text:
Play Slideshow >>
Small-Shop Powermatic Table Saw
As enclosed cabinet saws go, the PM1000 is very compact – about the size of a contractor's saw, though with a much more solid build. There are two versions of the saw; this one weighs about 350 pounds and can rip 30" to the right of the blade
David Frane_ToTT
This is the larger version of the saw; it has a wide extension table and can rip up to 52" to the right of the blade.
There are a few things of note in this photo. To turn the motor on, push the button in the middle of the donut-shaped switch. Turning it off is a matter of pressing the red part of the switch, which in a pinch can easily be done with a hip, leg, or knee. The yellow piece above the "donut" is a safety that can be removed to prevent unauthorized use of the machine. Note the heavy steel hand wheels and the 115-volt plug on the end of the cord. If 230-volt power is available the saw can be converted to that voltage by switching some jumpers inside the motor and changing the cord.
The saw has a modular guard similar to the ones found on portable models. The guard, pawls, and splitter can be removed and installed without tools. The manufacturer refers to the splitter as a riving knife – and while it performs the same function is not the same thing because it can't be lowered for non-thru cuts.
This should give you a sense of how compact the saw is. The gal in the photo is Kimberly Winkle, a renowned furniture designer who teaches at Tennessee Tech University and did a promotional video for Powermatic.
Last week I was in Nashville for the unveiling of the PM1000, a new saw that made me wish I could trade my old saw in. And I already have a really nice saw (a 15 year old Powermatic 66); it's just that it takes up a lot of space and is more saw than I need for the work I do now.
The PM1000 is essentially a downsized version of the PM2000, a 10-inch enclosed cabinet saw that has been out for 7 or 8 years. This new model has two claims to fame: It's very compact and has a 1 3/4 HP motor that comes wired for 115 volts (it can be converted to 230 volts).
For some, this will be the difference that allows them to use a high quality machine in a small workspace or in a shop that is not wired for 230 volts. It also makes it easier to bring the saw onto a jobsite – though frankly, few people will because at 350 pounds the PM1000 is not very portable. Still, for those contractors who set up on site for a very long time, the 115-volt wiring will make this machine a more viable option.
The Powermatic pedigree of the PM1000 goes deeper than the distinctive gold paint. It has a nicely machined cast-iron top, heavy cast trunions front and back, a TEFC motor, and the heavy hand wheels one expects from the brand. Upgrades over previous generations of Powermatics include: a switch that is easily turned off with the bump of a hip or knee, and arbor lock for changing blades, and an adjustable fence on the miter gauge. The saw is equipped with an Accu-Fence, a simple solid rip fence that rides on a single heavy rail and locks in place by a lever-operated cam.
One of the more interesting parts of the saw is hidden below the table. The blade is almost totally enclosed within a dust shroud that is piped to a port on the back of the machine. Instead of pulling air from the entire cabinet – which must remain leaky if the motor is to be able to cool itself – air is pulled from around the blade only so less dust escapes.
The saw can be used with the included modular guard, splitter and pawls, splitter alone, or the old-fashioned way – with no protection at all. Powermatic refers to the splitter as a riving knife, but it can't be adjusted down for non-thru cuts so it's not a true riving knife. It's also worth noting that the splitter is too thick for use with thin-kerf blades. That would not be a problem for me, because with a saw like this I would not feel the need to use thin-kerf blades - which are designed to lessen the demand on underpowered machines.
The PM1000 is available with and without an extension table(specs and pricing below).
Table Saws
Few tools are as dangerous, and few tools garner more opinions on proper technique. In...
David Frane
For such a small and light tool, this 12V max barrel grip model has a surprising number...
It's smaller and weighs less than most portable table saws, and it comes without one...
Please read our Content Guidelines before posting.
Check out Tool Videos from our Editors and Contributors
Copyright ©
2016 Hanley Wood Media, Inc. All rights reserved.


text:
Healthy Gluten-Free Dinner Recipes
The recipes look delicious, and thanks, Eating Well, for bringing attention to the ways that gluten-free eaters eat.
However, Eating Well seems to have included some patently gluteny options here. Bulgar, for example, is definitely made from wheat and therefore off-limits. In making recommendations for gluten-free meals, it might make sense to just exclude the gluteny alternatives. Or at least make sure to note which have gluten and which don't...
Just a thought. Thanks again!
— Anonymous
09/21/2010 - 5:57pm
Blue cheese dressing is not gluten free. Blue cheese it's self isn't gluten free. Therefore this recipe is labeled incorrect, and that could be potentially dangerous for those who have a gluten allergy. Just a simple FYI.
— Anonymous
09/14/2013 - 10:25pm

subset: commoncrawl


text:
40% Off of Everything
Except for mangoes. You have to pay full price for those. Now, kittens. You can have as many of those for 40% off as you want.
3 Comments add a comment
Yay Oshkosh. Still sad that he sold the company off (I know the person who owned it, went to school with his kids).
Snap. I'll have to swing by and shop the next size up for my kids. They're due for a step up soon.
Oh no! I'm not supposed to be buying any clothes for the little ones right now :( darn you OshKosh, how could you have this sale right now? and such cute swim suits!


