text:
If I have a brown eye gene which encodes the protein that is responsible for the brown color and have a blue eye gene as well, what is the reason that my eye color is brown? How does one gene maintain dominance over the other?
One version or allele of the gene for eye color may encode instructions to make the brown pigment, while the blue allele makes no pigment. Alternatively, it is possible, logically speaking, that the blue allele blocks the productions of brown pigment, but this is not the case.
Now, brown vs blue is not a case of one gene and two alleles. After producing pigment, it must be transported, deposited and such. Many processes are involved. So, the pigment deposition process may be functional or not, but as above, it is often found that a non-functional version is simply non-functioning and not actively inhibiting the process. There are numerous cases where an aberrant form of a protein, encoded by a variant allele, acts as an active inhibitor of a given biological or biochemical process.
The key to your question as written is blue eye color is a lack of pigmentation.
At the DNA level there are several mechanisms that might be cited.
A mutation (change in the DNA sequence) of a gene may actually render one copy of the gene defective. In the case of albino-ism, the skin is pink - no melanin pigment is made at all. This is a case of both copies of a vital gene being defective and an ability lost completely.
Some cases of genetically inherited diabetes (<1%) dwarfism and obesity are examples of this. There are many others - most genetic diseases are like this.
This can be caused by a single mutation in each defective gene, and others an entire segment of the chromosome can be lost or disrupted by a new, often nonsensical sequence dropped into the gene region.
Other changes can affect the way the genes turn on and off. - similar sequence changes in the regulatory sequences next to the gene sequence will make the gene behave differently. Even babies of african descent may be born with blonde hair and blue eyes and get the darker pigmentation later. this is genetically caused by a change in they timing of the genes for hair and eye color turning on at other times (blonde hair and blue eyes have little or no pigment, so if the genes are off, then this is what you get). So when genes are active can cause dominant (always on) versus recessive (sometimes off) patterns. which are because one copy of the gene behaves differently than the other copy.
Sometimes a single mutation in one copy of the gene can cause rather interesting effects. A single good gene and a mutated, less effective gene might result in lost of activity because the mixture of the two genes is different between a wholly functional or wholly variant set of genes.
A classic example is the sickle cell trait of hemoglobin. two copies of sickle cell hemoglobin causes the red blood cells to be stiff and misshapen which in turn causes a painful condition in the carrier. a person with a single copy of the sickle cell gene does not have this problem - is nearly asymptomatic. So we say sickle cell anemia is recessive for the HbS mutation. but in reality there is plenty of the HbS version of hemoglobin (Hb) in the blood cells, just that the mixture of the two does not cause the anemia.
There are lots of other specific cases on how dominant and recessive effects happen, but this might give you a picture.
Sorry to blockquote, but this note from wikipedia gets to the heart of the question:
Recommended reading for an overview:
You can also look to "dominant negative" phenotypes to get a good idea of what "dominance" entails (this was the concept that really locked it in for me in college). One example is Marfan syndrome, where the mutant allele of FBN1 (fibrillin-1) produces a version of the protein that is antagonistic to the protein produced by the "healthy" allele.
Dominant negative and semi-dominant alleles can be seen when the protein forms dimers to function. Activin type receptors form dimers to transduce a signal from an extracellular ligand into the cell. A truncated receptor protein that has the dimerization domain but lacks the intracellular domain necessary for signal transduction will act in a dominant negative fashion over the wildtype allele: Dimers are formed but the signal is not transduced. This has been implicated in hereditary colorectal cancers.
Below are some insights about the evolution of dominance. It does not directly answers your question but understanding how it is thought to evolve also help understand the mechanism governing dominance relationship between alleles.
There are several hypotheses about the evolution of dominance. It is important first of all, to note that empirical observations show that beneficial alleles tend to be more dominant than detrimental alleles. Among the two main hypotheses to explain the evolution of dominance, one has been formulated by Ronald Fisher and one by Sewall Wright.
Fisher's hypothesis
According to Fisher's hypothesis, between two equally beneficial alleles, if one is more dominant than the other than it's heterozygote carrier will have higher fitness. In consequence, beneficial alleles evolve to become more dominant while detrimental alleles evolve to be recessive (so that they can hide from selection in heterozygotes).
Wright's hypothesis
According to Wright's hypothesis, beneficial alleles are more dominant because of the kinetic of biochemical reactions. The rate of a biochemical reaction is a function of the concentration in the substrates of interest. The function is called "Michaelis-Menten function" after the name of the authors. The Michaelis-Menten function looks like this:
Think about a knock-out mutation. Such mutation will decrease by half the concentration of protein the gene in question produce in heterozygotes. Imagine, the concentration of proteins in the wildtype homozygote was 3 (see above graph). The rate of reaction of this homozygote is therefore about 3. The heterozygote would have a concentration of 1.5 and the rate of the reaction is therefore about 2.5-2.75. Assuming that the rate of this biochemical reaction is directly related to fitness, then a the locus of interest, benefical alleles are necessarily dominant and detrimental alleles are necessarily recessive. Selection for dominance is not involved in Wirght's model.
Is Fisher's or Wright's hypothesis correct?
Current state of the art is to consider Wright's model to be correct and Fisher's model to be wrong. In reality, the truth probably lies somewhere in between these two extremes. Note also that some other alternative explanations may exist in the literature but Wright and Fisher original hypotheses are by far the most considered hypotheses for the evolution of dominance. During my undergrad, I remember a speaker (but I forgot his name, sorry!) who showed that some alleles actually have some domain that are directly responsible for decreasing the expression of the other allele on the sister chromosome suggesting that Fisher's hypothesis might sometime be a good explanation as well.
A gene is dominant (lets call it B) when its presence in combination with a recessive allele (heterozygotic Bb) leads to the same phenotype as homozygotic BB. A recessive allele leads only to phenotypic expression when it is present twice (homozygotic bb).
To illustrate this rather abstract definition of dominant and recessive alleles let's look at a striking example, namely a gene mutation responsible for albinism.
One of the causes that can lead to albinism is a mutation in the gene that encodes tyrosinase (TYR). Tyrosinase is used by melanocyte cells to convert the amino acid tyrosine into the pigment melanin that colors the skin, hair, and eyes (Ballantine, 2009). Animals lacking tyrosinase have white skin and hair and red eyes, such as the kangaroo in the picture below (source: Listverse):
One functional gene (B) is enough to allow for pigmentation to occur and hence it is dominant. The other mutated allele (b) produces nonfunctional enzyme, but is recessive as one functional allele produces sufficient enzyme to allow for normal pigmentation in a Bb individual.
In your question you mention blue and brown eyes. AS @Larry_Parnell indicates, in blue eyes the eyes do not contain the pigment melanin and are therefore blue (the blue color is caused by non-pigmented optic effects). Brown eyes are therefore dominant as the melanine colors the eyes such that the blue color is masked (it is still there though). The phenotype of blue eyes is therefore recessive, as one allele for brown eyes is enough to bring pigment into the iris.
Note that other interactions also exist, such as co-dominance (e.g., the ABO blood group system where the genes for A and B antigens are both dominant over O) and incomplete dominance. I refer to the wiki page on dominance here, as the question is not specifically about these interactions.


text:
Premier Pontoon Captain Bucket Seat, Mocha-Mocha Java Punch-Midnight-Rock Salt - Wise Boat Seats
This item is found in the following Product Families
Wise Premier Pontoon Captain Bucket Seats
You will appreciate the luxurious comfort of the Wise Premier Pontoon Captain Bucket Seat filled with plush compression foam as you steer your boat …
Premier Pontoon Captain's Bucket Seat Features:
Finely appointed Captain's Bucket features rotational molded frame with universal mounting plate to fit any marine pedestal system. Includes WD399-1 Plastic Flat Mounting Plate.
Premier Pontoon Captain's Bucket Dimensions
- Height: 25.5"
- Width: 22"
- Depth: 23.5"
- Seating Depth: 13.5"
- Base Footprint: 22" x 15.5"
This product ships in 3 business days.
Add to Cart and enter your Postal Code to determine the shipping charges and estimated delivery date.
Most products and orders leave our warehouse in 1 business day. However, select items may take more processing time. Alaska and Hawaii orders please add 1 additional warehouse processing day.
Standard Shipping Policies
Please be careful when ordering this product, it has limitations that differ from our General 30-day Return Policy. After all, we want you to be satisfied with your order so you'll return again and again as an iboats.com customer, and to also recommend us to your boating friends
- Seats
- All seat returns are subject to a 15-25% restocking charge. The item(s) must be in clean and resalable condition otherwise the return will be denied.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Huskies finally get more rebounds than opponent
By Lee Lewis and Ed Daigneault Republican-American
Not a subscriber? You can purchase a single-day subscription for only $0.75 to read this and access all of our content and our E-Edition. CLICK HERE purchase a single day subscription.
Become an electronic subscriber to the Republican-American for only $8 a month. CLICK HERE.


