text:
Atom gets first ride in HP's CPU-agnostic server
4 comments
SAN FRANCISCO Hewlett-Packard will roll out a processor-agnostic chassis called Gemini later this year geared for low power servers. Intels Centerton, a dual-core, 64-bit Atom SoC, will be the first CPU to ship in the system with ARM server SoCs following in the future.
HP will open its Discovery Lab to end users within 60 days showing servers running multiple ARM server SoCs as well as Centerton-based systems. Previously, the worlds largest server maker had only said it was testing a 32-bit ARM server SoC from startup Calxeda.
Years from now we will say this is where the disruption began with low energy servers, said Paul Santeler, general manager of HPs hyperscale business unit, referring to the Gemini/Centerton launch. We really expect Gemini will create a disruption around low energy servers, he added.
The Gemini system will accommodate Atom and ARM cartridges to target different workloads. The cartridges will house CPUs, memory and possibly other components.
Both HP and Intel declined to give details on the Gemini system and the Centerton processor until the products are formally announced later this year. Intel said previously Centerton is a 6W, 32 nm SoC that supports virtualization, error correction code and has some integrated I/O.
Jason Waxman, general manager of Intels cloud infrastructure group, said Intel and HP will work on future low energy processors. Intel will deliver a version of its Atom server SoC in its 22 nm technology in 2013, he added.
The Web site for HPs Project Moonshot, its low power server initiative, is currently running on a single Gemini server using a Centerton processor. The Gemini server is handling 300 concurrent Web sessions, serving 2,500 concurrent Web pages while consuming 12-14W, compared to 150W for a similar Intel Xeon server, HP said.
HP declined to name what other ARM SoCs beyond the Calxeda CPU it will show running in its lab where end users will be able to run test applications. At least one company has an unannounced ARM server SoC in the works, said Santeler.
Among the other players, Applied Micro announced last year its plans for a 64-bit ARM server SoC. Dell said it is using Marvells Armada XP in prototype servers for end user testing. Nvidia announced plans for a broad line of ARM-based computer CPUs. Samsung has hired a high profile ARM server SoC team in Austin.
HP echoes comments of other developers who have said the significant work is still ahead to get ARM SoCs ready for commercial servers. However, the 32-bit ARM SoCs, such as the Calxeda chip, will work fine on some workloads, Santeler said.
The Gemini systems will target a broad range of workloads including Web hosting, Hadoop analytics and Memcached memroy caching. HP may choose different ARM SoCs to target specific apps.
It's not surprising Intel is going first in HP's Gemini system given the 64-bit x86 chip will be in production late this year. Most ARM SoCs are not yet ready for prime time, but the extent to which they become used over the next several years will be a measure of how much disruption this sector sees. HP's CPU-agnostic design is a sign it sees this trend will be significant.
By 2015, HP estimates, 10-15 percent of the global server market could be using extremely low energy systems.
Intel's Jason Waxman (left) holds a Centerton chip next to HP's Paul Santeler.


text:
During a press conference at Minute Maid Park, representatives from the offices of Major League Baseball, the Astros, the Houston Police Department, the FBI, the District Attorney and the US Attorney's Office put potential counterfeiters on notice that counterfeiting is a crime and will be enforced to the full extent of the law.
The Anti-Counterfeiting Task Force also warned that undercover investigators will be on the lookout for counterfeit merchandise at All-Star Week events at Minute Maid Park and the George R. Brown Convention Center along with manufacturing facilities, retail stores and sidewalk vendors in and around Houston.
Counterfeit merchandise will be subject to seizure, and people found guilty of producing, selling or trafficking counterfeit merchandise will be subject to civil and criminal penalties which could include fines of up to $2 million and imprisonment for up to 99 years under federal, state and local laws.
These efforts protect consumers from purchasing unlicensed merchandise, which often is made from low-quality materials and crafted in a sub-standard manner, and also protect the officially licensed manufacturers and legitimate vendors who invest money and other resources to provide consumers with high-quality licensed products.
"The creation of this task force, and all of our anti-counterfeiting efforts, are intended to protect our fans during 2004 Major League Baseball All-Star Week in Houston," said Ethan Orlinsky, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Major League Baseball Properties. "When our fans purchase Major League Baseball licensed products they expect a certain level of quality, and the goal of our Task Force is to ensure that fans receive the highest level of quality with every purchase at 2004 All-Star Week events."
During today's event, the Task Force displayed official Major League Baseball merchandise, which carries the official Major League Baseball, 2004 All-Star Game or Houston Astros logos, as well as special Major League Baseball holograms and hang tags to illustrate the difference between officially licensed and bogus products. The special Task Force will also be coordinating efforts to curtail the sale of counterfeit tickets in and around 2004 All-Star Week Events.
Members of this collaborative law enforcement effort who attended the press conference included:
Pam Gardner, President, Business Operations, Houston Astros; Rob Matwick, Senior Vice President, Ballpark Operations, Houston Astros; Harold L. Hurtt, Chief of Police, Houston Police Department; Martha Montalvo, Executive Assistant Chief Houston Police, Houston Police Department; Dan Perales, Assistant Chief, Houston Police Department; Robert Dogam, Special Agent, Media Relations, FBI; Charles A. Rosenthal Jr., District Attorney, Harris County; Kate Dolan, Assistant District Attorney, Major Fraud Division, Harris County; Terry Clark, Chief, Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney's Office; Joe Porto, Assistant U.S, Attorney, Anti-Terrorism and National Security; U.S. Attorney's Office; Ethan Orlinsky, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Major League Baseball Properties; Kevin Hallinan, Senior Vice President, Security & Facility Management, Major League Baseball.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Hypocritical Dems In No Position to Blast GOP Over Paul
For years, Democrats have been on the defensive about the not inconsiderable portion of their party that was hostile to the State of Israel. But the attention and support being given Ron Paul in the Republican presidential race is giving them an opportunity to roast members of the GOP for refusing to treat the libertarian extremist as being beyond the pale of American politics. Thus, it was no surprise to read that the National Jewish Democratic Council condemned Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum for saying they would vote for Paul if he turned out to be the Republican nominee.
But to say this stance is hypocritical is an understatement. Did Jewish Democrats denounce their mainstream candidates for cozying up to racial hucksters and foes of Israel such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and pretending, as Romney and Santorum now do for Paul, that these persons were preferable to any Republican? Did they denounce their party for treating Jimmy Carter as a respected elder statesman? Of course not. Though it is troubling to see the other GOP candidates treat Paul as if he were a reasonable presidential choice, that is the way the game is played. Democrats are no more righteous in this respect than Republicans.
In truth, much of the Republican Party has rightly treated Paul as anathema. The Republican Jewish Coalition rightly refused to invite him to their presidential forum. It is also reassuring to see that the other candidates are finally shifting from a strategy of ignoring Paul's radical approach to foreign policy and instead pointing out just how dangerous he and his ideas are.
But to expect the leading candidates to go out of their way to snub Paul or to declare him unfit for the presidency is unrealistic. Just as Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis and John Kerry held their noses and pretended that Jackson and Sharpton were reasonable alternatives for the presidency because they wanted their supporters' votes in the fall, so, too, do Republicans pander to Paul.
The emergence of Paul is a worrisome sign not just for Republicans but all Americans. The limited success he has enjoyed so far illustrates that despite the overwhelming support of most Americans across the political spectrum for Israel, there is still a good-sized minority on the margins of both the left and the right that must be confronted. It is to be hoped Paul's numbers will decline as his connections with racist and extremist forces get more exposure.
It is some consolation to Republicans that Paul does far better in the polls with Democrats and independents than he does with Republicans, a point that should give partisans like the NJDC pause before they speak too loudly about the libertarian's source of support. Given that polls also show Republicans to be even more devoted to Israel than most Democrats, there is no chance he will be the nominee.
But it takes an extra helping of chutzpah for the NJDC, a group that has relentlessly defended every swipe at Israel on the part of the Obama administration, to start demanding Republicans take loyalty tests to the Jewish state. Though the NJDC claims Republicans who refuse to condemn Paul are putting party above principle, their endless apologias for Obama and other liberal Democrats who have distanced themselves from Israel are no different than the trimming being done by Romney and Santorum about Paul.
Choose your plan and pay nothing for six Weeks!
For a very limited time, we are extending a six-week free trial on both our subscription plans. Put your intellectual life in order while you can. This offer is also valid for existing subscribers wishing to purchase a gift subscription. Click here for more details.
Hypocritical Dems In No Position to Blast GOP Over Paul
Must-Reads from Magazine
Harvard Rewards an Iranian Hate-Monger
Another dubious honor.
What is it with the Harvard Kennedy School's penchant for celebrating dishonorable characters? First came a speaking invitation and fellowship for the traitor formerly known as Bradley Manning. The Kennedy School disinvited Manning following a public outcry in September, but now its leadership has awarded a fellowship to another equally odious figure.
That would be Hossein Derakhshan, an Iranian blogger and vehement apologist for the Tehran regime. Last week, the Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy named Derakhshan a fellow for the spring semester. The fellowship brings together "experienced journalists and practitioners who focus on some of today's most pressing issues: race relations, the urban/rural divide, the role of algorithms in society, and climate change, among other topics," Shorenstein Center Director Nicco Mele said in a news release.
Derakhshan's fellowship will focus on technology entrepreneurship, presumably drawing on his experience as one of Iran's first bloggers in the early aughts, work that won him the moniker "the blogfather." The Shorenstein release presents Derakhshan as a dissident of sorts, who "was imprisoned in Tehran for six years for his writings and online activism." Yet spending time in the mullahs' jails doesn't necessarily make someone a dissident–or worthy of a top journalism fellowship. Derakhshan has spent years viciously assailing real dissidents, and he has a long record of public statements in support of the regime, its leadership and security apparatus, and its conspiratorial and anti-Semitic worldview.
