text:
Dancing to the music of time
TAGS: ***** usaonly. policy politics. economy, Fiscal Crisis.national. shortrun, midrun, longrun. commentary, analysis. background. [Asterisks indicate importance. Small caps indicate general categories. Within them, Initial Caps indicate a specific topic.]
Scenarios 1.1
Accomplishments 1.2
Failures 1.3
Shortrun partisan strategy 2.1
Midrun "regime shift" 2.2
Longrun Constitution 2.3
Shortrun recovery 3.1
Midrunchange 3.2
Longrun growth 3.3
HAPPY NEW YEAR to all readers. THANK YOU to Caixin for inviting this Blog to its website.
I will strive to achieve the MISSION of this Blog:
First, call the attention of Chinese readers to the best COMMENTARY on American politics in the American media.
Second, relate that Commentary to the best ANALYSIS in academic research on American politics, particularly explanations.
Third, relate both of those to relevant EVALUATION, whether through elite frameworks or mass sentiments.
This week we focus on America's turn-of-the-year fiscal crisis, relating much media Commentary to a little academic Analysis. The first section on FISCAL CRISIS summarizes the basic fiscal and political problems involved and how they were or were not solved. The second section unravels some of the POLITICS involved, at varying time scales. The third section provides some of the ECONOMIC background of America's fiscal difficulties, again at varying time scales.
America's fiscal crisis is a complex subject, so this is a long Post. It provides BACKGROUND, not only for the partisan battle over how to avoid the recent "Fiscal Cliff," but also for more battles over the same issues in coming months and years. The many media comments on this episode add up to a detailed account, but are difficult to assemble and are subject to partisan simplification. Accordingly, this Post begins by summarizing that journalistic Commentary and only gradually shifts toward more academic Analysis. Readers are welcome to proceed only as far as their interest carries them. (For further BACKGROUND, readers may wish to consult a previous Post on this Blog: 121201 "The politics of "fiscal crisis.")
A first theme of this Post is that partisan POLITICS drives policy-making more than does the substance of policy. In economic policy-making, political logic often overwhelms economic logic. A second theme is that the particular current configuration of American politics tends to turn problems into CRISES. In American policy politics, "crisis" is becoming the new "normal". A third theme is explicit attention to TIME as a dimension of policy politics. Time is intrinsic both to the substance of policies and to the strategies of politics through which policies are formed. Both policy and politics involve interactions between shortrun, midrun, and longrun ("inter-temporality"). Overall, the main temporal contradiction is between shortrun political advantage and longrun economic benefit. However, we also note temporal contradictions within politics and economics.
(The New York Times collects its articles on the Fiscal Cliff – along with links to relevant resources – under Federal Budget in its Times Topics at topics.nytimes.com. For general literature on American fiscal politics, an expert and accessible introduction is David Wessel 2012 Red ink : inside the high-stakes politics of the federal budget. New York : Crown Business, 204 pages (using 2011 as example). A competent textbook is the similarly titled Gary Evans 1997 Red ink : the budget, deficit, and debt of the U.S. government. San Diego CA: Academic Press, 297 pages. An incisive analysis is Simon Johnson and James Kwak 2012 White House burning : the Founding Fathers, our national debt, and why it matters to you . New York NY: Random House, 268 pages. An history is Dennis S. Ippolito 2003 Why budgets matter : budget policy and American politics. University Park PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 329 pages. On a formative period, see Jonathan Kahn 1997.Budgeting democracy : state building and citizenship in America, 1890-1928. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press, 222 pages. On recent decades see Iwan Morgan 2009The age of deficits : presidents and unbalanced budgets from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush. Lawrence KN: University Press of Kansas, 375 pages.)
As readers know, approaching the end of 2012, America was approaching a "Fiscal Cliff": an already scheduled combination of sharp rise in taxes and sharp fall in spending. Those drastic changes did not result from a crisis in the real economy. They were an artificial punishment that in 2011 American political leaders had scheduled to force themselves to compromise on fiscal policy in 2012. Nevertheless, failure to meet this artificial challenge would put the real economy back into recession. (For an acerbic critique of this episode, see Paul Krugman 121230 "Brewing up confusion" at nytimes.com. Also Clive Crook 130102 "When governing means lurching between phony crises" at bloomberg.com.)
Most liberal commentators deplore both the political process and its policy outcome. Some very liberal commentators say the policy outcome is not too bad but that strategic situation in which the negotiating process leaves Obama is disastrous. Most conservative commentators deplore the policy outcome (higher taxes but not lower spending) and defend the confrontational political process as necessary – in the face of potential future fiscal catastrophe – for pursuing any and all possible means to cut spending. A rare positive view of the legislative process that produced the Cliff Deal sees democracy prevailing over usually anti-democratic conduct of congressional business (Steven Pearlstein 130102 "Congress tries democracy for a change!" on Wonkblog at washingtonpost.com.)
Before plunging into details, let's OVERVIEW both policy and politics. On the POLICY side, the main argument is between radical conservatives and moderate liberals over how to manage America's longrun TOTAL DEBT. Conservatives call for drastic action in the shortrun, liberals for gradual adjustment over the midrun.
The radical-conservative analysis views America's longrun total debt with deservedly great alarm. Debt is currently about 23% of GDP and currently growing faster than GDP. So the DEBT/GDP RATIO is rising. If debt continues to grow at the current rate, within a few decades it could reach 40% of GDP. That will make us into "Greece," the current exemplar of an unsustainable situation from which there is no easy escape. Any current strategies to avoid such a future national catastrophe are justified. These include using any and every issue in the current fiscal crisis as leverage to force reduction in spending. Conservatives should demand spending cuts in exchange for again raising the Debt Limit and, if it does not get such cuts, should threaten to allow the country to DEFAULT on its debt obligations. Obama and the Democrats have already raised taxes, so all further debt reduction should come from decreasing spending. As quickly as possible, the USA should totally restructure existing social programs to remove them from the national government budget. (Such arguments, much data, and other specifics are available at a website of the very conservative Cato Institute, downsizinggovernment.org.)
The moderate liberal response is that what the USA needs to do is, over the next ten years, achieve a sustainable relationship of total debt to GDP. Getting there requires that debt grow slower than GDP, so that debt gradually falls as a proportion of GDP. That requires a total of about $3.3 trillion in debt reduction over the next ten years, during which total GDP will be about $200 trillion. Of the $3.3 trillion needed reduction, $2.1 trillion have already been achieved: $1.5 trillion in spending cuts during the August 2011 negotiations over raising the Debt Limit and $0.6 trillion in tax increases in the Cliff Deal just passed. So we need only another $1.2 trillion in debt reduction, notionally half from spending cuts and half from tax increases. Although that will be painful and difficult, a rational congress should be able to do it. If so, of the $3.3 trillion in debt reduction, $2.1 trillion will have come from spending cuts, and $1.2 trillion from tax increases. If, as the Republicans now demand, all further debt reduction comes from spending cuts, then $2.7 trillion will have come from spending cuts and only $0.6 trillion from tax increases. (See Jared Bernstein 130106 "A little table (or two) showing why we're neither Greece nor in need of default" at jaredbernsteinblog.com. That Post contains links to longer analysis supporting that argument and that Blog contains earlier Posts on the Fiscal Cliff crisis. Jared Bernstein formerly was economic advisor to Vice President Joe Biden and is now at the liberal Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.)
On the POLITICS side, a main disappointment is that it took American politicians so long and such effort to arrive at a policy outcome on which they all agreed from the beginning: taxes should not rise on the American middle class. Commentators expect policy outcomes to be even harder to reach about issues on which the parties actually disagree, such as whether to cut spending on defense or on social programs. To understand why political conflict over the Fiscal Cliff exceeded the actual extent of policy disagreement, commentators use a variety of explanations.
Most commentary involves an IDEOLOGICAL EXPLANATION: That Republicans have become increasingly radical in their conservatism and are not interested in compromise. Politicians in both parties have become more uncompromising because, through redistricting, their constituencies have become safer and more homogenous. Some commentary also involves a GENERATIONAL EXPLANATION. When formerly the views of the two parties overlapped, older politicians experienced the advantages of compromise. Now that the views of the two parties do not overlap, younger politicians have not had experience at compromise and perhaps never will. Most commentary relies also on an INSTITUTIONAL EXPLANATION: to prevent rash action, American institutions deliberately fragment and delay decision-making. Most observers think the Fiscal Cliff takes that too far. A more STRATEGIC EXPLANATION is that the various sides were exploring all possibilities for taking apart or putting together the various policy elements involved. Of course they were doing that for their own partisan purposes, but the effect was to consider a lot of alternatives. The strategic explanation may be paralleled by an ANALYTICAL EXPLANATION. The most advanced formulations in American political science argue that, under certain analytical conditions, decision processes are inherently chaotic. Under those conditions, the main things that makes any decisions possible at all are institutional rules.
With that overview in hand, we continue by noting the range of possible scenarios that the recent Cliff Crisis involved. The same range will apply to the several more fiscal crises that will erupt in coming months and years. Indeed, that range of scenarios could apply to any policy crises that American politics creates. That includes crises that result from linking resolution of fiscal crises to solving other problems – such as the upcoming issues of gun control, energy, and immigration. In other policy domains, the specific policy items will be different, but the range of policy packages and political processes will be similar. A classic academic formulation of this range of scenarios contrasted "synoptic" policy-making – which overviews all aspects of a matter at one time – with "incremental" policy-making – which addresses problems piecemeal over time. That author thought incremental policy-making more feasible and effective. (See Charles Lindblom 1959 "The science of 'muddling through'. Public Administration Review 19, 2 (Spring) 79–88.)
Scenarios 1.1
In late 2012, the range of SCENARIOS for avoiding the Fiscal Cliff included the following.
(See Carrie Budoff Brown and Jake Sherman 121112 "5 fiscal cliff scenarios" at politico.com.)
At one end was a comprehensive agreement in late 2012 on all the main fiscal issues for early 2013: increasing TAX, cutting SPENDING, raising the DEBT LIMIT, authorizing the annual BUDGET and, in the long run, reducing America's cumulative TOTAL DEBT. A comprehensive agreement would have been an exemplary policy process, hopefully leading to wise policy.
At the other end of the spectrum of possibilities was simply "going over the cliff" of the arbitrary 31 December deadline, without resolving ANY of these issues in 2012 or establishing ANY common FRAMEWORK for solving them in 2013. That would have revealed a completely DYSFUNCTIONAL policy process that produced no policy at all.
In between were various possible combinations of (1) resolving some issues but not others and (2) for the unresolved issues, creating or not creating a framework for addressing them. There was also the possibility of aggregating issues into packages and treating them together, versus the possibility of disaggregating packages into single issues and treating those sequentially.
Most observers of the current congress predicted a relatively dysfunctional policy process that would, nevertheless, produce some policy result in the end. Congress would do what it usually does: as little as possible until as late as possible, then do the minimum necessary to avoid crisis. Expecting congress to try to do just that, a few canny observers added that the only way the USA would actually "go over the cliff" was through one side or the other making a tactical miscalculation in the final stages of bargaining. Nevertheless, as it became clear that the "cliff" was only a "slope,"an increasing number of observers predicted that the deadlocked sides would simply "go over" it.
Those observations correctly anticipated the PROCESS that actually occurred. Policymaking remained deadlocked even until shortly AFTER the deadline had already passed. The process was made even more messy and uncertain because key actors DID made tactical miscalculations, For example, approaching negotiations with Obama, House Speaker Boehner miscalculated the firmness of Obama's determination to raise taxes on the rich – in Obama's plan, all income over $250,000. Attempting to adjust for that miscalculation, Boehner proposed an alternative plan, but miscalculated his ability to obtain House Republican support for it. Breaking recent Republican principles, Boehner's plan allowing taxes to rise, but only on income over $600,000.) The final compromise in the Cliff Deal was to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire on all income over $400,000 ($450,000 for couples) – effectively the USA's new definition of "the rich." (On the overall process, see Jennifer Steinhauer 121231 "Grand deals give way to legislative quick fixes" at nytimes.com)
Accomplishments 1.2
Despite the messiness of the process, the resulting POLICY was a solid accomplishment on TAX matters. It avoided tax increases of more than $200 billion a year that might have driven the economy back into recession. It replaced "temporary" Bush policies with notionally permanent ones. That somewhat reduced economic uncertainty and thereby should promote economic growth. Taken as a whole, the Cliff Deal probably reduced government taxation of the economy by about 1-1.5% of GDP, most of the contraction in the first half of the year. So on balance, despite continuing tax cuts for the middle class, the Deal probably had some "austerity" effect. (A good short summary of the fiscal details and their likely economic effects is 130105 "Nothing to be proud of" at economist.com. A particularly positive view of the policy substance of the deal is E.J. Dionne Jr. 130102. "The cliff deal is better than it looks" at washingtonpost.com. A particularly negative view is Dylan Matthews 130102 "Everything is terrible" on Wonkblog at wasingtonpost.com.)
To understand why this tax accomplishment was a "big deal" in American politics we must briefly review the tax policies of recent administrations. The Republican Reagan administration significantly lowered tax rates in 1981 but, when that produced deficits, endorsed tax increases that took back about half of the cut. Under Reagan, nominal marginal rates on the highest incomes began at about 50% and ended at about 28%. Famously breaking a campaign pledge, the Republican first Bush administration raised top marginal rates to 31%. The Democratic Clinton administration raised the top marginal rate to 39.6%, which helped balance the budget and evidently did not harm economic prosperity. The Republican Bush administration repeatedly LOWERED taxes, including top marginal rates to 35%, until 2012. This was accompanied by budget deficits and, in the end, the Great Recession. One expected the Democratic Obama administration, once past the Great Recession, to RAISE taxes to prevent cuts to social programs while reducing deficits. Obama had long promised to raise taxes on very high incomes from their Bush 35% back to their previous Clinton 39.6%. With the Cliff Deal, he has succeeded in doing that. (Throughout all this, effective rates differed from nominal rates.)
Nevertheless, Obama has also always advocated making permanent the tax cuts that Bush Republicans granted the "middle class." Those middle class cuts were more important, both politically and fiscally. Bush lowered taxes on the middle class in order to secure broad electoral support. Now, politically, Democrats cannot afford to approach the American electorate as the party that raised taxes on the middle class. Meanwhile middle class Americans are not contributing as much as they must to fund the social programs they expect.
Thus, in the Cliff Deal, the main accomplishment of Obama and the Democrats was to fulfill a campaign promise to raise taxes on the rich. In addition to raising the rate on high income, the Cliff Deal raised taxes on the wealthy by other means as well. The increase in the tax on capital gains and dividends was one. Earners of $250,00 or more will lose some tax deductions. The wealthy will contribute more to funding Obama's health care reform (currently about $24 billion per year, as previously scheduled). Obama emphasized his accomplishment in raising taxes on the rich in his announcement of the Cliff Deal.
The Cliff Deal left income taxes on the middle class low. Another tax favor to the middle class was fixing the "alternative minimum tax" (at a cost in foregone revenue currently about $105 billion a year). This tax was originally an attempt to ensure that the wealthy paid at least SOME taxes. However, inflation made it gradually impact more and more middle incomes. The Cliff Deal permanently "patched" that by pegging the threshold for having to pay the tax to inflation, protecting about 30 million middle class taxpayers. In addition, in 2009 Obama had enacted expansions of tax credits for families, workers and college students. The Cliff Deal extends those for five more years. Extra-long unemployment benefits were extended for one year (at a cost of about $30 billion). (On the history of the "alternative minimum tax," see 130103 "The phantom tax that made the deficit look better" at npr.com.)