text:
6 Feb 2013 10:52 AM #21
Feel free to offer suggestions on other features - though bear in mind I want to keep the scope limited to JUST figuring out your app's dependencies - I'll leave concat, minification to other great tasks in grunt.
Also - note this is very much alpha at the moment, but it works in the basic case for my app right now.
8 Feb 2013 8:28 AM #22
Will it be able to learn custom structures? For instance, we have built View Controllers into ExtJS which don't extend Ext.app.Controller and implement custom properties for dependencies other than the default controllers, models, views & stores.
For example:
... models: ['ModelA', 'ModelB'], view: { class: 'App.view.GridThing' } ...
Obviously of course it's your spare time we're talking about.... ;-]Why did they have to go with CKEditor??
9 Feb 2013 7:19 AM #23
@lsdriscoll You could write your own pre-processor step which does this as a grunt task before the sencha_dependencies one is invoked. I'd suggest dropping in a issue on to the github project so we can discuss it in a bit more detail:
9 Feb 2013 11:55 AM #24
After wasting a day trying to figure it out how to build the output from the Architect I decided to uninstall it and went back to use the SDK Tools. (2 simple cmd lines and done!!)
Not sure why I need to go thru all this pain http://www.sencha.com/forum/showthre...md-v3&p=901360 when the output should have been recognized by the tools. In the end they are all made by Sencha without any modifications from my end so I expected to be something more like this 'sencha build architect.xds' and let the tool figure it out itself without any input on my own.
17 Feb 2013 3:48 PM #25
Learning the build process is harder than learning the framework itself.
I cannot step into the code to spot where your docs don't match reality.
The docs need to be read as a whole. Information is hidden everywhere.
Why is there not a standard set of sample data? All the examples are fragments.
Post the command that builds a no-charts version. Is this not a no-brainer for somebody at sencha?
Make a multi page project. The feed viewer or song player or both.
Clone the project and add a fubar to each clone: this one demonstrates a union, this one demonstrates a third-party encoded script in a non-app folder, this one demonstrates an intersection....
I am still learning javascript and learning the framework. It's already a big load. It's fun and challenging.
Sorry I do not have the smarts or time to debug or step through your build process. There is bizarre stuff like "a space after a comma at this point breaks the compile".
I can learn by breaking a working sample. That gives me the power of deduction.
So provide real live working sample projects. That will give your documentation something to focus on for the tutorial part.
Then we need separate reference pages geared to the kind of application we are building. This is started but incomplete, you still have to read everything to put yourself back in the big picture when you return after a break.
+1 for all the complaints in this thread. Color me angry. I paid for this?
Kind wishes to the team on a challenging project. It's great and you have my encouragement.
Can you provide genuine working sample builds asap ?
None of us have the same requirements. But don't hide behind that. There are common patterns, you guys must know the top half dozen.
18 Feb 2013 6:32 AM #26
Well, good I came across this post. I have been wasting a good part of my working day trying to get this SenchaCMD to work?! I'm not familiar with SenchaTouch 2, and I have no idea where to start now. First the (official) docs or a tut, don't remeber had me download SenchaSDKTools. Is this deprecated or something? Now I have installed SenchaCMD, but I have no idea how I should make this work. sencha: command not found....
18 Feb 2013 6:37 AM #27
I really don't think the getting started part is that bad documented. But when you run into stuff that does not work you are in trouble.
Very good idea with sample projects etc.
18 Feb 2013 6:54 AM #28
On another note, this tool is now WELL documented, but it's fully usable. We are using it in a full blown project, with 10 developers and a continuous integration system. So it's possible.. i can agree that it needs improvements. But calling in a ty tool is draw the line a bit far to say the least.
18 Feb 2013 7:29 AM #29
I read that, but I'm completely stuck on this. The problem is it keeps saying:
'sencha: command not found'
I have added the path of the Cmd folder to the $PATH variable. Now I have to figure out how in the world I can set the environment variable manually....
18 Feb 2013 7:47 AM #30


