text:
Understanding Trump's Election
March 14th, 2017 // 4:52 pm @ Oliver DeMille
Why Did the American People Give Donald Trump the Presidency?
Lasting Confusion
The mainstream media doesn't get it. Why did the majority of people in the majority of states—enough to win the Electoral College—vote for Donald Trump in the last national election? For much of the elite class, not just in national newspaper offices and television network suites, but also in Hollywood circles and the halls of academia, the election of Trump makes no sense. They blame flaws in Hillary's campaign, or Jared Kushner's algorithms, or even Putin's hackers.
The underlying belief among much of the elite is, "Someone smarter than the masses must have made this happen; the people certainly didn't do this all on their own." For elites, the explanation is still as shocking and elusive as it was on election night. The impossible happened, in their view. Therefore something must be amiss.
The truth is much more simple. The American people chose Donald Trump, for better or for worse, because they saw something the media and other elites never grasped—and still don't. Love Trump or hate him, or anything in between, but it's important to understand what happened, to know why voters put him in the Oval Office. We need to understand what they wanted, and what they're still expecting from him today and in the years ahead.
Powers Big and Small
To get to the bottom of this blue-state mystery, we first need to reject the typical media attempts to explain something they don't really understand. Simplistic rationalizations such as "white backlash" or "the rise of the angry-uneducated-poor" lack comprehension. These types of analysis show just how deeply most elites misunderstand the situation. Their shocked faces on election night demonstrated the level to which they lack clarity on what occurred—and is still occurring.
The problem is a huge gap of understanding between elites and the masses. The rift between these two groups is extreme—and widening. Today there is a great need to translate the view of the masses on freedom and progress to the elite classes (who are deeply dipped in the sauce of university-ism, careerism, and professionalism, all of which color their attempts to understand).
To begin with, the great challenge of freedom is that it is vulnerable, as Michael Polanyi assured us in his 1951 classic The Logic of Liberty. If freedom isn't protected by the vigilance, sacrifice, and wisdom of the masses, it is even weak. Note that it is the vigilance and sacrifice of the masses that matters, not the training or sophistication of the upper class. Indeed, freedom is vulnerable and even weak precisely because the elite classes exist—and are always trying to take over. When elites of any sort rule, freedom declines for the large majority of people.
Thus the American framers gave the voting power–ultimate sovereignty and control over the government–to the masses. Not to the popular vote, but rather to the majority of people in the majority of states (through the electoral college). They did this so that a few of the most populous states couldn't combine as a kind of elite ruling group. The framers not only wanted the people to rule, but for all people, even in little towns and on the back roads, to have a real say in government.
Why? History is clear on this: whatever group is in charge treats itself better than other groups. Always. Thus the solution to dominating rule is to have the masses govern. But even this would lead to some corruption, so the framers had the masses rule certain things (locales, states, the House, the purse strings) while elites in each state were allowed to rule other things (the Senate, foreign relations, protection of the states). National elites were given no direct power under the Constitution because the framers considered them too dangerous.
Checks in Action
Freedom is vulnerable, even weak, unless the people keep elites in check–but how? Answer: Elections. The framers knew that the masses understood something the various elite groups would never quite grasp: what the people really want. Of course, elites always think they know what is best for the masses, believing that somehow their "superior" education, training, views or wealth make them better able to tell their "inferiors" what is needed. This was arguably the framers' biggest worry, that such elites would rule (e.g. Federalist 1,10,14,17-20,51).
Elections were designed precisely to put down such elite power.
The elite classes certainly dislike this arrangement. Who wouldn't? But it is the very arrangement the framers gave us, and for this precise reason: to keep elites in their place. That the elite establishment is still shocked when it happens is ironic. No matter how often they think they've finally circumvented the Constitution and replaced chaotic Jeffersonian-society with clean, ordered aristocracy (though they never openly use this term), elections somehow keep coming along and disrupting their plans. Madison must be grinning from beyond the grave.
In the 2016 presidential election, the framers' system once more stood up and rocked the institutions of the elite. That they'll fight back is clear. But what will they fight against? It isn't Trump that did this. Madison did. Hamilton gave it eloquence, Franklin added gravity, and Washington provided clout. And here's the rub: few elites even understand why it happened. They fight it in a rage, but what, exactly are they fighting against? Most aren't sure…
In contrast, most of the masses do understand. It was time to reduce elite power.
There is a reason most elites struggle to cut through the clutter and understand what happened. Their language isn't designed to explain this. Their training never included it. They grasp at straws, like sophomore students of Mandarin, content to memorize vocabulary but only vaguely aware that the tone of each word drastically alters its meaning. For elites, today's political tone from middle America is distant, unclear, alien. Most aren't even sure it is real.
They prefer to explain away the masses as "angry." But ask them what causes the anger, or why so many people thought Trump was the solution. The elites don't know how to explain this to their children, much less articulate it fluently to themselves. It is a mystery… something most modern elites deeply resent and consider inferior. Not quite tangible.
Class Languages
With all their training, status, and cosmopolitanism, why are many elites so clueless about the masses? Because most non-elites communicate their political views in a different language, something elites find strange and unexpected. Also, partly, because most elites have spent a lot of personal and institutional effort trying to climb the status ladder away from the masses. To "rise above" their roots. To leave the crowd, which they largely, as mentioned, consider inferior.
Once they've "arrived" and become part of the professional and elite classes, the thought of going back, or, even worse, of realizing that the masses have something elite culture doesn't—or, horror of horrors, that it might even be better in some ways—is largely unacceptable to them. The socialization of professional and elite culture makes people almost purposely unable to understand what is going on among the masses.
In other words, modern professional/elite education and training customizes people with a certain way of seeing the world. As a result, they frequently believe nobody has more wisdom than they do—certainly not people who weren't trained to see things in the same way. But people who don't bother or don't know how to analyze certain things in the accepted academic way aren't less intelligent, they just aren't trained to respond to things in the prescribed academic format.
Instead, they use their intelligence in other ways—analyzing, considering, noticing, and responding to myriad additional clues in their search for understanding. As such, they naturally come up with different conclusions than the proscribed expert/professional method.
Who is to say their way is inferior? The truth is, the framers believed that the masses should be given more power than elites in electing our political leaders. The framers knew that the American masses would be best at knowing what is best for the American masses.
It's really very simple. The masses vote for what they want, and elites sometimes don't understand it because the elites want something very different. Specifically, the 2016 election meant the following to the masses:
- America was on the verge of turning its entire government and culture over to elite domination, and we have been heading in that direction ever since the end of Ronald Reagan's tenure.
- It was time to reverse this trend, to reduce the power of elites and give more power back to the people.
Like the shocking upheavals that lifted a Jefferson, Jackson, or Reagan to the presidency (tearing down the growing power of elite groups, even wreaking havoc and division, but the very kind of chaos and division that drastically reduces elite power) the majority of people in a majority of states turned to Trump. Indeed, if the masses in the Democratic Party would have had their way (without the elite-class power of super-delegates), Bernie Sanders, another anti-elitist, might well be the president right now.
Two Different Elections
To the professional/elite classes this all made little sense. Accustomed by educational training and long years of seeking status in the world, the elite classes computed the election using the accepted tools of academia, career, and government. The masses had no such blockage. While the establishment shook its head in dismay, saying "he'll bring chaos," "he's a blowhard," "he's so offensive," "he's spreading hatred," and so on, many of the masses said, "He's not one of them. He doesn't talk like them. He doesn't think like them. We need to stop them."
The elite class voted based largely on the issues. They emphasized facts, figures, policies, and specifics. That's what all politicians do—at least those who appeal to the elite classes (including most of the mainstream media).
In contrast, the masses voted to reduce the increasing power of elites.
Read that last sentence again. That's what happened in the 2016 election. The masses wanted someone to fight against elites. They chose a Jackson. Hated by the establishment. Hated even, perhaps, by a majority of the masses. But seen as one who hopefully might be able to stand for the majority of people in the majority of states—against any more power to the elite class.
Elite culture wanted someone who appealed to them, their standards, their values, their tone, their club—a Gore, a Bush even, a McCain, Romney, Biden, Kerry, Rubio, or Clinton. Someone who played the establishment game—universityism, careerism, professionalism. Put very simply: They wanted someone who believed in and trusted experts.
According to all their metrics, Trump wasn't even qualified to run for president. But to the winning voters, only one qualification mattered: Can he stop or slow the increasing power of elites? Not all voters articulated their feelings this way, but it was the pivot-point of the election.
First, however, such voters wanted to be sure he wasn't actually one of them, one of the elites. He was a billionaire, after all. How could they be sure he wasn't just pretending to be against elite rule? They found their answer in his speeches, in his language. Where the elite classes hated Trump's imprecise language (his penchant for ignoring the facts and even stating wrong facts as long as they supported his narrative), this very approach convinced the masses that he isn't one of the elites. Not for more elite rule. Rich, yes. But not one of them.
The more the media railed against him for his imprecise language, "tenuous connection to the facts", and "outlandish claims and attacks", the more secure the masses became. "He's not one of them, he's on our side," they said. This continues long after the election, and most of the elite media still seem to have no idea it is happening.
The People's Goals
A lot of voters hoped Trump could stop the power of elites, including many who disliked his personality or disagreed with him on the issues, or worried that he might turn authoritarian. Truly effective CEOs, Peter Drucker taught, are selected not on the basis of their overall strengths (the "impressive" candidate) or for their lack of weaknesses or personal flaws (the "affable" candidate), but because they are the most likely to accomplish the one biggest thing the organization most desperately needs.
Many American voters saw Trump in this light: Stop or slow the spread of elite power.
This changed the whole equation—but in ways the professional/elite/expert-loving class couldn't even fathom. It was so far outside of their training that they laughed when Trump's name came up, from the beginning of his campaign right up until late evening on election night. Even then, they refused to believe what they were witnessing.
Once he won, their laughter turned to anger. But they still didn't understand. The American people elected Trump precisely because these laughing elites and professionals wouldn't like it. He was elected to reduce their power and influence, to keep them from becoming any more powerful. To block them, thwart them, weaken them. To give the economy and our national destiny back to the masses, not leave it to the whims of the few in elite conclaves of power and influence.
The masses want change. They want to remake the economy into a nation for all, not just a nation for elites or those who play the education/career game outlined by elites (mainly for the benefit of elites).
As the establishment slowly figures this out, the more enraged and extreme their reaction becomes. The election was a referendum on them! Thus their angry opposition in the media will continue.
"Did the masses even understand candidate Trump's position on the issues?" elites ask. Answer: Yes. They understood that his take on the issues was mostly the opposite of what the elites stand for. That was enough.
Questions and Answers
But there is more. What exactly is it that the masses understand in their non-establishment-style assessments of the election? What wisdom do they have that the elites simply can't grasp—and that isn't being reported in the media? What are those who put Trump into office actually seeking? On the one hand, it's simple: reduce the power of elites. On the other hand, now that the election is over, what the masses want from Trump is deeper than the elite classes realize. What is it?
The answer to this question will be discussed in Part II of this Article, out next week.
For now, the glaring reality of the election stands, and there are those who know what it is, and those who don't. To repeat: Voters elected Trump to reduce the power of elites.
Those who understand this, understand the election. They also understand why the media is so extreme and angry right now, and why this extremism will continue. Those who don't understand this don't understand the election—or current politics in Washington and around the nation.
Those who understand this also know that the elite media will do everything in its ability to get back its power. Everything. We no longer have anything resembling an objective mainstream media—it is now the leading arm of elites on the warpath. We need to see everything coming from the elite media in this light.
(For more on this great current battle for freedom, and how to help the right side win, see The Coming Aristocracy by Oliver DeMille. You can purchase it HERE>>)
Category : Aristocracy &Blog &Business &Citizenship &Community &Constitution &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Education &Generations &Government &History &Independents &Leadership &Liberty &Politics
When the Media Says "Chaos" or "Crisis" They Mean "Conservative"
March 7th, 2017 // 8:27 pm @ Oliver DeMille
Three Five Ring Circus
It's true. When the mainstream media says "chaos" or "chaotic", it means conservative. When the media says "divisive" or "unAmerican", it means conservative. When the media says "crisis" or "out of control", it means conservatives are getting things done. If the mainstream media communicates that everything in Washington is tainted by conflict and tumult, and the leaders are terrible people who want to destroy our nation, it means that conservatives are making headway.
To understand this, let's begin by taking a broader look at modern politics in general. Today there are 5 (not the traditional 3) major de facto branches of government, each with significant influence, and each exerting power over the American people. Much has changed since the Constitution of 1787. Today's five branches include:
- executive
- legislative
- judicial
- federal agencies and bureaucracies (now much bigger than the rest of the executive, legislative, and judicial combined, both in numbers of government employees and organizational budgets)
- media and the parties (which act as major influencers on everything the government does, both in terms of policy and elections)
Each of these five branches acts differently in our time than originally intended by the framers. But the biggest problem in this new governmental arrangement is the federal bureaucracy. Agencies are seldom checked or balanced by the other branches of government, and they routinely get away with numerous unconstitutional or extra-constitutional actions.
Biased Commentary and Unused Powers
Federal agencies now produce a great deal more "law" and policy than Congress, and they mete out more rulings, fines, and regulations than Congress, the White House and the Court combined. Again, they face few checks and balances except budgetary constraints. Note that because of this, their goal is always to grow in budget and power. They are by nature liberal, never conservative, because their objective is to grow and then grow.
The fifth branch of government, encompassing the media, a large part of academia, and the two major political parties, is closely aligned with the federal bureaucracy. Conservatives have a few national media supporters, including many on talk radio and some from Fox News and The Wall Street Journal, for example, but the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, including most television networks and most major newspapers, have a near monopoly on American media. Make no mistake, the mainstream media (including Hollywood) is an integral part of the liberal movement in the United States—as it proves whenever it covers politics.
This is a bad arrangement for the American people because it is heavily weighted. While the nation is split roughly in half between conservatives and liberals, and independents who lean Right or Left are almost evenly divided, the media is strongly liberal. In the famous pre-election survey of 2016, 97 percent of national media professionals were liberal.
