text:
Do you like to work standing in one place for hours at a time? Do you enjoy warmer than normal environments? Are you good with your hands and like putting things together over and over again? Then call Liberty City Community College. We can train you for a new career. At Liberty City Community College, you can get a degree and be fully trained for a new career in any of the following fields:
Street Cleaning
Processed Agriculture Rotation
Grill Management
Floor Cleaning
Restroom Administration
Coatroom Management
Automobile Ignition Circumvention
Pharmaceutical Baking
If you don't see the field of study that you've been searching for, call our admissions office to define your own major, or set up an appointment by calling 1-800-EDU-KATE.
Copyright 2001, Liberty City College. All Rights Reserved


text:
A set of strategies to attack climate change — which includes a path to divestment from fossil fuel companies — was passed by General Synod 2013 Monday afternoon at the Long Beach Convention Center. This action on July 1 makes the United Church of Christ the first major religious body in the U.S. to vote to divest from fossil fuel companies.
The resolution, brought by the Massachusetts Conference and backed by 10 other conferences, calls for enhanced shareholder engagement in fossil fuel companies, an intensive search for fossil fuel-free investment vehicles and the identification of "best in class" fossil fuel companies by General Synod 2015.
By June 2018, a plan would be prepared to divest UCC funds in any fossil-fuel company, except for those identified as "best in class" which the Rev. Jim Antal, the major proponent of the resolution, called an "oxymoron," noting that no such fossil fuel companies are likely to exist.
"Today, the national Synod of the UCC added another 'first' when it became the first national faith communion to vote to divest from fossil fuel companies – and to do it with the support of its major investment institution, United Church Funds," Antal said.
"This resolution becomes a model for all faith communities who care about God's creation and recognize the urgent scientific mandate to keep at least 80 percent of the known oil, gas and coal reserves in the ground. . . This vote expresses our commitment to the future. By this vote, we are amplifying our conviction with our money."
The original proposal brought to General Synod called for a five-year movement toward divestment. In committee, a substitute resolution that Antal and the leadership of United Church Funds collaborated on to address the UCF and Pension Boards concerns of their fiduciary responsibility to maximize investment.
"This resolution calls on each and all of us to make difficult changes to the way we live each day of our lives," said Donald Hart, UCF president. "Implementing the multiple strategies outlined in this resolution will demand time, money and care — but we believe Creation deserves no less."
The Pension Boards didn't participate in the negotiations that led to the substitution resolution that was ultimately adopted. After the vote, Michael A. Downs, Pension Boards CEO issued a statement that his organization "will support and implement the resolution, to the extent possible, within our legal responsibilities as fiduciaries of the Annuity Plan for the UCC, acting on behalf of the active and retired members who have entrusted their retirement assets to us."
During the floor debate, a number of delegates urged consideration of the economic impact this course of action will have on jobs and the economies of states like Montana, Wyoming and Kentucky, which are heavily dependent on the fossil fuel industry.
"Let's talk real divestment here," Mark Wampler of Iowa Conference said. "Divest yourself of your airline tickets and find a non-carbon way to go home."
The General Synod also passed a resolution on making UCC church buildings more carbon-neutral. Earlier in the week, the committee amended the proposal to call on UCC congregations to conduct energy audits on their facilities as the first step toward carbon neutrality. Sara Brace, committee chair and delegate from the Pennsylvania Northeast Conference of the UCC, also stressed that achieving carbon neutrality can be a gradual process for congregations.
"The encouragement portions of the resolution are what resonated with many committee members," said Brace. "By reducing our carbon footprint, we are helping the environment one step at a time."
Please review our Community Guidelines before posting a comment. If you have any questions, contact us.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Our organic Honey Cardamom Spice is a celebration of the energy and brightness of the exciting markets of India. Imagine walking through an exotic spice market in the south; all the colors, textiles, artisans, flowers, the heady spices- just take it all in!
Our organic blend starts off with tart hibiscus blossoms; studies show that hibiscus may fight low grade inflammation, reduce anxiety and help combat mild depression, it is also known to lower blood pressure. To this we have added apple, orange and rose. Our blend finishes with an anti-inflammatory spice blend of cinnamon, ginger, clove, black pepper and cardamom.
The ruby red infusion has an aroma of honey drizzled orange slices. At first sip, the mild tartness quickly fades to rounded out gingery-clove and ends with sweet orange.
Honey Cardamom is wonderful hot, as a tea latte, and for a unique take- try this iced with plenty of sliced oranges!
07/19/2020, 18:53
06/04/2015, 11:59


text:
New contact centre opens to support Etihad's Airway guests
Etihad Airways, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), has completed the final phase in the development of its Al Ain contact centre facility, with the opening of a second contact centre, bringing to three the number of centres within the UAE, and a total of four worldwide.
The new facility will complement the airline's current Al Ain contact centre, which was launched in 2011, and is staffed and managed by a team of 170 UAE national women.
The centre will operate 24/7 with a desk capacity for 70 agents providing bilingual Arabic and English assistance to the airline's guests. Contact centre agents are trained to handle all aspects of customer inquiries relating to their journey with Etihad Airways and membership of the airline's loyalty program, Etihad Guest. The new centre will support the airline's guests in the UAE and across the Gulf region.
Etihad Airways' Chief Commercial Officer, Peter Baumgartner, said, "We are pleased to expand our Al Ain contact centre, and enhance the guest experience with highly trained, multilingual contact centre agents.
"Our contact centres, which are located in the UAE and the UK, handle around three million calls each year. As Etihad Airways grows, we continue to evolve our guest services to provide the best experience for all our guests and travel trade partners." The new contact centre will provide full time employment for 140 contact centre agents from a diverse mix of nationalities. Each agent will all undergo extensive training in all aspects of the airline's reservations systems and booking procedures.
Etihad Airways' contact centres in Abu Dhabi, Al Ain and Manchester support guests and trade partners in 37 markets across 14 languages.
The Al Ain contact centre was recognised as the 'Best Large Call Centre' at the Insights Middle East Call Centre of the Year Awards in June 2014.
Source : WAM News Agency for United Arab Emirates


text:
Multistix 10 SG Reagent Strips
Negative Means Negative
Study Conclusions
Multistix 10 SG urinalysis strips are an effective "rule-out" tool for patients with suspected UTI.
Negative Urinalysis Strip Results vs. Urine Culture
In 93% of cases, a negative Multistix 10 SG strip result for leukocyte and nitrite was confirmed negative by urine culture.
The number of false negative samples was significantly reduced when combining the leukocyte and nitrite urinalysis results.
False Negative Samples vs. Urine Culture*
*Further analysis confirmed that a large number of samples defined positive by urine culture did not show a WBC elevation, microscopically.
Related Products, Services & Resources
The products/features (mentioned herein) are not commercially available in all countries. Due to regulatory reasons their future availability cannot be guaranteed. Please contact your local Siemens Healthineers organization for further details.