Start with the anti-Semitism. In December 2015, amid the popular frenzy over Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Derakhshan took to his English-language Twitter account (he also maintains a Persian account) to note that the villain of the movie was identified as "Supreme Leader," which is also the title of Iran's ruling theocrat. Wrote Derakhshan: "A Supreme Leader in the new star wars [sic]? What is the very pro-Israel J. J. Abrams hinting at?"
The tweet played on the canard, rampant among Iranian Islamists, that Jews use Hollywood influence to plant pro-Israel and anti-Iran messages in the minds of global audiences. In the real world, there is no evidence that J.J. Abrams is "very pro-Israel"–other than his Jewish last name, of course.
Uncovering devious Jews based on their last names is something of an obsession for Derakhshan. When a Georgian-American chess champion, Nazi Paikidze Barnes, announced that she was boycotting a 2017 tournament in Iran over the hijab requirement, Derakhshan blasted a message to like-minded activists on the social-media network Telegram, asking them to "research her name in Hebrew." The "Barnes" last name (her husband's) had Derakhshan wondering: "Perhaps her husband is Israeli-American?" Eventually one of his comrades wrote back to say that Barnes "doesn't appear to be a Jewish name."
Then there are the odes, published on his blog, to the Iranian regime. In June 2007, Derakhshan declared that "I'm proud to be Iranian, not because of Cyrus [the Great], but because of Khomeini, a true anti-colonial leader who created the only true post-colonial state in the world, Islamic Republic of Iran." That would be Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, who executed thousands of secular dissidents, issued a death fatwa against the British novelist Salman Rushdie, and transformed Iran into an Islamist total state.
Derakhshan has similarly warm feelings for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the U.S.-designated Iranian terror army that, among other things, has been spearheading the slaughter in Syria on behalf of Bashar Assad. The IRGC, wrote Derakhshan in August 2007, is "associated with pure patriotic and Shiite ideals about justice and sacrifice." He added: "It's no accident that the birthday of Imam Hossein, the central icon of the Islamic Republic's ideology, was chosen as the official day to celebrate the" IRGC. In June 2008, Derakhshan railed against the "Iranian reformist-turned-exiled opposition" for attacking Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Holocaust-denying former president, "to justify themselves and make their puppet masters at the State Department and Hoover Institute [sic] happy."
Most egregiously, Derakhshan has accused prominent Iranian dissidents and thinkers of spying for the U.S.–while the regime imprisoned these figures. As Haleh Esfandiari, a scholar at the Wilson Center, was languishing in the nightmarish Evin Prison in 2007, Derakhshan blogged:
I know speaking against Haleh Esfandiari is like suicide these days. . . . [She] has become a symbolic victim of the 'most repressive regime on the planet.' . . . Haleh Esfandiari was the first Iranian fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in 1995. . . . And we all know about NED's roles and functions in countries where the U.S. wants to bring about its favorite governments such as in Venezuela and the rest. Some even suggest that the links between the CIA and NED are undeniable. . . . Given what we know about NED today, I believe, anyone in any country who has had any ties with NED and its affiliate organisations . . . deserves to be charged and fairly and justly prosecuted.
When another jailed scholar, the Iranian-Canadian philosopher Ramin Jahanbegloo, confessed to fomenting a "soft" revolution in a statement broadcast on Iranian state television, Derakhshan insinuated that Jahanbegloo was likely guilty as charged:
In a key section of the interview – which is not yet available in full in English translation – the political-science lecturer and philosopher describes how some American think-tanks provided him with research opportunities and financial support so that he could conduct comparative analysis of socio-political change in contemporary east-central Europe and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Jahanbegloo describes how this research gradually led to a strengthening of his ties with these think-tanks, and how he eventually realised that the main people interested in the research were intelligence officials and those associated with the United States state department, who sought to use it to help form their polices towards Iran.
Jahanbegloo then expresses regret that he was deceived by a quasi-academic structure that effectively treated him as an unofficial analyst for foreign intelligence services. He says that if he knew politicians were exploiting his purely academic activities, he would have never got involved with such institutions in the first place. The last point strikes me as a little odd, since I know Ramin personally from the time he lived in Toronto; I know that he is not so naive as not to realise what think-tanks do and where the research they pursue ends up being most useful. But I also understand how, for professional and economic reasons, a serious scholar could be dragged into such a dark and dangerous game.
He concluded: "Sometimes the trigger for a person to confess to his or her mistakes is not torture by a brutal bunch of interrogators but his or her honest and couragous [sic] encounter with the larger picture to which he or she is contributing."
A spokesman for Harvard told me that Derakhshan's fellowship didn't concern "Iran or politics related to Iran." Indeed. The real concern here is the Kennedy School's revolting moral negligence.
Choose your plan and pay nothing for six Weeks!
For a very limited time, we are extending a six-week free trial on both our subscription plans. Put your intellectual life in order while you can. This offer is also valid for existing subscribers wishing to purchase a gift subscription. Click here for more details.
The Left's Immigration Radicalism
Mirror images.
Observers on the right must have been confused by the controversy that erupted following Attorney General Jeff Sessions's recent appearance on Fox News. What he advocated sounds at first glance like common sense.
"When we admit people to our country, we should be like Canada," Sessions said. "What good does it do to bring in somebody who's illiterate in their own country, has no skills, and is going to struggle in our country and not be successful?" Based on these comments, you could be forgiven for thinking a plague of unskilled illegal immigrants had descended upon the United States. Rest easy; a combination of increased border enforcement and a tightening labor market—trends that predate the Trump administration—resulted in a decline in the low-skilled illegal immigrant population.
The statistics are beside the point. The attorney general is packaging unsavory preconceptions about immigrants in a marketable pitch to centrists based on meritocratic assumptions. The fact is that Jeff Sessions is not qualified to determine who will or will not be a "successful" immigrant to the United States.
Sessions's vision of a meritocratic immigration regime assumes that success is beyond the reach of under-educated immigrants—a judgment based only on his own preconceptions. That's not just immodest but antithetical to conservatism, a philosophy which, at root, recognizes that the billions of daily interactions and events that we call the economy routinely frustrate those bold enough to issue predictions about its trajectory. Sessions's vision of a meritocratic immigration system really isn't that meritocratic at all; not if it is based on his presumptions about who should and who should not have the chance to prove their worth.
There is truth in the notion that under-educated, low-skilled immigrants are no benefit to some Americans, but not because they are unlikely to be successful. Precisely the opposite; they are more likely to be successful, shutting low-skilled Americans out of the market. Those on the left who revel in the condition of the native-born Americans displaced by this phenomenon shouldn't laugh too loudly. Whether they recognize it or not, they are the mirror image of the right's hardliners. What's more, they are helping fuel the polarization that led to the ascension of an administration that ran explicitly on a restrictive approach to immigration.
Outgoing Illinois congressman Luis Gutierrez, a man with ambitions for higher office, exemplifies the blinkered radicalism of the left when it comes to immigration. This week, Gutierrez announced his opposition to the Trump administration's desire to end "chain migration," the practice by which American green card holders and U.S. citizens transfer their family members into the United States. Gutierrez insisted that American residency should be transferable to an immigrant's siblings, parents, spouses, and children, regardless of whether or not they've demonstrated the capacity or interest to assimilate into American society. That's not meritocracy; it's charity.
Of course, there are those on the intellectual left for whom meritocracy is an illusion indulged only by those who don't know the extent to which their successes are not their own. That's the view of Linfield College English Professor Reshmi Dutt-Ballerstadt, author of The Postcolonial Citizen: The Intellectual Migrant, who claimed the "logic of meritocracy that is built on this racist assumption that everyone has had the same access and opportunities." It's the view of columnist Jo Littler, who insists that "meritocracy is a myth." Western democracies like the U.S. and the U.K. are closed systems in which wealth and opportunities are reserved for those with connections to people with an abundance of wealth and opportunity. Meritocracy "is a smokescreen for inequality."
What these successful opinion-makers have marketed as wisdom is really just blinding resentment. In the United States, in particular, there are no rigid class strata, and there most certainly isn't any closed loop that guarantees the wealthy that status in perpetuity. "Citing tax scholar Robert Carroll's examination of IRS records," National Review's Kevin Williamson observed, "Professor [Mark] Rank notes that the turnover among the super-rich (the top 400 taxpayers in any given year) is 98 percent over a decade—that is, just 2 percent of that elusive group remain there for ten years in a row. Among those earning more than $1 million a year, most earned that much for only one year of the nine-year period studied, and only 6 percent earned that much for the entire period." Among those who found their way onto Forbes Magazine's list of the 400 richest Americans in 2016, a record 42 of them were immigrants from 21 different countries. Together, they have a combined net worth of over $250 billion.
Among liberals, however, this kind of old-school class envy is practically passé. What's really in vogue isn't resentment toward American capitalism but American culture. For many on the post-Marxist left, race and identity have supplanted wealth and power as the traits by which structural haves and have-nots can be identified and pitted against one another. For nearly two decades, liberal ideologues have debated whether assimilation into American society was possible or even desirable. Not only does assimilation represent the tacit acceptance of and submission to American racism, but it is the surrender of cultural heritage and traits that are superior to America's heterogeneous soup of appropriated customs. "Assimilation, instead of bringing upward mobility, brings downward mobility," Aviva Chomsky wrote in 2007. "It's not lack of assimilation that keeps them marginalized—it's assimilation itself."
As the decades have shown, and as the literate left would likely concede, assimilation continued apace, and it has not yielded a racial hierarchy. A 2015 study conducted by Harvard sociologist Mary Waters for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found that immigrants, particularly second-generation immigrants, are integrating into society faster than migrants of earlier generations. This is not without its setbacks; the strain on U.S. English language programs in schools and the evidence suggesting low-skilled migrants "appear to be filling low-skilled jobs that native-born Americans are not available or willing to take" increase social tensions. But assimilation is occurring, and all parties are richer for it.
