text:
A land of unexplored natural beauty and rich cultural heritage
The Indonesian territory of Kalimantan makes up 2/3 of Borneo island. Well known for its tropical forests, rich natural resources, and exotic flora and fauna, Kalimantan offers a unique, unexplored world of its own. Originally inhabited by the Dayak, it is now home to 10 million inhabitants with a variety of culture. The indigenous Dayaks, or the Orang Gunung (Mountain People), traditionally live in longhouses called Lamin or Umaq Daru that can house as many as 50 people. Once known as headhunters, the tribe consists of many sub-tribes such as Iban, Punan and Banuaq. The arrival of newcomers has given this land a rich cultural mixture of Dayak, Malay, Chinese, Javanese plus religious influence of Islamic teachings and Hinduism.
Rivers plays a very important role in communication and economy of the inhabitants. Most of community life are centered along rivers: houses, activities, etc. For the adventurous, this island offers many options to satisfy that desire: rafting or traveling along some of the world's most beautiful and challenging rivers, trekking through traditional villages and jungles, or take a safari trip in one of the many national parks.
There are four provinces: East, South, Central and West which have their own governor.
East Kalimantan
Home to the longest river in Kalimantan, the Mahakam river, where freshwater dolphin can be found, East Kalimantan is growing to be an industrially advanced area. This is contributed by its position as a major producer of oil and timber, and as the second largest province in Indonesia. Also home to Kalimantan's indigenous inhabitant, the Dayaks, in this province we can find many of Dayak cultural materials. 80 percent of this province is covered by forest.
South Kalimantan
This rich, fertile province is divided into two distinct regions by the Meratus mountains. The eastern part is mostly covered with mountains and dense tropical forest, while the southern part has more rivers and lowlands. The abundance of forests with their wide variety of trees has helped make this province one of the largest wood producers in Indonesia. The rich, unique natural resources found on this land can be seen from the exquisite traditional and commercial handicrafts which are completely made from local raw material. Some of the most exciting ways to experience all this is by backpacking over hills and racing down river on bamboo rafts.
Central Kalimantan
Covering an area of 153,800 square kms and consisting mostly of dense jungles, this is the largest province of the island. The terrain includes mountainous area in the northern part, dense tropical forest in the central, and swampy area with many rivers crisscrossing the southern part. Like other parts of the island, it has tropical climate with temperature ranging from 26 C to 30 C in day time and 15 - 20 C on nights, and average humidity of 70 - 90%.
West Kalimantan
The nickname 'land of the equator' earned by this province is contributed by the geographic position of its capital, Pontianak, which lies exactly on the equator. Covering an area of 146,807 square km, the province has swampy low plains containing many
rivers, lakes and villages, often linked by bridges. Once an important cultural crossroads, and because of its strategic location in the trade route of neighboring countries, this province is easily accessible from Jakarta and Singa pore. Like other Kalimantan provinces, this land is also rich of unexplored natural resources, such as minerals and precious stones.
The Special Sights
National parks and nature reserves
Kalimantan has a number of nature reserves to protect its unique flora and fauna. Kersik Luway is where the very rare 'Black Orchid' (Colongenia Pandurata) grows, located upstreams the Mahakam river, East Kalimantan. Bontang, in the regency of Kutai with an area of about 200,000 ha, has a rare flora and fauna. The Kutai National Park near Bontang is worth visiting to see scenery especially those at Beras Basah. Tanjung Puting National Park in Central Kalimantan is the oldest conservation site of Kalimantan's flora and fauna. The park is inhabited by Orang Utans, Owa-owa, Bekantan and other primates. Also found here the Orang Utan Rehabilitation Centre which is supported by the Would Wildlife Fund (WWF). In West Kalimantan, Gunung Palung National Park located in the Ketapang regency is home to miscellaneous flora and fauna. The Raya Pasi mountain located in the Singkawang regency is also an interesting place to visit to see the Rafflesia or giant flower. Singkawang is also a nature reserve. The forest of Sanggau is worth a visit where hot springs, lakes and caves can be found. The other nature reserves are the forests of Baning and Kelam Hill in the Sintang regency. While in Kapuas Hulu, there is the Bentuang. In South Kalimantan, there is the Kaget island, home to a wide variety of birds and monkeys, Most notably the humorous longnosed proboscis monkeys.
Cultural heritage
In East Kalimantan, Berau and Marine Tourism on Derawan island is where we can see the remains of a kingdom called the Keraton Gunung Tambur and the Keraton Sarnbaliung. Derawan island is approximately 3 hours boating from Tanjung Redep (The Capital of Berau regency). It is also a good place for water sports such as scuba diving, fishing, and swimming. Tenggarong, up the Mahakam river from Samarinda, is the capital of the Kutai regency and was once the seat of the Kutai sultanate. The Sultan's Palace on the riverside is now a museum where historical objects from the sultanate are kept. Every 24th of September, dance and music performances are given to celebrate the town's anniversary. Tanjung Isuy, located in East Kalimantan hinterland, has a traditional Dayak long-house which has been turned into lodges for visitors. Visitors are usually greeted by a traditional Benuaq Dayak welcome. The place can be reached through the scenic Mahakam river. At Muara Ancalong - Muara Wahau visitors can watch traditional dances of Kenyah Dayak which are performed at a long-house. In Flower Island, South Kalimantan, we can find many species of monkeys and an old Chinese temple where local Chinese bring offerings of fresh fruit and peanuts to a tribe of aggressive macaquef in hopes of being blessed with even greater prosperity. An original Betang (traditional longhouse) can be seen in Saham village, 158 km from Pontianak, West Kalimantan. The measures of this long-house are: 186 m long, 6 m wide, inhabited by 269 people. A heritage to Kaharingan religion, a sect of Hinduism, can be found in Bukit Rawi, small village of Central Kalimantan.
Trekking and water adventure
A trip along the Mahakam river in East Kalimantan offers unique riverside scenery of rare flora and fauna. Floating markets of all sizes can be found everywhere on Barito River, Banjarmasin South Kalimantan, with the one at the junction of the Kuin and Barito rivers is considered one of the best. Market activities usually end at 9 am. The traditional villages around Loksado, in the mountains east of Kandangan, is a wonderful place to be explored by foot. Amandit river is an excellent place for white water rafting. The first stretch, from Loksado to Muara Hatip, has rapids ranked grades I to 21/2. The second, from Muara Hatip to Batu Laki, includes rapids of grade 3. White-water lovers can also find satisfaction in Gohong Rawai, Central Kalimantan, known for its beautiful and challenging rapids. Many cities in Kalimantan are best explored through rivers, such as Pontianak and Banjarmasin.
In Teweh and Batu Apu gold mines, located in Rungan district of Central Kalimantan, gold panning is done traditionally by local people. A number of gold mines can also be found in other parts of Central Kalimantan. Traditional diamond digging, mostly with simple equipment, can be observed in Cempaka, 45 minutes from Banjarmasin South Kalimantan. In Martapura, visitors can see how precious stones are cut and polished. Beaches and resorts Kumai Beach, approximately 22.5 km from Pangkalanbun in Central Kalimantan has exotic views and serves as a transit place before Tanjung Puting National Park. Pasir Panjang, 17 km from Singkawang in the Sambas regency, South Kalimantan has a beach resort, ideal for swimming. Comfortable cottages are available equipped with a tennis court. In the vicinity of Singkawang, the Gunung Poteng hill resort with its fresh air is a good place for nature lovers. In East Kalimantan, Tanah Merah Indah - Lempake recreational park has a waterfall, located about 16 km from downtown Samarinda. Kijing and Temajoh island beach resorts near Pontianak, West Kalimantan, is also a good place for diving, fishing and sailing.