text:
"For God So Tough-Loved the World. . . "
Stephen Colbert on Christian physicians and conscience.
Key ethical distinction:
"But this latest case is a real breakthrough. It's not Christian medical professionals refusing to provide treatment they don't approve of. It's Christian medical professionals refusing to provide treatment to people they don't approve of."
About the Author
Cathleen Kaveny is the Darald and Juliet Libby Professor in the Theology Department and Law School at Boston College.
38 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
This is a fabulous example of the church of dogma. The Good Samaritan is definitely discredited since he helped a real enemy of God. Preemptive war is ok since we can send evangelicals to convert them. And pedophilia is tolerable since the reputation of the clergy is a priority and these kids wanted it anyway, especially the female ones.Now that one has refused service to a mother who has a tatoo we can celebrate the triumph of Christendom and prepare the next crusade. Maybe Iran.Now let's talk about what being a Catholic/Christian really means.
"Soddom and GUMmorrah"That's classic.Is this guy the only doc in town? There's no hospital? No ER?Aside from the fact that the doc in this case is a genuine butthead, my other reaction was what kind of mother would say, "She had to go the WHOLE night with this ear infection."Why? If the doc's office had been closed, would she also have gone the whole night with an ear infection, or would the mother have sought treatment elsewhere?I'm not debating the idiocy of the doc in question because I think that's pretty clear, but it's also clear that he's not a doctor I would want treating my child anyway. One does wonder how far such thinking will go. I didn't notice any piercings on the mother, but I did notice she was overweight. Will refusal of treatment based on the grounds of engaging in a deadly sin soon become another item on the list of sins docs who call themselves Christian will say they can't tolerate?I refuse to call them "Christian docs". To call them "Christian" at all would be as dishonest as their claim to love Christ.
Cathleen Kaveny often posts items here based on "hip" or young-bloods media. I complain these fail the old-style clarity of explaining "who, what, where, when, and how." I had to search around to learn that Colbert's story came from 2920 F Street in Bakersfield, California, and that Gary Miller, M.D., was a med school grad of the State University of New York at Buffalo, of all places. May I urge Commonweal's contributors to identify where things happen? Comedy Central is not an address in the real world!Joe McMahon, of Seaford, Long Island
Mr. McMahon,I'm sorry you don't like the posts. But I think it's imprtant to pay attention to what's going on in these veunues, if Commonweal hopes to engage the next generation on the relationship of religion and culture. Furthermore, I don't think Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert can be relegated to the kiddie corner. I think their prominence demonstrates that they have broader appeal than that.Commedy Central is a television network-- just like NBC or ABC; it's available on basic cable. The Daily Show and the Colbert Report are political commentary, largely in the form of satire. What I posted from Colbert is the equivalent of a video editorial-- it's the equivalent of a column on the op -ed page, it's not a news report. You shouldn't expect full information here, any more than you do from an editorial in newsprint. It ran a couple of days ago on the Colbert Report in precisely the form it was posted here.
Re: Donna's comments -- since we don't really know the circumstances of the parents, it's possible that they would have had to pay much more out of pocket for an emergency visit for a non-emergency condition such as an ear infection. It's possible that they lack insurance and were paying the total cost, which would be much cheaper if it was limited to a doctor's visit. It's true that this is a private doctor's office, as the sign says, but it's also true that doctors are expected to conform to some objective professional standards for the care they provide, and denying care to a child for an acute condition with potentially adverse consequences because of the mother's appearance or lifestyle is, in my opinion, a gross dereliction of duty, and the fact that she could have gone somewhere else is not much of a defense. This guy truly gives Christians a bad name. I doubt if the mother or the child, for instance, is more interested in becoming Christian today as a result of their encounter with this medical office. When Christianity is treated like a private country club (Dinner jackets and tie required, ladies must dress appropriately, no bathing suits except in pool area, no gum, no smoking . . . ) so-called Christians might as well not bother pretending it's a religion anymore.
I'm certainly not defending the doctor, nor am I blaming the parents.I was simply noting the dramatic effect with which the mother stated her kid went the whole night with an ear infection, which I personally do not find to be very plausible. There's a whole lot of stuff we don't know. We don't know their financial circumstances, we don't know how long the child had been sick, we don't know if they had a scheduled appointment or if this was a walk-in off the street, or if they had called the office in the middle of the night, if they have insurance or not, if there's a clinic in Bakersfield, CA or other health care providers.... And given the fact that doctors are less quick to prescribe antibiotics to young children and more likely to watch and wait, who's to say that the doctor would have given this kid anything even if he had seen her?The doctor is expected to conform to an objective professional standard for the care he provides. The problem here is that he didn't provide ANY care and is there an objective standard that requires a doctor to provide services at all. Catholic doctors in family practice have an out with HMO's so they do not have to write referrals for their women patients to obtain an abortion. The woman can obtain the referral directly from their HMO. I know this because I worked in such an office with such a doctor, and this was written into his agreement with the insurance companies. Without it, he would not legally be able to refuse treatment or services to a patient participating in a plan he agreed to accept.Were I to make a guess at this particular doctor's situation and his emphasis on his "private practice", I would guess that this doctor does not participate in any insurance plans at all so that he cannot be hamstrung by their rules.
"...if Commonweal hopes to engage the next generation on the relationship of religion and culture."Cathy,As part of the next generation, I have to say that I have no idea what message you are trying to send me about the relationship of religion and culture. From what I can tell (based on your other writings), it seems that you're largely contemptuous of orthodoxy. If that's not your message, might I suggest that you make it a little clearer? It would be most helpful.God Bless,FM
Donna, if he did not provide any care it is not a defense at all, in fact, it would make the situation worse. If he looked at the child and said, "she's stable, you can go find another doctor who's willing to deal with lowlife trash," to get treatment or the next follow up evaluation, that would be rude, but he would have satisfied, IMO, a minimal professional obligation to the patient. It's not the parents' job to figure out whether she needs care RIGHT NOW or can wait until the morning. Maybe the doctor did that much, it's hard to know from the clip provided.
As for HMOs and Catholic doctors, they get outs depending on the HMO and the state. It varies a lot. Most health plans don't try to characterize doctors by practice style or what have you, unless the doctor is viewed as being extreme and generates a lot of complaints from patients (for instance, berating female patients for asking for contraception).
Ferdinand Mary That's quite an insult. 1. How do you define "orthodoxy"? 2. Where, precisely, have I been contemptuous of orthodoxy, as you understand it?3. Where, anywhere, does Catholic orthodoxy require physicians not to treat persons with tattoos?I am utterly contemptuous of pharisees. I think this doctor is a pharisee. Christians like him pervert the faith; they give Christianity a bad name. Furthermore, they are not likely to win any converts What would a person--young or old-- not too familiar with Christianity think about the faith after being exposed to this story?Not exactly in line with Deus Caritas Est. No sign of love of neighbor, no sign of love of God.
Not knowing the particular circumstances and commenting in a more general way, I would think a written complaint to the state's medical licensure board and/or attorney general might be in order. At the very least, submission of a complaint helps establish a record that might, at some point, be actionable by the state.
Ferdinand Mary,Orthodoxy is caring about and for enemies, forgiveness, genorosity and challenge that will allow one to live the life in God that Jesus promised.If you are not challenged about spiritless "orthodox "people who sent clerics out again to abuse children then you might rethink what is responsible. Who do you believe the bishops or the abused? This is one of the central questions of our times.Cathy challenges us to rise above the letter of the law for the Spirit. The leaders, the orthodox, of the time of Jesus were severely rebuked by him because they were legalists and forgot the spirit. The answer might be that you may need to give your self permission to think outside of the Scribes and the Pharisees as to what someone might mean.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17160630/Here's a news story on it. There is an insurance company--Health Net of California. I'd want to look at the provider agreement he signed with the insurance company.
For what it's worth, here's why I think Catholics ought to be concerned about this story. As the Colbert video mentions, there is a national clash about Christian physicians refusing to perform certain procedures--to do an abortion, to provide IVF services, etc. They want an exception to any relevant state or provider requirement that they do so-- "a conscience" clause.Now, there is no constitutional requirement that the state give them an exception to state mandates-there is also no constitional requirement that private parties hire doctors who claim an exception to perform services within the scope of employment on religious grounds. They can try to negotiate an exemption to the requirement with their providers, or in case of licensure or other state requirements, with the legislature. But tin my view, their ability to gain the desired exemption depends on their ability to persuade the others that 1) they are acting reasonably; 2) tthe exception is narrowly tailored, and will not affect a broad range of necessary medical services; 3) the exemption they demand will not undermine the ideals of medicine and of good medical care more generally.You might claim that no one ought to be forced to provide services they don't agree with. You might claim that it is a type of coercion. But this is untrue. The response is that they don't have to be physician. They can choose another profession which doesn't present them with problems of conscience. Furthermore, the commnity invests a great deal in the training of physicians-- they reasonably expect ones who will provide the general run of services valued in the community--conscience clauses will, of necessity, be an exception, granted because you respect the class of people claiming it, and because you don't think that granting it will undermine your program of providing genreally accepted medical services to the population. So what in particular should the exception be based on? Colbert's distinction is key: It's one thing not to provide SERVICES that you think are immoral --especially if you think they harm other people. You're claiming freedom from engaging in an immoral act. It's something different to refuse to provide treatment to PEOPLE whom you believe to have performed an immoral act (chewing gum, getting a tattoo) --and especially, to the innocent children of thhose people. Your claim here is for freedom not to treat immoral people. Christianity has never taught that physicians should refuse to provide moral services to immoral people. We have no problem binding gunshot wounds, comforting drug addicts, curing prostitutes. These are not immoral acts. They are corpral works of mercy. If, in the public mind, the "conscience clause " exception claimed by Catholic physicians is associated with people like Dr. Merrill, they will see little reason to protect such consciences. Why? Go back to my three reasons. It does not seem he was acting acting reasonably or even in good faith on his own terms--what did the baby do wrong? Second, there is a wide range of common medical services at stake -- in this case penicillin. Third, his version of the conscience clause goes against the whole ideal of medicine: treating people who are hurt, no matter how badly they have behaved.So, I belive that people like Dr. Merrill actually undermine the likelihood that states like California will respect the consciences of physicians with respect to procedures they believe to be immoral. He will be the poster child for the Christian physician--and not a very attractive one at that.Rather like Bill Donahue functions in his sphere.So I think Christians need to 1) criticize Dr. Merrill, and 2) distinguish between the legitimate freedom not to perform immoral procedures and the illegitimate freedom not to treat immoral people.Which is precisely what Stephen Colbert did.
I realize that this blog emphasizes Catholic thought, but I thought this discussion might benefit from two quotations from one of my favorite Protestants, John Wesley:"In the afternoon I visted many of the sick; but such scenes, who could see unmoved? There are none such to be found in a Pagan country. If any of the Indians in Georgia were sick, (which indeed exceedingly rarely happened, till they learned gluttony and drunkenness from the Christians) those that were near him gave him whatever he wanted. O who will convert the English into honest Heathens!" (Journal, Feb. 8, 1753)."Whether they will finally be lost or saved, you are expressly commanded to feed the hungry, and clothe the naked. If you can and do not, whatever becomes of them, you shall go away into everlasting fire" (Sermon on the Mount, Discourse IV)
Joe, never apologize for bringing John Wesley into the discussion! I have always thought he and his brother Charles made tremendous gifts to the entire body of Christ.
Cathleen,I understand your point, but I don't see this as a real problem for Catholics who want to see conscience exceptions for physicians and other health care providers.This doctor may say his reason for denying care is because he is a Christian, but the reason he is not obligated to do so is has nothing to do with his stated reason. He could just as well have said, I think tattoos are trashy and disturb my other patients, and denied care. As the AMA spokesman says in one of the news articles on this, he has rights as a "businessman."The situation with Catholic health care providers is very different.I suppose your point is born out to some extent by Bill's reaction in equating this man's behavior to the "church of dogma," but I think most serious observers, and even more casual ones, see the difference.
"Rights as a businessman?" What church does that stem from? Or perhaps one cannot cure on the Sabbath. Surely the Good Samaritan had "reasonable" grounds for refusing since the robbed man was a known enemy. Just who is our neighbor?
I'm somewhat amazed that we're even debating this. There are two reasons for us as Catholics to be concerned about this story. The first, as Cathleen pointed out, is its potential relationship to what we might see as legitimate conscience clause issues. Unlike Sean, I'm not sanguine about many observers' ability to tell the difference. I can see this example brought up as a type of reductio ad absurdum. "If we legislate a conscience clause for Christian doctors, where will it end?"Regardless of the conscience clause issues, we who claim the title of Christian have a special responsibility to stand against those who use the name of Christ to try and justify immoral acts. Sean's point about the doctor's possible legal "rights as a businessman" is irrelevant. It might be an interesting legal issue to debate whether and in what circumstances doctors should be able to withhold treatment based upon their personal opinion of the patient. But the legal and ethical argments are not the same. As Catholic Christians, I would hope we could agree that the doctor's action was immoral and opposed to the teachings of Christ.
Bill,My point was that his legal right to deny care had absolutely nothing to do with his beliefs, Christian or not, and therefore have no relationship to any conscience claim.Why do you insist on equating traditional Catholic doctrine with lack of care for others? You could find no one more orthodox than Mother Theresa, and all of us would have a hard time matching her care for the poor. Why also do you insist on bringing the sex abuse crisis into any discussion? Frankly, the crisis had very little to do with where anyone falls on the doctrinal spectrum. There were as many "progressive" priests and bishops involved as "traditional" ones - some even think more.Gina,I don't claim that this doctor acted morally or as a a Christian. My only point is that some guy in Bakersfield says his Christian beliefs motivated him not to provide routine treatment to a child who's mom had tattoos is not the same thing as a physician refusing to perform abortions. I just think it is kind of a leap - and absurd, as Colbert is demonstrating.
Sean,1. First, the Doctor and they hypotheical Catholic doctors are in precisely the same place legally. The doctor's "right" not to provide care can be limited by statute, by regulation, and by contract. In fact, it's my strong suspicion is that this doctor's failure to treat the patient violates a provision in his contract , even if they haven't found it yet. (assuming this is a medicaid patient some contractual provision required by the federal or state law to be incorporated by reference in in medicaid provider contracts). So whatever right they have not to treat can be contractually or legally aborgated.2. Both this doctor and the hypothetical doctor refusing to perform abortions (say) are going to have to make their case to be treated differently than the norm, once non-discrimination clauses (in the first case) and willingness to provide a specified range of services (in the second case) are made the norm. In making that case, religion is relevant to both as motive. Motives matter--good motives help, bad motives really hurt. But motive is enough for neither. The distinction between not performing certain procedures not treating people is extremely important, but not conclusive in and of itself. In other words, just because you claim to be exempt from a requirement that one provide certain treatment , you're not home free.We would not allow a Muslim physician to say she doesn't want to accept male patients; we wound't allow an old style fundamentalist to say that he wouldn't give women an epidural during delivery because the Bible says women should bring forth children in suffering (I believe this argument was in fact raised when anesthesia became widely available for this purpose). 3. So I think we can't take for granted that most people see these distinctions. Abortion is a constitutional right. Many people believe it contributes to women's autonomy. So from their perspective, in both cases you have 1) doctors who are refusing to do their jobe; 2) for crazy religious reasons); and 3) with cruel and bitter consequences. No one is going to make exception for the conscience of someone they categorize like that.Why the video? I think Colbert make the point in two minutes, entertainingly.
