text:
134 US 1 Hans v. State of Louisiana
10 S.Ct. 504
33 L.Ed. 842
March 3, 1890.
This is an action brought in the circuit court of the United States, in December, 1884, against the state of Louisiana, by Hans, a citizen of that state, to recover the amount of certain coupons annexed to bonds of the state, issued under the provisions of an act of the legislature approved January 24, 1874. The bonds are known and designated as the 'consolidated bonds of the state of Louisiana,' and the coupons sued on are for interest which accrued January 1, 1880. The grounds of the action are stated in the petition as follows: 'Your petitioner a vers that by the issue of said bonds and coupons said state contracted with and agreed to pay the bearer thereof the principal sum of said bonds forty years from the date thereof, to-wit, the 1st day of January 1874, and to pay the interest thereon represented by coupons as aforesaid, including the coupons held by your petitioner, semiannually upon the maturity of said coupons; and said legislature, by an act approved January 24, 1874, proposed an amendment to the constitution of said state, which was afterwards duly adopted, and is as follows, to-wit: 'No. 1. The issue of consolidated bonds, authorized by the general assembly of the state at its regular session in the year 1874, is hereby declared to create a valid contract between the state and each and every holder of said bonds, which the state shall by no means and in no wise impair. The said bonds shall be a valid obligation of the state in favor of any holder thereof, and no court shall enjoin the payment of the principal or interest thereof or the levy and collection of the tax therefor. To secure such levy, collection, and payment the judicial power shall be exercised when necessary. The tax required for the payment of the principal and interest of said bonds shall be assessed and collected each and every year unti the bonds shall be paid, principal and interest, and the proceeds shall be paid by the treasurer of the state to the holders of said bonds as the principal and interest of the same shall fall due, and no further legislation or appropriation shall be requisite for the said assessment, and collection and for such payment from the treasury.' And petitioner further avers that, notwithstanding said solemn compact with the holders of said bonds, said state hath refused and still refuses to pay said coupons held by petitioner, and by its constitution, adopted in 1879, ordained as follows: 'That the coupons of said consolidated bonds falling due the 1st of January, 1880, be, and the same is hereby, remitted, and any interest taxes collected to meet said coupons are hereby transferred to defray the expenses of the state government;' and by article 257 of said constitution also prescribed that 'the constitution of this state, adopted in 1868, and all amendments thereto, is declared to be superseded by this constitution;' and said state thereby undertook to repudiate her contract obligations aforesaid, and to prohibit her officers and agents executing the same, and said state claims that by said provisions of said constitution she is relieved from the obligations of her aforesaid contract, and from the payment of said coupons held by petitioner, and so refuses payment thereof, and has prohibited her officers and agents making such payment. Petitioner also avers that taxes for the payment of the interest upon said bonds due January 1, 1880, were levied, assessed, and collected, but said state unlawfully and wrongfully diverted the money so collected, and appropriated the same to payment of the general expenses of the state, and has made no other provision for the payment of said interest. Petiticner also avers that said provisions of said constitution are in contravention of said contract, and their adoption was an active violation thereof, and that said state thereby sought to impair the validity thereof with your petitioner, in violation of article 1, section 10, of the constitution of the United States, and the effect so given to said state constitution does impair said contract. Wherefore petitioner prays that the state of Louisiana be cited to answer this demand, and that after due proceedings she be condemned to pay your petitioner said sum of ($87,500) eighty-seven thousand five hundred dollars, with legal interest from January 1, 1880, until paid, and all consts of suit; and petitioner prays for general relief.'
A citation being issued directed to the state, and served upon the governor thereof, the attorney general of the state filed an exception, of which the following is a copy, to-wit: 'Now comes defendant, by the attorney general, and excepts to plaintiff's suit, on the ground that this court is without jurisdiction ratione personae. Plaintiff cannot sue the state without its permission; the constitution and laws do not give this honorable court jurisdiction of a suit against the state; and its jurisdiction is respectfully declined. Wherefore respondent prays to be hence dismissed, with costs, and for general relief.' By the judgment of the court this exception was sustained, and the suit was dismissed. See Hans v. Louisiana, 24 Fed. Rep. 55.
J. D. Rouse and Wm. Grant, for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 4-9 intentionally omitted]
W. H. Rogers, B. J. Sage, and Alex. Porter Morse, for defendant in error.
To this judgment the present writ of error is brought; and the question is presented whether a state can be sued in a circuit court of the United States by one of its own citizens upon a suggestion that the case is one that arises under the constitution or laws of the United States.
The ground taken is that under the constitution, as well as under the act of congress passed to carry it into effect, a case is within the jurisdiction of the federal courts, without regard to the character of the parties, if it arises under the constitution or laws of the United States, or, which is the same thing, if it necessarily involves a question under said constitution or laws. The language relied n is that clause of the third article of the constitution, which declares that 'the judicial power of the United States shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;' and the corresponding clause of the act conferring jurisdiction upon the circuit court, which, as found in the act of March 3, 1875, is as follows, to-wit: 'That the circuit courts of the United States shall have original cognizance, concurrent with the courts of the several states, of all suits of a civil nature, at common law or in equity, * * * arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, or treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority.' It is said that these jurisdictional clauses make no exception arising from the character of the parties, and therefore that a state can claim no exemption from suit, if the case is really one arising under the constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. It is conceded that, where the jurisdiction depends alone upon the character of the parties, a controversy between a state and its own citizens is not embraced within it; but it is contended that, though jurisdiction does not exist on that ground, it nevertheless does exist if the case itself is one which necessarily involves a federal question; and, with regard to ordinary parties, this is undoubtedly true. The question now to be decided is whether it is true where one of the parties is a state, and is sued as a defendant by one of its own citizens.
That a state cannot be sued by a citizen of another state, or of a foreign state, on the mere ground that the case is one arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, is clearly established by the decisions of this court in several recent cases. Louisiana v. Jumel, 107 U. S. 711, 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 128; Hagood v. Southern, 117 U. S. 52, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 608; In re Ayers, 123 U. S. 443, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 164. Those were cases arising under the constitution of the United States, upon laws complained of as impairing the obligation of contracts, one of which was the constitutional amendment of Louisiana, complained of in the present case. Relief was sought against state officers who professed to act in obedience to those laws. This court held that the suits were virtually against the states themselves, and were consequently violative of the eleventh amendment of the constitution, and could not be maintained. It was not denied that they presented cases arising under the constitution; but, notwithstanding that, they were held to be prohibited by the amendment referred to.
In the present case the plaintiff in error contends that he, being a citizen of Louisiana, is not embarrassed by the obstacle of the eleventh amendment, inasmuch as that amendment only prohibits suits against a state which are brought by the citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of a foreign state. It is true the amendment does so read, and, if there were no other reason or ground for abating his suit, it might be maintainable; and then we should have this anomalous result, that, in cases arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, a state may be sued in the federal courts by its own citizens, though it cannot be sued for a like cause of action by the citizens of other states, or of a foreign state; and may be thus sued in the federal courts, although not allowing itself to be sued in its own courts. If this is the necessary consequence of the language of the constitution and the law, the result is no less startling and unexpected than was the original decision of this court, that, under the language of the constitution and of the judiciary act of 1789, a state was liable to be sued by a citizen of another state or of a foreign country. That decision was made in the case of Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 419, and created such a shock of surprise throughout the country that, at the first meeting of congres thereafter, the eleventh amendment to the constitution was almost unanimously proposed, and was in due course adopted by the legislatures of the states. This amendment, expressing the will of the ultimate sovereignty of the whole country, superior to all legislatures and all courts, actually reversed the decision of the supreme court. It did not in terms prohibit suits by individuals against the states, but declared that the constitution should not be construed to import any power to authorize the bringing of such suits. The language of the amendment is that 'the judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit, in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.' The supreme court had construed the judicial power as extending to such a suit, and its decision was thus overruled. The court itself so understood the effect of the amendment, for after its adoption Attorney General Lee, in the case of Hollingsworth v. Virginia, (3 Dall. 378,) submitted this question to the court, 'whether the amendment did or did not supersede all suits depending, as well as prevent the institution of new suits, against any one of the United States, by citizens of another state.' Tilghman and Rawle argued in the negative, contending that the jurisdiction of the court was unimpaired in relation to all suits instituted previously to the adoption of the amendment. But on the succeeding day, the court delivered an unanimous opinion 'that, the amendment being constitutionally adopted, there could not be exercised any jurisdiction, in any case, past or future, in which a state was sued by the citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.' This view of the force and meaning of the amendment is important. It shows that, on this question of the suability of the states by individuals, the highest authority of this country was in accord rather with the minority than with the majority of the court in the decision of the case of Chisholm v. Georgia; and this fact lends additional interest to the able opinion of Mr. Justice IREDELL on that occasion. The other justices were more swayed by a close observance of the letter of the constitution, without regard to former experience and usage; and because the letter said that the judicial power shall extend to controversies 'between a state and citizens of another state;' and 'between a state and foreign states, citizens or subjects,' they felt constrained to see in this language a power to enable the individual citizens of one state, or of a foreign state, to sue another state of the Union in the federal courts Justice IREDELL, on the contrary, contended that it was not the intention to create new and unheard of remedies, by subjecting so vereign states to actions at the suit of individuals, (which he conclusively showed was never done before,) but only, by proper legislation, to invest the federal courts with jurisdiction to hear and determine controversies and cases, beween the parties designated, that were properly susceptible of litigation in courts. Looking back from our present stand-point at the decision in Chisholm v. Georgia, we do not greatly wonder at the effect which it had upon the country. Any such power as that of authorizing the federal judiciary to entertain suits by individuals against the states had been expressly disclaimed, and even resented, by the great defenders of the constitution while it was on its trial before the American people. As some of their utterances are directly pertinent to the question now under consideration, we deem it proper to quote them.
The eighty-first number of the Federalist, written by Hamilton, has the following profound remarks: 'It has been suggested that an assignment of the public securities of one state to the citizens of another would enable them to prosecute that state in the federal courts for the amount of those securities, a suggestion whih the following considerations prove to be without foundation: It is inherent in the nature of sovereignty not to be amenable to the suit of an individual without its consent. This is the general sense and the general practice of mankind; and the exemption, as one of the attributes of sovereignty, is now enjoyed by the government of every state in the Union. Unless, therefore, there is a surrender of this immunity in the plan of the convention, it will remain with the states, and the danger intimated must be merely ideal. The circumstances which are necessary to produce an alienation of state sovereignty were discussed in considering the article of taxation, and need not be repeated here. A recurrence to the principles there established will satisfy us that there is no color to pretend that the state governments would, by the adoption of that plan, be divested of the privilege of paying their own debts in their own way, free from every constraint but that which flows from the obligations of good faith. The contracts between a nation and individuals are only binding on the conscience of the sovereign, and have no pretension to a compulsive force. They confer no right of action independent of the sovereign will. To what purpose would it be to authorize suits against states for the debts they owe? How could recoveries be enforced? It is evident that it could not be done without waging war against the contracting state; and to ascribe to the federal courts by mere implication, and in destruction of a pre-existing right of the state governments, a power which would involve such a consequence, would be altogether forced and unwarrantable.'
The obnoxious clause to which Hamilton's argument was directed, and which was the ground of the objections which he so forcibly met, was that which declared that 'the judicial power shall extend to all * * * controversies between a state and citizens of another state, * * * and between a state and foreign states, citizens, or subjects.' It was argued by the opponents of the constitution that this clause would authorize jurisdiction to be given to the federal courts to entertain suits against a state brought by the citizens of another state or of a foreign state. Adhering to the mere letter, it might be so, and so, in fact, the supreme court held in Chisholm v. Georgia; but looking at the subject as Hamilton did, and as Mr. Justice IREDELL did, in the light of history and experience and the established order of things, the views of the latter were clearly right, as the people of the United States in their sovereign capacity subsequently decided.