Emphasizing tax increases on the rich obscures the fact that the Cliff Deal DOES, to some extent, raise taxes on the middle class as well. The deal lets a temporary 2% reduction of the tax on wages expire, returning the payroll tax to its previous 6.2% (generating additional revenues currently about $115 billion a year). That tax funds a program that is a favorite of the middle classes, the government's retirement program, Social Security. The longterm solvency of Social Security is already in doubt, so evidently Democrats did not want to jeopardize it further.
Emphasizing tax increases on the rich also obscures the fact that, in the bargaining over the Cliff Deal, Republicans managed to secure some significant tax breaks for the rich. For example, the Cliff Deal did raise from 15% to 20% the taxes on capital gains and dividends (money made from money). However, that rate remains lower than before 2001. Similarly, the Cliff Deal did raise from 35% to 40% the tax on the portion of inheritances over $5 million. However, that is lower than the 55% that would have gone into effect without the Deal. Luckily the amount of inheritance that can be bequeathed tax free was not raised from $5 million to $7, as conservatives had proposed. Mostly the USA does not tax inter-generational transfer of assets within rich families, a tax that is a logical means of progressive taxation for funding a socially democratic regime. The Cliff Deal also contained some specific favors for specific companies. (Bob Greenstein 121218 "Further estate tax cut would be a disgrace" at huffingtonpost.com. On favors see Matt Stoller 130101 "Eight corporate subsidies in the Fiscal Cliff bill, from Goldman Sachs to Disney to NASCAR" at twitter.com/matthewstoller [of the Roosevelt Institute].)
Failures 1.3
Although the Cliff Deal was a significant tax accomplishment, it did not much address any of the other fiscal problems that constituted the Fiscal Cliff and that the Fiscal Cliff had been created to force congress to solve. This leaves the congress looking INCOMPETENT, both economically and politically. The unresolved issues remain in at various time horizons of the American fiscal policy agenda. That leaves a great deal of UNCERTAINTY, both economic and political. (On unresolved issues, see Neil Irwin 130202 "Get used to more fiscal cliffs" on Wonkblog at washingtonpost.com.)
The Cliff Deal did not address SPENDING, except by simply postponing the automatic cuts ($110 billion a year) from the beginning of January until the beginning of March. On spending reduction, the Cliff Deal did enact cuts in discretionary spending (currently worth $60 billion a year, totaling perhaps a trillion dollars over the next ten years). Obama had agreed to those cuts (which were not to entitlements) in August 2011 during the negotiations to raise the debt limit. Republicans now claim that, because Obama had agreed to that cut in the PAST, it does not count as a new spending cut in PRESENT negotiations. (An interesting temporal argument: imagine if you could not claim credit for having lost twenty pounds over the past six months, only the few ounces you lost this week.) Some Republicans even claimed that that trillion did not count because it was merely a promise not to spend that money in the FUTURE. (Another interesting temporal argument: ALL spending cuts are decisions not to spend money in the future!)
In striving for a comprehensive deal, Obama had demanded that congress raise the DEBT LIMIT (the total amount that the congress authorizes the national government to borrow). At first Obama had demanded a five year extension, then only a one year extension: eventually he got none. Correspondingly, the Republicans did not get the main concession that evidently Obama was willing to make in return, a change in the method of calculating Social Security benefits that would lower them gradually over time ("chained CPI"). Technically on 31 December 2012 the USA actually did hit its $16.4 trillion borrowing limit. The Treasury can use "extraordinary measures" to avoid a government default, but only for a couple of months. (Joseph J. Schatz and Patrick Reis 130101 "Enjoy the fiscal cliff debate? Just wait for the debt ceiling" at politico.com. For the two sides already squaring off against each other, see Zachary A. Goldfarb 130102 "Lawmakers clash over federal debt ceiling" at washingtonpost.com, in its Fiscal Cliff series. On Obama's strategy going into the forthcoming debt limit crisis, see Carrie Budoff Brown and Manu Raju 130104 "Obama's debt ceiling gambit" at politico.com.)
Another fiscal issue that will arise in early 2013 is reauthorization of the ANNUAL BUDGET for the current fiscal year. A 1921 Budget and Accounting Act specifies that the president must submit a budget to Congress each year and that Congress should process it expeditiously. Nevertheless, in recent years, Congress has not passed all of the appropriations bills before the start of the fiscal year (1 October). Instead, Congress has passed "continuing resolutions" authorizing temporary funding. The government is currently operating under a continuing resolution – signed by President Obama on 28 September 2012 – that provides funding through 27 March 2013. So, by then, the USA will need another continuing resolution, providing another opportunity for fiscal politics and even fiscal crisis. (On authorization as a policy tool, see Thad Hall 2004. Authorizing policy. Columbus : Ohio State University Press, 147 pages.)
The Cliff Deal made an only marginal contribution to reducing America's longrun TOTAL DEBT. Raising taxes on the rich raises revenue by about $42 billion a year (current value) or $600 billion over the next ten years, which should reduce the cumulative debt by that amount. "However, that represents just 7% of the projected increase in the national debt over that time. Instead of a $25.4 trillion debt in 2022, the debt would be $24.8 trillion. Little wonder that bond-rating agencies, not to mention both Democratic and Republican budget experts who have worked on deficit deals in the past, are unimpressed." (Susan Page 130102 " 4 lessons for round 2 of 'fiscal cliff' fight" at usatoday.com. Also Matthew Yglesias 120102 "The next Fiscal Cliff " at slate.com.)
To most commentators, even bigger than economic failure was political failure. The politicians involved seem to have quite different versions of what is happening. The divisions are not just between the two parties, but also between factions within them: radical versus moderate conservative Republicans and a moderate president versus the more liberal Democrats. Commentators note the divergence of views and wonder what their clash would produce in early 2013. (See Ezra Klein 121231 "Why the White House thinks it's winning the 'fiscal cliff'" and "Why Republicans think they're winning the 'fiscal cliff."" Also 130102 "The lessons of the fiscal cliff." All on Wonkblog at washingtonpost.com.)
This section treats the interaction within politics of shortrun partisan strategy, midrun regime shift, and longrun institutions. Here the main inter-temporal contradiction – already strongly manifest in the present – is between the present shortrun configuration of American politics (which will probably persist into the midrun) and the USA's longrun constitutional design. We discuss that contradiction below under 2.3, longrun institutions.
There is no longer any ideological overlap between Republicans and Democrats. Moreover, there are strong forces driving them further apart – or, at least, driving Republicans ever further to the Right. Now among the fiercest battles in American politics are those within the Republican party, between what used to be considered quite conservative conservatives (now called "moderate" or "establishment" conservatives) and truly radical conservatives (the young Republican insurgents). The radical-Republican opposition to raising taxes even on the very rich further polarized American politics and reduced the capacity of partisan sides to cooperate with each other in resolving future fiscal crises.
Both parties face a political contradiction between shortrun and midrun. Most directly relevant to fiscal politics is the Democrats' dilemma. In the shortrun, they remain committed to maintaining and even extending the liberal social policy regime that they have put in place. They want to maintain it not only for those already enjoying it (shortrun), but also for the next generation (midrun) and generations to come (longrun). At the same time, Democrats cannot show how, in the longrun, they are going to pay for this. With relatively minor adjustments, Social Security is sustainable. In contrast, even with proposed measures for economizing, health care is not. Particular liberal Democrats may understand this, but the policy positions taken by the liberal wing of the Democratic party do not reflect such understanding.
For example, during the "cliff" negotiations, Republicans proposed, and in principle Obama accepted, a method of fiscal adjustment that is politically easy. Instead of guaranteeing generous regular increases in welfare payments to compensate for inflation, government social programs could still make such adjustments, but adopt a less generous formula for calculating the rate of inflation ("chained CPI"). The cumulative longterm effect on seniors would be substantial. Nevertheless, this form of fiscal adjustment is politically easy now because the cost will be imposed only in the future – even then in an incremental and relatively invisible way. Presumably understanding that, "chained CPI"is one concession that Obama was willing to make to Republicans in exchange for raising the debt limit. Liberal Democrats denounced Obama for offering even this.
Republicans face an even sharper contradiction than Democrats between their shortrun positions and midrun adjustments. Their present ideology is a free market one of self-reliance. Their present political base is, disproportionately, prosperous white people, particularly in the South. In the shortrun, Republicans cannot deeply offend that base. Nevertheless, in the midrun, that base is declining as a proportion of the American electorate, even within the regions where, historically, it has been most dominant (the South and mountain West). So. Somehow, Republicans must adjust their ideology and base.
Shortrun partisan strategy 2.1
Most media commentary focused on shortrun strategy. Did Obama play his hand as well as he could have? How about Boehner? As Speaker of the House of Representatives, he was the main Republican leader and negotiator with Obama until near the end of the cliff process. How about the radically conservative Republicans in the House, who gradually destroyed Boehner's effectiveness?
In turning to the attitudes of various commentators toward these questions, let us note a wise qualitative piece by Nate Silver, the New York Times' quantitative analyst of electoral politics. Silver notes another interaction between politics and policy: how you evaluate the Cliff Deal depends not just on overall partisanship but also on your priorities among particular policy objectives. For example, some Democrats might prioritize redistribution, some the relationship between taxes and spending, still others the effect of expansionary or contractionary fiscal policy on the economy. It becomes extremely difficult – even for a skilled quantitative analyst – to assess the Cliff Deal as a whole. There are too many policy components, too many substantive objectives, and each component has different implications for different objectives. (Nate Silver 130102 "Why it's hard to score the fiscal deal" at nytimes.com.)
Liberal Democrats appear genuinely divided. Some regard the Fiscal Deal as a great victory for OBAMA: after all, he did fulfill his campaign pledge to raise taxes on the rich. Evidently that was Obama's own evaluation, since it was the first thing he said after victory. Republicans too were eager portray Obama as inordinately successful: He won this round for Democratic tax increases, so Republicans deserve to win the next round for Republican spending cuts. (For a roundup of liberal Democratic reaction and an argument for a positive evaluation, see Ezra Klein 130102. "Calm down, liberals. The White House won" on his Wonkblog at washingtonpost.com. Another roundup is 130104 "Liberals in a dither over whether Obama blew it, or nailed it" at npr.com.)
Other liberals blame Obama for once again proving to be a poor negotiator. The Fiscal Cliff deadline was his moment of maximum leverage for his entire remaining time in office, and he failed to make the most of it. The Cliff Deal was not as good a result as he could have obtained by being willing to "go over the cliff." Nevertheless, the fiscal result was tolerable. What was disastrous was the political result. Obama "caved" on some major issues and offered concessions on other issues in an effort to achieve a bigger deal. All confirms Republicans' assumption that not only does Obama make too many concessions too early, in the end he does always cave. (For polite concern about the strategic situation in which the Cliff Deal leaves Obama see David Leonhardt 130102 "For Obama, a victory that also holds risks" at nytimes.com. For stronger statements see Noam Scheiber 121231 "Democrats' cliff compromise is bad; but the strategic consequences are disastrous" at tnr.com. Also Paul Krugman 121231 "Conceder In chief?" and 130101 "Perspective on the Deal," both on Krugman's blog The conscience of a liberal at krugman.blogs.nytimes.com.)
Personally, although I greatly admire Obama, I can't understand his approach to this episode and its upcoming sequels, perhaps because I don't have access to the "inside" political information that he does. I would agree that the Fiscal Cliff deadline gave him leverage that he did not use and that that is important less for the content of the Cliff Deal than for his negotiating position in future policy crises. Going forward, I do not see anything equivalent to the leverage that the Fiscal Cliff gave him. This is particularly so because he has already renounced the idea of raising the Debt Limit himself, by declaring that the Constitution gives him the responsibility to protect the "faith and credit" of the USA. Evidently he does see alternative sources of leverage, presumably his ability to bring popular pressure to bear from outside Washington on inside Washington Republicans.
As for CONGRESS, because the House is constitutionally responsible for deciding fiscal affairs, during the Fiscal Cliff negotiations, the Senate and McConnell had deferred to the House and its leader Boehner. From the moment Obama was reelected, Boehner knew he would have to adjust Republican positions to accommodate that victory. Moreover, with the 2014 elections in mind, Republican leaders did not want Republicans to stumble further into the pro-rich position in which their failed presidential candidate Romney had put them. Insisting on continuing tax cuts for millionaires would allow Democrats to continue to pillory Republicans. ((On the fate of Boehner's plan for dealing with a reelected Obama, see the very detailed John Aloysius Farrell+ 130102 "The GOP's failed 'Plan O': Inside the fiscal-cliff Saga." at nationaljournal.com.)
(For background on congressional budgeting, see Lance T. LeLoup 2005. Parties, rules, and the evolution of congressional budgeting. Columbus OH: The Ohio State University Press, 250 pages. On budgeting by state legislatures, see Glenn Beamer 1999. Creative politics : taxes and public goods in a federal system. Ann Arbor MI : University of Michigan Press, 179 pages.)
As negotiations began over a Cliff Deal, to his surprise Boehner discovered that Obama intended to keep his campaign pledge to raise taxes on the rich. So eventually Boehner adjusted the Republican position, from refusing to raise taxes on anyone or anything, to accepting the resumption of higher taxes only on the VERY rich. That adjustment was intended to protect Republicans, politically. Nevertheless, young radical-conservative House Republicans rebelled against Boehner, declaring their principled opposition to any compromise with Democrats, particularly over allowing taxes to rise on anyone, including millionaires. The young radicals rejected not only Obama's proposals but their own leader Boehner's as well!
The negotiation process eventually broke down, not least because Boehner – no longer able to deliver Republican support for anything that he and Obama negotiated – could no longer act as the main Republican negotiator vis a vis Obama. McConnell watched in increasing dismay at the collapse, not only of responsible public policy but also of Republican unity and effectiveness. Finally, at the last minute, McConnell took the initiative of calling his old friend Joe Biden and offering to negotiate some deal. Biden got permission from Obama to answer the call, and Biden and McConnel negotiated a compromise. The compromise passed the Senate at 2am in the morning on 1 January (89-8, only three Democrats and five Republicans against). That bill then went to the House, where radical Republicans threatened to amend it, which would have required sending it back to the Senate, where reportedly Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid would have refused to bring it up for Senate consideration. (For a detailed narrative of the McConnell-Biden interaction, see David A. Fahrenthold, Paul Kane and Lori Montgomery 130102 "How McConnell and Biden pulled Congress away from the fiscal cliff" at washingtonpost.com.)
Passing the unamended bill in the House required some delicate maneuvering. Normal Republican House procedure has been to bring bills up for a vote only if the bill was approved by "a majority of the majority." That rule gives a minority of Republicans a veto over the work of the whole House. Boehner broke that rule in order to bring the Senate bill up for a vote. Probably the radical Republicans in the House could have prevented that if they had been determined to do so. By allowing the bill to come to a vote they in effect indicated that they were willing to accept it. But then, evidently not willing to go on record as accepting it, most of them (151) voted against the bill, which passed (257-167) only with support from Democrats (172). Only 16 Democrats opposed the bill.
Midrun "regime shift" 2.2
From the point of view of possible incipient "shift" in America's political-economic "regime," the current fiscal crisis is the main current battleground: between a liberal-Democratic regime and a conservative-Republican regime. In policy terms, the liberal-Democratic regime is the legacy of Roosevelt's New Deal and Johnson's Great Society, as moderated, defended, and even extended by Clinton and Obama. The Republican Reagan Revolution in the 1980s inaugurated a shift away from that liberal Democratic regime toward a "neoliberal" one (free markets), a shift mostly continued by Bush senior and Bush junior.