text:
Is it a sin not to vote? Or a virtue?
A number of Catholics and evangelicals across the political spectrum who have become disillusioned with their usual candidate or with the entire political system are opting out of voting -- despite the longstanding tradition of most churches that voting is a serious duty for Christians. (Voting is a civic sacrament, as Father Hesburgh once said.)My latest piece for Religion News Service rounds up some of the arguments for abstaining, or at least threatening not to vote, or voting for a third party:
Julia Smucker, a contributor to the Vox Nova blog who identifies as a Mennonite Catholic, wrote in July that Obama had disappointed her so much she may not vote for anyone. Meanwhile her colleague Kyle Cupp said he found both campaigns so vacuous that he has almost reached the point of not caring.Similarly, Jana Bennett, a professor of theological ethics at the University of Dayton in battleground Ohio, wrote a column at the Catholic Moral Theology blog saying she is considering voting for a third-party candidate or not at all because neither party adequately represents her beliefs.Something has tipped for me this election and its the way I think Im being asked to rip myself in half, figuratively speaking, by one party or the other, or both, Bennett wrote in early October, lamenting the stupidity of the apparent choice with which I am faced in the election.The stark disparity between the two partys platforms indicates to me that regardless of who wins in November, the net result will be that nothing will continue to get done," she said. "In a two party system, we seem to have only one choice, even if that choice splits us down the middle.Bennetts colleague at the University of Dayton, Kelly Johnson, also advocated not voting, though she framed the decision as a fast in which believers should abstain from some good for the sake of orienting our desires toward a higher good.Abstaining from voting for now would recognize that in this setting and for us, elections can be an occasion of sin and a site for scandal, Johnson wrote last spring. Paul abstained from meat sacrificed to idols for the sake of other Christians; Catholics could abstain from U.S. party politics, for the sake of all of us, Catholics and non-Catholics, who are misled by such efforts.
I can understand the frustration but I have an instinctive reaction against abstaining from voting. You wind up working to elect someone anyway, in a negative way. And personally, I'd rather be guilty for what I do than for what I don't do. Thoughts?
About the Author
David Gibson is a national reporter for Religion News Service and author of The Coming Catholic Church (HarperOne) and The Rule of Benedict (HarperOne). He blogs at dotCommonweal.
78 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
I think we have a civic duty to vote. I don't see why there needs to be a moral conflict; if the Democratic and Republican candidates present an occasion for sin, vote for a third party or write-in someone you find morally acceptable. As a liberal, I am extremely frustrated that my "real" choices are between a conservative incumbent and a very conservative challenger. So, Obama is the lesser evil (for me), but I am also wondering if he is lesser-evil-enough. But it wouldn't occur to me not to vote.
Mr. Gibson - excellent question and post.Here is something I posted earlier on the McGovern post:"A good and decent man with a conscience that he acted on. Unfortunately, both his campaign process (chaotic at best) and his decision on his running mate (abandoning him) pushed me in my first presidential vote to lodge a protest vote for Pat Paulsen. (yes, I know, immature and tilting at windmills).McGoverns principled stand against the Vietnam war is what sealed my admiration for him. But, as many say, I dont single issue vote."So, your question resonates with me. As you can see above, made a decision to lodge a protest vote just as I have voted for third party candidates at times.Agree - not voting seems to be too easy and what does it accomplish? Guess part of this is what you do beyond or beside just voting? To that point, have both a son and niece who stated last Sunday that they will not vote because the whole political system appears to them to be a travesty. But, that really is an easy way out - take some responsibility and do something about it. Finally, let's face it - the *lesser of two evils* are choices we make almost every day.
We have a responsibility -- I would not say "duty" -- to vote. The idea of "duty" suggests voting in the rigged plebiscites that dictators are fond of fixing. But we do owe it to each other to weigh in as long as we have the remnants of a democracy here. The responsibility to vote, however, does not include the responsibility to vote for one of the only two candidates who are enjoyed by the media. It might be fulfilled by voting for a third party. That has the value of showing you went to the polls but had low regard for the evils of the two lessers offered by the major parties.Or you can write in Uncle Bob. A beloved family member will never assassinate someone with a drone, and he or she might get a kick out of getting a vote for president.
And rather than fasting from voting, how about those urging such a fast, instead start working on building a democratic movement of Catholics to put together a comprehensive platform that isn't fragmented? and then line up a candidate? We could ourselves be that alternative third party that unifies the Church and provides a positive witness. There's another presidential election in 4 years.
I think we do have a duty as concerned engaged citizens to vote. I might understand not voting if there was no real difference between the candidates, but that isn't so in this instance. Choosing not to vote seems almost like a kind of selfish sulking - I thought Catholics were all about the common good.
Wouldn't ruining a ballot make more sense than not casting one in terms of expressing frustration with the candidates?
Thanks for this post, and the comments above.Here's a related question it provokes in my mind: is refusing to vote for the lesser of two evils an act of complicity with the greater evil? (I'm pretty sure there's not one right answer.)
It makes me sad to think of Catholics not voting. (Is that a win for the Nativists/Know Nothings/APA/etc.?) Sad to think of Catholics not voting. Is it a win for the Nativists/Know Nothings? For the APA? For the Syllabus of Errors? If you don't like Romney or Obama personally, at least think about the Supreme Court. Do you want your children and grandchildren to be ruled by Tea Party appointees? In days of yore, we learned in grade school about the importance of voting. Here's one example from Treasure Chest. (The great Catholic comic book is provided online by CUA.)http://www.aladin0.wrlc.org/gsdl/cgi-bin/library?e=d-01000-00---off-0tre...(See page 5 for an example of how things haven't changed all that much in 54 years.)
Is the question "not to vote" or "not to vote for President". In my state( Ct) the senate vote is more important than the president.
I remember in high school being shocked that a teacher said that he had never voted for a presidential candidate but only against one of them. I then thought this was rather cynical. I don't think so any more.I don't know that I would regard not voting as an act of virtue, but neither do I think it a sin. In the past I've voted for candidates for some offices and not for others. Apart from deciding in favor of one's own candidate, what do you suggest as an option--on election day--for those who have come to the conclusion that they can't vote for either presidential candidate? The only suggestion above that would appeal to me would be to write in someone else's name. Are write-in votes counted?
Making choices in an imperfect world is something I thought that Catholics, as well as other normal people, did every day. Barring some unforeseeable event, one of two men will be President of the United States for the next four years, and it won't be a third-party candidate or a write-in. It may not be sin, but it is surely not virtue to put pique before principle and refuse to vote because I perceive that neither of these men is perfect. There never has been such a candidate. But if I can see no significant difference between them, and between the policies each will try to implement in office, I am just not trying very hard.
Father Komonchak, yes. write-in votes are counted. They are listed at the end of voting registrars' reports, but I have rarely seen them reported in the newspaper. In 1968, the Kansas City Star did run a list of write-in votes, but that year there was an organized campaign for Eldridge Cleaver in some states, although not in Missouri. As I recall, Dick Gregory got 43 votes in Kansas City.
There's a moral conflict for me in voting for either candidate.They both believe in murdering people.I believe in self defense but what obama is doing is not self defense.Nor is his position on abortion defensible. To vote would be to add my one vote to a culture of murder-legalized murder. Though I prefer obama to romney for other reasons- contributng to this culture of murder with my vote-when i really don't have to, is wrong -i believe. i have to pay taxes, i can't leave the country as that would be too cumbersome at this point in my life[economically and for my family which I have responsibility to] but I CAN not vote.That's easy.The lesser of two evils is one thing-but when we're talking about cold blooded murder -whether abortion or the "war on terror" meaning dropping bombs on the villages of pakistan and afghanistan and targeted assasinations, I can't add my vote to that.
I find this to be a particularly interesting and (obviously) pertinent topic. I do have one reaction to the last point from the original post. David Gibson writes, "I can understand the frustration but I have an instinctive reaction against abstaining from voting. You wind up working to elect someone anyway, in a negative way." I have two points to make here: 1) Because of the electoral college, this only applies to people voting in swing-states. So, the question becomes somewhat arbitrary. How wide does the gap have to be before one's vote is meaningless anyway. I vote in the state of Connecticut and this year I wrote in Daniel Berrigan (mainly because I would love if he were president, and also because the irony of voting for him is too much for me to pass up). Now, there is about the same chances that Berrigan gets the electoral votes from my state as there is that Romney gets them. So, I have avoided voting for anyone from the two major parties, and I'm not certain how that matters from a pragmatic point of view.2) This is the more important point, I think. If one truly does not want to be responsible for either Obama or Romney being elected to the presidency, why should s/he choose one of them? If an individual truly believes that casting either of those votes goes against his or her conscience, it would simply be wrong to cast that vote, even if there may be a "lesser evil."
If one ops out voting as a continuing lifestyle choice I say great. But if a citizen voter throws up his hands at a particular election I say he/she is a bug out. Something like joining the infantry and suddenly say I'm not firing in this engagement because half the German infantry in front of us are fellow Catholics. a little notion and a little late.
Here is the US bishops on this question in "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship":"13. In the Catholic Tradition, responsible citizenship is a virtue, and participation in political life is a moral obligation. This obligation is rooted in our baptismal commitment to follow Jesus Christ and to bear Christian witness in all we do. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church reminds us, "It is necessary that all participate, each according to his position and role, in promoting the common good. This obligation is inherent in the dignity of the human person. . . . As far as possible citizens should take an active part in public life" (nos. 1913-1915)."14. Unfortunately, politics in our country often can be a contest of powerful interests, partisan attacks, sound bites, and media hype. The Church calls for a different kind of political engagement: one shaped by the moral convictions of well-formed consciences and focused on the dignity of every human being, the pursuit of the common good, and the protection of the weak and the vulnerable. The Catholic call to faithful citizenship affirms the importance of political participation and insists that public service is a worthy vocation. As Catholics, we should be guided more by our moral convictions than by our attachment to a political party or interest group. When necessary, our participation should help transform the party to which we belong; we should not let the party transform us in such a way that we neglect or deny fundamental moral truths. We are called to bring together our principles and our political choices, our values and our votes, to help build a better world.[...]"16. As the Holy Father also taught in Deus Caritas Est, "The direct duty to work for a just ordering of society is proper to the lay faithful" (no. 29). This duty is more critical than ever in today's political environment, where Catholics may feel politically disenfranchised, sensing that no party and too few candidates fully share the Church's comprehensive commitment to the life and dignity of every human being from conception to natural death. Yet this is not a time for retreat or discouragement; rather, it is a time for renewed engagement. Forming their consciences in accord with Catholic teaching, Catholic lay women and men can become actively involved: running for office; working within political parties; communicating their concerns and positions to elected officials; and joining diocesan social mission or advocacy networks, state Catholic conference initiatives, community organizations, and other efforts to apply authentic moral teaching in the public square. Even those who cannot vote have the right to have their voices heard on issues that affect their lives and the common good."
Count me in John Prior''s camp. And by the way, I find all this "lesser of two evils" talk much too glib. We're voting for someone to fill a political office. So far as I know there has never been a political practice in a large state that could, without qualification, be called good. Flaws, large and small, have affected all such political regimes. Nonetheless, unless we are "political Manichaens" we have good reason to applaud some political regimes as good, not simply as the lesser of evils. Those who lead them deserve praise for having done so. With all the objections that can rightly be raised against a number of Mr. Obama's policies, I find that his overall record is, all things considered, notably better than that of his predecessor and that of his predecessor's father. His predecessor was a disaster, I think, and his father was insufficiently concerned with the safety net. I'll have no qualms about voting for Mr. Obama. In answer to the Romney question: "Are you better off?" my answer is a resounding Yes.
That's a good final point from Faithful Citizenship, I think: that if you can't or won't vote, you have a duty to affect politics in some other way. Voting really is the least burdensome civic responsibility. You go in, pull a couple levers, and you get to complain for the next couple of years. Getting involved is better, though I'd say doing both is best, if you can.
I think not voting, especially when you can write in any name of your choice, is not an act of protest, it's an act of hubris. Not unlike asking someone to stand down, then taking repeated shots at him when you know he won't reply. But I digress.
I remember my priorities 4 years ago: closing Guantanamo, and ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I thought the easiest task by far for the new president would be the closure of the Guantanamo detention center. I was wrong... But I also remember stating that if he achieved even only one of my main goals, I would call myself satisfied. Do others remember what they wanted 4 years ago?
I understand and appreciate the angst involved in decision like this. But, I have come to a point in my life where if I begin to feel that during elections, I need to take a step back and do some serious self (and political) examination. Politics should not be so all consuming nor should we allow any institution or government to have such involvement in our lives that it affects us in emotional ways.We are not voting for spiritual or moral leaders but political leaders who will apply themselves in specific ways to specific problems. Everybody can establish their own criteria and interests and examine the positions of each to see which best fits. Good heavens we are not choosing a spouse or a lifelong commitment. If you don't like it, then make another change in four years or get involved in the local party and advance different candidates.Even in three party systems, you always run in to strategic voting situations (i.e. I would like to vote NDP but that candidate does not have a chance so I will vote Liberal so Conservative will not get in or some variant of that). I always say, vote for the candidate that most represents your interests. It is not a wasted vote that way. But at the same time, I don't think you should do a write in ballot. If you are really dissatisfied, get involved in a third party and help it to grow so that the third party can be on the ballot. If the rules are such that you are only given two choices, I think you are obligated to select one of those two choices until such time as third party can be on the ballot. But one should invest energies in that if one is consistently torn.I think you should vote for the person you most think could positively affect the community and country in positive ways.I am not a fan of purity tests. But then again, I already know which way I would likely vote even though I may not be with the candidate in every respect. The overall trajectory is in the direction, that persuades me.One cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good. But of course what I think might be good is probably (well likely in this case) different than what the majority here might believe. But that is why we have elections eh!
"Are write-in votes counted?"Yes, Prof. Komonchak, they're counted, but they don't count for much, sad to say.I'm not a diehard Obama fan, but there is absolutely NO way I can support the Republican platform. The thought of Ryan being a heartbeat away from the presidency scares the hell out of me! I suspect the Democrats would better respond to the needs of the poor.
"It may not be sin, but it is surely not virtue to put pique before principle and refuse to vote because I perceive that neither of these men is perfect."It is an insult so to describe those who have a moral conflict in voting for either presidential candidate. Similar condescending comments would not be hard to conjure up for those who have their minds made up. Voters for the two major candidates are not the only responsible ones around.
As I said before, which of these 2 men do you want making the next appointment to the SCOTUS? I know who I want to do that!I personally do NOT want an doctrinnaire religionist for President. We are electing a President of the entire nation with all of its diversity, not a leader of a Judeo/Christian nation (which doesn't exist, anyway).
"Voters for the two major candidates are not the only responsible ones around."I wholeheartedly agree. And we will always be stuck with only two major candidates as long as voters choose to only vote for those two parties. Claire: I wanted the same things you wanted last election. Sojourners has a nice essay which reflects my own values in electing a President:"For Christians, our election choices should always have most to do with protecting the the least of these: low-income individuals and families undocumented people, who are in the biblical category of the stranger children born and unborn those most vulnerable to hunger and disease around the world poor people most impacted by climate change women and children being trafficked and exploited, and those who are victims of violence and the collateral damage of war "http://sojo.net/magazine/2012/11/how-choose-presidentI'm not hearing very much discussion on any of this from either major candidate.
Jim Pauwels (5:40 p.m. ) Here is a paragraph from Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship that you overlooked:"36. When all candidates hold a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, the conscientious voter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likely to advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic human goods."That seems to equate voting for the candidate you hope is the bigger liar with not voting in that race at all, although I am sure that is not what the bishops intended. It does, anyway, give protective fire for Catholics who choose to skip a race.
Joseph A. Komonchak @ 6:22 pm:If it is an insult and a condescending comment, it is directed, as the sentence shows, against myself. Sadly, I have not the exquisite moral sensitivity to understand that this election is a contest between Hitler and Caligula.
I think voting for someone who has absolutely no chance of winning is the same as not voting.In this election, while neither candidate may be stellar on issues of war, in other areas, like the environment, they are worlds apart. A vote for Obama could make a big difference to the environment, and if there's a "least of these" list, I'd think our planet would make the cut.
Perhaps I am a moral midget. I find it very difficult to think that not voting at all or voting for someone who has no reasonable chance of winning to be a very peculiar exercise of citizenship. Unless one can make the case that not voting will be politically effective, i.e. will lead to some likely reform of the political discourse and practice in the society, then it is hard for me to see that one is not just advocating that we write off the entire political process. That may be the only acceptable option in a dictatorship or totalitarian state, but when, as is the case in modern democracies, there is an opportunity to work politically with others to effect policy changes as well as to prevent the dismantling of important programs to alleviate the plight of our fellow citizens, then to opt out is, I think, hard to defend.Note that what I say does not mean that I think that only a vote for Obama is defensible. Though I myself strongly support his reelection, I have to admit that one could plausibly conclude that a vote for Romney would be better for our society. I cannot see how not voting at all could reasonably be regarded as a positive contribution to our political life.
Tom B - how do you know I overlooked it? Maybe I just didn't read that far :-)It's certainly an interesting snippet. Note the formulation, "When all candidates hold a position in favor of an intrinsic evil". Intrinsic. Probably this sentence is the source for some statements by individual bishops that have been criticized here (including from time to time by me) for equating "intrinsic" with "important".Off the top of my head, I'm not aware of an intrinsic evil which both President Obama and Governor Romney support. (Without denying that war can be, and even almost always is, evil, and that it is important, I don't view it as an intrinsic evil; and at any rate, both candidates seem to agree more or less on the current policy toward Iran and Pakistan, and see that path as the path to peace).
I believe a citizen has a responsibility to vote after trying to get informed about the choices. This is the best country I have, for better and for worse. My vote is about 0.00004% of the state total and counts if I use it shrewdly. If I were to walk away, I wouldn't matter in this election. The election is not an examination of consciences or a beatification process. One of the presidential candidates (and his immediate successor in case of calamity) will be elected to carry out a very complicated job in a treacherous future not easily predicted. The daily complexities on national and global scales are not amenable to campaign sound bites and buzz words. A vote is a bet and a hope that the man chosen will do as much as possible as well as possible in the world we are entering. Therefore, the decision of how to vote should be demanding but not the decision on whether to vote. Where I grew up, the more crooked candidate was the preferred choice at times because he knew how to get the job done better with tolerable overhead.