This means that media attacks on Republicans in office aren't going to diminish any time soon. In fact, they're likely going to get worse. Most of the mainstream news media is no longer trying to be objective—it is openly part of the liberal movement. It does whatever it can to keep its power, and increase its power. This includes lying or skewing the facts if it thinks this will further its agenda.
To summarize: Whether you like or dislike President Trump (and a lot of conservatives are troubled by his style, words, and some policies), the idea that Republicans now control the government because they hold the White House, Congress, and soon the Court, is inaccurate. Even with the executive, legislative and judicial branches in Republican control, the government is deeply split. The majority of those who work for the government in the federal bureaucracy are liberals, and even among those who vote conservative on a personal level, the natural desire to see their agency increase in power and resources means they act like liberals at work.
Also, as mentioned, the media is overwhelmingly liberal. Republicans in Congress hold the purse strings, but they've proven afraid to use this power in recent decades. At the same time, the liberal media and bureaucracy have no such fear. They use their power as strongly as they can, and their boldness is escalating.
He Said, She Said
Here's what to expect in the months and years just ahead: conservatives will try to reduce the power of the bureaucracy and K Street lobbyists (President Trump called this "draining the swamp"), but the media will cry foul—and it will be up to Congress to decide which direction we'll take. If Congress backs major deregulation and defunding of the bureaucracy, we'll see economic boom and a rebirth of American freedoms. If not, we won't.
Whether you like Trump or not, and whether he's doing things for the right reasons or more authoritarian goals, the current push for deregulation and defunding of the entrenched bureaucracy is good for America. If only Congress will follow through and make it happen.
But make no mistake: The media will fight this at every turn. The more successful Republicans are at deregulating and defunding, the worse the media will react. Remember, the mainstream media and others on the Left compared Reagan and Bush with Hitler and heaped upon them every negative they could muster, and Trump will be no exception.
In short, the conflict between media and conservatives is only going to escalate. If it slows down or weakens, it will mean that conservatives have backed down. Sadly, what we need is a lot more screaming and gnashing of teeth from the mainstream media—signaling that conservatism is making increased headway.
A lot of people don't like this, but it's true.
It Sounds Worse Than It Is
The biggest weapon on the media's side is labeling everything conservatives do with terms like "chaos," "chaotic," "confused," "divisive," and "extreme". As long as the media keeps saying this, conservatives know things are going well. Again, the media said similar things about Reagan before he helped reboot the U.S. economy and national security, and the media said similar things about Reagan before his leadership brought the Soviet Union to its knees and Berlin Wall to the ground.
The media said these kinds of things about the Tea Parties in 2010, just before conservatives took back the House. The media went on to say similar things about the GOP just before it took control of the Senate. The media said similar things about Republican candidates at all levels in the 2016 election, just before they kept both houses of Congress and took back the White House—and, by extension, the Court.
The media is saying these types of things about conservatives today, which signals that conservatives are making real progress. As mentioned, if the media ever stops accusing conservatives of "chaos", "divisiveness", "ineptitude", "being unhinged', and "causing upheaval", it will be time to worry.
We are, today, witnessing the fight of our generation. Even conservatives and Right-of-center independents who don't like Trump, Trump's style, or Trump's policies have to admit that under a Hillary presidency things would have gotten very, very bad—starting with the Court, and then spreading through government and society at all levels.
We need conservatism to win this battle—to deregulate our nation and economy in numerous important ways, and to significantly defund the federal bureaucracy. This is going to be decided in Congress, and we need Congress to do the right thing. If this doesn't occur, we may never have another chance in our life times.
So keep an eye on the mainstream media. As long as it is loudly opposed to the White House and Congress, conservatives are making progress. If the mainstream media ever starts praising the government or its leaders, citizens will know that something is going terribly wrong.
Category : Aristocracy &Citizenship &Community &Constitution &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Generations &Government &History &Independents &Information Age &Leadership &Liberty &Politics
Symbol vs. Substance
February 27th, 2017 // 7:44 am @ Oliver DeMille
(The Reality of Today's Political Protestors)
Thought vs. Feeling
No doubt about it. Symbols matter. The flag. The national anthem. Stories about great heroes from history, such as Paul Revere or George Washington, Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King, Jr. In short, symbols move us. They take on a life of their own—above the historical facts, more important to peoples' hearts and minds than mere reality. "Never let the truth stand in the way of a good story," as Samuel Clemens put it.
Symbol has power. But not as much power as truth. The simple, genuine truth is even more formidable than symbol. Not always as influential, or persuasive, in the short term—but more important. Compare two views of the world:
Symbol over Substance: "Perception is reality."
Substance over Symbol: "The truth shall set you free."
The truth is that perception isn't reality; reality is reality. Period. But perception, or symbol, does have great power. That's why the arts are often more influential than science or logic: symbols make us feel, and feel deeply, and when our feelings are at high pitch our minds usually follow.
When politics is added to this mix, the results are interesting. Or, in more symbolic language: when our emotions take over politics, everything becomes larger than life–even overwhelming. The feelings are strong, tied to deeply emotional symbols: the White House, the media, election night agony or ecstasy. As a child I was always surprised at how much emotion adults exhibited when the names Nixon or Carter were mentioned. Immediate anger, or sadness, or a smile. Then came the name Ronald Reagan—a certain cause of sudden frowns or grins, depending on whom I was talking to at the time.
I wonder at today's children. Say "Barack Obama" to them, or "Hillary Clinton," and the immediate response is extreme. Happy or sad. Smiles or anger. Hardly ever anything in between. Say "Donald Trump" to our youth, and adults, and the response is pretty much never boring or uninterested. Anger, yes. Joy, yes. Sometimes mixed emotions. But seldom lukewarm.
Look Both Ways
Such symbols have power. Indeed, to a large extent, the symbols of our modern politics dominate public opinion.
But substance still matters. It is, in fact, vitally important. If we limit our understanding of politics to symbol, we've got a major national problem. Jon Stewart pointed this out very effectively when he noted that while many of his friends voted for Hillary Clinton, those who alternatively voted for Donald Trump didn't do so because they support racism or calling people names, but because they tended to believe he'd be better for the economy.
In short, every top political figure is really two people: the symbol and the substance. To understand both is mature. To ignore both, thinking that the political leader is really only the symbol, or only the substance, is inaccurate and short-sighted.
The old adages "Focus on the issues" or "It's the economy, stupid," suggest that substance is king, that ultimately the voters choose based on the issues. But daily media spin and the words of celebrities, singers, actors (Oscars, Grammys, Music Awards, Hollywood, etc.) emphasize the other view—that symbolism is the real battle. One popular song says that we don't want science, we want signs.
In the Information Age, the symbols frequently consume us. Wise citizens see through media spin that paints a leader as all symbol. But such citizens aren't so fully swayed by substance that they think symbol doesn't matter.
This is complex. It's difficult for wise citizens, because they must weigh both the symbol and the substance of each political candidate, and decide which mix is best for the nation.
Just Symbol
The two big political parties make it even more difficult, by constantly trying to put symbol above substance, trying to convince voters that their party is best and their candidate best—regardless of the details or the optics, how things really are, or how things look. "Just vote for us" the parties assure us. "We're right; the other side is wrong. Always."
Again, astute citizens see through the smokescreen. They identify each candidate's substance, and symbols, and make the difficult choice. Wouldn't it be nice if we had more candidates who were strong both on issues and symbols?
For some, President Obama met that standard. The symbols were strong: first black president in the United States. Wonderful! The American Dream is real, the symbol of Obama assures us. For those who like weaker national security, supporting Israel's enemies, more government intervention in the economy, and further regulating peoples' lives, Obama made sense. But for people who wanted to reduce governmental regulation and get the economy booming, while strengthening our national security, Obama's tenure left much to be desired.
Neither McCain nor Romney offered something clearly different. The overwhelming symbol of both was "more of the same," "a repeat of the status quo," "a continuation of the Bush Administration." Both candidates actually offered significant differences in their policies—but the symbol most voters experienced was still "the same old thing."
Hillary had a similar problem. Her policies and symbols offered voters "more years like the Obama era." For many Americans, particularly among those who were hurting economically, the idea of more Hillary/Obama policies was appalling. They wanted something drastically different. They yearned for change. In fact, it is very possible that if Bernie Sanders had been the Democratic nominee, with his powerful symbols of change, he would have won the White House.
This is the complexity of voting. Sanders and Trump both owned the symbol of "massive change", while by 2016 the leading Hillary/Obama symbol was "no change, bad economy." For some, Hillary symbolized "first woman president," but the larger public view for many was "more of the same". She found this symbol too deeply ingrained in the populace to overcome.
Diverging Paths
In other words, voters don't just have to choose who to vote for in presidential elections, they also need to choose their personal voting criteria: for specific policies, or for the symbols. It can be even more challenging than this, in fact. Voters also have to choose between every candidate's good and bad symbols, and good and bad policy promises.
For example, Trump lost a lot of votes because he too often symbolized "acting like a jerk, attacking people who disagree with him, being insensitive to women, minorities, the disabled, etc." But he gained votes with citizens who believed he symbolized "truly big change in Washington" or who focused on the issues of "booming economy and stronger national security." Many voters hated the first set of symbols, but liked the second.
In earlier elections, Obama supporters had to choose between the motivating symbols of "yes we can" or "breaking the glass ceiling of race" and the divisive symbols of "Americans cling to their religion and their guns," as if personal faith and individual freedoms are somehow suspect. This lost him votes, but it gained him votes as well. No candidate's take on the issues is perfect for a majority of voters.
Hamilton and Madison started the Federalist Papers with a discussion of this same reality. Specifically, Federalist 1 notes that a number of wise and good people opposed the new constitution, while a lot of wise and good people supported it. With any important issue, Hamilton assures us, there are wise and good people on both sides. How can this be? The answer, Hamilton explains, is that only bad people do the wrong thing for the wrong reasons, but good people act in three ways:
- good people sometimes do the right thing for the right reason
- good people sometimes do the right thing for the wrong reason
- good people sometimes do the wrong thing for the right reason
In other words, in our day not everyone who voted for Hillary wanted the economy to get even worse or for public officials to be lax with national security emails, and not everyone who voted for Trump looks down on women and minorities or hates immigrants. The symbols and the substance aren't in lock step. This makes attacking someone who wears a Trump hat or openly supports Hillary, for example, particularly disgusting kinds of physical abuse.
Indeed, while supporters of Hillary often downplay her use of emails as much less important than the media suggested, or note that her views on national security and trade were actually much stronger than Obama's, even though the media refused to effectively show it, and Trump supporters will point out that he's spoken widely of wanting more legal immigration (going against the Republican norm), symbols once ingrained in the public mind are hard to overcome. The reality is usually far deeper and more complex than the symbol.
Response and Responsibility
The truth is important: the symbols and the substance aren't the same. The way the press portrayed Senator Clinton is only partially true, full of spin and falsehoods; same with President Trump. The reality has layers and levels. Wise citizens need to look deeper than party, media, and popular spin.
All this makes the violent protests of the Left even more ridiculous. Many on the Right hated President Obama's policies and his perceived symbol of "bigger and bigger government" every bit as much as many on the Left now hate Trump's approach. But instead of breaking windows, starting fires, looting, and violently assaulting those with a different view of things, they focused on working hard in their jobs, raising families, and serving in their communities.
They suffered under a president whose policies and perceived arrogance they deeply disliked, and with every Obama increase in regulation that made the Bush-era economy even worse. But they accepted the votes of those with a different view who put President Obama in office. They didn't mob together to destroy property or physically assault people. Even the Tea Parties, as vocal as they were, didn't make a national trend of out looting, burning, and assaulting. They focused instead of sharing ideas, seeking for a more favorable election outcome in the future.
Those on the Left who have chosen violence to protest the new president are entirely out of line. There violent acts are, in fact, illegal and immoral. Both the symbols and the substance of violent protest are wrong. Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. stood loudly and effectively for peaceful protest, and left a powerful and noble legacy of standing up for change, for what they believed in, for what is right—the right way.
James Madison considered every election a "peaceful revolution". There are ways to disagree in a civil society. Violence isn't one of them.
In fact, the worst negative symbol of the Trump era is calling names and acting like a jerk to people who disagree with you. It's often offensive, and sometimes extreme. Note that some of the talking heads on MSNBC and other networks have done the same thing for a long time. Still, two wrongs don't make a right; both sides are to blame when they overstep the bounds of civil discourse.
But as bad as this is, at least it is done with words. The physical violence of those on the contemporary Left who loot and destroy in the name of political anger is a true tyranny in our time, a literal fascism in our midst—and the media who encourage this by portraying it as noble, or somehow blame it on the president or anyone else, or who refuse to condemn it in the strongest terms because the looters agree with their politics, are just as bad. This is precisely the wrong kind of symbol—and substance.
Category : Blog &Citizenship &Community &Constitution &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Featured &Generations &Government &History &Independents &Information Age &Leadership &Liberty &Mission &Politics
Founding a New Kind of Media?
February 16th, 2017 // 12:51 pm @ Oliver DeMille
We are on the verge of a new media era in America. The first occurred during the American Founding, and was characterized mostly by articles and pamphlets—short, direct commentaries by numerous citizens on whatever topics they considered important. The second era was dominated by full-time commentators and publications—the Newspaper Age—where nearly everything that got published had to go through editors and editorial boards.
A third phase of American media centered around professional journalists—newspaper, magazines, radio, television, and cable—who saw themselves as intermediaries between those with financial/political power and the rest of the populace. At its best, such journalists bravely stood up to power and told the populace the kind of truth that only insiders can know. At its worst, mainstream media became a tool of spin for the elite Establishment.
Today a fourth, different type of media is taking over; and while some of its members naturally attempt to look as much as possible like the journalists of the Professional Era, many others couldn't care less about what is increasingly considered old-style "credibility". In this new stage of American media, we are in many ways witnessing a return to the kind of media that dominated the American Founding.
Circling Around
Consider the parallels, noticeable in the following quotes about American media between 1760 and 1790:
- "The newspapers, of which by 1775 there were thirty-eight in the mainland colonies, were crowded with columns of arguments and counter arguments appearing as letters, official documents, extracts of speeches, and sermons."[i] Some of these were closely screened by editors, but the majority were not. Newspapers during this time period were a gathering place, where practically anyone could share an opinion or argue with the views of someone else. Unlike modern newspapers—where even op-eds and letters to the editor are carefully vetted, partitioned, and "blue-lined"—this was a grassroots free-for-all, much like today's blogs, memes, vines, posts, tweets, etc. Regular people (not editors, boards, or committees) wrote them.
- "Broadsides—single sheets on which were often printed not only large letter notices but [short] essays…appeared everywhere; they could be found posted or passing from hand to hand in the towns of every colony."[ii] This is in many ways a similar kind of media as modern blogs, tweets, RSS feeds, and social media posts—specifically, news and thoughts on the issues go directly from the individual to others. Some ideas catch on and spread, others don't. But professional editors and committees are entirely left out of the process. It's person-to-person media, like that experienced during the American founding.
- "Above all, there were pamphlets: booklets consisting of a few printer's sheets…. Then, as now, it was seen that the pamphlet allowed one to do things that were not possible in any other form."[iii] This is like the modern blog or online article—from 1 page in length to 8 or even 10. It addresses a topic, without editorial oversight, and is shared with anyone who shows interest. Many of today's pamphlet-equivalents are also found in online tutorials, YouTube videos, TED talks, etc. In the same way that reality television is often more popular than shows that are scripted, edited, and re-edited, person-to-person media is the new reality. The professional mainstream media—big business—doesn't like this shift, of course. But that hasn't stopped it from spreading.
Popularity Contest
Apply what George Orwell said about person-to-person news in his day: "The pamphlet is a one-man show. One has complete freedom of expression…more…than is ever possible in a newspaper, or in most kinds of periodicals. At the same time, since the pamphlet is short and unbound, it can be produced much more quickly than a book…. Above all, the pamphlet does not have to follow any prescribed pattern. All that is required is that it be topical, polemical, and short."[iv]
The word polemical certainly describes a lot of modern online posts—clearly expressing opinions, and frequently against something. When people see a concern or a need, the Internet allows them to research, learn about it, and share their opinions widely.
As noted, this is a significant return to media between people, rather than media controlled by experts and handlers. No wonder the modern media is apoplectic about this development in the Age of the Internet. They're losing both their jobs and their status; even media professionals who keep their jobs are watching their prestige and credibility decline.
In much of society the media is now less popular than Congress—a dismal position in the past few decades. The reasons are instructive: (1) Increasing numbers of people simply don't believe what the media says. (2) A lot of people, maybe a majority of people, think the media has deeply abused its power by trying to sway the populace on numerous occasions—and that perhaps it always did, even before most people realized what was happening.
The Need to Question
During the American Founding era, all "great public events"[v] were "surrounded"[vi] by numerous individually-produced media responses from various citizens on all sides of the issues. This had huge influence on the nation. While some people argue that professional media is better at emphasizing the facts than person-to-person media, a growing number of people simply don't trust the mainstream media to remain objective. The history of media in just the past twenty years proves that media outlets have almost consistently exhibited a clear and obvious bias.[vii] To trust them now without skepticism and deeper personal research would be entirely unreasonable.[viii]
Moreover, more people are asking themselves: If individuals must research things on their own to find the truth, why should we give any real credence to the words of "expert" media figures? A lot of Americans don't. Since most of the professional media is clearly biased, even partial, why give it our carte blanche trust? The truth is, all media has some spin.[ix] Let's just admit this reality, and let citizens read what they want and draw their own conclusions.
The myth of a truly objective and accurate professional media system is just that: a myth. Certainly there are still good journalists,[x] but trust in our media Establishment is largely fractured. Citizens must take what the news tells them with a grain of salt—or continue allowing themselves to be expertly "shepherded" by the mainstream media.[xi]
A look back at history is instructive: The American Founders deeply believed in the people. They didn't consider the masses perfect, or infallible. But they realized something today's elites seem not to understand: that experts and political leaders have the same flaws, faults and weaknesses as the regular citizenry. Trusting either group is potentially dangerous, but trusting elites to take care of the masses will always fail, while trusting the people to take care of their own interests will, over time, lead to better results than giving such power to any small group of influencers or rulers.[xii]
The differences between experts/elites and the people are important. While the modern media tends to operate on a "chisel of skepticism driven by the hammer of social passion," as Michael Polanyi put it,[xiii] the people have long been too trusting of, and too dependent on, the press. The masses needed a bit more skepticism, and it has come in spades in recent years—spurred more than anything by the triangular relationship of the people, the media, and the president, from Bill Clinton and George Bush to Barack Obama and Donald Trump.
Freedom vs. Followers
We live in an era of Reality News, not just Reality Television. The people of the nation are less and less interested in news filtered by experts. They want things straight up, raw, and direct. Media consumers now prefer the smartphone camera version of the news, captured by whoever happens to be passing by, rather than the slick, doctored news filmed and edited by professional camera crews and producers (although we usually need to take such reporting with a grain of salt as well).
The worst "problem" with the new era of person-to-person media is that people will have to think deeply, think independently, avoid being swayed by whatever they read or watch or hear, do some further personal study on news stories that interest or effect them, and ponder the issues on their own.[xiv] Which, we should all note, is precisely what every citizen should have been doing all along with any news reported by the mainstream media.
This is necessary for freedom to flourish. The new era of widespread person-to-person media is more conducive to real freedom than any media system since the American Founding. It also has real dangers—if people don't actually study and think.[xv] But at least with person-to-person media, we know this is the reality: it is up to the people to vet the news.
The truth is that a media revolution has already occurred: anyone still largely trusting the mainstream media and accepting its words at face value is stuck in fantasy.[xvi] Nobody reads multiple Facebook posts and just believes everything. But that's largely how many Americans absorbed ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN news for decades.
It is time for a different kind of citizen. The era of implicit trust in a professional media is over. What remains to be seen is if we as citizens will do any better.
[i] Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution, ch. 1: "The Literature of the Revolution".
[vii] See Neil Postman and Steve Powers, How to Watch TV News.
[x] See, for example, Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, The Elements of Journalism.
[xi] See op cit., Postman and Powers.
[xii] See, for example: John Adams, Discourses on Davila; St. George Tucker, View of the Constitution of the United States.
[xiii] Michael Polanyi, The Logic of Liberty, p. 4. [see pp. 4-6] (Classics of Liberty Library version)
[xiv] See Alvin Toffler, The Third Wave.
[xv] See, for example, Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Seventh Sense, pp. 300, 170.
[xvi] See, for example, op cit., Postman and Powers.
Category : Aristocracy &Blog &Citizenship &Community &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Education &Generations &Government &History &Information Age &Leadership &Liberty &Politics
Why the Constitution is Suddenly Popular by Oliver DeMille
January 31st, 2017 // 10:36 am @ Oliver DeMille
Servant or Partner
There is a funny undertone right now in many media circles. For decades the national mainstream media has largely portrayed Congress as the little brother of the White House—existing mainly to support the president's agenda. Since at least 1996 the level of independent action by Congress—directly tackling presidential action and shutting it down when necessary—has decreased. On a longer trajectory, this same pattern has been gaining momentum since 1861. Many have referred to it as the era of the Imperial Presidency.
Moreover, real use of power by Congress has become increasingly unacceptable in the eyes of the national media. Just consider the results when Congress tried to use the purse strings to check the president: the media called it "shutting down the government" and portrayed any who supported it as pariahs.
Now that Donald Trump controls the future of the Oval Office, however, the media is seeing things from a different perspective. Maybe the silver lining in Trump's election, a number of journalists are suggesting, is that Congress can finally get back on track. It should be more of a partner with the president, less of the president's support base.
Well…yes. On the one hand, this is patently true. Of course Congress should be a partner, independent, sometimes supporting and other times checking the White House and pruning the powers and budgets of the sprawling executive bureaucracy. On the other hand, it is ironic that the media is just now figuring this out. Thanks to Donald Trump, the media is suddenly concerned that we need a stronger, more independent Congress. But when Barack Obama was in charge, not so much.
Filling Purpose
This is a fundamental problem with liberalism/progressivism. It promotes what it wants, and changes its views on our system of government whenever such promotion would benefit its agenda. In the process, however, it creates confusion and chaos. "Follow the Constitution when it blocks something we don't like, but just ignore or circumvent the Constitution when it makes what we want more difficult."
The official name for this is "rule by men," as opposed to "rule by law." As one article suggested, "The arrival of President Donald Trump could revive Congress' political will…" (Foreign Affairs, January/February 2017, 133) Many in the media seem to think this is a new idea. Indeed, Congress might actually start doing what the Constitution says it should do.
A wave of progressives sigh in relief. "Congress shouldn't have blocked Obama, clearly. But it should block Trump. A lot." The hypocrisy is poignant.
Or consider another suggestion: "…foreign policy leaders in Congress should take advantage of their positions to fight back against deception on the part of the executive branch." (Ibid., 143) This is exactly right. What isn't mentioned is that Congress should have been doing precisely the same thing a lot more effectively for the past eight years.
"Legislators often sense that the administration is not telling them the whole truth but do nothing to call it out." (Ibid.) A serious problem. But why didn't the national media call for a change while Obama was in office? Why did they in fact excoriate any Congressional committees that tried to do exactly this? Why the newfound popularity of the Constitution among media elites now?
Don't get me wrong. I'm elated that more voices are now calling for Congress to step up and do its job. All I can say is: "Finally. It's about time." I support this trend, even if it is coming many years late. I can't help but smile at the irony, however. Now that their candidates are out of office, many in the liberal media are suddenly noticing the importance and value of the Constitution.
The Lesser of Two…
As one writer put it, quoting Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.: "History has shown that neither the Presidency nor the Congress was infallible, and that each needed the other—which may well be what the Founding Fathers were trying to tell us." (Ibid., 145) Right on. Just as those of us who believe in the Constitution have been saying for the last three decades.
But this trend is bigger than first meets the eye. The sad reality is that the Constitution is more often lauded and promoted by those out of power than those in office. The real need is for it to be cherished and followed by those in authority.
Which brings us to the subject of President Trump. Many who voted for him didn't do so because they believed he was the great champion of the Constitution, or even America. Indeed, many Trump voters weren't at all sure what their vote would bring about in our nation and world. They cast their ballot for Trump largely because they were sure a vote for Hillary would bring more the same—more rule by career politicians and bloated bureaucracies, more economic stagnancy and empty promises from Washington, more business as usual politics, more blah, blah, blah from the mouth of politicians, more problems and few actual fixes.
They voted for change, hoping that it would actually come. Many—perhaps most—feared that the election wouldn't actually change things very much at all. Politicians frequently promise change, and then don't deliver. Why would Trump be any different? Many Americans are still skeptical that things will truly improve. They expect more bureaucratic double speak, more economic bad news.
They're waiting, watching. Wondering what will happen. As one Trump voter told me: "Maybe Trump will make things better, maybe he'll make things worse. But with Hillary we know what we'll get: more of the same. No solutions. Just an endless stream of problems. If Trump can bring even a little bit of positive change, it's worth it."
Note the cynicism wrapped in a tiny husk of wistful hope. "If" he can bring "even a little bit of positive change…" The subtext is sobering: "It's not likely anyone will bring any solutions. But if only we could get even a tiny bit of good news…"
Dusk or Dawn
We are now an America deeply in doubt. "No good news will come. Probably not even a little. But still, if only it would…"
The desperation is palpable, if we allow ourselves to notice. In short, America 2.0 is suffering from PTSD. We're just waiting for "the other shoe to drop." Too many Americans expect bad news. We expect tragedy. We are biding our time, assuming bad things will come. "This is the new normal," the Obama Administration told us. We anticipate more that is negative.
Consider the following headlines:
"Officials hold firm, despite Trump's skepticism" (USA Today, January 6-8, 2017).
"Department stores become endangered" (Ibid.) [More lost jobs, the end of the Mall Era that began in the Eighties and became synonymous with the postmodern American Dream.]
"Year Ahead: A partly sunny outlook for sales" (Ibid.) [We bide our time, trying to stay positive, largely sure that clouds are coming.]
"Sears watches its relevance fade in changing world" (Ibid.) [For many people, this sentence would be even more true with the word "America" inserted for "Sears".]
"Macy's and Sears, which owns K-Mart stores, announced more than 200 store closings on Wednesday and Thursday" (Ibid.)
All of these come from one page of the same national newspaper. They paint an emotional picture of a nation not in full-blown crisis but clearly expecting it. Or, maybe, it is in crisis already. Sadly, each day's front page is similar. Another front page from a different national newspaper tells the same story:
"The retail property market is showing signs of a slowdown…" (The Wall Street Journal, January 6, 2017)
"Trump Creditors Are Many, Varied" [The article tells us the new president is deeply in debt, as is the norm for real estate developers, and this may weaken his ability to lead.]
"The Yuan surged, posting its largest-ever two-day gain against the dollar…" [China is still gaining ground on us, slowly but surely.]
"Trump blasted Toyota…" [Big government and big media are constantly in conflict.]
"Belgium's Botched Hunt for ISIS Cell" [Danger everywhere…]
Looking Forward
Look past page one, and the same newspaper adds the following:
- Young people are now renting more, buying fewer homes.
- "More older people carry student loans"
- Research shows that smartphones hurt children's eyes.
- Sales at Barnes and Noble and other bookstores are way down, while liquor sales are up.
- Saudis cut oil production, so fuel prices are expected to rise.
- Macy's, Kohl's, and many other retailers' sales are way down.
The news is endless. It's more than "bad news sells," there's a distinct tone of worry, concern, even fear of what's ahead. "What is coming next?," Americans seem to be asking. The answers are generally cynical and a bit gloomy.
Again, in this environment, the Constitution is gaining "support" in many media outlets. No doubt President Trump will face many big battles with Congress, not just from Democrats but from those in his own party. (See The Wall Street Journal, January 7-8, A13) In fact, Trump probably won't just face an attempt to set the national agenda from Chuck Schumer, but also from Paul Ryan. (Ibid.) Congress seems poised to reassert itself.
That's a good thing. The Founders would have applauded. It's way past time for Congress to do its Constitutional duty and stand up to the President as needed. Sadly, it didn't do this very well during the Obama era—or the Bush era, or the Clinton era. It's great that there is more support for such a resurgence today, even it makes us chuckle at the irony.
The fact is, the Constitution is still the best hope for good government. We should follow it. Congress should follow it. They should follow it with Trump in office, and with anyone and everyone else in the Oval—not just when it's convenient, or popular in the media, but always.
Category : Blog &Citizenship &Constitution &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Foreign Affairs &Generations &Government &History &Independents &Leadership &Liberty &Politics