But Hamilton was not alone in protesting against the construction put upon the constitution by its opponents. In the Virginia convention the same objections were raised by George Mason and Patrick Henry, and were met by Madison and Marshall as follows. Madison said: 'Its jurisdiction [the federal jurisdiction] in controversies between a state and citizens of another state is much objected to, and perhaps without reason. It is not in the power of individuals to call any state into court. The only operation it can have is that, if a state should wish to bring a suit against a citizen, it must be brought before the federal court. This will give satisfaction to individauls, as it will prevent citizens on whom a state may have a claim being dissatisfied with the state courts. * * * It appears to me that this [clause] can have no operation but this: to give a citizen a right to be heard in the federal courts, and, if a state should condescend to be a party, this court may take cognizance of it.' 3 Elliott, Debates, 533. Marshall, in answer to the same objection, said: 'With respect to disputes between a state and the citizens of another state, its jurisdiction has been decried with unusual vehemence. I hope that no gentleman will think that a state will be called at the bar of the federal court. * * * It is not rational to suppose that the sovereign power should be dragged before a court. The intent is to enable states to recover claims of indviduals residing in other states. * * * But, say they, there will be partiality in it if a state cannot be a defendant; if an individual cannot proceed to obtain judgment against a state, though he may be sued by a state. It is necessary to be so, and cannot be avoided. I see a difficulty in making a state defendant which does not prevent its being plaintiff.' Id. 555.
It seems to us that these views of those great advocates and defenders of the constitution were most sensible and just, and they apply equally to the present case as to that then under discussion. The letter is appealed to now, as it was then, as a ground for sustaining a suit brought by an individual against a state. The reason against it is as strong in this case as it was in that. It is an attempt to strain the constitution and the law to a construction never imagined or dreamed of. Can we suppose that, when the eleventh amendment was adopted, it was understood to be left open for citizens of a state to sue their own state in the federal courts, while the idea of suits by citizens of other states, or of foreign states, was indignantly repelled? Suppose that congress, when proposing the eleventh amendment, had appended to it a proviso that nothing therein contained should prevent a state from being sued by its own citizens in cases arising under the constitution or laws of the United Shates, can we imagine that it would have been adopted by the states? The supposition that it would is almost an absurdity on its face.
The truth is that the cognizance of suits and actions unknown to the law, and forbidden by the law, was not contemplated by the constitution when establishing the judicial power of the United States. Some things, undoubtedly, were made justifiable which were not known as such at the common law; such, for example, as controversies between states as to boundary lines, and other questions admitting of judicial solution. And yet the case of Penn v. Lord Baltimore, 1 Ves. Sr. 444, shows that some of these unusual subjects of litigation were not unknown to the courts even in colonial times; and several cases of the same general character arose under the articles of confederation, and were brought before the tribunal provided for that purpose in those articles. 131 U. S. App. 50. The establishment of this new branch of jurisdiction seemed to be necessary from the extinguishment of diplomatic relations between the states. Of other controversies between a state and another state or its citizens, which, on the settled principles of public law, are not subjects of judicial cognizance, this court has often declined to take jurisdiction. See Wisconsin v. Insurance Co., 127 U. S. 265, 288, 289, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1370, and cases there cited.
The suability of a state, without its consent, was a thing unknown to the law. This has been so often laid down and acknowledged by courts and jurists that it is hardly necessary to be formally asserted. It was fully shown by an exhaustive examination of the old law by Mr. Justice IREDELL in his opinion in Chisholm v. Georgia; and it has been conceded in every case since, where the question has, in any way, been presented, even in the cases which have gone furthest in sustaining suits against the officers or agents of states. Osborn v. Bank, 9 Wheat. 738; Davis v. Gray, 16 Wall, 203; Board, etc. v. McComb, 92 U. S. 531; U. S. v. Lee, 106 U. S. 196, 1 Sup. Ct. Rep. 240; Poindexter v. Greenhow, 109 U. S. 63, 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 8; Virginia Coupon Cases, 114 U. S. 269, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 903-934, 962, 1020. In all these cases the effort was to show, and the court held, that the suits were not against the state or the United States, but against the individuals; conceding that, if they had been against either the state or the United States, they could not be maintained. Mr. Webster stated the law with precision in his letter to Baring Bros. & Co. of October 16, 1839. Works, vol. 6, p. 537. 'The security for state loans, he said, 'is the plighted faith of the estate as a political community. It rests on the same basis as other contracts with established governments,—the same basis, for example, as loans made by the United States under the authority of congress; that is to say, the good faith of the government making the loan, and its ability to fulfil its engagements.' In Briscoe v. Bank, 11 Pet. 257, 321, Mr. Justice MCLEAN, delivering the opinion of the court, said: 'What means of enforcing payment from the state had the holder of a bill of credit? It is said by the counsel for the plaintiff that he could have sued the state. But was a state liable to be sued? * * * No sovereign state is liable to be sued without her consent. Under the articles of confederation, a state could be sued only in cases of boundary. It is believed that there is no case where a suit has been brought, at any time, on bills of credit against a state; and it is certain that no suit could have been maintained, on this ground, prior to the constitution.' 'It may be accepted as a point of departure unquestioned,' said Mr. Justice MILLER in Cunningham v. Railroad Co., 109 U. S. 446, 451, 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 292, 'that neither a state nor the United States can be sued as defendant in any court in this country without their consent, except in the limited class of cases in which a state may be made a party in the supreme court of the United States by virtue of the orginal jurisdiction conferred on this court by the constitution.'
Undoubtedly a state may be sued by its own consent, as was the case in Curran v. Arkansas, 15 How. 304, 309, and in Clark v. Barnard, 108 U.S. 436, 447, 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 878. The suit in the former case was prosecuted by virtue of a state law which the legislature passed in conformity to the constitution of that state. But this court decided, in Beers v. Arkansas, 20 How. 527, that the state could repeal that law at any time; that it was not a contract within the terms of the constitution prohibiting the passage of state laws impairing the obligation of a contract. In that case the law allowing the state to be sued was modified pending certain suits against the state on its bonds, so as to require the bonds to be filed in court, which was objected to as an unconstitutional change of the law. Chief Justice TANEY, delivering the opinion of the court, said: 'It is an established principle of jurisprudence in all civilized nations that the sovereign cannot be sued in its own courts, or in any other, without its consent and permission; but it may, if it thinks proper, waive this privilege, and permit itself to be made a defendant in a suit by individuals, or by another state. And, as this permission is altogether voluntary on the part of the sovereignty, it follows that it may prescribe the terms and conditions on which it consents to be sued, and the manner in which the suit shall be conducted, and may withdraw its consent whenever it may suppose that justice to the public requires it. * * * The prior law was not a contract. It was an ordinary act of legislation, prescribing the conditions upon which the state consented to waive the privilege of sovereignty. It contained no stipulation that these regulations should not be modified afterwards if, upon experience, it was found that further provisions were necessary to protect the public interest; and no such contract can be implied from the law, nor can this court inquire whether the law operated hardly or unjustly upon the parties whose suits were then pending. That was a question for the consideration of the legislature. They might have repealed the prior law altogether, and put an end to the jurisdiction of their courts in suits against the state, if they had thought proper to do so, or prescribe new conditions upon which the suits might still be allowed to proceed. In exercising this latter power the state violated no contract with the parties.' The same doctrine was held in Railroad Co. v. Tennessee, 101 U. S. 337, 339; Railroa Co. v. Alabama, Id. 832; and In re Ayers, 123 U. S. 443, 505, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 164.
But besides the presumption that no anomalous and unheard-of proceedings or suits were intended to be raised up by the constitution,—anomalous and unheard of when the constitution was adopted,—an additional reason why the jurisdiction claimed for the circuit court does not exist is the language of the act of congress by which its jurisdiction is conferred. The words are these: 'The circuit courts of the United States shall have original cognizance, concurrent with the courts of the several states, of all suits of a civil nature, at common law or in equity, * * * arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, or treaties,' etc. 'Concurrent with the courts of the several states.' Does not this qualification show that congress, in legislating to carry the constitution into effect, did not intend to invest its courts with any new and strange jurisdictions? The state courts have no power to entertain suits by individuals against a state without its consent. Then how does the circuit court, having only concurrent jurisdiction, acquire any such power? It is true that the same qualification existed in the judiciary act of 1789, which was before the court in Chisholm v. Georgia, and the majority of the court did not think that it was sufficient to limit the jurisdiction of the circuit court. Justice IREDELL thought differently. In view of the manner in which that decision was received by the country, the adoption of the eleventh amendment, the light of history, and the reason of the thing, we think we are at liberty to prefer Justice IREDELL'S views in this regard.
Some reliance is placed by the plaintiff upon the observations of Chief Justice MARSHALL in Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 410. The chief justice was there considering the power of review exercisable by this court over the judgments of a state court, wherein it might be necessary to make the state itself a defendant in error. He showed that this power was absolutely necessary in order to enable the judiciary of the United States to take cognizance of all cases arising under the constitution and laws of the United States. He also showed that making a state a defendant in error was entirely different from suing a state in an original action in prosecution of a demand against it, and was not within the meaning of the eleventh amendment; that the prosecution of a writ of error against a state was not the prosecution of a suit in the sense of that amendment, which had reference to the prosecution by suit of claims against a state. 'Where,' said the chief justice, 'a state obtains a judgment a gainst an individual, and the court rendering such judgment overrules a defense set up under the constitution or laws of the United States, the transfer of this record into the supreme court, for the sole purpose of inquiring whether the judgment violates the constitution or laws of the United States, can, with no propriety, we think, be denominated a suit commenced or prosecuted against the state whose judgment is so far re-examined. Nothing is demanded from the state. No claim against it of any description is asserted or prosecuted. The party is not to be restored to the possession of anything. * * * He only asserts the constitutional right to have his defense examined by that tribunal whose province it is to construe the constitution and laws of the Union. * * * The point of view in which this writ of error, with its citation, has been considered uniformly in the courts of the Union, has been well illustrated by a reference to the course of this court in suits instituted by the United States. The universally received opinion is that no suit can be commenced or prosecuted against the United States; that the judiciary act does not authorize such suits. Yet writs of error, accompanied with citations, have uniformly issued for the removal of judgments in favor of the United States into a superior court. * * * It has never been suggested that such writ of error was a suit against the United States, and therefore not within the jurisdiction of the appellate court.' After thus showing by incontestable argument that a writ of error to a judgment recovered by a state, in which the state is necessarily the defendant in error, is not a suit commenced or prosecuted against a state in the sense of the amendment, he added that, if the court were mistaken in this, its error did not affect that case, because the writ of error therein was not prosecuted by 'a citizen of another state' or 'of any foreign state,' and so was not affected by the amendment, but was governed by the general grant of judicial power, as extending 'to all cases arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, without respect to parties.' Page 412.
It must be conceded that the last observation of the chief justice does favor the argument of the plaintiff. But the observation was unnecessary to the decision, and in that sense extrajudicial, and, though made by one who seldom used words without due reflection, ought not to outweigh the important considerations referred to which lead to a different conclusion. With regard to the question then before the court, it may be observed that writs of error to judgments in favor of the crown, or of the state, had been known to the law from time immemorial, and had never been considered as exceptions to the rule that an action does not lie against the sovereign. To avoid misapprehension, it may be proper to add that, although the obligations of a state rest for their performance upon its honor and good faith, and cannot be made the subjects of judicial cognizance unless the state consents to be sued or comes itself into court, yet, where property or rights are enjoyed under a grant or contract made by a state, they cannot wantonly be invaded. While the state cannot be compelled by suit to perform its contracts, any attempt on its part to violate property or rights acquired under its contracts may be judicially resisted, and any law impairing the obligation of contracts under which such property or rights are held is void and powerless to affect their enjoyment. It is not necessary that we should enter upon an examination of the reason or expediency of the rule which exempts a sovereign state from prosecution in a court of justice at the suit of individuals. This is fully discussed by writers on public law. It is enough for us to declare its existence. The legislative department of a state represents its polity and its will, and is called upon by the highest demands of natural and political law to preserve justice and judgment, and to hold inviolate the public obligations. Any departure from this rule, except for reasons most cogent, (of which the legislature, and not the courts, is the judge,) never fails in the end to incur the odium of the world, and to bring lasting injury upon the state itself. But to deprive the legislature of the power of judging what the honor and safety of the state may require, even at the expense of a temporary failure to discharge the public debts, would be attended with greater evils than such failure can cause. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
I concur with the court in holding that a suit directly against a state by one of its own citizens is not one to which the judicial power of the United States extends, unless the state itself consents to be sued. Upon this ground alone I assent to the judgment. But I cannot give my assent to many things said in the opinion. The comments made upon the decision in Chisholm v. Georgia do not meet my approval. They are not necessary to the determination of the present case. Besides, I am of opinion that the decision in that case was based upon a sound interpretation of the constitution as that instrument then was.
Affirming 24 Fed. Rep. 55.


