text:
July 3, 2005
Quick summary of the current state of the O'Connor replacement rhetoric.
DEMOCRATS: O'Connor was a moderate and ought to be replaced by a moderate. We Democrats can't say more than that until we see who the nominee is, at which point we will need plenty of time to do our research. (And you should get the point that this will take forever and include a filibuster if Bush doesn't get the message and choose a moderate.)
REPUBLICANS: Bush will do an exquisitely careful, thoughtful job in choosing a nominee, who, being so carefully, thoughtfully chosen, will deserve the utmost respect, which must be expressed in the form of a quick "up-or-down vote."
Tempted to tune out until we actually hear who the nominee is? Or do we have to worry that the terms of the fight are being importantly "framed" right now? If so, I feel compelled to get into the act, because the blogosphere has got to make a show for itself too.
So let me say four things.
1. I agree that O'Connor was a moderate, within the spectrum of opinion that currently reigns in constitutional interpretation -- reigns in the courts, I hasten to say, not in the academy, of course.
2. It's a contestable point whether a Justice ought to be replaced by someone as much like her (or him) as possible. I think we should notice and fight over whether a different sort of Justice is filling a vacancy, but there's no general principle here. Past Presidents have often taken advantage of vacancies to shift the Court. The President has the power of appointment under the Constitution, and the President has reached his position of power through a democratic process that today very much includes debate about the direction the Supreme Court should take. The real question is whether this Court, now, should be shifted, not whether it is legitimate in the abstract to shift the Court.
3. I don't think the failure to choose a moderate can, in itself, be portrayed as the sort of "extraordinary circumstances" that justify a filibuster under the terms of the recent filibuster compromise. Still, filling a Supreme Court vacancy is very different from putting someone on the Court of Appeals, so it's not enough to say the new nominee is no more conservative than the nominees who were confirmed after the compromise. We need to concern ourselves about the Supreme Court's power to overturn precedents, so what was not "extraordinary" at the appellate court level can become "extraordinary" at the Supreme Court level. But it would be unfair to simply assert that the circumstance of appointing a Supreme Court Justices is in itself "extraordinary."
4. The mere fact that Bush is going to "take this responsibility seriously" -- as he put it -- doesn't mean whatever he does warrants supine deference. If the Republicans chant "up-or-down vote" too much, it's going to feel really oppressive. (I'm already sick of that phrase.) There are a lot of people who worry that they are going to lose rights they believe they are entitled too. Getting all overbearing in response to this genuine fear is going to turn moderates like me against you. And I'm not one of those people insisting on a moderate.
72 comments:
- Allah said...
I think the filibuster is a fait accompli no matter who the nominee is (well, maybe not if it's McConnell but that's unlikely), so the Republicans would be foolish to waste their breath by insisting on a floor vote. Accept the fact that the Dems are going to portray whoever's appointed as the Antichrist, line up your 51 Republican Senators for the nuclear option, and proceed forward. It's too bad that it's come to this, but it has.
- Matt said...
Four very good points, Ann, in particular, the third one, which, to me, is the rub. There's a big difference between being willing to place Michael McConnell on a Circuit Court (which I would have done, despite some reservations) and being willing to confirm him to serve on SCOTUS (especially given that O'Connor's most direct "swing voting" has been on Establishment Clause issues, where he's most vigorously advocated to a change in the law).
That said, as a liberal, I would find McConnell less objectionable than some of the names bandied about (Luttig, Wilkinson). I still say that the most responsibile thing to do would be for Bush to appoint a judicial conservative whose credentials and character are above reproach but who's not necessarily doctrinaire politically (a Posner or Kozinski), but I think that gets him in some very hot water with portions of his base.
- Gerry said...
"We need to concern ourselves about the Supreme Court's power to overturn precedents, so what was not "extraordinary" at the appellate court level can become "extraordinary" at the Supreme Court level. But it would be unfair to simply assert that the circumstance of appointing a Supreme Court Justices is in itself "extraordinary.""
While it will be fun for us to debate what is, and is not, extraordinary, it really is not something we need to do, nor is it something that matters at all if we do.
All that matters is how the individual "Gang of 14" members feel about it. If they think it is extraordinary, then a filibuster can go on.
A few of the gang's decisions are no brainers, such as Byrd's.
In the end, it is going to come down to what McCain, DeWine, Graham, and Warner think.
Interestingly, DeWine and Graham endorsed McCain in 2000-- two of the three US Senators to do so.
So it could be that the whole thing comes down to the impressions of one man. John McCain. Does he think it is an extraordinary circumstance?
And possibly even more important, does he think it helps his Presidential ambitions, or hurts them, for him to say that there are no extraordinary circumstances, versus saying that he can see how his other gangmembers might see there is.
It's McCain's world right now, and we're just living in it.
- Allah said...
Gerry -- If McCain torpedoes a hardline conservative nominee, he's finished as a candidate for the GOP in 2008. His candidacy is already on life support thanks to campaign finance and last month's filibuster deal, but if he obstructs on this he has to know that he'll never be forgiven by the Republican base.
Of course, if he's planning to run as an independent (or not planning to run at all), it's a moot point. Indeed, obstruction now might actually help him with a third-party campaign later. But there will be long, long memories and hard, hard feelings. Elephants never forget.
- Matt said...
Actually, it may well be instead Arlen Specter's world. In the prior nuclear option vote counts, the count was pretty firm as 50 "No," 49 "Yes," and Specter refusing to commit. Now, the compromise document may affect that vote count by shifting No to Yes for a few people, and I think some Senators who were lukewarm on the idea may be warned away by the hightened scrutiny of a SCOTUS nomination, but between his position in the middle of that vote and as Judiciary chair, Specter's going to be a very interesting fellow to watch.
(All that said, saying anything beyond what's already been said by both sides until we have a nominee is going to be generally unproductive.)
- Ann Althouse said...
Gerry: I realize all that, but as indicated in the post, I'm just playing the game of being a participant in the framing phase. I have no delusions about the effect of my statements.
- jeremy said...
Even as a liberal, I recognize the absurdity of the "X was a moderate, and so should be replaced by a moderate" argument. Which is not to say I don't want the Democrats to fight for a moderate, and maybe that argument will play better with the masses than it does with me.
- Ann Althouse said...
Jeremy: I think there are lots of good arguments for a judicial moderate and for preserving the balance on the Court, and the Democrats are -- at least some of the time -- making this argument. As a moderate myself, I'm fond of calling attention to the nonexistence of problems, the relatively good current state of affairs that we don't appreciate enough. Aren't things good now, with the balance achieved through O'Connor's participation? People aren't willing enough to say yes. And this is an intrinsically conservative attitude (associated with Edmund Burke).
- Allah said...
As a moderate myself, I'm fond of calling attention to the nonexistence of problems, the relatively good current state of affairs that we don't appreciate enough. Aren't things good now, with the balance achieved through O'Connor's participation?
How panglossian! Let us cultivate our garden.
- Ann Althouse said...
Allah: I didn't say things were the best they could possibly be, just that the status quo tends to be underrated. But people also love it too, so it should be relatively easy to get people to pay attention to the good that exists. Politicians try to make their way by pointing to all the problems that need to be solved -- and never mind that their solutions may make things worse. Ordinary people ought to be suspicious that they are being played. Actually, I think they are.
- Gerry said...
"just that the status quo tends to be underrated. ...solutions may make things worse. Ordinary people ought to be suspicious that they are being played."
Good, conservative impusles!
I approve.
Then the question becomes, has the Supreme Court been an instument of change to the status quo, or has it been a protector of a relatively good state of affairs?
Good people can have different perspectives on that question.
- Ann Althouse said...
Gerry: I agree. I just think a moderate Justice is most likely to keep the rights we've come to expect at the same level, not cutting back or giving more on things like separation of church and state, abortion, gay rights, and affirmative action. And I think there's a pretty good argument for wanting to do just that.
- Allah said...
I didn't say things were the best they could possibly be, just that the status quo tends to be underrated.
I know. I'm teasing (sort of). In fact, I mentioned you in my comment here as the type of centrist voter whose concerns Bush should consider when choosing nominees.
That said, I'm not sure how to distinguish actual problems with the Court's jurisprudence (as I perceive them) from problems which, as you say, don't really exist. For example, I think the Court's increasing willingness to look to foreign law for guidance is potentially a significant problem. O'Connor was a very much in the foreign law camp. Isn't now a good chance to tilt the Court back the other way, or is this a phantom problem which doesn't require a solution?
- Ann Althouse said...
Allah: I think you have to put real, substantial people on the Court who are stable and wise enough to trust for thirty years. They can't possibly be neat little doctrine plugs or ideological remedies. If we try for that, we will be left with a mediocrity. Who cares if some ambitious man now says what the people who have the power to grant his ambitions want to hear about the use of foreign law or any other particular matter? When that person is ensconced in his lifetime spot and his ambitious are all fulfilled, what will he do then?
- amba said...
Matt, what's your objection to Luttig? The Chicago Tribune article Ann posted here about him last week sounded unimpeachable and unobjectionable. (Maybe Ann will provide the link back there.)
- amba said...
Allah, McCain can't be the Republican nominee -- the base wouldn't have it -- and it increasingly looks to me (what do I know?) as if running as an independent could be the smartest thing he could do. A lot of moderate Democrats would go over to him, especially if the alternative was Hillary. So would moderate Republicans. Of course, it depends on who the Dem and Republican candidates turn out to be.
- Gerry said...
How about an "Ann" list? You've seen, I am guessing, the various versions of a 'short list' floating about, such as this one.
Do any of the names get your nod of approval?
What names would you like added that you think would possibly have the same sort of appeal to the President (in other words, that he actually would consider nominating)?
What names would you like added that you think he would probably not consider nominating?
I think that would be a great post-- and there are several days at least until we get a nomination.
- Gerry said...
I think that McCain most certainly can be the nominee. He does not have to mollify all of the conservative base, just more of it than he did in 2000. In 2000 he was facing a single opponent. In 2004, he will probably be facing several, which could make his task easier still.
And if he comes in on a white horse to save Bush's judicial nominees, do you really think, to throw a name out there, that Dr. James Dobson would rally his troops against him?
I am not a big McCain fan, for a number of reasons (not the least of which is McCain/Feingold). But I think that people who write him off as a definite loser in the nominating process are very much underestimating him.
- Gerry said...
Ann, in particular I am interested in hearing your opinion of Edith Brown Clement, if at all possible.
- Matt said...
Probably my biggest concern with Luttig is the death penalty stuff. As you probably know, Judge Luttig's father was (tragically) murdered--my concern is that ever since then, he's (I believe) never met any death sentence he didn't like. I'll agree he's a better choice than, say, another Thomas, whose credentials were, shall we say, less tha impressive.
- goesh said...
With Rheinquist fading fast, Liberals now know how Custer felt when up the hill at the Little Big Horn came all those angry Indians. Some wag in an ultra-right blog has composed a ditty about Karl in black. This forum has too much class for me to repeat it here.
- ziemer said...
if the issue is having balance on the court, and protecting individual rights, then how about a court with 4 justices who would revive lochner and protect my liberty of contract, 4 against economic liberty, and 1 swing vote.
that would be a balanced court, too, don't you think?
- Adam said...
That neither Posner nor Kozinski are on any of the short lists suggests that something other than merit and excellence are at stake here. Instead, it's the kind of results-oriented jurisprudence which conservatives decry in liberals. Feh.
- Ann Althouse said...
Adam: Posner's way outside of the age criterion. I don't know why Kozinski doesn't get onto these lists. And the fact is Clinton in no way went for especially strong liberals. On the other hand, the record of Republican appointees going way liberal is so pronounced that I can hardly blame them for going into compensation mode.
Gerry: I'd have to do a fair amount of my own research to have much to say, but maybe I'll look at some of her opinios. I don't trust the filtered information at all.
- Allah said...
On the other hand, the record of Republican appointees going way liberal is so pronounced that I can hardly blame them for going into compensation mode.
We won't get fooled again!
Actually, we probably will. Gonzales is the new boss; same as the old boss, O'Connor.
Here's where I do the big Daltrey scream.
- Allah said...
On the other hand, if we get Luttig or some other hardliner, I'll tip my hat to the new Constitution.
- Matt said...
There are two current Republican appointees who one could argue have veered "way left"--Souter and Stevens. Let's leave Stevens beside because there's a decent argument to be made that he hasn't shifted as much as the court has shifted around him. Souter is an example of why both sides have to be careful in choice and criticism (he's also turned into, IMHO, one of the stronger intellects on the Court currently--probably #2 behind Nino). On the other hand, we already have at least two (arguably three) pretty far to the right justices in Scalia and Thomas (and sometimes Rehnquist)--the balance argument doesn't hold water to me.
- Adam said...
Posner is 66; could serve 15+ years without a problem, but I understand wanting to keep it under 60. Kozinski is only 54.
Conservatives would argue that Kennedy veered to the right just because of his vote in PP v. Casey, nothing more. Lawrence v Texas was just more gasoline on the fire.
- Ann Althouse said...
Adam: Bush isn't looking at anyone over 60s, I've heard. Possibly over 55 is too old too. But I think Posner has other drawbacks for Bush. And re Kennedy: you meant to say left, not right, I assume. And yes, Kennedy, lately, has draw a lot of ire, to the point where there's been (idiotic) talk of impeachment. And Kennedy was the fallback choice after Bork was defeated. A LOT of conservatives think that Bork should have been on the Court all this time.
Matt: The balance question is different from the question whether the conservative feel they've got to protect themselves from the leftward drift problem. With respect to balance, there is reason to think Bush should try to preserve the current situation, so things don't change much. To see a leftward drift problem is to view the current balance as something that ought never have occurred, that resulted from betrayal of the appointing Presidents. In this view, the President now is wholly justified in trying much more forcibly to shift the Court rightward.
- Michael said...
Jeremy: "Even as a liberal, I recognize the absurdity of the 'X was a moderate, and so should be replaced by a moderate' argument"
That's not absurd. If you replace a moderate with a conservative, then a bunch of close decisions will go the other way, having a large impact on the Court's future decisions. Precedent will be overturned, etc., whereas if a conservative were replaced by a conservative, none of that happens.
That is, I think, why certain Democrats have been portraying O'Connor as a wonderful moderate. It would hardly make sense for them to say "O'Connor was a right-wing nutjob, and if Bush replaces her with a right-wing nutjob, things will change for the worse." THAT is absurd.
- MrBuddwing said...
From the Dept. of the Horribly Obvious:
Of course Democrats want a "moderate" who's "just like Justice O'Connor." They know they can't get a liberal like Justice Brennan or Mashall, so they'll settle for someone just like O'Connor who was, after all, appointed by President Reagan.
- CJ said...
This fight won't be about how "moderate" the justice is. This fight will be about how "moderate" the justice is on the issue of abortion. It's a stupid fight in light of where the world is these days, but abortion will dominate the debate. I blog a little more about it here.
- ziemer said...
dear matt:
surely, you must be joking.
souter - a strong intellect?
i was working at the people for the american way when he was nominated, and the only reason he wasn't opposed was that he was considered too stupid to be dangerous.
we were correct.
he has proved himself stupid.
as far as dangerous goes, oh dear!
- nikita demosthenes said...
Judge Edith Hollan Jones of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit is the best choice to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court.
And I agree with Patterico. See:
We have a GOP President and Senate (and House, for that matter). OF COURSE, Bush should only appoint only conservative jurists to the Supreme Court. Bush was elected by conservatives. Elections have consequences.
Indeed, liberals know that their only hope to achieve their agenda is by non-democratic means - i.e., the courts - since they are no longer a viable national party - as Zell Miller correctly wrote.
For pete's sake, we shouldn't HELP the liberals achieve court-imposed decisions that they would never be able to achieve through the national (or most state) legislatures.
Please, President Bush, appoint the most conservative and well-qualified jurists available. Again, I commend (1) Edith Hollan Jones, (2) John Roberts, (3) J. Michael Luttig, (4) Viet D. Dinh or (5) Miguel Estrada.
You campainged on it. Please do it. Let's end the liberals' only remaining tool: an anti-democratic activist court
And when the Chief Justice's job comes up, please make Antonin Scalia the new Chief Justice. He's earned it, and he's the right man for the job. He knows that being a judge is about interpreting text - not about being a social theorist. There is no "moderate" way to interpret text, as Scalia has appropriately argued time and time again. See, e.g.:
-nikita demosthenes
- nikita demosthenes said...
Here are the above referenced links:
the speech by Justice Scalia
- ed said...
1. IMHO McCain is setting things up to run as a Democrat in 2008. Perhaps as Hillary's VP. Frankly McCain as an independent is ridiculous. He doesn't have a sufficiently large base to pull it off. And allying himself with the Libertarians would simply be an exercise in futility.
On the other hand McCain could deal for a lot by joining the Democrats. As it is he carries a lot of water for them by playing the role of "the reasonable Republican". And frankly I seriously discount his ability to garner support amongst Republicans. Most Republicans I know despise him.
2. I could live with a mediocre justice who will follow the damn Constitution. I am absolutely opposed to using foreign rulings as justification for domestic rulings. If necessary I'm in favor of impeaching the entire court and starting over if this continues.
- Richard said...
Allah -- McCain ruined himself for GOP2008 with the Compromise2005, so I don't think he's concerned with conservatives anymore. He's now free as a jay bird to obstruct all he wants, I suspect he'll do just that.
Matt -- I don't want to live in a world that belongs to Arlen Specter. Please stop depressing people.
Ann -- Bush is a conservative and so should fight for a conservative appointment. To suggest that he should seriously be considering "balanace" on the court is crazy talk. What's the point of running for president if you feel obliged to give your opponents half the pie after you win. Winning elections should mean something.
- RiverRat said...
Give me originalism with a touch of stare decisis or death.
The heck with liberal or conservative. We already have partisan legislatures that we've elected. I want my constitutional rights protected; not advocated.
BTW, privacy as in Griswald and Roe is not a constitutional right. It's judicial fiat. Reverse Roe and pass a national reproductive rights act. I'll lobby my representatives to vote for it.
The Civil Rights Act seems to have worked fairly well with judicial fiat or a Constitutional Amendment. Hmmmm!
- Mike Liveright said...
As far as I can see the only question is whether the group of 14 decide to over-ride the Filibuster.
1) Bush will put up a "Strict Constructionist"
2) There will be a lot of Yammering, all predictable, given the (R) or (D) of the yammerer.
3) The nominee will be voted out of the committee on a partisan vote.
4) There will be a Filibuster, after the same predictable yammering, and then either:
. 5) The filibuster will be broken and the nominee is approved,
. 6) Or it holds and then after a sufficient time there is a recess and the nominee is recess appointed until the next Senate
So let's sit back and see the show, given the outcome is determined!!!
- Doug said...
Mike, I think you're right on the money with 1 through 5. The only reason I don't see number 6 happening is because I think if the Dems filibuster for any length of time, the Republicans will finally trigger the "nuclear option." If McCain is at all interested in running for president, even he'll sign on, saying that a SCOTUS nominee is "just too important."
And in response to ed, there's absolutely no way McCain would, or could, run as a Democrat. The fact that he's pro-life alone is enough to put the Democratic nomination out of reach. Plus, he's on the record calling Clinton a liar (back in the 2000 primaries, he said W "twists the truth like Clinton"). That's just not done if you're a Democrat.
McCain does have a shot at the Republican nod, if the only other real names in the race are Pataki and/or Giuliani. Compared to those guys, he DOES look conservative.
- betsybounds said...
Ms. Althouse,
You're already sick of the term "up-or-down vote?" ALREADY?? I presume you've been sick of it ever since Mr. Clinton used it over and over and over again during his administration. I used to wonder why Republicans didn't call for such more often, since Clinton used it so many times to make himself sound reasonable about contentious matters.
- Adam said...
The problem for Dems is that this is a vacancy that has to be filled; you can't just filibuster and keep the seat open on a 4-4 bench.
Ann: thanks for catching that obvious mistake.
On Dinh, three easy knocks: age (just 37); the fact that he has professed before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had no idea that the Federalist Society had any political agenda; and that he's currently representing alleging terrorist financiers before an MDL in the SDNY in 9/11 related litigation.
- tarpon said...
What would Clinton do, and what would the Democrats say about. All you need to know.
- Moneyrunner said...
Do you see the problem here? We are discussing this issue as if the Supremes were a "Super Legislature" whose personal opinions were critical in creating our laws.
I am truly baffled that honest partisans of whatever persuasion are looking for the establishment – or the maintenance – of such a body of unelected people with lifetime appointments who can sit as a permanent constitutional convention.
Please give us some justices who have a more humble opinion of themselves and feel bound by the constitution as written and amended by the people.
- ziemer said...
the democrats would never want mccain to become a democrat. what they want is what they have -- a republican lapdog to pat on the head so they can say, "look how a good republican acts."
- Cousin Don said...
I believe what Nikita Demosthenes said elections have consequences is very true, and there is definitely no obligation for Bush to replace a moderate with a moderate.
This makes McCain's cross aisle faction extremely important.
Personally, I think McCain is still smarting about South Carolina in the 2000 primaries and I believe that he doesn't give a hoot about the far right.
I think McCain believes the Republicans are going to be looking at the choice between a true conservative candidate or a Hillary Clinton Presidency, and I think he believes the threat of President Hillary is enough to secure him the Republican Nomination.
- David Blue said...
"If the Republicans chant "up-or-down vote" too much, it's going to feel really oppressive. (I'm already sick of that phrase.)"
Fair enough.
Pro-lifers are going to need some chants in the coming struggle. What do you want us to say?
- M. Simon said...
Questions for the nominee:
What is Interstate Commerce?
What is public use (the Vth)
What is the meaning of IXth?
In our system what is limited? Government or the rights of citizens?
Scalia couldn't pass the IXth test.
Thomas for Chief Justice.
- M. Simon said...
Privacy is covered in Amdmt IX.
Rights in our system are not enumerated.
You might like to read what Prof. Reynolds has to say about Bork and Roe. He thought it was correctly decided if poorly explained.
- h said...
They can't filibuster a guy whose being vilified in an organized campaign by conservative groups, can they? How can the Dems in the gang of 14 say with a straight face that such a nominee is an "extraordinary circumstance"?That's why it says here: Gonzales is the nominee, Gonzales is confirmed with a minimum of fuss.
- Matt said...
I agree that during his confirmation (I was quite young at the time) substantial and justified doubts were raised about Souter's competency. However, I think he's grown into the bench quite well. In contrast, Thomas began as intellectually lazy and has continued to be so on the bench.
- Ann Althouse said...
Matt: Thomas is "intellectually lazy"? Do you read his opinions on a regular basis or are you picking up your opinion second-hand. When the book is written on how our culture treated Clarence Thomas, we will look back with shame.
And whoever wrote about Souter not being that smart: please! If anything, he's too smart.
- Beldar said...
Prof. Althouse commented, "Aren't things good now, with the balance achieved through O'Connor's participation?"
I respectfully dissent. I don't think the Supreme Court has done a particularly good job for the last couple of decades.
"Moderates" and "centrists" are what produce the fractured cases that split off into three to six separate opinions, none commanding a majority, or else produce majority opinions that have been watered down to the point that they're splitting hairs and adding more "balancing tests." That's very, very unhelpful for the lower courts who must deal with the real world on a daily basis. "How do Justices O'Connor and Kennedy feel this week?" ought not be the lodestone for Supreme Court precedent.
A muddy, unpredictable Court radiates near-randomness that ultimately erodes public understanding of (and respect for) all courts and for the law. A vacillating Court also makes it more difficult for those with a coherent point of view to educate and rally voter support to accomplish the slow (but nonetheless important) changes that are the difference between the Court being the least democratic branch of government and an entirely undemocratic branch of government.
Prof. Althouse further commented, "I just think a moderate Justice is most likely to keep the rights we've come to expect at the same level, not cutting back or giving more on things like separation of church and state, abortion, gay rights, and affirmative action."
But how do you actually know, Professor, what those "rights" are? To the extent they can be discerned (and sometimes they can't -- e.g., Vieth -- because there's no majority opinion), they seem to change almost from term to term. It's been a while since Justice O'Connor's opinion for the Court in Grutter for instance; so tell me, ma'am, has Michigan Law School gone far enough down her 20-year path for the racial preferences that were constitutional as of the moment that case was decided to have become (as promised, mysteriously) unconstitutional yet? And was that decision -- on affirmative action, a "right we've come to expect" -- genuinely helpful to you and your colleagues at Wisconsin? Sure, you could compare your program to Michigan's as of the moment Grutter was decided and come up with a rough thumbs-up or -down. But does the Constitution move at the same 20-year pace in Wisconsin that it does in Michigan?
And how many more months or years will it be before Justice Kennedy moseys the rest of the way on down the line from "states can outlaw same-sex sodomy" all the way to "states can't outlaw gay marriage"? I don't recall the Constitution being amended in that regard, but I know that he and the forces of substantive due process are moving in that direction; so on what day, month, and year will the Constitution get there?
Bless their consistently liberal and bleeding hearts, I know what Justices Stevens and Ginsburg stand for. If a presidential candidate says, "I want more Ginsburgs" or "I want more Scalias," the public can figure that out, vote accordingly, and play its indirect but essential role in affecting the Court. Dubya certainly campaigned on the premise that he was going to choose someone like Scalia or Thomas every chance he got, and for a certain nontrivial number of people (including me), that was an important reason to vote for him. I think that's a good thing.
I'd rather have the public's input come through the constitutionally devised nomination and consent process than through the Court trying to read the latest USA Today opinion polls. "Moderate" and "centrist" judges are the absolute monarchs of our times.
- Ann Althouse said...
Beldar: Thanks for the long comment, which says a lot of things that I think myself, on alternate days, when I'm not appreciating the balance. Yes, it would be nice to have clearer, crisper law, but that benefit will bring its own set of problems. We're used to the problems we have. Shake things up and see how you like the new problems: you may be sorry.
- Matt said...
I read Thomas' opinions, and while they're written with undeniable passion, in my view, they fail to confront contrary precedent and distinguish or explain why they must be overruled. Contrast this, with say, Scalia's opinion in Raich, which legitimately wrestles with how Lopez and Morrison affect the case rather than the majority, which perfunctorily says that they're wrong.
- Ann Althouse said...
Yeah, Matt, that's called having a consistent, principled commitment to original intent interpretation.
- Matt said...
See, that, to me, is not the function of judging. I believe in stare decisis. (I also disagree both with pure originalism as a philosophy and what Justice Thomas believes the "originalist" answer to the question is in this case, though I haven't done massive research on the issue--normally "originalism" can be used to support whatever end is desired.)
While I disagree with Lopez and Morrison, I think they either have to be wrestled with in constitutional interpretation or explicitly overruled (with five votes) rather than simply ignored--that's why Scalia's opinion is better than the majority's in Raich. That's my expectation of any judge--that they show some deference to precedent (though that deference obviously need not be absolute).
- Ann Althouse said...
Matt: So you disagree with his theory of interpretation. That does NOT make it acceptable to call him "intellectually lazy." Giving more weight to precedent isn't more work -- or "wrestling" -- as you like to call it, and even if it were, the best theory of interpretation isn't shown by what takes more work!
- ed said...
1. Hillary needs a highly visible and well known military credential. In 2004 it was supposed to be Wesley Clark, but he imploded in a rather public way. But McCain has it all. He's largely acceptable to the Democrats. He's got a very public military record. He's pro-life, which would be a bonus for having him as a VP.
2. The whole timeline of the "Gang of 14" was oriented towards delaying the "nuclear option" until a Supreme retired. This way it wouldn't be resolved prior to this point. If it had been resolved already, then the rancor and struggle over this Supreme nomination wouldn't be as significant. But since the "nuclear option" hasn't been resolved it makes this struggle even more difficult.
McCain was the instigator of that agreement so you have to ask why did he do it? We all knew that a Supreme was going to retire, the only question was who and when.
McCain obviously planned this entire fiasco. It is his bargaining chip for power in the Democratic party because he recognizes that he doesn't have a chance any longer since he has severely alienated the far right in the GOP.
So let me ask you. If you were a Democrat would you prefer to resolve the filibuster issue with a circuit court judge, and have the result applied irregardless to a Supreme? Or would you rather duke it out over a Supreme? Which would make it easier to fire up your base?
3. No offense to anyone but I was appalled by the Supreme's decision on the Michigan case. So here's how it is. Since African-Americans get to discriminate against you white people for your crimes against them, us Asians should be allowed the same thing against all of you.
After all the Chinese Exclusion Act prevented asians from becoming citizens until well after 1945. The litany of discrimination, violence and outright robbery is well documented.
So bow before my victimhood you white bastards!
And if you can't detect the sarcasm in the above, you need a beer. Frankly I lost all respect for the Court with that decision. It's a basic fact of life that asians are forced to adhere to much higher standards in order to compete, due to the quota system.
This is not in any way, shape or form "equality". And quite frankly O'Connor is an ass for having tried to split that hair.
- Cousin said...
Hi Ann -- first time poster, longtime follower (and think Madison is the second prettiest place in the Midwest (after Winona, MN).
Pardon my cynicism, but don't the Dems really want a scenario where Bush nominates another Scalia/Thomas type, the Dems threaten to block it, Frist pulls the nuclear option, and then a stream of conservative decisions comes down (next term and/or after Rhenquist resigns)? "Allah" should be careful what he wishes for: say Roe v. Wade --was-- overturned, wouldn't this be an election windfall to the Democrats? They could then gerrymander their way to control Congress. By the way, I'm a Democrat and I've seen far too many state elections where Dem incumbants practiced similar Machiavelian tactics (witness Mayor Daley, a closet Republican who worked with Danny Hassert to keep Patrick Fitzgerald from U.S. Attorney and supported the former GOP governor George Ryan).
Finally, I think Thomas gets off wayyyy too easy. First, the idea that a 1-year judge/head of a minor govt. agency was the "most qualified person for the Supreme Court" was shameful. Second, it's hard to judge how rigourous he is intellectually because you can't judge that from opinions. I've seen him on C-Span and he's no Scalia. Personally I think any judge who signed-on that Bush v. Gore opinion with the footnote that the decision was not to be used as precedent for anything in the future (convenient when you're doing a 180 degree turnaround on the scope of the Equal Protection Clause) has some explaining to do on the rigourous thing! But I digress -- happy 4th everyone!
- michael a litscher said...
Ann Althouse said... Adam: Posner's way outside of the age criterion. I don't know why Kozinski doesn't get onto these lists. And the fact is Clinton in no way went for especially strong liberals.
I guess that depends on your definition of "strong liberal," but Ruth Bader Ginsburg is no centrist.
- michael a litscher said...
My previous post linked to an article which referenced: "Report of Columbia Law School Equal Rights Advocacy Project: The Legal Status of Women under Federal Law," co-authored by Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Brenda Feigen Fasteau in September 1974.
- Ann Althouse said...
Michael: You're linking to National Review. The liberals I heard talk about her called her conservative. There were many judges out there at the time that real, hardcore liberals loved much more.
- Matt said...
Trust me, there are far harder core liberals out there--for instance, over on Daily Kos, I've seen people saying that the Controlled Substances Act (in its entirety) is unconstitutional not because of the commerce clause issues raised in Raich, but because it violates the right to personal privacy. Or, hell, look at some of the hardcore CLS types--that's "ultra-liberal." Ruth Bader Ginsberg is undoubtedly left of center by her background, but she's no wild-eyed liberal (not even on the sex discrimination issues that are her signature).
- Patterico said...
Shake things up and see how you like the new problems: you may be sorry.
But if we are ruling ourselves, rather than being ruled by judges, we can try to fix the new problems with new laws.
- Bruce Hayden said...
Who is centrist and who is extreme is really all about where you are yourself. Being a bit right of center, I consider O'Connor fairly centrist, but a little to the left. Her Takings dissent did a lot to redeem her in my view. But of course, that means that in my view, Ginsburg is out there quite a way on the left. Nothing centrist to me in any of her decisions - rather knee jerk liberal to the core.
But as I said above, it is all relative.
- michael a litscher said...
Michael: You're linking to National Review.
I also linked to Ginsburg's own work, which was the basis for the National Review article.
So sayeth former general counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union, Justice Ginsburg, in her own words:
"Prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions."
A statutory restriction on political rights of bigamists "is of questionable constitutionality since it appears to encroach impermissibly upon private relationships."
"Sex-segregated adult or juvenile institutions are obviously separate and in a variety of ways, unequal. . . . If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected."
"The Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts, while ostensibly providing 'separate but equal' benefits to both sexes, perpetuate stereotyped sex roles to the extent that they carry out congressionally-mandated purposes."
"Replacing 'Mother's Day' and 'Father's Day' with a 'Parents' Day' should be considered, as an observance more consistent with a policy of minimizing traditional sex-based differences in parental roles."
Then there's the whole lowering the age of consent to 12.
Not very "moderate" to me. But like I said, I guess that depends on your definition of "strong liberal."
For some, a "strong liberal" would advocate lowering the age of consent to 6, or eliminate it altogether, whereas a far-right-wing out-of-the-mainstream extremist nazi zealot would advocate 18 as the age of consent. All depends on your perspective of where the middle is, I guess.
Oh, and for the record, she was confirmed (96-3) in six weeks.
- Brandon said...
Why would John McCain want to be anyone's running mate in 2008? He will be 72 that year. If the ticket is successful, he would then be precluded from running for president until 2016, when he will be 80. If it is unsuccessful (especially if he switches parties) he will probably be blamed for the loss, and his political career will be over. Either way, at his age, running for VP is a way of ending his career with a whimper rather than a bang, it seems to me.
- Adam said...
Regardless of her personal views, Justice Ginsburg certainly has not been a "strong liberal" as a judge. Compared to Brennan and Marshall, today's "liberals" are so mild -- no one's routinely dissenting in death penalty cases because they believe the punishment is unconstitutional, for instance.
- Chris L from MI said...
Aren't Judges supposed to be free of partisan politics? We are talking about someone that will serve for twenty or thirty years, whose positions on current issues will no longer be relevant in the near future. It seems to me a Supreme should be chosen not because of a position on the political spectrum but because they have a proven track record of fair and legally sound judgements. That's why their appointed for a lifetime, so that they can make judgements on the merits of the case without any concern of political backlash.
Or I just being too idealistic and unreasonable to expect the Founder's intent to be honored?
- David Blue said...
Chris from MI: "We are talking about someone that will serve for twenty or thirty years, whose positions on current issues will no longer be relevant in the near future."
Roe has already stood for thirty years. It will be a work of many generations to get rid of it.
It won't go just because five anti-Roe have been appointed (and the proper case brought forward). Leftward drift is powerful, and much of what each generation does will be washed away.
When the final test comes, even if it seems that there are still five good judges left, it will be like turning over a face down "treachery" card for each judge, and there will be losses. So you don't need any five-four, you need seven-two-at least, before the final round of defections from the great project.
The longer the fight goes, the harder it gets, in law because the longer a decision stands the more legitimate it is, and in politics because rights (however deadly) once conceded cannot be withdrawn. Each generation has to be stronger than the one before it, to stand up under the crushing, growing weight of the judicial imposition.
To sustain focus, and winning democratic coalitions, for decade after decade, is a huge ask. It may exceed the possible. But anything less than that - or an alteration to the constitution - is futile.
So it's the single issue that stays important, decade after decade. On the other hand, the integrity of judges is ephemeral. Again and again it vanishes, like HELP! written on a beach by some child's artless hand, washed away over and over by the pitiless tide.
- the pooka said...
Wow, that was sort of creepy...
On a lighter note, I encourage folks to check out O'Connor Replacement Futures Market. Good fun, that.