text:
Photos provided by Ocañas Photography
This past Monday July 18th 2016 at 7 pm to 11 pm Houston Area Photographers converged to Near Northside Studios aka The NeNo for the first ever "Houston Area Photographers" Meet up.
Some of Houston's up and coming and established photographers had a chance to network and shoot some photos together.
Sponcers included Jack Daniel's and Outlaw Dave Show AM 950 KPRC and the Lone Star Beer Party Patrol. Music provided by Pfaff Pfaffenberg. Cake provided by Word of Mouth Event Planning Services. Gift card provided by Humble Camera Center. Hosted by Near Northside Studios aka The NeNo.
Video provided by Ricey Flush

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
June 30, 1983
CONFERENCE OF STATE BANK SUPERVISORS, APPELLANTv.C. TODD CONOVER, COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY OF THE UNITED STATES 1983.CDC.173
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Robinson, Chief Judge; Wilkey, Circuit Judge; and MacKinnon, Senior Circuit Judge.
Opinion for the Court PER CURIAM.
Appellant Conference of State Bank Supervisors (the Conference) sought a declaratory judgment that regulations promulgated by the Comptroller of the Currency (the Comptroller) establishing the terms on which national banks may offer or purchase adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) are invalid to the extent they purport to preempt inconsistent state laws. The district court granted the Comptroller's motion for summary judgment on the ground that the challenged regulations fall within the scope of powers granted by Congress under two different acts. The Conference appeals and we affirm. I.
The essential feature of an adjustable-rate mortgage is that the interest rate may be adjusted periodically to reflect changes in prevailing rates. The Comptroller's regulations at issue here provide that all national banks may offer or purchase ARMs subject to various conditions relating to the permissible amount of each increase in interest, the frequency of increases, the maximum overall interest increase, and other matters. Adjustable-Rate Mortgages, 46 Fed. Reg. 18,932 (1981) (to be codified at 12 C.F.R. pt. 29) (JA 37-39). *fn1 The Comptroller described the regulations as intended to "encourage national bank participation in the residential mortgage market by facilitating the development of new mortgage instruments . . . ." Id. at 18,934, col. 1 (JA 28).
A number of states, however, have established restrictions on ARMs that conflict with the Comptroller's regulations in various respects. Believing that these state restrictions have the effect of discouraging national banks from offering ARMs, the Comptroller determined that his regulations should override inconsistent state law. Id. at 18,942, col. 2 (JA 36). The regulations provide generally that national banks may offer ARMs without regard to any limitations imposed by state law. In addition, the regulations preempt state laws that prohibit the charging of interest on interest and prepayment fees and that impair the enforceability of due-on-sale clauses. *fn2
The Conference is an association composed of state government officials who are responsible for regulating state banks. It brought a prompt declaratory judgment action challenging the Comptroller's authority to preempt inconsistent state laws. Since it was undisputed that the banking laws conflict with the Comptroller's regulations, the only question upon which issue was joined was "whether these regulations are within the scope of the Comptroller's powers granted by Congress." *fn3 Conference of State Bank Supervisors v. Lord, 532 F. Supp 694, 696 (D.D.C. 1982) (JA 58). The court considered the question on cross-motions for summary judgment and the parties' written oppositions thereto.
The court accepted both alternative bases offered by the Comptroller as conferring the requisite rulemaking authority. First, the Comptroller relied on the rule-making power conferred by 12 U.S.C. § 371 (g), which was enacted as part of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-383, 88 Stat. 633 (1974). Section 371 (g) provided:
Loans made pursuant to this section shall be subject to such conditions and limitations as the Comptroller of the Currency may prescribe by rule or regulation. *fn4
Viewing the purpose of the Act as the authorization of wider real estate lending powers for national banks, see H.R. Rep. No. 1114, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 44 (1974), the court reasoned that since ARMs are "real estate" loans within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. § 371(a), and the challenged regulations establish "conditions and limitations" on such loans, the Comptroller was authorized to issue the regulations under section 371(g).
Second, the court held that the Comptroller had an independent statutory basis for issuing the regulations under 12 U.S.C. § 93a, which was enacted as section 708 of the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 , Pub. L. No. 96-221, 94 Stat. 132 (1980). Section 93a provides:
Except to the extent that authority to issue such rules and regulations has been expressly and exclusively granted to another regulatory agency, the Comptroller of the Currency is authorized to prescribe rules and regulations to carry out the responsibilities of the office, except that the authority conferred by this section does not apply to section 36 of this title [ i.e., the McFadden Act, which makes the power of national banks to branch subject to ...
Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.
Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Lots of options in a central location with FREE PARKING!
Whether it is a weekly breakfast meeting for your group or club, a computer training session or a meeting in a convenient downtown San Rafael location, Whistlestop provides a variety of rental choices. Fees range from as little as $30 per hour for (capacity eight) to $125 per hour (capacity 125). A deposit of $200 is due with the Rental Agreement and will be applied to the room fee. Rental fees include room set-up. Please fill out the form on our website to make a reservation request.
Food services professionals are encouraged to explore our full-service kitchen for their operations during off hours. Parking is available across the street in our rented lot; there is also two-hour metered street parking.