America in the 1990s and 2000s experienced an immigration boom and, as historian Arthur Schlesinger said, "Mass migrations produce mass antagonisms." Even though the undocumented and legal permanent-resident populations have leveled off since the collapse of the economy in 2008, America's politics haven't caught up with the trends. As the light and heat around immigration fade, so, too, should the insufferable generalities about immigrants bandied about by opinions makers on both the left and the right. At least, that would be ideal.
Choose your plan and pay nothing for six Weeks!
For a very limited time, we are extending a six-week free trial on both our subscription plans. Put your intellectual life in order while you can. This offer is also valid for existing subscribers wishing to purchase a gift subscription. Click here for more details.
Presidents, Porn Stars, and America's Soul
Podcast: Is America in decline?
So Trump pays off a porn star and it isn't even the biggest story of the day. On the second COMMENTARY podcast of the week, we explore all angles of this peculiar state of affairs. What does it say about us politically? What does it say about us morally? And what does it tell us about the condition of the American soul? Give a listen.
Don't forget to subscribe to our podcast on iTunes.
Choose your plan and pay nothing for six Weeks!
For a very limited time, we are extending a six-week free trial on both our subscription plans. Put your intellectual life in order while you can. This offer is also valid for existing subscribers wishing to purchase a gift subscription. Click here for more details.
The Favor Trump Has Done for the Politically Correct
Legacy achievement.
The controversy surrounding ugly and profane remarks Donald Trump allegedly made in a meeting with a bipartisan group of senators has had a longer half-life than the average Trump-linked contretemps, perhaps because so many appear willing to throw themselves under its treads.
When the scandal broke, the usual suspects immediately volunteered as tribute in defense of Trump's honor. Many claimed that the president's alleged assertion—that certain equatorial regions of the world were blighted cesspits—was an empirical fact. The president, they averred, was guilty only of describing these fetid nations with his trademark "authenticity." Then, when Trump emerged about 14 hours after the scandal broke to insist he had never made the comments attributed to him, his defenders pivoted on a dime and echoed the president's assertion.
This scandal might not have damaged the credibility of so many of Trump's allies if the White House had not responded to it with such lethargy. At first, the White House press office didn't even bother denying claims made by the meeting's attendees. According to reporting in outlets like the New York Times and by conservative columnists like Erick Erickson, Trump initially did not see much of a scandal at all. "His base loved what he said," the Times dispatch read, "a refrain he repeated in phone calls over the holiday weekend." Finally, after nearly a week, the administration's clean-up crew got around to defending their principal in a reasonably convincing way. Their line of defense will, however, have lasting and damaging consequences for the conservative movement.
"Look, no one here is going to pretend like the president is always politically correct. He isn't," said Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. "He tells things like they are sometimes, and sometimes he does use tough language."
Do Republicans recognize what an irresponsible mishandling of their agenda these comments represent?
The president is credibly accused of contending that skilled immigrants primarily originate from European nations like Norway and, perhaps, East Asia. They do not come from places like Haiti or Sub-Saharan Africa. This is factually inaccurate; these countries produce more assimilative and better-educated immigrants than Europe does, and the nations the president derided as "s***holes" are usually more enthusiastic American values than are their European counterparts. It's no coincidence that Trump enjoys some of the strongest approval ratings abroad in places like Nigeria, Kenya, Tanzania, and Ghana.
There is a word that describes the assumption that skilled and assimilative immigrants can only come from certain countries, and it's not "un-PC." Compared to the outright racial hostility underlying the sentiments expressed by Donald Trump in what amounts to only his latest racially-tainted controversy, the stuff we used to consider "politically correct" is downright quaint.
As Robert Novak demonstrated in his 1995 essay on political correctness in American newsrooms, offenses against PC dictates were once limited to phrases like "Indian summer," "Welshed on a bet," and going "Dutch" on a check. More recently, descriptive phrases like "radical Islamic terrorism" and even gender-specific pronouns are under attack. When conservatives objected to PC culture, they did so in defense of clarity and concision. Too often, politically correct language obscured and obfuscated under the pretense of being both precise and civil.
This is why what Donald Trump and his Praetorians are doing by appropriating anti-PC crusaderism in defense of his unenlightened racial effrontery is so reckless. In pursuit of a quick and painless way to get the president out of the latest mess he's created for himself, Trump's defenders are blurring the lines between opposition to censorious liberal culture warriors and bigotry. Trump is not winning any converts to his crusade; this White House preaches to the converted. In the end, the president's conduct may instead ratify political correctness as a necessary check on those inclined toward racial antagonism. If Trump's fans think "telling it like it is" amounts to presuming people cannot contribute meaningfully to the American bottom line due only to their places of birth, they'll soon find that Americans have no appetite for that kind of candor.
No amount of evidence will convince pro-Trump partisans of their totem's flaws. The president's historically low approval ratings despite a strong economy at home and peace abroad haven't done it. The slaughter of Republicans in the off-year elections didn't do it. The drubbing Republicans are about to take in the midterm elections won't do it. For them, Trump's political success is self-justifying. He threw out all the rules, ran what should have been a radioactive campaign, abandoned the GOP's post-2012 prescriptions, and won. Nothing will convince them of the error of Trump's present course until it is far too late to mitigate the damage.
If one of Trump's legacies is to taint anti-PC culture with the stain of racism, it will do American discourse a great disservice. Trump will have demonstrated to a critical mass of persuadable Americans that the PC crowd was right all along; they were all that kept the hateful bigotry of a bygone age from reemerging from the shadows. But the costs of the Trump era will only become clear in hindsight, when they are intractable features of the political landscape. Today, there are tax cuts to celebrate.
Choose your plan and pay nothing for six Weeks!
For a very limited time, we are extending a six-week free trial on both our subscription plans. Put your intellectual life in order while you can. This offer is also valid for existing subscribers wishing to purchase a gift subscription. Click here for more details.
Venezuela Targets the Catholic Church
Deliver us from communism.
Vatican diplomacy moves slowly and cautiously. The Pope is the spiritual leader of some 1.2 billion Catholics worldwide, but he commands no armies and his statecraft runs mostly on moral authority. He and his representatives understandably prefer quiet, behind-the-scenes advocacy to public grandstanding. But from time to time, it becomes necessary for the Holy See and the Pope himself to throw down the gauntlet to worldly authorities that threaten the Church and her flock.
Such a time is at hand in Venezuela.
On Monday, Venezuela's socialist thug-in-chief, Nicolas Maduro, called on prosecutors and the Supreme Court to investigate two Roman Catholic bishops for supposed hate crimes. Maduro didn't name any specific prelates, but local media outlets have identified Bishops Victor Hugo Basabe of San Felipe and Antonio Lopez Castillo of Barquisimeto as potential targets. These bishops' only "crime" is speaking out against the graft and socialist mismanagement that have transformed the country from one of the breadbaskets of Latin America into a basket case.
Bishop Basabe had recently prayed for Venezuela to be delivered from the "corrupt plague" that has forced thousands to dig "through the trash looking for garbage to satisfy their hunger." Bishop Castillo elicited cheers from his diocesans when he expressed similar sentiments at a Mass. This wasn't the first time that Venezuelan prelates had challenged the regime. The Venezuelan Bishops' Conference in July tweeted a prayer asking the Blessed Virgin Mary to "free our homeland from the claws of communism and socialism." Cardinal Jorge Urosa Savino, the archbishop of Caracas, hasn't minced words, either. In September, he told the newspaper El Tiempo that "all Venezuelans, especially those who have a larger responsibility in society, have the obligation to defend their rights and everybody else's. That's what we do as the Catholic Church, and that's the reason the government doesn't want us."
Yet Pope Francis' response has been disappointing. So far, he has mainly offered bland, conciliatory words that seem to suggest a moral equivalence between the socialist regime and the opposition. This, even as Venezuela's economic crisis has worsened and thousands have braved police-state brutality to protest Maduro's dictatorship. The Holy See played mediator in a "dialogue" that went nowhere last year. At one point, the pontiff seemed to blame the opposition for the breakdown. "Part of the opposition does not want this" dialogue, he told reporters last spring. "Interesting, the opposition itself is divided and, on the other hand, it seems that the conflicts are increasingly escalating."
Since those puzzling comments, the Vatican has issued at least one statement denouncing Maduro's efforts to destroy the last vestiges of Venezuelan democracy. But the rhetoric from Rome remains tepid, and one gets the sense that the Pope's heart isn't in the struggle. Perhaps, as my former Wall Street Journal colleague William McGurn has written, the Pope still looks on world events through a Latin-American leftist lens, in which the bad guys are always capitalists, American corporations, and their local compradors. The Venezuelan situation doesn't quite fit into that worldview. Rather, it reaffirms the truth that socialism and collectivism are the surest recipes for poverty and starvation.
Whatever its origins, the Pope's hesitant posture is no longer tenable in light of Maduro's latest attempt to intimidate the Church. Venezuela is an overwhelmingly Catholic country in an overwhelmingly Catholic region, and its regime has lost all legitimacy. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:
Authority does not derive its moral legitimacy from itself. It must not behave in a despotic manner, but must act for the common good as a moral force based on freedom and a sense of responsibility. Authority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned and if it employs morally licit means to attain it. If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience. In such a case, authority breaks down completely and results in shameful abuse.
The Catholic Church cannot remain silent, nor can it equivocate, in the face of such abuse.
Choose your plan and pay nothing for six Weeks!
For a very limited time, we are extending a six-week free trial on both our subscription plans. Put your intellectual life in order while you can. This offer is also valid for existing subscribers wishing to purchase a gift subscription. Click here for more details.


text:
STEINER (PIONEER M&R) Slings/Binocular Straps
Vero Vellini Black Rifle Sling
The Vero Vellini air cushion sling is the most comfortable gun sling. Features include a full non slip rubber backing. The triple balanced neoprene cushions every step. Leather end panels, nylon woven rubberized end fit 1" swivels.