text:
Do you have a question about part # DT24959?
Please tell us your vehicle year, make, model, and version, and as much as you can about your particular needs so our Experts can provide you with the best possible response.
What our customers are saying:
Thanks for all the help and the quick response. Michael H gave a very detailed answer to all of my questions. Thanks!
Questions Asked About Part Number DT24959

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Great DiningDon't go to just any restaurant... We take the guess work out of wondering whether a restaurant will be a good or bad experience. Justskye gives you the good food and eating articles you need!
CoffeeThe daily ritual of coffee drinking is part of millions of lives around the world. Why not drink the best coffee, by learning the tips and tricks of the top coffee connoisseurs? Come visit us at Caffekalina!
DessertsThe wonderful world of desserts and cakes is best explored at Pink Desserts, see the finest examples of cakes for all occasions here and learn how you yourself can create these masterpieces.
RecipiesGet great recipies for that perfect lunch box, meatless dinner, low fat lunch, low carb snack, and lots of perfect organic food recipies.
Wine TastingThe exquisit world of wine and wine tasting. Canjiren gives you the tips you need to become a seasoned wine taster in no time!
TeaTea is truly a diverse and interesting drink, with so many different varieties, tastes and origins, there is much to know. Come with us at QD Shunde and learn more about tea!
Wine TastingWine tasting is such an incredible experience, expand your wine knowledge to make it an even more enjoyable past time by trying Perrichet!
Italian FoodGreat Italian recipies, restaurant reviews, articles on table manners and so much more. Great for the true Italian food lovers.
SushiSushi is truly an artform. The colours and tastes come together to create a unique experience each and every time.
Restaurant DiningIf you're going to go out for a night on the town, make sure you know the places to go. Try Menucity for the best information.
ChocolateChocolate the world round, is celebrated as one of life's amazing foods. The variety of chocolates, tastes and desserts it is within can take you a lifetime to explore. Let us at Chocolado show you the way.
AlcoholWe cover all the major alcohols from Brandy, Gin and Rum to Tequila Vodka and Wiskey. Plus our great wine and beer coverage keeps all the bases covered.
Cooking IdeasRecipes, kitchen basics, cooking guides and articles to make you the master home chief you've always wanted to be.
CoffeeCoffee types, tips and articles for you to become the ultimate barista!
RestaurantsWorldwide restaurant guide featuring reviews, raves, resources and articles.
RecipesLearn how to cook through our learn-to-cook series and tutorials. If you keep up with us, you'll be making Japanese noodles, cooking up super bowl dishes, baking pumpkin pies, or just something simple as making scrambled eggs in no time!
Health FoodAre you into healthy living? There are many flavorful and healthy meals that you can prepare. Get the lowdown on health foods, recipes, dieting, and many more!
Italian CuisineItalian Rainbow is a cooking site that offers online culinary help with lots of free food recipes on Italian cuisine and menu ideas.
Thai FoodIf you're new on Thai food but would like to discover it, then you've come to the right place!
WinesWine is one of the most widely consumed drinks and if you're among those some who enjoy drinking and collecting wines, we have tips and resources for a wine enthusiast like you.
Cooking IdeasGet great cooking ideas, tips, recipes, articles and lots more.
Fine DiningWelcome to the world of fine dining. Read about famous chefs, tips and suggestions for fine dining, gourmet clubs, exotic foods, and the best restaurants for that ultimate fine dining experience!
CookingDaily food news and articles, cooking tips, delicious recipes.
Alcoholic DrinksA comprehensive internet guide to making and serving mixed alcoholic drinks.
Fish RecipesIn our seafood glossary, you'll find helpful information about fish, shrimp, lobster, crab, and other seafood varieties, interesting facts about seafood, tips on how to buy fish, best preparation methods, and more. You'll become a seafood expert in no time!
SushiSushi is the most famous Japanese dish outside of Japan, and one of the most popular dishes among the Japanese themselves who usually enjoy sushi on special occasions. Learn how to eat and enjoy sushi!
Australian DiningSee the best of Australian dining, restaurants, pubs, bars, beer and wine.
Row grows over 'limited mobility' services - basic telecommunication companies and wireless local loop platforms - Brief Article, NEW DELHI -- Basic telephony service providers and cellular operators in India are at loggerheads with one another over the issue of allowing WLL-based mobile services in the country.
Copyright 2024 thrdmill.com All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication in part or whole strictly prohibited by international copyright law.
Affiliate Programs | Affiliate Marketing | Teen Dating | Law Enforcement | Online Dating | Internet Dating | Online Romance | Affiliate Marketing