Recent conversations with my fellow volunteers at the local version of the St. Vincent de Paul's Society reinforce for me the importance of emphasizing among our fellow Catholics the demands of our faith concerning how we deal with people, any people, who do not have the means for satisfying their elementary needs. Quite simply, our faith forbids us to play the judge and decide which needy people are "deserving" and which are not. Whatever distinctions the state's laws may allow are irrelevant for how we ae to conduct ourselves as Catholics. The conversations I've had with my fellow volunteers concerned how we deal with illegal Hispanics. For the Catholic, their legal status is in principle irrelevant. (Prudence of course is relevant in all cases.)When the state law is morally defensible, then Catholics, like all citizens, can follow its guidance. But more frequently than we might like to admit, Catholicism and state law clash. It's hard, I've come to see, for many good Catholics to recognize and deal with these clashes in a Catholic way.I know that these comments are more or less tangential to the main issues on the table here. Nonetheless, I trust that they're not useless.
Sean, The pedophilia crisis is about bishops not caring about victims of sex abuse by clergy by sending them out again to abuse children. 99% of those bishops are orthodox. The problem is the bishops are still resisting as the movie posted on this blog, and countless other incidents, shows. Make no mistake about it the bishops are the issue. These hierarchs were called "The Cosa Nostra" by Frank Keating who was selected by them. Also, the National Lay Review Board, selected by the bishops called their actions "tyranny."The bishops are still stonewalling on the issue as they are on the latest issue, finances. The bishops are the issues, make no mistake about it. They make the term "orthopraxy over orthodoxy" more true and poignant than ever. They have lost their moral edge. So much so that Marci Hamilton said that the pedophilia scandal would have never been exposed without the courts. The glaring fact is that the bishops have not truly repented of their because they are continuing. Unfortunately, both conservative and liberal Catholics are overlooking this since it is exhausting. We give the bishops a bye at our peril. But the issue is still pertinent and cuts the moral authority of a criminal bishopric. Is this apostolic leadership when the courts have to force Christian leaders to be moral? Is this the leadership that you will tolerate?
Bill,You said, "The pedophilia crisis is about bishops not caring about victims of sex abuse by clergy by sending them out again to abuse children. 99% of those bishops are orthodox. ' Frankly, that's hogwash, and I challenge you to back it up with facts. Today, Cardinal Mahony, one of the most liberal bishops in the US, is perhaps the posterchild for poor handling of this problem. As I said, I for one won't tie resposibility for this crisis on to one end of the theological spectrum or the other. There is plenty of blame to go around.I am not talking about giving the bishops a "bye." But I am also suspicious, rightly I think, of those who have used the crisis to promote completely unrelated ideological or theological agendas. It becomes tiresome when every discussion, whether it is about abortion, or church governance, or women's ordination, or even contraception, the answer is always "abuse crisis - bishops bad - don't obey them."You like to point to the example of the scribes and pharisees. Our Lord, even as he condemned their hipocrisy warned the disciples, "Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice." The human failings of the Church cannot be an excuse for ignoring her teachings.
Sean, the rights of doctors as "businessmen" would be easier to accept if doctors accepted their status of businessmen in other ways. For various reasons, I am well aware of the ways in which doctors have persuaded state legislatures to protect them from competitive pressures, particularly as it pertains to their dealings with health insurers. They have found a receptive audience precisely because they have been able to convince state regulators that their interests are aligned with those of their patients, and that they are thus a well-suited proxy for advancing those interests. In other words, "As doctors go, so go their patients." Doctors who are picky about who they serve based on extraneous or even frivolous factors are setting up a conflict between their interests and those of their patients. The more conflicts there are, the less respect and deference to their wishes doctors will find among the public at large, as well as those that represent them. What does this mean for Catholic health care providers? Pretty much what Cathy says -- those that object to specific procedures or treatments will be told to either find a different profession or that their employer is not required to accommodate their views. In other words, conscience clauses are considered to be okay because the people who assert them are generally believed to be sincere in their desire to help others, therefore, their unwillingness to engage in this or that procedure could only be the result of sincere moral position on their part. When the first presumption fades away, so will the follow on conclusion. The other interesting thing was the MSNBC report in which a lady with a tattoo stated that she had been treated by the doctor's office. One wonders whether the "No tattoo rule" is selectively applied as a subterfuge for avoiding patients based on other reasons. If that were the case, the doctor would clearly have a problem.
A few points hereFirst, I am not approving what this guy did. My point is that his "right" such as it is has nothing to do with his claim that it is based on his "Christian" belief. He could have said whatever he wanted for a reason, but his "right" not to treat this woman would only be the same right he would have not tot treat anyone. Except in some emergency situations, a physician has a right to refuse treatment unless he is governed by aome other set of standards. This could be governed by any number of factors including contracts he may have with insurers, whether he takes medicare or medicaid, etc. But he is in no way invoking a conscience exception.As for doctors using the law and regulations to promote their own economic agenda, even at the expense of patients - no argument from me there. I only made the statement about his rights as a "businessman" because that's what the AMA says his rights are - i.e. not a conscience based legal exception. In that regard, however, show me any group in our society that doesn't do this - including teachers, nurses, lawyers, social workers, and any other professional service - and I'll give you a dollar.Cathleen,You speak of the state's right in establishing rules of licensure are nearly absolute - that the first amendment would have absolutely nothing to say about it. Is it your opinion that a state would withstand a first amendment challenge to a licensing rule that required obstetricians to perform abortions?
You know, Sean, that's a really interesting question. I doubt if the state could go so far as to make licensure contingent on a doctor's willingness to engage in any specific procedure. On the other hand, I think the state could go pretty far in the direction of not protecting doctors who refuse to render care on the basis of conscience. For instance, not prohibiting health plans or employers or hospitals from refusing to contract or terminating a contract because a doctor won't provide certain types of care. As for your first point, there is no doubt that many professionals might choose not to deal with people based on non-morally based extraneous grounds. But most of these professionals wouldn't think of running to state legislatures and asking for protection based on their important role they play in protecting the public. Well, they might think of it, but for the most part, they won't be taken very seriously. To whom much has been given . . .
I am sorry that this is now becoming ad nauseam, again. Mahoney might be left of Mother Angelica but he is not a liberal. Gumbleton is a liberal. The reason I bring up pedophilia is because it is still not being addressed properly as the bishops continue to withold information and reconciliation for the victims. It must be in the forefront until the bishops do the right thing. And they are not.So the bishops are like empty, tingling brass until they get square with this one. It will be a long decade.
The first amendment does not protect people from generally protected laws or regulations not specifially aimed at punishing the members of a particular religion. It doesn't require special treatment because someone has a religiously based objection.So, I think a state could say: 1) You need to have a medical degree to be a doctor; 2) I think a med school could say, you need competent obgyn training to be a doctor, and a doctor needs to know how to perform an abortion. Also, if a state is licensing HMOS,or contracting with providers, it might say that abortion is one of the services that has to be made availab.e The HMO would then be on be able to say --any obgyn who works here has to know how to perform abortions, and take their turn if necessary.Cf. Employment Division v. Smith --Scalia wrote the majority opion. A quick Google summary: "Facts of the CaseTwo Native Americans who worked as counselors for a private drug rehabilitation organization, ingested peyote -- a powerful hallucinogen -- as part of their religious ceremonies as members of the Native American Church. As a result of this conduct, the rehabilitation organization fired the counselors. The counselors filed a claim for unemployment compensation. The government denied them benefits because the reason for their dismissal was considered work-related "misconduct." The counselors lost their battle in state court. But the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Oregon Supreme Court's judgment against the disgruntled employees, and returned the case to the Oregon courts to determine whether or not sacramental use of illegal drugs violated Oregon's state drug laws (485 U.S. 660 (1988)). On remand, the Oregon Supreme Court concluded that while Oregon drug law prohibited the consumption of illegal drugs for sacramental religious uses, this prohibition violated the free exercise clause. The case returned to the U.S. Supreme Court in this new posture.QuestionDoes the state law violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment?ConclusionNo. Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, observed that the Court has never held that an individual's religious beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that government is free to regulate. Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind." Scalia cited as examples compulsory military service, payment of taxes, vaccination requirements, and child-neglect laws.
I think there is an important distinction in the case of licensure. The case you cite and the other examples that Scalia cited are laws of general application with incidental impact on certain people because of their religious beliefs. In a licensure situation, there is an individualized inquiry into qualifications and is more like Sherbert v. Verner. Scalia said in Smith that the critical distinction was that the law generally prohibited an activity.
Two points. First, I don't think much of the basic framework of Sherbert (1963) survived Smith. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act tried to put the Sherbert framework back, but it was struck down. In an case, FFRA was a statute, not a constitutional requiremrentSecond, the licensure is a generalized requirement. If you're going to be licensed, you need a medical degree. Schools can set the requirements of medical degrees. You might argue that the law is targeting Catholics specifically--but I don't think that argument would succeed. It's targeting people who won't perform abortions--no matter why.
There's a difference between what the state requires for licensure and what a medical school requires for its students. I think the distinction that I made is valid: It would be problematic (not necessarily but very possibly prohibited depending on how it was done) for a state to condition medical licensure on being trained in abortion. "Medical licensure" is a very broad certification and no matter what the state says, because most doctors never perform the procedure, and the state would likely have to show that there is more than a rational relationship between being so trained and the state's interest. However, if a medical school or a training program considers D&C an important procedure for ob-gyn training, it's doubtful that it will be required to exempt students or residents. Students probably have a better chance of being protected than residents or other employees. Just so you know, this issue has already played out when the accrediting body for graduate medical ob-gyn programs refused to certify some training programs conducted by Catholic hospitals, not because they didn't perform abortions, but because they wouldn't train residents to do D&C procedures -- the procedure used in first trimester abortion, but also used in "missed" or incomplete miscarriage. I think some accommodation was reached, but the hospital lost the lawsuit that it brought. In looking at these cases, it's important to trace the state and/or federal law nexus between the condition and various benefits conferred by accrediting bodies, and the penalties associated with loss of accreditation, etc. The unemployment cases are really vexing. I worked on one of these where the employee quit on asserted religious grounds (though many people quit for the same reason but not on religious grounds) and the court ruled against the employee.
Barbara, I see the point of your distinction --In a way, that's what I'm trying to get at in my "second. .. " in the above post. I see that it is morally problematic for a state to make abortion training directly a condition of licensure, but I still don't see why would it be problematic constitutionally. Although it's not generally done, I see no reason why a state couldn't specify its own requirements for licensure rather than ceding those requirements to medial schools. It could appoint a medical board to do so, for example. And for people who practice in the area of obtetrics, the procedure used in abortion can be medically necessary after an incomplete abortion, as you know. Because abortion is such a common procedure, I don't know why states couldn't require people who work in that general area to know how to do an abortion--even if they don't plan on doing them down the line.It might be bad policy for the state -- or an employer --to require such things. But I just don't see how it is unconstituitonal after Smith.
It would be unconstitutional if it were a subterfuge for enforcing a condition of licensure based on moral/ethical/religious viewpoint as opposed to being based on actual concerns about the training of doctors. That's also why students stand a better chance of getting out of medical school requirements than residents do of getting out of training requirements. As the "category" becomes less and less general the requirements are easier and easier to defend on the basis of real concern over a doctor's skills rather than made up concerns that are based on rejection of someone's beliefs. It's for the same reason you can't teach creationism in schools -- the mere statement of a permissible reason will not be accepted at face value by courts trying to untangle the intent behind the requirement, which is relevant to the inquiry.
I'm not so sure about "ethical" viewpoint. There is nothing that requires the state not to enforce express certain moral norms in the law--just because they either track or fail to track religious beliefs.We believe it is morally wrong to discriminate against women and African-Americans. That moral norm is enforced by law, whether or not it tracks the moral norms of each and every religious community in the country.Massachusetts licensure requirements for adoption agencies prohibited discrimination against homoexuals. No religious exemption for Catholic Charities.
Well, generally, regulation has to be "viewpoint neutral." The first amendment doesn't just protect religious beliefs, it also protects political belief and, generally, free expression of all kinds. The Massachusetts adoption example can only be analyzed in light of the fact that CC was carrying out a specific state function (if I understand correctly, placing children in the state's custody for adoption) and would not or could not agree to place children in compliance with the state's non-discrimination requirements. It would be much more problematic if Massachusetts ordered private adoption agencies placing children on behalf of their biological parents (rather than the state as custodian) not to discriminate against homosexuals. It would be even more problematic if Massachusetts refused to let CC handle adoptions because of the Church's stance on gay marriage, notwithstanding its agreement that it would adhere to the state's ostensibly neutral standards.
But viewpoint neutrality has to do with freedom of expression, not freedom of action. Laws against discrimination are not themselves "viewpoint neutral" between discrimination and non-discrimination. The state is imposing a moral view on discrimination.Nutshell: the first amendment protects your right to speak freely against anti-discrimination laws; not to violate them.Boston Catholic Charities IS a private adoption agency--the non-discrimination requirement is a licensure requirement --all private adoption agencies have to be licensed. It's not merely a requirement having to with kids in state care. That's part of why the battle was so harrowing.So I'm not sure why you think this is "much more problematic" from a legal point of view. This is precisely what happened in MA.From a moral point of view, that's another story, of course. Now, consider your third case "If MA refused to let CC handle adoptions because of the Church's stance on gay marriage, notwithstanding its agreement that it would adhere to the state's ostensibly neutral standards." I agree, but with a caveat--I think MA would have the legal right to seek special assurances from CC, given the pressure on top from the Church not to comply with the requirements, and perhaps even to impose special monitoring requirements. (by analogy with UCC's reasonable grounds for seeking assurance).
You're probably not reading this anymore, but based on your last comment, I looked around to see whether I understood the law correctly (that is, the scope of the law), and I couldn't find anything that was definitive. To me, requiring an agency that is placing children on behalf of the state to conform to state standards on discrimination is mostly fine (still subject to some review regarding the legitimacy of the standard). The second, regarding privately placing children of bio parents who retain the agency on their own -- that is a more challenging requirement to defend. The Church clearly believed that was the scope of the law, at least from what I could find, but I couldn't find supporting documentation. Also, I've never understood exactly what it means to be "non-discriminatory" in the provision of adoption services, because women who voluntarily give up their babies pretty much have an all but inalienable right to reject placement on any grounds at all and the state's role is basically to ensure the safety of the child and the "fitness" of the adoptive parents. Not so with parents whose rights have been terminated on fitness grounds. Then the state is acting in its role of parens patriae and can reject candidates on any number of grounds (for instance, I am guessing that it could refuse to place children with parents who acknowledge a penchant for spanking as a form of discipline, even though lots of parents spank and are not considered to be unfit.) The state is allowed to define a higher standard. So the issue would be, is it constitutionally proper for the state to force a private adoption agency placing children only on behalf of their biological parents to accept applications from gay applicants for consideration as adoptive parents? I think I could argue this in both directions, and I suspect that where I would come out is that so long as the state doesn't trample on the parents' legitimate rights in placing their children it's probably okay for the state to control how the agency itself handles the process. I think one of the things that would be challenging for the Church to show is that it deserves a religious exemption based on the notion that it is carrying out a "core mission" that requires it to discriminate against people who do not share its convictions. There's probably no question that the Catholic adoption service places babies with Protestants and Jews and Muslims and Hindus -- as it deems appropriate.


