text:
Natal Arcadia Birch 5pc 22" Shell Pack, Purple Sparkle
Natal Arcadia Birch 5pc 22" Shell Pack, Purple SparkleDetails
The new Natal Arcadia 5pc 22'' shell pack fuses all the necessities for drummers to perfect their skills, along with some premium features from kits higher up the range. The birch shell produces a deep low sound, whilst retaining a bright and clear tone. You get the definitive sound of birch's presence, with a clarity that's easy to manipulate into a specific style. The kit features two rack toms, a floor tom, snare and bass drum. Its robust build makes it perfect for gigging drummers who need a reliable kit at an affordable price.
Product Ref: 96067View Full Description
Buy on finance from £10.40 per month Finance from £10.40 per month
Please note: This is only available where all items in the order are dispatched in a single delivery.
To make it as easy as possible for you to get the gear you want, we offer a range of instant finance options. If you spend £50 or more online, you can choose to pay over 48, 36, 24 or 12 months. The majority of decisions are given instantly, so you could get your new gear sooner than you thought!
Representative Example
To help you understand how our finance options work, the examples below are based on a total order value of £50:
|Deposit to Pay
|Total Payable
|48 months
|No Deposit
|48 months: £1.41Final Payment: £1.41No settlement fee
|36 months
|No Deposit
|36 months: £1.78Final Payment: £1.78No settlement fee
|24 months
|No Deposit
|24 months: £2.57Final Payment: £2.57No settlement fee
|12 months
|No Deposit
|12 months: £4.69Final Payment: £4.69No settlement fee
How to Apply
Applying for finance couldn't be easier - if your order totals £50 or more, simply proceed through the checkout as normal, then select Pay by Klarna Finance on the payment page, then click the orange PLACE ORDER USING FINANCE button. This will start your application with Klarna Retail Finance, our finance partner, and completing this form should take approximately 10 minutes.
You should get an instant answer on whether your application has been successful, though in some rare cases Klarna may need to look at the application in more detail.
Please note: This is only available on orders placed via the website consisting of a single delivery, and is not available in store or via phone currently.
Full DescriptionView Full Description
The Working Drummer's Kit
Natal knows that constant gigs and trips can take their toll on your equipment, so the Arcadia shell pack is a workhorse of solid, reliable tone. Modelled around Natal's Original line, the Arcadia has short-stack toms and a contemporary build. The road wearing Purple Sparkle finish gives a protective and attractive coating, so you know your kit will be safe in transit and on stage.
Excelling Sound
Despite its affordable price, many of the Arcadia features are shared with the higher spec Original line. The Arcadia benefits from the signature Natal Sun Lug design, and produces a well-focused, precise tone ideal for gigging. The mid scooped quality is a necessity for solid, punchy recordings in a home studio environment. The birch's bright tone makes the Arcadia easy for microphones to capture, whilst maintaining the depth that many drummers find critical to a kit's sound. The low mass lugs and triple flanged hoops increase sustain for a beat that not only projects on contact, but has a levelled decay on the open sound.
- Bass Drum: 22'' x 16''
- Rack Tom 1: 10'' x 7''
- Rack Tom 2: 12'' x 8''
- Floor Tom: 16'' x 16''
- Snare Drum: 14'' x 6.5''
- Finish: Purple Sparkle
The product price includes 4 years' warranty and 60 day money back guarantee.
However, the Gear4music extended warranty scheme provides an enhanced service, and is designed to offer a higher level of protection than many 'free' warranties offered by some retailers and manufacturers.
The highlights of this enhanced warranty service are:
- Warranty is extended to 4 years from the date of delivery.
- Our Money Back guarantee is extended from 30 days to 60 days (terms apply after 30 days)
- Collection and delivery costs are included for the first 2 years
- Claim 50% cash back on the cost of the policy after 4 years if it has not been used!
- Warranty is transferable if the item is re-sold
- Loan or replacement equipment will be provided if the product isn't repaired within 30 days
- If an item can not be repaired, a similar alternative product or cash discount (as defined in this policy) will be offered
- The policy can be cancelled within 30 days, and at any time after that for a pro-rata discount
Please note that this extended warranty is currently only available on products sold within the EU or EEA, and is subject to the terms and conditions as detailed on the extended warranty certificate provided.
For customers in outlying areas of the country, the price of the Extended Warranty may be marginally higher, due to the potential for higher collection and redelivery transport costs.
This enhanced warranty is in addition to the standard Gear4music and manufacturer warranty policies, and the Gear4music terms and conditions of trade. No statement or condition of sale contained within these terms affects or restricts your statutory rights as defined under the Consumer Contracts Regulation 2014.
Once the product is delivered, you have 60 days to decide that you definitely want to keep it. If you decide it is not suitable for any reason, you can return it back to us for replacement or full refund, including standard delivery charges.
All Products are new unless stated, and include a minimum of 2 years warranty.
Some items are only eligible for money back guarantee if they are returned to us unused and sealed in the original packaging, and in the case of software, unregistered. These items include:
- Software
- CDs & DVDs
- In-ear Monitors
- Earplugs and Ear Protection
- Mouthpieces, Reeds etc… for Woodwind and Brass instruments
- Mouth / Lip Care Products
We are unable to accept returns of any custom made items designed to work together as a unique package, such as computer system built to a customer's personal specifications. Exceptions may only be possible with prior agreement of the vendor, and may be subject to a cancellation fee.
If you also purchase items that do not qualify for free delivery, some delivery charges may be applied to your order which will be shown in your shopping basket.


text:
Thats an awesome comic! Who voted 'do us a favor and stop making them'?
Woozah wrote:Tainee wrote:I like Timmy - but is that a dimple on his forehead??
I'm afraid I don't get the joke in your comic?
(btw wired -> weird - if you mean odd/strange).
He probably meant Miji gave the account to Donald
judgement14 wrote:no im pretty sure thats his third eye on his forehead
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Friends of Secret Woods Nature Center organization was created and incorporated in July of 1984. The earliest record of its non-profit organizational status (501c3) is dated March 2001. The Friends have taken an active role in educational programming and support of the nature center.
During fiscal year 2009, volunteers performed 901 hours during special events, educational programs, animal care, responding to customers, and ecoaction workdays.
Volunteers create and conduct many of our programs and special events throughout the year. This past year, they offered the watercolor workshops, nature photography workshops, ethnobotany walks, crafting classes, critter encouters, and school and camp group educational programs. These special events occured because the volunteers were on hand to assist: Snowflake Fun for Everyone, Native Plant Sale, Insectigations, Bountiful Butterflies, Recycling Rodeo, EcoArts Craft Fair, and Along Came a Spider. The goals from the bylaws of the Friends of Secet Woods are:
ARTICLE III: MEMBERSHIP Section 1. Qualifications for MembershipAny person is welcome who wishes to support the goals of Secret Woods. All volunteers must complete a Broward County Volunteer application and be approved by Broward County. A current member is defined as one who volunteers a minimum of 1.0 hour every 365 days. Section 2. DuesThere are no dues. Volunteer information contacts:Secret Woods contact: 954-357-8884 ext. 3 or e-mail. Friends of Secret Woods e-mail contact.


text:
katdcable on Family Tree Circles
sort: Date Alphabetical
view: full | list
view: full | list
Journals and Posts
looking for information on gearldean leach of vinton county ohio parents leo and edith leach
I am searching for information on my biological grandmother. Her name is/was Gearldean Marie Leach. She was born June 18 1913 in Hamden, Ohio. Her parents were Leo and Edith Leach. In October of 1934 she married a man by the name of Chester Napper. I can't find any trace of her after that.
- Displaying 1-1 of 1 Journals
- 1
- of1


text:
Meet thousands of Stoney Fork singles through one of the best Stoney Fork online dating sites. Matchmaker.com has great instant messenger and live video Stoney Fork chat service for our members. Stoney Fork dating has never been easier with our show interest feature that will allow you to break the ice with attractive local singles.
Matchmaker.com has some great services for Stoney Fork singles looking for a longer term relationship. Besides our great Stoney Fork chat product with live video matchmaker users can send email messages to people in the area. The Stoney Fork dating scene can be hard to find the right person at times; however, we are here to help and our Stoney Fork online dating service is free to register.
Stoney ForkJoin Now Free!
Stoney Fork Girls | Stoney Fork Men | Stoney Fork Gay | Stoney Fork Lesbians
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
More Stoney Fork Links:
Stoney Fork Personals | Stoney Fork Speed Dating | Stoney Fork Chat | Stoney Fork Singles | Stoney Fork Love
Senior Dating | Catholic Dating | Christian Dating | Muslim Dating
Black Singles | Asian Singles | Latin Dating
Try our Stoney Fork dating service today. Matchmaker.com is one of the oldest Stoney Fork online dating services on the Internet and has brought thousands of couples together from the area. Test drive our Stoney Fork Chat room with one of the best online communities for the Stoney Fork single person. Also, keep in mind that we have a huge member base of Stoney Fork singles and that we also cater to members of the many backgrounds.
Still not convinced that matchmaker is the free Stoney Fork dating service for you? Once you've filled out the quick registration process you will be to see full size photos and profiles of thousands of Stoney Fork singles. Did you know that free Stoney Fork dating is a few clicks away? Find love and romance in Stoney Fork at matchmaker today!