Btw - the Romney campaign just texted me: the Governor's view on this moral conundrum is that progressive Catholics certainly should stay home on election day.
"Where I grew up, the more crooked candidate was the preferred choice at times because he knew how to get the job done better with tolerable overhead."I think I grew up near you. Where I grew up, it was suggested that one vote for the rich guy; if he has enough money of his own, he won't steal yours.
One would think, by way of example, a Republican casting a meaningless vote for President in New York and otherwise not participating in political life or public service cannot be more virtuous than a Democrat in Alabama who abstains from voting while otherwise participating extensively in political life. Furthermore, to the extent someone is willfully abstaining from voting as an act of temperance, for example to ensure emotional attachments do not affect their moral judgements, then to people who view temperance as the greatest virtue, I would expect that person would therefore find that abstention a virtuous exercise of the will.
I can understand not being able to vote for either candidate in good conscience. I've been known to write in the name of our pastor.I hope, though, that not liking either presidential ticket won't dissuade folks from showing up to vote. There are a lot of down-ballot elections that deserve your civic engagement.
MAT brings up an interesting sidebar to this discussion. Several of our WWII generals did not vote in presidential elections to avoid being in the position of having voted against the man who became their commander-in-chief. Anyone have a moral problem with that?Jim Pauwels (8:07), I urge you to consider this: Committing assassination without a declaration of war from Congress OR a judicial determination that the target/victim is who the president says he is and is guilty of what the president says he did OR at least a post-assassination assessment by somebody outside of the president' circle of yes-men, gofers and flunkies. The subject came up fleetingly in the third debate with the moderator assuming the president was for that policy -- since it is his -- and the challenger nodded along happily like a bobblehead doll. I'd call that evil, and I'd call the evil intrinsic.
I think voting for someone who has absolutely no chance of winning is the same as not voting.I don't think so. If you don't vote, no one will know whether it was not imply by indifference or laziness. But if you do vote for a "loser", you're sending a message of protest and expressing some preference for a hypothetical alternative. If a significant number of people do that, then the new president will know that x% of the people feel strongly enough about that alternative to thus throw away their vote on someone with no chance but better ideas: it makes those ideas visible. A politician would be foolish to ignore that! It may also serve as a wake-up call to reform the system.
"Committing assassination without a declaration of war from Congress OR a judicial determination that the target/victim is who the president says he is and is guilty of what the president says he did"I'm very troubled by the regime of assassination. Would a Congressional or judicial imprimatur change its moral status? I'm not sure that it would. But here's a less complicated example: presumably, both candidates (and every major presidential candidate since 1945?) has supported the use of nuclear weapons, which I would argue is an intrinsic evil. Having said that, I think the President doesn't get - or claim - nearly enough credit for reducing nuclear stockpiles. That, and the large increase in food stamp enrollment, should rank every bit as high as Obamacare in the Catholic social teaching honor roll of his accomplishments - and arguably higher than the financial reform or the GM bailout.
In 2000 I believed that it didn't really matter which candidate US citizens would vote for, Bush or Gore. I thought that once in office, they would be so constrained and so inclined to pander to results of polls that it wouldn't make much difference what party they came from. How wrong I was! We're still working on undoing the damage of the disastrous decisions taken by Bush during his presidency. Bush's legacy, I believe, is a powerful incentive to cast an immediately useful vote rather than a protest vote.
In an imperfect world we sometimes have difficult choices to make. But is it right to abstain from choosing when it is possible to-- at least-- minimize future damage by taking into consideration the likely fallout from the election of each candidate and voting for the one who would do the least harm?
In voting for a president we are voting not just for a person who promises to do X or Y but for the person's administration and party. BEcause we are voting for a party, we must look at what the party has done in the rather recent past. In the case of the Republican Party in the last several decades, taken as a whole (including the Republican presidents) the Republican Party has gotten us into two major wars, cut taxes for the rich and not the middle class, and has not met the challenges of energy, education and infrastructure. Further, it has spent vastly more money than the Democratic Party, even though it used to have the reputation as fiscally conservative. Further, during the Obama administration it willfully obstructed his every initiative, even when the initiatives had first been proposed by a Republican!!True, the Democrats are rather bad on abortion, but the Republicans have actually not done much better even when they were in power. The abortion problem can't be solved until the populace wants it to be solved, and that means persuading people to change their thinking. Changing presidents won't do it.So vote early and vote often, folks. I don't have to say how.
And how could I forget -- the financial crisis was largely due to the lack of regulation of the financial sector by the Republican administrations, and the current Republican candidate is all for eliminating the regulatory laws that Obama managed to get passed. Some people never learn.
I consider financial reform a huge failure of the Obama administration. There was ample political will for real reform and it never happened. But what else could we expect when the President surrounded himself with the Tim Geithners, Bill Daleys and Lawrence Summers of the world I guess, when you're bankrolled and beholden to corporate America, it is difficult to regulate it.
It's rather simple for me this time. I'm voting to save Obamacare.
Ann's particulars are precisely the sort of things that tip the scales for me. And...could anyone imagine the Republican party to be less " bankrolled and beholden to corporate America" than the Democrats?
'could anyone imagine the Republican party to be less bankrolled and beholden to corporate America than the Democrats?"No, the Republicans would be just as bought and paid for as the Democrats are.
In just 4 short years, we've gone from the lofty rallying cry of "hope and change" to..."No, the Republicans would be just as bought and paid for as the Democrats are."Why even bother voting?
This is an interesting post. For those who like a little history, here is an excerpt from an October 5, 1916 editorial by Joseph Matt for Der Wanderer, when it was still a German-Catholic newspaper, counseling readers not to vote, since both Wilson and his Republican challenger Justice Hughes would both lead the United States into war, despite their promises to the contrary. Matt, by the way, while counseling readers to abstain from voting for president, did urge his readers to vote for Democrat House candidates because he feared Republican internationalism. Here is the excerpt:"American election campaigns have never enjoyed the reputation of promoting the education of the people in high ideals. For the most part, they were dedicated to self interest, eloquence, demagoguery. Pessimists generally came out ahead when they claimed to find their dour expectations realized in our political life. But those who sought comfort in the politician who repeated the phrase: 'My son, you have no idea how much nonsense is spoken in world governance'these were not on the short end either. "It is hard to say what is the dominant characteristic of the current campaign: is it a tragedy of a people undoubtedly called to high tasks which sets about building its future devoid of all planning and setting of goals and lacking any kind of solid principles or is it a comedy in which its political leaders articulate soothing, multivalent phrases behind which an ego-trip stands as a categorical imperative. Thus, the anointed leaders set about extolling each other.."Our people, the ruling party, the leaders of the parties have the splendid opportunity to make their mark on world history and assure for the American republic lasting gratitude from all the peoples now suffering from the catastrophe of a world war. It makes no difference which political party is in power in this difficult time. For the basic root of the malaise affecting our American political life lies in the fact that there is no really constructive party, no party whose program is anchored in eternally valid ethical principles. On the contrary, any party in control allows itself to be swayed by considerations of momentary advantage, and it is from this standpoint that judgments about right or wrong are formed."As the situation looks now the most useful strategy lies in the direction of abstaining from voting in the presidential election...."
Paul L, interesting bit of history, thanks. I believe Dorothy Day could not bring herself to vote for president either, no? Good discussion here, thanks.I try not to be too cynical about it all, and I think there are real differences and also much at stake for others than myself. So I feel a duty to participate. Similarly, many can become cynical about the state of the hierarchy, which seems to be no better than our domestic politics. But I still vote for bishop. Oh. Wait...
david, i couldn't agree with you more. not voting isn't an effective act of protest. it's a passive act that undermines our system, which is unarguably flawed, but yet has its merits. what irene said at the top of this thread is true, it is our civic duty to vote. plus, to my mind, if you don't vote, you lose your right to complain about how bad things are. here's to voting.
Bishop McElroy in SF, who has a doctorate in political science, seems to make sense:http://www.catholic-sf.org/ns.php?newsid=22&id=60569
Contrary to what some believe, said the bishop, the church does not teach that Catholics must cast their votes based solely on a candidates stand on abortion. While that issue should be considered pre-eminent, the other issues can also be taken into consideration.This is really the hard call for us as Christians, Bishop McElroy told the group.Catholics should also consider if a candidate can or will do what they promise, he said.
Unless one is concerned about giving an aura of legitimacy to a totalitarian farce, not voting seems to be giving into despair.
@Mark Proska (10/26, 9:18 am) Actually, as you've most likely noticed, the Obama campaign has gone from its 2008 slogans of "Change We Can Believe In" (primaries) and "Change We Need" (general election) to "Forward.", the slogan it has used for the past several months.It may be less inspiring, but it (most likely) more accurately reflects this moment in time---the president's administration has spent the past four years dealing with the worst economic crisis in 80 years and with trying to end the two wars it inherited. After making significant progress on both those fronts, and on some of candidate Obama's top priorities (e.g., passing Obamacare), the challenge now (if you're a supporter of the president) is to keep moving forward, and not go back to the kinds of policies that got us into trouble in the first place (policies embraced by Romney and Ryan).
Related, but only tangentially:In the latest issue of Commonweal, Paul Griffiths has published "Fellow Travellers? Four Atheists Who Don't Hate Religion." Most of this piece is both interesting and informative, but the concluding section makes me wonder what he is saying. Each of the four authors he discusses longs for some version of what Griffiths calls political theology. Griffiths concludes by saying that unlike their "churches without Christ," the "Church WITH Christ acts upon its acolytes because he is there....The Church without Christ is better than no church at all, but it is a poor substitute for the church of Christ." Is Griffiths implying that a Christian, precisely by being a Christian, is better equipped to make a positive contribution to his or her spciety's political life than nonbelievers are? Is the sincere Christian one who recognizes the truth of Simon Critchley's view that "all theology is directly or indirectly political....[T]here's no theology without politics, and no politics without politics."Without much work, I could gun up an interpretation of this claim that is perhaps true but utterly devoid of practical import. I could equally easily gin up an interpretation that would make this claim patently false. I take it that a bright person like Griffiths has something more substantial in mind. Can Grant or Matthew or Mollie or anyone else help me make sense of what Griffiths means here?
Bernard --As I read Griffiths he is saying that a political body needs its citizens to be motivated to die for each other , but without religion there is no such guarantee. Without religious belief we can end up like Ayn Rand -- in it for ourselves and ourselves only. A populace motivated by self only cannot sustain a community. It's the old "individualism" v. "collectivism" or "community".By the way, I think that the GOP spinners current use of the word "collectivism" in place of "community" and even in places where "the common good" would be appropriate is the most cynical bit of political spinning so far. What they're doing is a great example of semantic manipulation. The Democrats need to take lessons from them.
Masochistic as it sounds, I think it would be a good thing if we had more presidential campaigns like Bush v. Gore, where the winner of the popular vote fails to gain 270 electoral votes. Maybe then, at long last, the American people will be so fed up with the Electoral College that they'll demand it be abolished.
"Several of our WWII generals did not vote in presidential elections..."The tradition goes back further to the beginning of representative democracy. However, of the era you refer to, most worthy of note is Gen. Marshall, who really couldn't exist in post-Vietnam America. Perhaps someone like Sen. Webb of Virginia who is mildly disliked by both sides but not really hated is the best we can do although the way one of his signature policy themes was politically polarized during the last Presidential debates makes me think perhaps not. Another interesting case is Gen. Petraeus. I recall from reading a defense industry rag a while back that when OIF began to become politically polarized he stopped voting to try to satiate concerns of his enemies that he was becoming too popular. He seems to have survived that period although I reckon after the election Mr. Axelrod will use the events of 11 Sep 12 to ensure his career in public service is cut short.
Thanks, Ann, for your comment. My concern is with the apparent claim that without religious belief there is insufficient motivation for citizens to die for the common good. I think that this is a poor reading of history. On the other hand, it's not clear to me that religious belief, precisely as religious belief can be counted on to provide this kind of need, especially for a pluralistic society. Archbishop Chaput is supposed to have said recently that we are Catholics first and only thereafter Americans. I recognize that there is something right about what he is reported to have said, though I hardly think that it suggests that we Catholics are more likely to die for our fellow citizens than our non-believing fellow citizens. So far as I can see, history would hardly bear out such a claim.
Luke--With respect to "Forward", do you think the President has been honest, forthright and transparent with you on Lybia? If you can't reply with an immediate and resounding "yes" to that question, how can you think we've moved forward?As an aside, am I the only commenter who's noticed the dearth of threads on the Lybian debacle on this blog?
"As an aside, am I the only commenter whos noticed the dearth of threads on the Lybian debacle on this blog?"Maybe it's because I don't watch FOX News.
Bernard --Your criticsm of Griffiths theory is well taken, but I think he's right that religious people are more likely to feel obliged to die for others in some circumstances and selfish ones are not so-inclined. It't the reason that some people like deBotton, an atheist, are starting to see the value of religion for the society as a whole. deBotton himself is an example of a generous atheist -- he's terribly rich and has started a foundation in England to help non-believers deal with their lack of religious values.
Religious faith may help some people to be more selfless than they would otherwise be, but self-sacrifice even unto death is far older than anything we would consider to be religion, even older than anything we would consider to be human. It exists among social insects, troops of baboons, hunting packs, schools of fish, flocks of birds, and more or less among any population of animals that cannot survive as individuals. We have rationalized and sanctified it, or tried to, but its roots are deep in our animal past.
TANGENT --What will happen if the electricity goes out in the Northeast for two or three weeks and the election there is impossible? Is there any legal precedent for such circumstances?(Coastal folks and those inland, you are in our prayers.)
What will happen if the electricity goes out in the Northeast for two or three weeks and the election there is impossible?Some of the ballots of the early voters are already in. As to the others, if they are unable to vote, then clearly it is something that God intended to happen. As Ryan would say.
A sign of the times. With an unprecedented natural disaster arriving here in about 18 hours, the longest line in town by far is not for bread, milk, toilet paper, and batteries but at the village early-voting center.
Jack B. --Has anybody said what will happen if the electricity is out on election day? And what about people who are ordered to evacuate and can't get back? Now the weather bureau is saying there will be an 11 foot surge in the NYC area:-(Let us pray.
I wonder whether the undeniable fact that a second megastorm is hitting the U. S. just seven years after Katrina will impress the people who insist that global warming is just a myth concocted by the liberal academics. (It's against the old odds that megastorms would hit so frequently.) If so, I wonder if the storm will influence how they vote.
This is the masterpiece of voter suppressionjust look at all that blue in the Northeast on the electoral mapand clear proof that some folks have the Almighty's ear. I guess I should be more than normally worried, living practically on the San Andreas Fault.
Ann O. -- Today's very busy early-voting center becomes a county shelter at noon tomorrow. (Bring meds, sleeping bags, etc.) Widespread power outage will occur, much caused by trees and flooding, not just branches. Repair crews cannot even begin until after 2-3 storm days. Significant outages through Nov 6 won't surprise me at all. Helpful county communications deal with higher, more immediate priorities at present, but I'm sure someone is agonizing over the election questions you bring up. Tens of millions of voters in a swath about 800 miles wide are exposed to the storm effects. (Note especially East Coast Blue.)
The worst systems failures in Katrina were the levees, of course, followed by the various communications systems (city, state, military). They couldn't talk easily to each other. After the storm a great deal of work was done on the communications systems, and many, many municipalities have taken advantage of our experiences and improved their own systems. But it hasn't ended yet. My nephew, a program designer, works for a company that is doing a huge program for the Navy. It will keep track of where in nearby states all sorts of needed equipment like ambulances, trucks, food supplies, etc., are at any given time so they can be made available quickly. (I wonder if Mitt is going to cut that program.) Don't you all forget to get your meds refilled. You can't do that easily if you're out of town for days. (After Katrina, I couldn't come back for 6 weeks, and that was early.)God bless you all.
John Prior: we should compare ZIP codes. I probably live as close (maybe closer) to the Hayward fault as you do to the San Andreas fault. Ed Gleason is right in their in "fault" country, too.But it sure beats dealing with hurricanes and floods. I was raised in tornado country and will take 'quakeville anytime.
John Prior -- Keep an eye on the fault. That Magnitude 7.7 off Vancouver last night looked like either a near miss or a practice stroke. The Holy Spirit may be advising on David G.'s electoral sin/virtue issue with particular attention to coastal Blues. I am trying to figure out whether local cancellation of early voting tomorrow reassures those who choose to abstain from voting or deprives them of an opportunity to make their point.
A big drop-off in voting in the Northeast is unlikely to change the electoral vote count, but it increases the chance of a "split" decision: Obama winning the Electoral College and the Presidency, and Romney winning the popular vote, which would give his opponents one more argument that Obama is not a legitimate president. Of course, if it's not that, it will be something else.This is not, I swear and affirm and aver, a hope or prayer for a counterbalancing election-eve meteor strike on any red state, bless them all.
The NY Times had an article on how our political parties are losing control of the political dialogue thanks to the big money donors. http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/billionaires-going-rogue/
"What will happen if the electricity goes out in the Northeast for two or three weeks and the election there is impossible?"As a practical, tactical sort of thing: I'd hope that they have a disaster plan that includes low-tech voting. Punch cards or paper and pen are all that is really needed to vote, if the logistics of getting low-tech ballots and voting booths out to the precincts can be accomplished. If it takes weeks rather than minutes to tally the results - then it does.I am praying for Commonweal and its staff, and the many contributors, commenters, subscribers and readers at dotCom who are on the East Coast and even inland.
"A big drop-off in voting in the Northeast is unlikely to change the electoral vote count, but it increases the chance of a split decision: Obama winning the Electoral College and the Presidency, and Romney winning the popular vote, which would give his opponents one more argument that Obama is not a legitimate president. Of course, if its not that, it will be something else."I've been thinking a bit about the chances of a Constitutional crisis emerging from this election. I think we denizens of dotCom should take a unity pledge that we will not fan the flames of such a crisis, regardless of which way the election comes out.
Here's some madness from Romney. He said in one of the debates that FEMA should be cut and the powers given to the individual states. "During a CNN debate at the height of the GOP primary, Mitt Romney was asked, in the context of the Joplin disaster and FEMA's cash crunch, whether the agency should be shuttered so that states can individually take over responsibility for disaster response."Absolutely," he said. "Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that's the right direction. And if you can go even further, and send it back to the private sector, that's even better. Instead of thinking, in the federal budget, what we should cut, we should ask the opposite question, what should we keep?""Can you see the state militias trying to coordinate their actions now? And the local foodbanks in 15 states? I've finally concluded that the man is literally mad -- he has what the French call a "manie", an obsession, and it's the federal government, as if the feds were Satan himself.. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/28/mitt-romney-fema_n_2036198.html...
Two pieces from Salon: the progressive case for and against Obama:http://www.salon.com/2012/10/29/the_progressive_case_for_obama/http://ww...