text:
Chilli Parotta
Nowadays however Chilli Parotta is a common feature in most restaurants in India (atleast TamilNadu) and there is no trouble finding vegetarian versions of both chilli & kothu parottas. My dad's friend owns a small restaurant so I was allowed to watch the chef make this since my dad mentioned how much i like this to the owner... They first deep fried the parotta pieces (now that was a shock because parottas are fattening as is and are made with Lots of oil & maida and then to deep fry them as well was atrocious i thought)... and then he told me how they typically make the gravy and keep & toss it all together when an order comes through. So, the recipe here is my attempt at replicating it at home, but with a few modifications of which first & foremost was to skip the deep frying part... :) Still, this is definitely not a diet friendly or health conscious recipe but definitely falls in the 'once in a while indulgence, in moderation' category.
Parottas- 5 to 6 (I use the frozen ones)
Red Onion - 1 big
Green Bell Pepper - 1 small to medium, cut into 1 inch cubes
Tomato - 1 medium, chopped
Tomato paste - about 1 tbsp
Poppy seeds (khasa khasa) - 1 tsp
Cashews - 3 or 4 (optional)
Ginger - half inch piece
Garlic - 2 to 3 cloves
Spring Onions - 2, chopped, green & white parts separated
Chilli powder - 1 tspCoriander powder - 1 tsp
Curry masala powder/Garam Masala - half tsp to 1 tsp
Turmeric powder - 1/4 tsp
Salt - to tasteOil - 1 to 2 tbsp
1) Peel & halve the red onion. Chop one half and set aside. Cut the remaining half into 1 inch cubes (similar to the capsicum).
2) I used frozen paratha so i popped them in the microwave for 30 seconds before frying them on a tawa till they get crisp (instead of deep-frying). Cut the parotta pieces into 1.5 to 2 inch squares - i used a pair of kitchen scissors.
2) Meanwhile, heat 1 to 2 tsp of oil and saute the chopped onion, garlic and ginger cloves till brown, then add the chopped tomato with the masala powders and salt. Also add the poppy seeds & cashews at this point and let it cook till it gets thick. Allow this mixture to cool a bit and grind in a mixie to a paste.
3) Heat the remaining oil in the pan, and add the cubed onions & the white of the spring onions and saute for a few minutes till translucent before adding the cubed capsicum and a pinch of salt. When they get tender crisp, add the ground onion-tomato paste and saute for about 4 to 5 minutes atleast.
4) Add a tbsp or two of water (to loosen up the mixture so the parottas can soak it up) and immediately add the parotta pieces and toss so they are uniformly covered by the paste. Cook this on a medium-high flame till dry.
5) Switch off the stove and stir in the green tops of the spring onions - reserve about a tbsp for garnish later. Delicious Chilli Parotta is now ready.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
20100 W. 12 Mile Rd, Southfield, MI 48076map
Douglas Fogel has provided dental care for me and my sons for over 20 years. I am certain that I have the best dentist in the Metro Detroit area. I have always been impressed with Dr. Fogel's level of care, and his excellent advice. Even my sons enjoy going to the dentist because of the warm staff and good natured and compassionate care that they receive.
We love our dentist! Doug and his staff are great with me and the kids – no fear of coming here! Love the patient education they provide. If you need care beyond his scope of practice, he has great referrals to get you what you need. They run the office on-time too, you'll never wait the annoying 30, 60, 90 minutes to be seen.
I just wanna send some love to two wonderful people, my wife Jackie and our dentist Dr. Doug Fogel in Southfield. ( if you're looking for a great dentist with a great staff please check him out).
I have been a patient of Dr. Fogel's for the past 7 years, and can honestly say that I feel like family. The excellent dental care I have received by Dr. Fogel and his staff is only outdone by the level of warmth and caring shown for my well being. I'm a patient for life! My sincerest thanks to all of you.
We cherish the long term relationships we have with our existing families and look forward to building a new relationship with your family.
I met Doug Fogel the hard way: an emergency visit brought on by a throbbing toothache. Not only did Dr. Fogel find a way to bring me right in — with no history on me whatsoever — he saved a tooth that my former dentist had given up on. But there is another aspect to Dr. Fogel's practice: a great office. Everyone is smart and knowledgeable, lighthearted and funny. The usual boundaries of a doctor's office just aren't there. All patients who walk in feels like they belong.
Dr. Fogel has been my family's dentist for many years. He knows how to encourage and motivate my children to take care of their teeth. Dr. Fogel only believes in doing procedures that are necessary for the health and integrity of your teeth. In addition, the hygentists are very thorough. You leave the office knowing a job has been well done!