text:
Chanwoong Baek '12
Chanwoong Baek '12
Hometown: South Korea
President, Bowdoin International Club
How Did You Choose Your Major at Bowdoin?
Originally I came to Bowdoin majoring in government and legal studies. That's what I did, but I also found out about Education 101 classes in my first year. I loved it so I took more education classes. I was in the interesting position of being in a new learning environment and studying it simultaneously. Because of this, my perspective on education was very open and different. I now am minoring in Education and hopefully will be certified as a teacher by my senior year.
What Do You Want to Do After Bowdoin?
After graduating, I am applying for graduate school and want to continue studying education policy, as a mixture of what I'm majoring and minoring in. I am seeing how the purpose of education can be altered by how we present information. It is not only a problem of individual learning but is influenced by an array of issues from poverty to diversity to culture. Currently, I'm thinking about continuing studying in the U.S.
What Is Your Advice To New International Students?
Don't be afraid to be yourself. A lot of times as an international student we try to act confident enough; we're afraid we might not be accepted. The thing about Bowdoin, they are so open to everything and everyone is so nice. People are interested in who you really are and what you're interested in. Don't try really hard to be like other people. Stick to what you believe in. At the same time, be open for challenges and experiences.


text:
Did you know your mobile phone is at risk from viruses? We don't mean the "Sexy View" kind, but the microscopic, bacterial type...
Purelight wants to flog phone owners a wand-type gadget that will kill bacteria on mobile phones with a "sweep of light".
The Purelight MD is a portable "flip" offering that uses the power of UV-C light to exterminate 99.7% of invisible bugs and bacteria on your mobile.
This light breaks down the microbial DNA, killing the germs and viruses responsible for causing disease without any chemical residue.
"Holding your phone to your mouth is as dangerous as placing your face on a toilet bowl, and yet we do it all day long without a second thought", says PureLight's MD.
Purelight's MD flip is available now for £35 plus VAT from www.purelightUKltd.com.