The Principal Towns
Samarinda, the capital of East Kalimantan, is known for its fine sarong cloth. Samarinda has a number of modest but comfortable hotels. Balikpapan has the second busiest airport in Indonesia. The city now serves as the gateway to East Kalimantan with air and sea connections to Jakarta and other major points in Indonesia. It has a number of good hotels, including one of international standard, as well as recreation facilities. Baniarmasin, capital of South Kalimantan is now developing as a tourist city. The nickname 'river city' reflects the unique way of life of its local residents found along the numerous rivers crisscrossing the city. Palangkaraya is the center of government, train and education of Central Kalimantan. Worth visiting is the Regional Museum of Palangkaraya that contains historical and cultural interests from all over Central Kalimantan. Pontianak is the capital of West Kalimantan lies exactly on the equator' Some interesting place to visit are Equator Monument, Kadariah Palace in Kampung Dalam, the State Museum, the Kapuas and Landak Bridges. This city is best explored by boat along the many rivers found in it.
Where to Stay
In the four existing provinces you will find several luxurious hotels and losmens (inns), fine restaurants, exciting nightlife and other facilities for visitors who come to visit this island. National as well as international entertainment and recreation can be found in most of hotels in the capital cities.
In Balikpapan, Banjarmasin, Pontianak, Samarinda and Palangkaraya as big cities, enough entertainment can be found around the city. There are many theatres as well as night clubs in the capital cities.
The following are typical tours of those available on the island:
- Banjarmasin and Diamond Mines (3 days)
Board a boat on the Kuin river to visit the floating market on Barito river, then on by car to the diamond mines at Cempaka. Here you can see the traditional way of digging for diamonds. Continue to Martapura to see how diamonds are cut and polished. Return to Banjarmasin. - Mahakam River (5 days)
Experience cruising in a riverboat through the beautiful Mahakam river in East Kalimantan. Highlights include Muara Muntai, a unique wooden village where even the roads are made of wood, visits to Mancong across Jempang Lake and Tanjung Isuy to see the Banuaq Dayak and spend the night at a Dayak longhouse. On the subsequent days you will be taken to Kota Bangun and Semayang Lake to see the fresh water dolphin, visit Tenggarong, the former Kutai Kingdom, then return to Balikpapan. - Banjarmasin Loksado
Starting from Banjarmasin, this tour includes visit to Loksado village, A Dayak village where you can spend the night. The next day on to Tanuhi village on a bamboo raft down the Amandit river. Back to Banjarmasin by car.
Getting Around
- Air - There are regular flights between Palangkaraya, Banjarmasin, Pontianak and Samarinda, so it is comparatively easy and quick to move from one provincial capital to another.
- Taxis - Big towns only. Meter-taxis are not yet in general use, but there are plenty of vehicles available. Fixed fare for certain routes: e.g airport to centre.
- Becaks - Human-powered tricycle taxis for two passengers. Found in big cities of Kalimantan.
- Motorboats - As the land consist of rivers and jungles, these are available for hire by the hour.
- Water taxis - Small boats as well as ferries. It's the main means of transportation.
- Klotok - A motorized longboat can be chartered to start the 4- or 5-hour trip up. It is possible to immerse yourself in jungle sounds by sleeping in a boat. There is also 'Klotok Ambulance' for the health services in the hinterlands in South Kalimantan and has function of a mobile public health service.
Palangkaraya is very proud of their rattan handicrafts. You can buy for souvenirs the rattan pleated bags, hats and many attractive wall decorations. The trading centre for semi-precious and precious stones is Martapura about 35 km east of Banjarmasin. Jewelery shop and diamond polishers line the road, where diamonds, emeralds, rubies, sapphires, topaz, amethysts, jade, turquoise but remember to bargain.
Handy Facts
All visitors to Indonesia must be in possession of passports valid for at least six months with proof of onward passage, either return or through tickets. A visa is not required for tourists visiting Indonesia for a period not more than two months. Visae are required except for all nationals of Australia, Brunei, Canada, Europe, Japan, Malaysia, Malta, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, United States of America not exceeding a stay of two months (60 days) which is not extendable.
International certificates of valid smallpox, cholera and yellow fever vaccinations are required only from travellers coming from infected areas. It is however recommended to contact the local health authorities for further information on vaccinations before entering certain areas in Indonesia.
Customs - You may bring in 200 cigarettes or 100 gm of tobacco. Plus up to 2 litres of liquor for personal consumption.
Money - The Indonesian unit of currency is the rupiah. Banks everywhere accept notes and traveller's cheques in major world currencies. Leading international credit cards are accepted by most of the major hotels, airline offices and certain stores.
Postal services - The air mail service between Bali and overseas countries is fast and efficient. The charge depends on letter weight. There are also excellent telex, fax and telephone facilities.
Language - The national language is Bahasa Indonesia. English and Dutch are widely understood - and major hotels have staff who speak other languages.
Climate - Warm and delightfully fresh all the year round. The dry season is mid-April to September but the so-called 'wet season' is still a time of clear, sunny skies with a few sudden, tropical showers.
Clothes - Informal summer short sleeved attire - but take woollens for cold mountain region trips or latenight dance performances.
Time - There are three time zones in Indonesia. West and Central Kalimantan observes Western Standard Time (GMT+7 hours), East and South Kalimantan observes Central Standard Time (GMT + 8 hours).
Activities - trekking, river trips, caving, eco tourism, cruises & sailing and scuba diving.


text:
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Astronomers searching for planets outside our solar system have discovered the tiniest one yet -- one that's about the size of our moon.
But hunters for life in the universe will need to poke elsewhere. The new world orbits too close to its sun-like star and is too sizzling to support life. Its surface temperature is an estimated 700 degrees Fahrenheit. It also lacks an atmosphere and water on its rocky surface.
University of California, Berkeley astronomer Geoff Marcy, one of the founding fathers of the planet-hunting field, called the latest find "absolutely mind-boggling."
"This new discovery raises the specter that the universe is jampacked, like jelly beans in a jar, with planets even smaller than Earth," said Marcy, who had no role in the new research.
It's been nearly two decades since the first planet was found outside our solar system. Since then, there's been an explosion of discoveries, accelerated by NASA's Kepler telescope launched in 2009 to search for a twin Earth. So far, 861 planets have been spotted and only recently have scientists been able to detect planets that are similar in size to Earth or smaller.
While scientists have theorized the existence of a celestial body that's smaller than Mercury -- the baby of the solar system since Pluto's downgrade -- they have not spotted one until now. Nearest to the sun, Mercury is about two-fifths the Earth's diameter; the newly discovered planet and our moon are about a third the size of Earth.
The teeny planet was detected by Kepler, which simultaneously tracks more than 150,000 stars for slight dips in brightness -- a sign of a planet passing in front of the star. The planet -- known as Kepler-37b -- orbits a star 210 light years away in the constellation Lyra. It's one of three known planets in that solar system.
Discoverer Thomas Barclay of the NASA Ames Research Center in Northern California was so excited when he spied the moon-sized planet that for days, he said he recited the "Star Wars" movie line: "That's no moon." It took more than a year and an international team to confirm that it was a bona fide planet.
The discovery is detailed in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.
Scientists are looking for an Earth-size planet that's in the so-called Goldilocks zone -- that sweet spot that's not too hot and not too cold where water, which is essential for life, could exist on the surface.
While the newly discovered planet isn't it, "that does not detract from the fact that this is yet another mile marker along the way to habitable Earth-like planets," said Alan Boss of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington, who was not part of the discovery team.
Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature
Follow Alicia Chang at http://twitter.com/SciWriAlicia

subset: commoncrawl


text:
iPhone 5 vs. Samsung Galaxy S3: Which phone should you get?