In political terms, the classic New Deal was achieved and attacked through two strong political parties, both run mostly by professional politicians and both containing a wide range of views. The Democratic side relied on considerable mass mobilization by labor. Both parties are now greatly transformed. It is not professional politicians who choose their party's candidate but popular primaries in which extremists within both parties have an advantage. Redrawing of congressional districts has produced more and more districts that are "safe" for an incumbent from one side or the other, making those incumbents more independent of the national leaders of their parties. Finally, even the population has "sorted" itself into districts that are increasingly either Republican or Democratic. All of these processes have produced the polarization and indiscipline that plagued the Cliff Deal. And, in turn, the Cliff Deal has aggravated polarization and accelerated the transition from old to new styles of politics.
These changing partisan alignments reflect changing political geography. In the 1960s the Democratic party over-rode its Southern faction and finally unequivocally supported the rights of African Americans in the South and elsewhere. In response, Southerners began shifting from Democrat to Republican. The Republican party, whose base was long in the North, has now shifted largely to the South, Midwest, and Mountain West. The crucial last-minute votes on the Cliff Deal reflect this. (See Alex Isenstadt 130102 "Why 85 House Republicans said 'yes' to taxes: The biggest dividing line within the Republican conference was geography" at politico.com.)
The reappearance, late in the Cliff process, of two "senior statesman," McConnell Biden, embodies the difference between the old and new political styles. "Adults" from the older political generation had to step in and pick up the pieces of what "kids" from the younger political generation had smashed. This highlights that some "regime shift" may be occurring in American politics and highlights the uncertainty that prevails during such a transition. Going through the normal channels of formal institutions (on fiscal matters, negotiations between President and House) failed to produce a solution. Personal networks had to intervene to save the day – networks between persons other than those managing the formal channels. No one any longer knows exactly how American national policy making works. (On Biden see Michael Hirsh 121231 "Biden May Be the Most Influential Vice President Ever" at nationaljournal.com.
For a rebuttal, see Timothy Noah 130105 "Stop acting surprised by powerful Veeps" at tnr.com.
On political uncertainty, see Karen Tumulty and Peter Wallsten 130102. "Has the 'fiscal cliff' fight changed how Washington works?" at washingtonpost.com, in its Fiscal Cliff series.)
Longrun Constitution 2.3
Our theme here is the confrontation between recently polarized American politics (midrun) with the institutional design of the American Constitution (longrun). Most readers will already know that this combination is not working well.
The American political system has worked quite well during periods when politics was "multi-polar": more than one issue dividing political actors in more than one way, so that opponents on one issue often allied on another. For most of the period after the Civil War between North and South, the Republicans who had won the war dominated the North, while Democrats sought support in both North and South. There were many liberal Republicans in the progressive North and many conservative Democrats in the conservative South. There was much ideological overlap between the two parties. Diverse politicians formed diverse alliances with each other on diverse issues.
Beginning in the late nineteenth century, many American political scientists expressed disgust at America's ideologically "confused" parties. They admired "programmatic" British parties, which embraced relatively consistent conservative or liberal principles and were highly disciplined in pursuing those principles. In the centralized British parliamentary system, if a party won an election, it controlled all branches of government. Now, however, both the Republican and Democratic parties have become much more ideologically consistent: virtually no liberal Republics, fewer and fewer conservative Democrats. Democrats vote mostly with Democrats and Republicans vote almost exclusively with other Republicans. Party discipline has increased. The result is that the decentralized American bicameral presidential system is now run by the parliamentary-type parties for which American political scientists once longed. And it doesn't work. (See Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein 2012 It's even worse than it looks : how the American constitutional system collided with the new politics of extremism New York : Basic Books, 226 p.)
We now turn to the interaction of fiscal policy with economic performance, particularly with the economy's still slow recovery from the Great Recession. (For academic analysis, see Richard W. Kopcke, Geoffrey M.B. Tootell, Robert K. Triest eds, 2006.The macroeconomics of fiscal policy. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 383 pages.)
Here the main temporal contradiction is between shortrun and longrun. In the shortrun one must maintain spending in order to propel recovery. Nevertheless, somewhere in the midrun – in a "timely" fashion, as soon as possible – one must reduce spending in order to balance annual budgets and reduce cumulative longterm debt. This problem is sufficiently nuanced – requiring timely optimization among contradictory goals – that it would challenge even a single smart human. Unfortunately, in politics, this sort of problem lends itself to tendentious framings and partisan demagoguery.
Thus the question of timing is central to partisan disagreements over American fiscal policy – or at least to how those disagreements are argued in public. Democrats want to continue to spend and invest in the immediate future in order to restart the American economy and generate more revenue. Republicans look at the longrun consequences of continuing current practices and demand the complete reform of those practices – evidently even at some cost in shortrun economic growth. To Republicans, the Democratic insistence on current "stimulus" and investment is just an excuse (in the name of an uncertain future benefit) to continue their irresponsible "tax and spend" ways. To Democrats, the Republican invocation of longrun disaster is just an excuse to demolish the liberal Democratic Welfare State as quickly and completely as possible.
Shortrun economic recovery 3.1
One question about the shortrun interaction between fiscal policy and economic performance is what the impact on the economy would have been of "going over the fiscal cliff." Higher taxes and lower spending would have kicked in only gradually, over the course of 2013. However, spending would fallen immediately, reducing funding for all government agencies and programs. Further loss of confidence in American decision-making would also have been immediate. Evidently markets expected American politics to reach some sort of Cliff Deal, and would have been unpleasantly surprised if it had not.
The other main question about the shortrun interaction between fiscal policy and economic performance is what the impact of the Cliff Deal will be on the economy. After the Deal, stock markets rallied – but moderately, knowing that more Fiscal Cliffs lay ahead. But the Deal did not meet the requirements of the prescriptions of at least three rival economic theories: Keynesian stimulus, conservative reduction of both spending and debt, and reduction of uncertainty. The best any of these theories could say about the Cliff Deal was that things could have been worse. (See Jim Tankersley 130101'Fiscal cliff' deal falls short under three economic theories" at washingtonpost. Also Zachary A. Goldfarb 130103 "How the fiscal cliff deal will affect the economy and deficits, in six charts" on Wonkblog at washingtonpost.com
On any economic theory, fiscal and economic affairs interact. Decline in government spending would slow recovery. The speed and extent of economic recovery greatly affects both government revenues and government spending. Of course, liberals and conservatives have different theories of the connection. Liberal Democratic economic policy is based on Keynes' insight that, in order to prevent recessions from deepening into depressions, during recession governments must combat them by spending money to stimulate the economy. When severe economic downturn threatens to occur, deficit spending is not only prudent but necessary. Unfortunately, the American political leaders who ran the liberal regime – both Democrat and Republican – failed to heed the other side of Keynes' advice, that during periods of prosperity governments should run budget surpluses and save the money, so that they would have the resources to engage in deficit spending when necessary. The result was a gradual accumulation of total American national debt, during both recession and prosperity.
In fact, along with the Bush tax cuts, the Great Recession has been the main explanation for persistent annual government deficits during the Obama administration. Downturn in economic activity produced both downturn in government revenue and a rise in government spending to combat the downturn (by stimulating the economy and relieving unemployment). Perfidiously, Republicans portrayed all this spending – that Obama had to do in order to rescue the country from the financial and fiscal disaster that Republican Bush had allowed – as just further proof of Democrats' incurable preference for "taxing and spending."
It therefore became imperative for Democrats, both economically and politically, that the USA recover from the Great Recession as quickly as possible. The postwar American economy experienced periodic recessions, most of them cycles in inventories or inflation. The American economy regularly recovered from those recessions within two or three years. As Obama took office in 2009, the mainstream expectation among both economists and politicians was that this would occur within two or three years. Accordingly, Obama unwisely promised a quick recovery. When it did not occur, Republicans demanded to know why. Their answer was that "big government" taxing and spending depressed economic activity.
Liberal Keynesian economists provided an opposite answer, in advance. Around 2009, their calculations showed that the shortfall in demand caused by the Great Recession was well over a trillion dollars. Therefore a "stimulus package" to combat the Great Recession effectively needed to be about that size. Liberal economist Paul Krugman even warned that if the initial stimulus were not that large, it would fail to restart the economy, increasing congressional opposition to any further stimulus spending and jeopardizing Obama's reelection. Obama judged that such a large expenditure was not politically feasible and instructed that the stimulus package be kept under a trillion dollars. As Krugman had predicted, this failed to do the job – though towards the very end of Obama's first term signs of recovery began to appear. Overall, one of Obama's most amazing short-term accomplishments has been to achieve reelection despite that problematic economic record. (For a critical liberal account of Obama economic policymaking, see Noam Scheiber 2012 The escape artists: How Obama's team fumbled the recovery. New York NY: Simon and Schuster 368 pages.)
Midrun economic change 3.2
We now turn to the midrun interaction between fiscal policy and economic performance.
Here one question is the exact nature of the Great Recession. During 2009, a deeper answer to that question emerged from economists and quickly spread within the Obama administration. On this academic analysis, the Great Recession was not an ordinary recession but a rare and deadly FINANCIAL form – in the past, financial "panics" that frequently turned into depressions. Recessions precipitated by financial crises are usually deeper and longer than ordinary recessions. It takes a long time for a capitalist economy to get back on track when its basic mechanisms for savings, investment, and commerce have been disrupted. (Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff 2009.This time is different: Eight centuries of financial folly. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 463 pages.)
Another midterm issue with a somewhat longer time scale concerns INTER-GENERATIONAL TRANSFER, in particular between the generation currently in or near retirement and the next generation or two. All Americans pay to maintain the social security system, but not by saving to pay for their own benefits. Instead, each working generation pays for the benefits that go to the previous, now retired generation. This can be a sound system. However, one problem is that – in America, over the past several generations – each generation has collected more in benefits than it had paid into the system in payroll taxes.
Other problems are demographic. People are living longer and retiring earlier. Successive generations have produced fewer children than the one before, shrinking the population of young people relative to the population of old people they are supporting. For example, in 1950, average life expectancy was 68 years and 16 workers supported one retiree. By around 2000 the average life expectancy reached around 78 and three workers support one retiree. The ongoing retirement of the large "baby boom" generation will straining the system. (On interactions between fiscal policy and demography, see Alan J. Auerbach, Ronald D. Lee eds. 2001. Demographic change and fiscal policy. New York NY: Cambridge University Press, 446 pages.)
The Northwestern University economist Bob Gordon, an expert on American labor productivity (and my college roommate) notes six "headwinds" that may slow American economic growth in the midrun, even if the Great Recession had never happened. We just mentioned two of them: overhang of debt (consumer and government) and the end of the "demographic dividend" (a high proportion of productive young people). Other domestic headwinds are rising inequality, deteriorating education, and government burdens (environmental regulations and taxes). A global headwind is "factor price equalization stemming from the interplay between globalization and the Internet." Meaning that, increasingly, workers everywhere compete equally.(Robert J. Gordon 2012 "Is U.S. economic growth over? Faltering innovation confronts the six headwinds." Cambridge MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. (NBER working papers, 18315, August. At nber.org/papers/w18315)
Longrun economic growth 3.3
Finally, we turn to longrun interaction between fiscal policy and economic performance.
Gordon's headwinds may amount to a midrun structural shift that produces longrun structural change in the American economy. Between 1860 and 2007, per capita real GDP in the USA grew by an annual rate of about 1.9%. In the future, the six headwinds might reduce that to half or less, as low as 0.5% for the bottom 99 percent of the income distribution! Slow economic growth will increase fiscal problems and constrain their solution, which will in turn contribute to slow economic growth.
As commonly described in economic journalism, the structural shift might be one in which many high employing, high paying industries move from America to other countries, including China, of course. In that case, if there is to be a recovery, it is unlikely to be recovery of already lost jobs (though some businesses ARE moving some operations back to the USA). If there is to be economic recovery to a previous level of prosperity , it will have to be recovery to some new set of high employing, high paying industries. Many people hope those might be high technology industries. However, the problem arises that hitech industries might be high paying but not high employing. In fact, the high technology they produce might put low skilled workers out of employment.
However, Bob Gordon provides a more pessimistic and profound analysis, concerning the longrun growth in per capita real GDP produced by technological innovation. Increase in productivity – the value that workers produce per unit of time – is what raises per capita real output and consumption. Over the past three centuries the USA has benefitted from three relatively brief waves of technological innovation that have provided the basis for subsequent relatively long phases of economic growth – except in the third wave. The question is, what went wrong in the third wave and is America likely to benefit from any more major waves of technological innovation in the foreseeable future? Gordon says no. Many of the innovations from the second wave – such as urbanization – could happen only once.
The first technological revolution (1750 to 1830) replaced animal and human power with mechanical power: steam and railroads. The second technological revolution (1870 to 1900) introduced numerous innovations: electricity and the internal combustion engine, running water and indoor toilets, communications and entertainment, chemicals and petroleum. Many basics of America's modern economy were created in the half century between 1870 and 1920. Later elaborations of similar technologies produced airplanes, air conditioning, and interstate highways. Thus the second technological revolution laid the basis for eighty years of rapid growth in per capita real GDP from 1890 to 1972. After that, from 1972 to 1996, such growth slowed.
The third technological revolution (1960 to the present) was in information technology: computers, the web, mobile phones. However, the spurt of growth in real per capita GDP that it produced was brief, lasting only from 1996 to 2004. Here Gordon's pessimistic assessment becomes controversial. He has long expressed skepticism about the contribution of IT to actual productivity. From his point of view, the earlier technological revolutions enabled humans to do things they never could have done before. The IT revolution just gives humans new ways of doing things that they already know how to do. Some economists disagree.
Nevertheless, Gordon has a striking chart showing the rate of growth in per capita real GDP between 1300 and 2100. (To get such a long run, he links the early record from Britain to the later record from America.) There is virtually no growth before 1750, per capita real GDP languishing at a very low level until then. During the mid 1900s growth surges to a very high peak but then, according to Gordon's estimates, is likely to plunge back down to the pre-1750 level!