text:
So things are slowly coming back together on the AES front again, so I thought I'd do an update. No point dredging up my old thread as it's all gone.
In 2012 I decided to sell off the remainder of my collection, and all of this went, a large chunk to members on here -
Last year I made the foolish mistake of letting the last couple of items I'd held on to go, and had instant regret. That's when the rebuild started. So I have a bunch of doubles as I've bought a few bundles, but this is where I'm standing as my own collection right now -
I also have myself a nice minty AES system again as well as a CMVS. I had talked myself in to going full MVS a while back, but the fact is that a whole part of the experience of playing the games is just doing so through the home system. It's definitely a nostalgia thing, but at least it's never rose tinted glasses with the Neo, the games are timeless.


text:
- News
- Business
- Sports
- Entertainment
- Lifestyle
- Health
- Travel
- Technology
Among Republicans, the word of the day is "soul-searching." As in: "Republicans do some soul-searching after Romney loss." "Obama win forces Republican soul-searching." "Republican Party has some serious soul-searching to do." Well, perhaps they do at that.
But let's not overstate matters. The Republicans very nearly won this thing. Had about 300,000 votes gone the other way in four states — Florida, Ohio, Virginia and New Hampshire — Mitt Romney would be the president-elect today. The GOP kept control of the House, gave up but two Senate seats, and added at least one state governor. It's a loss, not a rout.
All the same this was a winnable election, in a sluggish economy against a flawed incumbent. And they have only themselves to blame. Barack Obama didn't win this election: the GOP lost it. The president did not run on his record, or his platform, but simply contrasted his party's values with those of the Republicans, the better to remind his supporters of who was on their side, and which side they were on. It proved to be the right strategy — but it could not have worked without a major assist from the Republicans.
Simply put, you are unlikely to win an election in today's United States if you are giving away 75 per cent of the Latino vote, nearly all of the black vote, and substantial margins among women and young people. Neither are you likely to appeal to the moderate and independent voters you need if you have spent much of the previous two years showcasing the shrillest and most intemperate voices in your party.
These are not matters of ideology so much as identity, on the one hand, and temperament on the other. Large numbers of voters outside the GOP's overwhelmingly white and male base simply could not imagine themselves voting for the party — not so much because of what it stands for as what it is: namely, Not Them. Many other voters might be inclined to vote Republican, were it not so evidently in the grip of a bunch of yahoos.
Obama's victory, then, was not accidental. It required a Herculean effort on the part of the Republicans. That the GOP came within a couple of percentage points of winning even then suggests it should not be too hard to avoid such defeats in future. All that is required is to a) reach out to voters it has gone to such great lengths to alienate until now, and b) stop behaving like yahoos.
I repeat, the adjustment needed is less ideological than attitudinal. For all the emphasis on the deep divide between the parties, there is little evidence that this election turned on questions of policy. Americans seem perfectly prepared to vote for Republican ideas, provided they are presented by a reasonable and thoughtful person. They elected Bill Clinton twice, after all.
No doubt Romney had his limitations as a candidate: the stiffness, the Thurston Howellisms, the serial flip-flops. And no doubt the Obama campaign's summer of hate — millions of dollars in harshly negative and unusually personal attack ads — reinforced those weaknesses. But the candidate was already deeply wounded by his own party, forced to soldier on through the long months of the primaries while it dallied with a succession of cranks, extremists and generally unsuitable alternatives.
Romney, for his part, did his cause no good by pandering to the base so overtly. But he shouldn't have had to. The "Moderate Mitt" who emerged after the first televised debate in fact remained distinctly right of centre by anyone's standards, championing not only Medicare reform, but a radical overhaul of the tax code. So those Republicans who are grousing that Romney lost because he was not conservative enough are as mistaken as those who will undoubtedly counsel the party to follow a more "pragmatic" (i.e. content-free) course.
Promoted beforehand as presenting a fundamental choice about the role of government, the election did not turn out as advertised. Obama's cautious liberalism hardly makes him the standard-bearer of big government, whatever some in his party might wish. As for Romney, his message was in constant danger of being drowned out by ill-judged outbursts from members of his party. What cost him the election was less his own cautious conservatism than his party's yahooism.
It's one thing to oppose raising tax rates: many economists do. It's another to oppose any measure that happens to raise more revenues, even by closing the most egregious tax loopholes. It's one thing to be pro-life: many women are. It's quite another for middle-aged men to be musing publicly about the necessity or otherwise of abortions in cases of "legitimate rape."
But it won't be enough for the grown-ups in the party to take charge. The Republicans must accommodate themselves to the changing face of America — not only in its demographic makeup, as in the rapid growth of the Latino population, but in social attitudes. Perhaps the most significant results Tuesday night were the ballot initiatives in several states approving gay marriage and marijuana liberalization. Increasingly, it appears, even conservative Americans are inclined to live and let live. Republicans will have to adapt their conservatism to this new diversity, embracing what a commentator online called "cosmopolitan conservatism."
Whoever was elected Tuesday, and whoever is elected in future, they will confront the same basic dilemma: how to pay for the costs of an aging population, with whatever combination of entitlement reform and increased revenues. Those debates will be hard-fought, if over relatively narrow ground. For Republicans to win those battles, they will have to take the sneer out of their voice. They will have to stop equating principle with extremism, compromise with capitulation, sensible conservatism with know-nothing yahooism.


text:
Help Desk
Work Orders
A-Z Index
Academic Calendar
Event Calendar
ECU News Services
About Us
ECU Now Blog
Students brighten treatment time for young patients
By Doug Boyd
ECU News Services
GREENVILLE, N.C. (Feb. 15, 2012) — Doctor visits aren't always fun for young patients with cancer and blood diseases, but those at East Carolina University have something to help them smile thanks to the work and generosity of an academic honor society.
Students of the ECU chapter of Phi Eta Sigma, the national freshman honor society, donated their time and talent last fall to paint three exam rooms in special themes at the new pediatric hematology/oncology clinic at the Brody School of Medicine at ECU. They also used society funds to provide televisions, video players and toys at the clinic. Altogether, the project cost approximately $4,500.
"When I was given this opportunity to do this service project, I knew what I wanted to do," said Phi Eta Sigma President Julian Stalls, a 19-year-old sophomore from Williamston who was treated at ECU herself as a pediatric cancer patient. "They stay in these rooms for hours when they are here getting treated, so they need some bright colors."
Last year, the pediatric clinic moved from the Pediatric Outpatient Center into a bland space formerly occupied by the ECU surgery department. Led by Stalls, approximately 35 students worked in evenings to repaint exam rooms in jungle, undersea and ECU themes. TVs and DVD players along with iPods, games, game players, books and toys will help keep children in good spirits as they are being evaluated or receiving chemotherapy.
Pediatric staff originally asked Stalls if her group could repaint one room. Stalls insisted they do more than one room and do more than redecorate.
"It's special," said Dr. Beg Fuh, an assistant professor of pediatrics and sickle-cell disease specialist. "I think when the children come and I tell them it was a child who was treated here years ago who did this, it gives them some comfort."
Stalls' mother died of breast cancer when Stalls was 13. A few months later, Stalls was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nevertheless, she graduated from one of the state's top high schools in Durham while commuting to Greenville for cancer treatment. She's been in remission since 2009.
"This kid got chemo and went to the (N.C.) School of Science and Math," said Dr. Charles Daeschner, professor and chief of pediatric hematology/oncology and Stalls' physician when she was being treated for cancer. "I couldn't have pulled it off."
ECU physicians treat approximately 500 patients with sickle-cell disease and another 180 with hemophilia or other blood disorders. Another 70-85 children with cancer are receiving treatment at ECU. The patients come from eastern North Carolina, and some come from farther away if they have left for college in another city.
Students who meet academic requirements are invited to join Phi Eta Sigma during their freshman year. They are members during their sophomore year. Stalls is majoring in psychology and minoring in child development and family relations.
Turtles are painted on the walls of the undersea room at the ECU pediatric cancer clinic.
Some of the movies bought by the students of Phi Eta Sigma are shown at the ECU pediatric cancer clinic.
Doug Boyd
| 252-744-2482
East Carolina University
ECU News Services
1001 E. Fifth St.| Greenville, NC 27858 USA | 252.328.6481 |
Contact us
©2018 |
Terms of Use
Report a Barrier


text:
As I mentioned in my last post, I have been in communication with two Cadignans, Christian, who lives in Martinique, and Jean-Pierre, who lives in France. Christian was the one to point out to me that there are many people with the last name Cadignan in a part of Martinique called Francois. When I contacted Jean-Pierre I asked him if he was from that region of the island, and he answered that yes, he was born there but now lived in France. (This is the opposite of Christian, who grew up in France and moved to Martinique a few years ago.) A couple of other Cadignans I've had fleeting contact with also confirmed familial ties to Francois.
I have had the most contact with Christian and Jean-Pierre – who did not know each other beforehand- because (a) they can communicate in English and (b) they were very interested in figuring out how and if we are all related. (I figure (a) was a barrier to (b) for the other Cadignans I reached out to.) With a flurry of emails between San Diego, Martinique, and France, we were able to sort out how Jean-Pierre and Christian are related to each other (yes, they are!) and how Josephine could also fit into the family tree.
Jean-Pierre's great-grandfather Augustin and Christian's great-grandfather Francois were brothers. According to Jean-Pierre's mother and aunt, they had another brother, Joseph, whose two daughters were said to have left for Panama and never returned. Jean-Pierre is confident that my great-grandmother was one of these two daughters. It struck me that Jean-Pierre was able to provide the name of this Cadignan, Joseph, without my having yet mentioned to him that my great-grandmother was known as Josephine. The potential connection between the two names was obvious.
Just a few weeks after getting this information from Jean-Pierre, we learned that Josephine's real name was probably Adele, as shown on the birth certificate of one of her children (Alfonso). So why was she called Josephine? Well, if Joseph was her father, perhaps she acquired this nickname because she looked like him or shared some other quality. Or it could have been her middle name. Who knows?! Right now, these are all theories that seem plausible but definitely need to be further investigated.
Jean-Pierre was also able to provide a bit more information about Joseph's family. First of all, he says that a slave by the name of Cadignan can be found in French registries for Martinique and that this individual may have been brought over from Africa. Jean-Pierre said that this mysterious Cadignan had three other children besides Francois, Augustin, and Joseph. There was also Julie and Ida, and one other whose name he had not yet obtained. Of course, you can only get so many details from e-mail conversations, thus one of my goals is to gain access to any documentation related to these Cadignans and see how it fits with whatever information related to Josephine's life in Panama I am able to track down.
Another interesting and new angle to this story is that Joseph had two daughters that migrated to Panama. As far as I know, no one in the family remembers hearing of Josephine having a sister – or any other relatives – in Panama. Again, this is another fascinating angle that merits further inquiry.