Android is the most popular smartphone platform on the planet, Samsung is the most popular Android manufacturer, and the Galaxy S3 is almost certainly going to be the most popular Android phone this year. And the iPhone 5 is going to be one of the most popular phones, period. So, that means anyone looking to buy a new phone for the next year will likely end up trying to decide between the Samsung Galaxy S3 and Apple's iPhone 5. The good news is, both are phenomenal devices. The bad news is, that makes the choice especially tough. Our Mobile Nations sibling site, Android Central has already given you their take. Here's mine.
iPhone 5 vs. Galaxy S3: Hardware
I'm not wild about Samsung hardware. I'll state that bias right up front. When it comes to Android, I far prefer the build and material quality of HTC to Samsung. Likewise the LCD to SAMOLED PenTile display. That said, Samsung has been improving year after year, generation after generation. It's still not at the level of HTC, much less Apple or Nokia, but it's better. Apple's fit and finish is still out of this world. At roughly 20% thinner and lighter than the iPhone 4S, the iPhone 5's glass and aluminum monolith, from design to construction, simply outclasses Samsung's plastic river stone.
Build aside, however, Samsung continues to jam a breathtaking amount of specs into their flagship line. While the Galaxy S3 screen remains PenTile, it's also HUGE. 4.8-inches, 1280x720 huge to be precise. That absolutely dwarf's even the iPhone 5's newly expanded 4-inch, 1136 x 640 screen. The iPhone 5's IPS in-cell display looks better and at 326 ppi than the Galaxy S3's 306 ppi, and is insignificantly sharper, but overall size does matter. Unless you really want a screen you can use one handed, or you have tiny hipster jean pockets, or you really care about pixel-perfect graphics, Samsung's bigger is bigger. (You might even be able to skip a Nexus 7 if you buy a Galaxy S3 -- it's seriously, luxuriously, big.)
When it comes to performance, it's difficult to compare Apples to Samsungs. The iPhone 5 has the brand new Apple A6 processor, which they simply cite as being twice as fast as last year's Apple A5. Apple has a huge advantage in that they tailor make their own unique software for their own exactly matched hardware. Body and soul in one device. Samsung has to fit Google's generic software to their specific hardware. Hand at the wheel. The Apple A6 is Apple's first custom chipset with a dual-core ARM v7s based processor and triple-core PowerVR graphics chip. That's a big deal. To geeks. For everyone else, Samsung's 1.4GHz Exynos quad-core monster will likely be every bit as impressive. Tie.
Apple has a higher built-in storage option, at 64GB to Samsung's 32GB, but Samsung lets you put in up to 64GB of extra, micro SDHC storage. There are some cons to removable media, but not enough to stop me from giving Samsung the edge there.
Both the iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy S3 have aGPS and GLONASS. Both go up to 802.11n Wi-Fi at 5GHz and Bluetooth 4.0. Both can support ultra-fast 4G LTE. Apple can't do simultaneous voice and data over LTE, so if you're on AT&T/GSM, you'll drop down to still fast DC-HSPA+. If you're on Verizon or Sprint, however, you'll be offline (unless you're on Wi-Fi), just like the pre-LTE days. If you use a lot of simultaneous voice and data on Verizon or Sprint now, like looking things up on the web while talking on the phone, Samsung has the advantage. The Galaxy S3 also has NFC, which is a checkbox in its favor to be sure, but only if you frequently have a mobile payment system, check in system, or other NFC-enabled Android devices to work with. Still, winning.
Samsung had a dud of a camera in the Galaxy Nexus, but made everything right in the Android world again with the glass in the Galaxy S3. It's 8 megapixel, f2.6 shooter looked almost, if not exactly as good as the iPhone 4S' 8 megapixel, f2.4 lens. We'll have to wait and see what, if any, pure photon enhancements the iPhone 5 camera offers over the 4S before we can decide this one, but once you factor in software and apps, it'll almost certainly be too close for any mainstream shopper to call.
Master your iPhone in minutes
iMore offers spot-on advice and guidance from our team of experts, with decades of Apple device experience to lean on. Learn more with iMore!
So when it comes to hardware, the story is pretty much what it always is with Apple and Samsung: Apple wins on design, manufacturing, and elegance, and Samsung wins on size, power, and quantity of specs.
iPhone 5 vs. Galaxy S3: Software
iOS vs. Android is almost a cliche at this point. To take just one example, Apple's personal digital assistant, Siri, has a funner, better personality, and is tied into some helpful apps and services, but Google Now is being more aggressive when it comes to context awareness and predictive behavior than Apple. Siri will do what you tell it. Google Now will try to figure out what to do before you tell it.
But here's the thing -- the Galaxy S3 didn't ship with Google Now because it was released before Android 4.1 Jelly Bean hit the market, and Samsung included their own S Voice instead. When Apple releases a new OS, every compatible iPhone gets it the same day. When Google releases a new OS, it can take weeks, months, or an eternity for you to get it, depending on the manufacturer and the carrier. Buy an iPhone 5 with iOS 6 this week, and you'll get iOS 7 day and date next year. Buy a Galaxy S3 this week and it's even odds when, if ever, you'll get next year's version of Android. That may not matter to you -- your phone will keep working the same then as it does now.
If you like the idea of consistent, dependable software updates, Apple has the edge over Samsung. (As do Android Nexus devices with "pure Google" experiences like the Galaxy Nexus.)
Apple is also leading the charge on accessibility features for users with special needs. You don't need to be able to see or hear, for example, to get considerable value from an iPhone. Aside from that, both Apple's Safari and Google Browser/Chrome will get you to your web pages. Both the iPhone 5 and the Galaxy S3 have email programs so you can get your messages. Both have a myriad ways to listen to music, watch videos, and do everything else you'd expect a modern mobile computing platform to do. iOS 6 on the iPhone 5, however, is one thing. The software on the Galaxy S3 is two. It's Android 4.0 Ice Creme Sandwich on its way to Android 4.1 Jelly Bean at the core, but the frosting is all Samsung's own TouchWiz interface. For some people, that's an easier, friendlier blessing that enhances the Android experience. For others, it's a blight they dearly wished Samsung would spare them by simply going stock.
The thing about most Android phones, however, is that you can customize and change it far, far beyond what Apple allows with iOS. Sure you can almost always root Android and jailbreak iOS, but you can do more, and more easily, with the Galaxy S3 than you'll be able to do with the iPhone 5, and for a while still. That includes everything from widgets for easy, glanceable information, to different keyboards to adjust your typing experience.
So software is a similar story to hardware. Apple writes better code and creates more cohesive, consistent user experiences than Google. But Google makes code that does more things and is more customizable than Apple. Argue that all you want, but at the end of the day iOS in invariably smoother, more intuitive, more up-to-date, and more pixel perfect than Android, yet just as invariably misses out on a lot of features Android gets early and gets stock. If you want something that's accessible and just works, iOS has the advantage. If you want something configurable that just works the way you want it to, Android wins.
iPhone 5 vs. Galaxy S3: Services
When it comes to services that bring the internet fully to your phone, Apple has iCloud, which includes iTunes in the Cloud, iTunes Match, Photo Stream, Documents in the Cloud, Find my iPhone, Find my Friends, and more. As a service goes, it's... serviceable. It backs up and syncs your data and gives you access to all of the your iTunes content. But Apple is still new to the cloud and they aren't as strong at it as they are hardware and software. At least not yet.
Google was born in the cloud. They're the biggest cloud services provider in the world. Android, in many ways, is a localized front end for Google's cloud. Now the localized part traditionally wasn't as good as Apple -- they just chucked web pages inside of apps -- but Google has been getting better code as well. Now their services not only work well, but look good and perform far better than ever before.
The twist here is that you can get almost every single Google service on the iPhone 5 that you can get on the Galaxy S3. Now, Android has by far -- by far! -- the better Google integration of course, but the iPhone has a surprising amount as well. From Gmail to Google+ to YouTube to Voice Search to Drive, Google has a full, robust, and increasingly good set of offerings available in Apple's App Store. (For reasons that involve the difference in business models between Apple and Google.) Samsung does add some of their own services on the Galaxy S3, for example S Voice (their version of Apple's Siri), but they tend not to be as good as Google's.