text:
Rogue FX is a full-service production company staffed by alumni of the award-winning Youth FX. Based in Albany, NY, we create videos tailored to your needs with a special focus on telling stories with heart and soul.
100% of Rogue FX's profits support Youth FX's free programming, which provides hundreds of young people from divers backgrounds access to creative and technical skills in digital film and media production.
Hire Rogue FX to create a video for your business, organization or event!
We make promos, commercials, industrials, and shoot live events of all shapes and sizes for web, TV, social media, Youtube, or just to show around the office. We also work with a budget that works for you.
For more information about Rogue FX please email us at firstname.lastname@example.com
For more information about Rogue FX please email us at firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Employment and Summer Opportunities
New items will be posted here when received, and will be included in the weekly newsletter if received by Friday prior to the event.
Check here often to find out about summer opportunities!
The North Texas Land Scholars youth camp
... awards 2 college scholarships each summer. This outdoor leadership camp is open to students ages 13-17 with the mission to engage high-school students in a fun camp that fosters land stewardship and land entrepreneurship while honing skills in leadership, communication, and resource management. Our vision is to get younger generations interested in making money off the land, while being land stewards, to restore the land, ranch, and wildlife legacy of Texas. This is the inaugural year for this exciting and challenging summer camp to be held at the Cedar Mountain Lodge near Scurry, Texas from July 13th to July 18th. Deadline to apply is May 16th. Read more and download application here.
University of Texas at Dallas - Offering many programs
Computer Science department of the University of Texas at Dallas has touched 1000s of school students' lives through Programming Workshops and Summer Camps in the past 2 years. We are thrilled to invite your students to our campus to participate in programming contests and Summer Camps: Download pdf to see all the options.
University of Texas at Dallas: Summer Robotics programs for students, teachers, and coaches
Check out the various programs offered.
Summer Youth Arts Enrichment Program
Free to DISD Students! June 9 - 29.
Fax: 214-743-2451 Email: email@example.com or mail to: The Black Academy of Arts and Letters | Dallas Convention Center Theater Complex | 650 S. Griffin Street | Dallas, TX 75202 | ATTN: NORA L. WILSON
Download flyer for details. | Download application to apply.
Volunteer opp with Dallas Museum of Art.
Here is a great volunteer opportunity! The DMA Teen Docent program provides opportunities for high school students to initiate and deepen their relationship with the Dallas Museum of Art. Teen docents conduct summer tours for young visitors (ages 5-12) and assist with DMA family programs. Qualified students are invited to train as teen docents and eventually facilitate summer tours and assist with Museum activities.
Teen docents also have the opportunity to assist with DMA Late Nights and various programs for family audiences throughout the year.
We seek teens who are comfortable talking about works of art and engaging young children. You must be at least 14 years old and have completed the 8th grade to be eligible for this opportunity. All teen docents are required to work one full day per week for a minimum of four weeks and up to seven weeks. Shifts are Tuesday-Friday 10:45 a.m.-4:00 p.m., June 16-August 8.
Applicants must be available for training Monday, June 9, and Tuesday, June 10, if selected.
To be considered for a 2014 teen docent opportunity, request an application from Rhiannon Martin email@example.com and return the completed application no later than Monday, May 5, 2014.
Download: Letter | Responsibilities | Application
Lyle School of Engineering 7th - 10th Grade Summer Camp 2014
There are only a few spots left for the 7th through 10th grade Lyle Engineering Summer Camp.
To complete an online application please use this link:
Summer Camp for 7th through 10th Grade Students:
This day program is designed for girls and boys entering 7th through 10th grade in Fall 2014. Students will explore disciplines of engineering offered at the Lyle School of Engineering; electrical, mechanical, civil and environmental engineering through hands-on, interactive projects.
This camp is for students who have an interest in engineering, but not an expertise. By the end of camp, the students will have a solid foundation on which to build on and encourage them to engage more actively in their math and science classes upon their return to school.
Eligibility: Camp is open to all girls and boys who will be entering the 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th grades in Fall 2014.
*Please note that the same material will be presented at both sessions per grade level.
Cost: $150 (includes lunch and snacks)
9th & 10th Graders
Session 1: July 14th-15th (2 day co-ed camp)
Session 2: July 17th-18th (2 day co-ed camp)
7th & 8th Graders
Session 1: July 21st-22nd (2 day co-ed camp)
Session 2: July 24th-25th (2 day co-ed camp)
If you have any questions, please contact Christie Pearson at email@example.com or 214-768-2070.
Student Election Clerk Opportunity
$8/hr - This program is designed to provide students (16 years old min.) with a greater awareness of the electoral process and the rights and responsibilities of voters. The students will assist their local election officials by filling positions at polling places on Election Day and working under the direction of the polling place presiding judge.
Download program information/application here, and criteria checklist here.
Low Cost Engineering Camp!
DeVry SUMMER ENGINEERING CAMP
Download flyer (date wrong on flyer) | Download registration form
Early Bird Registration: $25.00 per person (ends May 15th)
Regular Registration $35.00 per person (due by June 6th)
4800 Regent Blvd. Irving, TX 75063
Send registration form via email to: firstname.lastname@example.com and call (972) 929-9743 for payment by phone.
Physics Camp for Female Rising Sophomores (or Juniors)!
What? 2-week day camp that provides hand-on exposure to physics concepts. Go to http://www.designconnectcreate.org/ for application and to watch a video of last year's camp.
Who? High school young women entering their sophomore or junior year in the fall who will be taking pre-AP Physics or AP Physics I and have completed Pre-AP Algebra II.
- Dallas ISD — June 9 - June 20 at Irma Rangel
- Dallas ISD — June 23 - July 3 at N. Dallas High
- All other ISDs — June 16 - June 27 at UT Dallas
Hurry to apply! Each session is limited to 40 students. Payment of $500 would be due at registration, but DISD students are eligible for FREE tuition! The deadline stated on the website has past, but Ms Gass has extended it for SEM students to still apply. Download flyer...
Contact: Wanda Gass, Executive Director
214-728-6219 email@example.com
Students invited to Saturday auditions for district TV programs
Students who will be juniors and seniors next school year are invited to audition for the casts of Dallas Schools Television programs School Zone Dallas and Aquí en Dallas ISD.
Auditions will be held from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m., this Saturday, Feb. 22, at the Dallas ISD Administration Building, 3700 Ross Avenue.
For more information, call 972-925-3103 or go to www.dallasisd.org/Page/2127
Financial aid workshop set for Saturday
Information for Juniors and Seniors
Please remind families that need help completing federal or state student aid applications to attend a free workshop this Saturday at Moises Molina High School from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.
The workshops are offered in English and Spanish and are free and open to the public. Trained volunteers will be on site to help answer questions and fill out financial aid forms.
Summer JOBS for our YOUTH
Goal is to enroll 800 youth
- Attend Orientation Saturday, February 22, 2014 @ 8:45 A.M.
WORKFORCE SOLUTION Southwest Center - 7330 S. Westmoreland Rd., Suite 200 Dallas, TX 75237
- Ages 16 -21 years old
- Those between the ages of 16 -18 (minors) accompany by a legal guardian or parent.
- Summer Jobs ( six weeks) @ $7.25 per hour (you have to attend orientation to qualify & participate in this program)
Northeastern University Summer Program
Dear Counselor:
Last year, Northeastern University experienced great success with its Summer Programs for High School Students. This year, we are confident that the program will be our best yet. As we look forward to Summer Programs 2014, we encourage you to tell your talented students and their parents about this opportunity.
Summer Programs at Northeastern are designed to prepare rising high school sophomores, juniors, and seniors for the academic, social, and campus experiences of college. Building upon Northeastern's world-renowned reputation for experiential learning, our credit and non-credit programs bring together classroom learning and real-world experiences.
What makes our Summer Programs at Northeastern so unique? Students can:
- Test an area of study: Prepare for college and beyond by exploring classes in environmental studies, entrepreneurship, robotics, and more.
- Put ideas into action: Whether you're programming an app or developing a business plan, you'll watch your ideas come to life.
- Explore Boston: Our 73-acre campus is set in America's best college town, Boston. Visit Fenway Park, the North End, Newbury Street, and all that summer in Boston has to offer.
Learn more by attending our January 14, 2014 webinar or contacting Lucy Fitzpatrick, enrollment coach for our Summer Programs at 877.668.7727.
Application Deadline: May 16, 2014
Program Starts: June 29, 2014
The Summer Programs Admissions Team
Northeastern University
7th Annual Mayor's Intern Fellows Program is an 8 week (Jun 18- Aug 8)PAID summer internship program that introduces students to careers and employment opportunities at some of the finest companies in the city. Open to rising 2014-15 Juniors and Seniors who are eligible to work in the US, are 16 years old by June 16, 2014, GPA of 85%, solid attendance record, an able to attend one day training session. See attached letter to our principal for more details. Contact: Adam Powell, 214-306-6706
Application Deadline: January 31, 2014
Program Starts: June 18, 2014 (but there are required pre-trainings see full schedule here.) Next Business 101 Training Session: January 11 – Townview Magnet Center (9am-3:30pm)
Upcoming Events
What can you do online?