text:
- Networking Support|
Sign In
My Networking
A complete set of security solutions that address today's sophisticated security threats at the perimeter and interior of your business.
Security Modules and Appliances
Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS)
Proactive network security for today's real world networks and datacenters.
HP Traditional Firewalls
High-performance security platforms delivering policy-based multisite connectivity.
- HP TippingPoint Next Generation Firewall
Delivers reliability, high-performance, and granular application visibility and control for improving your security posture.
- HP Firewall Series
Security Research
Innovative research delivered as actionable security intelligence.
Centralized Module and Appliance Management
Robust management functionality and flexible deployment.
Centralized Network Access Management
Supports user identity authentication based on access policies associated with infrastructure resources.


text:
Dennis Ray Lynch, 34, died Monday, Dec.17, 2012 in rural Ford County. He was born Aug. 3, 1978 at Dodge City, the son of Bob and Connie (Davidson) Lynch.
He attended Cimarron Schools and was a avid Green Bay Packers fan. Lynch liked going to the races and riding his quads.
He was preceded in death by his grandparents.
He is survived by his father Bob Lynch and wife Teresa of Dodge City; mother Connie Manzanares and husband Joe of Pampa, Texas; three sons Zachary, Jayce, Seth; two daughters Kaytlen and Lindzey; one brother Toby Lynch of Pampa, Texas; one sister Bobbi Lynch of Pampa, Texas.; three step brothers; Nathan, A.J., and Isaiah; and one step-sister, Shanda.
Funeral service will be held at 10:30 a.m. Saturday, Dec. 22, 2012 at Dodge City Church of the Nazarene with Rev. Michael Burns presiding. Burial will follow at Cimarron Cemetery in Cimarron. Visitation will be from noon to 8 p.m. Friday, Dec. 21, 2012 at Swaim Funeral Home.
Memorials are suggested to Dodge City Church of The Nazarene in care of the funeral home.
Thoughts and memories may be shared in the online guest book at www.swaimfuneralhome.com.
Location, ST | website.com


text:
Mexican restaurants nationwide are celebrating Cinco de Mayo today.
In Mexico, May the 5th is celebrated as a day of freedom.
But in the United States, Cinco de Mayo has become a time to celebrate.
Restaurants like Chuy's offer day-long happy hour specials and decorate for the occasion.
"It's one of our biggest days as a company. It's thought of as our Mexican Thanksgiving so to speak, for us personally. But it's a huge day for us, and that's why we put a lot into it," says Bruce Rosenblatt, Chuy's General Manager.
Cinco de Mayo originated in the American West during the Civil War when the Mexican Army beat the French at the Battle of Puebla.


text: This lesson is for all you Seattle Seahawks fans. This is just a simple lesson of the logo or symbol for the pro-football team out of Seattle. The mascot for the football team is Seattle Seahawks Blitz. It is a blue colored hawk with a green eye. The lesson is drawn from the side view which makes drawing the Seahawks logo a whole lot easier. Have fun and let me know if you are a fan.