So, going with the Galaxy S3, you get almost the best Google can offer (tainted only slightly by Samsung), but nothing from Apple. Going with the iPhone 5, you get everything Apple and almost everything Google, so I'm tempted to make this category close to a tie. But there's one more kind of service -- customer service.
The Apple Store is unmatched. From buying your iPhone 5, to being taught how to use it, to easily getting help with it when something goes wrong, Apple has hundreds of stores in dozens of countries. If you live anywhere near an Apple Store and your iPhone 5 stops working, you can go in and get it fixed, or get it swapped out for a replacement, in a matter of hours. With the Galaxy S3, all you'll have is lost time and patience as you wait for 3rd parties or the postal system.
Thanks to the Apple Store and iCloud, I've literally walked in with a damaged iPhone and walked out with a new phone with all my data and content wirelessly synced back to it in less than an hour. In that regard, no one yet comes close to Apple and the iPhone.
iPhone 5 vs. Galaxy S3: Content
Apple has a tremendous advantage when it comes to content. iTunes started earlier and is now in more countries and provides more content than anyone else on the planet. Moreover, like with the services above, even if you don't like iTunes books, movies, TV shows, etc., you can also get Amazon, Netflix, Spotify, and all the other content companies right on your iPhone.
Google provides a lot of its own content now with Google Play, and Samsung fills in a lot with Samsung Hub, and you have access to enough third party content that there's no real difference. If you live in the U.S., you're almost certainly good to go. If you live outside the U.S. it can literally be the difference between being able to get legitimate content onto your phone and not (if that matters to you).
When it comes to apps Apple used to win by default based on the sheer magnitude of numbers. That's still true for tablets, but not for phones. The Google Play Store has hundreds of thousands of apps, just like Apple's App Store, including just about every big name app and game you can think of.
Apple has also become slightly more open over time, and Android apps have become much better looking and better working. You can still knock Apple for being more controlling, both in terms of what apps you can get and how those apps can interact with each other (or not), but for some users the simplicity and security of that model trumps any neck-bearded annoyance.
Now, if you already have an iPhone or iPod touch or iPad, and a lot of iOS apps that work on the iPhone, or if you've already bought a lot of iTunes media, that can make it easier and cheaper to stick with Apple. Likewise, if you already have a lot of content from Google Play, you'll find it easier to stick with Android.
Otherwise, if you're in the U.S., you're good to go with either, and if you're outside the U.S. and really care about buying your media, check and see what's available, but Apple and the iPhone 5 is your safer bet.
iPhone 5 vs. Galaxy S3: Bottom line
Like I said at the beginning, we're well past the days of obvious and easy disparities in devices. Things are more balanced and more nuanced now. And that's a very good thing for consumers. Apple's iPhone 5 and Samsung's Galaxy S 3 are both among the very best phones ever made and you'll be well served by either one.
Samsung offers things that the iPhone 5 just doesn't provide, including a much larger screen, NFC, widgets, and other customizations, DLNA support, etc., Those are important differences, make no mistake, so weigh them carefully. The Galaxy S3 is an absolute beast. If any of those things matter to you, or you just plain prefer Google and Samsung to Apple, get the Galaxy S3.
Otherwise get the sleekest, slimmest, easiest to use, most mainstream friendly, most content rich, most well supported phone in the industry -- the iPhone 5.
- iPhone 5: Everything you need to know
- Galaxy S3: Everything you need to know
Rene Ritchie is one of the most respected Apple analysts in the business, reaching a combined audience of over 40 million readers a month. His YouTube channel, Vector, has over 90 thousand subscribers and 14 million views and his podcasts, including Debug, have been downloaded over 20 million times. He also regularly co-hosts MacBreak Weekly for the TWiT network and co-hosted CES Live! and Talk Mobile. Based in Montreal, Rene is a former director of product marketing, web developer, and graphic designer. He's authored several books and appeared on numerous television and radio segments to discuss Apple and the technology industry. When not working, he likes to cook, grapple, and spend time with his friends and family.
Apple halts Vision Pro 2 plans to focus on a cheaper alternative — here's why that's the right move as buyers balk at the current $3,499 asking price
Best Prime Day Apple deals: What to expect and early savings
Apple to make huge Apple Pay change in EU shake-up — developers to get NFC access without Apple Pay or Wallet as company seeks to avoid massive antitrust fine


text:
Our Acotar Elves Paint By Numbers will bring out the artist within you and make you unleash your creative side, and the best part, our Paint By Numbers need no previous artistic skills just grab your brush and create a beautiful masterpiece you can proudly show off to your family, friends, and fellow artists.
Why You Should Start Our Paint By Numbers :
- Relaxing activity: Drawing with Paint By Numbers kit could be very amusing and joyful. The pleasure of creating a stunning work of art is beyond description. It will help you to relax and decrease stress in your leisure time.
- Perfect Gift Choice: If you are in trouble finding an appropriate gift, this is the ideal solution. Painting By Numbers kit is a pretty choice as a gift for Christmas, Thanksgiving Day, New Year, Birthday, or other occasions. Besides, it is suitable for both young and adults.
- Best Decoration: Paintings are highly preferred as beautifying items because of their heartwarming influence. It is a perfect item for decorating your home, apartment, office, hotel, restaurant, and any other place.
What's In Paint By Numbers kit ?
- 1x Numbered acrylic paint set (About 24 different colors, depending on the painting).
- 1x Numbered high-quality linen canvas.
- 1x set of 3 paint brushes (1x small, 1x medium, 1x large).
- Reference paper and a copy of the canvas so you can follow up the numbers easily.
How To Paint Your Acotar Elves Paint By Numbers :
- STEP 1: Prepare your paint by numbers kit. Lay your acrylic canvas out on a flat surface. Organize your paint and apply base layers.
STEP 2: Follow the numbers. Match the numbers of paints to the numbered areas on the canvas.
STEP 3: Enjoy your Paint By Numbers kit. Stand proudly back and admire your masterpiece! Posting your Paint By Numbers on social media is also recommended.


text:
The first of three courses required for a Person-Centered Elder Support certificate, which is designed to prepare the student for a caregiver role with elders. Content will focus on educational concepts and practices for the care and safety of elders experiencing normal aging. Sensory, physical and psychosocial changes of aging, normal aging, myths of aging, and culture change will be discussed.
Fee: $40
Course will focus on effective person-centered communication techniques to promote quality relationships between caregivers and elders. Content focuses on promoting holistic approaches and respect for the individual, and emphasizes adaptive services as the elder experiences changes in his or her health or abilities. This approach empowers both caregiver and elder by offering positive, well-defined strategies to enhance the elder's quality of life.
Course focuses on educational concepts and practices for the care and safety of elders experiencing dementia. Topics include signs, symptoms, and causes of dementia, as well as caregiver strategies for persons with dementia. Alzheimer's disease will be studied, including stages, symptom progression, and behaviors. Focus will be on understanding the disease and meeting the persons needs using person-centered concepts, techniques, and strategies. Caregiver support and community resources will be explored.


text: This page is for the enjoyment of fans of these wonderful characters! Please Visit the official websites for more information! All characters, names are trademark TM and © of their respectful copyright owners, they may not be altered or used for profit without permission. All images, text, or other information to the knowledge of the sites administration are being used fairly. Any infringement on trademarks and copyrights is unintentional and will be rectified upon notification


text:
This is FRESH AIR. I'm Dave Davies, in for Terry Gross, who has the day off. While the nation's attention is riveted on the presidential race this fall, much of what actually happens after a new president is inaugurated will depend on who controls Congress, and our guest Robert Draper says the winners of many of this year's 435 congressional races will be influenced, if not determined, by people you've never heard of who did their work behind closed doors in state capitols around the country.