text:
Well, maybe argue is too strong a word, since you never get a cogent argument out of any gun-grabber anyway. What you see here is what happens when you force a leftist to look at rational facts about gun control.
Posts Tagged With: connecticut
How Leftists Argue the Gun Control Debate
Some Rational Thoughts on Gun Control
Sometimes you find something that says it all and says it right, and with Mr. Carl Stevenson's comment on the GodfatherPolitics.com article, Stop Trying to Reason with Anti-gun Advocates, that is just what we have. Thanks Carl!
With all of the hysteria, hype, and misinformation regarding gun control that's emanating from the "progressive" left and flooding the media in the aftermath of the recent tragic shootings in Oregon and Connecticut, there are many important things that need to be raised into the public consciousness and which are deserving of serious consideration by the public.
I'm going to start with the origins of the Gun Control Act of 1968 ("the GCA68"), since it's in many ways the seed from which the misnamed "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994-2004 (the "AWB94") sprung.
Since reinstating and expanding the AWB94 is the immediate goal of Senator Diane Feinstein and her fellow tyrant wannabes, knowledge of the roots from which the ban sprung is important.
Most people don't know that the Gun Control Act of 1968 was "written" by Senator Thomas Dodd (ironically, D-CT), the father of Senator Chris Dodd (also, D-CT), a major proponent of the AWB94.
I put the word "written" in quotes above, because Dodd actually had the Library of Congress translate Hitler's gun laws from the original German and used them almost word for word in "crafting" the law.
This is WELL documented … poke around at http://www.jpfo.org and you'll find the proof of that little-known fact, and much more of interest. (In particular, see http://jpfo.org/alerts/alert20…, but do poke around more on the JPFO website – there's a wealth of useful information there.)
OK, now that we've established the heritage of the AWB94, let's explore the facts about both the myths that are circulating about the weapons they seek to ban and the general outcome which has, historically, always followed the disarmament of a population.
The Bushmaster AR-15 and similar civilian weapons that Feinstein et al are demonizing and want to ban are NOT assault rifles at all. Don't give the gun banners any leeway on these lies and distortions. Their intent is to confuse and misinform those who don't know any better. In other words, they're lying.
Tell people the truth … tell them that the AR-15 is not really functionally different than other rifles except that it outwardly RESEMBLES the M-16/M4 machine gun that our troops use. (For reasons of economy in manufacturing, the inherent reliability and maintainability of the underlying design, and other factors, there are a lot of common parts, but the important ones that determine function are designed to preclude illegal conversion to fully-automatic operation like the military weapons with which the gun-banners want you to confuse them.)
The guns they want to ban are NOT machine guns, as the gun grabbers and media try to convince you. They do NOT "spray bullets" as military weapons do. However their outward appearance, combined with deliberate untruths and the use of incorrect terminology, makes it easier for the deceivers to demonize these guns as they try to build support for banning them. (Which is, of course, just a step towards further bans in the future.)
Also impress up on people that the AR-15 and functionally similar guns are NOT "only suitable for a war zone" as the ban's proponents and media personalities keep saying, but that they are, in fact, NOT really suitable for combat use at all because of their limitations. (Our troops would be SERIOUSLY out-gunned if they went into battle with AR-15s.)
Further, they are not "heavy weapons" as some of the media people keep saying. Inform people of the factual reality that these weapons are actually considerably LESS powerful than most of their grandpa's deer rifles – to the point that in many states it's illegal to hunt game larger than groundhogs and coyotes with the .223/5.56mm round that the AR-15 fires.
The public has to be informed so that they understand that they are deliberately being misled and misinformed by the media to advance the citizen disarmament agenda of leftist tyrant wannabes in our government. (These same people through DHS and other alphabet agencies have recently purchased over 1.5 BILLION rounds of ammo – enough to shoot every man, woman, and child in the country 3-4 times – ammo that's illegal for military use under international law). Considering that the you and I and all of the other US taxpayers are paying for all of this ammo, it's frighteningly reminiscent of the story of political prisoners' families being forced to pay for the bullets used to execute them … isn't it?
If we allow these leftist control freaks to ignore and ultimately gut the 2nd Amendment, history will inevitably repeat itself. These "gun control" proposals have NOTHING to do with preventing crime, but EVERYTHING to do with CONTROL.
Hitler disarmed the Jews and others, then murdered about 15 million.
Stalin disarmed the Russians, them murdered about 40 million.
Mao disarmed the Chinese peasants, then murdered nearly 100 million.
The Turks disarmed the Armenians, then murdered 1.5-2 million.
Pol Pot disarmed the Cambodians and murdered millions.
Rwanda disarmed its ethnic groups, then murdered millions.
The list goes on … over 170 million people murdered BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENTS in the 20th century – AFTER they allowed those governments disarmed them.
They ALL thought "It can't happen here" – until they were disarmed and it started, then it was too late. Don't make the same mistake. Don't EVER let your government disarm you.
The Founders knew that government, if not constrained at every step, will continue to accumulate power and control until it becomes tyranny. That's why they feared standing armies and insisted that the "right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
"Never forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn't let him do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians." – Aaron Zelman and L. Neil Smith, Hope (2001)'
The Failure of Gun Control
It takes only a minute to see that no amount of gun control would have prevented the school massacre in Connecticut. After all, the shooter, Lanza, had already broken a number of other laws, and most of Connecticut's already stringent gun control laws, before he ever pulled the trigger.
In an article appearing on www.wnd.com, Drew Zahn observed that "if you count theft, murder and breaking and entering – since CBS New York now reports it likely Lanza broke into the school through a window to circumvent a locked-door and intercom security system – [Lanza] would have violated a half-dozen laws in his crime, including the following gun-control statutes: First, Connecticut law requires a person be over 21 to possess a handgun. Lanza was 20. Second, Connecticut requires a permit to carry a pistol on one's person, a permit Lanza did not have. Third, it is unlawful in Connecticut to possess a firearm on public or private elementary or secondary school property, a statute Lanza clearly ignored. Fourth, with details on the Bushmaster rifle still sketchy, it's possible Lanza may have violated a Connecticut law banning possession of "assault weapons." Lanza's known personality disorder would have also likely stopped him from legally owning and carrying a firearm, adding a fifth violation of the state's gun control laws.
What does this tell us? To me it represents a terrible failure in the ideology that contends that you can stop crime by regulating the instruments of crime, in this case guns. Great Britain saw what happens when you try that. In the 1990s, they banned nearly all guns. What happened? Home invasions, armed robberies, rape, murder, assaults, and other crimes of violence shot up. "How could this happen?" I hear you cry. "They banned all the guns." They only reached the lawful gun owners with their ban. The criminals, deeming it better for their career prospects, hung onto their guns. American criminals will do the same. So, if the gun grabbers get their way, the the bumper sticker slogan will come true, and only outlaws will have guns. Moreover, the people, once free citizens, will turn into subjects of the government, and the socialist revolution of the U.S. will be complete. The State will be in charge, and the people will just have to keep their mouths shut (1st Amendment rights will be next, they are already under attack from the Leftists and the Muslims) and obey.
It is time for the People to recognize the threat to their freedom posed by gun control zealots, and for government to finally accept an idea that the rest of us figured out a long time ago: that gun control is a failure and that an armed society of free citizens is a safer, more civil, society than one under the jack boot of the almighty State.
Fox Reports Connecticut Shooter Suffered Mental Illness…What a Surprise!
According to Fox News, Connecticut kindergarten shooter, 20-year old Adam Lanza, "was believed to suffer from a personality disorder and lived with his mother, said a law enforcement official who was briefed on the investigation but was not authorized to discuss it. A law enforcement official speaking on condition of anonymity said investigators believe Lanza attended the school several years ago but appeared to have no recent connection to it." Lanza, described as "brilliant but remote" shot and killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, who was a teacher at the school, and then drove her car to the school itself to carry out his attack. The guns, according to Fox, were legally owned and registered to his mother.
So, what do we take away from all that? The Leftist gun-grabbers and their lackeys in Hollywood call it proof that we need to disarm Americans, but for those who: A) Don't follow Obama's Leftist totalitarian agenda; and/or B) Are not craven "peace at any cost" cowards, the lessons are very different. They are:
- Gun control does not protect anyone. Those intent on committing crimes of violence do not adhere to gun laws.
- Gun free zones are really mass murder zones. All school shootings have one thing in common: the victims could not fight back. Had a teacher or two been armed, then maybe Lanza would have been killed before he shot so many kids.
- No one can stop the unthinkable from happening. Those intent on mayhem and destruction will always find a way. Consider the knife-wielding Chinese man who attacked a school and seriously injured over 20 children. If a maniac has no gun, he will make do with a knife or some other weapon.
We cannot, must not, surrender our liberty because of a tragedy, even though the leftists in power–through their propagandists in the media and useful idiots in Hollywood–are demanding we do exactly that. We must educate the people around us, and demand proper and useful self-defense in all places and at all times.
The best way to stop a mass murderer like Adam Lanza in his tracks is to shoot back.