text:
Hamilton Sees Armstrong's Long Road
The television in Tyler Hamilton's New York City hotel room didn't carry the Oprah Winfrey Network. That was a little bit of a problem. So on Thursday night he went to a friend's apartment, where, like three million or so estimated viewers, he watched a tense Lance Armstrong confess, finally, to using performance-enhancing drugs.
Hamilton wasn't a viewer hoping to hear the truth. He knew the truth about Lance Armstrong, because it was also the truth about himself. Hamilton carried his ugly truth like a heavy bag for many years, doing shameful things to hide it. He'd told many lies, until, not long ago, he decided to stop telling lies. With co-author Daniel Coyle, he'd written a book called "The Secret Race," about his years as an elite U.S. cyclist alongside Lance Armstrong, and his experience using drugs in the pro ranks. When the book came out, Hamilton was blasted for his past deceptions, but he knew what he had done. He knew the book was the truth.
And now here on his friend's television was Lance Armstrong, his former teammate turned adversary, sitting across from Oprah Winfrey in a hotel chair in Austin, Texas, beginning his own slow, defiant, maddening confrontation with the truth. Armstrong's predicament was far larger than Hamilton's—Armstrong was a seven-time Tour de France champion and global celebrity, the biggest name the sport had ever seen. But like Hamilton, he ran from reality until he couldn't run anymore.
"It was an odd experience," Hamilton said Friday morning on the telephone. "I can't say I was looking forward or excited about this. It was a weird position for me to be in. I'm not like the general public. I've known the truth since 1998."
Still, Hamilton said he was riveted as the interview began with a drumbeat of yes and no questions from Winfrey. Armstrong, tense but displaying little visible emotion, told Winfrey that yes, he'd used banned substances in his career as a cyclist. Yes to EPO, to blood doping, to testosterone/cortisone/human growth hormone. He said he'd used PEDs in all seven of his Tour victories.
"Super powerful," Hamilton said of the interview's opening minutes. "My jaw was on the floor."
From there, Armstrong's TV interrogation went wide and personal. The reviews have not been charitable to the disgraced champion. Armstrong has been criticized for giving incomplete, tentative answers or no answers at all on some of Winfrey's questions—and for a perceived lack of remorse over damaging personal attacks against his accusers. There was a sense that Armstrong, while admitting some things, was still spinning, still evasive.
But Tyler Hamilton saw something else in Armstrong's interview. He saw himself.
Timeline: A Giant's Fall
Decades of Doping
See some key events involving doping in cycling.
Photos: Armstrong's Cycling Career
Hamilton had sounded like this, too, when he first began confronting the truth. Hamilton's own admission had been much smaller in scale, but in the early stages it was also painful, awkward, halting, often incomplete. Coyle, his co-author, said that when he first began talking to Hamilton for "The Secret Race," Hamilton's answers came so slowly he could transcribe every word and comma easily, by hand, with no abbreviations.
"When I first started telling the truth, it came out like water trickling out of a faucet," Hamilton said.
That's what Hamilton recognized in Armstrong—the slow, brutal process of a man coming to terms with his deception. Coyle recognized it, too. "People underestimate how difficult it is to tell the truth when you have lived a secret life for a long time," Coyle said. He compared the process to digging out a "buried city in the sand."
"This isn't like a syringe in a toilet stall," Coyle said. "This is a life. With people and all these plotlines and secrets that are interlocked and nested together."
Hamilton wasn't trying to diminish the magnitude of Armstrong's life of deceit, or his own. Nor was he unaware of the pain Armstrong inflicted upon those who dared to counter his narrative. Hamilton knew Armstrong's fury well. He'd experienced that fury himself. Profoundly. Armstrong was in no mood to discuss Hamilton with Winfrey. He told her he hadn't read "The Secret Race."
But that wasn't what stuck with Hamilton. What stuck wasn't words but the way the words were coming. Hamilton said the interview wasn't a big step or a tiny step –just a first step. He said Armstrong would get better at talking, because that's what happened to him. He hoped Armstrong talked to agencies like United States Anti-Doping. He felt this was necessary and would help the sport. But he also believed that over time, it would help Armstrong.
"Secrets suck," Tyler Hamilton said. And he knew this to be the absolute truth.
Write to Jason Gay at email@example.com


text:
|Forum Home
|Members List
|Mark Forums Read
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Location: Raleigh, NC
Top 5 favorite/best Video Games
I figured I would post this to see what some of you thought about my writing skills, and to start a thread that would maybe last a while. This is my list of what I consider to be the 5 best games (or at least my favorite) of all time.
So to get to the point, I am by no means actually saying that I think that these 5 video games are actually the best 5 video games of all time because every person is different and everyone likes different things. But these are the 5 games that have affected who I am as a gamer the most. I will of course argue that any intelligent and true gamer won't be able to deny that these are 5 GREAT games and should be considered among the best. Now that everyone hopefully understands what I'm talking about and where I am coming from, let's get started.
At number 5
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past (Ocarina of Time)
Most people would say of course that Ocarina of time is the best of the Zelda series and possibly even the best game ever, and I'm not arguing that point at all. Thanks to a friend of mine, I was introduced to Ocarina of time, but i was unfortunately never able to finish the game, so I can't actually say that it is one of the 5 best games ever. So in honor of Ocarina of time, I chose A Link to the Past because it is my favorite of the Zelda series and I would still consider it one of the best games of all time. So in a sense you could use either game interchangeably. A Link to the Past is a good example of classic gaming which combines problem solving (puzzles) and RPG elements making for a great all-around game. They also make excellent use of the SNES graphics by making a beautiful 2D gaming experience.
At number 4
Resident Evil 2
I chose this game in the number 4 spot because I can't think of a game that I have played and beat more often than Resident Evil 2. Granted it is a short game, but the fact that I (and many others) come back to this game time after time must say something about its quality. The Resident Evil story line is captivating and Resident Evil 2's storyline is a large part of the entire picture. The gameplay is addictive and the quality is above average, and there is no feeling quite like when you enter a hall loaded with zombies who steadily begin to creep towards you. The sound is great and really solidifies to the overall mood of the game. This is a short game that you should definitely at least borrow if not own.
At number 3
Pokemon (Red, Blue, Yellow)
Ok, so I know that at this point, most of you would consider me "Super-dork", but that's ok, because if playing Pokemon classifies me as "Super-dork" then I will gladly take the title. This is a game that really helped usher in a new age of gamers. Kids who played this in Elementary school and middle school are the same people who are 20-25 right now and make up the majority of gamers. Pokemon does a great job of allowing the gamer to have customizable gameplay, which is something that many gamers require in their games today. Pokemon was actually a little before its time, especially for a gameboy game. You usually didn't see a game with so many characters and attacks, and Pokemon gave us a lot of game packed into such a little box. It's hard to forget the feeling of getting your first pokemon and leveling them up for the first time. Or seeing your pokemon begin to evolve and having to make a split second decision of whether to let him evolve or wait a few more levels. I hope that you will look past the "childishness" of this game and give it a try.
At number 2
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
Once again I've posted another great RPG in my top 5 list. If you haven't seen this game in action then I suggest that you stop reading this (for now) and go to youtube and find a gameplay video of Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion and sit back and enjoy. This game is beautifully put together, visually and conceptually. I can't think of many games that can beat Oblivion's graphics, vastness, or match its hours of game play. I personally love a game that I can spend a lot of time playing and get my money's worth out of it, Oblivion does exactly this and more. I have had this game for almost a year and I have put over 100 hours into the game and I still haven't completed every quest in the game, and I'm not even halfway through the mainline quest, and the great thing is, I'm still not bored with it. The character customization aspect of the game makes Oblivion what it is. The fact that you can customize your characters looks, fighting style, and skills makes the game very replayable because each time you can have a new experience. The maps are huge and it would probably take you a solid 30 min.+ just to walk across the map in a straight line, and still at that point you've probably only seen 2% of the map. The Elder Scrolls IV is a must-own game, but I understand that it's not for everyone. I would suggest borrowing or renting and seeing if you like it. Even if it's not your style of game play, I believe that you will at least enjoy its visual aesthetics.
And finally…at number 1
Final Fantasy VII
So I have to go ahead and give props to the person that introduced me to this game (not that I hadn't heard of this game before, I had just never had a desire to play it). Thank you so much Jay Seawell for introducing me to this game! I credit this game to changing my perspective of gaming entirely. I can't think of a better storyline in all of gaming, and it still rivals some of the better novels out there. The storyline is completely captivating and once the game is over it leaves you wanting more. While the visuals aren't exactly top notch, due to the fact that it was released on the PlayStation 1, it still makes for a great game for today's "next-gen" gaming generation. Final Fantasy VII also has something called the "materia" system which is one of the best gaming concepts that I have ever run into. It basically allows you to fully customize your attacks and fighting style. The music is unbeatable, and it is still popular today because they have symphonies that play the final fantasy music live, and CDs are still being sold.
Simply put, Final Fantasy VII is a legacy, and it is the greatest game of all time. I would bet that you can't play the game and not get hooked in some part of it. The fact that there have been other games made that "spin-off" of the final fantasy VII story, and the fact that a CG movie has been recently released based on Final Fantasy VII shows that it is in fact a legacy. I urge you to play Final Fantasy VII, it is the game that took me from being a casual gamer to a "hardcore" gamer, and I think that it will make a difference in how you view video games as well.
Honorable Mentions
These are the games that didn't quite make it into the top of the list because they just weren't as good to me as my top 5. These games are all great and you would probably put some of them in your top 5 but they just didn't quite make it for me. Feel free to message me with arguments. Keep in mind that this is not an all inclusive list, mostly just ones that I could think of.
Super Mario Bros. 3/Super Mario Galaxy
Gran Turismo 2
Grand Theft Auto: Vice City
Halo 2 – obviously Halo 3 is better than Halo 2, mostly because of the Mythic Map Pack that was recently released, but Halo 2 changed the face of multiplayer online gaming and it should get some credit for it.
Tiger Woods – I added this game in here for all of you sports fans. I'm not a big fan of sports games, but if I had to pick a good one, it would be Tiger Woods PGA Tour.
Fallout 3
Final Fantasy XII
Tomb Raider II
Resident Evil 4
Metal Gear Solid
Games that I can't really can't have an opinion on
This section is for games that I have heard over the years that are really good but I can't put into my lists because I have never played them. Once again this is not an all inclusive list but just a few of the games that popped into my head…feel free to add some.
Half Life 2
Metal Gear 2+ - I hear that Metal Gear Solid 2 is better than Metal Gear Solid, but I never finished the game. This "Metal Gear +2" is added just to pay respects to one of the greatest game series of all time.
Baldur's Gate (series)
Diablo (series)
Well, that's all. I hope that you all enjoyed my list and I hope that you will try these games out. I did this list to practice some of my writing skills and give you all some food for thought, and hopefully maybe get some debates going. If you don't like video games and you read this, then I hope you will try video games soon, maybe these will get you more interested. Thanks for reading. POST YOUR OPINION!
Last edited by JohnsonM : 09-15-2009 at 08:59 AM.
Location: Netherlands
My OPINION is that you are a fool for not including (heck, not even honorably mentioning!) Super Mario 64. FAIL.
[COLOR="#000000"]My name is Louis. Hi![/COLOR]
[COLOR="#F5F5FF"]Uh oh! The princess is in another signature![/COLOR]
Location: Raleigh, NC
I don't mind admitting that I may have forgotten to mention some things, but I never had a 64 so I actually never played anything on Mario 64 past the first couple of levels. I know it's a good game, but I don't have a personal opinion.
Location: New Mexico
I always found Mario 64 to be tedious. It was definitely before they figured out how to really handle good 3D camera work. Mario Kart, Smash Bros and OOT definitely surpassed Mario 64 in terms of quality for Nintendo franchise N64 games.
Johnson, I suggest you pick up the Orange Box (for whichever platform you have, or preferably on PC) and play Halflife 2 + episodes, and Portal as well.
I have to say you have a pretty nice list going. Heck, I worked on two of the games you mentioned.
It seems as though you came onto the scene around when the N64/Playstation was popular. I'll list a few Super Nintendo games that you may like:
Chrono Trigger
Super Metroid
Yoshi's Island (the first one, not the crappy N64 one)
Final Fantasy 3 (Japanese 6) - I personally like it more than FF7, although each has their own qualities. 9 is pretty good too.
Location: UK
I have to say I believe that Super Mario 64 is slightly over-rated, but I will admit that it paved the way for 3D platform games and without it we wouldn't have some of the great games that we have today, but I was under ten years old when I first played it, so maybe I should play it again and give it another go, as after the Bowser boss fight I lost interest. (Mario Galaxy on the other hand, that's a bloody great game). I think that there were better 3D platform games for the N64, I loved games from RARE like Banjo-Kazooie and Donkey Kong 54, they were awesome.
I couldn't think of a top five but I have games that I think are great-
Metal Gear Solid (Series)
strongest of the series: Metal Gear Solid & Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater
Mario (Series)
strongest of the series: Super Mario Bros. 3 & Super Mario Galaxy
God of War (Series)
There are others, but I could take all day thinking of games that I love, I agree with some already said such as Pokemon, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Legend of Zelda, GTA, Final Fantasy (although I would say X is better than XII as I prefer turn based RPGs & I never played VII, but I really need to as everyone says how good it is).
I also thought the recent Batman: Arkham Asylum was a great game, as I am an avid Batfan, but I thought that what let it down was the boss fights, they had the opportunity to create some really epic rememberable boss fights, but alas.
lets get a good discussion going here, I'd like to see if we could all agree on what should be in THE top 5 games of all time...
Location: Raleigh, NC
WOW...what two games did you work on? And thanks for complimenting my list.
I started gaming more heavily around the PlayStation era. I do have a Super Nintendo, but my parents didn't buy a whole lot of games, and the best games I had were A Link to the Past, Mega Man X, and Super Mario All-Stars. Then when the PlayStation came around I really started getting into gaming. I have never really played N64, so I don't have too much of an opinion of the games on that system. I felt that the 64 had good games, but not enough to justify going out and buying a system; kind of like how the PS3 is now. Oh, and thanks for the list of games.
And I agree with Tenacious about trying to come up with a top 5 list we can all agree with. So start by posting your 5. We could also consider starting by posting top 5 per system.
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Grant Shonkwiler()
"I would love to fix the world if someone would just give me the source code"
Website Industry blog LinkedIn
Location: Netherlands
[COLOR="#000000"]My name is Louis. Hi![/COLOR]
[COLOR="#F5F5FF"]Uh oh! The princess is in another signature![/COLOR]
Last edited by Protector one : 09-16-2009 at 08:51 AM. Reason: grammar
Location: Raleigh, NC
Location: UK
5 per system? SNES- Mario All Stars, Link to the Past, someone else want to add others? I'm not very good with full lists as I just can't decide what I think should get a spot
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Linear Mode
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:42 PM.