text:
Undeniably, the emergence of Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL) has benefited language learners in grasping the 5 essential skills of language which are listening, speaking, reading, writing and grammar skills. Let's take a look at how CALL could actually aid the improvement of these 5 skills one by one.
1. Listening skill
In terms of listening skill, CALL is very important especially for those learning English (or any other language as well) as a second or foreign language (ESL/EFL) in places where English is not one of the native languages there. Computers are able to supply both the learners and teachers listening materials such as audios and videos of English spoken by the native speakers themselves. This allows the learners to receive direct contact to how English really sounds like thus allowing them to perceive and synthesise the sound aspect of the language.
For instance, learners can browse from the computer and the internet for English news, documentaries and movies to train their listening skill apart from the educational software and application where learners can look for words, phrases or sentences and listen to the audio recorded from native speakers of English.
2. Speaking skill
Just as how an input produces an output, the listening skill leads to the speaking skill. Similarly, CALL gives ESL or EFL learners in non-English-speaking countries the availability to receive input regarding the everyday conversation of the native speakers of English. As a result, they are able to learn to converse using the language among themselves. This is crucial especially in regards to pragmatic knowledge which varies across different languages and cultures.
The software and application to this skill include chat rooms that allow learners not only to converse via written text but also voice messages to their pen pals across the globe. Others are speech synthesiser software or applications. Today, most dictionary apps available allow the users to even listen to the pronunciation of the words.
3. Reading skill
The computer and the internet are able to provide learners and teachers a database of reading materials without requiring a piece of paper. Nonetheless, they are able to print them out too. Other than texts and sets of comprehension questions, learners can also access the the dictionary software or application which helps the learners in terms of speed and time. In other words, they can access a lot of information to help their reading skills in a shorter period of time compared to the orthodox learning type.
4. Writing skill
The infamous software or application to induce the writing skill is of course the word processor. Today, the word processor does not only help to reduce the painstaking exercise of writing on papers using pen. Instead, there are also other benefits to using it including the spelling checker, grammar checker, dictionary and thesaurus. Thus, while practicing writing through word processor, learners learn to spell the words correctly, write grammatically correct sentences, and look for definitions of words or phrases as well as their synonyms and antonyms to widen their vocabulary.
5. Grammar skill
Traditionally, grammar is learnt by first understanding the rules and concepts, memorising them, followed by drills of practices and exercises. As mentioned previously, the grammar checker in word processor helps the learners to construct grammatically correct sentences. The emergence of CALL helps the learning of grammar by making it more fun and interactive through games, for example. Learners can access a number of games related to grammar learning through their computers, tablets and smartphones.
To conclude, CALL in language skills has prompted the concept of learner-centredness. It means that learners are seen as individuals where they are able to access the computer and the internet individually to learn the language. It can also be seen that in language class, the focus is shifted from teaching by the teachers to the learners to learning by the learners themselves aided by the teachers. We can also see that there are many approaches to learning language and it differs from one person to another.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Straight Distance
Driving Distance
Estimated Driving Time
The straight distance between Karumba (Queensland) and Innes Park (Queensland) is , but the driving distance is .
It takes to go from Karumba to Innes Park.
Driving directions from Karumba to Innes Park
Straight distance: 0 km. Route distance: 0 km
Latitude: -17.4871 // Longitude: 140.844
We're sorry but Karumba weather is not available right now.
Latitude: -24.8681 // Longitude: 152.479
We are sorry, but Innes Park weather is not available right now.