text:
Compression Sport Short - Navy
Take workouts to the next level with these performance sport shorts for girls. We've taken our popular gymnastics shorts and made them even better by making them from compression performance wear. They are just as comfortable and snappy-looking while performing even better at practices. Available in a range of classic neutrals and fun fashion colors, these shorts are for young athletes who go above and beyond just like we strive to do.
Our compression shorts have all the great features of our other shorts, including a stay-put waistband and longer inseam. We make shorts that are tight-fitting and never ride up, so she has one less distraction when trying to land her next handspring or salto. You'll be happy as well with our affordable prices on these premium gymnastics bottoms that are made in the U.S.
Our apparel runs true to size as we follow national clothing standards. The size your gymnast wears in street clothing is a great starting point.
We discourage using other leotard brands as a reference point as all brands size differently.
Check out our size chart that has the most up-to-date information regarding fit. We recommend measuring your gymnast and referring to the chart when deciding which size to order to get the best, most accurate suggestion. If you're deciding between two different sizes, we suggest choosing the size that is closest to your gymnast's torso measurement as this is the most important one.
Please note: Our Junior (JR) size has recently been renamed to Child X-Large (CXL).
Should your item not fit as expected, we always offer free first time exchanges!
*Exchanges subject to eligibility and availability. Custom items are final sale so we recommend sizing up for extra room to grow.
Our apparel is designed to exceed product lifetime standards for athletic wear. Garments that undergo the demands of sports can expect a life span of about 1.5-2 years if care instructions are adhered to.
The proper way to care for your apparel is to hand wash inside out in cold water using a mild detergent and hang to dry. Do not use Woolite, granular detergent, fabric softener, or bleach. Do not iron.
Embellishments, such as crystals, and graphics are subject to abrasion wear. Velcro on mats and gym equipment can cause damage. Be gentle with mesh, lace and other delicate details. Strappy leotards should be pulled up by the body to minimize stress at the seams.
You can check out our full care instructions for more details.
Rates and delivery time will vary depending on delivery location, chosen shipment method, carrier capacity and possible other factors.
Free standard shipping over $99 for contiguous continental US!
International shipping to Canada, Mexico, Australia and New Zealand. Both pre-paid and post-paid taxes and duties options available at checkout.
*Destira is not responsible for lost or stolen packages, or courier delays due to natural disasters or current events once the package leaves the Destira distribution center.
Returns are valid within 30 days of delivery if purchased retail on Destira.com. Item must be unworn and in original condition with tags and scrunchie attached. Items not meeting these conditions will only be eligible for store credit and are subject to additional fees.
Exchange shipping is free for first time exchanges! Discount codes will not be carried over to an exchange of a different item. Returns for refunds will be charged a $6.95 shipping fee upon processing.
Please allow up to 14 business days for returns/exchanges to be processed.
Mystery, holiday, face masks and special promotional items are final sale. No returns or exchanges allowed.
For complete details, read our Shipping and Return policies.
*Applicable to Continental US only. For more assistance with international shipping and returns, contact customer service.


text:
Marketing to healthcare providers is made easy with the options Contactaffix has. We can help you reach Healthcare specialty marketing lists and Cardiothoracic Surgeons email & mailing list. Cardiothoracic Surgeons email list is continuously updated with most accurate, quality and verified contacts. Opt for HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY EMAIL LIST INCLUDES: email list to connect with thousands of key healthcare executives, Cardiothoracic Surgeons user's mailing list and decision makers at your fingertips
Today most of the firms are looking for ways to trim their costs and to reach targeted decision makers who has the authority to buy your product or services. By using Contactaffix contact discovery services you can reach a wide range of key decision makers at Clinics, Hospitals, Healthcare Institutions, Nursing Homes and other healthcare centers located across U.S. to increase sales and make your business more profitable.
Contactaffix healthcare database enables you to select the aspect that best fit for your targeted marketing; whether its location wise target, number of employees, select with NAICS Codes / IRS Business Activity Codes / SIC Codes, Physician Specialty or any other healthcare department. Get customized Cardiothoracic Surgeons email list based on your marketing campaign, you can select variety of channels for multi channel b2b marketing campaigning to go viral and to expand market presence.
Thank you for your interest in obtaining samples of Cardiothoracic Surgeons Email & Mailing List. We can understand clearly that samples are critical to help evaluate and validate your target industry. Our sales specialists are ready to discuss about your target industry.
Don't let your sales and marketing efforts be compromised by outdated or incomplete data.
Get Clean & Append Emails – Free Match Test
Our data cleansing services include appending missing data, de-duplication, merging, rebuilding, migration, standardization, normalization, verifying and enriching.


text:
Loading Map....
Date(s) - Aug 31 2017
9:30 am - 10:30 am
Alpert Jewish Community Center
Categories No Categories
Come join the fun! This class will help you burn fat, boost your metabolism, and increase your energy levels. Be prepared for a challenging fusion of cardio, strength, agility, and core moves that will engage our entire body. We use timed high intensity intervals of 20-60 seconds with active recovery/rest periods.
You must be a member of the Alpert Jewish Community Center in order to attend classes. Visit the JCC and inquire about membership.


text:
Artist - Edo era artist (not read)
Image Size - 7" x 4 5/8"
Condition - This print with nice color and detail as shown. Light rubbing and staining. Fold at bottom corner. Thinning at top corner. A few tiny holes along right edge. Please see photos for details.
Shopping Fuji Arts Clearance-
We sell thousands of clearance prints every year in our three ultra-low price categories. Start collecting, purchase an inexpensive print, or discover something special in Fuji Arts Clearance. Notable collectors worldwide shop the clearance regularly.
What prints are in Fuji Arts Clearance?
- Prints that have moved through our auctions and will sell below cost.
- Overstocked prints.
- Prints with condition issues.
Use the item page and photos to shop clearance. We don't offer support for clearance purchasing (additional photos or enhanced identifications). All available information is on the item page. Clearance prints are final sale.
Shipping minimums: We do not ship orders totaling less than $24.99.


text:
This weekend I got the chance to go back to my normal routine; I had time to make a meal plan, go to the farmers market, etc. I was just itching to try some recipes from my vacation in Greece and this was the at the top of my list. On my first night in Greece, after I had settled into my hotel room and walked around the neighborhood a bit it was about 10pm and I was hungry. I found a nice looking taverna with sidewalk seating so that you could sit down, relax and watch the world walk by. Luckily the taverna had quite the menu and I made sure to look at everything on it before ordering. I recognized most of the dishes on the list and I wanted to try authentic Greek versions of all of them. I got to the section on pies and I saw the spinach pie and the cheese pie, both of which I was familiar with, but there was a third pie in the list, a pumpkin pie. This was the first that I had heard of a Greek pumpkin pie and it was under the meal section not the dessert section so I could only assume that it was a savoury pie rather than a sweet pie. Unfortunately, when I tried to order it I was informed that that section of the menu was no longer available, I guess by 10pm they are only serving the dinner part of their menu. Oh well, not to worry, since it was my first meal in Greece what better place to start than a gyro, preceded by some tasty saganaki?
I never did get to try a Greek pumpkin pie in Greece but as soon as I got home I looked it up on the web and I found this recipe for a pumpkin pie or kolokithopita . This is a nice and simple recipe where the filling is simply pumpkin puree, feta and some eggs to bind, all wrapped in crisp and crunchy phyllo pastry. The original recipe called for rolling the phyllo dough up around the filling but I decided to go with more of a pie shape. I also threw in some fresh sage because I had them on hand. The savoury pumpkin pie turned out pretty good! I really liked the way the sweet pumpkin paired with the salty feta cheese. I enjoyed the pumpkin pie warm the first day and straight out of the fridge the second day and it was good both ways. I am thinking that a sweet pumpkin pie would be really nice cooked in a phyllo dough crust as well.
Savoury Pumpkin Pie (Kolokithopita)
- 2 cups pumpkin puree
- 1/2 cup feta (crumbled)
- 2 eggs
- pepper to taste
- sage to taste (chopped)
- 1/4 cup olive oil
- phyllo dough (thawed over night in the fridge)
- Mix the pumpkin, feta, eggs, pepper and sage in a bowl.
- Brush the bottom of an 8×8 inch baking pan with olive oil.
- Brush the top of a sheet of phyllo dough with olive oil and place it in the pan. (You may have to cut the phyllo dough to fit the pan.)
- Repeat until you have 6-8 layers depending on how thick you want the crust.
- Place the pumpkin mixture on top of the phyllo dough.
- Brush the top of a sheet of phyllo dough with olive oil and place it on the pumpkin filling.
- Repeat until you have 6-8 layers depending on how thick you want the crust.
- Bake in a preheated 350F/180C oven until golden brown on top, about 30-50 minutes.