text:
HBO has a long-standing tradition of making shows about show business: "Larry Sanders," "Entourage," "The Comeback." Heck, they're even developing a show about a show business blogger. So it's not surprising, and yet bizarre, that they would greenlight a show about real-life agent Brandt Joel and his "wacky" wife, Nikki. Would you be shocked to learn that the idea to do a show about Joel came from Joel himself? No, you would not. Nikki Finke of Deadline reports:
HBO has just bought a comedy pitch based on the modern day Lucy-&-Ricky 10-year marriage of Brandt and Nikki Joel…
The genesis for the show is Nikki Joel's tell-all blog about her marriage -- LifestyleLemonaid.com -- where she regularly shares with the Internet her husband's most intimate details.
I have clicked over and sampled this blog so that you, fair reader, don't have to. Suffice it to say, it's pretty much exactly what you would expect the blog of an agent's wife, who is herself a former agent, to be like. Here's a sample of the site:
"Husbands love concerts!"
Yes, that's really all you need to read. That pretty much gives you the gist of it. Thankfully, Brandt herself won't be writing the show. That task, according to Finke, will fall to "Gilmore Girls" and "Desperate Housewives" writer Jordon Nardino. I know "Entourage" has been a success for HBO. But plenty of people out there hate that show with the white-hot fury of a thousand death row inmates. I don't see how a vanity project like this one, one that screams WE'RE SO KRAYZEEEE!, will offer much of an improvement.
As I said before, HBO is also developing a show called "Tilda" which is loosely inspired the very blogger who reported the news about Brandt. Does the network really need two super-inside Hollywood comedies when they've already plowed this field a few times over? Also, from reading the blog, I hate both these people already.
But hey, there's always "Boardwalk Empire." No agents in that upcoming show. I think.