text:
Anthony Silva upset Ann Johnston in the mayor's race by blaming her for everything and by making promises that will be very hard to keep.
Anthony Silva upset Ann Johnston in the mayor's race by blaming her for everything and by making promises that will be very hard to keep.
Silva exploited the anger and fear in the electorate over Stockton's bankruptcy and crime, but also - forgive me - unwitting voters' yen for a quick fix.
"Bankruptcy is a meaty topic," said Johnston's campaign manager, Andrew Acosta. "Voters don't know who to blame. They don't understand it."
Acosta polled voters. Who is responsible for Stockton's ills? Respondents blamed everybody: city leaders past and present, and the state of California.
"But who can they take their frustrations out on?" Acosta asked. "The people on the ballot."
This week, I canvassed a neighborhood south of Charter Way, asking residents who caused Stockton's woes.
"I say the mayor," said South California Street resident John Gilbreath. "She's the head honcho, isn't she?"
"I really don't know," said Angelina Ceno.
"The mayor," said Ralph Felix. "Bankruptcy, a lot of crime, everything. She's the head of the city."
Felix added: "The first murder this year was right down the street. Right by that tree."
Hence a disconnect. A City Hall insider would probably say Stockton's insolvency is complex and rooted as far back as the 1990s; the current council bears little responsibility for it; its members enacted tough reforms.
Ordinary residents of crime-plagued neighborhoods, for their part, look out their windows, see bullets going by, lose family, friends or property and chafe at slow police response times. To them, unsafe streets equates to government failure.
Silva, who was raised in a Kelley Drive duplex, understood this mindset.
To counter Johnston's fundraising advantage, he and his campaign staff went door to door. In addition to mailers, he used social media and frequent event appearances.
"What worked for me is just walking and talking," Silva said. "I walked and met people from all over the city. People were saying they're sort of embarrassed (by Stockton's dismal standing). They don't feel safe."
Fate hit Johnston with an October surprise: eight homicides within three days. Stockton's killings reached an all-time high. Silva's campaign capitalized.
"At the very end, when we put out the plan to put more cops the street, we gave an idea of what we need to do for the next four years," said Silva's campaign manager, Lee Neves. "That is also something Mayor Johnston didn't do."
Silva's "common sense plan to restore Stockton" features no white paper, no analysis and recommendations, no proposed panel of staff or stakeholders and a sketchy funding source. It is mainly three goals on a mailer.
� Bust and prosecute lower-level crimes: "zero tolerance."
� Get banks to allow police to set up mini-offices in foreclosed homes.
� Recruit new cops "for a fraction of our current costs."
Funding source: a sales tax increase.
A skeptic would say these back-of-the-napkin goals are simply unrealistic.
Stockton is broke. It lacks funding for new cops, let alone zero tolerance law enforcement. The district attorney's prosecutors have been slashed.
The City Attorney's Office, which prosecutes misdemeanors in some cities, lacks staff for a new mission.
Voter-approved tax increases are a maybe. Even if a tax to fund more cops were approved, though, the jail is full.
How banks will view an (admittedly creative) request to set up police mini-stations in foreclosures is anybody's guess. Police union reaction to cops paid a "fraction" is more predictable.
Silva's proposed tax also neglects to factor in Stockton's bankruptcy. The city owes creditors hundreds of millions. They'll claim any large tax revenue.
Silva told a Sacramento TV news station he is consulting with attorneys over that little snag. This sounds like ready, fire, aim.
The smart play is to optimize existing law enforcement until the city emerges from bankruptcy. That is what the Marshall Plan seeks to do, albeit slowly. Too slowly, evidently.
With due respect to Silva, I believe Johnston deserved to be re-elected.
On the other hand, this is the wrong time to dismiss new approaches out of hand. Silva deserves a chance to surprise. He's done it once already.
Contact columnist Michael Fitzgerald at (209) 546-8270 or email@example.com. Visit his blog at recordnet.com/fitzgeraldblog.


text:
Theaters (The Marquee)
Theaters and the Movies They Are Playing
Looking for showtimes by movie? Try Movies (formerly Now Showing)
Remove ads with our VIP Service
|Kentucky Theatre
|Lexington, KY (< 1 mile)
|Cinemark Fayette Mall and XD
|Lexington, KY (~4 miles)
|Regal Hamburg Pavilion Stadium 16 IMAX & RPX
|Lexington, KY (~4 miles)
|AMC Classic Lexington 10
|Lexington, KY (~5 miles)
|Movie Tavern at Brannon Crossing
|Nicholasville, KY (~7 miles)
|Theatres of Georgetown
|Georgetown, KY (~12 miles)
|Change Location
|6 Theaters Found
This page displays a list of movie theaters near Lexington, Kentucky. You can view showtimes for movies playing near Lexington, Kentucky by selecting a theater in the list above. To change the distance range covered in this list, select a new range below.
|Save Your Settings
|View a New Location
Select an option below to change your current location or to select your favorite theaters and save your settings.
Home - About Us - Ad Info - Feedback
Journal/Blog - The Marquee - Movie Links - News and Events - Now Showing - Reader Reviews
Customize - VIP Service
Journal/Blog - The Marquee - Movie Links - News and Events - Now Showing - Reader Reviews
Customize - VIP Service
|The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a service of SVJ Designs LLC. All graphics, layout, and structure of this service (unless otherwise specified) are Copyright © 1995-2018, SVJ Designs. The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a trademark of SVJ Designs. All rights reserved.
'ACADEMY AWARDS®' and 'OSCAR®' are the registered trademarks and service marks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.


text:
This exhibition presents a selection of works by award recipients who participated in the Young Artists' Competition in Plastic Arts, and includes paintings, drawings, photographs, and sculptures.
This yearly competition, initiated by the late Dr. Hecht in 1992, was meant to encourage young artists beginning in the field. The competition is intended for high school students from Haifa and Northern Israel, soldiers from all parts of the country, and students currently enrolled in the Fine Arts Department at the University of Haifa.
The winners receive scholarships and prizes granted by the Hecht Foundation.


text:
Matchmaker.com is your source to meeting attractive Bodega Bay Women. Single and available Bodega Bay girls are just a few clicks away. Matchmaker has hottest Bodega Bay women on the Internet from young Bodega Bay girls available looking for dates to maybe visit the Bodega Bay nightlife or one of the top Bodega Bay restaurants. Find Bodega Bay single women and meet Bodega Bay single girls, sexy single women, Bodega Bay women who are looking for a date through our trusted Bodega Bay matchmaking site. We have thousands of Bodega Bay babes to female models to classy mature ladies also know as sexy Bodega Bay cougars looking for toy boys. If you are looking for a wife for a happy marriage, serious girlfriend, or friend, create a free dating profile today.
Bodega BayJoin Now Free!
Bodega Bay | Bodega Bay Men | Bodega Bay Gay | Bodega Bay Lesbians
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
More Bodega Bay Links:
Senior Dating | Catholic Dating | Christian Dating | Muslim Dating
Black Singles | Asian Singles | Latin Dating
Whether you are looking for a few fun nights out to a Bodega Bay night clubs with hot Bodega Bay girls on the town or a long term relationship, keep things fun and light for now. If you seem too serious in an introductory email, it can scare her off. The thrilling part of matchmaking online dating is that it takes the impersonal and gives it real potential. Meeting Bodega Bay women for online can be easy. Two strangers who sending each other letters through their computers might actually meet in person, start dating and end up in a real relationship!


text:
28 U.S. Code § 2462 - Time for commencing proceedings
§ 2462.
Time for commencing proceedings
Except as otherwise provided by Act of Congress, an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture, pecuniary or otherwise, shall not be entertained unless commenced within five years from the date when the claim first accrued if, within the same period, the offender or the property is found within the United States in order that proper service may be made thereon.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 974.)
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 791 (R.S. § 1047).
Changes were made in phraseology.
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.