This will be the first election since congressional boundaries were redrawn following the 2010 census. Draper writes in the current issue of The Atlantic magazine that most redistricting is done by state legislatures, often resulting in bizarrely shaped districts, which maximize political advantage for the party in control.
It's a time-honored practice, but Draper says the process is more sophisticated and cynical now, and it's giving us increasingly safe blue and red districts, giving voters less real choice in elections and making the Congress more polarized and less willing to engage in compromise.
Robert Draper is a contributing writer at the New York Times Magazine and a correspondent for GQ, National Geographic and The Atlantic. His latest book, based on his experiences following the 112th Congress, is called "Do Not Ask What Good We Do."
Well, Robert Draper, welcome back to FRESH AIR. We're talking about redrawing election boundaries that can really affect who gets to go to Congress. Let's start with some basics. When do congressional boundaries get redrawn and why?
ROBERT DRAPER: They get redrawn every 10 years in fulfillment of the constitutional mandate of one person, one vote. And, you know, every 10 years, Dave, we have a census. And that census captures not only how many people are in America but where they are. And we're therefore able - and in fact required by law - to reapportion our 435 congressional maps so that every American has the same amount of voting influence. That's what redistricting was meant to be about.
Now, sometimes these congressional districts will move out of one state and into another state because, for example, the state of Texas will have grown in population, while next door the state of Louisiana will have lost. And so that's what happened in 2010, that as a result of what was found in the census, eight states in the South and West gained congressional seats, while 10 states in the Midwest and East, as well as Louisiana, which had been ravaged by Hurricane Katrina, lost seats. This is what redistricting was set up to do.
DAVIES: Right, so some states will gain or lose representatives, and then within states, people will have moved within them, so there will be a need to readjust boundaries. You can't simply run in the same districts. Who draws the new lines?
DRAPER: Well, typically they are drawn by state legislatures in the particular state. There are a few cases, seven or eight, I think, in which the states now have passed laws having a bipartisan commission or a so-called nonpartisan commission draw the maps. But typically it's done by the legislature that's in power.
Of course, what that means is that the legislature that's in power is likeliest to draw maps that will favor members of their own party, and indeed that's proved to be the case.
DAVIES: Now when these state legislators draw the lines - we're talking about boundaries for congressional districts - do members of Congress contact them? Are they allowed to say: You know, I'd really like to get rid of this neighborhood and get that neighborhood in my district?
DRAPER: They are allowed to, and they do say that, and so there is often communication, usually informal, usually not in writing, between those who are on the ground in the state writing the maps, those who are in charge of the state redistricting legislative committee and then those who actually are going to be affected by it.
And as you've indicated, Dave, there are all sorts of capricious things that will go on in the drawing of maps. The chief purpose, as it's evolved, what it's now really become is an opportunity for an elected official, for a congressman, to sort of build a garrison for himself, an impregnable garrison that consists of the best voting bloc, likeliest to keep him in power for a long period of time.
And for the state legislatures who are drawing a map, it presents not only an opportunity to help out those people from their own party but to of course gut the districts of the opposing party. And so what you'll hear from let's say a Republican congressman in Texas, since the Texas legislature is dominated by Republicans and they draw the maps, is that they will communicate with the redistricting committee, who in turn will communicate with the people actually drawing the maps to make sure that my district includes these particular businesses, which donate to my campaign, that they include this particular neighborhoods, that includes maybe my mother-in-law, that it excludes this particular neighborhood, which is becoming increasingly Hispanic or African-American.
And so in this way they basically build a district that's most favorable to them, which may be altogether different from the district they've been representing over the years.
DAVIES: Now, you write in this piece that the lines that were redrawn after the 2010 census would particularly benefit Republicans. Why?
DRAPER: Well, because following the 2010 midterm elections, that also was a year in which state legislators were up for election all across the nation, and what happened - a lot of people paid attention to the fact that the Republicans took back the House of Representatives. That's not all the Republicans did in 2010. They also gained something like 700 seats in state legislatures across America.
What this meant was that there were certain states, such as North Carolina, which had not had a Republican-controlled legislature since Reconstruction, that now had an opportunity for the first time to draw maps that benefitted their party, benefitted the Republican Party.
And so, the prediction by a number of Republicans as a result of what took place in 2010 was that they could really, really cut into the Democrats' numbers, really build further into the new majority that the Republicans had and in fact perhaps could even gain as many as 15 additional seats just in drawing maps; in other words 15 seats that would become de facto Republican seats even before there had been a new election.
DAVIES: In this piece you profile a gentleman named Tom Hoffler, a guy who's done redistricting for a living for years. Explain exactly what he does.
DRAPER: Sure, for the last 30 or so years, Hoffler has been the chief map drawer for the Republican Party. He had been the actual chief of redistricting out of the Republican National Committee. He now has an informal consultant position, but it's - he still has offices in the RNC. And Hoffler is this guy, you know, obviously not a household name. No one would recognize him on the street, he doesn't do interviews and is more than content that it be so that he be anonymous. Nonetheless is a very, very powerful figure in the Republican Party because over the last several decades, he has been counted upon to draw these very, very aggressive maps, but to do so in a legal manner because even if a particular party is in power, it doesn't mean they can just simply draw whatever map they want wherever they want it.
There are certain legal restrictions and in particular legal restrictions regarding discrimination, vis-a-vis the Voting Rights Act. Hoffler has become expert at this sort of thing. And so, he has been kind of leading the fight for Republicans, albeit behind the scenes, for the past several cycles of census-taking and map-drawing, I think the last three or four.
DAVIES: So this consultant, Tom Hoffler, when he advises legislatures on redistricting, he has a partisan goal. He wants to get more Republicans elected, and he's clear about that. But you write that he says that there's a right way and a wrong way to do it.
DRAPER: Well, the wrong way to do it is to - to put it crassly - to get greedy, to recognize that you have an opportunity now that you're the party in power and you can draw the maps and to try in one fell swoop to grab all that you can get.
There are two problems with that, as Hoffler points out. I mean, one of them is that there are often legal problems. If you, for example, cut into a Hispanic community and dilute their voting power, then that's what's known as retrogression, which in one of the states that has been covered under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act for having a history of discrimination would cause those new maps to be thrown out.
And the other matter is that you have to think long-term. Even if you have an opportunity right now to aid your district by trying to avoid let's say a certain constituency that you don't want, then that may come back to haunt you in years later when that constituency grows so much that it results the need to form an altogether new district that will be from the other party.
So you have to weigh immediate concerns with not only the legalities but long-term implications. And this is a difficult thing for Hoffler to be able to teach, particularly states like North Carolina, which had not had an opportunity, if you were a Republican, to draw the maps in a very long time. They're eager to make up for lost time, but there are legal implications for doing so.
DAVIES: He advises people not to use email. Why?
DRAPER: Well because these emails can, if tracked, if uncovered, can disclose a discriminatory intent. If for example you're saying, you know, I don't want this district, or I don't want this precinct, don't give me this precinct because those are African-Americans, and they've never voted for me, then you've basically connected the dots for anybody who's wanting to file a lawsuit against you, saying what this is about is discrimination.
You're allowed to draw a map that has fewer, say, African-Americans or Hispanics if you can demonstrate that there was no pattern, no intent, to retrogress, to discriminate against those minorities, but if you have emails that say so, you've lost the case.
DAVIES: So an example in his view of doing it the wrong way is Texas, where they gained was it four congressional seats with this census?
DRAPER: That's right, and Texas is an interesting case because the reason they gained four seats, Dave, was that the population in Texas over the last 10 years swelled by 4.3 million people. Of those 4.3 million new residents of Texas, 2.8 million were Hispanic, and another about half-million-or-so were African-American. So 3.3 of the 4.3 million were Hispanic and African-American.
What that means is that if you actually had taken away those new inhabitants who were African-American and Hispanic, Texas wouldn't have gotten a new seat. But it got four new seats. And so Texas then was faced with a choice, and you'll recall that Texas has a Republican governor, Rick Perry, as well as Republican-dominated legislature.