SPECIFICATIONS:Mfg Item Num: V17022 Category: SLINGS & SWIVELS Type :SlingSwivel Size :1"Length :AdjustableWidth :Color :BlackMaterial :Neoprene


text:
Ending to the Percival Drama
When the Rays visited the Los Angeles Angels this past week they got some good or bad news depending on how you see the situation. During their 3-game series, Rays closer Troy Percival finally admitted to the media and his teammates what most of us knew the moment he went on the Disabled list on May 22,2008 with shoulder tendinitis. I take it as no huge surprise that he did retire, but I am so curious on why it took so long. And adding to that is the fact he has not started his retirement papers, probably waiting to see what might happen with the Rays in their chase of the postseason in 2009.
I know he can not and will not be added to the roster for the playoffs even if they make it again this season, but the fact he might be holding out for the last crumb of his 2-year $8 million contract might just be added incentive to delay the paperwork a few months. And this can finally end the speculation and the drama involved in why we have seen him only once since he went on the disabled list in late May. The only other time I have seen him in uniform for the Rays was on Saturday, June 1st, the same night as the Rays post game Three Doors Down concert. I got some exclusive photos of the recluse closer as he came back into Tampa Bay to discuss his rehab plans with the team.
But I guess with a guy like Percival, you have to take the good with the bad. But there are a few situation that rubbed me the wrong way about the feisty closer. Believe me, I appreciate the 28 saves he got the team in 2008, and that the team posted a 34-1 record when he hit the mound, but some of the negatives should also be sounded out today. Those 28 saves were the fifth largest amount in Rays history, but Percival also only had 1 save after August 13th. Add onto that the fact he collected 19 of those saves and posted a 3.54 ERA before the All Star break. After the All Star break, he only saved 9 games and posted a 6.11 ERA for the Rays.
And that 34-1 record can be a bit deceiving at times. Sure they won 34 games when he hit the mound, but people forget he did blow three saves during that stretch and the Rays offense ended up getting him off the hook for the loss. The only loss suffered in that span was during a September 6, 2008 game in Rogers Centre, in Toronto where current Ray Gregg Zaun hit a grand slam home run off Percival to seal the Blue Jays win. But another situation might keep Percival's name on Trivial Pursuit games for the rest of time.
Anyone sitting in their seats on September 3, 2008 at Tropicana Field will not forget this game any time soon. In that contest against the New York Yankees, Percival took the mound in the final inning and faced Alex Rodriguez. what ended up happening will keep the Rays and Percival on the tips of people tongues for a long time. Percival threw a hanging breaking ball out over the plate and Rodriguez hit the ball high and over the leftfield foul pole. The umpire crew could not effectively call the shot and went to perform the first Instant Replay decision in MLB history. The replay result ended up upholding Rodriguez's 549th career home run in the game.
Strike One
But some of Percival's action both on the mound and around the Rays in 2008, and this season did get me to question is commitment to the Rays seasons and their ultimate goals. The first might have been after his last DL stint with his injury to his right knee he seemed to disappear from sight from the Rays. This does not mean he just did not come out to the Bullpen, or even consort with his team, but disappeared totally from sight right after the season ended. Sure he was left off the Postseason roster because of his injuries, but his value to the team then should have been as a clubhouse leader to this pack of guys who had never made it to the playoff before this season.
He could have done some work in the Bullpen just sitting there chatting with your relievers Grant Balfour and J P Howell and mentored them a bit of the difference in postseason and regular season late game strategies. Instead he was probably home in Southern Cali relaxing in the leather recliner watching TBS. And because he did not have his knee operation until after the playoffs were concluded, there was no reason he could not have still been there for his teammates.
Jonny Gomes and Chad Orvella also were not on the post season rosters, but both were there in the dugout with their team mates all throughout the playoffs. It seemed a guy who was a former coach and also a veteran of playoff games would know his expertise would be a true treasure to the Rays relieving corps, but he was not there for them.
And that was only the first thing that upset me about Percival. The second was the way he used to disrespect his manager Joe Maddon on the mound. I understand passion and a fighter's mentality of not backing down, but to be focused in by television camera and you can read the words coming off his lips to his manger are unacceptable. The only that has stayed in my mind was this season in Baltimore when Maddon went to the mound and did not even get to Percival before the argument had started and both men were seen jawing at each other in heightened voices until Maddon ended up taking the ball from Percival.
Strike Two
Add that to the public display that came after the Sunday May 4th game in which a fan did not see Rays third baseman Evan Longoria coming into the third baseline seats just beyond the visiting dugout for a foul pop up. The ball ended up only going about three seats deep and Longoria did come over for the ball and did not voice a peep to his intentions. A fan in that area then made a play on the ball not hearing any vocal announcements and kept the ball from Longoria. Now you have to consider that first, the guy was not looking at Longoria and was trying to get the ball for his 6-year old son. Granted, if Longoria had made some sound, the guy might have pulled back from the ball and this sutation might not have happened at all.
Well, Longoria is throw a few choice words at the guy and gave a few stares after the play, but it was forgotten by Longoria. Not to be outdone, after the last out of the game, Percival again began to yell at the guy with a few choice blue words towards that area of the stadium. The fits of rage towa
rds the fan by Percival as uncalled for as a professional athlete. Sure the guy made a mistake, but you just saved the win for the team and the guy might have gotten the message. But for Percival to deliver gestures and a few blue-colored words is beyond professional. But what did I expect out of a guy who says the same thing to his team manager.
Strike Three
But since Percival had left the team in 2008 after going on the DL late in the season, why would I think the situation would change in 2009/ When the team did put him on the disabled list on May 22, I like so may other Rays fans knew that he would not be back. Something told me that moment that the closer was not going to be able to rehab his back situation in time to be productive for the team in 2009. He appeared in only 14 games this season garnishing 6 saves and a 6.35 ERA. Now we all know this is the second year of his $8 million contract, and even if he was put on the DL, he would get that contract fulfilled by the Rays.
But from the moment he went on the DL, to his announcement on Tuesday, we never knew 100 percent where he was headed, or what he might do in the way of rehab or trying to get back to the Rays roster. "I still wish I was out there playing and what have you," he said in an interview with the St. Petersburg Times, " but at least my mind is clear that I know I just physically can't do it." Adding to that statement was the fat that up until a month ago he had not even comtemplated any Bullpen sessions to see if he might indeed have to finish his dreams of retuning to the mound. Percival said he began Bullpen session about a month ago after a call from Rays Vice President of Baseball Operations Andrew Friedman, but after 6 sessions over a Friday-Sunday schedule he knew what the outcome was going to be for him.
He would throw on Friday with little or now pain, then on Sunday would be in extreme pain and finally realized he could not help the Rays again in 2009. "Every Sunday was just awful," Percival added in a story by Marc Topkins of the St. Petersburg Times. "I could throw okay on Friday but the Sunday one was bad. So it's just not going to work." And so the idea of retiring again as a player resurfaced in Percival's mind. "I've got so many ailments now I don't see that I can go out an compete at this level anymore," he said. "I can do it once in a while, maybe once every four or five days, but that's not good enough at this level."
But even with the announcement that he will not be back with the team again in 2009, Rays Manager Joe Maddon think the team should have a special day for Percival to 'celebrate what he has done for the club." What? Are you serious Joe? You want me to celebrate a guy who will not put in his retirement papers until after the season to garner the last $1 million on his contract. You want me to again show some sort of hand clapping for a guy who has now abandoned his team twice in two years.
You truly want me to celebrate the 'Tampa Bay" career of a guy who berated a man and his son after they made an honest mistake during a home game. Most of Percival's player success happened even before he put on the Rays jersey. Maybe he needs to be celebrated in Anaheim and not Tampa Bay, where he made his reputation. Sorry Joe, I know you had a front row seat to the post season records set by Percival when he was with the Angels, but here in Tampa Bay, I still see his legacy as an unfinished story. If you really want an ending, maybe he should submit those retirement papers and release the Rays from holding a 40-man roster spot with his name on it. I know he has a million reasons to not consider that option. But, I think that is what you would expect a true professional to do.
12 Comments
It's got to be tough for a ball player to finally admit it's to hang up the glove… there is always that glimer of hope that there is one last shot in them… now the Rays are home they need a 9 game win streak…deflate the BoSox confidence and over take them in the WC…
Outside the Phillies Looking In
It is tough to go out on other terms that your own.
I know I did not finish in the NFL on my terms, but my health did prevent it.
I can see his accomplishments for what they are, which were remarkable, but a few situation took him out of my favortism towards his career.
Disrespect a fan, disrespect a coach, show disrespect to your teammates. All are swinging strikes to me, and not a bold statement for a veteran player like Percival.
Rays Renegade
I'm with you on Percy. Yes, it's difficult to know when to hang it up, but he's always been kind of a tough guy who does his own thing. Not my fave player by any means. He did have a good career though.
Career-wise, he has done some great things.
He even did some great things for the public in his career.
Heck I even heard a story he took his 2006 World Series share and bought the Tiger's wives a suite for the next season because he did not play in that year's classic.
Still waiting to hear if he did the same for the Rays…..
Rays Renegade
I thought Troy Percival was a great closer for the Rays. I feel like he ditched the Rays big time here. I don't really know if he should pitch for the Tampa Bay Rays again. I think Joe Maddon is weird for celebrating Troy's short time with the Rays
Matthew Tang
How can you not be with your team during the playoffs? Wakefield had to sit out in 2007 because of injuries but he was there! That doesn't say much for a player who doesn't support his team mates.
Troy's time with us has expired.
He is basically holding out for some reason (financial) before issuing those retirement paperwork to the New York MLB office.
I really hope the Rays do not entertain that idea of a "Percival" celebration.
If they do, I will be the guy turned with his back to the field booing him.
Rays Renegade
Guess he got a lot of practice at it since he was not in the dugout either for the 2006 run of the Tigers in the World Series.
I know several Rays players who were there to do anything they could to support their teammates. Heck, I wasn't even on the roster I would have cheered from the dugout!
Just glad the drama is finally over for good…….We at least know what is going on now and can go from there.