text:
Is there a way to bootstrap these ideas on a small scale?
And then scale them up based on demonstrated success?
A blog (from "web blog") is a discussion or informational site consisting of discrete entries ("posts") typically displayed newest first. All Corrente posts are front-paged; there is no up-rate or down-rate process. Corrente posts are almost entirely community moderated. We encourage a clash of ideas, and do not encourage a clash of persons.
If you are the author of this post, see the Edit tab ad Help (and Advanced Help) for detailed documentation.
Last week, Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) abruptly announced his intention to retire from the Senate in 2014, on the heels of Harry Reid's failure to get the two parties to agree to reform the Senate's notorious filibuster after the 2012 election.
According to Harkin, the failure of filibuster reform will make it "virtually impossible" for Obama to carry out his vision for his second term.
Even after a $6.5 billion election cycle, the new Congress is so little changed that it will most likely continue the partisan gridlock that has long prevented it from addressing the urgent crises facing the nation.
Failure to reform the filibuster, and scant Congressional turnover, however, are just tips of the iceberg when it comes to the fundamental problem I think we are facing: the systemic failure of the nation's governing institutions to govern in the public interest.
The reasons they cannot do so is because key institutions like Congress have been corrupted, as retiring U.S. Senator John Kerry noted in his farewell address after his appointment as Secretary of State.
The problem is not that the lawmakers we elect are corrupt, as Kerry and Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig have astutely pointed out.
The problem is that the institutions on which they depend to get elected and pass laws corrupt them.
These corrupted institutions include, in my opinion, not only Congress but political parties, state legislatures, executive agencies and courts that promulgate laws favoring special interests over the public interest.
I do not think the 2014 Congressional elections and the 2016 presidential election will diminish the corruption of these institutions, no matter who gets elected. These elections and the laws underpinning them may actually increase it.
Nor am I convinced that system-changing reforms of the federal and state laws that have corrupted our governing institutions will be forthcoming -- especially since most require legislative action by the same lawmakers who use them to get elected.
In my opinion, what is required is a system-changing solution that enables voters across the political spectrum to join forces to un-corrupt Congress directly — as well as all the other institutions in the web of corruption in which Congress is the most visibly entangled.
It is a solution that I have been working on for several years, which I have blogged about here at Corrente previously. The distressed state of our democracy prompts me to take the liberty of providing an updated overview of this solution excerpted from a website devoted to it.
While many of you may find my solution complex, it is far less complicated than the myriad electoral and legislative laws and institutions that have been engineered to obstruct voter choice.
It also has the advantage of empowering the U.S. electorate to take control of these institutions directly within a few election cycles — without having to overturn federal and state laws that have been passed by special interests to undermine popular sovereignty.
I invite those of you who read my solution below to share your thoughts as to whether you think it might work, what ideas you have for improving it, or whether there are alternatives you think will work better. I will do my best to incorporate your suggestions in future iterations.
In 2011, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a patent for the Interactive Voter Choice System (IVCS). In 2012, in a paper presented to the 12th European Conference on eGovernment, scholars refer to the web-based IVCS technology as a complex adaptive system (CAS) because it enables entire electorates to create complex systems of self-organizing voting blocs and electoral coalitions that can leap frog over the legal and institutional obstacles to the exercise of popular sovereignty that have been erected in democratic forms of government.
It empowers voters across the political spectrum to circumvent obstacles such as the institutional corruption of legislative bodies that plague modern democracies. They can mobilize the collective intelligence of their nations' electorates to set their governments' legislative priorities, consensually resolve disputes about what they should be, elect lawmakers who will enact their priorities, and hold them accountable at the ballot box if they fail to do so.
IVCS makes this empowerment possible by providing voters unique agenda setting, political organizing and consensus building tools that they will be able to access at reinventdemocracy.net to build nationwide decentralized networks of interconnected, voter-controlled voting blocs and electoral coalitions.
The networks' online and offline communication capabilities, combined with IVCS tools and the large scale collective action power of the Internet, enable these blocs and coalitions to build electoral bases larger than those of any single political party so they can elect representatives of their choice.
Reed's Law posits that the utility of large networks — particularly social networks — can scale exponentially with the size of the network. Similarly, IVCS is designed to enable electorates to create networks whose utility and political influence increases with the number of voters using the network.
IVCS's interactive databases and data processing techniques will create unique networks comprised of large aggregates of like-minded voters with similar legislative priorities. Voters can transform these aggregates into self-organizing voting blocs and electoral coalitions with political parties of their choice, or no parties.
The blocs and coalitions can function online and offline, using technologies such as MeetUp.com to schedule online and face-to-face meetings, a combination that recent research indicates reinforces civic and political participation.
Blocs and coalitions can use the system's agenda setting, political organizing and consensus building tools to:
They can accomplish the above by using IVCS agenda setting and consensus building tools to reach out to ever larger numbers of voters across the political spectrum and engage them in negotiating common legislative agendas and slates of candidates and continue to do so until the agendas and slates appeal to enough voters to elect their candidates to office.
In the process, voters at local, state and federal levels can use voter-controlled blocs and coalitions to collectively resolve the political conflicts over legislative priorities and proposals that political parties and special interests often contrive to divide the electorate into hostile camps — in the hope of driving angered voters to the polls to elect their candidates.
These blocs and coalitions can neutralize conflict-producing political parties and replace the members of corrupted legislative bodies by using their electoral bases to get control of the undemocratic electoral and legislative processes on which they depend. They can democratize these processes and institutions without having to pass laws reforming them.
The blocs and coalitions can use their agendas as legislative mandates to oversee the work of the candidates they elect, evaluate their performance and hold them accountable at the ballot box if they fail to exert their best efforts to enact bloc and coalition agendas.
As democratic forms of government become increasingly weakened by institutional corruption and deliberate attempts to obstruct voter choice and popular sovereignty, IVCS provides unprecedented democracy-building tools accessible via a web-based platform that enable electorates to circumvent these institutions and obstructions so they can determine who runs for office, who gets elected, and what laws are passed.
Disillusioned Voters
Voter turnout in many countries has been reported to be on the decline for decades, even in democracies once considered robust.
U.S. voter turnout for many types of elections ranks near the bottom of industrial nations.
Voting statistics show that U.S. presidents are typically elected with less than one third of the votes of the nation's eligible voters. In the 2012 presidential election, Barack Obama was elected with 28.6 percent of the votes of the nation's eligible voters. (Note: the calculation is based on estimates of eligible voters rather than the voting age population, which includes individuals who are not currently eligible to vote.)
Similarly, either major party can gain control of the U.S. House of Representatives with less than one third of the votes of eligible voters. The House plays a pivotal role in the legislative process because of its exclusive power to initiate revenue bills.
In the 2012 elections, Republicans maintained their control of the House with only 26.6 percent of the votes of the nation's eligible voters.
These low turnout rates and undemocratic legislative processes within the House and the Senate, such as their committee structures and the Senate's filibuster, allow legislation to be framed and passed by Congressional legislators belonging to parties that gain control of these bodies with fewer than one third of the nation's eligible voters.
Low voter turnout, minority rule and undemocratic processes are resulting in a shift toward other forms of political engagement in the U.S. and abroad. (Kulish, 2011.)
Increasing numbers of citizens are taking their dissatisfaction with unresponsive democracies into the street in the form of mass protests, occupations, strikes, boycotts, and acts of civil disobedience — with a growing minority vowing to resort to extra-legal means, if necessary, to attain their objectives.
The Interactive Voter Choice System has the potential to render such alternatives and confrontations unnecessary by providing electorates with effective levers for getting control of their governments' electoral and legislative processes and their outcomes.
The Crux of the Problem
Low turnout percentages in the U.S. and the frequent passage of legislation by Congress that lacks widespread popular support, or is opposed by a majority of the electorate, go hand-in-hand with surveys showing that a majority of Americans:
Nonetheless, the large majority of Congressional representatives remain in office, often for decades, due to numerous obstacles that prevent voters from nominating and electing candidates of their choice. (See Congressional Stagnation in the United States, Wikipedia.)
These obstacles include:
These obstacles interfere with the exercise of popular sovereignty in the following ways:
Institutional Corruption
While critics claim that the fundamental problem at the federal level is corrupt Congressional lawmakers, legal scholars like Harvard University law professor Lawrence Lessig are of the opinion that it is the institution itself that is corrupt. (Lessig, 2010.) The institution corrupts lawmakers, not the reverse.
The reason is that most lawmakers find it impossible to get elected without private funds to finance their electoral campaigns from contributors that are not eligible voters residing in their state or election district.
These non-voting contributors tend to be large corporations that can spend large amounts of money on behalf of candidates they support. These contributors expect that if the candidates they support win, these lawmakers will enact legislation the contributors demand.
If lawmakers do not do the bidding of their contributors, they are unlikely to remain in office because the contributors will finance the campaigns of opponents who will defeat them.
It is important to note that the corruption of a legislative body like Congress contributes to the corruption of the judicial and executive branches as well. Contributors can use their campaign contributions not only to determine what legislation lawmakers pass or reject, but also to determine how lawmakers beholden to them vote on appointments of judges and regulatory officials. This leverage extends contributors' corrupting influence to all three branches of government.
It is also important to note that the responsibility for obstructing voter choice and the exercise of popular sovereignty by corrupting governmental institutions is equally divided between state and federal levels. State legislatures and the political parties that control them contribute to institutional corruption at both the state and federal levels because they gerrymander election districts, including Congressional districts, and pass election laws that make it extremely difficult for any third party candidate to defeat candidates run by the nation's two major parties, whether they run at state or federal levels.
The significance of this complicity between candidates, elected representatives and non-voting contributors is that it creates, according to Lessig, a "dependency relationship" unintended by the framers of the U.S. Constitution. (Lessig, 2010.)
He argues that the founders of the Republic clearly intended Congress to be "dependent upon the People alone". However, the "private funding of public campaigns" creates within Congress a second dependency that conflicts and undermines the primary dependency between the people and their representatives that the framers strongly believed was necessary to protect the public interest from private interests.
Similarly, Fordham University law professor Zephyr Teachout points out that the founders were determined to create "structural limitations to the power of outside money in governmental decision-making". (Teachout, Winter, 2009.) They adopted a variety of measures to ensure that "the great corporations of the country" would not be able to "procure the passage of a general law with a view to the promotion of their private interests". (Teachout, March, 2009.)
And yet, campaign finance laws passed by Congress itself and court decisions issued by the Supreme Court in Citizens United versus FEC appear to have greatly magnified the dependency relationship between Congressional lawmakers and corporate campaign contributors by enabling contributors to expend unlimited sums of corporate money to influence elections and legislation.
These laws and decisions are all the more remarkable when viewed in light of the stern warnings issued not only by the founders but more than 100 years later by renowned U.S. statesmen such as Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th U.S. president. In a famous 1910 speech delivered in Osawatamie, Kansas, Roosevelt declared:
Our government, national and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. . . the great special business interests too often control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own profit. We must drive the special interests out of politics. . . .
Every special interest is entitled to justice, but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench, or to representation in any public office.
The Constitution guarantees protections to property, and we must make that promise good. But it does not give the right of suffrage to any corporation.
The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have themselves called into being.
In a 1912 speech, Roosevelt called attention to the "invisible government" created by "corrupt politics" and "corrupt business":
Political parties exist to secure responsible government and to execute the will of the people.
From these great tasks both of the old parties have turned aside. Instead of instruments to promote the general welfare, they have become the tools of corrupt interests which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes.
Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.
To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.
Yet 100 years later, Roosevelt's and the founders' admonitions are repeated in 2013 by U.S. Senator John Kerry in his farewell address to the Senate after being named U.S. Secretary of State:
There is another challenge we must address — and it is the corrupting force of the vast sums of money necessary to run for office. The unending chase for money, I believe, threatens to steal our democracy itself. I've used the word corrupting — and I mean by it not the corruption of individuals, but a corruption of a system itself that all of us are forced to participate in against our will. The alliance of money and the interests it represents, the access it affords those who have it at the expense of those who don't, the agenda it changes or sets by virtue of its power, is steadily silencing the voice of the vast majority of Americans who have a much harder time competing, or who can't compete at all.
The insidious intention of that money is to set the agenda, change the agenda, block the agenda, define the agenda of Washington. How else could we possibly have a US tax code of some 76,000 pages? Ask yourself, how many Americans have their own page, their own tax break, their own special deal?
We should not resign ourselves Mr. President to a distorted system that corrodes our democracy. This is what contributes to the justified anger of the American people. They know it. They know we know it. And yet nothing happens. The truth requires that we call the corrosion of money in politics what it is: it is a form of corruption and it muzzles more Americans than it empowers, and it is an imbalance that the world has taught us can only sow the seeds of unrest.
Like the question of comity in the Senate, the influence of money in our politics also influences our credibility around the world. And so too does the difficulty, the unacceptable and extraordinary difficulty, we have in 2013 in operating the machinery of our own democracy here at home. How extraordinary and how diminishing that more than 40 years after the Voting Rights Act, so many of our fellow citizens still have great difficulty when they show up on election day to cast their vote and have their voice heard.
In spite of the same warnings issued by the framers of the U.S. constitution and eminent U.S. statesmen, the American electorate has been unable to curb the increasing dependency relationship between lawmakers, officials and special interest campaign contributors with any levers at its disposal.
This failure has in turn exacerbated the widespread public perception that not only are key American institutions like Congress corrupt but that elections themselves are "rigged."
When these perceptions are combined with low voter turnout, obstacles preventing voters from replacing Congressional incumbents despite majority disapproval of their performance, and undemocratic decision-making in Congress resulting in minority rule, it becomes impossible for the major parties and the nation's elected officials to claim that they have legislative mandates expressing "the will of the people", or that the legislation they enact represents "the will of the people."
The Interactive Voter Choice System will free U.S. lawmakers from having to make these false claims and the American public from having to listen to them. For the system will enable lawmakers to get elected and pass the laws their constituents demand without financing their electoral campaigns with special interest campaign contributions, gerrymandering their election districts to stay in power, or passing unfair election laws to prevent competition.
The Solution
U.S. electoral and legislative processes and institutions are extremely complex. They are governed by complicated state and federal laws, many of which have been passed in recent decades to obstruct voter choice and popular sovereignty.
The numerous proposals and plans to reform these laws and institutions will take years and possibly decades to pass, if they pass at all, for many require the consent of Congress itself, state legislatures and even constitutional amendments to overturn Supreme Court decisions. Enacting time-consuming piecemeal reforms is unlikely to produce the systemic change that is urgently needed.
The difficulty of effecting these reform measures makes the large scale systems-changing capabilities of IVCS the most promising solution. These capabilities place the power to institute democratizing systems change in the hands of the U.S. electorate immediately.
Voters across the political spectrum can join forces to use IVCS agenda setting, political organizing, and consensus building tools, in combination with the large scale collective action power of the Internet, to get control of electoral and legislative processes in just a few election cycles. They do not need to change unfair election laws, reverse the widespread gerrymandering of election districts, or overturn campaign finance laws favoring the private financing of public campaigns by special interests.
These tools enable voters to tap into the collective intelligence of the entire U.S. electorate to:
They can urge political parties to use IVCS tools to empower their supporters to assume a determining role in:
How the Interactive Voter Choice System Works
A primary objective of the technology and its unique interactive databases is to enable the U.S. electorate to build a new genre of political organization: voter-controlled, self-organizing voting blocs and electoral coalitions. These organizations can work with political parties as well as independent of parties.
IVCS communication capabilities and the reinventdemocracy.net website, when combined with the large scale collective action power of the Internet, enable these blocs and coalitions to spontaneously form a nationwide decentralized network of autonomous, inter-connected, voter-controlled voting blocs and coalitions.
The networks will take advantage of the complex adaptive systems capabilities of the system to adapt to the complex political landscapes of U.S. election districts and transform them from the bottom of the political system upwards.
These capabilities enable individual voters at the grassroots to join together with like-minded voters with similar legislative priorities — within and across election districts — to build and manage their own blocs and coalitions around collectively set agendas.
The capabilities enable these blocs and coalitions to build electoral bases that become large enough to nominate and elect candidates who will enact bloc and coalition agendas -- and defeat candidates likely to reinforce institutional corruption by enacting their own personal legislative agendas and those of their special interest campaign contributors.
These blocs and coalitions will be able to run winning candidates even in severely gerrymandered election districts because the captive voters that political parties corral into such districts are likely to switch their allegiance to IVCS-enabled voting blocs and electoral coalitions — as soon as they learn that they can join them in setting common legislative agendas and adopting common slates of candidates to enact their agendas.