Those Republicans could either sort of read the writing on the walls and say, well, OK, we've got four new seats, but let's face it, we got them because of all these new Hispanics and African-Americans, let's go ahead and create those four districts for Hispanics and African-Americans, and let's do, as George W. Bush did when he ran for re-election in 1994 as governor of Texas, which is compete very heavily for, you know, very fervently for the Hispanic vote.
And Bush, in fact the record shows, was quite successful in doing so. That was one choice they could do. Another choice is kind of a middle ground, where they maybe create a couple of minority opportunity districts and then gerrymander the other two remaining districts more favorably to themselves.
But they instead chose a third course, which was basically to avoid those demographic realities, to hang on to power as much as they could, and to draw maps that were favorable to them but which definitely leant the impression of discrimination.
And these were immediately challenged in a variety of lawsuits. They were immediately thrown out by a federal court in San Antonio, and those maps over the better part of a year ping-ponged between a number of federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.
DAVIES: So as we approach the 2012 elections, what's the situation with the boundaries in Texas?
DRAPER: Well, the congressional districts as they were drawn by the Republicans and then reconfigured due to a court challenge, they are standing through this election. But because they're under a challenge, the courts in all likelihood will order that they be redrawn after the election for the 2014 election. So, you know, once again because of the mischief of the Texas State Legislature in their zeal to maximize their gains even though their gains came as a result of increased Hispanic and African-American populations, that this is going to remain an unsettled issue for possibly years.
DAVIES: We're speaking with Robert Draper. He's a veteran political journalist. His most recent book about his time in the 112th Congress is called "Do Not Ask What Good We Do." He's written most recently in The Atlantic about congressional redistricting. We'll talk more after a short break. This is FRESH AIR.
DAVIES: If you're just joining us, we're speaking with journalist Robert Draper. His most recent book about Congress is called "Do Not Ask What Good We Do." He's written most recently in The Atlantic about congressional redistricting, which is what we're talking about today.
There are some colorful figures in Texas politics, and give us an example of a district that kind of tells the story of what happened there.
DRAPER: Well, one that comes immediately to mind is the 27th District of Texas. This is where Corpus Christi, Texas, is, and that seat is currently represented by a Tea Party freshman named Blake Farenthold, a very sort of legendary name in Texas. His grandmother, Sissy Farenthold, was a liberal icon there. Blake Farenthold is not a liberal.
And he managed to eke out a victory. He won by something like 900 votes in a recount, beating a veteran Hispanic incumbent, Solomon Ortiz, in a district that is something like 90 percent Hispanic. Eighty-six percent of the Hispanics voted against Blake Farenthold. How did he win? Because the Hispanic turnout was abysmally low in this midterm year, and there was a very, very high Tea Party turnout, which favored Farenthold.
So he won but knew that he was living on borrowed time, that the demographics of his district were such that unless there was another wave election, he would likely be swept out. So Farenthold was very, very hopeful that redistricting would favor him, and it did.
The Republicans took the 27th District, they saw their endangered new Republican inhabitant, and what they did simply was saw off of the district the town of Brownsville, which is where a preponderance of the Hispanics in his district reside, and instead they redrew the map minus Brownsville and into an area, corridor further sort of north and west that is distinctly Republican.
And so Farenthold I find to be a very, very self-effacing and also plainspoken congressman, and I asked him, so, you know, why didn't you just say look, I'm content with the district that I have, and I'm willing to compete to win in my district yet again. And he said, look, I would rather have a, you know, 60-percent Republican district than a, you know, a swing district any day. Duh.
And so that's what he has, and for the next 10 years, he is essentially protected as a Republican.
DAVIES: Does the district have a funny shape?
DRAPER: It does. It's shaped like a Glock pistol.
DRAPER: It's - there are a lot of funny shapes in Texas because of the rather imaginative map drawings. I mean, one of them is called a Texas jumbo shrimp. There's another one that looks like a bottle opener. It's - these maps can be very, very fanciful as they sort of - you know, they are these kind of impressionistic representations of the yearnings and deviousness of politics today.
And so in so doing, they take on these very, very odd shapes. I mean, Tom Hoffler likes to makes fun of other - there's a Maryland which he likens variously to an amoeba convention or an amoeba orgy. There is one in Georgia that he has called flat cat roadkill. He himself has been responsible for ones that look more or less like a gimpy leg, you know, a leg that's been shelled.
And so yeah, you look at these maps, and they don't look like a country. They don't really look like anything except perhaps splatter art.
DAVIES: You write that Republicans in North Carolina had a chance after the 2010 census and the 2010 elections to redraw maps there that might favor Republicans. And this consultant that you write about, Tom Hoffler, went there and did it, as he says, the right way. What did he achieve in North Carolina?
DRAPER: Well, at the time, North Carolina had a slim Democratic majority. There are 13 congressional seats in North Carolina. Seven of them are occupied by Democrats, six by Republicans. Now that the Republicans controlled the map-drawing capabilities in North Carolina for the first time, they enlisted the aid of Hoffler, and through the machinations of Hoffler and others on the ground in North Carolina, they created maps that will result in that seven-to-six Democratic majority becoming either a 10-to-three or a nine-to-four Republican majority.
And so it's a rather dramatic switch, and of course as is always the case these days, there are court challenges. But Hoffler is a veteran at these sorts of things, and the challenges, once again, claim that there has been a retrogression of minority districts. But by and large what Hoffler and the North Carolinian Republican achieved was that they managed to take out some so-called blue dog Democrats, these kind of moderate Democrats in swing districts, by unswinging the districts, making them more Republican.
By taking those Democrats who were in the swing districts and moving them into a liberal bastion, Chapel Hill district, held by a former political science professor named David Price, such that Price, who was safe in that district anyway, will now be that much safer.
And then finally as a coup de grace, they looked at the district of Renee Ellmers, who was a Tea Party freshman, who like Blake Farenthold also won in a recount by a very, very slender margin. And they shoveled more Republicans into her district such that what was clearly a swing district before is now a very safe Republican district for a decade to come.
DAVIES: I wonder if when you attempt to be aggressive in party gerrymandering that it can fail over the long run. If you try and get too many seats, you disperse your support, and then in a year when the other side gets some momentum, you find that in fact you lose more seats than you might otherwise have. Is this a phenomenon that you see?
DRAPER: It is, yes. When you try to have as many seats as possible, you basically are diluting - if you're, say, the Republican Party - you're diluting your own core. You're spreading it out to as many different districts as possible to feed as many beasts as possible, and that means that these districts are kind of on a demographic knife edge, and as they change over a period of years, as more and more voters who may not be what you had in mind move into that district, then it becomes something altogether different than what you'd expected.
Actually, a case in point of this, when Tom DeLay and the Republicans did a very radical redistricting in 2003...
DAVIES: In Texas.
DRAPER: In the state of Texas. And there was, for example, one area, south of Houston I believe, that they believed was very favorable to the Republicans. But over that period, over that decade, the very sparse population in that area began to be inhabited more and more by African-Americans. And so by 2006, when the Democrats took back the House, they took that particular district.
It was something that looked Republican at the time but only by sort of a slender majority, and literally within a few years, a lot of Democrats had moved in, and so in a sense the Republicans had outfoxed themselves, and 2006 was a seat that they - they lost that seat in 2006 as a result.
DAVIES: Robert Draper's piece on redistricting appears in the current issue of The Atlantic. He'll be back in the second half of the show. Draper's latest book about Congress is called "Do Not Ask What Good We Do." I'm Dave Davies, and this is FRESH AIR.
DAVIES: This is FRESH AIR. I'm Dave Davies, in for Terry Gross, who has the day off. We're speaking with journalist Robert Draper who writes about congressional redistricting in the current issue of The Atlantic. He says partisan gerrymandering is an old tradition but is now practiced more aggressively, giving us more safe Republican and Democratic districts and making Congress more polarized.