text:
Today our class was fortunate to have a visit from Jan Underwood from C.A.R.E. (Central Alberta Refugee Effort). Jan talked to us about life in India. During her presentation, Jan showed us a PowerPoint, then she had some artifacts for us to see. She even brought some clothes for a few lucky volunteers to try on. We really enjoyed her presentation!
Grade 3's, what did you learn from Jan? What was your favorite part of the presentation?


text:
15495 Los Gatos Blvd Ste E, Los Gatos, CA 95032
Toll Free: 800-423-8272 24hr: 408-356-0442 Local: 408-356-0442Email Us
- 15495 Los Gatos Blvd Ste E, Los Gatos, CA 95032
Six Stolen Kisses500511
Featuring 6 large headed red roses hand-tied with gypsophila and salal and finished with gift wrap and ribbon.
All items featured on this site represent the types of arrangements we offer and may vary depending upon availability in certain regions. Substitution Policy


text:
Over to you Bully...
Red Rooney
First of all I'd like to say congratulations to England for qualifying for Euro 2012 in the way they did, because normally we seem to rely on other results and this time it's been very comfortable.
The game against Montenegro wasn't the best but a point was needed and it was good enough in the end. You have to hold your hands up and say fair play to them, but the one minus was Wayne Rooney lashing out. More on that one below! Good luck this weekend
On the Rooney red card
When it's your reputation and England career on the line, you don't do silly things like kicking out, but hopefully he's learned from it. You can't take that away from Wayne Rooney because that is the way he performs, with aggression and passion, but this was just stupidity and it's going to get him banned for at least one game.
You do have battles on the pitch so if someone is pulling your shirt or trying to trip you up, eventually you flip and lash out. I think I was sent off eight or nine times in my career and half of those were stupid ones like Rooney's.
On the Black Country derby
Every game is a big game in the Premier League but derbies are absolutely superb. I used to relish them because you're not just playing for yourself or the team, but for the Wolves fans who can talk about it for the next six months and rub West Brom's noses in it.
Last season's results give us a bit of an edge plus we've got a few players from the Black Country, so I'm expecting them to portray how much it means to those who aren't locals. I just hope we put in a performance like we did against Newcastle, but get the rub of the green too so we get something from the game.
Liverpool 1-3 Man United
This match always produces plenty of passion even when the entertainment is lacking, but I can see both being on show come Saturday lunchtime. I've got a hunch on Luis Suarez to score first for Liverpool (5/1) but Man United to come storming back to win 3-1 (18/1).
Man City 2-0 Aston Villa
Man City have been flawless at home so far this season so why would they slow down now? Even if Aguero and Balotelli miss out, I can't see Villa scoring so I'm going to back them to win 2-0 at 5/1 and Draw-City at 14/5 in the Double Result market.
Wigan 0-0 Bolton
Billy boring pick of the week goes to these two, who look like they're going down on current form. Wigan struggle to score goals and I think Bolton will be desperate just to stop the rot, so 0-0 looks like a bet at 10/1 along with the 4/1 for Draw-Draw.
Stoke 1-2 Fulham
Fulham blew QPR off the park just before the international break and I think it's a sign of things to come from Martin Jol's team. Stoke is never an easy place to go but Fulham won there last year, so I'm putting a few quid on 13/5 Andy Johnson to find the net again and a few more on the 11/1 for a 2-1 scoreline.
Norwich 2-1 Swansea
The battle of the promoted sides should give us a few clues which one is more likely to stay up this year. I'd rather both went down so Wolves survive, but I think Norwich will have the edge at home, winning 2-1 (8/1) on the back of a Grant Holt strike (9/5 any time).
QPR 2-2 Blackburn
QPR have struggled for goals at home but they do create a lot of chances so they are capable, as I saw when they came to Molineux. I don't trust their defence, however, so I'll go for 2-2 here, priced 14/1, with Shaun Wright-Phillips my pick to score at 12/5.
Chelsea 3-0 Everton
Chelsea were brilliant against Bolton before the break and Daniel Sturridge looks a real talent – thank goodness he's English! He's had the week off after Fabio Capello ignored his form, so I think he'll prove a point with a goal, which pays even money, and inspire a 3-0 home win (7/1).
West Brom 1-2 Wolves
Neither team is in great form going into the Black Country derby but this is a massive game for the people in the area, so there's plenty at stake. Wolves got the better of Albion last season so fingers crossed they can continue that, with Draw-Wolves at 13/2 my tip for the Double Result market and the 11/1 for a 2-1 away win also worth a punt.
Arsenal 3-1 Sunderland
Arsenal have got a nice run of fixtures now and I think they'll start with a win against Sunderland, who have been poor this season. My feeling is for 3-1 at odds of 10/1 with Robin Van Persie the only man worth backing for the opening goal. Sportingbet have 11/4 available for that bet.
Newcastle 0-2 Tottenham
This is a real test for Spurs' recent surge in form, but it's one I think they will come through, as Harry Redknapp continues to prove what a good manager he is. Luka Modric staying has been crucial and I quite fancy him to score at 3/1 any time, setting up a 2-0 away win for another 11/1 payday.
Five for a Ton Offer!
Five winning weekends in a row equals a £100 free bet! Just email your best bet of the week to email@example.com at odds no shorter than 4/6 (1.66) together with the codeword which is revealed on the Sportingbet podcast.
For more details on Five for a Ton listen to this week's Sportingbet podcast.
A Sportingbet account is required to participate in Five for a Ton.
Sign up with Sportingbet now to claim up to £100 in free bets!
Reproduced with permission by Sportingbet. Goal.com encourages all readers who bet to do so sensibly.