text:
As a totally natural food supplement obtained from a concentration of fish body oils, each gelatin and glycerin capsule has no sugar, starch, artificial preservatives, colors, or flavors.
Evidence from several studies has suggested that amounts of DHA and EPA in the form of fish or fish oil supplements lowers triglycerides, slows the buildup of atherosclerotic plaques ("hardening of the arteries"), lowers blood pressure slightly, as well as reduces the risk of death, heart attack, dangerous abnormal heart rhythms, and strokes in people with known heart disease. However, high doses may have harmful effects, such as an increased risk of bleeding. Read more…(Mayo Clinic)


text:
When it comes to lifetime income planning, your clients are always looking for the latest and greatest strategy to ensure that their income needs will be met during retirement. Deferred income annuities are finally experiencing a dramatic growth spurt in the market, which has motivated insurance carriers to design products with features that allow each product to be tailored to meet the individual client's needs. As the number of carriers offering deferred income annuities expands, a corresponding boost in client demand is expected—especially when clients discover that they can find the income features they have come to expect from an annuity product, but with a level of flexibility in required contributions and income options unique to the deferred income annuity market.
Deferred Income Annuities
Originally, deferred income annuities were meant to be purchased as a safety net that would kick in to provide a stream of income once the client reached old age (typically around age 80 or 85) in order to ensure the client did not outlive his retirement savings. However, in the past two years, insurance carriers began taking a broader approach by offering deferred income annuities that could begin payouts much earlier in the client's retirement, perhaps deferring income only for a year or two before payouts begin.
While many clients liked the idea of the deferred income annuity, it is only recently that they have become more widely available, offering features that extend far beyond the basic annuity payment structure.
The New Deferred Income Annuity
Deferred income annuities now often offer features that make them much more flexible than the traditional annuity product, opening the market to a wider range of clients. For example, while a traditional annuity will usually require the client to make one large lump sum payment to purchase the annuity, many deferred income annuities allow the client to make multiple contributions. This lets the client spread the purchase over a period of time prior to the income starting date, which can alleviate some of the downside risk of locking a large portion of his savings into the contract with no expectation of a return for several years.
Further, while deferred income annuities can provide for an income starting date in as few as 13 months and as far into the future as 45 years, many of these products now allow the client to change the date originally chosen. This gives the client flexibility as circumstances change over what can be a protracted accumulation period.
Along the same line, many deferred income annuities also protect against inflation risk by providing for cost of living adjustments (COLAs) that can give clients certainty that their income needs, which are inherently difficult to anticipate, will be met, even if the annuity starting date is as far as 45 years into the future.
As with many traditional annuities, insurance carriers have begun to offer enhanced liquidity features in conjunction with deferred income annuities to protect clients from the risks that they will eventually need the funds they have locked into the annuity contract prior to the income starting date. These options include accelerated payment options (such as the ability to start the annuity payments earlier than originally planned), but also allow the client to access the commuted value of his annuity payment stream if the funds are needed in a lump sum.
While deferred income annuities still represent a relatively small segment of the market—recent studies show that about 12 companies currently offer the products, up from only six in 2012—demand for these products is growing rapidly. As the market continues to expand, it's probable that product offerings will also expand to meet the needs of even more clients' retirement income goals.
For additional coverage of this issue and similar ones, we invite you to sign up with AdvisorOne's Summit Business Media partner, National Underwriter Advanced Markets, for a free trial.
You may also be interested in signing up for a free trial with another Summit Business Media partner, Tax Facts Online.


text:
June 16
MENA: What you need to know about the C189— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 20, 2019 01:10 AM
Domestic Workers, especially migrant domestic workers are vulnerable and they need joint effort to promote decent work for them. Learn more about the ILO Convention 189. The video is in Arabic.
Africa: Domestic Workers & ILO Convention 189: Making it Real— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 15, 2019 05:15 PM
Millions of women work long hours, in dangerous conditions, for little pay. They are fighting for change, with the help of ILO Convention 189 on Decent Work for Domestic Workers. Watch this video to learn how.
ILC108: GFBTU and IDWF Signed MOU on Protection of Domestic Workers' Rights in Bahrain— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 19, 2019 05:53 PM
On the Eve of the International Domestic Workers Day commemorating the adoption of the International Labour Convention 189 Decent Work for Domestic Workers (C189) on June 16, 2011, the International Domestic Workers Federation (IDWF) and the General Federation of Bahrain Trade Unions (GFBTU) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to promote migrant domestic workers' rights and welfare in Bahrain.
ILC108: June 16 International Domestic Workers Day in Geneva marks by a strong message to governments to support an ILO Convention to stop gender-based violence against domestic workers— by IDWFED — last modified Sep 09, 2019 11:21 AM
Domestic workers from across the globe will share their stories of resilience and struggle to explain why an ILO convention with a recommendation is critical to help them to put end to gender-based violence. The event will be a great opportunity for all, including governments, employers, trade unionists and advocates, to interact and learn from domestic workers themselves about their victories and challenges from Asia, Latin America, and Africa to Europe.
Qatar: Domestic workers celebrating the International Domestic Workers' Day for the first time— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 19, 2019 11:08 PM
International Domestic Workers Day was celebrated in Doha, Qatar, on 14 June 2019. The event was organized by the Ministry of Administrative Development, Labour and Social Affairs (ADLSA), in close cooperation with the International Labour Organization (ILO) Project Office for the State of Qatar, and the International Domestic Workers Federation (IDWF).
Kenya: "Domestic Workers and Convention 189: Making it real!" workshop in Nairobifrom Jun 14, 2018 08:00 AM to Jun 18, 2018 07:59 AM — by IDWFED
The "Domestic Workers and Convention 189: Making it real!" workshop took place in Nairobi, June 14-17, 2018. On the 16th, a press conference was held to mark International Domestic Workers Day in support of Kenyan workers' demand for the Government to ratify Convention 189.
Global: 2018 June 16 - Events and activities of domestic workers around the world— by IDWFED — last modified Jul 16, 2018 04:02 PM
2018 June 16 - Events and activities of domestic workers around the world
India: Domestic workers urge the government to ratify C189— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 21, 2018 09:36 PM
NDWF - Jharkhand Domestic Workers Union 500 domestic workers from five districts came together in an assembly to celebrate June 16. They demand for C189 ratification, law for domestic workers, Minimum wages of domestic workers and BPL. Guests include parliament member, member of Legislative Assembly.
Global: 2018 June 16 - Support ILO Convention to Stop Gender-based Violence - Equal Rights, Respect & Justice for Domestic Workers— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 21, 2018 06:32 PM
Everyone, including governments and employers in our communities need to know this process and be supportive of our call. A workplace which is free of abuse and violence is good for everyone.
Italy: Stop violence at work - Filcams supports the campaign for the ILO Convention— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 16, 2018 03:41 PM
On the International Domestic Workers' Day, Filcams Cgil Nazionale supports the #StopGBVatWork campaign against violence at work and gender harassment.
Peru: Congress approved the ratification of C189 for the rights of domestic workers— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 19, 2018 10:32 PM
After 7 years of unattainable struggle of the Domestic Workers, today the Ratification of ILO Convention 189, and its recommendation 201, was debated and approved in the Plenary of the Congress of the Republic.
Asia: IDWF affiliates has celebrated 6th anniversary of the adoption of ILO convention 189 on decent work for domestic workersfrom Jun 15, 2017 08:00 AM to Jun 19, 2017 07:59 AM — by IDWFED
We demand for Dignity and Decent work for All in every country.
Canada: Caregivers Speak Out! International Domestic Workers Day 2017— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 29, 2017 06:13 PM
Since the early 1900s when women began migrating to Canada to work as caregivers, we have been organizing. And we will continue organizing until Canada ratifies ILO Convention 189, until caregivers have permanent residency status upon arrival, and until all caregivers are treated with respect and dignity.
Global: Domestic Workers Speak - A global struggle for rights and recognition (video)— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 21, 2017 06:07 PM
International Domestic Workers Rights Day – June 16 – celebrates the 67 million mainly women workers who do the behind the scenes work to keep our lives, societies and economies functioning.
Domestic workers speak: a global landscape of voices for labour rights and social recognition— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 21, 2017 06:08 PM
'Domestic workers speak: a global fight for rights and recognition' showcases the diversity and power of the domestic workers' rights movement. Featuring contributions from 23 worker-led groups, it details the struggle of domestic workers, explores their solidarity and methods of resistance, and calls for comprehensive rights for the world's most invisible workforce.
Dominican Republic: Campaigning for implementation of C189 on June 16— by IDWFED — last modified Aug 28, 2017 06:37 PM
Campaigning for implementation of C189 In Dominican Republic, IDWF affiliate Asociación de Trabajadoras del Hogar (ATH), organized a group of 150 people on 16 June to protest and remind the government of domestic workers rights as set on C189.
Italy: Myrtle Witbooi's Speech at the DomEQUAL EVENT on Anti-Racist & Feminist Movements— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 29, 2017 06:16 PM
DomEQUAL EVENT SERIES Venice Symposium #2 - The Global Fight For Domestic Workers' Rights
Global: International Domestic Workers Day June 16 2017, the IDWF calls for "All for one, One for all: Dignity and Decent Work for all National, Migrant and Refugee Domestic Workers"— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 17, 2017 10:20 PM
In 2017, 21.3 million people worldwide are refugees displaced from their homelands. One of the few employment options available to women (and girl) refugees, who account for 50 per cent of this population, is domestic work. The sector – loosely regulated and with limited barriers to entry – attracts many refugees who otherwise find it difficult to obtain work permits and to have their degrees and qualifications recognized.
Global: 2017 June 16 Resources Highlight— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 21, 2017 06:08 PM
In honor of International Domestic Workers Day (IDWD) we want to share these resources:
Cambodia: CDWN & IDEA - petition and forum on domestic workers' right for this June 16from Jun 16, 2016 08:00 AM to Jun 20, 2016 07:59 AM — Cambodia, — by IDWFED
This year, Cambodia Domestic Workers Network (CDWN) and Independent Democracy of Informal Economy Association (IDEA) had a petition submitting to the Ministry of Labour and National Assembly on June 16. They also did a forum on June 19 to discuss and promote the rights of domestic workers.
Indonesia: Domestic workers drama in celebration of the 5th anniversary of C189— by Fish Ip — last modified Jul 22, 2016 08:55 PM
In celebration of the 5th anniversary of adoption of ILO Convention 189, Jala PRT organized a drama which domestic worker tell people about their plight.
Global: On International Domestic Workers' Day, Turn Rights into Reality— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 28, 2016 04:41 PM
On International Domestic Workers' Day, we celebrate a growing movement to assert the rights of this vast but hidden workforce. An estimated 67.1 million people are employed in domestic work around the world, most of them women. They cook, clean, and care for children and the elderly. But working behind closed doors in private homes, many have few legal protections and regularly experience exploitation and abuse.
Australia: Plight of domestic workers must not be overlooked— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 28, 2016 04:09 PM
What we do know is that because of the extreme power imbalance within the employment relationship and isolated working conditions not subject to standard labour inspection, domestic workers are among the most marginalised and exploited workers in the world today. This is particularly true for those working for diplomatic and foreign officials.
Global: Today is International #DomesticWorkersDay – 5 years after the convention— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 28, 2016 03:51 PM
On June 16 2011, the ILO adopted Convention 189 on decent work for domestic workers and its accompanying Recommendation 201. Since then, after a slow start progress has been made: 22 countries have ratified the convention, more than 30 have extended legislative protections to domestic workers.
Asia: Asia scores low on labour law protection for domestic workers— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 27, 2016 08:58 PM
Over 35% of the domestic workers worldwide are accounted for in Asia where the Philippines remains the only country to ratify international labour standards for their protection. Changes are brewing and support is needed.
Trinidad and Tobago: A First Step Toward Strengthening Domestic Workers' Cooperatives— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 27, 2016 05:51 PM
In Trinidad and Tobago, domestic work (estimated at 30,000 employees by the Government of Trinidad and Tobago) is a growing sector. The members of the National Union of Domestic Workers (NUDE) formed Service Workers Centre Cooperative Society (SWCCS) in 2014 for improved benefits and working conditions and to have a legal entity for domestic workers that is recognized by employers. Domestic workers' participation in a democratic workplace upholds their rights as workers and as citizens of our society. The work of the ILO on this topic is guided by the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) , which to date has been adopted by 22 countries.
Nepal: Domestic Workers are also workers! NTUC urges the Government to Ratify ILO Convention 189— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 21, 2016 09:22 PM
Nepal Home workers Union affiliates of Nepal Trade Union Congress organized a conference on "Awareness on ILO Convention C189 and My Fair Home Campaign" to observe the 5th Anniversary of C189 and as the International Domestic Workers Day.
Nepal: GEFONT supports the My Fair Home campaign— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 21, 2016 09:57 PM
My Fair Home Campaign was inaugurated by the Chief Guest Deputy Secretary General of General Federation of Nepalese Trade Unions (GEFONT) on the occasion of International Domestic Workers Day, June 16.
Sweden: Union to Union supports to the campaign of My Fair Home on June 16— by IDWFED — last modified Jun 28, 2016 03:51 PM
Union to Union shows support to the campaign of MY FAIR HOME on the International Domestic Workers' Day June 16!
Jamaica: Jamaica Household Workers Union celebration for IDWDJun 16, 2016 from 08:00 AM to 07:59 AM — Jamaica, — by IDWFED
Jamaica Household Workers Union was having a celebration for International Domestic Workers Day on June 16.


