States and Europe.
• Closed a private placement for gross proceeds of $5.6 million.
• Concluded the reporting period with approximately $10.6 million in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments.
• Subsequent to quarter end, disclosed that the trial's composite 28-day mortality rate was approximately 33 per cent for randomized patients. The composite mortality rate continues to suggest that the Company is enrolling patients who are most likely to benefit from Spectral's treatment.
"We made excellent progress with the trial's patient enrollment in the second quarter, which moves us closer to the study's planned, second interim analysis," stated Dr. Paul Walker, President and CEO of Spectral. "We are optimistic that the results from the second interim analysis should support the successful completion of the trial."
At the second interim analysis, the Data and Safety Monitoring Board will advise the Company on the trial's safety, efficacy or futility, with stopping rules in place for efficacy and futility.
A sample size recalculation will be done if necessary. Management intends to disclose the results of the interim analysis after 184 patients have been randomized and followed for 28 days, and the data from the analysis has been thoroughly reviewed.
Spectral remains on track to disclose information from the second interim analysis in late 2013 or early 2014.
Financial Review
Revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2013 was $572,000 compared to $599,000 for the same period in the preceding year. For the six months ended June 30, 2013 revenue was $1,280,000 compared to $1,275,000 for the same period in 2012.
It is anticipated that revenue in 2013 will remain consistent with levels achieved in 2012.
Total expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2013 were $3,642,000 compared to $2,798,000 in the second quarter of 2012. For the six months ended June 30, 2013, total expenses were $6,449,000 compared to $5,774,000 for the same period in 2012.
The increase of $675,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2013 is primarily attributable to higher EUPHRATES trial costs ($1,261,000) due to the accelerated patient enrollment rate, offset by a $475,000 reduction in management service fees.
The Company continues to maintain a low cost operating structure for its base business and expects no material increase in non clinical operating costs in 2013.
The Company concluded the second quarter of 2013 with cash, cash equivalents and short-term investment of $10,600,000 compared to $10,562,000 as at December 31, 2012.


text:
Minimalism is one of the most popular design today, because of its simplicity and elegance, it's one of the most go to interior design. Whether it's a minimalist bedroom, living room or our post today – minimalist office, you'll fall in love with its unique charm.
Why Have A Minimalist Office
First, let's define "minimalist interior" – according to Impressive Interior Design, the minimalist interior design definition is one to be followed. Its purpose is to create simple, peaceful and orderly spatial arrangements. With reduced clutter and the interior to a minimum, it transposes the idea of quality. It gives a feeling of clarity and richness instead of a sense of emptiness.
In relation to the minimalist interior's definition, we can say that a "Minimalist Office" is all about having the essentials. It's getting the most out of a few pieces through careful selection and editing. By having a minimalist space, you'll be able to focus on what you really need to do – which is to work and concentrate on whatever you need to do. In the simplest form, less mess = fewer distractions.
Creating A Minimalist Office
Decorating a minimalist office is almost an art itself. When you're setting up your space, you are already curating pieces of furniture. Having said that, here are some more tips to perfect your minimalist office:
Quality Over Quantity
Pick a premium furniture or object that can stand on its own. Invest in a couple of pieces that you know you'd use a lot of times – in this case, maybe splurge on a high-quality office table or chair. Of course, your comfort is also a top priority so be sure to choose a furnishing that would satisfy both of these characteristics.
Your Wall Is Your Canvas
Speaking of canvas, to achieve that minimalist effect, your wall's paint color or wallpaper should be on the neutral side – think white, grey or nude color. You can even leave your concrete wall as is, with its natural finish.
Choose An Accent Piece
Even though you're styling a minimalist office, it doesn't mean that you can't have fun. A colorful or vibrant accent piece will pop and stand out in your office. Choosing an accent piece really depends on you and your liking – you can choose a flashy painting, a sculpture, or your seat.
Keep It Clean
Choosing this interior design idea also means choosing to be organized. Obviously, you can't have a minimalist office if you're not fond of neat and clean space. So, another useful tip is to have a lot of storage – built in storage, drawers or boxes (remember to incorporate their colors/style in your design).
Simple Design
Having furniture that is structurally uncomplicated or simple brings harmony to this design trend. Even if you have a couple of pieces of furniture, if they are simple and belong to one color scheme, they'd totally look chic and put together.
Give It Some Space
Give your furnishings plenty of space. Don't crowd them in one place, rather, put some space between your things. By giving them some distance, it creates a uniform and organized feeling.
And you're off to create your minimalist office! Do you need more inspiration? Head over to our decor page to get more ideas.


text:
Never Mess With A Geocacher Hoodie
No ratings. Art.No.: MIK-NeverMess
Manufacturer: Geokes
Availability: Custom made product
Never Mess With A Geocacher Hoodie
Geocaching hoodie: Never Mess With A Geocacher - We Know The Best Places To Hide A Body
Select your size and choose color.
|0.2 kg
|2 m
|2 m
|2 m
Customer who bought this product also bought:Write Product Review
Geocaching D /T Matrix T-shirt Art.No.: T-Matrix
Custom made product
Milestone Geocache Finds t-shirt - your own number Art.No.: T-Milestone-Own
Custom made product
Addicted Geocacher trackable t-shirt Art.No.: TT-Addict
Custom made product
Write a review. No review available for this item.