text:
The Sports Bar has taken on a new meaning in American culture, particularly in the past 20 years.
Walk into any one and there are a number of games in different sport on at any time.
Tonight, because of a perfect storm, most of the TVs in every sports bar in America—and some non-sports ones—will be tuned into the Temple football game and I can think of no better time to establish the Temple football brand as a tough and exciting one across the nation than tonight.
For all of the evidence you need, just fast-forward the "guide" section of your TV listings to 9 p.m. tonight. Hit "sports" and this is what shows up:
Women's World Cup Soccer Qualifying Pre-game Show. Err, no.
PGA Tour Golf. Hey, it's night time. Who can see what's happening?
Winchester Legends. Bob heads south of the border to Sonora, Mexico to see Desert Big Horn Sheep. Rather watch sheep watching grass grow than that.
Temple vs. Houston. ESPNU, 9 p.m. Channel 853, Comcast, ESPNU.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
For a Temple fan who has had to beg, plead and endure laughter for many years walking into sports bars all across America while asking for the Temple football game to be put on one TV, this is like dying and going to Heaven—without the dying part.
Now is the best time to change people's long-held perceptions and misconceptions about Temple football. Let's hope the '][' travels well tonight.


text:
Hi class, we wanted to give everyone an update on your Lohfink book reviews. We are working on getting things set up so that you will be able to access your grades online, but don't have all the information we need in order to make that happen yet. In the meantime, we wanted to let you know that just about everyone received a 7 on the first book review. There were no 8's this first time around, but that's pretty normal. A few people scored lower than an 8 and we will email those people indivdually to explain why. As you complete the 2nd book review just be sure to revisit the guidelines in the syllabus and you should be fine. Hopefully the comments we were able to make on your blogs were helpful as well. As always, feel free to email us with questions. Happy Martin Luther King Jr. Day!
Lohfink ReviewPublished January 15, 2007 MC500W07 Leave a Comment
0 Responses to "Lohfink Review"
- Leave a Comment


text:
JFK Website (0)
Digital Archives (56)
Subject: Cold War
Person: Johnson, Lyndon B. (Lyndon Baines), 1908-1973
Oral history(14)
Sound recording(1)
Textual folder(2)
White House Photographs(39)
John F. Kennedy Oral History Collection(9)
Robert F. Kennedy Oral History Collection(5)
Papers of John F. Kennedy. Pre-Presidential Papers. Presidential Campaign Files, 1960(2)
White House Audio Collection(1)
International relations(38)
National security and defense(24)
Advice and counsel to the President(17)
Economics and economy(14)
Voyages and travels(12)
Kennedy, John F. (John Fitzgerald), 1917-1963(37)
Rusk, Dean (David Dean), 1909-1994(20)
McCormack, John (John William), 1891-1980(13)
Clay, Lucius D. (Lucius DuBignon), 1897-1978(10)
McNamara, Robert S. (Robert Strange), 1916-2009(9)
Berlin (Germany)(15)
Germany (Federal Republic)(10)
Houston (Tex.)(6)
United States. Congress(21)
United States. Congress. House of Representatives(15)
United States. Congress. Senate(18)
United States. Department of Justice(11)
United States. Department of Justice. Attorney General(10)
Democratic National Committee (U.S.). Research Division(1)
Kennedy, John F. (John Fitzgerald), 1917-1963(1)
Knudsen, Robert L. (Robert LeRoy), 1929-1989(14)
Rowe, Abbie, 1905-1967(8)
Stoughton, Cecil W. (Cecil William), 1920-2008(17)
Bell discusses his contacts with and impressions of John F. Kennedy (JFK) as a senator, JFK's relationship with Vice-President Lyndon Baines Johnson, and JFK's assassination, among other issues.
Clay discusses Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson's 1961 visit to Berlin, the Berlin Wall crisis, and John F. Kennedy's special committee to study foreign aid, among other issues.
In this interview Conway discusses working with John F. Kennedy's [JFK] 1960 presidential campaign; the negative reaction to the choice of Lyndon B. Johnson for JFK's running mate; labor leadership and JFK's campaign; unions and the religious issue during the 1960 election; discussing presidential appointments with JFK after the election; Conway's ...
In this interview Robert F. Kennedy [RFK] discusses beginning John F. Kennedy's [JFK] presidential Administration with no political obligations; carefully picking Cabinet members, specifically Secretaries of State, Defense, and Treasury; RFK's decision on what role to play in JFK's Administration; JFK's unhappiness with Dean Rusk as Secretary of St...
In this interview Robert F. Kennedy [RFK] discusses American aid to Argentina; American, British, and French involvement in Africa; the 1962 executive order about segregation in federally-funded housing; appointing African-American judges; changes John F. Kennedy [JFK] was contemplating in the Alliance for Progress; the Dominican crisis; the wheat ...
In this interview Robert F. Kennedy [RFK] and Marshall discuss how John F. Kennedy [JFK] and RFK grew increasingly more involved with and concerned about civil rights; getting Martin Luther King out of jail during JFK's 1960 campaign; civil rights advisers during JFK's 1960 campaign; RFK becoming Attorney General amidst the civil rights battle and ...
In this interview Robert F. Kennedy [RFK] and Marshall discuss the very limited proposal for voting rights legislation before the demonstrations in Birmingham, Alabama; how civil rights groups did not always understand politics or how to get things through Congress; John F. Kennedy [JFK] trying to explain political difficulties to civil rights lead...
Search powered by Oracle Endeca ®.
JOHN F. KENNEDY PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND MUSEUMColumbia Point, Boston MA 02125 (617) 514-1600


text:
Without looking back at how much everything cost, I feel like I spent a small fortune! I'm sure I didn't as Blackpool is a cheap and cheerful place, but even so: rail transport, theme park entry and two meals out? It can't be cheap.
Theme park entry we got a deal on. Blackpool Pleasure Beach have WOW! Weekends throughout the year (especially early season) where wristbands are just £16.25 each. That's £32.50 for two adults.
The train was £8.40 after railcard discount (£12.60 before), pushing that to another £16.80 for two 16-25-year-olds.
When we got to Blackpool, we opted to take the tram. It's £2.40 for a single from North Pier to Blackpool Pleasure Beach (you pay on the tram), and a child's fare is just £1. Another £4.80 gone!
Once in the park, we had little call for spending as we just wanted to hit the rides until our tummies grumbled. There is a Burger King on site and two regular adults meals plus a side of onion rings came in around £11 (I can't remember the exact figure!).
When we were in Nickelodeon Land, I nipped into the shop to see if there was anything exciting I could buy for my nephew Oscar. He loves Paw Patrol! Pocket money managers will be pleased to know that for just £3.70 I came away with some Blaze bubbles, a pack of 3 Paw Patrol stamper roller pens and a little badge with a picture of Chase and the gang saying Nickelodeon Land.
The only other thing I spent money on in the park were two pencils that say "Blackpool Pleasure Beach" on them to chuck into my work pencil case. I think these were 90p each, so that's £1.80 I spent on souvenirs for me! (Caroline managed to get away with buying nothing).
After we left the park we hit a rock shop. There's only one rule about going to Blackpool: you have to bring people back a stick of rock. Rock is one of the cheapest souvenirs ever. It is just a sweet and so it isn't ever going to break that bank. There are different offers available along the promenade depending on how much rock you want and what size. We opted for the "average" size and bought 10 sticks of rock for £4. (Of the ones we looked at, the only E number to be wary of is E153 – the black colouring – as this can be derived from plant or animal sources).
All that's left to spend money on, was dinner out. A lovely meal at Las Iguanas for just £24 for the two of us. Including an alcoholic beverage each and pudding (we shared).
The total cost:
£98.60 for two adults
That does seem high, but that averages down to £49.30 each. There are not many day trips you can make for that, let alone one with some of the most significant roller coasters in the world!
What are you waiting for? Get booked, get gone!