text:
Meet and Communicate with Fun Singles Near You on BBW Personals Plus
Register now to search thousands of members and post your FREE profile!
Looking for a Lady who loves to be pampered! I am looking for a lady who is not scared to show her true feelings. I want a lady who wan...
made4love is a 46yr-old single man in Three Way, TennesseeView Profile


text:
Check out Michael's model available from MIG productions.
Keywords: Michael fichtenmayer 1/35 scale martian light hovertank resin cast model from mig productions F 35-652
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Google+ Pilots
Popular Posts
Scott has been crazy busy on his book BLAST which will drop around March of 2012. It will feature art from Scott as well as Danny Gardner ...
Incredibly detailed illustrations from the French illustrator Manchu. Philippe has a new book from Delcourt/SerieB editions titled "M...
Sadly, We lost a big legend in the Sci-Fi concept art world yesterday. Mr. Ralph McQuarrie has passed away at the age of 82. I've alway...
Check out museum of the improbable. There is a Cinema 4D gallery RIGHT HERE! Keywords: 3D three dimensional concept spaceship modele...
Temporary post here. Can anyone out there help me with my CSS and HTML? I would like to give a little action to my buttons at the bottom of ...
Some huge compositions by Finnian MacManus. 17 years old and busting! Seeing the large images in his portfolio make me realize conceptship...
It is super hard for me to believe that Mobeius is gone. Jean Henri Gaston Giraud passed away at the age of 73 on March 10, 2012. I remembe...
Inspirational and unique Lego ship designs by Jon Hall. Keywords: concept lego spaceships planes by graphic desig...
KaranaK on deviantart. Some more of Alex's ships. Hi definition header. Keywords: digital video game conc...
Our friend KARANAK sent us these renders as high quality .png files with transparent backgrounds. Thanks! Keywords: high definition...
Blog Archive
- ► 2015 (172)
- ► 2014 (167)
- ► 2013 (186)
- ► 2012 (194)
- ► 2011 (136)
- Concept spaceship art by Adel Adili
- EVE Online concept ship
- Joon Ahn concept ships
- Fred Gambino concept ships
- Frank Frazetta concept spaceship art
- Concept ships by Pascal Blanché
- Concept spaceship art from BLIZZARD entertainment
- Concept ship art by Dei Gaztelumendi
- Concept ships by Roman Kochnev
- Concept vehicle art by Anderson Leão
- Concept ships from Ghost in the shell 2: INNOCENCE...
- 3D concept ship by Steve Jenkinson
- Vector concept spaceship illustration by Rémy Pont...
- Concept ships by Eduardo Gonzales
- Concept cargo ship by Doug Williams
- Concept martian hovertank by Michael Fichtenmayer
- ▼ June (16)
- ► 2009 (156)
- ► 2008 (227)


text:
Android: Netrunner Card Game (Richard Garfield) for $19.99 + free shipping
Best price I've seen on this one recently....
In 1996 (three years after creating Magic:The Gathering) Richard Garfield created a cyberpunk card game called Netrunner.
At the time, it seemed heavily influenced by Shadowrun. It is also somewhat reminiscent of The Matrix (which would follow in 1999).
For a long time the game got harder and harder to find, until FFG re-released it as a non-collectible game themed in their dystopian "Android" universe
Unlike M:tG you don't have to worry about buying pack after pack. Just get the core set and you have all the cards for two players.
Get more than one core set if you want to play with more than 2 players using the "The Big Sellout" variant.
I got 3 so we can play a 6 player game with 3 corps working with 3 runners.
The Netrunner (original game) Big Sellout variant:
8 Comments add a comment
This game is excellent! I waiting in line for nearly an hour to get one at GenCon this last year... haven't ever thought twice about it. :)
In for one. This is a fantastic deal!
Any relation to the old Netrunner BBS game from the late 80s/early 90s?
Thematically; absolutely. Both were thematically very close to Shadowrun 1st Ed.
Gameplay; The BBS game was pretty close to the hacking in Shadowrun and avoiding ICE. Netrunner was more about agendas; more about Corp vs. Runner, but there are some similarities.
Hmmm.. Interesting to see this. I have a starter set from a version maybe 10 or 15 years ago.
@shyguy91284: Same game. Updated artwork and modernized themed with reworked/updated rules.
I also have the old one... it reminds me of the days of modems, Phrack, BBS' and FBI takedowns of Steve Jackson Games.
Ooooh, this is a fantastic deal! In for one. Thanks and repped.
This game is rated extremely well, almost a 9/10 on boardgamegeek.
@thefennec: And, that's with 1625 ratings. Most top games settle into the 6-7 range after 200+ ratings.
It's already #15 overall, #1 customizable, and #11 strategy.


