text:
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — Breanna Stewart and Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis each scored 17 points, leading top-seeded Connecticut over Maryland 76-50 on Saturday in the Bridgeport regional semifinals.
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — Breanna Stewart and Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis each scored 17 points, leading top-seeded Connecticut over Maryland 76-50 on Saturday in the Bridgeport regional semifinals.
Stewart got help from fellow freshmen Moriah Jefferson, 10 points, and Morgan Tuck, eight points, in sending the top-seeded Huskies (32-4) to their eighth straight NCAA regional final.
Alyssa Thomas, who had averaged 28.5 points in the tournament, had 13 to lead Maryland, which finished its season at 26-8. Tianna Hawkins and Chloe Pavlech each had 11 points for the Terps.
UConn led 35-26 at halftime, then opened the second half on a 9-0 run.
The Huskies will play Kentucky in on Monday night in a rematch of last year's regional final, which was played just over 100 miles away in Kingston, R.I.
The Wildcats beat Delaware 69-62 earlier Saturday.
Connecticut will be playing in a regional final for the 19th time. The Huskies have made five consecutive trips to the Final Four and are seeking their eighth national title.
Connecticut's freshmen were not part of any of that. But they were the difference in this one.
Stewart pulled down nine rebounds and also blocked four shots.
Jefferson made several key defensive stops and her two fast-break layups capped the early second half run that pushed UConn's lead to 18 at 44-26 and gave the Huskies control of the game.
Her blow-by layup midway through the half stretched the lead to 60-38.
UConn's reserves outscored Maryland's 25-0.
It was the second win over Maryland this season for UConn. The Huskies won by 15 points in the Jimmy V Classic in December. Thomas had just six points in that game, and the Huskies held the Terps to just 48 points, their lowest output this season. They also were outrebounded 39-35, one of just five times that happened this season.
Maryland came into the game ranked second in the nation in rebounding margin, grabbing more than 14 more boards per game than their opponents. They had outrebounded opponents in 32 of their 33 games.
UConn won that battle this time around 41-36.
Stefanie Dolson had 10 to go with nine points.
Maryland hit just seven of its first 23 shots, but was 4 of 7 from 3-point range during that span, and trailed just 23-20 midway through the first half.
But 3-pointers from Bria Hartley and Kelly Faris pushed the lead to nine, and started a 12-1 run.
The Huskies looked as if they were about to extend that further, when Faris drove to the basket and appeared to take a hard foul. But there was no whistle, infuriating coach Geno Auriemma, who received a technical foul.
Thomas made one of two foul shots, then hit a jump shot that cut the lead to nine, 35-26, at halftime.
UConn outrebounded Maryland 24-20 in the first half.
UConn is now 44-4 in NCAA Tournament games played in the state and 8-1 in Bridgeport.
UConn's lone blemish came against Duke in 2006 in the regional final.
Maryland was in its 10th regional semifinal and looking to make back-to-back trips to the regional final despite losing three players this season to ACL injuries, including the expected starting backcourt, guards Brene Moseley and Laurin Mincy.
UConn beat Kentucky last year 80-65 in the Kingston regional. Kentucky forward Samarie Walker said the Wildcats view this year's regional as a second chance.