text:
One of our most favorite restaurants in the world is Manresa in Los Gatos. I consider myself very, very lucky to call David Kinch a friend. Several years ago, I was reading a biography of David and was pleasantly surprised to see that he had worked at Quilted Giraffe in New York City, a favorite restaurant of ours during the 80's.
Quoted from
"Lest you think David Kinch is an overnight sensation, he has been working in professional kitchens for 30 of his 44 years. He grew up in New Orleans, where he started as a dishwasher and landed a job as a prep chef for Paul Prudhomme at the age of 17. After high school he attended culinary school at Rhode Island's Johnson & Wales, which eventually led to four years at Barry Wine's four-star Quilted Giraffe in New York City. The Giraffe closed after a 17-year run in 1992 but was, in its day, a veritable breeding ground for bright young chefs who looked at food with a fresh eye. After a stint at Silks in San Francisco's Mandarin Oriental Hotel, he cooked his way across Europe at restaurants in Germany, France and Spain. For the last eight years, Kinch has made his home in Santa Cruz, where he tries to surf every day, a hobby he picked up on the Gulf Coast nearly 20 years ago when he was a self-described "skateboard and surf punk." Manresa is in fact both the name of a beach in Santa Cruz and a city in Catalonia, Spain, which in many respects mirrors Kinch himself. His innovative cuisine du terroir skillfully yet comfortably combines French and modern Catalan cookery with the bountiful native ingredients from the surrounding region, primarily the Santa Cruz foothills that rise majestically above his restaurant."
One of my all-time favorite dishes was the Quilted Giraffe's beggars purse.
From James Beard:
"These precious bite-sized packages first came into vogue in New York City in the 1980s after Barry and Susan Wine, owners of the Quilted Giraffe, visited France. During their trip, a chef at Vieille Fontaine outside Paris served the Wines something he called un aumonière (an alm's purse), an appetizer of caviar and crème fraîche bundled up in a little crêpe and secured with a thin strip of chive. The Wines were so taken with the dish that they brought it home to New York, changed the name to a beggar's purse, and began serving it at their restaurant."
About 4 years ago, I prevailed upon David to make the beggar's purse, if we would supply the caviar. – 3 separate servings of beggar's purses for 3 of us – that was 15 purses!!!!!!
This was an extravaganza of a meal in celebration of my 60th birthday – over 20 courses!!!!!!
I have tried to make beggar's purses at home, but so far no success.
From Dean and Deluca
Freshly made crèpes are filled with caviar and crème fraîche, then bunched
1 1/2 cups milk
2 eggs
1 cup instant flour, such as Wondra
1 tablespoon butter, melted and warm
1/4 cup clarified butter, melted
12 fresh chives
1/4 cup crème fraîche
3/4 cup beluga, osetra, or sevruga caviar, chilled (about 7 ounces)
1. Combine the milk, eggs, flour, and a pinch of salt in a mixing bowl. Whisk until completely incorporated. Pour through a chinois into another bowl. Just before you cook the crèpes, add 1 tablespoon of warm melted butter.
2. Heat a nonstick, 5- to 6-inch crèpe pan (or round skillet) over moderately high heat, then brush with some of the clarified butter. Add a scant 1/4 cup of crèpe batter. Working very quickly, swirl the pan around to spread out the batter into a very thin crèpe. Cook until set, about 40 seconds. Turn the crèpe and cook for another 10 seconds or so. (Crèpes should be paper-thin and white; for beggar's purses, you should avoid the brown spots that are desirable in crèpes destined for other uses.) Place the crèpe on a plate and set aside. Brush the pan with some of the clarified butter again, and repeat the process until 12 crèpes are made. You may stack the crèpes directly on top of each other, but keep the pile covered with a cloth.
3. Bring a pot of salted water to a boil, and dip the chives in the water for 5 seconds. Place under cold water and reserve chives on paper towels.
4. Lay a few crèpes out and place 1 teaspoon crème fraîche and 1 tablespoon caviar in the center of each one. Pull the edges of the crèpe toward the center until they meet. Then, working with thumb and forefinger, create small pleats all around the top of the purse (where the crèpe edges meet). You'll have a ruffle at the top. Tie a reserved chive around the top and make sure the purse is tightly secured. (The beggar's purse should look like a small purse, or sack, with the chive functioning as the tie-string. This technique takes a little practice, so don't be frustrated with the first one.) Continue making beggar's purses in the same manner until 12 purses are made.
5. Brush the top of each purse with a little clarified butter, and serve immediately.