text:
Did you notice that!
What the hell happened?
What the hell happened?I sure hope a staffer will respond to this question.
"Valid info" ??!Yes, valid info. This is a database. It stores data. In this particular case, about, among other things, people who worked on movies, series and video games. Someone's name as well as someone's birth name is data. It is stored in a database.
WTF do you knowing someones dead name?I think that for literally 99 per cent of all famous people, it's easy to find out their birth names. So knowing the birth name of someone in this database is not that weird.
You are here to look up moviesAmong other things. People are also here to look up actors, or directors, or simply people with whom they share a birthday. As founder and current CEO of IMDb, Col Needham, once said "IMDb means different things to different people."
what you want is one of those investigation sites so you can dox people and harass them.If you are actually accusing people on this board of wanting to dox or harass people, you are way out of line and I feel you should take it back and apologize.
I'm not in the business, but is this something of concern across the industry like birth dates? I can think of a whole list of security reasons why it might be the case, but just don't know.
This is a fricken fan movie site,Well, partly, but more that a fan movie site, IMDb is a database (guess what the Db in the name IMDb stand for :) ) about films, tv series and video games and the people who worked on them. Obviously, such a database will draw a lot of fans of a lot of movies, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a database.
not the FBI Luke.
You do realize that lots of internet sites mention birth names of well-known people don't you?
You can't put that over the well being of marginalized people.A database is neutral. It doesn't judge. It doesn't give one group of people an advantage or a disadvantage. It doesn't have an opinion about the people it lists, be they marginalized or not.
A database does not marginalize people. Other people do that. And that is terrible and should be stopped. But not allowing people to talk and know about FACTS is always the wrong answer, no matter what the question is.
"The IMDb spokesperson also said for birth name removal requests pertaining to titles in which a person was credited on-screen as their birth name, their credited name will remain listed in the credits section of applicable IMDb name and title pages in parentheses."
If someone was credited under their birth (or other former) name, then the credited name will still appear for credit identification purposes along with the current name (but the birth name will not appear in the biography section if requested).
If someone was not ever credited under their birth name, and all of the other conditions apply, then you won't see the birth name anymore.
But they also state that will go forth and erase ALL birth names of those who have changed their names for whatever reason..
Are the rules in these 3 following articles still permanent
Are the rules in these 3 following articles still permanentThe way I understand all this bad news, is that the content of the first two articles needs an update and is currently incorrect.
Because of this new policy on removing birth names
Imdb will still keep all factual film titles, tv shows and video game titles permanently? Correct?
Bad Call on IMDb's part.
Can a staff member please confirm this: So to be absolutely clear, will this new policy regarding name changes, will it affect film titles, tv shows and video game staying on imdb permanently? Film titles, tv shows and video games staying on imdb for good will never change, correct?
As documented on the site, we will now review requests to remove a birth name from a person's biographical details if the birth name is not broadly publicly known (i.e. it's not already widely recognized and available elsewhere through sources such as major reference sites or publications) and if the person no longer voluntarily uses it (i.e. only uses their birth name when compelled to do so by government/legal requirements, but not in other aspects of their daily or professional life).
Names listed in filmography credits for titles in which the person was credited under their birth name will continue to be displayed. This is in order to continue providing IMDb's hundreds of millions of customers worldwide with comprehensive information about film and TV credits, thereby preserving the factual historical record by accurately reflecting what is listed on-screen.
They are transsexual . REMOVE THE DEAD NAMING YOU HAVE PLAGUED THEM WITH FOR 15 YEARS. You have been the single source of harassment for transgender community because no other site does what you do . I hope Glaad continues the lawsuit because CLEARLY you have not learned a thing Economically you have caused massive discrimination against them .
"if the person no longer voluntarily uses it "
Is this as joke? Whether they have to use it for any reason is none of your business. There are legal issues that are none of your damn business.
"in order to continue providing IMDb's hundreds of millions of customers worldwide with comprehensive information"
That is the biggest joke of all. You are a fan site and you use IMDB Pro to extort money out of people simply to control their own data. No person should have argue that they have changed their name then watch you pull out those old names to abuse them with like it is some kind of "pure data collection".
"hereby preserving the factual historical record "
That is utter BS. Laverne Cox being Laverne Cox on previous films does not alter the films credits. You do not create or alter credits, you track them. Laverne Cox does not become a different person. It is an absurd argument. Historical record. For what when NY falls and we become the Planet if the Apes?
As documented on the site, we will now review requests to remove a birth name from a person's biographical details if the birth name is not broadly publicly known (i.e. it's not already widely recognized and available elsewhere through sources such as major reference sites or publications) and if the person no longer voluntarily uses it (i.e. only uses their birth name when compelled to do so by government/legal requirements, but not in other aspects of their daily or professional life).
So what you're saying is that birth names can be removed, even if they're factual?
Doesn't that go against the fundamental concept of a database? Isn't IMDb undermining IMDb here?
They are transsexual .Maybe I missed something, but I don't believe anybody said they aren't.
REMOVE THE DEAD NAMING YOU HAVE PLAGUED THEM WITH FOR 15 FKING YEARS.Shouting and cursing is rather unbecoming.
You have been the single source of harassment for transgender communityYou have quite some nerve accusing a database that publishes data of harassment. If you don't want a database stating facts, I genuinely feel sorry for you.
Is this as joke?That's what I thought when I first heard about this ridiculous policy change, but for a totally different reason.
That is the biggest joke of all.Are you saying that you know what it is all these hundreds of millions of people look up while they're on IMDb?
You are a fan siteDatabase.
you use IMDB Pro to extort money out of people simply to control their own data.You don't have to use IMDbPro you know. If you deserve an IMDb name page, you will get one. And on regular IMDb, your name and some information about you will be visible, whether or not you have IMDbPro doesn't change that.
to abuse themWhy do you consider it abuse that a database stores birth names of the people in the database? There's no shame in one's birth name. It's the name one is given around the time of their birth, nothing more, nothing less. There is no abuse in stating the fact of one's birth name, and especially not for a database.
But IMDb is only allowing the removal of one kind of personal information. And they're doing it because they caved in to a pressure group. I'm against caving in to pressure groups.
I hope IMDb notices that they gained NOTHING through this decision. One of the pressure groups is already calling the decision "a half-measure." The more they cave in, the more the pressure groups will demand more caving.
But sure, I can see the various problems related to information such as birth dates, residence, the names of a spouse and children, info of ex-wives-husbands/girl-boyfriends, divorces, criminal record issues (since now even an accusation seems to be enough - people want to add that to trivia or to biography), etc. Also "biography" is one of those areas where problems can arise quite easily. I personally feel that there's a difference between "biography" and "professional biography" and I support the latter.
I don't have any real answers, however, and I'm not sure that is this decision a good or bad thing for IMDb (maybe a bit of both?). But I do understand some issues behind it. Internet is a pretty nasty and dark place, especially nowadays. IMDb shouldn't give any additional "tools" for abuse. At least they should be very cautious with biography/trivia/etc information that is considered more "personal" than "professional" (there's a very fine line sometimes, but it's often there).
They Will Not Reply!
Typing Is Futile!
We Will Be Assimilated!
A .5% of the population has made us Comply!
We are Borg!
The case is on appeal, though. There will be a hearing in the Court of Appeals next month.
In case you are looking for more information about that case, it is called IMDb.com, Inc. v. Becerra.
I WANT IT REMOVED. Wah Wah it hurts me.
You wait
The Inch has been given.
The Mile comes next!
And what does this sentence me PPP?
"You are talking about the trivial facts about fantasy."
When your translator gets here......
So somebody taking the position that true info should be kept is a bad person to be attacked personally. All at the same time you argue that keeping accurate info is de facto attacking someone.
And criticizing someone personally by their # of posts which you've had 10 posts in one day would mean that you're living on here.
And then to top it all off you pull out the race card to try and shame someone. Be proud of your position, be respectful, and quit trying to drag the argument into the muck.
And PPP you are ignoring my question about the sentence I didn't understand because it looked like it got clipped. I'm trying to listen to your argument, but you aren't making it easy.
And PPP you are ignoring my question about the sentence I didn't understand because it looked like it got clipped. I'm trying to listen to your argument, but you aren't making it easy.
No, Im just not an asshole.
"So somebody taking the position that true info should be kept is a bad person to be attacked personally."
No, don't try and conflate being an asshole with keeping a proper data base. That isn't what he was doing bigot, he was enjoying the suffering these people feel.He should be kicked from this forum.
So thx for calling me an asshole. Been awhile that I've had a teen throwing names at me and it's just as funny now as it was then. All you're doing is prove my point that you're taking this personally which destroys your ability to make any good argument.
I've been here for an hour......... not 100,000 hours.
I've been here for an hour......... not 100,000 hours.
So in less than an hour you started calling me curse names and going to the lowest denominator of using race baiting.
I was in the navy, attached to marines, so trust me I've been called everything in the book and it doesn't bother me in the least.
I'll at least say this, Ed can be sharp-tongued, but don't recall him calling people names.
But if it makes you feel better PPP, go ahead and call me names. I can tell this is a very personal, troubling issue for you for which I'm sorry for you. I'd really like to understand the angles as it's not something I'm familiar with. I've only known one person who was trans and that was about 20 years ago. She was a friend and a fellow vet, and times or people were different because none of us cared. So it's something I'm ignorant about, but would like to understand. So try and make a cogent, non-personal counter-argument vs saying someone is a curse word, bad person, or a bigot.
100,000 equals 11 years and appox 5 months. That's based on a 24 hour day.
I own a business. I'm semi retired. I unlike you can multitask. I help people. You complain and are here to accomplish what? You have no agenda other that to agitate.