text:
Free Fight
By Jordan Newmark - Belt or no belt, "The California Kid" Urijah Faber is the face of lighter weight MMA. Agile, creative and ferocious to his 145er opponents Faber is a fan favorite. (He's also, we hear, not entirely repulsive to the female fans among us.)
By Jordan Newmark
Belt or no belt, "The California Kid" Urijah Faber is the face of lighter weight MMA. Agile, creative and ferocious to his 145er opponents Faber is a fan favorite. (He's also, we hear, not entirely repulsive to the female fans among us.)
Outside of the cage, pays them back for their loyalty, scheduling piles of appearances and always making time for his supporters -- for example, at the UFC Fan Expo May 28-29, Faber will appear in the UFC/WEC booth to sign autographs and will also teach a training session for aspiring athletes who want to learn his submissions and speed.
To be a great mixed martial artitst, a fighter must master multiple talents, and and perhaps no one exemplifies that more than Faber, who truly wears many hats. Here, we pay tribute to eight of his most impressive roles he's taken on.
1. Champion – On June 6th, 2004, Faber defeated then-Gladiator Challenge Bantamweight champion David Velasquez by unanimous decision. Fewer than 8 months after making his professional MMA debut, Faber had won his first title. Five months later, he submitted Eben Kaneshiro and earned himself the bantamweight King of the Cage championship belt.
In 2006, "The California Kid" made his WEC debut in a featherweight title fight, that he won after Cole Escovedo's corner stopped the fight. Including this weekend, an amazing eight of his 10 Zuffa appearances will have been in title fights.
2. TV Star – On January 9th 2007, MSNBC network began a 4-part documentary mini-series entitled Warrior Nation about the lives of Mixed Martial Arts fighters. The premiere episode focused on Urijah Faber and Enoch Wilson preparing for their fight against each other. Faber won by TKO in the second round.
3. Poster Boy – Like most big name fighters, Faber has a host of sponsors including clothing brands like Silver Star, Alpha Male (his own label) and Form Athletics. Faber's latest and greatest sponsor is AMP Energy Drink (Pepsi co.), which is airing his mug round-the-clock in an inescapably awesome TV commercial.
4. Cover Model – FIGHT! Magazine is the best-selling MMA monthly in the world, and Faber is currently on the cover of the April 2010 issue. This appearances marks the first time any fighter has made it to that spot twice -- Faber was also on FIGHT!'s third-ever cover in December/January of 2008.
5. PPV Headliner – Fights on Versus reportedly get double the viewers when Faber is fighting, and the Zuffa lightweight organization is banking on his popularity. On April 24th, 2010, Faber's fight will be the main event of the promotion's first foray onto pay-per-view. At the ARCO Arena in his hometown of Sacramento, Faber will challenge Featherweight Champion Jose Aldo.
6. Businessman – In 2006, Urijah Faber make his practice and public as he became co-owner of his first MMA training center called Ultimate Fitness in Sacramento, CA. Two years later, Faber opened a second Ultimate Fitness in Rancho Cordova, CA.
7. Mentor – In January 2007, Joseph Benavidez made a pilgrimage to California from New Mexico in hopes of becoming Urijah Faber's protégé. After Benavidez "basically beat the crap out of everyone," Faber offered Benavidez a position at his gym. Since then Benavidez has gone 10-1 with a drubbing of former WEC Bantamweight Champion Miguel Torres and is talked about as the top contender for Dominick Cruz' title. Other proteges include fellow Aldo vs. Faber fighter Chad Mendes, WEC lightweight Danny Castillo and TUF 10 standout Kyacey Uscola.
8. Streetfighter – Belts, sponsors, and fame are nothing to an MMA fan compared to a real life street fight story. In an interview with Men's Fitness (later retold on video to Fight!), Faber wove a tale that reads like the second act of a Jean Claude Van Damme film. The action took place on a vacation in 2006 in Bali, Indonesia. Asian gangs, European girls, fist fights, broken bottles, a shoe hammer, a foot chase, and blood everywhere – everyone became a fan of Urijah Faber after hearing this story.
(Fan pictures from the Aldo vs. Faber Facebook album)


text:
Happy independence day Hoodie TP1501
Details & Fit
This is our take on cozy, responsibly made hoodies that are kind to you and to our planet crafted from 100% Recycled Polyester from plastic waste. It is highly resistant to wrinkles, shrinking, or abrasion while it provides the feel and looks of fleece. All of our products are printed using dye-sublimation technology with great attention to detail to ensure the long lasting vividity of colors and crisp print wash after wash.
This is a Unisex Fitted Hoodie. For women's sizing, we recommend selecting 1 size down for slim fit.
Easy to clean, just let the washing machine do the work.


text:
Some days it feels as though there are too many dead people in my life. Today was one of those days.
Dirge Without Music
I am not resigned to the shutting away of loving hearts in the hard ground.
So it is, and so it will be, for so it has been, time out of mind:
Into the darkness they go, the wise and the lovely. Crowned
With lilies and with laurel they go; but I am not resigned.
Lovers and thinkers, into the earth with you.
Be one with the dull, the indiscriminate dust.
A fragment of what you felt, of what you knew,
A formula, a phrase remains, - but the best is lost.
The answers quick and keen, the honest look, the laughter, the love,
They are gone. They have gone to feed the roses. Elegant and curled
Is the blossom. Fragrant is the blossom. I know. But I do not approve.
More precious was the light in your eyes than all the roses in the world.
Down, down, down into the darkness of the graveGently they go, the beautiful, the tender, the kind;
Quietly they go, the intelligent, the witty, the brave.
I know. But I do not approve. And I am not resigned.
Edna St. Vincent Millay


text:
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does shipping cost?
Shipping costs will vary depending on the shipping destination and the number of items that you purchase
How long will it take to ship my order?
Orders typically ship within 5-20 business days. Shipping times vary based on the product and destination.
To view estimated shipping times for your orders, please visit the Track Your Order page https://www.lindashopus.com/orders/track. You can track your package's delivery progress at any time from this area.
What are the sizing specs of my order?
I'm having issues placing an order.
What is the status of my order?
I need help with a late order.
Orders from our store vary by shipping location
If your order has not arrived after 30 business days, please contact customer service at https://www.lindashopus.com/contact.
You can keep track of your order at any time by visiting https://www.lindashopus.com/orders/track.
My tracking number isn't working.
I'd like to modify my order.
I'd like to cancel my order.
My order is missing or defective.
Can I add a coupon code after an order is placed?
Can I use multiple promotions for an order?
Some of our Coupons can be combined while others can't. Since our coupon system can handle many situations, the best way to know is to add the coupon during checkout and our system will notify you if a coupon is usable. Below are some examples of possible situations you might encounter:
Example 1
- Sitewide Promotion for "Free Shipping".
- Have a "10% Off" Coupon code. This coupon can be combined. Your cart is eligible for "Free Shipping" and an additional "10% Off".
Example 2
- Sitewide Promotion for "Free Shipping".
- Have a "10% Off" Coupon code. This coupon can not be combined. Your cart is only eligible for "Free Shipping", but not "10% Off".
Example 3
- Sitewide Promotion for "10% Off".
- Have a "10% Off" Coupon code. This coupon can be combined. Your cart is only eligible for one "10% Off" discount.
What payment methods do you accept?
We currently accept the following forms of payment:
Credit Cards: We accept Visa, American Express, Mastercard, and Discover
Debit Cards: We accept debit cards featuring the Mastercard or Visa logo. If you're paying with a pre-paid debit card, you must register them before using them for online purchases. You can do this by following instructions on the card or contacting their own support teams.
PayPal: PayPal allows members to have a personal account linked to any bank account or credit card for easy payment at checkout.
Sofort: Sofort allows European customers to use their online banking details as a payment method. It is available in the following European countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland and UK. This payment method is only available to customers shipping to the eurozone.
GiroPay: GiroPay enables online customers in Germany to pay via direct bank transfer. This payment method is only available to customers shipping to the eurozone.
How secure is my payment?
We take your security very seriously by verifying each transaction with the credit company and processing only those orders if the credit company so authorizes it. In the case of a suspicious or declined transaction, our company may contact you to confirm the validity and ensure your identity or cancel that order with full notification.
On credit/debit cards, CVV verification is required before any order can be completed. Additionally, most credit cards and Paypal offer buyer protection for online purchases. Please contact them directly for specific details as it may vary from one financial institution to another.
Our website protects your information during transmission by using Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) software, which encrypts information you input at 128-bit strength. This is often symbolized on most web-browsers by a small padlock appearing on the bottom bar of the window and the address of the window changing from http:// to https://, meaning a secure connection. In the event that an order cannot be completed, please contact our Customer Service. If our website cannot establish a secure connection, we will not risk your confidential information (it will not be transmitted).
What is the security code?
Credit and debit cards have a security code located on them to offer additional protection. For most cards it will be a 3-4 digit number located on the back. For American Express cards, look on the front side for a 3-4 digit number.
Is my credit/debit card charged as soon as I order a product?
Yes, your charge is processed immediately. It may show up initially as an authorization on your account, and then, as it is accepted it will show as a charge on your statement.