text:
Follow RFF News on your cell phone. Text follow rff to 40404 you will receive txt messages with RFF News
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jeff and Jordan at the CBS Fall Premiere Party last night....they are such a cute couple!
I think you guys heard about Jeff being on Bonnie Hunt's show, right? Well, he won't be alone. From the Twitter user "bigbrotherleak": http://twitpic.com/i4abuDon't know if it's okay for me to actually put the picture up as a picture. So I kept it a link just to be on the safe side.
Page created in 0.086 seconds with 32 queries.


text:
543 W Saint Louis Ave
East Alton,
Robert's Motors
4350 N Alby St. Alton, IL
A.C.T. Auto Body
827 Belle St Alton, AL
Let Maaco Collision Repair & Auto Painting, turn the car you drive back into the car you love. As America?s #1 bodyshop, Maaco Collision Repair & Auto Painting are the experts in accident damage, dents, dings and faded paint repairing more than 20 million vehicles nationwide. Our expertly-trained technicians will make handling your insurance claims and accident repair easy by providing quality repairs you can trust with a nationwide warranty. We work with all automotive insurance companies to make the process easy, affordable and reliable from start to finish. We meet a strict repair standard at a value and quality other collision repair shops can?t provide. Call Maaco today to schedule your free estimate.. Auto Painting Process Step 1: Body Repair - Worried about those small dents and unsightly scratches ruining your paint job? Our body repair technicians have mastered the method of eliminating those blemishes down to a Five-Step Process to ensure that your finish is free from those small dents and unsightly scratches. Step 2: Surface Preparation - You know those chips,scratches,cracks and excessive peeling on your vehicle? If left untreated and exposed to the elements over time,these conditions could ultimately ruin your paint job. At Maaco,our estimators examine your vehicle and suggest condition repairs. We offer affordable surface prep options that ensure your MAACOVER looks great. A little surface repair before the paint goes on can ensure it holds that gloss and shine for years to come. Step 3: Surface Sealer - Sealer plays that all-important role of establishing a barrier between the old and new paint. This ensures consistent color and a higher gloss throughout the entire painted surface. At Maaco we offer 3 grades of sealer. The right choice is all about durability,and ultimately the amount of prep work needed for your particular vehicle. When it comes to the durability of your vehicle's paint,sealer helps keep consistent shine long after the job is done. Step 4: Paint Services - We offer three paint packages tailored to your specific needs and budget concerns: Basic,Preferred and Premium. What makes each of the three services unique all comes down to two factors: Longevity of the paint,which includes warranty/durability,and the appearance of the paint,which includes gloss,color match,and metallic appearance. Step 5: Protection & Services - A great paint job deserves great protection. We often apply clear coats to our paint jobs to not only protect the paint,but to ensure an accurate gloss match and an overall seamless repair.
If you've been to or used
Maaco Collision Repair & Auto Painting, leave a review.
It's easy, only takes a couple of minutes and you'll help thousands make an informed decision.