You are failing to do one thing correctly.
You have used crude language. You have demonstrated what our modern academia churns out. Every post you make embarrasses you and no one else. You are not capable of slinging an arrow in anyone's direction with anything that resembles a coherent well formed thought. Your 100,000 hours blunder is proof of your incapability to speak with any authority that commands any respect.
No, actually.
"So in less than an hour you started calling me curse names"
That is a lie.
"race baiting. "
Ohh a Trumpster. I merely demonstrated that you were using the same argument as bigots.
"I've only known one person who was trans and that was about 20 years ago."
There it goes, I have a friend who was trans.
" So try and make a cogent, non-personal counter-argument "
I've made the argument why you and yours are unqualified to decide.. Might want to look at one of those 15 posts in 60 minutes.
"You have used crude language"
No, I choose to.
". You are not capable of slinging an arrow in anyone's direction"
LOL! Sir, this is a case of pure projection.
Keep on writing! It's Reese Witherspoonishnesly awesome!
Frankly this isn't an issue that impacts me regardless. My friend committed suicide but it had nothing to do with being trans but instead with ptsd. But I should also say that I may have met other people that were trans but didn't know. It's not something I care about. Kind of like someone saying they're taking a particular point of view and being nasty from the start. It makes me care much less about their position. Thus far I've not seen anything that is persuasive that the actual names in credits shouldn't be listed.
Why you are here and not working.
"Will have a character based on you in a short shortly! "
No, you won't. You might try but it will be Ed Wood. Let me describe my character. 40 years in the business, supervisor, member of the Academy, negotiated with unions. 26 features, worked in Europe and every major in the US and Canada. Bow go write it Hemingway.
They provides great entertainment. I just replied to see what They would say next.
No, you won't. You might try but it will be Ed Wood. Let me describe my character. 40 years in the business, supervisor, member of the Academy, negotiated with unions. 26 features, worked in Europe and every major in the US and Canada. Bow go write it Hemingway.And hiding behind a pseudonym. And your real name is PPP?
Making up one was enough.
" And deny it all you want, your post did call me a name."
Now its just a name.
"Frankly this isn't an issue that impacts me regardless."
UHUH ! Wait for it....
"My friend committed suicide but it had nothing to do with being trans but instead with ptsd."
Well Dr Freud, so you KNOW it had nothing to do with her being trans, just PTSD. Excuse me if your assessment of a transgender persons motivations for suicide are laughable. So 20 years ago when people and the government were openly discrimination against trans people you somehow convinced yourself her suicide had NOTHING TO DO WITH BRING TRANSGENDER! You are a piece of work.
Discussion over.
I didn't see this until now, and was going to ignore it, but just for the record she left a note. She had served in Vietnam and was haunted by what someone who has been in a war is haunted by. I know you know nothing of this because none of your comments reflect anything indicative you ever served, but that was your choice as was mine, my friend's, and many others who choose to serve so you could voice opinions.
As to the trans issue impacting the suicide, I guess I choose to assume that being in war had nothing related to her trans gender because if it did, then the whole concept of trans would be blown up because it's supposed to be about something more fundamental than just a tragic issue.
So again you fail to speak with anything inteligent, and no matter what name you choose to be here as, you fail to make any persuasive arguments as to the actual harm done to anyone is.
In fact I found a blog that gave me the best argument related to removing birth names and it's based on that unlike a stage name, someone who is trans it's not a stage name but a more fundamental name change as it's associated with a sexual identity change. Now that argument alone doesn't convince me that imdb should change it's policy, but it's a good argument and start.
See unlike you, I like to be informed and persuaded before making a decision.
And again I'm going to ignore you, although I wish I could just block you.
Waiting for your reaction to the Princesses abusive diatribe.
The last instance took 6 hours.
Faster than staff, but too slow in real time. We need three Toms!
I'm Lowbar
No Dragons
And I wasn't aware there was any lawsuit over this issue.
As to my opinion, you had stated that I expressed an opinion which I had not until all this garbage you've slung which makes me believe that the counter-argument that the names on titles should be kept is appropriate if you can't make a cogent argument.
I'm done in this banter with you. I feel sorry for you that this is the way you act. It's just sad and if this is how you try to persuade people I hope that if there is a court case you're not called as a witness because you will lose the jury who's opinion does matter.
I wish you the best and hope that you can get some help for your situation.
I AM NOT TRYING TO PERSUADE YOU! I HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN FROM PERSUADING YOU OR ANY OTHER PREJUDICE PERSON ON THIS FORUM! ! You aren't a jury, you decide nothing. You just purvey your common ignorance to other ignorant people who validate your ignorance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBvIweCIgwk
Yes, this is a small step toward fixing the problem. However, listing deadnames in previous credits brings up all sorts of problems, including young people who made projects in their teens with friends before they were working professionally. They would be followed by their deadname and face discrimination in the industry, side jobs, and housing. IMDb significantly lowered the bar for what qualifies for listings some years ago, around when they still ran the now failed Withoutabox.
There are other fixes, including using the most recent credit, not the first credit, which would allow the database to stay accurate, in fact more accurate.
However, listing deadnames in previous credits brings up all sorts of problemsSo after this, there are more facts you feel should be removed from the database. And after that, perhaps you feel people should be able to remove their date of birth? Or do you feel that I Am Not Your Negro () should be called I Am Not Your N-word? You can't have a proper functioning database and at the same time please every group of people who - for whatever reasons, some of them perhaps even rather understandable - wants to delete information from that database. You have to choose, you can't have both.
However, listing deadnames in previous credits brings up all sorts of problemsSo after this, there are more facts you feel should be removed from the database. And after that, perhaps you feel people should be able to remove their date of birth? Or do you feel that I Am Not Your Negro () should be called I Am Not Your N-word? You can't have a proper functioning database and at the same time please every group of people who - for whatever reasons, some of them perhaps even rather understandable - wants to delete information from that database. You have to choose, you can't have both.
Missing you.
Always love the joy and laughs you bring
You only came here to gloat at your victory.
You need not have come here at all.
You could have remained silent.
You came here for one purpose.
You saw me replying and could not resist harassing me.
Well you got a couple of others here that don't like this idea of the far left in this country bullying corporations. Especially a very small fringe of the population mind you.
That you were not counting on. Were you.
I shall no longer reply.
You have become repetitive and petty.
"Ed Jones (XLIX) has unrelentingly cyberbullied me into trying to stop an investigation
I have been the victim of an unrelenting attack of ridicule and harassment and belittling to try and stop me investigating a company registered with IMDb."
Your rhetoric I believed emboldened the Princesses behavior. She no longer has a voice here because she assumed that your bad behavior and usage of colorful metaphors was acceptable.
You are responsible.
You should apologize publicly to her and to anyone else here you have insulted with your name calling and unfounded accusations.
? ?
Princess Perky Pants
Joined community on August 14, 2019
0 Conversations
38 Replies
16 Reply Likes
Page not found :(
Princess Perky Pants's profile
Joined September 26, 2014
16 stars received
38 replies
0 topics
1 topics followed
Suspended Privileges:
= = =
Mrs Potato
Joined community on August 15, 2019
Mrs Potato :
I like how this forum is censored.
Mrs Potato
Joined community on August 15, 2019
Page not found :(
Suspended Privileges:
- - -
Snowflake Especial
Joined community on August 15, 2019
Accommodating .6% of the population has now caused a false belief that 4 or 5 people can effect change. IMDb needs to reverse their decision on this and stick to their longstanding policy
IMDb aims to be the most comprehensive and reliable source of information on movies, TV and celebrities. We are committed to accuracy and it is our longstanding policy not to alter or remove correct factual information from our records.
It is NOT MAJORITY
It was the MONARCHY
How smart can you be if you don't know your own history.
Get your facts right.
You are not debating a knuckle dragging Hillbilly!
It is a business entity.
You have ZERO SAY in how any business is run.
And the same exact argument can be used in Minority Rule too.
Or does that not make logical sense to you.
Get your facts straight again!
1. Majority-rule maximizes self-determination
Self-determination refers to the ability to govern oneself and have one's freedoms curtailed only through the laws that one consents to. It is arguably a good thing, since it maximizes personal autonomy in a society of conflicting interests. Majority-rule ensures that in any such clash of interests, more people 'get their way' than people who do not. This in turn increases the overall welfare of society.
On the contrary, it may be argued that counter-majoritarian solutions necessarily cheats a community of its sense of common adventure.
2. Majority-rule is likely to provide middle ground solutions
According to Anthony Downs' Median Voter Theory, political preferences tend to be distributed over a single peaked 'bell' curve; the median voter will therefore be pivotal in securing a majority. Hence, majority-rule will tend to create middle ground solutions, which is arguably better than 'radical' outcomes.
3. Majority-rule is more likely than not to produce the 'right' answer to political questions
Based on Condorcet's jury theorem, by applying the law of large numbers, if there are right answers to political questions, voters are more likely than not to identify them. This is because, while there will always be many people who will 'get it wrong', over the large number of decision-makers, more likely than not, people will get it right. For example, rarely do radical and destructive political systems arise out of majority rule. Yet, history is full of examples of oppressive regimes arising out of dictatorships.
4. Majority-rule is just
Majority-rule treats everyone equally. Allowing minorities to succeed would mean treating each of their votes as carrying more weight than members of the majority. This is wrong, since it fails to accord to the majority the equal respect they deserve as citizens in a political community.
The case against majority-rule
1. Majority-rule does not necessarily protect minority rights
The idea behind rights is that there are certain interests that we consider 'overriding demands'. These are attributed to individuals in a society out of respect for their position as citizens, and their status as human beings. These rights are a constraint on society's use of political power. However, majority-rule can deprive minorities of these rights. Take for example, the right to vote being denied to African-Americans for most of the USA's history.