text:
KTM 1190 & 1290 Adventure / R or 690 Folding Brake Lever -
Any off-road rider knows the importance of having a folding brake lever. When riding tough trails, the tip of the stock KTM brake lever on your 1190 or 690 can get caught on rocks, stumps, or branches, bending and ultimately breaking your rear brake lever. This folding tip kit from Touratech is a quick and easy way to protect your brake lever from uneccessary damage during your off-road trips.


text:
I started wondering recently if paper really could be the way to go. That is, in my everyday, non-GTD-obsessive personal issue tracking and task management. Here's why I'm considering this:
A task manager application's window is on the same playing field as any one of a million distractions (think web browser & co). If I stick a note on my actual, physical desk it's there and, due to its physical nature, I can't really ignore it. This point can obviously be translated into dozens of scenarios (alert in mobile app vs. sticker on front door, bills placed somewhere notable vs. bill-tracking app, etc.)
Digital text has way less substance-- It can be deleted with a swift keystroke or, better yet, deleted along with all its assigned metadata. In a paper planner you can strike through items, but everything leaves a mark - you'll be reminded that there was something you should've done.
I've been trying to leave myself more glaring reminders (paper, that is) both at home and elsewhere and it sorta seems to kinda work. I'm not sure if I'm just imagining this (placebo-effect-style) or if there have been studies or lengthier discussions about this confirming that physical reminders are indeed more effective. Any insight would be appreciated!
Then again, I realize that digital GTD and other, more simple methods done via software have enourmous upsides. I'm just thinking, at the task level: what's more important? Alerts, intelligent reminders, etc (digital) or substance, tactility (physical)?
Bottom line: is paper more effective for people who are prone to a bit too much procrastination on their computers and mobile devices? Have there been studies looking into this?