text:
Murda Mook In The Booth (Spittin Bars To "Best Rapper Alive")
HipHopStan TV Reports "Watch Murda Mook lay down lyrics to 'Best Rapper Alive' "
Please click the "Report" button below if the video on this page is not working properly.
Comments will only be displayed by verified emails. No Spamming or Racism.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Lawsuits Filed Against Twitter, Facebook & MySpace For Confirming That A User No Longer Wanted Text Messages
from the frivolous-lawsuits deptAh, class action lawsuits in action. If you want an idea of how the class action lawsuit process is often used for completely ridiculous purposes, just take a look at three separate lawsuits filed by a bunch of California lawyers. Each lawsuit is separate (and embedded below), and all three were pointed out by Eric Goldman. The lawsuits are against Twitter, Facebook and MySpace, and all are basically identical, other than the plaintiff. They're all attempts to file class actions against these companies for violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which is supposed to block unsolicited contact to mobile phone lines. In all three cases, the plaintiffs were people who willingly turned on a feature in early April to receive text messages from each of these services. At some later date (probably a few days), each plaintiff chose to no longer receive those text messages, and responded to a message received by texting back "stop." As is quite typical, each of these services sent a message back to confirm that the person no longer wanted to receive such text messages. This is a completely standard procedure. And yet, these lawsuits claim that those messages broke the law, because the second the "stop" message was sent, any and all future messages, even the confirmation message, were unsolicited:
Plaintiff continued to receive text message notifications from Defendant. At some point Plaintiff decided that he no longer wanted to receive text message notifications on his cellular telephone from Defendant.I can't see any of these lawsuits getting very far, and one would think there should be some sort of sanctions for setting up a situation like this solely for the purpose of filing a class action lawsuit. A confirmation message that the service provider is not to contact you again is hardly an unsolicited contact. It seems like it should be easy to argue that it was very much solicited by the individual issuing the "stop" command. That this law firm filed all three of these identical lawsuits at about the same time, also suggests that the message was very much solicited in that this law firm wanted to receive the confirmation message, solely for the purpose of filing a silly class action lawsuit (or three). The thing is, if this lawsuit goes anywhere, it'll create more of a hassle. Many of us like receiving a confirmation that we've been unsubscribed from something. This is clearly not the intent of the law, and one hopes that the courts will slap this down quickly.
Plaintiff then responded to Defendant's last text message notification by replying "stop."
At this point, Plaintiff withdrew any type of express or implied consent to receive text message notification to his cellular telephone.
In response to receiving this revocation of consent, Defendant then immediately sent another, unsolicited, confirmatory text message to Plaintiff's cellular telephone.
Filed Under: class action, spam, tcpa, text messaging, unsolicited
Companies: facebook, myspace, twitter


text:
TERM ONE: Auslan (Sign Language) Two @ LAUNCESTON
- Event Date
- February 18, 2020 - March 24, 2020
- Time
- 6:00pm - 8:00pm Tuesdays
- Where
- Expression Australia, 64 Cameron Street, Launceston
This level is for people who want to learn more about Sign Language and have completed Auslan One. You will build on your learning from Auslan (Sign Language) One and learn more about the grammatical structure of the language. Auslan (Sign Language) One or an equivalent study must be completed before enrolling in Auslan (Sign Language) Two.
Auslan (Sign Language) Two
- Your Auslan Teacher will be Deaf.
- You will be learning a visual language.
- Your Auslan Teacher will demonstrate how to sign and for you to follow.
- Classroom will not be based on auditory learning.
- You will receive a new handbook for each class.
- There is no assessment for this Auslan course.
- Class will run for 2 hours and you will get a 15 minutes break in between.
- Small activity/game on the new signs you have learnt. This can be in pairs or in a group activity.
You will learn expressive and receptive signing skills and practice every day signs for use in basic conversations with Deaf people. You will also learn about Deaf culture.
Auslan Two Outline:
Week 1: Revision of key signs from Auslan One, animal signs
Week 2: Revisit signs from week 1, education and work, roles at work
Week 3: Revisit signs from week 2, nature and environment, weather signs
Week 4: Revisit signs from week 3, advanced places, advances house signs
Week 5: Revisit signs from week 4, transport, direction and location, describing signs
Week 6: Revisit signs from week 5, technology, cities and country signs
For more questions, you can visit our FAQs page - click here.
Our Auslan classes are taught in an adult learning environment appropriate for those aged 16 years and above. Students aged 13-16 years old are welcome to attend along with a parent/guardian enrolment.
Please read our terms and conditions before enrolling, in particular to payments, withdrawals, deferrals and cancellations.