Hence, the argument that majority rule is just because it treats everyone equally falls apart when we observe the way permanent minorities can, and have been treated, such that they are stripped of their rights and denied a say in the laws they live under.
2. Majority-rule does not necessarily maximize self-determination or welfare
This is because of what is called the "secession paradox". Majoritarian decision making presupposes the existence of a political unit, but says nothing about why that unit should be defined in any particular way. If 40% of a population constantly lives under laws they do not like, it is wrong to say that self-determination is maximized because 60% get their way. Instead, self-determination is maximized if the two groups separated, such that everybody would live under laws of their choosing. Whenever there is conflict, this can keep happening, up to the point where the benefits of co-operating with people one disagrees with outweighs the benefits of sovereignty.
In any case, it is argued that more people getting their way does not necessarily need to maximum welfare. Imagine that out of 10 people, 6 of them gain 1 unit of happiness if policy A was chosen, while the remaining 4 gain 10 units of happiness if policy A was not chosen. If welfare maximization is our goal, policy A should not be chosen. Yet, majority-rule says it should.
3. Majority-rule leads to disproportionate outcomes
Imagine two groups of people: economizers and conservationists. The former favours relentless economic growth while the latter favours environmental conservation. Economizers constitute 3/4 of the population, and conservationists constitute the remaining 1/4. Imagine there are 4 policy decisions of equal weight to be made; surely it is disproportionate that the economizers get their way on all 4 occasions. The proportionate outcome should be the economizers having their way only 3/4 of the time, or that each policy decision go only 3/4 of the way. Either solution is preferable to the winner-takes-all solution that majority-rule leads to.
4. Majority-rule reduces deliberation and compromise
A healthy majority has no incentive to accommodate, engage or convince permanent minorities, since they have the numbers to win every election. Deliberation and engagement is good, since it fosters sincere political discussions about important issues and leads to better policies. This is because, the practice of presenting reasons in the process of engagement and deliberation increases the likelihood that people are making sincere representations for the common good and allows proposals to be subject to scrutiny, and accepted or rejected on the strength of its reasons.
It also ensures that those in the minority are not denied the respect they deserve as equal members of a political community, and that their views and grievances are listened and responded to. This is important because a decision by a majority can only be seen as a decision on behalf of the entire political unit if all members, including members of the minority, see themselves as a meaningful part of that unit.
5. Majority-rule does not necessarily lead to right answers, if there even is such a thing as 'right' answers
Indeed, where large groups of independent thinkers are concerned, right answers are much more likely to arise than wrong ones. However, Condorcet developed his theorem in the 19th century; in our interconnected world today, there is much greater scope for propaganda and demagoguery than before.
Furthermore, there are often no 'right' answers in politics. Politics is not a scientific exercise oriented towards the pursuit of objective truth. In many conflicts, there are no right answers – merely a conflict of interests or ideas. For example, in terms of choosing between greater economic growth and therefore allowing income inequality to increase, or, reducing income inequality at the expense of slower economic growth, there is no right answer – it is a question of what people want.
I hope that the arguments above demonstrate that the appropriateness majority-rule as a form of decision-making is not as clear cut as many people might think. Many complex issues are involved, and we need to understand them in order to develop decision-making systems that serve our community best.
As noted earlier, this article is not meant to be exhaustive, and has probably left out some arguments that you might think of. For brevity, I have also declined to provide a detailed elaboration of existing arguments. Nonetheless, I hope that the ideas presented here will feature in future discussions that engage issues pertaining to majority decision-making, such as issues concerning ethnic, religious and sexual minorities.
If I can present both sides of an issue. Why can't you?
Federalist Papers: No. 10 – Full Text
The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
To the People of the State of New York:
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired; but it would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as effectually obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the unsteadiness and injustice with which a factious spirit has tainted our public administrations.
By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.
There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.
It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.
The second expedient is as impracticable as the first would be unwise. As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves. The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests. The protection of these faculties is the first object of government. From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties.
The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts. But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time; yet what are many of the most important acts of legislation, but so many judicial determinations, not indeed concerning the rights of single persons, but concerning the rights of large bodies of citizens? And what are the different classes of legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they determine? Is a law proposed concerning private debts? It is a question to which the creditors are parties on one side and the debtors on the other. Justice ought to hold the balance between them. Yet the parties are, and must be, themselves the judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail. Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures? are questions which would be differently decided by the landed and the manufacturing classes, and probably by neither with a sole regard to justice and the public good. The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice. Every shilling with which they overburden the inferior number, is a shilling saved to their own pockets.
It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.
The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.
If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great desideratum by which this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind.
By what means is this object attainable? Evidently by one of two only. Either the existence of the same passion or interest in a majority at the same time must be prevented, or the majority, having such coexistent passion or interest, must be rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression. If the impulse and the opportunity be suffered to coincide, we well know that neither moral nor religious motives can be relied on as an adequate control. They are not found to be such on the injustice and violence of individuals, and lose their efficacy in proportion to the number combined together, that is, in proportion as their efficacy becomes needful.
From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischief's of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people. The question resulting is, whether small or extensive republics are more favorable to the election of proper guardians of the public weal; and it is clearly decided in favor of the latter by two obvious considerations:
In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude. Hence, the number of representatives in the two cases not being in proportion to that of the two constituents, and being proportionally greater in the small republic, it follows that, if the proportion of fit characters be not less in the large than in the small republic, the former will present a greater option, and consequently a greater probability of a fit choice.
In the next place, as each representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens in the large than in the small republic, it will be more difficult for unworthy candidates to practice with success the vicious arts by which elections are too often carried; and the suffrages of the people being more free, will be more likely to centre in men who possess the most attractive merit and the most diffusive and established characters.
It must be confessed that in this, as in most other cases, there is a mean, on both sides of which inconveniences will be found to lie. By enlarging too much the number of electors, you render the representatives too little acquainted with all their local circumstances and lesser interests; as by reducing it too much, you render him unduly attached to these, and too little fit to comprehend and pursue great and national objects. The federal Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures.
The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary.
Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic,–is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage.
The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.
You must convince the majority of an overwhelming need for compromise. If you fail keep at it. But if you do not then you will initiate a breakdown of society as a whole and inevitably fail because of this discord. And if society as an established republic fails so does that radicalized minority that defied the majority.
Your basic Lose, Lose scenario.
Are you saying your a conservative? A Red Hat?
This is usually a sign of someone that is losing an argument.
I can control myself. You however cannot.
It makes you impossible to be found credible.
Bye Bye
This is usually a sign of someone that is losing an argument.
I can control myself. You however cannot.
It makes you impossible to be found credible.
Bye Bye
Delete your account
On or Off topic here ? ?
Caitlyn Jenner
Born: October 28, 1949 in Mount Kisco, New York, USA
Birth Name : William Bruce Jenner
In June of 2015,
she completed her public gender transition
and introduced herself as Caitlyn Jenner
with an article and photo shoot in Vanity Fair magazine.
Actress: Movie (5 credits)
2014 - The Hungover Games - Skip Bayflick (as Bruce Jenner)
2011/I - Jack and Jill - Bruce Jenner (as Bruce Jenner)
1999 - The Big Tease - Bruce Jenner (as Bruce Jenner)
1990 - A Man Called Sarge - Special Appearance (as Bruce Jenner)
1980 - Can't Stop the Music - Ron White (as Bruce Jenner)
- - -
Bruce Jenner Was an Actor way back then...
Before and after.
Using your logic actual person named Divine never existed, but that's how Harris Glen Milstead was nearly always credited. And just in case: no, Divine reportedly never had GID, so in this case his birth name applies. Although IMDb trivia is perpetually confused and refers to Divine as both her and him, depending on perspective.
Take your ............ and Shove it?
Nerds being used in a derogatory hurtful manner. Purposeful Intention.
Where is your action on these?
Please be fair.
If you don't know when or where the term applies???????????????
You have used another derogatory reference!
Mirror Time!
You have not won the argument.
You have only made a small step.
Don't push your point too harshly as you will become what you despise..
Please continue with your policy, keep all valid information on this website permanently
keep all valid information on this website permanentlyI second this.
IMDb needs to stop deadnaming trans people
IMDb should not put trans people's old names out there.
The site should make an exception for the policy
of not removing factual information,
since this is extremely disrespectful
to all trans people working in the film industry....
Kati Knitt
Posted 3 months ago (May 27 2019)
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.
- - -
Poll: How do you think IMDb should handle birth/other pre-transition names of transgender people?
Kelly L.
Posted 7 months ago (Jan 27 2019)
Related Categories
Data Issues & Policy Discussions
- 30382 Conversations
- 4551 Followers