These previously captive party members will help blocs and coalitions put their candidates on the ballot lines of the members' parties, if the blocs and coalitions choose to do so, by signing the party nominating petitions required by state election boards.
The Pivotal Democracy-Building Function of the Interactive Databases
IVCS core databases comprise the Legislative Options Database, the Legislative Priorities Database and the Election District Database.
In contrast to typical platforms of political party candidates that comprise a short list of oversimplified options, IVCS databases enable individual voters, voting blocs, and coalitions to set comprehensive legislative agendas consisting of any number of legislative priorities they select from the Legislative Options Database, or add to the database. They can also add their own options to their agendas alone.
When the Legislative Options Database is fully developed and tested, it will provide voters clear-cut generic choices expressed in commonly understood language. The options will enable virtually unlimited numbers of voters of all political persuasions to join together to negotiate consensus across partisan and party lines regarding a broad spectrum of mainstream options that they select from the database and/or add to it.
They can annotate the options they choose and email their agendas to internal recipients registered on the reinventdemocracy.net website, and also to external recipients such as their elected representatives.
Voters can request their representatives to set their own legislative agendas using the website's Legislative Options Database, and email their agendas to voters for comparison with their own. Voters can evaluate their representatives' stances, pressure them to enact voters' priorities, and decide whether their representatives' legislative agendas and track records merit their votes for re-election.
After users submit their agendas to the Legislative Priorities Database, they are entitled to query the database to identify and contact voters in specified ZIP Codes and election districts whose agendas contain similar priorities or clusters of priorities.
Any voter, voting bloc or electoral coalition registered on the website that sets legislative agendas using this database, and transmits their agendas to the priorities database, can use the priorities database to identify and connect with like-minded voters, blocs and coalitions registered on the website.
If they decide to join forces to run candidates in U.S. election districts, e.g. Congressional districts, they can access the Election District Database to gather and integrate into their own databases strategic intelligence that will help them get their candidates elected.
Blocs and coalitions can increase their voting strength by using IVCS databases, data processing capabilities and consensus building tools to merge with other blocs and coalitions with similar agendas to set common legislative agendas and adopt common slates of candidates and action plans. They can also invite external participants, such as political parties, voter mobilization groups and other organizations, to join their blocs and coalitions so they can make these vital decisions collectively.
Large Scale Voter-Driven Consensus Building
Although the 535 members of Congress claim to represent the nation's electorate of 200,000,000+ eligible voters, there is no systematic mechanism by which these voters can tell these lawmakers and their political parties what their legislative priorities are, across the board.
Parties, candidates and incumbents conduct surveys, but the small number of voters surveyed are passive respondents who do not frame the limited number of questions they are asked. Responding to questions is not the equivalent of voters' setting their own legislative agendas across the board and using them to drive a nation's electoral and legislative processes, as IVCS permits them to do.
By preventing voters from determining party, candidate and elected lawmakers' legislative agendas, Congressional representatives are thus free to set their legislative agendas on the basis of their personal preferences, the demands of their special interest campaign contributors, and what they claim to be the priorities of their constituents.
Given this loose connection between voters and lawmakers, it is difficult for 535 lawmakers to claim they represent 200,000,000+ eligible voters who have no means of expressing their legislative priorities, face nearly insurmountable hurdles in nominating their own candidates, and are compelled to choose among candidates who place themselves on the ballot and run on vague platforms over which voters have virtually no control.
Most voters reject such claims. Countless polls indicate that the large majority of the U.S. electorate does not feel that the nation's lawmakers represent them or that the legislation lawmakers pass is related to mandates voters have given them.
Fortunately, this virtual disconnect between the U.S. electorate and their representatives can be surmounted by IVCS's capacity to enable entire electorates to bring their collective intelligence to bear in prioritizing, framing and implementing legislative priorities.
Its interactive databases, modern electronic data processing technologies and agenda setting, political organizing, and consensus building tools enable the U.S. electorate to provide the nation's 535 Congressional representatives written legislative mandates across the board when they run for office and after they are elected.
These mandates, however, will represent far more than an enumeration and summation of individual priorities. They will be the result of large scale voter-driven consensus building in which voters reconcile divergent and even conflicting priorities by negotiating common legislative agendas that reflect the views of millions of voters. Large scale electronic data processing technologies enable IVCS to facilitate the formulation of common agendas by entire electorates.
The system's Legislative Options Database and Legislative Priorities Database will enable large scale collective agenda setting by electorates in the U.S. (and subsequently, on a country-by-country basis abroad) because they enable large numbers of interacting voters to overcome typical differences in the way people conceptualize their legislative priorities and the terms they use to articulate them.
These databases and tools enable voters to collectively negotiate common agendas despite initial differences in their political stances, as well as terminological and linguistic differences in the way they articulate their legislative priorities.
The databases and tools also enable individual voters to overcome the barriers to political consensus building that have traditionally hampered individual unorganized voters and resulted in the emergence of political parties that are run from the top down by party officials, rather than from the bottom up by party supporters.
This classic consensus building dilemma that ultimately disempowers individual voters is the cause of what classical scholars such as German sociologist Robert Michels referred to in 1911 as the Iron Law of Oligarchy -- the transformation of political parties into institutions run from the top down by political elites rather than the bottom up by party members.
The same stumbling block prevents dissatisfied U.S. voters residing in the same election district from banding together in voting blocs and coalitions large enough to run and elect candidates of their choice, and defeat incumbents that the majority opposes.
IVCS enables voters to surmount this classic consensus-building dilemma with a simple solution. It consists of a comprehensive database of 104 mainstream legislative options that cross the political spectrum. Voters can select their priorities from the database, add to it, and connect with voters who select similar priorities.
To help voters find and recall where options are located in the database, the 104 basic options are visually displayed on cards in two decks of playing cards. The options are divided into eight themes and stored in the Legislative Options Database. (Needless to say, when the platform is internationalized, the content of the options will be customized on a country-by-country basis by knowledgeable experts.)
Each individual voter can choose their preferred options from the database, add options to a separate pool of voter-generated options, and write comments on the options they choose so their choices reflect their own needs, specific circumstances, and recommendations.
The databases are unique not only because they enable voters to set individual and collective agendas in writing for the first time in history, but because they enable electorates to use them as written legislative mandates to drive an entire nation's electoral and legislative processes and determine their outcomes.
The databases will put an end to the anomalous situation in which Congressional representatives claim to have legislative mandates from their constituents -- without actually having any -- and lawmakers representing a small minority of the electorate pass legislation in the name of the American people as a whole -- even when most Americans oppose it.
Large Scale Voter-Driven Conflict Resolution
The databases are also unique in their capability to enable the U.S. electorate to play a decisive role in resolving substantive political conflicts. These conflicts include those that emerge spontaneously and those that are artificially contrived by political parties and their candidates. Parties and candidates contrive these conflicts in order to win elections by dividing voters along partisan and ideological lines.
This artificial conflict-producing practice persists despite statistics indicating that increasing numbers of voters -- approaching 40% of all voters -- refuse to register in either of the nation's two major parties and espouse transpartisan agendas that cross party lines. (For an analysis of the trend towards transpartisanship, see Beyond Red and Blue, Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, May 4, 2011.)
To surmount these conflicts, IVCS's interactive databases enable voters to form voting blocs and coalitions whose members can continue negotiating which priorities they wish to include in common transpartisan agendas until their agendas appeal to larger cross-sections of voters than those of any party. By resolving conflicts and legislative stalemates contrived by political parties for political gain, voters can forge winning transpartisan electoral bases larger than the electoral base of any single political party and run candidates who can defeat party candidates.
The ability of blocs and coalitions to win elections without aligning with political parties will hopefully encourage political parties to join these coalitions and provide their members the opportunity to collaborate with bloc and coalition members to collectively set common legislative agendas and adopt common slates of candidates. Such a giant leap-forward in consensus building has the potential to end the legislative stalemates between the nation's two major political parties that are preventing Congress from devising workable solutions to the serial crises facing the nation.
The unique capabilities of the databases to promote large scale consensus building and conflict-resolution cannot be overstated. Their capacity to enable entire electorates to develop a highly sophisticated and comprehensive collective intelligence about the whole spectrum of a nation's legislative priorities fundamentally alters the way democratic forms of government set and implement their priorities.
Millions of engaged citizens and voters organized in voting blocs and electoral coalitions devoted to evaluating, framing, and overseeing the enactment and implementation of a nation's legislation is far more desirable than leaving these precious tasks of a democracy to a few hundred legislators, with the large majority beholden to special interest campaign contributors.
To facilitate the development of this collective intelligence, the Legislative Options Database comprises options that are diametrically opposed to each other. Each option contains links to online information that voters can access to evaluate their pros and cons. The system's voting utility, and its communications and data processing capabilities, enable virtually unlimited numbers of voting bloc and electoral coalition members to actively engage in reconciling major and minor policy differences. They can discuss, debate and vote on which options they wish to include in collectively set agendas until they forge a larger electoral base than any political party, and can run candidates who can defeat those of any single party.
It should be noted that voters can use the voting utility to vote on any decisions they wish. For example, they can vote on whether to build and merge blocs and coalitions, which candidates they wish to nominate and support, and how they wish to manage their blocs and coalitions and make collective decisions.
Undemocratically-run blocs and coalitions will prompt an exodus of their members to join or build competing blocs and coalitions.
The self-organizing, self-governing capabilities enjoyed by electorates that use IVCS will ensure that the democracies they build and re-build will be controlled by nationwide decentralized networks of autonomous voting blocs and electoral coalitions that are run from the bottom up by their members.
12th European Conference on eGovernment.
Nancy Bordier, Interactive Voter Choice System (IVCS). U.S. Patent 7,953,628, issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, May 31, 2011.
Eliza Newlin Carney, Voters Blame Both Parties for Big Money in Politics, October 1, 2012.
Complex adaptive system (CAS).
Congressional Stagnation in the United States, Wikipedia.
John Kerry, Text of John Kerry's farewell speech, Boston Globe, January 30, 2013.
Adam Lioz and Blair Bowie, Billion-Dollar Democracy: The Unprecedented Role of Money in the 2012 Elections, Demos, January 17, 2013.
Nicholas Kulish, As Scorn for Vote Grows, Protests Surge Around Globe, New York Times, 2011.
Lawrence Lessig, Democracy After Citizens United, Boston Review, September/October, 2010.
Rasmussen Reports, 53% Say Elections Are Rigged To Help Incumbents in Congress, May 12, 2011.
Reed's Law, Wikipedia.
Theodore Roosevelt, The Progressive Covenant With The People, Performed by Theodore Roosevelt, Recorded August 1912.
Theodore Roosevelt, The New Nationalism, Speech delivered in Osawatomie, Kansas on August 31, 1910.
Jonathan D. Salant, Few Want Members of Congress Re-Elected, Poll Finds, Bloomberg.com, February 12, 2010, (Update 1).
Zephyr Teachout, Original Intent: How the Founding Fathers would clean up K Street. Democracy, Issue #11, Winter 2009.
Zephyr Teachout, The Anti-Corruption Principle, Cornell Law Review, Vol. 94, No. 341, 2009.
United States Election Project, Eligible voters, George Mason University.
Voter turnout, Wikipedia.
Voting statistics, Wikipedia.
Homero Gil de Zuniga, Aaron Veenstra, Emily Vraga and Dhavan Shah, Digital Democracy: Reimagining Pathways to Political Participation, Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2010.
And then scale them up based on demonstrated success?
Actually, proof of concept of several of the core functions of IVCS have already been provided by competitors.
I had more in mind real life implementations with real consequences as opposed to proofs of concept.
These were actual real life implementations with real consequences.
And saying that parts of the system works due to competitors can be easily turned around to say, the system's parts have been gamed, due to competitor slackness.
And if a system is so fragile that it cannot be tested outside a statewide or national implementation, then it might as well not be implemented. Voting machine fraud has taught us that open systems, available for brute force testing, is the only way to develop robustness on the level of paper ballots, publicly monitored for storage, publicly counted.
I want to respond to your statement: ". . . saying that parts of the system works due to competitors can be easily turned around to say, the system's parts have been gamed, due to competitor slackness."
IVCS is a "system" whose component parts will work together as a whole once it is implemented to empower voters to build and control self-organizing voting blocs and electoral coalitions that run candidates in actual elections.
As I responded to Lambert, one of these components has been tried, but the implementation was not well done, and the goal was not the same as IVCS.
For this reason, I am not sure what you mean by your assertion "system's parts have been gamed".
I am also perplexed that you have concluded that the system is "fragile" when the system as a whole has not been implemented.
Re your evocation of the possibility of "voting machine fraud", which I agree is a serious problem, I am unclear how your statement relates to IVCS, since the voting conducted by IVCS-enabled voting blocs and electoral coalitions, e.g. to decide which candidates to support, is separate and distinct from voting in actual elections.
... is for actual elections or not, we would prefer that the sorts of attacks made on existing e-voting systems are not made on IVCS systems?
If it's on Windows, it will be hacked, and on Linux, it may take more time, and if the solution's on a homebrew database, then the only barrier is stealing developer access.
Since I assume this solution is largely paperless, then there is no independent source for voters to check whether the proposal language they see is the proposal language someone else sees. And, with the nudging the present Administration favors, I wouldn't put it past any political consultant eager to takeover this concept to develop ways of pumping out targeted proposals for micro-constituencies.
For example, I want to vote for the "Save FIDO Act", 'cause I think it will save puppies from being strays. The implementation I see says, "we will support shelters who adopt policies that reduce the population of strays", with lots of surrounding marketing that makes me think this will increase the number of humane, no-kill centers.
On the other hand, PETA, or businessmen eager for the shelter contracts, know the goal is to build more shelters will kill pets first and ask questions later. When the proposal comes up, they ask their employees and political allies to vote (gving them links to do so, which trace referrals); those employees see the facts about shelter buildings full of gas chambers.
A third constituency in favor of spay/neuterings gets details specific to them, and so it goes.
As long as a database can be reprogrammed, and the process for auditing those changes is not transparent, we could vote for nuclear war and think we're voting for more light in the world. Not only does one need to create a new procedure for the polis; you have to create a tamper-proof and transparent technology, which, if there were profit in it, would already have replaced the paper ballot.
But it seems to me that a system is not the same as implementation, which is a sort of substrate. ("Computers," for example, used to be people. There's nothing to prevent a Von Neuman architecture from being implemtented by people using paper and voice communication.)
So I completely buy BradBlog's concept that paper ballots, counted in public, are the "gold standard" for electoral voting.
However, it's also clear that the process of getting to the votes, and the process of aggregating the votes must be in some way digital.
And I also very much like the concept of setting up an authoritative and independent system of voting: [#198].
It used to be very difficult to rig an election, but now its quite easy.
According to university computer scientists, e-voting machines can be re-programmed and their results altered at a distance using hand held electronic devices that can alter votes and tallies without leaving a trace.
In contrast, paper votes that are counted in public appear to be a preferable alternative.
IVCS empowers voters to build winning voting blocs and electoral coalitions that can nominate and elect their own candidates -- and then mandate them to pass laws that make electronic vote rigging impossible. From what I have read, computer scientists and others have developed systems that cannot be hacked, but our lawmakers refuse to implement them.
Fortunately, IVCS enables voters to build voting blocs and electoral coalitions with transpartisan electoral bases that are larger than those of any single political party.
Their overwhelming electoral clout at the polls will make it very difficult to rig the outcomes of elections.
NB: I interleave my responses into your comment below, in brackets:
"If it's on Windows, it will be hacked, and on Linux, it may take more time, and if the solution's on a homebrew database, then the only barrier is stealing developer access.
"Since I assume this solution is largely paperless, then there is no independent source for voters to check whether the proposal language they see is the proposal language someone else sees. And, with the nudging the present Administration favors, I wouldn't put it past any political consultant eager to takeover this concept to develop ways of pumping out targeted proposals for micro-constituencies.
[NB: Agreed. This could happen. But with people like you standing watch and coaching us, we will overcome!]
"For example, I want to vote for the "Save FIDO Act", 'cause I think it will save puppies from being strays. The implementation I see says, "we will support shelters who adopt policies that reduce the population of strays", with lots of surrounding marketing that makes me think this will increase the number of humane, no-kill centers.
"On the other hand, PETA, or businessmen eager for the shelter contracts, know the goal is to build more shelters will kill pets first and ask questions later. When the proposal comes up, they ask their employees and political allies to vote (gving them links to do so, which trace referrals); those employees see the facts about shelter buildings full of gas chambers.
"A third constituency in favor of spay/neuterings gets details specific to them, and so it goes.
"As long as a database can be reprogrammed, and the process for auditing those changes is not transparent, we could vote for nuclear war and think we're voting for more light in the world. Not only does one need to create a new procedure for the polis; you have to create a tamper-proof and transparent technology, which, if there were profit in it, would already have replaced the paper ballot.
[NB: This scenario you paint is ominous and technologically feasible. Yet, again, there are more of us demanding integrity and developing the technological smarts to prevent such mischief!]
Of course!