text: Sudden Cardiac Arrest: Know Your Ejection Fraction By Michael D Eifling MD February 20, 2013 Every three minutes someone dies from sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) in the United States. In fact, it claims about 300,000 lives in the US each year – more fatalities than from stroke, breast cancer, and HIV/AIDS combined. Read More


text:
I am running a VPS with FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE-p3
This is my first time using FBSD as a server, and as a newbie I locked myself out of su by taking my user out of wheel group.
I have disabled the ability to login with 'root' from SSH in order to increase the security level of my server.
I know that someVPS providers provide remote console control service that allows you to see what's going on the screen while booting and everything, but mine doesn't allow that.
Will installing VNC for command-line use only, keep me unworried of making mistakes like taking myself out of 'wheel' and not being able to 'su'?


text:
The judge in the Katie Autry murder trial reversed his own decision of 2 weeks ago, and lifted a gag order imposed on the families of Autyr and her alleged murderer, Lucas Goodrum.
In court Tuesday, Judge Tom Castlen vacated his earlier decision that warned families and friends connected to the case not to speak out in public about the case. Castlen did, however, warn the families to continue being careful about what they say to the media, and warned them not to make judgements in public about the sufficiency of the evidence for either side in the case.
Castlen also said the website "lucasisinnocent.com" can continue to be operated by the Goodrum family, and specifically Goodrum's mother, Donna Dugas.
"The reason that I spoke out to begin with was nobody had spoke out for Lucas. He had just been sitting there with no voice, and everyone else seemed to have a voice, and I thought he needed the same treatment as everyone else did," Dugas said.
"We feel good about it, we think the judge is on target, we think he's doing the right thing and we think that will benefit the process," said William Kirkland, attorney for the Dugas family.
Judge Castlen asked both sides to clear their calendars for November, in case he decides the trial must be delayed to guarantee an impartial jury. Castlen said the prospect of continued intense publicity around the case means he must now consider the possiblity of pushing back the scheduled March 1st trial date, and consider a change of venue, as well.
Goodrum's defense attorney, David Broderick jumped up in court to protest, saying his client and his family don't want any delays. Goodrum has been in jail since May of 2003, when the alleged crime took place.
"Yeah that does concern me about moving in to November. That would put him in jail for 2 and a half years with, as I've said from the very beginning, no DNA, no fingerprints, nobody placing him at the scene. Lucas is innocent," Dugas said.
Goodrum will be back in court on February 10th for a pre-trial hearing.


text:
In June 1959, Charles Vernon Bush became one of the first three black cadets at the United States Air Force Academy. As squadron commander, Bush was the first black to graduate in the Academy's history. Prior to his attendance to the academy, Bush was selected by Chief Justice Earl Warren as the first black Page to the U.S. Supreme Court. He even transferred to a special high school, Capitol Page School, made specifically for U.S. Pages.
Bush started his secondary education at Howard University, where his father Charles Bush, Sr., was an administrator, then transferred to the Air Force Academy in a dual program with Georgetown University. He was required to learn oral comprehension of the Russian language.
Bush attended Air Intelligence Officers School and was stationed at Westover Air Force Base. A top-notch officer, Bush learned to speak fluent Vietnamese and was transferred to Vietnam in 1967 as an intelligence officer. He was in charge of six teams. He was awarded the Bronze Star for his service.
In 1968, Bush returned to the U.S. and taught political science at American International College. Two years later, he focused his attention on Harvard Business School to get a finance degree.
He lived out his career as an executive for Merrill Lynch-White Weld Capital Group, Max Factor, and Hughes Electronics.
Charles Vernon Bush passed away on November 5, 2012 at his home in Montana.


text:
University Counseling Services (UCS) is proud of its long tradition of offering quality training experiences to graduate students from CSUN and other universities and programs. UCS trains approximately 20 students each year from graduate programs in psychology, psychiatry, social work, and college counseling or student services.
UCS has been providing training for graduate students in psychology since the fall of 1968 and currently serves as the community mental health center for the approximately 38,000 students at the university. We offer a pre-doctoral internship program that is accredited by the American Psychological Association (APA). The staff at UCS is multidisciplinary with psychologists, counselors, a social worker, psychiatrist, psychiatric residents, pre-doctoral psychology interns, graduate assistants and administrative support staff working in a team setting. We have a graduate student assistantship whose role is to provide supervision and mentoring support for the day-to-day operation of one of our peer education programs. The UCS Psychiatry Residency Program provides a mandatory fourth-year rotation for psychiatric residents in the UCLA-San Fernando Valley residency program.


text: Heavy Duty Industrial has moved to 707 E. Front St., Empire, a location that will allow the company to continue to grow. Cory Jursik, the company's vice president of business development, said the new, conveniently located facility offers plenty of growing room. The company had about 60 workers on the job prior to the move, and since then, Jursik said the company has hired 40 new employees and would like to add another 40 beyond that. — Linda Harris