text:
Office: JAP Science Building – Rm 430
Email: email@example.com
Phone: (601) 979-3461
Fax: (601) 979-5853
- Ph.D. University of Louisiana at Lafayette, 2012; Environmental & Evolutionary Biology
- M.Sc. The University of Southern Mississippi, Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, 2006; Coastal Sciences
B.A. University of Missouri at Columbia, 2003; Biology
Research Interests
- Phylogenetic systematics, taxonomy, and natural history of marine malacostracan crustaceans (e.g., crabs, shrimps, scuds)
- Transcriptomics natural selection, and the role of differential gene expression in adaptation
- Population connectivity and dispersal is marine crustaceans, particularly in groups lacking clear dispersal mechanisms
- Benthic ecology and ecosystem health of seagrass and associated marine habitats


text:
I've been busy sewing up some baby / little girl things the last few days. (Not to mention that my internet has been down for days, again!) I'm going to post pictures (by the way, Becki, could you send me one or two pics of Reegs modeling for me? I didn't get a before and after pic.)
I made a purse and dress out of a maternity skirt. It was my goal to not throw anything away, and well, I'd give myself an A since all I threw out was a few scraps where I evened out my edges when cutting. It was a fun challenge during naptime on Saturday. It was one of those things that I decided at the beginning if I made a mistake I would do a quick fix and move on. I actually really liked how it turned out and shipped it to a friend.
I made another dress out of a tank top. Again, I don't have a before picture, but I'll post the finished products. I'll write about it tomorrow when I get my camera out. Look at the picture above and you can see that I took 1 light blue tank and made a dress (right) and then took the bottom part of the tank and made the ruffles for the tank on the left. Now, I better get going on the household chores before little one wakes up! That and the white chicken chili I'm going to make since it feels like October here in Michigan today. Oh, and I have another pattern review I'll be posting on a girlie tunic. Stay Tuned! I'll be back soon.


text:
Welcome Guest!
Previous Message
All Messages
Next Message
Wildduck Publishing
May 22, 2008 06:39 PDT
Welcome to THE FLAMINGO TIMES a Weekly Newsletter!
Thursday May 22nd, 2008
Published weekly on Thursdays, give or take a day.
Mailed by request to anyone who loves good cooking, fun,
and a laugh here and there.
This is an opt in mailing list, you must join in order
to receive it. Subscribe/Unsubscribe directions are in
the signature of this newsletter.
You can read The Flamingo Times Online at:
Join The Flamingo Times discussion group and
participate with other readers, photos, news,
storys, humor and recipes! Its free to join!
On the web at:
Or Email to:
Or add from your current yahoo mail account.
Recipes, Humor, Cooking Tips, Links,
4 Great Recipes! A Bubba favorite!
Applesauce Meatloaf
Barbecue Meatloaf
Slow Cooker Meatloaf
Bubba's Easy Meatloaf
More Humor
News From Possum Waller
And More Bad Jokes
Support America, Support our troops!
DAV site for phone cards for our troops.
Laptops for the Wounded
I urge you to boycott Citgo, why support terroism.
Applesauce Meatloaf
1 1/2 pounds extra-lean ground beef
1/2 pound ground pork
1/2 cup finely diced onion
1 egg, beaten
3/4 cup applesauce
1 cup bread crumbs
3 tablespoons ketchup
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
1/4 teaspoon black pepper
Preheat oven to 350°. Lightly grease a 9x5x3-inch loaf pan.
In a large bowl, combine all ingredients; mix well. Place
the meatloaf mixture in the prepared pan. Bake for 1 1/2
to 2 hours. Let cool 10 minutes; remove to a platter and
slice. Serves 6 to 8.
Barbecue Meatloaf
2 to 2 1/2 pounds ground chuck
1 can tomato soup, divided
1 egg, slightly beaten
1 cup crushed Ritz crackers
2 tablespoons honey
1 tablespoon plus 2 teaspoons Worcestershire sauce, divided
2 tablespoons dried minced onions
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon pepper
1/2 cup water
2 teaspoons prepared mustard
2 tablespoons brown sugar
Combine ground chuck with half of the tomato soup, egg,
crackers, honey, 2 teaspoons Worcestershire sauce, onions,
salt, and pepper. Mix well and form into a ball. Place a
crinkled length of aluminum foil in the slow cooker/Crock
Pot so the ends extend an inch or so out of the pot. Place
the meatloaf in the pot (the foil will make it easier to
lift the meatloaf out and keep it out of the drippings).
Combine remaining soup, 1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce,
the water, mustard, and brown sugar. Whisk together and
pour over the meat loaf. Cover and cook on low for 8 to
10 hours. Serves 4 to 6.
Slow Cooker Meatloaf
2 pounds of lean hamburger
2 eggs
2 slices bread, in small cubes
Salt and pepper
1 small onion, chopped
Beat eggs - add bread cubes. Add enough milk to moisten all.
Add hamburger....squish all together with your hands. Season
to taste. Place in slow cooker/Crock Pot....shape to fit,
flatten. Pour catsup on top (enough to cover completely)
Crock on low all day 8 - 12 hours.
Notes: I've also used crushed crackers instead of bread,
and salsa instead of the ketchup. With only 1/2 lb. of
meat, you'll probably want to use just one egg.
Bubba's Easy Meatloaf
1 pound ground beef
2 cups shredded cabbage
1 medium green pepper, chopped finely
1 teaspoon salt
dash of garlic powder
1/2 teaspoon celery powder/salt
1 tablespoon crushed dried onion flakes
1/2 teaspoon caraway seed, optional
1 egg, beaten, optional
Thoroughly combine all ingredients. Shape into round loaf.
Place accessory meat rack in slow cooker/Crock Pot. Place
meat loaf on rack. Cover and cook on high for 4-6 hours.
This recipe can be doubled to fit a large 6 qt.
Sorry can't be responsible if you don't like it or doesn't
taste good ... can't test everything and I would weigh about
400 lb.. if I did!
Womens Revenge
What's a man's idea of foreplay?
A half hour of begging.
Dogs are Better than Men"
Dogs think you are a culinary genius.
Kitchen and Household Tips for this week:
Cleaning Tips
Getting Grease Build-Up Off of a Tiled Kitchen Floor
Stuck on grease is usually a sticky goo-ish type substance that is best
with by using a soapy kind of cleanser- namely a degreaser along the
of 409 Cleanr and a heavy duty nylon scrubbing pad.
If you have kitchen or household tips that you would like to share with
fellow readers, please jot them down and email them to:
Standard issue chicken jokes.
Q. What Is The Difference Between President Hoover And President
A. One Promised A Chicken In Every Pot And The Other Was An
Unpromising Chicken Who Smoked Pot.
News from Possum Waller
Ever since the new Indie movie was announced Supperman has given up
his cape and started riding around on his bike wearing a beat up old
and leather coat. Well thats not to bad but he found an old whip and
been scaring the kids and dogs with it. He happened to show up at the
Possum Waller General Store about the same time Buffy did...well he
decided to jump off his bike and yell while popping his whip...well he
scared Buffy so bad she backed her new Beemer into the the Bread Sign
in front of the store(again) of course she had to scream and then cry
a bit, we just gather round and watch the show.
"y'all have fun now ya heah"
Ways Professors Grade Their Exams
Students are asked to blot ink in their exam books, close them and turn
them in. The professor opens the books and assigns the first grade that
comes to mind.
Take my wife...please
I've been married for 49 years. (or it seems like 49 years....) Where
I failed?
A little more humor ...
You know your middle aged when...
For the first time you have to deal with nose hair.
Funny English Signs
NOTICE IN A DRY CLEANER'S WINDOW: Anyone leaving their
garments here for more than 30 days will be disposed of.
Do you need a silencer if you are going to shoot a mime?
The Cat To English Dictionary
mrowwwww - (only heard in males) I am now recalling, with sorrow, that
some of my private parts did not return with me from that visit to the
The ice cream truck in our neighborhood now plays rap music.
Now support our sponsors ... OK ... I mean I promised them you
would ... so go now, tell them I sent you ...
And if you would like to sponsor this newsletter email me:
Sugar Magnolias Antiques, Collectables Vintage Clothing, Purses, Shoes
Scarfs, Dresses and more!
OK boring legal stuff ... but have to do it.
OK, we are copy written ... all original content that is.
Have fun with it, use the recipes ... laugh at the humor,
most content is contributed, don't have a clue where some
of it comes from, so, sorry not responsible for it ... send
it, print it, fax it, take it to work and use the Xerox
subsidy your company provides ... just mention our name in
a loving sensitive way OK?
...................Wildduck Publishing......................
Support this newsletter by donating at the web site or going to Paypal
and making your donation to: firstname.lastname@example.com
Well that's it for this week ... if you missed a copy let me
know and I will forward it to you.
If you wish to personally communicate with me, send email to:
Thanks for all your support! Keep reading OK!
Publishers Note:
Always do right - this will gratify some and astonish the rest. Mark
.................Y'all have fun now ya heah!................
Previous Message
All Messages
Next Message
Check It Out!
Topica Channels
Best of Topica
Art & Design
Books, Movies & TV
Food & Drink
Health & Fitness
News & Information
Personal Finance
Personal Technology
Small Business
Travel & Leisure
Women & Family
Start Your Own List!
Email lists are great for debating issues or publishing your views.
Start a List Today!
© 2001 Topica Inc. TFMB
Concerned about privacy? Topica is TrustE certified.
See our
Privacy Policy


text:
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
2 Comments:
- At 7:51 PM, jason said...
Ahhhh...so good to hear that song again!
From the dimmest corner of my memories.
- At 7:55 PM, Ladrón de Basura (a.k.a. Junk Thief) said...
Jason - That song deserves to be left in a dim corner where it can grow moss and mushrooms.