text:
From our food contributor, Shaina Olmanson.
I feel under qualified to be talking about grits. Coming from the Midwest, grits are not exactly an everyday food. In fact, an upbringing and solidified love for farina and creamed wheat cereals is what led me to believe I would love a bowl of grits equally, and so when the opportunity arose to order them on a road trip well into my teen years, I did just that.
I'll leave it at this: Truck stop grits are not the type you fall in love with. Still, there was something to that bowl of white and creamy food with a big pat of butter melting on top. I was not to be thrown off course in my desire to adopt grits as my new "it" food. It had all the same promises as my breakfast favorites, but with expanded possibilities for my palate. At the top of the savory list: shrimp and grits.
Creamy, cheesy grits get topped with vibrant shrimp and crisp green onions. What's not to love about this? The idea of adding butter and cheddar and plump shellfish to a bowl of warm comfort food seemed to me like a decision that was already made in the affirmative. So I set out to learn as much as I could about grits.
The first issue was obtaining them. Outside of the generic "quick-cooking grits" on the market shelf, there weren't many options at first in the urban Midwestern area I lived in. I finally settled on making grits with white cornmeal to begin my experiments and then ordering online. Traditional grits are made from hominy, alkali-treated corn, and were stone ground in a rough, coarse texture. You'll find both white corn and hominy when looking, so determine which you want to go for.
Once you have the grits in hand (or nearly grits), the rest of the preparation is satisfyingly simple, and the payoff is pure comfort food. It's the kind of meal that leaves you satisfied at the end, the type of dish that begs to be made again and again.
- 4 cups water
- 1 teaspoon salt
- 1 cup stone ground white grits
- 2 tablespoons butter
- 1 cup shredded white cheddar cheese (I used Kerrygold Dubliner)
- 3 slices thick-cut bacon
- 1 medium yellow onion, diced
- 2 garlic cloves, minced
- 1 pound shrimp, peeled and deveined with tails removed (if desired)
- ½ cup chopped scallions
- 2 tablespoons minced fresh parsley
- 1 tablespoon lemon juice
- Bring the water and salt to a boil in a large saucepan. Slowly whisk in the grits. When all the grits have been added, reduce the heat to low and simmer, stirring frequently, for 25 minutes. Keep the butter and cheddar cheese ready off to the side.
- While the grits are cooking, in a large skillet cook the bacon until crisp. Remove the bacon pieces, leaving the grease in the pan and add in the garlic and the shrimp. Cook the shrimp over medium heat just until pink.
- Add in the scallions, parsley, and the lemon juice. Cook for 3 minutes to combine the flavors and then remove from the heat and stir in the bacon pieces.
- Stir in the butter and shredded cheese at the end of the cooking time for the grits. Immediately spoon into a bowl and top with shrimp and bacon to serve.
Pin It