Rays Renegade
Guess this goes to show that as a healthy player he was great, but as a teammate (in a support your team sort of way) he was lousy. I thought it showed a lot of team spirit when I saw Jonny Gomes on the bench even though he wasn't on the roster for the playoffs. He brought a lot of spirit and laughs to the team. To be a motivator for the team is a great asset too. Too bad Percy never thought that much about it. I can see why you would not want to be a part of a special day for Troy. Let Anaheim celebrate him instead.
Troy Percival's total saves with the Rays is 34 saves.
that is good enough for fourth place all-time with the Rays.
In Comparison, Esteban Yan is in third place with 42 saves, and Roberto Hernandez is the saves leader with 102 saves as a Ray.
I agree totally, he made his reputation with the Angels, but they already gave him a day the first time he retired……….He even threw out the First Pitch at that game.
Rays Renegade
Yep. We all knew it was coming. Just glad it finally came, eh? Now Scott Kazmir can start his reign as the Rays closer… right? Well, signs point to no. Perhaps Kazmir is now the Rays' new "problem". I'm just sayin'…
The Rays have a bigger problem than Kazmir.
I actually think he is fine, it is the pitching system that Rays Pitching coach Jim hickey is using that is zapping these guys potentials.
He is the bigger target right now on my radar, and I am about to put in some coordinates to send a heat seeker to his brain.
Something within the system is broken in the pitching aspect of the game. Good wins like the Rays top 3 starters do not turn from fine wine to vinegar in one season.
Rays Renegade


text:
Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Infern0, Feb 4, 2013.
But let us be serious for a moment here...
When Kirk fired that torpedo at an unshielded impulse exhaust port, he should've had no doubt that it would be a crippling blow (which we see as there are explosions in multiple parts of the ship). The design itself was a decade plus old at least, one of Starfleet's best engineers got the chance to study one up close and personal for three months and it's likely that Starfleet retrieved the remains of the one Kirk crashed into the bay and gave it careful study.
Anyone arguing that one Kirk's "fire everything" is anymore respectable than anothers is simply deluding themselves.
Hey, as I said, Nu Kirk's attack is/was no worse than Prime Kirk 's tricking Kruge's men into beaming over then destroying the Enterprise and giving them no chance to escape. Prime Kirk would have pulled the trigger on Nero too. Hell after nuking Vulcan, I seriously doubt that he would have even made the offer to save Nero's ass.
Of course, that's not what the audience would want to see.
Funny, I didn't find it particularly bloodthirsty behavior by Kirk, at all. Time was of the essence, and the obstacle needed to be removed quickly. Remember, the scene cuts back and forth between the battle and the assassin preparing to shoot as the president gives his speech.
I found Spock's reaction to Kirk offering to rescue Nero and his men far more out of character and bloodthirsty than the things Kirk did that are being discussed here.
In TUC, I'd think any surviving Klingons would've destroyed themselves and the ship rather than face the dishonor of surrender, anyway (and Kirk and Sulu probably knew that). After all, that's what the Romulans did in "Balance of Terror" after Kirk offered to rescue their survivors.
I don't find either action particularly blood-thirsty either.
But you have some folks trying to define the new version of the character as having a reckless disregard for life. They were both in situations where they could've called off the dogs but didn't.
Yeah. I guess I don't see it. In Nero's case, it really boils down to whether or not Kirk believed Nero could somehow still be a threat. It's a judgement call, at best.
After all, if someone believes he showed a reckless disregard for life, then why did he offer to try to save Nero and his crew in the first place? It may have been a perfunctory offer, but he still made it and would've been committed to it if Nero had accepted. That is, unless after Nero accepted, he said, "Hah! FU, Nero! I was just toying with you. I'm not going to save your sorry ass. Die, you bastard! Mr. Sulu, fire everything!" Now that would be reckless disregard for life.
That's not to say this younger Kirk isn't reckless. General recklessnes is part of the reason for the lecture from Pike, I'm sure.
I'd also think that someone with a reckless disregard for life would give signals and be singled out by Starfleet psychologists as unsuited for command.
I think it was this thread I said it in: Nu Kirk's reaction tracked to me more like a "Well fuck you too" to Nero's refusal.
And yet I am still right on both counts. Your claim contradicted Kirk's behaviour and my second sentence is what the vast majority of unbiasied viewers would obviously agree with.
There will always be some more minor issues we disagree with "society" about, but when it comes to the basics they tend to centre around conflicts between "the value of life" and "quality of life". While I often come down on the latter side, I think the concept that life has intrinsic value and that we shouldn't just extinguish it because we believe "normal objections" have been removed, has value. It is obviously safer for a start. Although I don't claim society is always right, I think the latter principle has been tested in the cauldron of experience that purely utilitarian philosophies may not take adequate account of.
No they don't but it helps to know what is being described so more precision would be helpful.
A) Those two words describe completely different states:
- Indifferent meaning: he doesn't care if he lives or dies
- Resigned meaning: he isn't necessarily happy with his death but has accepted it given his circumstances and decisions.
B) Nero's state of mind is not "indifference to his death".
(but see later comments on this issue where you appear to be describing a third state of mind)
Of course even the above is a red herring from my point of view as I don't see any way that another person's state of mind gives someone else a right to unilaterally decide if they die or not.
In the original scenario there was definitely no compulsion so I imagine you are referring to the crazy Romulan analogy. That one is irrelevant to the initial issue because not only is it not the case, but it tells us nothing about the actual situation. The latter part seems to be the bit you are missing.
No I'm not. I am not saying Kirk shouldn't pull the trigger because of a non existant Romulan rescue. He shouldn't pull the trigger because he doesn't have the state of mind you require him to have as I understood your requirement until recently.
Of course that recent clarification about your view of Nero's mind state, seems to make my counterfactual no longer relevent. This is obviously unfortunate as it was always clear I was objecting to the notion he was "indifferent to his death".
No because as above I am not arguing Kirk should hold fire because of a non existient "Romulan rescuer", so I don't require you to abstain from euthanising him on the basis of a situation that doesn't exist. If your hypothetical told us something important about the actual situation, things might be different but I didn't see you suggesting that or what it might be.
Sadly many of my responses are probably now only of historical interest to explain why you thought my reasoning was in error.
That's fair enough. Quite right. However I don't have a particularly good handle on you actual position (or at least the reasons behind it). Only two of the "rules" you have given seem reasonably general. The others don't appear to have any real bearing on such decisions.
Partly that's due to my above admission, but I am not so much "inserting my ethical principles" as simply stating my position. As I previously understood your poistion, your defence of Kirk's actions had already failed due to you not satisfying your own ethical criteria. Namely the requirement for Nero to be indifferent to his death (he isn't). That seems to have now changed.
I'm sure you are right about that!
As per my comments above, perhaps we have sorted out that definition problem. I have to say that "indifferent" or "pro death" attitudes on the part of the potential victim made a certain amount of sense from a purely logical standpoint (still not enough in my opinion of course). However the idea that it is OK to kill someone A) whose death is imminent and inevitable and B) who would rather die than accept help from the person who is thinking of killing them, not so much. Even on purely practical grounds, your criteria takes no account of Nero's possible mental illness etc, for a start.
By the way, as a matter of interest, would Kirk have to hold fire if there actually had been a Romulan in a position to help Nero and Nero was willing to accept it? Sounds like you are saying he would. But that woudl open up its own can of worms (which I have no desire to get into!).
I may not be following your meaning here but at the risk of injecting my own values, I would not agree it leaves Kirk ethically compelled to do anything. But it would provide a defendable reason for doing what actually happened. Of course the traditional Star Trek plot would have them thwarting the bad guy at the last moment and at least not gunning Nero down in cold blood.
I can see that in terms of general philosophy, but I was thinking more of this specific situation. That, I suspect, they may have difficulty with.
I guess that would depend on what you value most about Star Trek.
Another brilliant misrepresentation of the actual situation. Ie. He seemed willing to Kill Picard and others in aid of his cause. I am not however defending the premise behind the movie in general. Ideally they should have saved him too but at least they didn't execute him out of hand. So if it wasn't quite in earlier ST tradition it didn't cross the line in my view.
The Chang business is clearly a fair battle on the part of Kirk and Sulu given the need for split second decsions. Three or four shots per ship (obviously not "fire everything") is what would be expected and the whole thing was over in about 10 seconds. It is just not comparable with Nero's situation (unless you are highlighting the differences).
Once they hit Chang the first time or two, they could've just as easily ordered a tractor beam without losing any time or the battle.
If you think there was time for that sort of mucking around have another look at the clip. The first Torpedo was just a marker. No guarantee how much damage it had done and since they needed to aim at the explosion as soon as possible, not Chang, each ship would have had to fire a (seemingly staggered) salvo (2+2 or 2+1 etc) to make sure enough hits were achieved to neutralise Chang as a threat. The only problem was both captains had the same idea and that may have over cooked things a little. At most that's an Oops! Or hard luck! Combine that with Chang's ship's limited defensive abilities and the result was inevitable.
There is no way either captain could afford to fire less that 3-4 rapid shots in that situation. Probably their instincts took over and prevented Kirk and Sulu from having a "conflab" about how they were going to handle things! To expect Kirk and Sulu to coordinate their attack so that the each fired only one shot alternately and then waited to find out the effect (They could have missed entirely), is ridiculous and obviously dangerous. Certainly not a chance they could take given the circumstances. There is clearly no problem here.
It doesn't 'contradict' his behaviour. And you can no more know what 'the vast majority of unbiased viewers would agree with' than you can know that Kirk believes Nero has no weapons. I can't stop you from claiming to know things you obviously don't know, but I don't have to take it seriously, either.
In narrative terms, the reason Nero doesn't fire any weapons is that our heroes have already pulled off their elaborate and daring plan. Having Nero continue to fire after that would undermine the impact of that sequence. But Kirk isn't some genre-savvy self-aware parody. He's given no information on Nero's weapons status.