text:
Private Label Management for Grocery Retailers
By Clint Chadwick-Oracle on Mar 25, 2013
Alex van de Velde - Principal Consultant, Enterprise PLM Solutions EMEA
Broader Solutions
Managing product information remains important in private label strategy. Today, leading grocery retail companies are increasingly looking for broader solutions that allow them to better manage cross-functional product lifecycle business processes across their global product networks.
Product Lifecycle Management solutions give complex enterprises the comprehensive support they need to implement an integrated private label process. These solutions provide a single view of products across business processes and geographical regions. By optimizing the global product network, they allow private label retailers to achieve key business objectives such as enhanced product innovation, faster speed to market, shorter time to shelf, lower costs, improved product quality, and regulatory compliance.
Accelerate Time to Shelf
Time to shelf and time to volume determine success and failure in many markets. Product Lifecycle Management helps retailers turn time into a competitive advantage for your company by enabling your teams to collaborate across your extended supply chain to design, source, and build (outsourced) products that are right for the consumers. As a result, you can eliminate information latency, minimize errors, and accelerate both time to shelf and time to volume.
Minimize Cost
As your product network extends around the world, managing costs can become more complicated and cumbersome. It becomes even more important to streamline and formalize (cost) price management processes by giving managers the information, tools, and analytical power they need to apply their business insight and skills to (cost) price management and product sourcing activities. Product Lifecycle Management gives private label retailers the ability to manage and improve product margins, release new products at or below target costs, control margin erosion through purchased material repricing, and outsourced (manufacturing) activities without losing control of your product cost.
Improve Product Quality
As the product network expands outside the four walls of the company, it becomes more difficult to manage the design, formulation and manufacturing details that affect product quality. With private label management, retailers can put into place the processes and product improvements required to improve quality and customer satisfaction. It also allows retailers to design higher-quality products, improve product reliability, shorten complaints resolution times, and ultimately increase customer satisfaction and loyalty.
Ensure Regulatory Compliance
Without a product lifecycle management backbone, managing compliance documentation and processes across a global product network, complying with diverse regulations from various countries, and keeping documents consistent can be a tough challenge. Software solutions allow some retailers to turn regulatory compliance into a competitive edge by tightly controlling the whole process. With these solutions, retailers can establish and manage compliant, efficient, and auditable product lifecycle processes, thereby reducing business risks and ensuring adherence to regulatory requirements.
Drive Innovation
Innovation is the engine of growth for shareholder value. Product Lifecycle Management enables private label retailers to accelerate innovation without compromising creativity or supply chain flexibility. Dispersed product design teams can collaborate in real time to leverage insight, creativity, and core product designs. As a result, retailers can compress cycle times from concept through release .
Drive Strategic and Operational Decisions
Leading grocery retail companies need solutions that let them leverage embedded decision support and analytics capabilities to drive better strategic and operational decisions about their private label portfolio. Out-of-the-box decision support allows grocery retailers to make better decisions that improve product quality and enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty.
Product Lifecycle Management helps retailers to add best-selling products or drop poor-selling ones from the supply chain faster, and it helps in reduction of inventory losses. It also helps increasing product quality by minimizing errors in the design and development process and bringing compliant products to the market.


text:
*image shown is 5 x 8 or larger rug
*smaller sizes will not show complete pattern, will be scaled down to fit.
Additional 10% discount will be applied in cart once discount code is entered.
Rating: 4.00 / 5
Read 2 Reviews >>
Name: Caspian 1004
Manufacturer: Oriental Weavers
Material: Polypropylene
Construction: Machine Made
Thickness: approx. 0.16 in
Colors: Multi , Blues
Made in: Egypt
Description: A striking new indoor/outdoor collection in trend-forward shades of indigo and Mediterranean blue and bright lime green. Simple, sophisticated patterns come alive with tons of texture and pops of bright color. It is a collection of high-style, high durability rugs that are perfect for the outdoors or for any room in the home. Machine made of 100% polypropylene. (Caspian 1004 - Machine Made Polypropylene Rugs from Oriental Weavers)
Other Related Patterns You Will
Related products are usually selected because they employ the same materials and colours of the product featured above but in different patterns and therefore are often perfect for use in the same or adjacent rooms.


text:
2016 (1)
2015 (1)
2014 (6)
2013 (34)
2012 (100)
2011 (78)
2010 (1)
2009 (1)
Pion-Era '13
Summer in Saskatchewan would not be complete without a visit to one of the WDM's great summer shows. The summer show season kicks off with Pion-Era '13 in Saskatoon on July 13 and 14 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Pion-Era offers something for the whole family. The history of early 20th century agriculture is told in the Story of Threshing, our old fashioned harvest show which takes place twice on Saturday and once on Sunday. The Parade of Power showcases steam, gas and horse-drawn vehicles following the afternoon Threshing Shows.
Boomtown Park comes alive with old-fashioned children's games and family entertainment. Our Children's Tent opens at 11:00 a.m. with activities and games throughout the day. We welcome our community partners, the Mendel Art Gallery and Wanuskewin Heritage Park, who will be providing some of the activities in Boomtown Park. Children can also help solve the Pion-Era puzzle for a chance to win a great summer prize package.
We have some great entertainment lined up both inside and outside the Museum. Indoor entertainment includes a special sneak preview of the Canadian Grand Masters Fiddling Competition, featuring three-time Grand Masters Champion fiddler, Mark Sullivan. A Pion-Era favourite, our fashion show featuring clothing from the WDM collection, will take place both Saturday and Sunday afternoons. And don't forget to look for "Boomer", our sock monkey mascot who will be out and about during Pion-Era.
Saturday events include the Harvest Pancake Breakfast, $5.00 per person, from 9:00 – 11:30 a.m. Enjoy your pancakes and sausage to the music of the Silver Strings in Butler Byers Century Hall. Sunday at Pion-Era opens with the Hymn Sing and Church Service on Boomtown Street at 10:00 a.m. The church service is followed by our Sunday Brunch. Featured entertainment at the brunch is Cash Back, performing the music of Johnny Cash. Doors open at 10:45 a.m. with brunch starting at 11:30 a.m. Tickets are limited so get yours early to avoid disappointment. Tickets are available from the Museum Store or by calling 306-931-1910. Tickets are $25 each (includes Pion-Era admission, brunch and entertainment).


text:
Marriage Cases May Hinge on Procedure
In 1793, George Washington's administration asked the Supreme Court for help interpreting treaties. The court politely declined, telling the first president that it was in business to resolve actual disputes, not to give advice.
Based on this week's Supreme Court arguments in two same-sex marriage cases, that precedent on judicial procedure—rather than the landmark cases on individual rights looming over the public debate—could play a role in resolving challenges to state and federal laws limiting marriage to heterosexuals.
Justices discussed scenarios in which California's Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act might fall not because the court found them unconstitutional in substance, but because the unusual journey of the cases left the court with no legitimate dispute to resolve.
And in an outcome sure to fascinate law professors—while frustrating many Americans—the resulting precedent would have nothing to do with gay marriage, but plenty to say about the relative powers of the executive and judicial branches.
At the root of the issue are the positions of the U.S. government and the state of California, both of which agree with plaintiffs that the challenged laws are unconstitutional.
After an appeals court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, the Obama administration appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, even though it agreed the act was unconstitutional. In the meantime, the administration continues to enforce the act. On Wednesday, Deputy Solicitor General Sri Srinivasan told the court the administration took that unusual step of appealing partly "out of respect for the role of the judiciary in saying what the law is."
The implications, Justice Anthony Kennedy said at one point, could cause "intellectual whiplash."
Chief Justice John Roberts was harsher still, suggesting President Barack Obama should have stopped enforcing the law and describing Mr. Obama's attitude as, "We'll wait till the Supreme Court tells us we have no choice."
A third party defended the federal marriage restriction—the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. But the court has almost always forbidden individuals and groups from litigating unless they can show how they personally were injured by the challenged conduct.
Paul Clement, the lawyer representing the House, said Congress had an interest in seeing the laws it passes enforced. But several justices fretted over the prospect of legislative chambers second-guessing the government's litigation positions and entering cases as a sort of shadow executive branch.
Chief Justice Roberts raised a scenario where members of Congress thought the president's lawyers were doing an incompetent job defending a law. "Is that a situation in which you have standing to intervene to defend the law in a different way than the executive?" he asked Mr. Clement.
Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan also expressed concern about Congress meddling with a president's legal strategy. "I can see arguments for and against it, but I can't think of another instance where that's happened," said Justice Breyer.
In the California case, the state didn't appeal after a federal district court ruled Proposition 8 unconstitutional. Private citizens who sponsored the 2008 voter initiative stepped in to defend it, something authorized by California law.
But on Tuesday, justices said that federal courts had their own requirements for legal standing that were not controlled by state law. And some doubted whether the private citizens met them.
"Have we ever granted standing to proponents of ballot initiatives?" Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked Charles Cooper, representing Prop 8 proponents. "No, your honor," he conceded. But, he added, a state might be able to deputize individual citizens to represent its interests.
Chief Justice Roberts expressed skepticism, saying that would mean states could define who has standing under Article III of the federal Constitution. "I don't think we've ever allowed anything like that," he said.
Some justices were more willing to give Mr. Cooper's clients legal standing. "In a state that has [voter initiatives], the whole process would be defeated if the only people who could defend the statute are the elected public officials," said Justice Samuel Alito.
In both cases, the court could find that the essential elements of a federal case are present—two parties with concrete interests that can be vindicated through litigation—and reach the core issues that have impassioned advocates and opponents of same-sex marriage.
But if the court dismisses the cases for lack of jurisdiction, the message would be one regarding the structure of government rather than civil rights. And it would be that if the executive charged with defending the government's laws concludes a law can't be defended, the remedy for those who disagree would be the ballot box, not the courthouse.