text:
Jan. 2009 Introduction & Addendum: The following snarkalicious post has since become somewhat legendary in the atheist/creationism/science blogosphere.
To cut a long story short, this is the one that led self-styled "conservative columnist" Yomin Postelnik to respond vengefully with bizarre edits to my Wikipedia entry (accusing me of all manner of crimes and misdemeanors, including fraud, drug addiction and pedophilia — vandalism that Yomin wasn't smart enough to realize would be stamped with his IP address, 18.104.22.168), to launch a series of blogs solely geared toward smearing me (since taken down), and to eventually make an Internet-wide nuisance of himself by posting to such forums as RichardDawkins.net (link expired) and ChristianForums.com accusing me of harassment and something he called "Google stalking." This activity only led people back here, where they could see for themselves what Yomin was really up to, and that his histrionic claims of being victimized by "militant atheists" led by me was revealed to be projection at its worst. The only one engaging in unbridled harassment and defamation was Yomin, against me.
My opinion is that Yomin is not merely a thin-skinned adolescent unable to handle criticisms; I think he has full-blown narcissistic personality disorder. The Wikipedia entry on the condition notes, "To the extent that people are pathologically narcissistic, they can be controlling, blaming, self-absorbed, intolerant of others' views, unaware of others' needs and of the effects of their behavior on others, and insistent that others see them as they wish to be seen... People who are overly narcissistic commonly feel rejected, humiliated and threatened when criticised. To protect themselves from these dangers, they often react with disdain, rage, and/or defiance to any slight criticism, real or imagined.... With narcissistic personality disorder, the person's perceived fantastic grandiosity, often coupled with a hypomanic mood, is typically not commensurate with his or her real accomplishments."
This is Yomin to a tee. He likes to imagine himself — hell, he's desperate to imagine himself — a powerful and influential leader, and anything that threatens to tarnish this inflated self-image is met with ferocious outbursts of emotion.
The second half of 2008 appears to have been the worst six months of Yomin's life. In September of that year, he had his pre-paid legal service send me a cease-and-desist letter, which was odd, because I wasn't doing anything to him while he was actively maintaining no fewer than three anti-Wagner blogs. It transpired that this was a lame attempt to intimidate me into removing posts from this blog revealing his libelous activities. Basically toothless, because C&D letters carry no legal weight. In response to this, to get Yomin, basically, to pull his head out and back off, my attorney filed an online defamation suit at the end of October. Dumb luck, however, smiled on Yomin here, because for two months, the investigator employed by my lawyer in Florida claimed he could not find Yomin, and the two addresses we had for him were no longer current. This kept Yomin from actually being served for two months.
At the end of December, Yomin sent me a bizarre array of increasingly unhinged, delusional and vituperative emails, alternating pleas to end our conflict (which was entirely of his own making) with threats of further harassment if I didn't take certain posts down from this blog. I forwarded all of these to my lawyer, who advised me that the whole affair was "just getting petty...you need to get this guy out of your life!" Also, to continue to pursue the suit would cost thousands of dollars I didn't have. I had raised the filing fees initially through the help of online donations promoted by folks like PZ Myers. But I didn't feel right continuing to go back to the same people for more money, when this was, truthfully, turning into a childish battle of egos in which Yomin was simply baiting me and trying desperately to drag me down to his level of juvenile vindictiveness. Therefore I agreed to a tentative truce with Yomin at the end of 2008.
Part of me regrets this, as, given Yomin's narcissism, it basically means he thinks he "won" and that he's been able, essentially, to get away with the kind of behavior that, had he been held accountable, would have (hopefully) resulted in some desperately needed character building. The evidence I had linking Yomin to the Wiki vandalism was, in my opinion, ironclad enough to assure a court decision against him. But I didn't want to do this out of other people's pockets, and, knowing the personality type I was dealing with here, it is dead clear that a legal victory against Yomin would have been portrayed by him as further evidence of his victimhood. It is simply better to have this poor sad fellow gone.
In his last emails to me, Yomin, in a revealing moment, exclaimed, "I have to defend my reputation." What the narcissist never understands is that any damage to his reputation is the fault of his own actions. Ultimately, I decided it simply was not my job to help Yomin grow up. Materially, I had not been hurt in any way by Yomin's foolish behavior, while Yomin's name ultimately became synonymous with online hysterics of the most absurd sort. One of our commenters coined the phrase "pulling a Yomin" to refer to anyone having a four-alarm meltdown online. That's a legacy hard to undo, and, in its way, more deflating in the long term than even a court decision.
So, enjoy the following, if you are so inclined.
August 2009 addendum: A number of people have brought it to my attention that Yomin is running for the Florida House in 2010! No wonder he was so frantic to get me to remove embarrassing information about his activities from this blog. While I am amused by this, and by the way a little amount of Googling reveals he is already alienating his hoped-for voter base with his usual online behaviors (like sockpuppeting in blog comments to make it appear he has hordes of supporters, a stunt he pulled all the time in his little battle with me, which was always rendered infinitely sillier by the fact he thought no one would notice he was doing it), I have to say I just don't care. Yes, it is funny that a man who cannot even handle criticism on a blog thinks he's got what it takes to enter the snake pit of politics. But as the GOP has sunk so thoroughly into extremism that many of them actually view an airhead like Sarah Palin as White House material, then I have to say their standards are now such that Yomin ought to be considered an entirely viable candidate. So I wish him the very best of success for victory in his campaign!
January 2011 addendum: After polling less than 6% of the vote in the GOP primaries, Yomin was arrested on November 12, 2010, on charges of misdemeanor domestic battery.
It's been a while since I bloodied my knuckles and let some smug ignoramus have it right in the teeth. So I figured it's time. This is a l-o-n-g one, but a fun one. I hope.
Via Dawkins' site, I learn of a lengthy essay over at Canada Free Press by a nincompoop with the improbable name of Yomin Postelnik, with the grandiose title of "Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound". If you thought Ray Comfort was a cocky assclown, you'll love this guy. Postelnik fancies himself a master of logic (if not proper punctuation or English), and yet doesn't seem to notice that his entire, long-winded blather amounts to one spectacular logical fallacy, namely, the argument from incredulity, with a heaping side dish of straw men. Here he sums up his whole position on why atheism is logically unsound.
No one in their right mind would claim that 10,000 hundred story buildings built themselves from randomness, even over time. Yet those who doubt the existence of a Creator believe that an entire universe, containing all of the billions of elements necessary for life to form, may have come about without a builder. As such, they give credence to billions of times more coincidences to having come about.
Ah, yes. It's the old "just look at all the trees!" argument that Matt Dillahunty and I goofed on on the TV show last week, just on a slightly grander scale. Apart from making the fundamental dumb apologist mistake of inferring design in nature from observing it in known artifacts like buildings — I'll explain why Paley's famous "watchmaker" argument actually does not demonstrate intelligent design in nature a little later — Postelnik's whole rant reveals little more than boilerplate religious scientific illiteracy, total ineptitude at this whole "logic" thing for which he repeatedly flatters himself, and a laughable tendency to recycle any number of long-refuted and feeble apologist canards as if they were amazing new concepts no atheist had ever considered before.
Let's have fun going through Postelnik's catalog of failings here, shall we?
Reading through this, you might wonder: why bother? Postelnik is so stupid that he can say this with a straight face: "Would human beings survive if one organ or cavity was missing or displaced, even after somehow being otherwise perfectly formed with no designer?" Well, knowing, as I do, several people who have had kidneys, bladders, appendixes, uteruses removed, I'd say, well yeah, duh. He's so silly that he launches his whole article with false analogies and unsupported a priori assumptions like this, which reveal the pitiful depth of his idiocy in living Technicolor...
The simplest proof (yet one that no atheist has ever been able to counter effectively) is that a universe of this size and magnitude does not somehow build itself, just as a set of encyclopedias doesn't write itself or form randomly from the spill of a massive inkblot.
Well, I bother because millions of people sadly think like this twat, that's why, and they're the ones launching all-out assaults on science education around the world in the name of their invisible magic sky fairy. It's incumbent upon atheists not merely to refute their nonsense, but to take some of the air out of their puffed-up egos by blasting it to smithereens and peeing on the ashes to boot. I've written before about the way Christianity allows its dumbest believers to adopt an air of faux-intellectualism. Here the stupid is unmasked for all to see, and laugh at. Postelnik is the very model of fractal wrongess.
- Postelnik thinks scientific explanations are all about "random chance." Towards this end, he offers up variants on the old "tornado in a junkyard" argument.
[Atheists] believe that not only did whole planets appear spontaneously, but also believe that the fact that these planets do not collide as meteors do, that they have gravity, that they contain the proper atmospheric conditions for life to take hold and contain sustenance to sustain this life all happened by mere fluke.
Reality check: Naturally, nothing in science (let alone atheism) promotes any of the nonsense Postelnik spews. Where in physics or cosmology is the theory proposed that planets emerged "spontaneously," or that collisions between worlds never happen? (Such a collision is, in fact, why we have a moon, and an asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.) Nowhere, of course, but Postelnik is typically butt-ignorant of the science he attacks and, like so many apologists, doesn't realize what a fool he's making of himself parading his lack of education in public. Planets, as any first year astronomy student will tell you, form within accretion discs of dust and other particles surrounding a star. Gravity, which Postelnik seems to think of as some ineffable magic property (he refers to celestial bodies as "possessing" gravity) when it's nothing more than the natural attraction between objects based both on their respective masses and the inverse square law, eventually causes the particles in all this whirling dust to coalesce into planets. It is only a "spontaneous" process if you're a fool who thinks spontaneity takes place over lengthy periods of time. But that seems to be a basic misunderstanding of creationist twits.
Here's what Postelnik is too thick to grasp. Science understands the eons of time required for celestial objects like stars and planets to form. And instead of the mere guesswork Postelnik seems to think scientists engage in (typical twaddle: "...they outrageously chalk up to coincidence billions upon billions of times more detail and design in all parts of life found in this universe"), there are in fact well understood laws upon which everything in the universe operates. The "spontaneous" appearance of a planet or a life form would, in fact, refute everything science understands about how nature works, since science does not argue for the spontaneous generation of these things. The laws of physics allow us to understand why planets, once they are locked in their orbits, don't collide willy-nilly, though eventually their orbits could change or decay, and then they could. After all, whole galaxies collide, so certainly planets could.
(Incidentally, you would think that with all his dogging on science, Postelnik ought to have some pretty impressive CV's, don't you? Well in fact...I know this will come as a shock...no. His bio identifies him as "the President of IRPW, a company that offers business plans, funding advice and facilitation, SBA loan applications, SWOT analyses, bold and effective marketing strategies, general business development and grant writing and research for non-profits and certain qualified businesses." Clearly he has all the expertise he needs to explain why all the world's leading astronomers, physicists, cosmologists, and biologists are wrong. One hopes, for the sake of IRPW's business clients, the "research" Postelnik does for them isn't as deficient as that which he's done here.)
- Again with the "spontaneity"! Postelnik continues to demonstrate he snored his way through junior high science class by bringing up "spontaneity" straw men over and over again.
Even if all the planets somehow formed themselves, all somehow staying in perfect orbit and possessing gravity, even take for granted that all the chemicals needed for life were so how [sic] there as well, by sheer happenstance, would it then be possible for billions of species to spontaneously come about, each with a male and female of each kind so that they could exist in the long run?
Reality check: I'll take "Scientifically Illiterate Verbal Diarrhea" for $1000, Alex.
Let's set aside the fact planets didn't "somehow form themselves," they were formed by well-understood natural laws. Let's set aside the fact that most life on Earth is microbial, with many species reproducing asexually, some reproducing both sexually and asexually, and some, like viruses, unable to reproduce on their own at all. Let's set aside the fact that, while the ultimate origins of life are still an open question, no one in science is arguing for its spontaneous — as in "poofed into existence in a puff of smoke" — emergence. Let's set aside the fact that the vast majority of Earth's life forms, even the ones like dinosaurs who had the run of the place for far longer than we have or will, have eventually gone extinct. Let's set aside the fact that, for over a billion years of Earth's early existence, the whole planet was unable to harbor life. In fact, let's set aside every fact that science has established about the development of life at all. And once we're that stupid, we can begin to think along the lines of Yomin Postelnik. Because it's only through a totality of ignorance that one can hold the views he holds.
Where does his whole obsession with things popping up spontaneously come from? Why, from religion, of course. Remember, it isn't science claiming that stars, planets, galaxies, people and puppy dogs emerged spontaneously. It's religion. You know, God said "Let there be," and poof, there it was. That's how tards like Postelnik think things really did happen. And once you think things really did happen in that way, then certainly it will seem illogical to think they happened that way all by themselves, without some agency bringing them about. But of course, things did not poof into existence spontaneously. Not even the universe. Remember: the Big Bang theory is not a creation ex nihilo theory. The Big Bang only describes the event that caused the universe to expand into its current state. There had to be something to go bang in the Big Bang, after all.
Nothing in science, outside of the more esoteric realms of quantum mechanics, argues for the spontaneous creation of things from nothingness. Religion does. Postelnik is, hilariously, attacking his straw man of science by accusing it of making the very claims his religion makes. The problem isn't that Postelnik doesn't accept spontaneous creation. Being religious, he does. But religion offers up a god, and science doesn't, and so in that context, science has the sillier explanation, you see? This is how people with a head full of Bronze Age myths and no education in actual science think. Pathetic, isn't it?
Postelnik babbles on a bit, repeating his bogus analogies (remember, encyclopedias couldn't write themselves!), occasionally pausing to compliment himself on his brilliance (he has to, as no educated person would), ignoring all of the detailed fields of scientific study that do in fact show that everything we observe in nature can very easily evolve and develop over time. Like many apologists, he seems to think blustery rhetoric constitutes evidence.
Then he offers up what he thinks are three "stand out" arguments for God, which have been demolished many times, and which I will now demolish all over again.
- And the "stand out" arguments are: (And savvy readers will note that Postelnik isn't even clear on what he does claim to believe. His definitions of the three following arguments are rather confused and conflated, overlapping one another oddly. The way he defines the anthropic principle is closer to the definition of the first cause argument, while his definition of the teleological argument actually sounds more like the anthropic principle. The man argues like a drunk driver.)
- The anthropic principle.
Postelnik thinks: The anthropic argument contends that the universe is too complex to have no Creator. This is in effect the central point of this column, although explained in a more common manner.
A more foolish manner, you mean. Let's deal with the obvious initial objection, which is that if complexity requires a Creator, then that Creator must be at least as complex as his universe and must have had a Creator too, and so on, ad infinitum. I mean, it's just logical!
The anthropic principle has been punctured so many times and in so many different ways that one has to wonder just how many rocks Postelnik has been hiding under all his life to convince himself that "I have yet to meet an atheist who can make even a feeble argument to counter any of these points." I don't get the idea he's met many atheists at all, and certainly has read no atheist literature, all of which has nuked every silly argument Postelnik proudly flogs. To date, the most interesting and unusual refutation of the AP isn't so much a refutation at all: in The God Delusion, Dawkins makes the fascinating point that the AP is not an argument for God, but a substitute for one. Properly understood, what is known as the Weak Anthropic Principle fully supports a naturalist explanation of reality.
Douglas Adams lampooned the AP in his famous bit about the puddle of water remarking on how amazing it was that the hole it was in was so perfectly formed to contain it. This is the problem with the AP if used to support theism: it's a tautology. Any universe whose properties for supporting life such as ours we could marvel at would have to be one in which we existed in the first place. This fact alone says nothing about a godly designer, nor does it address the likelihood of other possible universes containing entirely different properties, under which entirely different forms of life might arise. Hey, the believer might say, there's no evidence for those other universes, so that's just hypothetical guesswork! To which we say, by Jove, I think you've got it! Your God is the same kind of hypothetical guess, chum. At least the concept of other universes or other physical properties for sustaining life are hypotheses about natural rather than supernatural things.
Understood as supporting natural processes, the AP points out that life developed after an environment in which it could exist arose. We, along with millions of other species (making the term "anthropic" both arrogant and inaccurate — since dogs exist, why do we never hear theists argue the "caninopic" principle?), were fortunate enough to be that life. Such an environment could just as easily not have arisen, as in the false start we see evidence of having occurred — remnants of vast flows of water, etc. — on Mars. In other words, we have been fine-tuned (by the ongoing processes of evolution) for our environment, not vice versa.
The vast bulk of this universe is deeply inimical to life. Most of it, as Postelnik might have overlooked, is hard vacuum hovering around zero Kelvin. And of all the planets we know of, ours is the only one we yet know of teeming with life.
An all-powerful universe-creating God could easily have populated every single planet and satellite and asteroid out there with highly advanced forms of life. Argue for an all-powerful God, and suddenly the need of the universe to possess specific properties for the support of life becomes superfluous. Unless the theist wants to argue that natural laws don't permit that. In which case, they've just argued their God is subject to (thus not transcending) natural laws, and not likely to be the creator of them. An omnipotent being would not be bound by the kinds of natural laws that keep the planets on their courses, and only allow life on our little blue globe while seven other perfectly lovely planets full of pretty exotic real estate go to waste. He wouldn't need to "fine tune" the universe for life. He could merely say, as the Bible has him say, "Let there be..." and there it is.
- The cosmological argument.
Postelnik thinks: The cosmological argument maintains that finite matter (original matter, which was clearly finite) cannot create a universe that is greater than itself.
The cosmological argument is better known as the "first cause" argument, one basic objection to which I've mentioned above: the problem of infinite regress of Gods. Postelnik adds confusion to the whole thing in trying to skirt this objection, by qualifying his version of the argument to state that "finite matter...cannot create a universe that is greater than itself." But he offers no support for this simple assertion, and in terms of its content, it's really nothing more substantial than the creationists' routine insistence that complexity cannot arise from simplicity through natural processes. Postelnik simply wants to throw the phrase "finite matter" into the mix as a way of differentiating his God, which he naturally assumes is "infinite matter." But in making this distinction, our Master of Logic has fallen into another fallacy, that of special pleading. Nature has to obey these particular rules which disallow it from creating a universe, says the apologist. So here is my God, who doesn't have to obey those rules. Convenient, eh?
Cosmological arguments answer no questions at all while raising more than they ever can. Why make assumptions about the supposed limitations of "finite matter," and what evidence does Postelnik provide for the "infinite matter," a.k.a. God, that he clearly sees as the "logical" alternative? Why assume, even if such "infinite matter" exists, that it needs to bear any resemblance to Postelnik's ideas about a God? Finally, the fallacy at the core of cosmological arguments is that they assume knowledge of conditions at the beginning of the universe — mainly, that it was "caused" — that simply are not known. Their very premises are insupportable. They fail before they even get going.
- The teleological argument.
Postelnik thinks: Especially compelling is the teleological argument, that the existence of a Creator can be seen from the fact that the universe works in perfect harmony, as would a giant machine. Gravity, orbits, chemical atmospheres and all other ingredients needed for life to exist come together in unison to allow such existence to happen. An enormous machine that works like clockwork needs to have a Creator.
Postelnik embarrasses himself hopelessly here. His scientific illiteracy is complete, and his fondness for bad analogies is simply spewing over. Again, good old natural laws that have been understood and derived through observation — all the way from classical Newtonian physics to the more exotic fields of study that new research and knowledge are just now opening up — are proving entirely sufficient to explain why the universe functions the way it does, and though we still have numerous unanswered questions, we don't need to invoke any magic man in the sky just yet to fill our knowledge gaps.
And it's hardly a flawless, clockwork-like process. Some planets have atmospheres conducive to life (though ours is the only one we know of), most have deadly atmospheres or none whatsoever. There is evidence at least one of our sister planets, Mars, started out warm and watery, which would be life-friendly conditions, then failed. Where in that fact is evidence of a creating hand, let alone that of the Biblical God who supposedly made us in his image, whom Postelnik is clearly trying to argue for? If anything, what we observe about the way life has developed on Earth (and more importantly, where life has failed to develop) is ideal evidence of the way evolution allows organisms to adapt. Speaking of which: there are over 1,000 species of parasites that can live in the human body. Evolutionary explanations for why they exist make sense, but why would Postelnik's God need, let alone desire, to "design" such creatures to infect us? Is this part of his "perfect harmony"? Maybe it's part of our punishment for Eve's "fall," eh?
Once more with feeling: argue for an omnipotent God, and all this talk about the universe needing to obey specific laws, work in "harmony" like a "machine," have only certain planetary conditions to harbor life, and all that, is so much superfluous noise. Postelnik's all-powerful creator God could, if he so wished (and, given this God's obsession with being worshiped by as many sentient beings as possible, there's no reason for him not to wish), have intelligent beings living on every planet in the solar system, on every airless asteroid, hell, even on the surface of the sun and floating in pure vacuum between the worlds. The great irony of apologists who employ such things as design and anthropic arguments is that they don't realize they are using limits to prove the existence of their limitless God. The premise of their arguments contradicts the nature of the God they're arguing for.
- The anthropic principle.
- And now for a little projection. Postelnik goes on to make a further fool of himself by throwing out some vacuous twaddle about how (he thinks) scientists think that will utterly fry your irony meters. After falsely claiming, without citing sources, that more scientists are embracing theism than otherwise, he goes into what can only be called weapons-grade projection. Try this on for size.
However, we must realize that while the sophistry it takes to purport a falsehood can be easily countered, the person who has upheld such notions for decades must have each of his or her counterpoints addressed. This is able to be done smoothly, in light of the inherent logic that necessitates the existence of a conscious Creator, but it must be done thoroughly.
Encouraging atheists to open their minds to pure logic and to possibilities that they hitherto only sought to counter or to avoid on any pretext also involves an emotional challenge for them, as they must open themselves to the possibility of having to shed preconceived notions that they've held firm for decades. And that, rather than facts, is the primary challenge to exposing them to insightful logic. However, if they are willing to address the issue honestly, a search for the truth should be of paramount importance and enough reason for them to take an open look.
*snort* Yeah, whatever you say, Captain Logic.
Postelnik also amusingly advises all us atheist sophists to read Anthony Flew's book, There Is a God. Thing is, Richard Carrier has investigated this book thoroughly, and even corresponded with Flew. And the fact is that the book was not written by Flew at all, but entirely by evangelical Christian Roy Abraham Varghese, who is given a co-author credit on the cover. And one of the arguments in the book is one that Flew, in a letter to Carrier, had abandoned before the book was published. (Questions about Flew's possible mental decline remain, but are ultimately irrelevant. If a former atheist suddenly became a theist, and did so on the basis of lousy arguments, that would not undermine the views of rational atheism. It would simply mean we had a stupid ex-atheist out there.) So if Postelnik wants to shore up his case for theism with another fallacy — argument from (ex-atheist) authority — he'll have to do better than Flew.
And ba-dee, ba-dee, that's all, folks. I was going to go on another round of ridicule over Postelnik's final paragraphs, in which he claims the Bible reveals the first and second laws of thermodynamics before any stoopid scientist ever thought of them, so there. (He grossly misstates both laws, unsurprisingly.) But by this point I would hope I've exposed Postelnik's staggering silliness in all its tarnished glory, and frankly I'm as tired of writing this as I'm sure you are of reading it (assuming you still are). Maybe you folks will have fun refuting those final paragraphs of his yourselves. The fellow is your typical fundamentalist apologist, an intellectual poseur through and through, and in his entire article he never once advances a single new argument. He merely recycles every tired falsehood and fallacy that defenders of the faith have tried again and again, and they work no better for him. The only novelty about Postelnik's writing is watching a bozo who thinks he's some kind of logical paragon when what he really means by "logical" is "Gawrsh, it makes sense ta me!"
Stick with, uh, your "bold and effective marketing strategies," dude, okay? I have no idea if you do that well, either. But it can't be as bad as your oh-so-"logical" attempts at apologetics. (Or as dumb as the way you chose to respond to this critique of your essay.)