The decision isn't unilateral. Nero was specifically consulted and, of the two options available to him, he chose death. Perhaps he prefers 'death by black hole' to 'death by photon torpedo'. But from the brief footage we see of him after the firing, it's hard to say he seems any more upset than he would otherwise have been.
If Nero isn't responsible for his decisions then there is no value in consulting him at all. All the possibility of mental illness does is remove any issue of consulting Nero; the rest of the situation remains unchanged.
Yes, obviously he would. In practice he would need to make it clear to any rescuer that Nero is wanted for genocide and must be detained and handed over to the Federation.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. If Kirk's entire crew is endangered by Kirk not pulling the trigger and if fewer people will die if he pulls the trigger than if he doesn't, then Kirk is compelled to pull the trigger. That's all I'm saying.
I'm sure some would disagree, but I'm certain that many wouldn't.
Separate names with a comma.


text:
The award, valued at more than $100 million, calls for 59 high-speed catenary vehicles that will be used for the construction, maintenance, and repair of overhead catenary systems throughout Switzerland. Deliveries will begin in 2016 and continue through 2017, Harsco said.
The award comes as a follow-on option to Harsco's previously awarded $100 million-plus contract for specialty utility vehicles that will be used to support rail operations in the new Gotthard and Ceneri Base Tunnels, part of the historic Swiss AlpTransit project to increase rail capacity across the region. With its option award, SBB will be able to realize numerous synergies in the areas of technology, project management, training, spare parts stocks, and maintenance.
"We are delighted to receive this second, significant award from the Swiss railway," said Harsco Interim CEO David Everitt. "Together, these two contracts establish a solid foundation to a growing Harsco Rail presence in Europe, with vehicles designed and built to European specifications and standards and utilizing a strong network of established European supply partners."
"This second order underpins our division's large project pipeline and strengthens the partnerships we are developing as a local European railway supplier," said Harsco Rail President Scott Jacoby. "By exercising their option for additional orders, SBB is supporting our tailored business strategy to provide best-in-class solutions, making us a valuable partner for customers throughout the continent and across the globe."


text:
Discussion in 'Racquets' started by drakulie, Oct 16, 2012.
Is it the one I told you about?
Yes it is.
Have you tried closing the racket face a little more when going from a closed to an open pattern, eg turning your grip a little more western on your FH? Worked for me when I moved from my previous HPS 6.1 18x20 to my current 4D200Ts. Allows you to swing through the ball a bit more resulting in a flatter shot while converting the higher launch angle of the open pattern into additional topspin. In other words, you get a flatter heavy ball with lots of spin. Got the idea to try this from playing around with TWUs shotmaker program...
Yeah I naturally change between SW and western grips without thinking too much. If my shots are launching, I end up more western. I hit with a lot of spin so it seems like the Blade forces me to go a little flatter, which is nice.
That being said, I adjust. I just prefer hitting lower trajectory lasers over looping strokes. It sounds like the 99s does both from the reviews so far. I guess I will find out soon enough.
Hank saying that he played a different game with the 18x20 Blade compared to the steam is what got me thinking about all this.
I'm worried I won't be able to hit through the ball with this 99s, I rely on big groundstrokes for my game.
I should have it soon and ill give a lot of details on this. I have the same thoughts, but i am open to giving it a chance.
I keep asking around. Can't find any in Atlanta.
JackB1, I'm from Atlanta as well, but temporarily living in Illinois for work. I was home in Atlanta for Thanksgiving this past weekend and found a 99S demo at my regular shop in Midtown..along with a demo of the new Blade 16/19. Are they telling you they don't have the demos yet or that they are just out with another customer at the moment?
The shop in Charlotte had the Wilson rep give them "his" versions of 99s and 105s before the official demo frames come in.....buy told me yesterday he has sold about a dozen in pre-sale at his shop already off people hitting the demo.
which shop in Midtown? IPlay?
I did not get the 99s today, but i am up next. I did get the 105s. Anyone have the specs for this thing? I know it is light (10.2), but I was looking for SW or balance so I could try and make it a little heavier.
105s =
Length 27.5"
Unstrung weight = 10.2, so TW gives Strung weight which should be about 10.8
Balance = 8pts HL unstrung
I found another site that has listed strung specs as:
10.8 and 4pts HL
Cool..ill just play it stock, but that is real light. any guess on swingweight?
doesn't read like the 99s would suit this player's strokes. using the yy200 many balls clear the net by only a couple inches on the fh side...the antithesis of the torreball.
Yes. IPlay. When I picked it up, Dan, the owner mentioned that I wouldn't like it because it was way too powerful. I think he meant relative to my game since he knows I'm very capable of generating my own pace. My history of racquets shows I'm more comfortable with the Prestiges and Pro Staffs of the racquet world.
Isn't that where the spin comes in?
got my 2nd pure storm today first time owning 2 of the same sticks, feelsgoodman!
Check this
Every tennis manufacturer out there claims to use the newest technology to give the best results.
Thus, every new racket is the "best yet" -- more spin, more control and certainly more power.
But do they deliver?
Well, the Steam 99S from Wilson is the latest innovative racket on the scene, with new tech designed to help players put better spin on the ball.
In this Gear Test, ESPN Playbook enlisted Andrew Carter, the University of Louisville's three-time Big East champ and current pro, to put the new Steam through its paces and see if the hype is at all justified.
PRODUCT: Wilson Steam 99S, $219.99; available January 2013
WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO: Using Doppler radar technology, Wilson was able to accurately measure the spin placed on a tennis ball when hit.
By putting fewer strings on the Steam 99S -- the string pattern is a spread-out 16 x 15, as opposed to the more common 16 x 18 or 19 x 18 -- the company believes the racket can boost spin by up to 200 RPM.
More spin means more room to work the ball. Wilson claims the added spin effectively lengthens the court by a foot while making the net up to two inches lower. In theory.
What does this mean? Well, pros using the Steam will become spin wizards, and your average club regulars will start hitting shots they never dreamed they could.
DOES IT WORK? Here's the good news: Wilson has made one heck of a racket.
For starters, for a racket that weighs only 10.7 oz., the Steam 99S has oodles of power -- something Carter found when he pummeled some balls.
"The racket produces a lot more pop," Carter said. "Much more than usual on a Wilson racket. When you hit it in the sweet spot, it has a lot of pop."
Wilson typically makes rackets with smaller head sizes that come with smaller sweet spots -- but everything is that much bigger with the 99S. For players who trade backcourt bombs, the 99S will be a powerful weapon.
It also delivers slice shots that Carter described as "unbelievable." They'll stay so low your opponent will be scraping his racket along the floor the whole match, hopefully throwing in plenty of McEnroe-esque cursing to boot.
But here's the less good news: It's that spin again. While the 99S definitely generates extra spin, for the elite player it could be the unwanted kind.
"When Nadal hits the ball, he hits rockets," Carter explains. "With this [99S], it's like hitting balloons. When Nadal hits it, the ball goes straight through, but this ball sits up."
Translation: You'll get plenty of spin, but the ball may spin up at a higher vertical angle, which could give your opponent more time to hit the ball back. Against a casual player, this effect might be negligible, but against a pro it could make a big difference.
Another small complaint from Carter about the 99S is that while power isn't lost because of the light weight, control can be. When hitting off-center shots, the racket can feel unstable.
"On volleys, if you don't hit it exactly in the sweet spot, it's going to twist in your hand because it's too light," Carter says. "Someone of a higher ability would probably need to start digging out their lead-weight tape."
PRODUCT 2.0: Wilson wants you to get oodles of spin using the 99S, and it wants you to use Luxilon strings (made by Wilson) to achieve this.
Ideally, buyers of the 99S will get it strung with Luxilon strings in lieu of the cheaper generic Wilson strings. Most people buy racquets and yet rarely restring them, but if you want to maximize your Steam experience, make sure you get the strings to do it.
In conclusion: Wilson has made a very, very good racquet, but like all things in life it isn't quite perfect -- yet.
would be interesting to hanks view on that article above and also drakulie and all other play testers
which is better ? this one or babolat aeropro drive 2013?
Definitely one of them for sure...
The ball just sits up if you try to add spin, or if you try to play flat as well?
I think Wilson knew the pros and cons, and that is why did not introduce the spin effect for the elite frames (till now at least).
Interesting question is whether the ball would still sit up if the same open pattern was used in an elite heavy frame.
The 99s is 27.5 inches long? I was hoping for 27.
Do we ever gain anything without some loss somewhere?
More spin? More wear and tear on the LESS strings?
Big spin at sweetspot, but hinted maybe not the same response off center?
Less precise control on harder swings at harder incoming balls?
Seldom do we gain anything without a loss somewhere.
In this case, yes.
But when we went from wood to graphite, did we "lose" anything in terms of performance (not talking about opinions about the game)? I don't think so. We gained more power, more spin, more comfort and less weight.
Maybe. I didn't actually get to hit with the 99S but the owner knows me well enough that I trust his opinion...to an extent.
A little background about me. I grew up playing on a mixture of clay and hardcourts. Regardless of surface, I used to play with SEVERE topspin off of both sides. In my teens, I learned to flatten out the ball more and use less spin in general except when the situation dictated it. The one thing I've learned in making that change is that if I have to change racquets, I never want to choose a racquet that causes me to alter my swing path so severely that I have to "re-learn" my strokes. That's part of the reason why I'm not really comfortable with the Pure Drive/Aeropro racquets.
What the shop owner was implying..I think...is that for my current stroke mechanics I would find the racquet too powerful and would not be able to bring the ball back down into the court. I won't know if that's true or not until I have time to hit with the 99S.
The 99S is 27 inches. The 105S is 27.5 I believe.
Thanks that is good news!
Problem I see is .....
The reason they came up with 18x20 stringing is to provide more control for hard hit shots against hard hit shots.
Now you're going to LESS strings, and bigger racket head. I think LESS control against hard hit shots, if you hit hard also.