text:
Property listings in The Colony
"Could not have been more pleased with the entire process of selling my Katy house. Aaron was very professional and went out of his way to help kennel my dog before showings while I was at work. He had an outstanding knowledge of the entire real estate transaction process and was always very responsive to my questions. Would definitely recommend Mr. Layman to anyone I know!!"
"Aaron helped us narrow down our choices and navigate the market. He is very knowledgeable about making a wise decision. He will help you find a house that you love and is a good financial decision."
"Aaron was our realtor when we bought our house 13 years ago and he was our realtor when we sold our house in 2014. He is honest about the market and very helpful with all aspects of buying/selling a home. We would recommend him to anyone in need of realty services."
"We had several agents to choose from as we'd been in the area for several years. Aaron was an easy choice as he's knowledgeable and wasn't afraid to go after what's best for us, his clients! He kept us well informed throughout the process and was always prompt in answering questions from start to finish. We definitely recommend Aaron!"
"Working with Aaron was the best decision we made when looking for a new home and selling our previous home. He is one of the most knowledgeable realtors in the area. He knows the numbers, the trends, and always has data to back up his recommendations and decisions. Likewise, he made the process simple and understandable at the same time. Aaron was always in our corner and always did his best to get the best outcome for us. I have recommended Aaron to many friends and family and would recommend him to anyone looking to buy or sell their home."


text:
B.J. Evans
Manager, Media Relations and Publications
Phone: 719-228-6800
E-Mail: email@example.com
IRVINE, Calif. (Aug. 14, 2009) – U.S. Men's Volleyball Head Coach Alan Knipe and his team are looking forward to playing true home matches on Aug. 15-17 when they will play in the 2010 World Championship Qualifier for NORCECA Group F at the Bren Center on the campus of UC Irvine in California.
But they also know that playing at home can bring distractions that make it difficult to focus on the match in front of you.
"In some ways, it can be easier to play on the road, when you're a little more structured," Knipe (Huntington Beach, Calif.) said. "The guys have 100 percent of their attention on the match all the time. We are going to need our guys to play with focus at home. I'd like to play here a lot more."
Ranked second in the world and first among NORCECA teams, the U.S. Men will be playing Dominican Republic (No. 4 in NORCECA), Guatemala (No. 8) and Panama (No. 15) with the winner qualifying for the 2010 FIVB World Championships in Italy. The second-place team will travel to Mexico next week for another chance to qualify.
Team USA last played the Dominican Republic at the 2008 NORCECA Men's Olympic Continental Qualifier in Puerto Rico. Earlier this year, the U.S. Men's A2 team defeated the Dominican Republican twice at the Pan American Cup. The DR went on to finish third, defeating Puerto Rico in the bronze medal match.
Panama finished sixth at the 2009 Pan American Cup, defeating Guatemala in the final match.
But for the U.S. Men, this weekend's matches are about improving on the team's performance at the 2009 World League, where it achieved its goal of advancing to the final round, but then placed sixth overall.
"There are a few things we've been working on since we got back from World League," Knipe said. "It's all about trying to build and continue to play better. There are lots of guys on our roster who need more experience."
The U.S. roster includes six players from the team that was competing for a gold medal in Beijing one year ago this week: Sean Rooney (Wheaton, Ill.), David Lee (Alpine, Calif.), Rich Lambourne (Tustin, Calif.), Clay Stanley (Honolulu, Hawai'i), Kevin Hansen (Newport Beach, Calif.) and Scott Touzinsky (St. Louis, Mo.).
Setter Donald Suxho (Korce, Albania) was on the 2004 Olympic Team.
The other five U.S. players on the roster – Evan Patak (Pleasanton, Calif.), Paul Lotman (Lakewood, Calif.), Andrew Hein (Carol Stream, Ill.), David Smith (Saugus, Calif.) and Jayson Jablonsky (Yorba Linda, Calif.) – gained significant international experience at this year's World League tournament.
Tickets for the event will be $12 for adults and $6 for children under 12. Groups of 15 or more can get tickets for $8 each and an all-session pass is $25. Tickets are on sale now at the Bren Center box office at (949) 824-5000 or at TicketMaster.com.
The City of Anaheim is the Official Host City for the U.S. Men's and Women's National Volleyball teams. The Men's Team relocated to Anaheim from Colorado Springs, CO in 2006, and the Women's Team followed in 2009, with both teams citing the advantages of training in Southern California, unequivocally the volleyball capitol of the country. The Men's Team won the gold medal, and the Women's team the silver medal, at the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games. Anaheim serves as the training headquarters for the U.S. Men's and Women's National Teams, and in partnership with USA Volleyball, will further promote the City throughout the volleyball and Olympic sport communities. USA Volleyball is the National Governing Body for the sport of volleyball in the United States, and is recognized as such by the Federation International de Volleyball (FIVB) and the United States Olympic Committee (USOC). Both the Men's and Women's Teams will train in Anaheim through the 2016 Olympic Games. For more information on the City of Anaheim, please visit www.anaheim.net. For more information on USA Volleyball, please visit www.usavolleyball.org.
2010 World Championship Qualifier for NORCECA Pool F
Aug. 15-17 in Irvine, Calif.
No. Name (Position, Height, Hometown, College)
2 Sean Rooney (OH, 6-9, Wheaton, Ill., Pepperdine)
3 Evan Patak (Opp, 6-8, Pleasanton, Calif., UC Santa Barbara)
4 David Lee (MB, 6-8, Alpine, Calif., Long Beach State)
5 Rich Lambourne (L, 6-3, Tustin, Calif., BYU)
6 Paul Lotman (OH, 6-7, Lakewood, Calif., Long Beach State)
7 Donald Suxho (S, 6-5, Korce, Albania, USC)
8 Andrew Hein (MB, 6-11, Carol Stream, Ill., Pepperdine)
10 David Smith (MB, 6-7, Saugus, Calif., UC Irvine)
13 Clay Stanley (Opp, 6-9, Honolulu, Hawai'i, Hawai'i)
14 Kevin Hansen (S, 6-5, Newport Beach, Calif., Stanford)
16 Jayson Jablonsky (OH, 6-5, Yorba Linda, Calif., UC Irvine)
18 Scott Touzinsky (OH, 6-6, St. Louis, Mo., Long Beach State)
Head Coach: Alan Knipe
Team Manager: Rick McLaughlin
Assistant Coach: Gary Sato
Trainer/Therapist: John Hawks
Technical Coordinator: Chris Jackson
Team Doctor: Chris Koutures
Medical Support: Aaron Brock
Technical Consultant: Marv Dunphy
Match Schedule (All times PT)
Aug. 15
5 p.m.: Dominican Republic vs. Panama
7:30 p.m.: USA vs. Guatemala
Aug. 16
5 p.m.: Guatemala vs. Dominican Republic
7:30 p.m.: USA vs. Panama
Aug. 17
5 p.m.: Guatemala vs. Panama
7:30 p.m.: USA vs. Dominican Republic


text:
SSH.COM is one of the most trusted brands in cyber security. We help enterprises and agencies solve the security challenges of digital transformation with innovative access management solutions.
Plaintext FTP is an inherently unsecured, but a widely used method of transferring files. SSH Tectia Server for IBM z/OS with its client tools offers an easy way to secure file transfer connections with transparent FTP tunneling. This feature is most useful when there is need to secure lots of FTP scripts.
Transparent FTP tunneling allows the FTP service to use the existing scripts and applications as they are, so to the users and applications the SSH Tectia FTP tunneling happens transparently. As the existing FTP applications are left running, for example the FTP servers can keep performing all their designated post-processing jobs as earlier.
Transparent FTP tunneling captures the connections that use the FTP protocol and tunnels them in encrypted format via a Secure Shell server to the FTP server. Transparent FTP tunneling can be configured to pick the user name, password and destination host directly from the FTP client, and use them to open the secured communication channel. In the Connection Broker configuration, this is done simply with one rule that can fit all FTP connections.
The users can define connection profiles to perform transparent FTP tunneling of certain connections, or they can request the tunneling per FTP connection on command line.
For end-to-end security, SSH Tectia Server for IBM z/OS should be installed on the same host with the FTP client, and a Secure Shell server should be installed on the same host with the FTP server. If end-to-end security is not required, the FTP server can also reside on a third host.
The FTP server side can be on any platform, Unix, Windows or mainframe. SSH Tectia Server for IBM z/OS works ideally with SSH Tectia products, but supports any SSH2-capable Secure Shell servers.
Transparent FTP tunneling can be used to secure both interactive and unattended FTP sessions. It also provides an option to fall back to plaintext FTP for easier migration.


text:
A police officer has quit after admitting he told colleagues that he would volunteer to assassinate President Barack Obama.
Sam Koivisto told the Florida Times-Union on Wednesday that his comments had been blown out of proportion and that he'd planned to retire in five months anyway.
The 57-year-old retired earlier this month while facing an internal investigation into his comments to other officers after the election. He told them that if an order came to kill Obama, he "wouldn't mind being the guy."
When questioned by the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office integrity unit, he said he also didn't care if a nuclear explosion killed everyone in the Northeastern U.S because they supported Obama.
He told the investigators his comments were hyperbole and not actual threats.