text:
Home Page
Horsehair jewellery and painting galleries/ SHOP
Horsehair ring and earring designs SHOP
Horsehair bracelet designs SHOP
Horsehair necklace designs SHOP
Horsehair brooch/stockpin and pendant designs SHOP
Custom made pendants from your OWN photos SHOP
Hoof pendants SHOP
Resin pendants, bracelets,rings and earrings SHOP
Key rings in sterling silver and 9ct gold. SHOP
Designs for Men SHOP
Designs with horse teeth SHOP
EXCITING new horse HOOF designs!
Custom horse household items
Custom Non horsehair jewellery SHOP
Gemstone carved custom horse pendants SHOP
Horsehair jewellery braid styles SHOP
Horsehair jewellery end caps available/prices SHOP
Horsehair jewellery clasps available/prices SHOP
Horsehair jewellery charms/beads/bails/chains SHOP
Stones for rings, pendants, stock pins,bails SHOP
Custom Orca pendants
Horsehair jewellery-ordering info
Horsehair jewellery-general information
Customer comments
Customer satisfaction
Some notes on copper
Gift vouchers
Prices for commissioned paintings
Sterling silver 'Tilikum' pendant £65
enlarge image
Sterling silver handcrafted 'Tilikum ' pendant.
Approx 35mm and 12 grammes of silver.
You can choose a different message if you wish.
20% of profits goes to the orca charities for their invaluable work towards ending the torment of orcas and dolphins kept in captivity for human amusement.
Quote Orca originals : "Tilikum - a captive orca, whose sad life has been documented in the BAFTA nominated film 'Blackfish'. He was involved in the deaths of three individuals, including a highly experienced trainer. Blackfish is a groundbreaking, informative and heartbreaking film that clearly reveals the devastating consequences of keeping such intelligent and sentient creatures in captivity."
More info on Orca originals site:
Price: Ł65.00
Also available as a totally custom design with your own choice of orca and message.
Price: Ł85.00
Also available in 9ct yellow or rose gold
Price: Ł330.00


text:
Learn more about the history and traditions behind Chinese New Year, a celebration of good fortune at the end of winter celebrated by Chinese people around the world. How do you celebrate the new year?
For lesson plans, additional resources, and more teacher support, download our free iBook from the iTunes store All About the Holidays.
You must be logged in to use this featureLog In Enter Code Need an account?


text: Package: live-boot Severity: normal I tried a few more things with unionfs-fuse. First I tried break=init or init=bin/sh. At both points the system still appears functional but initscripts fail after that. I also found that if I type touch test exec /sbin/init at the prompt of the "init" shell the system boots but it does not if I script this from break=bottom or type only exec /sbin/init. This looks like a race somewhere. When the initscripts fail complaining about readonly filesystem I can still log in after some minuts if my root account is enabled in the image. fuse is still running and the union is actually writable but some files visible in /live/cow are not in / and the other way around. Looks like unionfs-fuse cannot take the beating from parallel initscripts, it's just too flaky. Not much debian-live can do about this. -- System Information: Debian Release: 6.0 APT prefers stable APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (500, 'testing'), (400, 'unstable'), (395, 'experimental'), (300, 'stable-i386'), (300, 'oldstable'), (280, 'testing-i386'), (270, 'unstable-i386'), (150, 'experimental-i386'), (65, 'oldstable-i386') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.36-r600fence-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash


text:
We are a provider of individual IT-Solutions for Business Intelligence and Data Warehousing. We support our Customers in the conception, as well as in the execution of projects. Over two decades of experience and 250 man-years of working together with specialized departments, top management and business leaders in numerous industries have made us to what we are today: the bridge between IT and specialized departments.
Our tailor-made solutions optimize your processes, reduce costs, increase transparency, and increase your efficiency. We help you to make your Business even more successful.


text:
Petry enjoyed playing at Bell Centre, the Canadiens' playoff run and his role on the team so much he wanted to return. On Tuesday the defenceman agreed to terms on a US$33-million, six-year contract to stick around for a long time.
General manager Marc Bergevin said Petry "showed a tremendous will to commit to the Canadiens and stay in Montreal." The 27-year-old undoubtedly took less money than he could have gotten in free agency.
"Once I started negotiating with the Canadiens, my wife and I made a decision we really strongly wanted to come back," Petry said on a conference call from West Bloomfield, Mich. "Everything from the day I got there to the playoff run, the environment at the Bell Centre, the players in the locker-room, the organization just being first-class — that all played into it and played a big part in ultimately signing the deal."
Petry will count $5.5 million against the salary cap through 2020-21. It's the same annual value as the Winnipeg Jets' Tyler Myers, Tampa Bay Lightning's Matt Carle, Arizona Coyotes' Oliver Ekman-Larsson and New York Rangers' Dan Girardi.
During his time with the Edmonton Oilers, Petry's game showed some flaws. But as a right-handed-shooting, puck-moving defenceman he could have likely earned upwards of $6 million on July 1.
Instead, Petry proved so valuable to the Habs that he became one of Bergevin's top off-season priorities. After three goals and four assists in 19 regular-season games, he had two goals and an assist in the playoffs and was excellent in his 22 minutes a game.
"He is a solid defenceman with speed and size who acquired valuable playoff experience this year," Bergevin said in a statement. "Jeff is a very good fit within our group of defencemen, and his presence gives us a lot of depth at this position."
Petry said he fit in so well in Montreal because of the style of play and what the organization and coaching staff expects from players.
"It's a quick puck-moving team with a quick transition," Petry said. "That's something I pride my game on is being a good first passer."
Petry said goaltender Carey Price and P.K. Subban expressing their interest in him re-signing "weighed a lot on the decision." Another thing was his belief that the Habs could be Stanley Cup contenders sooner rather than later.
"That was a big factor in the decision was looking at where we went this year and where the ultimate goal is and how close we are to reaching that," Petry said. "I felt that this organization, the team isn't far off."
The Habs traded a second-round pick and one that turned into a fourth-rounder for Petry at the deadline.
Follow @SWhyno on Twitter


text:
FOR SALE – 425 S Country Club Rd, Lake Mary FL – Listed for $749,000
LARGE 4 BEDROOM POOL HOME ON 3+ ACRES IN LAKE MARY!! Unusually large residential lot in the heart of Lake Mary just minutes to I-4 and 417. This Dutch Colonial Revival features a downstairs master & bath featuring, GRANITE counter tops, eat-in kitchen, STAINLESS STEEL appliances, two upstairs en-suite bathrooms, downstairs utility room, Florida room, formal dining & living, screened in over-sized swimming pool, separate 'mother-in-law' suite, boat/RV parking and a lot more!!!
SOLD!!! – 2656 Shinoak Dr, Orlando FL – Sold for $339,000
LARGE 5 BEDROOM 3 BATHROOM on one of THE LARGEST LOTS (1/3+ acre) in HUNTERS CREEK. BRAND NEW ROOF & BRAND NEW PLUMBING (2016) with transferable warranties. Sitting LAKE FRONT you'll have fantastic views across the long backyard with plenty of room for a pool.
SOLD!!! – 128 W Esther St #A, Orlando FL – Sold for $225,000
Large Three Bedroom Two & Half Bathroom END UNIT Townhouse in immaculate condition. One bedroom and the first floor with TWO MASTER BEDROOMS on the third floor. The second floor living space features a FORMAL DINING ROOM, Kitchen/Living room combination & TWO BALCONIES. The property also features a OVER-SIZED GARAGE & 2012 TRANE AC system.
SOLD!!! – 675 Tuscora Dr, Winter Springs FL – Sold for $345,000
OVER A HALF ACRE corner lot 4 BEDROOM 2+1/2 BATH home with EXCELLENT SEMINOLE COUNTY SCHOOLS & NO HOA!! Large wooded lot with Pebble Tech POOL and two built in water falls in FENCED IN BACKYARD. Downstairs features a formal dining and living area, indoor laundry room, 1/2 bath & kitchen/family room combination leading to large screened in patio.
SOLD!!! – 153 Walnut Crest Run, Sanford FL – Sold for $195,000
Simple 3 BEDROOM / 2 FULL BATH home located conveniently at THE PRESERVE AT LAKE MONROE. Featuring an open concept LIVING/KITCHEN/DINING space w/split floor plan, indoor laundry room and LARGE FENCED in backyard!
SOLD!!! – 3209 Waterbridge Ct, Kissimmee – Sold for $319,000
LARGE 5 BEDROOM HOME with almost 3,900 SQ FT and a MASSIVE BONUS ROOM just south of LAKE NONA w/ PROPERTY INSPECTION REPORT AVAILABLE. 4 bedrooms upstairs and a guest suite/half bath downstairs, this home features BRAND NEW FLOORS in living room/den, and an OPEN FLOOR PLAN w/ separate formal dining, kitchen & living room combination.
SOLD!!!– 1544 Regent Ct, Mt Dora FL – Sold for $185,000
LARGE OVER-SIZED LOT with backyard backing up to a LARGE POND with PRIVACY FENCE around the front an sides of the yard. SPLIT FLOOR PLAN 3 BED/2BATH with extra DEN that can be converted to a 4th bedroom. Updated kitchen with large island shares on informal dining and living area. Master bedroom features a large walk in closet. Home includes video monitoring and security system.
SOLD!!! – 128 W Fiesta Loop, Deland, FL – Sold for $169,000
Almost Brand New 3 bedroom 2 bath BUILT IN 2014. Featuring a large GREAT ROOM / KITCHEN / BREAKFAST NOOK combination, Indoor Utility Room, ceramic tile flooring, 42″ Kitchen cabinets and Large 10×24 Screened in porch. DOUBLE PANE thermal rated windows and ceiling fans throughout. Master bathroom features Garden Tub and separate shower. Backyard is private with no rear neighbors.
SOLD!!! – 100 S Eola Dr #1511, Orlando – Sold for $640,000
This 15th floor 2,100 square foot condo has had over $100k in renovations in 2015. With two master suites, two full and one half bathroom, two private balconies & a large open great room and kitchen all recently decorated by award MPC Designs.The kitchen features a quartz counter top, 2 Bosch Dishwashers, Bosch oven & induction cook top, and a Liebherr refrigerator with 3 storage zones, a large country sink w/touch faucet, wood cabinets recently treated with epoxy paint and two walk-in pantries.
SOLD!!! – 530 E Central Blvd #201, Orlando FL – Sold for $234,000
COMPLETELY REMODELED 1/1 FULLY FURNISHED (optional) directly across from LAKE EOLA in the heart of DOWNTOWN ORLANDO. This large unit features NATURAL OAK HARDWOOD FLOORS in the living room and BRAND NEW CARPET in the bedroom. Custom kitchen has been completely redone to feature MAPLE CABINETS, multiple Lazy-Susan's for extra storage, under mount double bowl stainless steel sink, STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCES, new Pass-Through Bar, GRANITE COUNTER-TOPS w/ full bull-nose edging & matching back-splash. MOVE-IN READY with everything you need in place!