Does that Wilson really have more power AND control than an AeroPro or a Dunlop500? Or the new stiffer Head Speeds?
Remember, all those stiff rackets gain a bunch of power and spin from looser stringing, as they have more strings than the new 99S.
I hate to burst anyone's bubble here, but for me the 105s is not even close to an option. It is super light, and I am not going to mod a demo. It feels like a toy, and I had the brand new APD from TW that I worked into the mix. The APD hit a bigger ball and felt more substantial, but it does weigh more. The 105s is basically much too light for me.
The spin I could produce in all honesty was nice, but I can produce that type of spin with my Blade. One difference I noticed was the ball was bouncing higher than my blade. It was shooting almost straight up off the court but it didn't really phase any of the 3 guys I hit with tonight. So while I did see a difference in spin, it was not anything that blew me away. I do hit with a lot of spin and can get the ball to drop sharply down with my 18x20 Blade. With the 105s, it is a launcher due to being so light and stiff. It was very easy to hit long, but I am sure I could get used to that if I used the racquet longer. I simply was not interested in doing so and probably hit with the 105 for 45 minutes total.
That being said, I am excited to try the 99s. The 105 is not a racquet for me anyway, no matter what the drill pattern is. It is far too light and lacks the control I like. I love to hit a heavy driving ball with placement and spin. That is my game. With the Blade I am able to place the ball exactly where I want it, and I believe placement is everything in tennis, even over spin. I did grow up playing with a western grip and heavy spin though, so I have never had a problem putting a lot of action on the ball.
I expect a much better experience with the 99s. I dry swung the regular 99 and it felt so much more substantial in my hand. I think it will be a lot better gauge for me on if this drill pattern is something that helps my game or not.
Basically what LeeD is saying is what I found tonight. I love control and the 18x20 gives me that. The 105 head size with a pattern that open just has too huge a sweetspot and too much power for me, even with the heavy spin. The weighting of the Blade gives me a ton of head speed to get the ball to drop sharply down, and I am still firmly Blading while open minded and excited about the 99s demo.
Other thing - what is up with the new overgrip? I really hate it because the grip size is a lot bigger now to me. I can not feel the bevels at all like I can with the 98 Blade. This was a very bad move by Wilson IMO. So if I buy a steam 99s or a new Black blade, I have to figure out how to make the handle feel like the 98 Blades. I am hoping the old wilson grips weigh the same so I can just put one on, but if not, that is a bit of a pain.
Anyone else notice how the new grips suck and feel bigger (especially with an OG on)?
that is because you don't have enough forward motion. Step in and add your body weight as well as spin. the topspin will just come thru big time, heavy and hard. like Rafa hit his shots.
Thought everyone would enjoy reading this review. I had the same experience as the Univ. of Louisville play tester who commented that the ball sits up, like a baloon you can throw an arrow at and pop. The feel of the racquet is much better than a Babolat however.
I think one important thing to try to do is for those who are reviewing the racquet; give the racquet to your partner and have him hit balls to you so you feel what they are feeling. So you get an understanding of how much spin is really getting generated from a first person perspective, because keep it mind, when you hit your "spin" shots, they are coming all third person perspective because you're not directly being effected by the spin, you're merely displacing the spin on others. So get a first person perspective by handing off the racquet to capable hands and get a taste for yourself!!!!!
Excellent advice.
I think it is unfortunate that many racquet companies offer extended length models only on ligther and larger versions of there racquets. Look at Wilson with their Steam 99S vs. 105S, Blade 98 vs. 104 or Donnay with their Pro One 97 vs. Pro One OS Ext. If you want to play an extended length racquet, that forces you to go for an oversize racquet an put quite a lot of lead tape on it, which ends up in quite a challenge: If you just add lead to the 3 and 9 o'clock position, your balance may shift to much to the top. Thus you also need to put weight to the handle in order to maintain the headlight balance and prevent the stick from becoming head-heavy - and adding weight to the handle decently is a major operation.
I guess this a part of the success of the Babolat racquets over recent years. They offer Plus versions on their standard head sizes and weights. You can order your APD and PD in extended length versions without having to accept larger head sizes and reduced weight. On the PD, you can even go for the heavier Roddick Plus version.
Many customers are a bit scared to try extended length racquets, but the adaption process is far easier than many people think. It gives you more pop, more spin, a better reach and especially a better serve. Double handed backhand players will also enjoy the longer handle.
So Wilson: Give us a Wilson Steam 99S Plus. And a heavier Wilson Steam 105S.
That is correct, the 105s is the 27.5" and the 99s is a standard 27"
Isn't that why they make lead tape, for personal customization? I love a 105 frame size but hate the weight and the balance of most. I find most are strung weight around 10-10.5 and around an even balance for a little HH. This one is heavier at 10.8 strung and 4 HL, which is a great improvement, now just a tiny bit of tape gets you to the 99s weight which is only 11 strung.
I loved the 105s and I did what the previous post mentioned, hit for a long time with a partner who I have had for the past few years and he told me to "buy a case" of the Steam 105s. No ballooning here, more pace and more spin. That having been said, I am the kind of hitting that even with spin, I only clear the net by about 12-24 inches on average.....so I am working on clearing a little higher now that I have spin that will drop it in.
If I had any issue it was balls low over the net with a lot of spin that dropped in the middle of the service box and allowed him to come forward and attack....just my thoughts on the 105s.
The thing is that I dont care what someone else does with the racquet if I am going to use it. I'll put it like this, I know if the spin is advantageous because the opponent will struggle with it, the ball will drop in more often..etc. While the ball does kick higher and straight up off the bounce, most guys I play are not really phased by that any more. We grew up seeing those bounces. That being said, the 105s just has no weight behind it in stock form, so it is not an ideal option for someone who hits with heavy top already. the 99s will be the benchmark for me, and I am simply waiting for it to come back to the shop so I can try it out.
The 99s is 15 grams heavier than the 105s. That is not a tiny bit of lead tape by any means. It is actually 60 inches of 1/4 in tape.
You really going spell check on me? Give us more Steam Suresh.
Just wanted to point out that the "sitting up" Carter mentions is a matter of trajectory, not spin. The OP, Drakulie, found that, in his hands, the 99S generated more spin and more pace than the APD. It also consistently gave him more net clearance, which means it produced a higher average launch trajectory. A high trajectory means a higher bounce. But we all know that trajectory can be changed. We can hit super spinny forehands that pass an inch over the net and land in front of the service line, or we can hit super spinny forehands that clear the net by ten feet and land on the baseline. That's up to us. The 99S most likely does rebound the ball at a higher angle than closed-patterned racquets, but trajectory is still something under the player's control. One way is to close the racquet-face, which lowers the launch trajectory AND generates even more spin. So if Drak was hitting with more speed and spin high over the net, he could hit with even more spin lower over the net. A fast shot with more spin on a lower trajectory is not a sitter, it's a heavy ball. This might not work for all players - conservative grips might make it tough to close the face, etc. - but I wouldn't write off these frames just because a high-level player wasn't able to make them work for him during a short playtest. The strings might have also been too loose, which would raise the launch angle even more - the ESPN piece doesn't say how they strung it.
Corners I appreciate your defense of the open pattern, but the facts are that I hit with it, and I disagree. First off, controlling the trajectory of every shot is not that easy. In fact I think that is why most players pick a string pattern. I can hit loopers with my 18x20, but my natural grip and rip forehand with the 18x20 is a lower trajectory ball that penetrates the court far better than with an open pattern. I like to contact the ball flush with just a little forward tilt of the racquet face, and there is no way I would want to close it more just to control an open pattern's higher trajectory.
The high kick is not due just to trajectory but also to how much spin is on the ball. What the playtester from ESPN is saying is that there is definitely a case of too much spin, and if you already know how to hit with it, you will hit more balls that will sit up like this. This also happens sometimes with the APD ( i just sen that demo back to TW), and it happens at the highest levels as even Nadal has been beaten due to his ball sitting up in the strike zone sometimes.
If you dont hit with a lot of spin, then this pattern will be a revelation in how the ball can drop sharply in, but if you already do, I will be surprised if this racquet makes you want to switch.
Once again, I have yet to hit with the 99s, just the 105s. But for me, it is not even close to the Blade 98 in any way.
You don't get something without losing something?
I really don't think its going to live up to it's hype...isn't it more for the amateur player?
I believe it is getting way too much hype on these boards, but I need to hit with the 99S before I can say for sure.
It is well documented how many sticks I have tried and bought. So if it is the real deal, I assure you I will buy one. I love wilson sticks, and the steam could be a great compliment to my Blades.
Power Player,
Are you playing with blades in stock form? In my opinion this is one of the best racquets in stock form. It hits a heavy ball, nice balance/SW/weight ratio, and you have a lot of control with access to spin when needed.
I'm afraid to try the new blades because they lowered the swing weight.
Yes I agree, and I am playing it at stock weight as well.
The good news about the new blades is it is just Wilson QC and they did not actually lower the SW. You will be able to get a new blade that has the same SW as the 98. Most of them are in fact 331-335, just like the last ones.
I respect your posts corners but you can only close the racquet face so much before the ball starts feeling like its sliding off the strings rather than embedding properly. Even with an APDC you can only flatten the ball out so much because you can only ever work against the design and drill pattern of the racquet to certain degree. It's never going to produce the type of the ball that say a closed 6.1 is going to produce.
Nadal is an animal. Anyone who's ever had the pleasure of watching him courtside knows that he absoutely crushes the ball. I've never seen any pro that hits a ball that's as heavy as he does. The power he generates is immense, with the ball rising, then diving, embedding before shooting forward and rising rather than dipping beyond the baseline. I don't think that anyone who plays with the 99S is going to produce anywhere near the same amount of power than he does, so any ball produced is always going to have a different, more of an up/down trajectory. I could be wrong, but I just can't see it happening.
What I see, for most players, is that a slight increase in spin on all shots might make no difference whatsoever in your level of play!