text:
China asks Japan to halt provocation
Beijing – China has asked Japan to immediately stop all of its provocative actions over the ownership of Diaoyu Islands.
Reacting to a video clip on the Japanese foreign ministry's website promoting the Diaoyu Islands (known as Senkaku Islands in Japan) as Japanese territory, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said Thursday it was another provocative action and China expresses its firm opposition to it, Xinhua reported.
Hong Lei reiterated that no publicity could change the fact that the Diaoyu Islands belonged to China.
Japan should face up to historical facts and reality, and that it should address these disputes through dialogue and consultation, the spokesperson added.
According to the news reports, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is looking f! or support from the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) on ! maritime and air safety.
In response, Hong said China urged parties concerned to avoid jeopardising a third party's interests with their diplomatic efforts.
The spokesperson also refuted Japan's charge of China's maritime and air activities, saying: "Japan has hidden political agendas in hyping up the so-called China threat," and referred to it as Japan's excuse for revising pacifist constitution and military expansion.
The official urged Japan to stop with the unreasonable accusations and take a peaceful development path to maintain regional peace and stability.


text:
There are three basic types of crowns:
1) Porcelain outer surface with a metal base crown.
2) Pure porcelain or composite crown.
3) All metal crown, which is usually gold. They all differ in durability, strength, appearance and cost. Select a crown below to learn more about it.
There are three basic types of crowns:


text:
The Uniqueness
The Innovation
The Solution
Top-edge in nanotechnologies
Multi-industrial knowledge
For different specifications
We work alongside national and international organizations.
Committed to conducting its business according to the highest…
Responsible customer relations through clear communication…
SoleMio Trading has gradually evolved into a commercial company engaged in trade with protective equipment and devices.
It works closely directly with several producers, which it represents commercially in various markets around the world.
We offer products with high added value, whether it is unique respirators FFP2 and FFP3 made using nanoparticles by a Czech company, which are among the few in the world providing real protection against viruses and bacteria, or alcohol-free Swedish antibacterial disinfection with Biopolymers, Aloe Vera and vitamin B5, for which we have exclusive representation rights on the Czech market.
However, we are not limited to the market in the Czech Republic, but trading with partners in many other countries around the world.
WHY our partners Choose Us
Czech Republic, where Solemio Trading is located, is on the top-edge in the nanotechnologies
What We Are Proud Of
In such a new industrial sector we are good at
- Experienced team
- Portfolio of inorganic nanofibres
- Technology transfer
- On-request development
Our Latest Projects
Our Offices
Head Office
Václavské námestí 64
110 00 Prague 1
Czech Republic
Ve Žlíbku 1800/77
193 00 Prague 9
Czech Republic


text:
|Home > Chayanne
♀ Chayanne
What does Chayanne mean?
Chayanne as a girls' name is of Native American Indian derivation, and the meaning of the name Chayanne is "unintelligible speakers". Chayanne is an alternate spelling of Cheyenne (Native American Indian): from the French name "shaiyena".
STARTS WITH Cha-
VARIANTS Shyanne▼, Shyann▼, Shayanne, Shayan, Chyanne▼, Cheyanne▼, Chayan
RELATED FORMS VIA CHEYENNE Cheyanna, ChiannaCREATIVE FORMS
Chayanne India (C.I.), ..
How popular is Chayanne?
Chayanne is an uncommon first name for women. Chayanne is a rare surname too for all people. (2000 U.S. DEMOGRAPHICS)
Which version is better?
Prominent related forms of Chayanne (NOT RANKED) listed in the Top 2000 are Cheyanna, Cheyanne (#1904 FROM CURRENT RECORDS), Cheyenne (#466), Chyanne, Shyann and Shyanne. Other variants, like Chayan, are seldom used. These relations of Chayanne were at the peak of their popularity in the year 1996 (AVERAGE #723) and have become significantly less conventional since, with forms such as Cheyanne becoming less trendy. (2018 BIRTH STATISTICS)
Similar Names
Chayanne is alike in pronunciation to Shayne. Other recommended sound-alike names are Bryanne, Cadance, Canna, Carinne, Caronne, Carynne, Cezanne, Chainey, Chalonn, Chamania, Chana▲, Chanae, Chanah, Chanee, Chaney, Chanha, Chani, Chania, Channa, Chante▼, Chanya, Chanyah, Charalynne (see Cherilyn), Charlaine, Charlanna, Charlayne, Charlene▼, Charline▼, Charlyne, Charmaine▼, Charmane, Charmayne, Charmine, Chastine, Chaunte, Chavonne, Chaya▲, Chayney, Cherianne, Chevaunne, Chevonne, Chiana, Chivonne, Chrisanne, Chyna▼, Chynna▼, Chyvonne, Cianna▼, Corynne, Cyanea, Cynnie, Dayann, Dayanna, Diahanne (see Diana), Dyanne, Fayanna, Ivyanne, Joyanne, Kaylanne, Leyanne, Lilyanne, Maryanne▼, Raeanne, Rayann, Rheanne, Ryanne, Shalaine, Shamaine, Shavonne, Shaylene, Shaylynne, Shyanna, Vivyanne and Vyvyanne. These names tend to be more frequently used than Chayanne.