text:
Autumn used to start in September, but now classes and conferences commence in August and vacation ends just that much sooner. Here's a list of various events you should consider attending between now and the end of the year, with thanks to conference organizers for the associated descriptions.
Scanning the range of topics, it's clear the combined IP and EDA industries have an increasingly broad range of interests: IoT, autos, wearables, software security, verifying/integrating IP, power, device physics, memory, embedded processors and software, sensors, MEMS, a range of standards, networking, both the professional and technical kinds, and "synergistic collaborative design" both up in the cloud and down below on solid ground.


text:
What to CookAmanda & Merrill
Three Seltzer Drinks
- Amanda
I will buy tabletop goods until I'm bankrupt, but you can't get me to buy another countertop item. No toasters are allowed. No bread box. And certainly no knick knacks will be found on my counter. Just a workhorse mixer and the bare necessities: coffee maker, tea kettle, salt bowl, oil, and utensil jars (the last of which I'd usually banish to a hanging rack but I've let my guard down).
But then everyone was talking about seltzer. Kristen wrote this article on seltzer makers. And Jenny had this one in her home. I wanted spritzy, optimistic drinks like everyone else, and I really wanted to get rid of the box of cheap seltzer we always had lying around for me to trip over.
Just this once, I let in another countertop squatter: the SodaStream. We've been getting to know each other over the past few weeks. He's slim and unassuming. He doesn't require an outlet. And he's only noisy when swooshing air into tap water. My kids love him. My husband has a new toy. And I now have a small but burgeoning repertory of summer drinks.
If you'd like to join me, here you go!
Gingerale with Cucumber
Makes 2 drinks (can be easily doubled)
- Three 4-inch-long slices English cucumber
- 2-inch piece ginger root, peeled and thinly sliced
- 1/2 cup raw sugar
- Chilled seltzer
See the full recipe (and save and print it) here.
Lemon and Sherry Spritzer (aka Rebujito)
Makes 2 drinks (can be easily doubled)
- Zest of 2 lemons
- 1/2 cup sugar
- 3 shots chilled fino sherry
- Chilled seltzer
- 2 thin slices lemon, for garnish
See the full recipe (and save and print it) here.
Vanilla Egg Cream
Makes 2 drinks (can be easily doubled)
- 1/2 vanilla bean, split in half lengthwise and seeds scraped
- 1/2 cup sugar
- 1 cup whole milk
- Chilled seltzer
See the full recipe (and save and print it) here.