text:
Students Recycling Used Technology (StRUT) is a not for profit organization that provides technology education, resources, and recycling to schools across Oregon. StRUT's backbone of operations is collecting used technology equipment to be redeployed for use in schools or responsibly recycled.
Used Technology
Working with companies such as Google, Intel, Symantec, and OHSU; StRUT coordinates the pick up or donation drop off of computers and peripherals which have seen their end of life come to pass for the companies which originally purchased them. Households, small businesses, and educational facilities themselves help round out our donation flow.Once the equipment reaches our secure facility in The Dalles, each piece is assessed for potential re-use. Old Computers, printers, monitors, keyboards and the like that don't make the cut are set aside for recycling. Each piece of equipment that is designated for recycling is broken down into its component parts to be sold to recyclers. The money that StRUT receives for commodities like circuit boards and heat sinks provides the operating capital to keep our facility running.
Students involved in StRUT evaluate, repair, and refurbish different models of computers. Units which meet Smarter Balanced/ PARC guidelines are prepared for redeployment in schools. StRUT students gain valuable computer knowledge and hands on computer skills. Member Schools receive allotments of computers and technology to be deployed for use in the schools with students. Computers, large printers, servers, a wide array of peripherals, and even office furniture can be refurbished and loaned out to our members for use in their schools. In this way, StRUT is helping schools to meet their expanding technology needs in a cost effective way.
When the computers and peripherals reach the end of their second life at our schools, they are returned to StRUT to be responsibly recycled. This ensures that each item donated to StRUT will reduce E-Waste in landfills and help to provide funding for StRUT!
School groups join our staff to disassemble and sort components for sale as commodities to our local recycling partners. Our staff and student volunteers processed over 500,000 pounds of E-Waste in the 2013-2014 fiscal year. Our receiving facility is set up to take donations of used computers one at a time, by the small truck load, or up to 10 pallets at a time in our delivery truck (or even more in yours!). Our warehouse is an elementary school gym converted to meet Oregon DEQ E-Cycle standards for workplace safety and technological commodity storage. We channel the recoverable technology parts to reputable recycling partners with R2, ISO 14001, and E-Steward credentials to ensure that your donations are handled responsibly by vendors with third party accredited auditing.


text:
Privacy & Cookies
We are committed to protecting your privacy. We will only use the information that we collect about you lawfully in accordance with the United Kingdom's Data Protection Act.
If you contact us via this web site we will only use the information provided to respond to your message and to improve our service to you.
We maintain web site server logs which record visitor information including IP address, browser type, platform type, internet service provider, referring/exit pages and date/time stamp. This information is used to analyse visitor trends and improve our service to you.
If you have any questions about this statement, or would like further information, please contact us via e-mail at email@example.com.
The public area of this site does not use any cookies.
The member's area of this site uses cookies to securely maintain your sign-in; as a member of TD-Info you accept this use of cookies.


text:
Nicolet High ushers in waves of students, not flood waters
School completes $1.2 million project to prevent recurrence of 2010 flood
Staff members ushered in a new wave of students at Nicolet High School today.
But district administrators are hoping new flood control measures will keep waves of water out.
Three years ago, a "hundred-years flood" consumed the school's parking lot and school.
The July 2010 flood dumped 7 inches of rain in two hours.
Flooding damaged 80 percent of the school and cost the district millions to repair.
The school lies in a bowl six feet lower than the frontage road to the east. The area shared storm sewers with the Department of Transportation as well as the City of Glendale, and was not built to withstand such a deluge.
Superintendent Robert Kobylski said that $1.2 million in landscape and drainage changes should keep the school dry.
"We're crossing our fingers so that the next time we have those significant rainfalls, we have the capacity to handle it," he said.
The school's storm sewers are now a stand-alone system, directing all waters directly into the Milwaukee River.
The parking lot, which was submerged in 2010, are now capable of temporarily storing water during heavy events before directing the water to a dry pond installed near the school's entrance.
According to Fox Point Patch, the pond can store the equivalent of 7 inches of rain from the school's parking lots and driveway.
Spillways will now direct the flow of water away from the school, preventing the 6-foot deep flooding that occurred in the basement in 2010.
Kobylski said the completion of the project, combined with the first day of classes, makes for a great start to the school year.
"It's a new beginning, a fresh start for everybody," he said. "Whatever happened, good or bad in the past, it's always an opportunity to start fresh."


text:
October is upon us…. a time for hauntings, Halloween - and all things spooky. This month, A Grave Interest takes a look at several haunted cemeteries. Get ready as we explore some 'lively' places, and the people who make them so…….
|Spring Grove Cemetery
|Rock Bridge in Cemetery
|Bronze Sculpture
|Norman Chapel
|Norman Chapel @ Turn of Century
|Jail Bars
|Dexter Mausoleum
|Edmund Dexter
|Dexter Mausoleum
|White Dog Statue in Cemetery
|Optometrist's Tools
|Breuer Monument
|Breuer's Brown Eyes
|Breuer Bronze Bust
|Interesting Stone
|Mausoleum Door
|Sinking Mausoleum
~ Joy


text:
Fabulous locations, hand-picked properties, first-class facilities, amazing value and a warm welcome, an OVO Network holiday is all about the very best experiences.
Only properties that offer something very, very special can join OVO Network. From hundreds of properties we review, less than 5% are accepted.
Our property experts inspect every single property against over 192 criteria. From beds to balconies, hot tubs to heating, you'll find no nasty surprises.
Always honest descriptions, photography, videos and floorplans, plus a specialist property advisor—we help you choose the right home for you.
Book instantly with credit or debit card, or take advantage of our free 24-hour hold option to give you time to discuss with family or friends.
The price you see is the price you pay. Plus with our OVO Verified guarantee, your money and your holiday are safe.
Personal greeting
Local tips & concierge
Linen & towels
Sparkling cleaning
From bottle warmers and baby monitors, to board games, trampolines and Playstations, our Cool for Kids and Cool for Kids Extra properties offer everything you—and your children—need to help make your holiday extra special.
We know what makes a great holiday—from first-class facilities to stunning locations, we test every property to the most exacting standards.
Add to this easy booking and our financial guarantees and you have complete peace of mind for your holiday.
192 checks
Best price guarantee
No hidden fees
Free 24 hour hold
Secure online payment
Instant real-time booking
If you have a question or would like to discuss any of our properties we're here to help. We know our properties inside and out, and are always happy to share our love for them!
Click to email an enquiry or make an appointment to speak to one of our Property Advisors.
OVO Network is always looking for beautiful new properties that offer something very special.
If you own a property and think it might be just right for OVO Network then please get in touch.
Chalets for sale?
We've teamed up with selected estate agents to bring you a range of properties that are perfect for a holiday rental business.


text:
|April 2, 2014 | 10:00am - 4:00pm
|Saint Louis, MO
The Art Market and the Museum: How Collectors and Dealers Help Shape World Class Art Museum Collections
Members earn 4.5 C.E. credits for this program
Join us for "The Art Market and the Museum: How Collectors and Dealers Help Shape World Class Art Museum Collections," which will focus on the interrelated roles of collectors, dealers, and curators in building art museum collections. Organized and moderated by Patricia Graham, PhD, AAA, the program is divided into two parts, with morning sessions held in the galleries of the Saint Louis Art Museum and afternoon presentations at a classroom in the art history building on the Washington University campus. This connoisseurship study day takes place the day before the Midwest Art History Society's Annual Conference (April 3-5 at the Saint Louis Art Museum), and has been planned so that participants can attend both programs.
"26 Reasons to Appreciate the Hidden Gem of St. Louis"
10:15am - 11:00am: Decorative Arts
11:00am - 11:45am: Asian Art
11:45am - 12:30pm: Prints and Drawings
12:30pm - 1:45pm: Lunch at Panorama
2:00pm: Case Studies: Meet at classroom Kemper 103 on the Washington University Campus
Wash U. is about a 5 minute drive* from the museum, and the art history building, where the classroom is located, is adjacent to the Kemper Museum of Art, a wonderful new art museum on the Wash U campus which participants can visit at the conclusion of the program. (It is open until 5pm).
Burton Dunbar Ph.D., AAA, is a certified member of the Appraisers Association and an art history professor at the University of Missouri in Kansas City. He will talk about the history of the Nelson-Atkins Museum's collection of prints and drawings, focusing on the curator-collector-dealer relationship.
Soodie Beasley, AAA, is a certified member of the Appraisers Association and an art history lecturer at Park University and the Kansas City Art Institute. She will talk about how the collecting of 20th century design has changed, especially in the past 10-15 years, because of the advent of social media and new online selling venues.
Charles Lowenhaupt, Chairman, President and Chief Executive officer at Lowenhaupt Global Advisors and attorney with Lowenhaupt & Chasnoff LLC is a wealth manager based in St. Louis. He will talk about the assembling of collections with an eye towards eventual museum donation. Several years ago, he donated a huge collection of Japanese prints and ephemera related to the Sino-Japanese and Russo-Japanese Wars to the Saint Louis Art Museum.
Valerie Rudy-Valli, Individual Gifts Officer in the Development Department of the Saint Louis Art Museum, worked formerly as a curatorial assistant in the Registrar's office, where she helped to catalogue the Loewenhaupt gift that Pat Graham appraised. Charles and Valerie will coordinate their talks.
4:00pm: Conclusion of Program
Suggested Accommodations:
As of January 1, 2014, changes or cancellations to your registration must be made at least 5 business days prior to the start of your program in writing (via fax or email). If you do NOT notify us at least 5 business days before your course, you will be charged a $50 administration fee.
212 West 35th Street, 11th Floor South | New York, NY | 10001 | Tel: 212.889.5404 x 11 | Fax: 212.889.5503
|Add Event To My Calendar


text:
For Immediate Release: Thursday, February 20 2020
The Sewerage and Water Board of New Orleans (SWBNO) will close its customer service center and administrative offices at 625 St. Joseph St. at 2:30 p.m. Friday, Feb. 21, to accommodate the revised early Carnival parade schedule.
Customers can still contact Customer Service at 52-WATER (504.529.2837) to report emergencies or pay by phone. They also can pay online at www.swbno.org. Our West Bank Customer Service office at 4021 Behrman Place will be open from 8:30 a.m. until 4 p.m.