When we left off, Draper was discussing former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who led an unprecedented effort to redraw congressional boundaries in his home state of Texas years before it would be required because Republicans - thanks largely to the DeLay's efforts - had managed to take control of the state legislature.
You know, go back in years, Tom DeLay was an incredibly powerful guy and he engaged in this aggressive maneuver, right, to do in fact a redistricting between census counts and he got into trouble. I mean he was indicted, I believe, by a state grand jury that had something to do with the way he used - did national fundraising to achieve the redistricting in Texas. What became of DeLay?
DRAPER: Well, last I checked DeLay is out on appeal. He was found guilty in that particular case that you cite, but he is living in Sugar Land, Texas. In fact, I visited with him for my book on the House and I think feels, you know, optimistic about its prospects.
It's true that he was an extremely powerful man. True, as well, that his misfortunes are connected to some degree to redistricting. He blames, in any event, people like the Democrat Martin Frost who was one of the Democratic congressman that he kneecapped in his redistricting gambit as being a force behind the prosecution of DeLay - unfair prosecution in his regard - in his voice. But what DeLay had done that was unusual there was that he had looked at these various seats in Congress in Texas that were being held by white Democrats.
They were not these minority seats but they were these white seats, and they were more or less Blue Dog, and he believed they were vulnerable or that they could be vulnerable and if they completely re-jiggered those maps such that a guy like Charlie Stenholm or Martin Frost, who had been representing the same district for ages, would wake up one morning and be surrounded now by constituents who didn't know him and who he didn't know, that they'd lose. And DeLay's redistricting gamble completely paid off, at least in the sense that they wiped out pretty much every white Texas Democratic congressman - with the exception of one, Chet Edwards, who lost a few years later. And so it was a message sent, really, across the nation, well outside of Texas, that you could use redistricting not just as a tool to build a wall, but you could use it as a spear.
DAVIES: And in that case, if I recall, I mean he had to first get control of the Texas Legislature. So a lot of money was raised and put into specific races so that they could get control of the legislature, which then undertook an unusual congressional redistricting - not prompted by the census - but in effect, motivated by opportunity.
DRAPER: That's absolutely right. And you're correct that it was that fundraising effort to help increase a Republican majority, or really take the majority in the Texas state legislature, that got him into trouble. But it's also true, as you referenced, that the, you know, redistricting had already taken place after the 2000 census, it had taken place in 2001, and so it was a rather nervy thing of DeLay then to do, to order yet another redistricting not prompted by a brand new census but simply because they could. And there were lots of court challenges. Some of those, at least one of those maps was thrown out - the 23rd District in West Texas - but by and large his gamble worked.
DAVIES: So he convicted of these fundraising violations, didn't actually go to prison, he's out on appeal. Is that where we are?
DRAPER: That's correct. Yes.
DAVIES: And he thinks he won't ever spend any time in jail?
DRAPER: That's certainly his hope and belief. Yes.
DAVIES: And what's the political legacy of this? Do people look at this and say man, he overreached, don't go there? Or do they look and they say, wow this is a smart and aggressive way to help your party?
DRAPER: Well, no one's ever committed the act or, you know, or repeated the act of doing a mid-census redistricting as DeLay did. I mean that was a very, very chancy thing to do and invited all sorts of legal repercussions. But what they have recognized is that the very notion of using partisan redistricting, not just as a means of protection, but as a spear point to gauge the opposition in a way that it never quite been done so aggressively before. No, he's become a role model in that regard.
DAVIES: Has this been going on since the early days of the republic? I mean like politics has always been, you know, played for keeps. Hasn't it?
DRAPER: It's been going on since there was a Congress. In fact, in 1788, when they were drawing maps for the first federal Congress, the state of Virginia got into some serious - what was not then known as gerrymandering, but would soon be - when Patrick Henry had his arch foe, James Madison, running and he wanted Madison to lose. So he convinced the Virginia Legislature to draw Madison into the same district that James Monroe was running in - the 5th Congressional District - in hopes that Madison would lose. Madison ended up winning. He became the fourth president of the United States. And when he was the president, he had as his vice president a fellow named Elbridge Gerry. Elbridge Gerry had been the governor of Massachusetts. And when Gerry was governor in I believe 1812, he presided over map-drawing so radical in Massachusetts, that it included a very strange-looking congressional district outside of Boston that was shaped like a salamander - in an effort to appease the particular congressman there. And so this is where Elbridge Gerry's creation that looked like a salamander gave rise to the term gerrymandering that we've used ever since.
DAVIES: So if politicians have been doing this for centuries, should we be more worried about it now?
DRAPER: Well, I think so, because what has taken place over time as we've gotten more aggressive in partisan redistricting, you know, one affect of this, Dave, has been the drastic diminishing of the number of swing districts. So what this means is that districts are becoming more and more red and blue or blue. If you're going to win in a red congressional district then that means you have to be as right wing as possible in the primary. The guy who is the most conservative wins. And then there is really the general election doesn't even count because it's a red district. The same with the very blue district. You've got to be all the way to the left and that's the person who wins.
Those individuals who come to Washington are not individuals who are predisposed to view anything with the desire to compromise. And we saw this phenomenon take place, most recently in 2011, and rather dramatically, with the debt ceiling debate. There have been studies that have shown that the people who were the most apt to vote for the debt ceiling deal were people from the swing states. And the people least apt to vote for it, the people who were, you know, keeping us, kind of, on the brink of default, were those who came from very, very hard-core districts, in this case usually red districts, Republican districts. And so, yeah, it's a matter of some concern. I mean as we, you know, see the intensifying gridlock in Washington, D.C., there's no question that redistricting has played a role in that.
DAVIES: Because so many people come from districts where they don't have two worry about the other party challenging, what they have to worry about are extremists within their own party taking them on in a primary.
DRAPER: Sure. That's right. And for that matter, when I was in - when I sort of embedded myself from the House of Representatives in 2011 while working on a book, I heard far less talk about how can we work together to achieve a solution, and far more talk about how can I get my map redrawn so that I get the voters I want and I basically won't have to take tough votes? And so I think redistricting has really created a perverse mentality that has undercut, you know, a lot of the intentions of a representative democracy.
DAVIES: Robert Draper writes about congressional redistricting in the current issue of The Atlantic.
We'll hear more after a break. This is FRESH AIR.
DAVIES: We're speaking with veteran political journalist Robert Draper. He has a piece in The Atlantic about congressional redistricting.
You know, it's clear that there are legal prohibitions on racial and ethnic discrimination. Is it illegal to engage in partisan gerrymandering? If the records said yes, I drew that district because I wanted to help my party and that's clear, have the courts found that to be illegal?
DRAPER: The courts have shied away from saying anything derogatory, putting any firm hand on the matter of partisan redistricting. Now what they do say is that you can't just wantonly cut up districts. You certainly can't to, in a way that's going to dilute minority voting strength, it's going to retrogress. But there other things that have been said on this as well. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor had said in a Supreme Court decision that appearances do matter in the case of the redistricting. And thus, it said that districts should have a certain is compactness, a contiguity and respect for political subdivision, that you can't just run right through precincts wantonly.
Having said that, there has been a basic modesty, a prudency(ph), from the Supreme Court in aversion to wading into political matters ever since Justice Felix Frankfurter said, in a Supreme Court case, that the Supreme Court shouldn't even be treading on the issue of gerrymandering - that that amounts to entering what he called, a political thicket. And though there have been a number of the Supreme Court cases ever since then, they have been very, very restrained on the issue of whether or not you can use map drawing to partisan advantage.
DAVIES: OK. So districts need to be somewhat compact. They need to kind of keep communities whole when possible. But there's no outright stricture on using the boundaries to help a political party.
DRAPER: There is not.