The opponent sees it from warmup, so has time to dial in and figure out a counter.
YOU start hitting with the advanced new spin, and get used to it.
So when the points start to count, it's nothing not encountered.
Separate names with a comma.


text:
Raekwon, like many others, was left awestruck by the Tupac hologram performance alongside Dr. Dre and Snoop Dogg at Coachella. During a recent interview with VIBE.com, Raekwon opened up about the Tupac hologram performance, and how he felt that this incredible use of technology was "beautiful" to him. It made him think about Ol' Dirty Bastard and how he would love to do a hologram performance with ODB, so long as he got ODB's mother's approval first.
Here's what Raekwon had to say about the experience:
"It made me think about Ol' Dirty, too. I would definitely have to have an understanding with his moms, because I think it all starts with they respect level. If they want us to do it and they feel like it's cool that's when we would continue to move on and do that. But I wouldn't jump up out of the blue and just say, 'Yo I want to reincarnate your son this way.' I think it's important that you get the moms respect for her son. Because it may hurt people."
Some people who saw the Tupac performance felt unnerved. To them, it was "disrespectful" to bring a dead man back for a digitally enhanced performance. However Afeni Shakur, Tupac's mother, gave her complete approval. Raekwon also shared his thoughts on some of the controversy that the performance caused with some fans.
"I think more importantly, moms, if she co-signed it, then it ain't about what we think. If that's a way where she felt like her son was close to the fans and that was their way of getting to touch him, I don't feel it was a bad thing. It was just kinda different."
Source: hiphopdx.com


text: A health tool known as the Archimedes model has recently been shown to help predict the outcome of diabetes in patients. The Archimedes in the past has only been applied to large populations, not individuals, making this a novel study. It was also shown that the Archimedes model is equally efficient in predicting diabetes in… Continue reading


text:
It appears you have not yet Signed Up with our community. To Sign Up for free, please click here....
In Reply to: hi, I have ADD and I have a question for all of you posted by Tara Kokesch on February 05, 2000 at 11:14:13:
: hi, my name is Tara, I have ADD, and I was wondering if there are any other ADD people who come in here. if there are please let me know, because I am doing a homework assignment for abnormal psych class(I want to be a neuro-psychologist) on personality types, and I am checking to see if ADD people have a similiar personality type, so if you could help me out here I would be greatly appreciative. If you are willing to take the test please e-mail me and I will send it to you.. thanks a bunch!: TARA
Hey, TARA:
I'm a 35 year-old ADDer. Would be glad to help. Please send your test to [email protected]
Site owned and operated by HealthBoards.com Terms of Use © 1998-2018 HealthBoards.com All rights reserved.
Do not copy or redistribute in any form!


text:
The European Commission is holding talks with member state authorities and companies such as Google and Apple in order to reach an agreement to enforce stronger regulations on free-to-play games.
The European Union's executive body is concerned that a substantial number of free-to-play games are marketed as free but dupe customers into purchasing expensive in-app content. It can be argued that adults should be held responsible for their decisions, but the EU believes that children "particularly vulnerable" to such systems.
The European Commission has outlined the four consumer-raised issues that will be discussed in detail at the meeting:
• Games advertised as "free" should not mislead consumers about the true costs involved;
• Games should not contain direct exhortations to children to buy items in a game or to persuade an adult to buy items for them;
• Consumers should be adequately informed about the payment arrangements and purchases should not be debited through default settings without consumers' explicit consent;
• Traders should provide an email address so that consumers can contact them in case of queries or complaints.
Through the meeting, the European Commission aims to "reach a common understanding with industry," before it takes "any necessary action" to protect European customers.


text:
Nats claim infielder Gomez from Blue Jays
Veteran Minor Leaguer tied for the Triple-A lead with 29 homers this year
By Adam Berry / MLB.com
The Nationals claimed corner infielder Mauro Gomez off waivers from the Blue Jays on Thursday.
Gomez hit .249 with an .843 OPS, 29 homers and 73 RBIs for Triple-A Buffalo this season. The 28-year-old first baseman/third baseman also slugged 21 doubles and drew 43 walks in 110 games for Buffalo.
The Blue Jays designated Gomez for assignment on Tuesday.
Gomez, a right-handed hitter listed at 6-foot-2 and 230 pounds, has hit 150 homers in his past seven Minor League seasons, an average of 21.4 per year. His 29 round-trippers this year tied Nats shortstop Zach Walters, rated as the team's 12th-best prospect, for the Triple-A lead.
Gomez made his Major League debut with the Red Sox in 2012, hitting .275 with two homers and 17 RBIs in 37 games. He is a career .278/.333/.488 hitter over 10 Minor League seasons.
Adam Berry is a reporter for MLB.com. Follow him on Twitter at @adamdberry. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.


text:
In Comic Shops 2/13/2013: Batman And Robin — White Knight Dark Knight TP
Feb 06, 2013
Publisher: DC Comics
(W) Paul Cornell & Various
(A) Guillem March & Various
(Cover) Patrick Gleason, Mick Gray
Pre-New 52 adventures!
Yes, just because DC turned the page on continuity does not mean old school adventures are forgotten. Here we recap how the Dark Knight and the Boy Wonder face foes new and old, including the mysterious White Knight, the villainous Absence, and Jason Todd! Collected from Batman And Robin #17-25!
Item Code: OCT120260 In Shops: 2/13/2013 Price: $16.99
Are you following PREVIEWSWorld on Twitter yet? Follow @PREVIEWSworld


text:
Getting fresh tracks at Mt. Snow
WEST DOVER -- The A.M. Express chair lift rides are Mount Snow season pass holders' best chance of getting the freshest tracks of the season.
"I don't mind getting up early for the short lines and better snow," said snowboarder Keith Brigley, who comes up almost every weekend from New Jersey and has been coming to Mount Snow for over a decade.
On scheduled Saturdays throughout the winter, the mountain allows season pass holders to get on the Bluebird Express chair lift earlier than all other ticket holders. The Bluebird Express is the newest lift on Mount Snow and is known for its blue, transparent cover that blocks out wind and other variables. A.M. Express starts at 7:30 a.m., a half hour before the mountain regularly opens on weekends. This past Saturday the wind was brutal, making the air colder than it's been this winter. A frost bite warning was definitely in effect. I had all my skin covered, except for a tiny bit of my nose, which got a little burnt from the cold wind.
When reaching the top, my brother decided that snowboarding in the trees would be the best idea on a day when the mountain reported 36 inches of new snow. The woods were still bare because snow had been melting and with little to no snowfall in the past few weeks, snow from Nemo was the only covering some spots had.
I hit a few rocks, but I floated on powder for most of that ride. On regular trails, there were groomed sections. The left and right sides of trails still had untouched powder -- a glorious find for many weekend thrill seekers.
"This is the second big storm of the year," said Pete Ripley, owner of Invasion Board Shop in West Dover. "The wind gets this bad about four or five times a year."
The steepest and most difficult terrain of the mountain, the North Face, was only open for part of the day.
People were getting stuck in the inches of snow that had gone without grooming. It wasn't easy for beginners in some spots on Saturday. There were skiers and snowboarders taking off their equipment because they were either stuck in deep snow or moguls had formed on many trails, making the terrain even harder to ride down.
"Nitro was moving really slow," said Ripley, of the chair lift at Carinthia, where the terrain parks are located. "But at least it got people up there."
Ripley joked that when he got to work, he was surprised his shop was still standing with all the wind.
Even with the harsh winds, people swarmed the mountain looking for the best skiing and riding of the season. A lot of people had taken off from work on Friday when they heard that Nemo was coming. Others took off the minute they heard that school had been canceled for children all over Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York.
After an hour of the bitter cold and strong winds, I went inside to warm up with a cup of coffee. It just so happened that Mount Snow Communications Manager Dave Meeker was standing in front of the cafeteria. He had taken a few runs already and was stoked about all the people visiting.
"It's great," he said, with a big smile on his face.
He said people were coming from all over trying to get fresh tracks and ride the new powder that landed on the mountain.
The Cupola is a ski and snowboard shop owned by Mount Snow that sells lift tickets to people who visit on Friday nights, who want to avoid lines at the ticket windows on Saturday morning.
Employees said that business had been great on Friday. There were big lines and it was really crowded. People were buying lift tickets and lessons until the shop closed at midnight on Friday. On Saturday night, a lot of visitors were still filling the store.
On the first chair of the day, we rode up with some rescue crew members, employed by the mountain. From the chair, they saw some skiers poaching the trail, which means they ducked the rope that said the trail was closed.
When asked about it, the rescue crew members said that if they saw people doing such acts, they would be taking their tickets away. It is just part of their job.
On a day like that, there was enough snow on the open terrain and in the trees, I thought.
Chris Mays can be reached at 802-254-2311, ext. 273, or email@example.com.
If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom.


text:
Black Troops, White Commanders, and Freedmen During the Civil War
Southern Illinois University Press, 1992 - Social Science - 189 pages
The important roles played by blacks in the Civil War have only recently drawn the scholarly attention they so richly merit. Now Howard C. Westwood's articles on this topic have been collected together with an original essay written especially for this volume.
Westwood's work covers topics ranging from the roles played by Lincoln and Grant in beginning black soldiery to the sensitive issues that arose when black soldiers (and their white officers) were captured by the Confederates. The essays relate the exploits of black heroes such as Robert Smalls, who singlehandedly captured a Confederate steamer, as well as the experiences of the ignoble Reverend Fountain Brown, who became the first person charged with violating the Emancipation Proclamation.
What people are saying - Write a review
Lincolns Position on Black Enlistments
Grants Role in Beginning Black Soldiery
Benjamin Butlers Enlistment of Black Troops in
7 other sections not shown
Other editions - View all
Black Troops, White Commanders and Freedmen during the Civil War
Howard Westwood
Limited preview - 1991
Black Troops, White Commanders and Freedmen During the Civil War
Howard Westwood
Limited preview - 2008