text:
Black Bottom Cupcakes
1 C cream cheese
1 unbeaten egg
1/3 C sugar
1/8 t salt
Combine in a mixing bowl.
Stir in: 1 C Chocolate Morsels
In a separate bowl, sift together:
1 1/2 C flour
1/4 cocoa
1 C sugar
1 tsp baking soda
1/2 tsp salt
1 C water
1/3 C cooking oil
1 T vinegar
1 tsp vanilla
Fill each muffin cup with the chocolate mixture to 1/3 full.
Top each one with a heaping teaspoon of the cream cheese mixture.
Bake at 350 degrees for about 30 minutes.
Cake Links


text:
Amazing Frech Riviera villa with private pool, garden and St Tropez view, sleeps 7 – Home 59694 Villa
- 3 bedrooms
- 7 sleeps
- min stay varies
Amazing Frech Riviera villa with private pool, garden and St Tropez view, sleeps 7 – Home 59694
- Villa
- 3 bedrooms
- sleeps 7
- min stay varies
Top Review
Villa / 3 bedrooms / 3 bathrooms / sleeps 7
Key Info
- Beach / lakeside relaxation
- Nearest beach 0.8 km
- Swimming pool
- Child friendly
- Car not necessary
- Pet friendly
- Private garden
Description from owner
More Less
- Great for children of all ages
- Pets welcome
Bed & bathroom
- 2 Double Beds, 3 Single Beds
- 1 Family bathroom, 1 Shower room, 1 Toilet Only
- Wi-Fi available
- Private outdoor pool (unheated)
- Private garden
- Patio
- Balcony or terrace
- Sea view
- Deck
- Internet access
- Central heating
- Fireplace
- Safe
- Table tennis
- Cooker
- Fridge
- Freezer
- Microwave
- Kettle
- Dishwasher
- Washing machine
- Clothes dryer
- Iron
- CD player
- Ceiling Fans
More Less
- Parking
- Secure parking
- Not suitable for wheelchair users
- Payment
- This owner does not use online booking. Please contact them and they will be able to offer you a secure way to pay for your stay. Never pay for your holiday rental by wire transfer (such as Western Union or Moneygram) as this type of payment is untraceable.
- Smoking
- Yes, smoking allowed
About the owner
Christope L.
- Response rate:
- 70%
- Calendar updated::
- 05 Apr 2018
- Years listed:
- 10
- Based in:
- France
- Overall rating:
Languages spoken: English, French, Spanish
This Villa has 3 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms and sleeps 7. It's been listed on Holiday Lettings since 22 May 2008. Located in French Riviera - Cote d'Azur, it has 15 reviews with an overall rating of 4.5. The average weekly rate varies from £878 to £3073.
The Owner has a response rate of 70% and the property's calendar was last updated on 05 Apr 2018.
Map and how to get there
Guest reviews
– based on 15 reviews
Very Good
15 reviews
- Excellent
- 10
- Very Good
- 3
- Average
- 0
- Poor
- 1
- Terrible
- 1
"1A / Fantastic Location !"
Our family (6 incl. 4 young children) loved the stay at L'Heure Bleue. Key upside is the location with magnificent views. We have never seen anything like it over the years. Our family hardly went anywhere outside of the house and patio because we liked it so much! We can recommend the house if you enjoy having private space in a very large patio outside of the house and are not fussy in regards to a relatively simple / functional home. If you have high standards in regards to a "designer" home, do not go here as the kitchen and furnishings are not high-end. The focus here is incredible location both in terms of view, privacy, and ability to enjoy the nature / foods outside on the patio. As we did have a minor question or two, the owner was very helpful in lettings us know very quickly per e-mail (fast wlan) how we can solve the questions we had. One additional tip, as the driveway is quite steep & narrow, we only drove up the first day to unload the luggage. Thereafter we parked at the bottom of the driveway to save our nerves.
"Loved L'Heure Bleu"
We came here in Jun 2013 and loved it. Home is in great location which I didnt realize until we were there as i struggled to find something in St Tropez, Cannes etc. Am so glad we stayed in Ste Maxime as it's quieter and covenient. My four kids ages 7-13 loved the pool, ping pong, and land to run around. I enjoyed the views everyday. We really made use of the outdoor space and ate all meals outside. House is in neighborhood that is up winding hill with many beautiful homes. Only downside is that house is cottage like-- with bathrooms, kitchen, electrical a little outdated. For us, we were fine with this since we ate most meals out and spent more time outdoors in the beautiful weather. Would highly recommend!
"Priceless, wonderfull, simply the best"
We are frequent visitors of the cote dázur and have never been in a better place than this. Charming provencial house, authentic in every way like it should be: old but everything works great. The views and the outside terras are outstanding. We like a good lunch and diner with the whole family and this house facilitates it all. Good and well equiped kitchen, bbq and a big outside table. We also had rain and than the inside of the house is comfortable. This house is completely private and close to all important activities like the centre of saint maxime, the beach and st. tropez, although you need a car. This house is built against a mountain and is not for people in a wheelchair. We will certainly come back if the house is still available after this review. TOP!
Build your perfect trip, with Holiday Lettings & TripAdvisor
Real opinions, real reviews
Genuine guest feedback from 100,000+ reviews
Quick response times
Know where you're staying within 24 hours
Also consider
Europe Holidays
477064 properties
France Holidays
70563 properties
Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur Holidays
17403 properties
French Riviera - Cote d'Azur
9,835 properties
2,014 properties
2,014 properties
1,937 properties
1,803 properties
1,713 properties
880 properties
655 properties
Alpes Maritimes
369 properties
353 properties
349 properties
207 properties
171 properties
164 properties
146 properties
100 properties
88 properties
48 properties
43 properties
27 properties
This advert is created and maintained by the advertiser; we can only publish adverts in good faith as we don't own, manage or inspect any of the properties. We advise you to familiarise yourself with our terms of use.


text:
For the BRILLANTE WEBLOG PREMIO 2008 award
The Rules Are:
1) Put the logo on your blog. check
2) Add a link to the person who awarded you. lisa kettell…check
3) Nominate at least 7 other blogs. lia, melba, alice, judy, suze, wendy, jes…check
4) Add links to those blogs on yours. double check.
5) Leave a message for your nominees on their blogs. pending.
Filed under: blog pals, blog sistas, blog things, friends |


text:
Valentine's Day: Scratch and Sniff Cupcake Cards
Pack of 24
From Paper-Source.com
Valentines that smell as sweet as your friends! With strawberry cupcakes, sweet vanilla hearts, peppermint lollipops and delicious chocolate truffle treats, these Valentine cards will be the envy of the entire class! Includes 24 scratch & sniff cards, 1 Teacher card, and 30 awesome stickers all in a handy little carrying case.
Available at any Paper Source retail store or online at PaperSource.com
apparentlyjessy permalinkJanuary 19, 2009 5:54 am
I would like to visit America during two seasons. Halloween, and Valentines Day. You guys have the most awesome stuff that we just don't get here in Australia. Some would say its all about making money, but the stuff is so cute I don't care! I adore these Valentines cards so much – and scratch and sniff stuff holds a special place in my heart every since Primary School! Sadly cause of these stupid economic times, I cant afford anything American cause the Aussie dollar is just too weak, but I do enjoy looking!
Ms. Cupcake permalinkJanuary 19, 2009 5:34 am
Hi Christa!Thanks for the heads up on the broken link. Fixed it!
Christa permalinkJanuary 19, 2009 5:12 am
very cute site! btw, i looked it up, & it's paper-source.com (there's a dash!)
blognut permalinkJanuary 18, 2009 5:48 pm
There's an award for you to pick up at my blog!
Abby permalinkJanuary 18, 2009 4:12 am
So cute! I haven't passed out Valentines in FOREVER. These might just change that this year!


text:
Marc SolerName audio
- Place: Vilanova i la Geltrú, Barcelona
- Birth: 22/11/1993
- Country: ESP
- Height: 186 Cm
- Weight: 68 Kg
- Pro debut: 2015
- Years in team: 3
- Career path:
2015-2017: Movistar Team
2015-2017: Movistar Team
A BIG HOPE. Winner of the 2015 Tour de l'Avenir with 21 years of age, already in his first season as Movistar Team member, he's since become arguably Spain's biggest hopeful for tours big and small. Always drawing comparisons to Miguel Indurain due to his physical appearance and long-range, winning attacks as an amateur, his evolution has been visible since that Avenir success. A year later, in his second pro season, he won the Queen stage of the Route du Sud after working hard for his team-mate Nairo Quintana, prior to a fantastic one-two GC finish for them.
LEAP FORWARD IN 2017. The last season was a confirmation of his popularity and quality. He contested the win on the final stage of Paris-Nice against Alberto Contador; took 8th overall in a WorldTour stagerace, the Tour de Suisse; astonished the cycling world with a podium finish in the Volta a Catalunya, alongside Valverde and Contador; and again showed his courageous style -no less than six breaks- in his first Grand Tour experience: the Vuelta a España. His efficiency was valued by the Spanish Federation, which took him to a first elite Worlds road race in Bergen in September.
STILL TO POLISH. A great climber and a more-than-decent time trialist -he took bronze in the 2014 Spanish under-23 TT champs-, his ability to recover extremely well from long efforts gives hopes of a future talent for one or three-week stageraces, which Spain is certain to need once the big ones are nearly gone following a 'golden era'.
He discovered bike racing -both road and mountain- with 13 years old, but for the next four seasons he combined cycling with football, his other big passion -he's an avid FC Barcelona fan–, a sport he had taken up before as a goalkeeper. At age 17, he took a decision to focus on the bike.
At the beginning of his third amateur season with the Lizarte development team, Soler received an unexpected phone call from the man who would become his boss few months later: Eusebio Unzué. "We like your style – let's see how you do this season," were the words from the Movistar Team manager, who recruited him for the 2015 season onwards.


text:
Ranked #191 in Fantasy
What would it take for you to make a deal with the devil?
Drake's little sister has cancer. He never saw her smile like she used to. He never saw her dance like she used to. Hell, he never even heard her sing like she used to. Her time is running out, and he knows it. So he does what any big brother would do, make a deal with death. Drake traded his life for his sisters, so he could watch her grow up from afar. Now she could live but now... Drake has to live in limbo with Death as his newest 'wife'. What happens when Death forces Drake onto his role of a proper wife? Since when I'd death gay? Find out...
- boyxboy
- cancer
- creatures
- death
- forced-marriage
- reaper
- sad
- undead
DarkQueenBlu Aug 20, 2017
I hate that song it so beautiful but it's the saddest song I know I cry every time so I hate it
YoichiTakashi Apr 18, 2016
That was beautifully written. It also made me cry a little... 😢
TransColoredAnxiety Dec 24, 2016
Because you've already seen death. You can see thestrals too and the voices in the veil
thekilljoysaredead Mar 06, 2017
Oh she's so pretty I love the W oh and the grey background is TO DIE FOR!
luckyalphawolf Sep 09, 2016
So sad and the only reason I'm crying is because I'm chopping onions at 10:15 at night that it
Chandra-Esmeralda Oct 30, 2016
Crying so hard.😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭 why you make it sad!!!😬😭😭😭