text:
Altering driving habits to cope with record-high gas prices is nothing new to motorists here in the Lone Star State.
Alternative transit routes are becoming a new trend In many Texas Cities, where transit and other commuter options are readily available.
In a study conducted by Associate Research Scientist , David Ellis of Texas A&M's-Texas Transportation Institution, evidence shows gas consumption for the month of April has dropped an estimated 3.4 percent.
"It's the largest decline since September 2007," says Ellis. "When there was a 3.4 percent decrease in per-capita consumption from the previous Semptember. At the time, gasoline averaged $2.80 per gallon, up 8.4 percent from the previous year."
Ellis is studying raw consumption data, adjusting the figures for population growth and other factors, in order to get an accurate idea of emerging trends.
"At $4.00 a gallon now, it could be that April's figure was the beginning of a trend of declining per-capita gasoline consumption in Texas, given the dramatic rise in price," Ellis speculates. "However, we simply don't know . This is all unfolding in real time. We've never had gasoline this high and we simply don't know if this is a blip or the beginning of something else."
With combined efforts from individual transit agencies, and the American Public Transportation Association, TTI's evidence proves that San Antonio has the highest increase in bus ridership among the large transit systems in America; a 10.6 percent increase during the first quarter of 2008.
Although Houston's HOV, or High Occupancy Vehicle Lane, only experienced a 3.3 percent increase from March 2007 to March 2008; The HOV lane in Dallas is up to 35 percent between January and March 2008 (Since three new HOV facilities opened up in December 2007, eperts don't know if the increase in HOV use was because of availability and/or high fuel costs.)
Evidence from the study shows that in both quarters of 2008, Waco experienced a 12.7 percent increase in fixed-route bus ridership and Corpus Christi's bus ridership grew 10.8 percent during the first quarter of 2008, compared to the same period last year.
"Long term, there are two big unknowns-the price of fuel in the future and how Teans will respond to that in terms of consumption," Ellis says. "We'll leave the first of those unknowns to others. We're trying to get a better handle on the second."
Gasoline consumption figures for the month of May will be available in July.
According to Ellis, if people are changing their driving behaviors, gasoline consumption during the summer months should reflect a per-capita decrease because of the high level of discretionary driving that traditionally takes place for summer vacations.


text:
I'd like to learn about
apt-get so nothing bad can surprise me. I was looking for some tutorials but have found nothing that teaches it carefully including its internals. I found this article but it's insufficient for me.
Where can I learn more (excluding documentation and manual pages)?
Mastering here does not mean that I will learn 100 switches of the
apt-get command but it means that I will learn how it works on some more general level than reading its source code.
Thank you.


text:
The 6 Most Hilarious Undercover Operations Ever Pulled Off
#3. Whack Dalia
The Case:
For a lot of newlyweds, after the honeymoon is over, the sex loses its allure and you suddenly realize the guy you're sleeping next to farts a lot and sometimes wears yesterday's underwear backwards, marriage gets to be a bit of a drag. You might say it can be murder. Pun absolutely intended!
At least, that's how things were for Dalia Dippolito, who, after marrying her husband Michael, suddenly realized that her new alliterative name made her sound like a character from a comic book, and decided to rectify the situation by taking her husband out old-school.
Taking a few lessons from the Rocky and Bullwinkle school of villainy, Dalia tried poisoning her husband a few times and even tried to frame him as a drug dealer. After failing so many times to inflict harm on him that shot right past the role of femme fatale into the realm of the tragically incompetent, Dalia's final master plan was to hire a hitman to do the job she couldn't.
The Stupidity:
About 30 seconds of research on the Internet would have taught Dalia the valuable lesson that hitmen are always undercover cops. Sure, there are probably real assassins out there under the employ of the Mafia and Apple, but the idea that a regular private citizen can just call up a gun for hire and draw up a contract kill is a classic example of the "real life is not movies" fallacy.
The worst part, for Dalia, is that the officer who posed as her assassin spent the entire negotiation trying to talk her out of it, doing the undercover police version of the "wink wink, nudge nudge" routine, informing her that a shitload of hard questions were going to come her way and she probably wouldn't be able to take the heat. We imagine that if he'd "accidentally" dropped his badge right in front of her, she probably still wouldn't have caught on.
Dalia assured him that she wanted the job done, and that she was "like, five thousand percent sure" of it. Cracked's Certainty Department has determined that Like Five Thousand Percent is as sure of anything that anyone can be, ever.
After Dalia hired the hitman, the police faked Michael's death, and Dalia completely bought it, doing her best to sell the performance of the distraught widow. Even after the police showed her that her husband was alive and well, and that the guy she'd tried to hire was a police officer, and that everything they had discussed had been recorded and videotaped, she still somehow figured she'd get away with it. After being hauled away to prison, she called her husband to assure him she was innocent, even though the only plausible denial at this point would be through some kind of alien conspiracy.
"This sucks so hard, def gonna be today's Facebook status, I'm so bummed."
#2. Neo-Nazis Just Don't Try Very Hard
The Case:
The Neo-Nazis need all the good press they can get. Championing the works and deeds of the only man in history to completely destroy a particular style of facial hair for everyone until the end of time, they aren't exactly the most popular kids on the block.
"If you don't look like this, get out of my face."
So, when they were approached by Ron Furey, an individual who claimed to be an Australian journalist for the white supremacist publication The Right Way, they jumped at the chance to tell the world that, aside from Edward Norton occasionally face-stomping some dudes into a curb, they weren't all that bad.
The "journalist" would go on to meet several high-ranking Neo-Nazis who embraced this new member with great enthusiasm. Furey maintained these relationships for months, enjoying such pleasurable experiences as a white supremacist movie night, which involves masturbating to films about Hitler and rape. Furey often felt mighty uncomfortable during these festivities, and we can't really blame him, because...
The Stupidity:
...he's Jewish. And we're not talking "my dad is Jewish so I get gifts for Hanukkah and Christmas" Jewish, we're talking "my parents survived the Holocaust and I used to be an Israeli police officer" Jewish.
His real name is Yaron Svoray, and in the early 90s he agreed to go undercover to help the Simon Wiesenthal Center acquire a lot of firsthand information about the Neo-Nazi movement. This assignment was more difficult than shaving his head, practicing his cold beady-eyed glare and making sure never to shout "oy vey" when startled; the success of his infiltration relied upon the group he was investigating being unable to do even the most rudimentary of homework assignments.
Luckily, Nazis are dumb.
The Neo-Nazi magazine that Svoray claimed to write for didn't actually exist, had never existed and although he had a bunch of fake stationery mocked up to give the illusion of legitimacy, his cover would presumably be blown the moment anyone thought to type the words into Google (or, since this is the 90s, AltaVista). Honestly, guys. Would Hitler have approved of this kind of sloppiness?
#1. Kindergarten Cop
The Case:
The Triads, or the Chinese Mafia, is such a problem in Hong Kong that the police force has a division which exists specifically to take them down. Not that they have much to worry about though, seeing as the crimes associated with the Triads appear to revolve around counterfeiting 50c pieces and petty copyright violations. Hey, it's a different culture.
Nerd crime!
Like any major gang, the Triads are always looking to recruit young members, and recently, this practice caused some serious problems for them. By identifying Triads who were attempting to lure students into their way of life, an anonymous undercover cop helped the Hong Kong police arrest a whopping 117 individuals.
How did he do it, you ask? Hilariously, we answer.
The Stupidity:
The cop posed as a 15-year-old boy.
Please tell us he dressed like this. Please.
As a young officer, he was able to successfully infiltrate the gang by pretending to be a high school student for several months. He befriended several Triads and witnessed a variety of criminal activities around the school. And the best part? He got the idea from a movie.
This movie.
Fight Back to School is not a realistic portrayal of undercover life. It's not even a badass kung-fu movie. It is a Hong Kong comedy movie about a cop who disguises himself as a high school student, gets made fun of and falls for the guidance counselor. That's right, the Asian version of Never Been Kissed brought down over a hundred members of one of the world's most elite criminal organizations.
Do you have an idea in mind that would make a great article? Then sign up for our writers workshop! Know way too much about a random topic? Create a topic page and you could be on the front page of Cracked.com tomorrow!
For more unfortunate criminals, check out The 7 Most Baffling Criminal Defenses (That Sort of Worked). Or compare these guys to the Hollywood versions, in 6 Baffling Mistakes Every Movie Criminal Makes.
And stop by our Top Picks (Updated 06.07.10) to meet the intern that brought down the nefarious Cracked neutical cartel.
And don't forget to follow us on Facebook and Twitter to get dick jokes sent straight to your news feed.


text:
The Hutchinson Community College has released their Fall 2012 honor roll which includes a number of local students.
The Evan Williams of Haviland has been included in the Vice Presidents Honor Roll, while Megan Wood of Haviland has been included on the President's Honor Roll.
The Vice President's Honor Roll includes students with a 3.5-3.99 GPA and the Presidents Honor Roll includes students with a 4.0 GPA .
More than 1,300 students have been honored with selection to the two honor roll listings, with 723 achieving the Vice President's Honor Roll and 642 achieving the President's Honor Roll.
Location, ST | website.com


text:
I have a Python script that adds an attribute field to a Shapefile if doesn't exist. This is easy to do with ArcGIS (graphically or via Python), but I'm looking for something that doesn't depend on ArcGIS.
I tried this unsuccessfully with OGR, since my Shapefile contains features.
I've looked at pyshp, but similarly there is no way to modify the schema after it has been created. I haven't had a try with shapefile (for Python), but I don't see this feature advertised. I also can't see how this can be done by tinkering with the DBF file via dbfpy.
Does anyone have any ideas?
I found a solution using OGR and thanks to help from a previous question. Here is a complete example:
from osgeo import ogr
# Open a Shapefile, and get field names
source = ogr.Open('my.shp', update=True)
layer = source.GetLayer()
layer_defn = layer.GetLayerDefn()
field_names = [layer_defn.GetFieldDefn(i).GetName() for i in range(layer_defn.GetFieldCount())]
print len(field_names), 'MYFLD' in field_names
# Add a new field
new_field = ogr.FieldDefn('MYFLD', ogr.OFTInteger)
# Close the Shapefile
source = None
My problem was that I used
layer_defn.AddFieldDefn(new_field) rather than
layer.CreateField(new_field). Many thanks to the help, and sorry for not throughly checking for the similar other question.