text:
Keyhole hysterectomies better for women, could save health budget $50 million
By medical reporter Sophie Scott
Australian experts say scarce funding for the health budget is being wasted by surgeons continuing to perform open hysterectomies instead of a less invasive procedure.
Every year, around 30,000 Australian women have a hysterectomy.
About 40 per cent of them will undergo an open hysterectomy, which involves a longer stay in hospital and a greater chance of side-effects.
Professor Andreas Obermair from Brisbane's Greenslopes Hospital says patients who undergo the open procedure have a much longer recovery period and are in more pain after the operation.
He says 50 per cent of women have a vaginal procedure, which is not invasive.
But he says too many women are still undergoing full, open surgery, which has greater risks of infections and readmission to hospital.
Only about 10 per cent of women are offered the minimally invasive, laparoscopic procedure.
"Not a lot of people would have trained in this kind of procedure and I guess there needs to be a new generation of gynaecologists coming through who are more proficient in the new, less invasive procedures that are better for patients," Professor Obermair said.
He estimates that if the laparoscopic procedure were offered in all cases, the savings to the health system would be enormous.
"We did the numbers and we calculated that straightaway Australia could save $50 million every year," he said.
Different procedures have pros, cons: Doctor
Dr Stephen Robson, the vice president of the Royal Australian College of obstetricians and gynaecologists, says hysterectomies are much less common these days than 30 years ago.
Dr Robson says the vaginal hysterectomy is the cheapest and least complicated, but he says it is not always appropriate for every patient.
He says both the laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomies have pros and cons and there are a number of factors that need to be taken into account when deciding which operation to choose.
Brisbane mother Amanda Renton had the minimally invasive procedure after discovering she had a genetic link to breast and ovarian cancer.
Ms Renton says she is pleased with her choice.
"It was really good to be honest, much better than I could have expected. It's been three weeks since the operation and I feel really good," she said.
Health funding being 'wasted', Professor says
Professor Obermair says health funding needs to be used more effectively.
"We could put a lot more effort into training doctors, so they are able to offer minimally invasive procedures. At the moment we are wasting dollars here," he said.
Associate Professor Nicholas Graves from the Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation at Queensland University of Technology says health funding is scarce and needs to be used wisely.
"In the current economic climate with healthcare resources under so much pressure we really need to be adopting these smart and useful innovations as quickly as possible," he said.
Professor Graves has analysed the cost effectiveness of the laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to an abdominal hysterectomy for treating early-stage endometrial cancer.
His research found that adopting laparoscopic procedures would result in savings to health services and an increase in health benefits.
While the initial surgery costs are higher for laparoscopic surgery, overall doctors say it ends up being cheaper as patients are less likely to end up back in hospital with side effects and infections.
Know more about health waste? Email email@example.com.


text:
EPA Administrator and Agriculture Secretary Team Up to Promote Farm Energy Generation
U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson today announced a new interagency agreement promoting renewable energy generation and slashing greenhouse gas emissions from livestock operations. The agreement expands the work of the AgSTAR program, a joint EPA-USDA effort that helps livestock producers reduce methane emissions from their operations.
"The farms and ranches that dot our countryside can contribute greatly to addressing America's long-term energy challenges and the partnership we are announcing today will not only help generate renewable energy, but provide new income opportunities for farmers and ranchers," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.
"We want to seize every opportunity to confront climate change and move into the clean economy of the future. This is a smart way to transform what would be a harmful greenhouse pollutant into a source of renewable energy — and make a profit for American farmers," said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. "We have the technology and the expertise, all we need now is to act. The AgSTAR program brings real benefits to our air and creates new opportunities for our farming community."
EPA and USDA's enhanced collaboration will provide up to $3.9 million over the next five years to help the farms overcome obstacles preventing them from recovering and using biogas. The collaboration will expand technical assistance efforts, improve technical standards and guidance for the construction and evaluation of biogas recovery systems, and expand outreach to livestock producers and assist them with pre-feasibility studies.
Biogas is composed primarily of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Biogas emitted from manure management systems called digesters can be collected and used to produce electricity, heat or hot water. Due in large part to AgSTAR's efforts, about 150 on-farm manure digesters are now operating at livestock facilities across the U.S. In addition, EPA estimates there are about 8,000 farms across the United States that are good candidates for capturing and using biogas. If all 8,000 farms implemented biogas systems, methane emissions would be reduced by more than 34 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent a year, roughly equal to the annual emissions from 6.5 million passenger vehicles. In addition, these projects could generate more than 1,500 megawatts of renewable energy.
Information on the AgSTAR Program: http://www.epa.gov/agstar


text:
Intermissions were necessary in the olden days because as they enabled the operators to change reels. However, as technology improved, intermissions became unnecessary, and were phased out in most parts of the world to save time and squeeze in more shows. India remains an exception, where for both Bollywood and Hollywood movies, theatres have an intermission, which gives the audience a chance grab more popcorn.
The unfortunate downside to phasing out intermissions is that, in case you need to take a leak, you are forced to miss out on parts of the movie. RunPee is a mobile app that's designed to help you with planning your bathroom break during a movie. Theaters don't have pause buttons, but with RunPee you can at least ensure that you don't miss out on the best parts of the movie. RunPee's database is updated the day a movie comes out with the best moments to run to the bathroom. These scenes are normally three to five minute intervals in the movie where not a lot happens. RunPee tells you the exact time that the scene will start at as well as a dialogue by which you can identify the scene.
For an app with just one purpose, RunPee is rather feature packed. You can either select a movie, and chose to identify the scene manually. Or you can start a timer as soon as the movie starts, and RunPee will vibrate your phone, when a 'peetime' comes along. It also provides a quick summary of what happens during the scene.
There are also a couple of bonus features. If you're running late, you can read a summary of what happens during the first three minutes of the movie on RunPee. Additionally, it also informs you if there are any extra scenes during or after the end credits.
RunPee is a free download on iOS and Android, while the Windows Phone version costs $0.99. I reviewed the Android version, and found it to work rather well. The user interface doesn't strictly adhere to the Android design guidelines and is a mishmash of Android and iOS UI elements. RunPee won't blow you away with its design, but the apps is undoubtedly handy, and serves its purpose brilliantly.
[ Download RunPee ]


text:
Then, we got started on our first course: Roasted Corn Soup Smoked Tomato Salsa and Blue Corn Pancake Barbecued Duck + Habanero Chile-Star Anise Sauce. The soup was decent it had an unusual hint of flavor, I thought squash maybe, but Frank thought it tasted more like seafood.
The blue corn pancake and duck were very tasty. Again, the blue corn does nothing for its appearance.
For the main course we had Blue Corn Crusted Halibut with Salsa Cruda, Sweet 100 tomatoes, capers, jalapeno, Fresh Oregano, Basil and New Mexican Spice Rubbed Pork Tenderloin Bourbon -Ancho Chile Sauce Sweet Potato Tamale Crushed Pecan Butter. The fish was nicely prepared, the presentation was different - thanks to the blue corn it looked liked it had asphalt glistening off the filet. The pork was flavorful as long as you had the crust in every bite. The tamale was unlike your traditional tamale, still tasty, however.
Lastly we finished with Coconut Layer Cake and Banana Cream Pie. Both were good, but nothing particularly memorable.
Service was very good throughout the meal. All in all, it was pretty good it's just nothing was particularly notable. I can't say I'd return, but I'm happy we took the opportunity to finally give it a try.


text:
When your lead, in this case Michael Fassbender, repeatedly shows his genitals and people use phrases like "dungeon sex" in talking about your film, it's a safe bet that the MPAA is gonna hit you with an NC -17. Sure enough...
The MPAA's decision to give "Shame," starring Fassbender as a sex addict whose life is thrown into turmoil by a too-long visit by his sister, Carey Mulligan, an NC-17 rating came down yesterday. It comes as a surprise to no one who's seen the film, as well as most of us who haven't yet.
"I think NC-17 is a badge of honor, not a scarlet letter. We believe it is time for the rating to become usable in a serious manner," Searchlight president Steve Gilula told The Hollywood Reporter. "The sheer talent of the actors and the vision of the filmmaker are extraordinary. It's not a film that everyone will take easily, but it certainly breaks through the clutter and is distinctive and original. It's a game changer."
U.S. & World
The day's top national and international news.
It's to director Steve McQueen's credit that when he was shopping this film to distributors he made it clear that he wouldn't allow them to cut a single frame, as he clearly knew what the ratings board would think of his film. And hats off to Fox Searchlight for having the courage to buy it, as the NC-17 is typically seen as a box-office death sentence.
We have to admit there's a small part of this that wishes Weinstein had bought the rights to "Shame" so we could enjoy his self-righteous histrionics as he appealed the rating.


text:
be shacked up with (someone)(redirected from are shacked up with you)
be shacked up with (someone)
1. To be living or sharing accommodations with someone while having a casual sexual relationship with them. I haven't seen my sister in weeks. I hear she's been shacked up with some guy from Oklahoma these days. I was shacked up for a while with a woman I met downtown, but I've been on my own for the last couple of months.
2. To temporarily share accommodations with someone. A: "Do you have a place to stay while you're in town for the wedding?" B: "Yeah, I'm shacked up with my brother and his fiancée for the weekend."


text:
French authorities said a train derailment south of Paris has left at least eight people dead and trapped many others in overturned train cars.
Broadcaster BFM-TV quoted police as saying at least eight people died when the train derailed and crashed into a station platform in Bretigny-sur-Orge while en route from Paris to Limoges around 4 p.m. local time, the BBC reported Friday.
Michel Pouzol, a local member of parliament, said some train cars overturned onto their sides and The Local.fr said reports indicated many people were trapped inside the cars.
The Le Figaro website said a police source revealed the trail split in two for undetermined reasons.
The Paris prefect's office said a red alert plan was activated following the crash.