text:
Rolling Chassis With Tiger Rear - Mastering Your Rear - DrivetrainWritten by on January 18, 2010 Swapping Chassis Manufacturers Requires A Close Look At Your Rearend
Our new Mastersbilt chassis came to us as a bare frame. Not being a rolling chassis, we planned on reusing the Tiger rearend that was originally in Project DLM-Rayburn version. It was a stout quick change rear from the North Carolina manufacturer that specializes in those types of rearends. We ran it through a season and a half of racing without any problems, whatsoever. Now, anyone who has ever switched chassis manufacturers and tried to reuse existing components knows that it is not nearly as cut and dry as it sounds. There is a lot more to do than just drop the rear out of the Rayburn and slap it into the Mastersbilt. We had a whole slew of items to address.
For starters, as I'm sure many of you, know a 2002 Rayburn is a swing arm car, while the 2008 Mastersbilt that we have is a four bar. That fact alone means that we'll need new birdcages. In addition, the rearend measurements for the Mastersbilt are different than the Rayburn with both Mastersbilt axle tubes being 1 inch shorter. So in addition to new birdcages, we'll also need new axles, axle tubes, and side bells. By the way, we're also going to need all of the bars, rod-ends, and so on to mount the rear in the car. However, we will be able to reuse the center section and ring-and-pinion
Now, the center section and ring-and-pinion is a particular area of interest for us. Like I said, we had run this rearend for more than a year and a half at tracks from Georgia to Southern Florida. What I didn't mention was that we never once had the rear serviced. The only time we ever had it remotely apart was when we changed gears when track conditions required us to.
Our Tiger Rear End has a metal treatment applied to it called RF-85. Unlike a traditional coating like Teflon that sits on top of the metal, RF85 actually treats the metal. RF85 stands for reduced friction 85 percent, which was derived from results of frictional behavioral tests performed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Tiger has led the RF85 charge into racing to collect data for the domestic automotive market.
The technology is derived from cutting tools, medical devices, aerospace, and industrial applications, but the company that produces RF85 firmly believes its true potential lies within domestic car or truck applications where oil needs could be reduced significantly. Imagine running just one quart of oil in the rearend of your F150.
Road vehicle applications aside, we were interested in seeing specifically how the guts of the rear looked after all the racing we did. We figured it should look pretty good since we never had any problems, but we were pretty surprised with what we found.
Before we got to the point of looking inside the rear, we first had to line everything up for the swap. So, follow along as we give our new Mastersbilt a "new" Tiger Rear End.
Measure That Tube Did you ever wonder exactly how to measure the tube length on your quick change rearend? Well we went to the source to find out exactly how. Gerald Williams of Tiger Rear Ends tells us that they measure all tubes from the B-Dimension which is the area on the snout where the inner hub bearing seats against. You measure from this area out to the end of the tube, including the 5 inches installed inside the bell. You measure from the outer end of the bell to the B-Dimension on the snout (remember, that's where the inner hub seats), then you add 5 inches to accommodate for the length of tube that is inside the bell. This will give you the total and proper B-Dimension Tube Length.
More Photos From This Article View Slideshow
The side bell and axle tube in the foreground is obviously the older used one, the new one is behind. Note the difference in size.Surprise number one came when we disassembled the rear to put the new side bell and axle tube on. Like our original install, we kept one hub on the original axle tube and mounted it into one of our Weld wheels. This put the center section in the perfect position for us to work on it.When we opened the rear up it looked as clean as the first day we installed it in the Rayburn. If you look closely at the ring-and-pinion, you can almost see how shiny it is. Intrigued, we took it a step further.Bearing wear is minimal thanks to the RF85 treatment. We were pleasantly surprised at how little wear the bearings actually experienced. We'd heard of other racers running up to 6,000 laps on an RF85-treated rearend, but being the cynical types, we always want to see for ourselves firsthand. Well, if the lack of significant bearing wear didn't convince us perhaps the ring-and-pinion's condition would. In this shot the ring-and-pinion look almost new.And in this one, they look as good as new. OK, we're convinced. If you run a quick change a Tiger Rear End with RF85, it could be your new best friend.Here you can see the thrust block, which is designed to take the slop/play out of the ring gear when shifting, particularly into reverse. Not a lot of guys run them but we think they're a good idea to prevent things from getting torn up.
The jam nut for the thrust block will get adjusted once the whole rearend is in place. The thrust block works by putting tension against the backside of the ring gear, keeping it in place. To adjust it, tighten it down until the block touches the backside of the ring gear, then back off one quarter turn and lock down the jam nut to the housing. Everything is held in place.We assembled the new right side of the rearend completely before placing it onto the center section. You can clearly see our new birdcages from Bert. Yes, we didn't know Bert Transmission made birdcages either, but they're really nice looking parts and we can't wait to get on the track to let you know how they perform. We also decided to stick with our 007 hubs from Winters. We loved the way they performed over the last year and a half so there was no reason to change.With the rearend positioned under the chassis and the birdcage in the right spot, we set about connecting the lower bar to the birdcage. You can see the mounting point for the top bar just above the new brake rotor. Those rotors and the accompanying calipers are a subject for a different story. So stay tuned for that one.The left side upper and lower bars are attached. Racers who run these cars know about the infinite adjustability which you can see in the wide variety of hole choices where the bars mount to the chassis.The lower bar which goes from the bottom side of the birdcage to the frame sits in front (or to the outside) of the dummy shock.Here's a view of the completed rearend which shows both the coilover shock, which is mounted to the rear of the axle tube, and the dummy shock in front.
Our car has rod-ends from Aurora Bearing Company. This one attaches the J-Bar to the BSB mount on the chassis.


text:
From what I've read it seems you Have to boil the full wort amount when going all grain. I just want to make sure that is the case, as I couldn't understand why you couldn't just boil the malt etc and make a strong wort and then just dilute it later, kind of like a beer kit? As after all the beer kit makers do sort of the same thing, the wort is concentrated and then later diluted. I'm mostly just looking to save money, but it would be fun to try out all grain. My biggest pot is around 12L and I'd be looking to do around 23L batches. thank you
No, you don't have to boil the full volume in AG brewing. I only had a 7 gal. pot when I started AG so I's boil about 5 gal. down to 3.5-4, then add top off water. Boiling less will reduce your efficieny because you don't collect as much wort. You need to use more grain to make a higher gravity wort at less volume, so you can top off afterward. That was my main motivation to get a bigger kettle and do full volume boils. But I won some awards with partial boils, so if that's all you can do you can still make great beer.
A full wort boil is not absolutely necessary, but you shouldn't be topping off too much of your volume. Your efficiency will suffer greatly from topping off. Even if you're able to hit 80% effiency with 11.5L of wort (a big if), after boiling and topping off to 23L you'll end up with below 40% brewhouse effiency. You would also definitely be limited in terms of how many pounds of grains you could work with.
This isn't an issue with extract brewing, because you get the same amount of sugars from the extract no matter how much water you use. This is not the case with grains at all, since you'll need more mash water, more sparge water, and you definitely need to boil all the wort you obtain.
Some ideas to try out all grain with your current setup:
Good answers already given, although if you choose to boil a higher gravity then add top up water, keep in mind that that boiling a higher gravity wort reduces hop utilization, so you need to use more hops to achieve the same level of bitterness. (Doesn't apply to flavor and aroma hops.)
Typically it's between 10% and 30% more. The table here lists hop utilization factors by time and gravity. If you're not using brewing software, which can do this calculation for you, you can work out how much more hops to use with the formula:
For example, if your original recipe has 60min hops for a 1.050 wort, but you do a concentrated boil, with a 1.080 wort, then the amount of additional hops is:
So, you'd need about 30% more hops than in the original recipe if you boil 1.080 wort rather than 1.050.


text:
|Follow Us:
Look for technology and marketing thought leadership every month from Marketing Magnified.
|Sign up for the Mailing List
programs & Surveys
Are you interested in a CMOC Premium Membership?
Your Premium Library Subscription is set to expire today, would you like to renew?
Your Premium Membership is set to expire today, would you like to renew?
The CMO Council, in partnership with Lithium Technologies, will undertake an eight-week authority leadership initiative to highlight the role social media is playing in developing, shaping and advancing today's customer experience. As the new CtoB paradigm evolves, consumers are enjoining their own personal networks for advice, product selection, service validation and after-market assistance. Social media and trusted business networks have evolved into dynamic self-help communities, peer-to-peer referral channels, and group purchasing ecosystems that are growing economic factors and forces in the market.
How well are marketers embracing social media in their quest to uncover market opportunities, respond to unmet needs, pre-empt potential issues, and further brand advocacy and affinity? To what degree are they using social media feedback, intelligence, insight and analytics to map intentions, build richer buyer profiles, understand lifestyle needs, refine segmentation and targeting, track trends, preview and test product concepts, as well as co-innovate with customers?
Understanding the variance in social experience has become a critical marketing imperative as the voice, velocity and value of communications among connected audiences plays a greater role in customer purchasing behavior, product adoption rates, as well as brand interaction and reputation levels.
Social Media has become one of the fastest growing engagement channels in marketing today. According to the CMO Council's 2011 State of Marketing report, 69 percent of senior marketers anticipate an increase in social media spend, with 35 percent of marketers indicating that the increase will be in excess of 5 percent. Additionally, 37 percent of respondents indicate that social media channel integration and alignment will be a major transformational project for their organizations in 2011. More are looking to apply process, operational rigor and measurement to this emerging channel of engagement. Some 34 percent of marketers say they will deploy some form of social media monitoring or data mining platform, while 35 percent say they are evaluating the use of private social networks or community building platforms.
Social media's greater share of marketing spend is justified by a bevy of new statistics that point to the influence and impact of social media on the consumer. According to research, over 50% of Facebook fans and Twitter followers say they are more likely to buy or recommend a specific brand or product than before they followed or liked that brand.
And, customers who engage with a brand via social media believe they have a stronger connection to the brand and often feel better served and embraced. Research also indicates that customers are using social media to problem solve (43 percent), solicit feedback (41%), or are looking for new ways to interact with brand (37 percent).
But are today's social media investments and exchanges rewarding customers and meeting expectations? Are social media experiences reinforcing brand perceptions, enabling richer conversations, and promoting the sharing of positive brand experiences?
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of surveyed marketers say they are actively monitoring social media via paid or free tools, but less than one-quarter (24%) among them are extremely satisfied with their social monitoring tools, according to a survey from Web Liquid and RSW/US. - Marketingprofs.com
Some 77% of U.S. adults are members of social networks -- 67% in Facebook alone. - Adage.com
Recent studies cite that 33% of all online content is user generated and six out of the top 10 websites in the world are social. Social is how we are increasingly learning about brands: 25% of search results for the world's top 20 largest brands are now links to user generated content. - Adage.com
In a Harris Poll released in 2010, 34 percent of adults who use social media said they have employed them "as an outlet to rant or rave about a company, brand or product." Among those who use social media, 50 percent of 18-34-year-olds, vs. 37 percent of 55-plusers, said "reviews from friends or people I follow on social networking sites" sway their interaction with companies, brands and products. - Adweek.com
McCann Worldgroup's newly completed global survey "The Truth About Youth," which polled 16-to-30-year-olds, found that respondents in Brazil, China, and India, where emerging consumers are forging fledgling brand loyalties, feel most strongly about telling friends about brands they like. - Adweek.com
Nearly half (42%) of businesses indicated that if they've already allocated a portion of their marketing spend to social media, they would increase this spend over the course of the year. Only 8% of those surveyed indicated that they would decrease social media spend. - Adage.com
A study of 24,000 consumers across the 16 largest countries found that those who are most connected, living on the cutting edge of social media tend to be more 'prosocial' than average, being more likely to do volunteer work, offer their seats in crowded places, lend possessions to others and give directions. - Thenextweb.com
Best Practices in Social Media 2011 - Case.org
State of Corporate Social Media in 2011 - Usefulsocialmedia.com
Social Media Marketing Report 2011 - Socialmediaexaminer.com
Marketers and Social Media Monotoring Survey 2011 - Brandchannel.com
Mobile Factbook 2011 - Portio Research