text:
- Home
- ...
- Categories
- Stand
- Stand Construction
- Stand Construction Packages
- Stand type X1
Stand type X1
The product is no longer available for this event, as the event is finished.
available up from 12sqm space
Construction and completion one day before trade fair opening, 8:00 am. Cleaning before the event. Carpet will be covered with protective foil during stand assembling. Disposal after the Show.
ATTENTION: Dismantling starts immediately after the show!
Details at a Glance
Stand system:
aluminum system, walls made of laminated fiberboard panels, white or light grey, back wall 250cm high, Columns 320cm high connected with 4 Point Alur truss, colored panels according sketch available in wall color choices
Stand construction:
lockable cubicle with door (100x100cm)
1 fascia board per aisle
1 spot per 3m² stand space for illumination
Fair-Rips carpet, color choice out of overview, included in the price
Velours carpet, color choice out of overview, additional charge
Included material:
Electrical package 5,2 KW
1x BE2202-3-phase current connections, 400 V up to 5,2 kW
2x BE2241-Euro power socket 230 V, 10 A, up to 2.3 kW
2x BE2248-Wieland coupler 230 V, 10A up to approx. 2.3 kW for exhibitor's own lighting fixtures
1x BE2251-earthing connection for earthing the stand, required for metal stands
1x BE3401-connecting the stand to the electric mains in the hall
Exclusive consumption
Furniture package:
2 x BE4051 glass display case 50x50cm, fixed on back wall
4 x built-in Podium 100x50x81cm along the back wall
12 x BE4013 shelf 100x30cm, flat
1 x BE4200_001 table round 80cm, white
4 x BE4202 upholstered chair, black
1 x BE4032 counter rounded, white
1 x BE4404 waste basket, black
1 x BE4016 coat rail
Colored walls:
Color choice could be done from our available color overview. White or light grey are free of charge.
Fascia board:
measurement 200x40cm
basic color white
lettering free of charge up to 15 letters, each additional letter per fascia board will be charged with 4.30€.
(color choice out of overview, Type: Arial 15cm high or adapted to the fascia size, additional letters at extra charge possible)
Graphics: Price on request!
Details of Service Partner Messe Düsseldorf GmbH:
Messe Düsseldorf is one of the 5 most successful trade fair organisers worldwide. Some 30.000 exhibitors present their products to 1.5 million trade visitors at events in Düsseldorf each year. About 50 trade fairs are being held in Düsseldorf, including 23 global leaders in five areas of expertise: machinery, plants and equipment, retail, trade and services, medicine and healthcare, fashion and lifestyle, and also leisure. Messe Düsseldorf GmbH is the trade fair company wi... read more
The product is no longer available for this event, as the event is finished.
The product is no longer available for this event, as the event is finished.