DAVIES: Seems so strange. Because, you know, in other spheres, you know, we rely upon independent arbiter. I mean when we have a legal dispute there's a court and it sort of you don't have the parties having private conversations with the judge or changing the rules. And in athletic competitions we count on umpires to be fair. And we don't have redrawing the strike zones or the foul lines to help their side. This is a really kind of odd exception, isn't it?
DRAPER: It is. Yes. And in fact, I remember talking to the congressman I mentioned before, Congressman Blake Farenthold about this. And I said, you know, that basically you won in a particular district. That district may now not be happy with your performance. And instead of getting to express their dissatisfaction towards you, you are conveniently re-jiggering the district. Isn't that unfair? Isn't that undemocratic? And after saying that well, I'm happy to, you know, run in whatever district, I'm happy to defend my record, you know, to anyone, he nonetheless added that look, elections have consequences. You know, Republicans won. They got to draw the maps. That's the way it is. And so to the extent that there is a view about fairness, the view of fairness is look, this is just one consequence of election. Democrats would do the same thing. And there's no question in my mind that that's true.
DAVIES: You know, one of the other things you hear about redistricting is that it doesn't just favor the party that runs it, it also favors incumbents. And I've seen cases, for example in Pennsylvania, where a lot of people objected to a map that the Republicans came up with, felt that it did too much for their party. But some Democratic Congressional Representatives didn't raise any complaints because the map kind of helped them protect their incumbency. Do they in effect kind of make deals so that everybody gets something?
DRAPER: They absolutely do. That happened in North Carolina and that happened in Texas where there was a lot of give and take, or let's say input, from Democrat incumbents who had been holding their seats for some time, and essentially what they were saying was hey, don't take these particular voters away from me. But implicitly, what they were, but implicitly what they were saying was, as long as you keep my district more or less intact I for one am not going to fight you in these other districts. Because yeah, there is, kind of, a handshake deal between both parties.
Now that's, it had been the tradition for many, many years that what redistricting was really about was favoring incumbents. It was only when Tom DeLay in 2003 began to go after Democrats with his radical redrawing that for the first time we saw the notion of redistricting used to kneecap opponents. But still, by and large it's a very sort of, you know, backroom and clubby thing where even for example, I mean you mentioned Pennsylvania, but also in Texas, there was some communication between a Democratic incumbent congressman and the Republican map makers. And implicit in those conversations was hey, don't do my map. Don't do my district much damage and you then won't get a fight from me.
DAVIES: There are a handful of states, you said, in which the legislature themselves don't redraw the boundaries. There are some kind of a commission with some Independents. Do they do a better job?
DRAPER: Well, that's in the eye of the beholder. I mean California now has a commission that is supposed to be nonpartisan or bipartisan, but the Republicans certainly don't think so. And indeed, there is, once again, a kind of an email trail showing the rather successful effort on the part of Democrats to influence that supposedly impartial commission such that seats were drawn in a way that favor Democrats. But yes, there are other states where they have had, for some time, a bipartisan commission. And at minimum what it does is it sort of takes the overheated radicalism of some of this map-drawing out of the equation. I mean, there is more compromise there and there's more of a sensibility to it, in addition to which the process is more open. You know, citizens have more of a sense of what's going on and why it's going on and there's a lot of back and forth.
That does seem to be a healthy way of doing it. And indeed, a former congressman from Tennessee, John Tanner, had for his last several years in Congress been waging this lonely quest to get a national redistricting reform bill passed that would require state legislatures to forfeit their power and instead turn over their map-drawing power to bipartisan committees in each state.
You can imagine how much enthusiasm there has been for that bill, both for - because the reality is Republicans, you know, they love having the power to draw maps. So do Democrats and, you know, what Democrats are thinking about right now is not, you know, how do we create redistricting reform but how do we take over all of those state legislatures so we can start drawing them (unintelligible).
DAVIES: You wrote a book about the 112th Congress called "Do Not Ask What Good We Do." You kind of embedded in Congress. What most surprised you about the way Congress operates when you see it up close?
DRAPER: Well, I think what surprised me is how zero sum Congress has become, how little even appetite for compromise there is. And I'm speaking mainly here about leadership. You know, so there are certain rank and file congressmen who will sit on committees and they want to get legislation done. They realize to get it done they need some help from the opposition. They'll form a partnership with one guy or another.
Those are noble, you know, endeavors that take place all the time in the halls of Congress, but they are almost always without the approval of the leadership. You know, what the House Republican leadership - John Boehner and Eric Canter and Kevin McCarthy - are interested in is maintaining power. What Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, the Democrats, are interested in is regaining power.
And everything that they have done, everything that they've not done, you know, has been about that. When the Ryan budget plan came up, for example, for a vote, there was a big war within the Democratic Party about whether they should put up a budget of their own. Chris Van Hollen won that war. He was the ranking member of the House Budget Committee and thus the guy who was squared off against Ryan.
And his belief was we need to stand for something. We need to have something that voters can see that we are for. The Democrats actually believe that, no, we don't need to do that at all. What we need to do is just beat the hell out of the Ryan plan like a pinata so that we don't have to contrast it against anything, so that voters will just simply see what's bad rather than get into a rational conversation of which is the more appealing budget.
And it's that kind of attitude that I think has become so unfortunate and has created such a lack of will in Congress to get really anything done and which in turn has fostered such a public dislike of Congress.
DAVIES: Well, Robert Draper, thanks so much for speaking with us.
DRAPER: Sure thing. My pleasure.
Robert Draper's piece on redistricting appears in the current issue of The Atlantic. Draper's latest book about Congress is called "Do Not Ask What Good We Do."
Copyright © 2012 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio record.


text:
MacQuarrie Modern Tartan Heavyweight
Received an item that doesn't fit or is not suitable? No problem, our exchanges, and returns policies are designed to make that as easy as possible.
We're happy to exchange most items if they are the wrong size or color, but unfortunately, engraved or custom-made items cannot be exchanged or refunded unless a manufacturer's fault is found with them
To exchange an item, please purchase a replacement item in a new order, and then return the unsuitable items for a refund.
If you are thinking of exchanging something - remember that you can combine the replacement item with any other items you may wish to purchase, and only pay to ship for the combined order.
If you would like to return an item for a refund, please send it back to us at the following address, including the following information:
Imperial Highland Supplies
Mehar Town, Aminabad Road
Sialkot - 51310
Phone # (+92) 337 714 1111
Thanks for subscribing!
This email has been registered!


text:
The appearance Monday of a new iPhone/iPad app called "NRA: Practice Range" is causing controversy. Critics say release of the game one month after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., was callous. And they're also incensed that it's tied to the NRA, which has pinned part of the blame for mass shootings on violent video games.
The app was apparently first rated as approved for children as young as 4 — children even younger than the 20 who were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School. But now the rating is "12+" because of "frequent/intense realistic violence."
The New York Post wrote that the app "spits on the graves of Newtown massacre victims." This afternoon, a progressive group called the Courage Campaign started an online petition asking Apple to drop the app from its store.
Some things about the game have led us to make calls to its developer (MEDL Mobile) and the NRA. So far, we haven't heard back. Neither have the many other organizations who have reached out to them, as far as we can tell.
We're wondering, first of all, just what connection the NRA has to the app or what input it had on the development.
MEDL Mobile's "details" page on the game says it is an "Official NRA Licensed Product." But the "NRA" logo on the app isn't like those on other National Rifle Association official apps — one for NRA news and another that an NRA "gun guide."
The reviews for the app aren't too flattering. CNET.com, for example, says it has "frankly quite awful controls." You'd think the NRA would be more choosy before lending its name to an app that claims to offer "the most authentic experience possible."
The New York Times' Bill Keller is thinking the app might be a hoax. But then why wouldn't the association have immediately issued a disclaimer? There's nothing on NRA's website about the app.
As we said, we have calls into the NRA and the app's developer. We'll update if we do get through to them. And we'll watch for reporting from elsewhere.
Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.