text:
I'm making a presentation and I need to know if I should use "duplicated data" or "duplicate data". Is there any difference? I'm talking about removing observations of a database that are duplicates.
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
The difference is subtle, but in this case, Duplicate Data would be preferred. I would interpret the two phrases as follows:
Duplicate Data: Entries that have been added by a system user multiple times, for example, re-registering because you have forgotten your details.
Duplicated Data: Someone has deliberately taken a precise duplicate of the data - or a proportion of it - maybe for backup or reporting purposes. It may have been accidentally added to the original.
In the context of what you are talking about, the difference is important, because the second implies exact duplicates, whereas the first is a much more complex issue.
And yes, "exact duplicate" and "partial duplicate" are misnomers - it is either a duplicate or not - but these are the terms used.
Other answers are good, but in my words:
Duplicated data used the old data as the source of the data.
process(X) -> A A-> B A is duplicated as B
Duplicate data had the same input and therefore are matching records.
process(X) -> A process(X) -> B B is a duplicate of A
Duplicate data.
What you discover and remove are instances of duplicate data.
What you or the processes create, mostly for a purpose, is duplicated data.
When I hear (or read) duplicate data, I presume duplicate is an adjective that modifies the word data.
Most of the dictionaries I consulted listed duplicate as a noun, verb, and adjective, but duplicated as a verb. For that reason, I'd use duplicate data.


text:
VS2008 Training Kit: Integrating Windows CardSpace
- Posted: Dec 03, 2007 at 7:30AM
- 3,580 views
Right click "Save as…"
Hi and welcome to another Visual Studio 2008 Training Kit screencast.
This session was presented by Nigel Watling and is the from the
Visual Studio 2008 training kit available from http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=7602397.
Windows CardSpace provides users with a simple, consistent and secure way to authenticate to applications. Passwords are made redundant by taking advantage of public key cryptography and presenting the user with a set of cards to represent their digital identities. These identities can be provided by the user and by third parties (e.g. banks, employers, government). CardSpace has privacy features, protection against phishing, and support for multi-factor authentication (e.g. smart cards). By utilizing open, standard web and web service protocols, it can be used with any web or web service application, regardless of platform, with minimal effort from the developer. With .NET Framework 3.5 comes an improved UI and the ability to use CardSpace over http as well as https. This session covers both CardSpace fundamentals and the new features.
Recorded September 2007.
Oops, something didn't work.
Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.


text:
21 Dec 23:46 2009
eBuppies.com - Offers New Online Dating Site for Black Urban Professionals
ebuppies admin <admin <at> ebuppies.com>
<http://www.ebuppies.com/tellafriend.php> December 18, 2009 <http://www.ebuppies.com/signup.php> Dear Friend, <http://www.ebuppies.com> eBuppies.com (www.ebuppies.com <http://www.ebuppies.com/signup.php> ) is a new online dating site that is dedicated to providing singles from all over with the opportunity to connect with other buppy singles in their local area or anywhere of their choice. More and more buppy singles are going online to connect with others because going out week after week to nightclubs and bars can be tiresome, as well as expensive. eBuppies.com makes dating easy by hosting hundreds of profiles of different singles looking for love. Buppies can join on a monthly basis for less than they would probably pay for one night at a nightclub or bar. Buppies who are looking for love, romance or just friendship now have a unique resource that can help them discover their future soul mate: eBuppies.com. Although high technology drives eBuppies.com, the online dating site is simple and easy for buppies to navigate. Buppies can register, browse, search and contact other singles <http://www.ebuppies.com/signup.php> at no charge. There is also no charge for buppies to upload a photo(Continue reading)


text:
Eleanor Bestrom
Eleanor V. (Cox) Bestrom, a life-long resident of the area, passed away on June 6, 2011, in Colville at the age of 83. She was born on Jan. 1, 1928, in the Bruce Creek area of Evans, the daughter of Chester and Anna (Peterson) Cox.Eleanor was raised in Bruce Creek on the family farm. She attended school at the Bruce Creek Schoolhouse and the Marcus School before graduating from Colville High School in 1945. Eleanor fell in love with Kenneth Bestrom, and they were married on May 21, 1950. They lived on their farm where they raised their three children. Eleanor worked hard caring for her family. She also worked as a secretary at the Washington State University Extension Office and later as the secretary of the St. Paul Lutheran Church in Colville for 23 years. Eleanor always had a beautiful garden and canned her fruits and vegetables. In her younger years, she was active in bowling leagues and loved playing Pinochle with Ken and her friends. Eleanor was a member of the St. Paul Lutheran Church, the Ft. Colville Grange, and the Aladdin Home Ec. Club. Eleanor was very talented in making quilts, and her family will treasure her handiwork for many years to come.Eleanor was preceded in death by Kenneth, her young daughter, Janice Louise Arlene Bestrom in 1952, and by her parents, Chester and Anna Cox.She is survived by her daughter, Diane Bestrom of Colville; her sons: Ron Bestrom and wife Beth, Puyallup; and, Duane Bestrom and Shirleen Oliveira, Colville; her six grandchildren: John, Jason, Angela, Adam, Erin and Erik; her great-granddaughter, Jade; as well as numerous nieces and nephews.The funeral service for Eleanor Bestrom was held June 14 at the Danekas Funeral Chapel in Colville. The graveside service followed at the Highland Cemetery in Colville. Please visit the online memorial and sign the guestbook at HYPERLINK "http://www.danekasfuneralchapel.com" www.danekasfuneralchapel.com. The Danekas Funeral Chapel and Crematory in Colville was entrusted with arrangements.


text:
After a fresh install, and various other tests (troubleshooting), I have concluded that my laptop (an HP Envy 14 - Beats Edtion) will not play DVDs, however it will play CDs.
When I first got the laptop, up until recently it played DVDs perfectly, I doubt there is a hardware issue sees as it loads the DVDs and can view the files in them, but not play them, as well as read and work with CDs perfectly.
Was there an update or something of the like that may have caused this? If so, is there a fix? I typically use this laptop 's HDMI out with my TV as a DVD player... so it would be very beneficial if there was a solution to this problem.
There was a similar issue with the touchpad that there was a fix for... so I'm hoping that this is something similar


text:
WACO (January 12, 2013)—Two families are homeless after a fire broke out in the Trentwood apartment complex.
According to officials, a fire broke out just before 8:30 p.m. Saturday at the complex off of Dallas Circle.
When crews arrived on scene, flames could be scene coming out of the windows of an upstairs apartment.
Crews evacuated the building and were able to quickly put the fire out.
The residents of the upstairs apartment, a family of four, were not home at the time of the fire.
A bedroom in their apartment was heavily burned and the rest of the apartment suffered smoke damage.
The apartment below was damaged by water used to put the fire out, displacing another family of four.
No one was injured.
The Red Cross is working to help both families.
The cause of the fire is under investigation.


text:
BEST BETS: "Jessica Jones," "Big Trouble/Escape from New York" & More October 2016 Highlights
Comic Books
Showing results 1-1 of 1
Mouse Guard and Other Stories: A Free Comic Book Day Hardcover Anthology
If nothing else, Archaia can boast about the presentation of its Free Comic Book Day offering. Of course, since it is from Archaia, the content is pretty darn good too.
|May 5th, 2012


text:
I want to add all of my contacts to the chat list. I have selected "Show in chat list:">All Contacts, but not all of my contacts are showing there. How do I do it?
I am doing that with Gtalk and Excel:
The Show in chat list: -> All Contacts refers to the contacts that are already in your Gtalk list, not to all your Gmail contacts.
Besides, to add a contact to chat, it has to have a Gmail account, otherwise it will not work. You can add a non Gmail contact to your chat list by sending an invitation to him/her, but he/she will just be invited to open a Gmail account.


text:
Sweden provides a great environment for a vacation. If you like golf, there are more than 300 courses.The nature, the heritage and culture are abundant with many places of interest. The countryside is pure and refreshing and the large cities very tourist friendly. Stockholm is a series of fourteen islands with great architecture, culture and a trendy feel and smaller cities also offer a unique experience for relaxation or sightseeing.
Please provide this reference number to our customer service center representative on request, so we can help you better


text:
A theorem of Chevalley, Shepard, and Todd states that if $G$ is a finite group and $\rho: G \rightarrow GL_n(\mathbb{C})$ a representation so that $\rho(G)$ is generated by pseudoreflections, then $\mathbb{C}[z_1,\dots,z_n]^G$ (the subring of $G$-invariant polynomials) is again a polynomial ring.
From my understanding, a pseudoreflection is diagonalizable with diagonal form $\text{diag}(1,\dots,1,\zeta)$ where $\zeta$ is a root of unity.
My question is whether the property of being generated by pseudoreflections is a property of the representation or of the group itself, and if so what is the equivalent abstract group-theoretic property. If it is not the case, could someone point me towards a group which furnishes a counterexample?