text:
Martini Table by Sticks MAR001-S39708
Kitchen & Dining Room Tables
Sticks artisans create this artistic one-of-a-kind Martini Table MAR001-S39708, constructed of hardwood. Hand-drawn whimsical designs are burnt in and then painted.
- Handmade in the USA
- Size: 16" D x 16" W x 24" H
- Signed, Dated
- Made to order
- Shipping time: three to six weeks
Anything you can imagine, Sticks can design for your space. Customize THEMES - COLORS - WORDS.
For more information please send your inquiries to email@example.com
1. Free Ground Shipping: On most items $150.00 and over, and under 25 lbs.
Read more…
2. Ground Shipping Charges: 0 - $149.99 = $18.00 (USPS, FedEx, and UPS only)
Read more…
3. Freight Charges: Larger items, for example, furniture.
Read more…
4. International Orders: Must contact us first: email@example.com
Read more…
For any shipping requirement other than free ground shipping, please call (845) 679-2622, or email firstname.lastname@example.com
Due to the nature of handcrafted work, subtle variations are natural.
Sticks furniture and home accessories have whimsical imagery and themes with inspirational words, phrases, and sayings. They are works of art.
Sticks furniture and accessories instill vitality, fun, creativity, and wonder into your space. If you are seeking an interior that makes a statement, we would welcome the opportunity to assist you in creating an extraordinary space.
Sticks design artistic installations and interiors for commercial and residential settings... talk to us. We are here to help.
Sticks was started by Sarah Grant in 1992.
Since then, Sticks has received national acclaim for its distinctive furniture, accessories, and object art.
Each piece is handcrafted within Sticks' award-winning studio in Des Moines, Iowa. All products are finely handmade from birch, poplar, and driftwood. The pieces are further designed with hand-drawn imagery, etched contouring, and vibrantly blended paint. Pieces are often embellished with 3-D wood components, metal, leather, and fabric. Sticks line is constantly evolving due to the imagination of its' design team and the many talented craft artisans they employ.


text:
Page, Arizona Individual Health Insurance
With so many different options, deciding on the right Arizona Health Insurance can be confusing. But with the changing laws and the cost of healthcare on the rise, you can't afford to take chances with the health of you and your family members. If an accident or illness strikes, paying high medical costs out of your own pocket can be a financial disaster. If your employer does not offer an adequate health benefit package, or you are self employed, unemployed, retired, or a student, we can help you sort through the maze of different insurance options and find the right plan at a price you can afford.
Warner-Gleave Insurance will help you understand the different types of health insurance choices for you and your family. Although plans differ, they basically cover most medical, surgical, and hospital expenses and can cover prescription drugs. Some plans even offer preventive health care, immunizations, and dental coverage.
Health Insurance options in Page, Arizona
Fee-For-Service (FFS) is a health plan in which the medical professional is paid for the services provided to the patient. Patients are free to choose their doctor and the claims are filed either by the health care provider or the patient.
Most health care plans are some form of Managed Care. Managed Care policies include Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO), Preferred Provider Organizations (PPO), and Point-Of-Service (POS).
HMO - With HMO's all your health care services go through your primary care physician. You will need a referral before seeing specialists or other health care professionals. This usually means less paperwork and lower health care costs for everyone.
PPO - This plan offers more flexibility. You do not need a primary care physician and can go to any health care professional you chose although with staying inside the network you will have lower out-of-pocket costs.
POS - These plans combine some of the qualities of the HMO and PPO plans and the benefits levels may vary depending on whether you receive your care within the network of providers. Like with HMO plans you choose your primary care doctors and need referrals to network specialists when needed. Like PPO plans you may receive non-network care but with greater out-of-pocket costs.
Obtaining the right Arizona medical insurance coverage is crucial. If you prefer to have your care coordinated through your primary care doctor, an HMO plan might be the right choice for you. If you would prefer more flexibility with your medical care or see a lot of specialists, you might look into a PPO plan.
Here are some additional lines of insurance that we service:
- Health Savings Accounts
Our team of professionals at Warner-Gleave Insurance can help you sort through all the options and help you choose the right Arizona health insurance plan for your specific needs.