text:
Bone Thugs-N-Harmoney: The World's Enemy (Watch How Intense Things Really Get Behind The Scenes) [1 Minute DVD Teaser]
"This is just a 1 minute experience with Bone Thugs-n-Harmony. We have years of classic footage being edited for the fan family's viewing pleasure. DVD Dropping in 2010" - Brand New Media
Please click the "Report" button below if the video on this page is not working properly.
Comments will only be displayed by verified emails. No Spamming or Racism.


text:
A Purdue Extension program taught Tara Conn and her family to stretch their food budget while choosing healthier foods.
Tara Conn, a mother of three elementary-age children in Warsaw, credits Purdue Extension and the Nutrition Education Programs (NEP) for her family's healthier diet. "They taught me about the importance of fresh fruits and vegetables, and how to cook safely," she says.
More than 882,000 people in Indiana like Conn receive food stamps. Last year, more than a half million students participated in in free and reduced-price lunch programs, and studies show that many are overweight and obese. NEP (in partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration) helps low-income Hoosiers learn to make healthy food choices on a limited budget.
Conn also credits the program with teaching her to stretch her food dollars. "I would run out of food stamps before the end of the month before. Now I have enough to make it through."
Because NEP partners with other organizations, it reached low-income families in 91 of Indiana's 92 counties. In 2013, NEP directly helped more than 66,500 participants (including 21,000 youth) with more than 223.076 client contacts.
Purdue Extension is making a difference for Hoosiers everywhere. Find out how.