text:
Register to comment or to subscribe to the SIGNpost listserve
The Safe Injection Global Network SIGN is a voluntary coalition of stakeholders aiming to achieve safe and appropriate use of injections throughout the world. The SIGN Internet Forum was established at the initiative of the SIGN secretariat at the World Health Organization's Essential Health Technologies (EHT) department which provides the secretariat for the network.
For more information, please read the terms of reference of the network at http://www.who.int/injection_safety/sign/en/
A safe injection does not harm the recipient, does not expose the provider to any avoidable risks and does not result in waste that is dangerous for the community
Unsafe injection practices are increasingly recognized as a major source of infection with bloodborne pathogens.
While it is the responsibility of all health care workers, their employers, the public, and national governments to ensure safe and appropriate use of injections, the prevention of bloodborne pathogen transmission and other adverse events associated with injections will require improved collaboration between organizations and individuals sharing a common interest in attaining this goal.
The comments made in SIGNpost or on this website are the sole responsibility of the writers and does not in any way mean that they are endorsed by any of the organizations and agencies to which the authors may belong.
Use of trade names and commercial sources is for identification only and does not imply endorsement.
Selected news items are posted or linked under the fair use doctrine of international copyright law:http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
13907 Avenida La Vista Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240
Hi, Nicole Grey.
My name is
and I have a question about 13907 Avenida La Vista Desert Hot Springs
You can respond by either emailing me at
or call during
My Question Is:
Estimated Monthly Payment$5,051
- Photos
- Location
- Questions
- Share
- Mortgage Calculator
- Status: Active with contingency
Listing courtesy of CT Properties, Inc.
Mid-Century Modern Architecture with all the innovations and energy efficiency of a brand new home. Spacious floorplans designed to take advantage of indoor outdoor living include: 9'-12' ceilings with clerestory windows, large 9,000+ lots, city/mountain views, 3 bedrooms, 3 full bathrooms, gourmet kitchen with stainless steel appliances, bright and airy baths, inside laundry room with utility sink.. Desert friendly front yard landscaping, fully fenced rear yard and private courtyard. A MUST SEE! HOME IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION , BUYER SELECTS FLOORING AND COUNTERTOPS, MOVE IN AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2018, Directions Drive north on Palm Drive to Hacienda Avenue. East on Hacienda Avenue to McCarger Road. South on McCarger to Panorama Drive, West to Valley View Ct Model home is on the corner of Panorama and Valley View Ct
Interior Features Include:
Open Floor Plan, High Ceilings (9 Feet+)
Fireplace Description None
Rooms Great Room, Master Bedroom, Walk-In Closet
Window Cov: Double Pane Windows
Source Forced Air
Floor Type: Carpet, Vinyl
Exterior Features Include:
Fence Wrought Iron, Block
Acreage: 0.2100 Acres
Description Sprinklers In Front, Yard, Paved, Sprinklers Drip System, Front Yard
View Mountain
Square Feet 9148
Garage/Parking: Driveway - Concrete, Garage - Two Door
Parking Driveway - Concrete, Garage - Two Door
Garage Capacity: 2
Other Features Include:
Subdivision: Vista Palms (1864)
Sewer: Sewer Paid
Pool: None
The information being provided by CARETS (CLAW, CRMLS, DAMLS, CRMLS, i-Tech MLS, and/or VCRDS) is for the visitor's personal, non-commercial use and may not be used for any purpose other than to identify prospective properties visitor may be interested in purchasing.
Any information relating to a property referenced on this web site comes from the Internet Data Exchange (IDX) program of CARETS. This web site may reference real estate listing(s) held by a brokerage firm other than the broker and/or agent who owns this web site.
The accuracy of all information, regardless of source, including but not limited to square footages and lot sizes, is deemed reliable but not guaranteed and should be personally verified through personal inspection by and/or with the appropriate professionals. The data contained herein is copyrighted by CARETS, CLAW, CRISNet MLS, DAMLS, CRMLS, i-Tech MLS and/or VCRDS and is protected by all applicable copyright laws. Any dissemination of this information is in violation of copyright laws and is strictly prohibited.
CARETS, California Real Estate Technology Services, is a consolidated MLS property listing data feed comprised of CLAW (Combined LA/Westside MLS), CRISNet MLS (Southland Regional AOR), DAMLS (Desert Area MLS), CRMLS (California Regional MLS), i-Tech MLS (Glendale AOR/Pasadena Foothills AOR) and VCRDS (Ventura County Regional Data Share).
"Some Information may be provided by CRMLS, all rights reserved. Content is for the user's personal, non-commercial use and may not be used for any other purpose. Content is deemed accurate but not guaranteed."


text:
Abdul Artan: 5 Things To Know About Somali Refugee Accused Of Brutal Ohio State Attack
We finally know more about the suspect in the Ohio State attack on November 28. Abdul Artan, 18, who was an OSU student, is allegedly responsible for injuring 10 victims; he was fatally shot by police during the encounter. Learn more about it after the jump.
1. He was fatally shot in the incident
Abdul Artan, 18, was named by law enforcement officials as the deceased suspect in the emergency at Ohio State University on November 28. He was fatally shot by police, according to an official statement about the incident from the university.
2. He allegedly injured 10 victims at OSU
Abdul was allegedly responsible for injuring 10 victims on campus — including one critically — by stabbing, "injury by motor vehicle," and other unnamed injuries. The incident reportedly began when the suspect allegedly drove his car into a group of people who evacuated a campus building after a caller reported a gas leak.
The victims, initially reported as "at least seven" were transported to local hospitals, including OSU's medical center. One victim was being treated at the scene, according to Columbus Fire Department officials. Their identities haven't been released at this time.
3. He was a Somali refugee
Abdul was a Somali refugee who left the country with his family in 2007. They lived in Pakistan and then came to the United States in 2014. He was a legal permanent resident of the United States.
4. He allegedly attacked people with a butcher knife
While the emergency was initially reported to the OSU community and public as an active shooting, it was revealed that Abdul allegedly stabbed and cut their victims. He was allegedly wielding a butcher knife to harm the victims, according to OSU police chief Craig Stone. OSU student Jacob Bower, 20, told CNN that he saw a man who "pulled a large knife and started chasing people around, trying to attack them,"in the same area of campus the university named in its emergency alert.
He also
5. Abdul was allegedly silent the entire attack
Jamie told CNN that the suspect allegedly remained silent throughout the entire attack, never once yelling or speaking to anyone. "He was completely silent. Which was very creepy. Not even when he was shot."
HollywoodLifers, our thoughts are with the OSU community during this difficult time. Send them your support in the comments.


text:
I said this 2 months ago and I'll say it again
Still haven't seen anything online to help the locals with IHRA membership switch over to NHRA. Nothing on Castrol, nothing on nhraracer, nothing on nhradiv6.
I suppose a phone call to NHRA may get some answers if I can connect to the proper person.


text:
Marin latest to crack down on water wasters
Marin County officials have become the latest to threaten fines for water hogs since the state began asking communities to take a tougher stand on conservation.
The Marin Municipal Water District board voted this week to beef up water restrictions for the 186,000 people it serves, including putting a ban on all outdoor watering between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. The district warned customers that it reserves the power to issue $250 citations to violators.
"For us, it's a last resort," said district spokeswoman Libby Pischel. "We wanted people to know that we have the option to do it. (But) really we're focusing on education and helping people comply."
In July, the State Water Resources Control Board passed a series of emergency regulations in light of California's prolonged drought, including statewide bans on using drinkable water to hose off sidewalks and driveways, watering lawns or gardens to the point of causing runoff, washing cars without a shutoff nozzle and using potable water in noncirculating fountains.
The rules were left to local water districts to enforce. The Marin County water board officially adopted the state's regulations Tuesday along with its new daytime irrigation ban.
The district joins the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission in saying it will use fines to push the water restrictions. In San Francisco, repeat violators face fines starting at $100 and increasing to $500.
The Bay Area's other large water retailers, including the East Bay Municipal Utility District and most South Bay water agencies, are enforcing state rules but not planning to issue citations.
A handful of smaller communities, like Pleasanton, have even stricter rules in place, with tough financial penalties for water wasters.
Marin water reserves stand at 92 percent of average, officials said, a decent level attributed to late winter rain, strong conservation efforts by residents and imported water from the Russian River.
Kurtis Alexander is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: email@example.com Twitter: @kurtisalexander


text:
It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by inverslyproportional
Also , Texas, you are funny to me, I have never heard of "paddlin papers" before. My son had gotten into trouble his last week in indiana, his last day he suspended for starting a fight, and then replied to the principal "I dont care".
So his mother and I had to go and pick him up. So when we were refistering him for school, we signed the papers, and checked the yes you may paddle my son box. To which he replied, bless his little heart, " why would you check yes!!??".
Lol, so I told him the truth of it, "well if you were controlling yourself correctly, this woukdnt be necessary now woukd it?".
He has had a week of perfect school behavior so far, I guess the yes box has had the desired effect.
TEXAS, why didnt I come to you sooner?
Originally posted by ElOmen
Welcome to Texas!
now please find nearest Whataburger and find out what you have been missing this whole time.