text:
Miss USA Olivia Culpo Wins Miss Universe Pageant!
Miss USA Olivia Culpo looks ecstatic while receiving her crown after winning the 2012 Miss Universe Pageant on Wednesday (December 18) at Planet Hollywood in Las Vegas, Nev.
The 20-year-old Boston University sophomore beat out 88 other beauty queens from around the world to become the first American lady to win the title since 1997. Olivia definitely brought home the crown at a time the country needed some uplifting news!
During her interview question, Olivia was asked if she ever regretted something in her life.
"I'd like to start off by saying that every experience no matter what it is, good or bad, you'll learn from it. That's just life," Olivia said. "But something I've done I've regretted is probably picking on my siblings growing up, because you appreciate them so much more as you grow older."
15+ pictures inside of Olivia Culpo being crowned Miss Universe…


text:
Katherine Heigl: 'Nut Job' Voice Actress!
Katherine Heigl waits for her car at a valet stand after having a meal at a restaurant on Friday (November 16) in Los Angeles.
The 33-year-old actress is set to lend her voice to the upcoming animated film The Nut Job! The flick will also feature the voice talents of Will Arnett, Brendan Fraser, Stephen Lang, Sarah Gadon, and Jeff Dunham, according to Deadline.
The Nut Job is an "action-packed comedy set in the late 1950s in fictional Oakton and follows the travails of the mischievous squirrel Surly and his rat pal Buddy as they plan a nut store heist that gets out of hand." Check out the film's poster below!
FYI: Katherine is wearing the Big Star USA Alex Skinny in Arctic.
10+ pictures inside of Katherine Heigl at the valet stand…


text:
Browse these south-of-the-border recipes for everything from tacos to enchilada casserole.
Having Mexican food is a delicious way to enjoy a weeknight dinner. These quick Mexican recipes make it easy to savor the tastes and flavors of Mexican food without spending a long time in the kitchen. Some of our favorite Mexican dinner recipes are also the easiest: The Mexicali Meatless Tostadas can be on the table in 15 minutes, and the Beef Fajitas with Pico de Gallo only take five minutes more. For quick Mexican recipes that give you a true taste of the South, you can't go past Delta Tamales, or Tex-Mex Fajitas. If you want to wake up to the zest of Mexico, plan your morning around a plate of Migas Tacos filled with scrambled eggs. Spicy, quick, and tasty, these Mexican dinner recipes make every night a fiesta.


text:
November 18, 2013Everyday
Battle Of The Bulge: Shape Up With Chic Workout Wear
The holiday season grants us many miracles but an immunity to calories unfortunately isn't one of them. To eat your fill of gingerbread men and not suffer a mini meltdown the next time you step on the scale, you have to stay faithful to your fitness routine (a tall order once you factor in all the Yuletide festivities that clutter your calendar). Hence, we've rounded up the latest and greatest workout wear to help you go the extra mile...literally. Fashion as exercise motivation? Hey, whatever works.


text:
The ten papers in the July edition would appear, at first glance, to have little in common. Upon a second glance, they can be grouped into three broad themes:
* Environmental (two papers)
* Technology (four in metallurgy and two in mining)
* Human knowledge (two papers). I admit that it's not a
very imaginative analysis, but it's the best that I can do!
The minerals industry is the proverbial 'whipping boy' for the environmental constituency, and there is, regrettably, more than enough historical cause to justify that label. The industry should make no excuses, take the criticism on the chin, green our mining and processing technologies, and move
That said, the paper using satellite images to determine the impact of marble quarrying in Turkey on the natural vegetation invites comparison with other industries. If one were to analyse the entire planet using satellite imagery to determine the percentage of the natural vegetation that has been destroyed for the sake of mining, what would that number be? Probably less than a fraction of one per cent, I suspect. Compare that with the devastation caused to the natural environment by food production – the massive loss of biodiversity through the cultivation of a few plant and animal species that we eat, and over-exploitation of the ocean's fish resources – and mining looks relatively benign! Why does turning a significant percentage of the earth's surface into monoculture wastelands to produce food attract little criticism, but an application to open a new mine to produce the minerals and metals required to build houses and cities does? The deafening silence when Cape fynbos is ripped out to make way for another wine estate is telling. Point made – time to move on.
The six technology papers cover widely differing topics, and it seems almost unfair to single out one for detailed comment. The only aspect of commonality is that the papers all extend the boundaries of existing technology in innovative ways. So, for example, we see the results of using highpressure grinding rolls for treating copper, iron, and gold ores; anode and cathode electrodes being used in DC arc furnaces instead of a submerged hearth anode; moisture reduction in fine coal filter cakes by increasing the flow of air drawn through the cake; measurement and modelling the pressures generated using non-explosive expansion materials used in hard rock fracturing.
This leads conveniently to a theme that I have discussed before at SAIMM events – the different risk-and-reward profiles of incremental and breakthrough research.
Incremental research is based upon the premise that whatever technology is currently being used today it can be improved. The technology can be made more energy efficient, the recoveries can be improved, the operating costs can be reduced, the environmental impacts can be minimized, and so on. Each improvement is relatively small, but when many such improvements are made over time the cumulative effect can be significant. The advantages of this type of research are that the investment costs are low, the time to implement is fast, and the technical risk is low. All the papers in this edition
of the Journal fall into the incremental category.
Breakthrough research is based upon the premise that existing technology has run its course, that no more improvements are possible, and that further advances require something completely new. Examples from the not- toodistant past include the development of the CIP process for gold and the HPAL (high pressure acid leach) process for the recovery of nickel from lateritic ores. CIP was intensively researched in the laboratory, on a pilot-plant scale, and even operated on a full scale using re-pulped filter plant tailings before being extended to large plants treating ROM ores. I cannot imagine the total cost of the research conducted in South Africa in today's Rands (a figure has been calculated in one of Mintek's Application Reports, but most certainly underestimated), to which must be added the equivalent costs in Australia and the USA. The technology worked, and the benefits more than justified the costs.
At that time most new mining projects were financed off balance sheet or with the issue of equity,and the decisions regarding the choice of technology were left exclusively to the mining houses themselves. By the time HPAL came along the financial climate of the world had changed significantly. It was now more common to leverage mining projects via debt, and a long, protracted, and costly research phase was just not acceptable to the lending institutions any more. Quick returns were the order of the day. The outcome of fast-tracking HPAL was technical and financial agony for those involved, and leading edge technology was renamed bleeding edge technology.
Today the situation is much, much worse. The risks associated with the health of the world economy, the uncertain demand for resources, fluctuating interest and currency exchange rates, and the time and cost of research have escalated so rapidly that investors simply do not want to be burdened with the risks associated with being the first implementer of breakthrough technology. Use proven technology is the new order of the day. And yet, given the combined impacts of deeper ores, falling grades, stagnating real metal prices, and constraints on energy and water availability, the need for breakthrough technology that is significantly better than what we have at present is escalating rapidly. How is this paradox going to be resolved?
There is never a simple answer to such a question, and I will leave the debate to another time and place. What is undoubtedly critical to the industry's long-term sustainability n South Africa is the education and retention of our mining and metallurgical engineers, and the ability of companies to maintain their critical in-house knowledge bases given the mobility of their workforce. The last two papers in this edition of the Journal address this particular topic.


text:
Keller Auditorium Tickets
Don't miss the chance to see your favorite events at Keller Auditorium! Keller Auditorium Tickets are available here at ShowTimeTickets.com! Our up-to-date event listings and seating charts will help you find the seats you want, to the events you want at Keller Auditorium.
ShowTimeTickets.com specializes in sports tickets, concert tickets, theater tickets and all special event tickets worldwide! We provide the most in demand tickets to the most popular shows - our service, selection and competitive pricing are certain to impress you!
|Sun, 31 Mar 2019 1:00 PM 2019-03-31T13:00
|Aladdin The Musical
|Keller Auditorium
Portland, OR Keller Auditorium Portland, OR
Don't see the event you are looking for?