text: Space | 26. August 2014 | posted by Reinhold Ewald German astronauts lose a friend and colleague Credit: NASA The crew of the D1 Mission (back row, from left to right): Pilot Steven R. Nagel, Mission Specialist Guion S. Bluford, Jr., Payload Specialists Ernst Messerschmid and Wubbo J. Ockels; (front row, from left to right): Payload Specialist Reinhard Furrer, Mission Specialists Bonnie J. Dunbar and James F. Buchli and Commander Henry W. Hartsfield, Jr. "Steve Nagel was also of particular importance for Germany, since he held a leadership position on both the D1 Mission and the D2 Mission (D1: Pilot, D2: Commander) and made a major contribution to the success of the two Spacelab missions. We are indebted to him and will honour his memory," explains Johann-Dietrich Wörner, Chairman of the German Aerospace Center (DLR) Executive Board. read more


text:
Writing Lab English Language Learner Workshop Series
This workshop series will clarify some of the mysteries of American English use for English language learners by discussing grammar, sentence structure, essay organization, and expressions. Conducted by Jen McGovern from the Writing Lab, in conjunction with David Perez, these workshops will provide tools for English language learners to combine fluency in their native languages with an improved understanding of English.
Wed, Oct. 2nd at 4:15 PM – JRC 203
"Little Words Make a Big Difference": Use of Articles, Conjunctions, and Prepositions
This workshop will address common grammatical issues for English language learners, focusing on smaller words such as articles (a, an, the), conjunctions (connecting words such as "and," "but," and "yet"), and prepositions (as in "over" the river and "through" the woods, "to" Grandmother's house we go). Since these words are different or absent in other languages, they often pose a challenge to non-native speakers. These little words make "a" big difference "in" understanding English sentences "but" are easy to overlook!
Wed, Oct. 16th at 4:15 PM – JRC 203
"Writing With an Accent": American English Sentence Structures and Organization
This workshop will consider the differences between American English sentence structures and essay organization compared to those of other languages. We will emphasize the use of active verbs, concise sentences, and thesis-driven organizational patterns that characterize American English academic essays. English language learners often "write with an accent" by incorporating traditional structures from their native languages into English prose. "Accented" writing can enhance both written and spoken English, adding international flavors to American fare!
Wed, Oct. 30th at 12 PM – JRC 224A (private dining room)
"Not My Cup of Tea": American English idioms and expressions
This workshop will familiarize participants with American English idioms or expressions in which the literal and figurative meanings of phrases differ from each other. Common examples of these phrases include "as American as apple pie," "to bite off more than you can chew," "the big cheese," and "the whole enchilada." With such tasty expressions, it's only logical to have this discussion over lunch—and a cup of tea!
Contact Jen McGovern at firstname.lastname@example.com for more information about this event.


text:
The Albin Schram Collection of Autograph Letters

More than three decades after his death, a letter written by J.R.R.Tolkien to his illustrator Pauline Baynes, has resurfaced. Dated 4th June 1949, Tolkien writes:

"I ought to have written to you before to tell you of the great pleasure that your drawings in illustration of "Farmer Giles" have given me. My friends, very justly, said after seeing them that they had reduced the text to a commentary on the pictures. I am hoping soon to get some larger works published, and in a more ample fashion; and if so, I hope you might be interested, or at least have time to consider them. One, a long romance in sequel to The Hobbit, is finished after some years of work, and is being typed.
It is held up at the moment, since I am immersed in examinations and other weary business; but when it's done, I wonder if I could prevail on you to glance at it."

After being in the keeping of Albin Schram's private collection at his home in Switzerland for almost 30 years, the letter will be auctioned off at Christie's on 3rd July 2007, and is expected to fetch a hammer price in the range of GBP 3000 – GBP 4000.

Bilbos Last Song - Illustration by Pauline BaynesPauline Baynes was undoubtedly Tolkien's favourite illustrator. She painted the covers for several British editions of The Lord of the Rings and also illustrated the maps found in The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Her work can be seen in several Tolkien books such as Smith of Wootton Major, Farmer Giles of Ham, Tree and Leaf, and The Adventures of Tom Bombadil. Her original illustration for the poem Bilbo's Last Song is one of the most rare and sought after Tolkien-related manuscripts.


text:
On capitalism
It was clear among many of the founders of capitalism that there had to be a moral foundation. What happened is that capitalism was reduced to Ayn Rand-ian selfishness. We need to recapture the principle that you do well, but in the process of doing well, you give back.
On the bailout
What is fascinating is the agreement among serious economists that we're doing the wrong thing by trying to protect the Wall Street oligarchy. What's amazing is that we're not having enough of a populist outrage about that.
On the market
My concern is that we're looking at the stock market as an indicator of self-correction, and I think that's a fallacy. There is still an illusion among many in this country that we can just get back to where we were, and I believe a) we cannot and b) we should not.
On poverty
The World Food Program estimates that if you spend just over $2 billion, you can feed every schoolchild going hungry around the world. We actually need to look at the opportunity cost of what we are not doing when we are saving Citigroup.
Watch video clips from the roundtable.
Next Tavis Smiley


text:
VICTORIA — Once again Premier Christy Clark was the most polished of the four party leaders. As with the earlier radio debate, Monday's televised debate showed her superior skills as a communicator, honed in the broadcast medium.
She also came well prepared for the tough question off the top about her ill-advised decision to stop and go through a red light with her son and a Vancouver Sun reporter in the car. "There is no answer other than to say I was wrong to do it."
If only that had been her initial response after the story was published Saturday in The Sun. Instead she gave it the brush-off — "it was 5:10 in the morning" — as she has often done when first confronted with one of the many embarrassments in her administration.
She got off a good shot at Conservative leader John Cummins for his Google-challenged screening of candidates. But other than that, if she had anything new to say about the Liberal plans for a fourth term, it didn't show up on my notes.
And as the 90 minutes unfolded question by question and exchange by exchange, one was reminded of just how much baggage both Clark and the B.C. Liberal party are packing into this provincial campaign.
Adrian Dix, no slouch with an attack question, nailed the problem early on when he brought up the B.C. Liberals' credibility-shattering experience with the harmonized sales tax.
Four years of fiscal policy wasted on a tax that was foisted on the electorate without warning, 10 weeks after an election campaign in which it was barely mentioned and then only as something that was not on the radar screen.
"Why," he asked, should the Liberal government "be rewarded for this policy failure?"
Conservative Leader John Cummins piled onto the premier as well, chronicling the Liberal record of debt, deficits, spending and the claim to have already balanced the budget, a mere four weeks into the current fiscal year.
Dix came back at her for the $16-million advertising campaign touting a job creation plan that was modestly successful if you accept her numbers, a failure if you accept his. The debt-free government was actually increasing the debt, the government that promised to keep taxes low had just raised them, and so on.
It was all "a little rich" to be accused of inconsistency by such a government, he lamented at one point.
As for his own weaknesses, I thought Dix had a stronger answer to the accusation that he was becoming the "Dr. No" to proposals for economic development, particularly in the resource sector.
He cited his support for forestry, mining, skills training, tourism, the film industry and the development of liquefied natural gas, which may come as a bit of a shock to some of the more doctrinaire environmentalists among his supporters.
But I thought his best answer was on the perennial tough question for him, namely the notorious memo to file, the one he backdated to try and protect himself and his boss Glen Clark during a scandal over casino licensing.
"I take responsibility," he said. And for emphasis, he said it four times. Enough there for the voters to judge, surely.
The other leaders? Jane Sterk had a good radio debate but was given a smaller role in the TV, in part because the other leaders did not pitch her many questions when they were given the opportunity.
There was more focus on Cummins. And in his workmanlike way, he spoke for a still significant group of disaffected British Columbians — many of them in rural communities — who feel unfairly treated by the carbon tax, by promising to abolish same.
Less persuasive was his answer when asked how he would make up the estimated loss of revenue, some $1.2 billion. Any group of fiscal Conservatives worth their salt could cut that out of a $46-billion provincial budget, he claimed.
He may have had the most telling comment of the night, however, with his devastating observation off the top that "nobody" expects Christy Clark and the Liberals to win the election and folks probably tuned in "to see what Adrian Dix would look like as a premier."
If so, then what they saw was a leader who remains a bit awkward and evasive here and there, but who is a master of his chosen material, with growing confidence overall.
If any of the other leaders laid a glove on him in Monday night's debate, it didn't show up in my notes.