text:
Illini Central (ICHS) Class of 2016 Alumni List
Help us Update the Illini Central 2016 Class List by adding any names missing from the list below:
Registered Alumni
2016 Class List
Know Illini Central Class of 2016 graduates that are NOT on this List? Help us Update the 2016 Class List by adding missing names.
Reunions and Illini Central High School News
More 2016 alumni from Illini Central HS have posted profiles on Classmates.com®. Click here to register for free at Classmates.com® and view other 2016 alumni.
Missing some friends from Illini Central High that graduated with you in 2016? Check the list below that shows the Illini Central class of '16.
If you are a former student of Illini Central High in Mason City, Illinois, register now to add your name.


text:
Główne składowe
In this national supplement for Tanzania, you will find a detailed presentation of how the main ethical and legal issues raised by research involving human participants are addressed in the national laws and regulation. On one hand, this supplement includes a point by point description of the legal framework, and on the other hand, a direct access to all the legal and regulatory provisions applicable in this country. Documents are made available either by hyperlink to recognized national sites, or in PDF format.
This national supplement for Tanzania is intended to anyone involved in, or interested by, the protection of participants involved in health research in this country.
Objectives: at the end of this supplement, participants will be able to:
- have an overview of the national legal and regulatory framework on research involving human participants in the country concerned.
- understand how principles developed in all TRREE modules are implemented in the national legislation of the country concerned.
- have direct access to the relevant regulations in relation to the key elements of ethics review as they are deducted from the principles developed in the TRREE modules.
This national supplement is freely accessible without registering on the site. Those interested in TRREE training are invited to register on TRREE by referring to the instructions on the home page.


text:
Paper Mfg
The paper manufacturing industry creates paper most commonly for writing and printing on; however, it is also widely used as a packaging material, in many cleaning products, in a number of industrial and construction processes. Plastics have long been aiding the production of paper.
Advantages of plastics
The advantages of plastics in Paper Manufacturing are numerous. Plastics are much lighter than metal, which equate into better fuel economy and cheaper to manufacture parts. Additionally, the lighter weight aids in safer material handling. Plastics can be designed to be impact and dent resistant, and modified for improved strength. Corrosion resistance, color and texture flexibility, the economical components and aesthetics are other advantages of plastics.
Materials Utilized Within Industry
Materials used in the manufacturing and production of paper and forestry products include Polycarbonate, Nylon and UHMW.
TECAFORM™ AH ID (Metal Detectable Acetal)
TECAFORM™ AH ID is the first commercially available thermoplastic that can be detected by the standard metal detection equipment typically used in food quality inspection.
Tecaform™ Acetal Copolymer
TECAFORM™ is commonly used as bushings, rollers, wear strips and other applications requiring a combination of strength, low moisture absorption, chemical resistance and dimensional stability.
Rochling Sustaplast Sustarin H
Material Properties and Machining Guidelines for Sustarin H, Sustarin H AF and Sustarin AF - DE588.
Rochling Sustaplast Sustarin C
Material Properties and Machining Guidelines for Sustarin C, Sustarin C ESD 60, Sustarin ESD 90 and Sustarin C TF.
Tecamid™ Nylon Sheets and Rods
TECAMID™ is an ideal material for metal replacement in applications whose design requirements include high strength, toughness, and weight reduction.
Rochling Sustaplast Sustamid 6G and Sustaglide
Material Properties and Machining Guidelines for Sustamid 6G, Sustamid 6G Blue, Sustamid 6G MoS2, Sustamid 6G OL, Sustaglide and Sustaglide Plus.
Prime LDPE 049
Machinists Tips - Milling
When face milling, use positive geometry cutter bodies. Quadrant Service & Support provides guidance when milling plastics.
TIVAR® Ceram P® UHMW-PE Plastic Sheets
Reduce maintenance downtime, extend equipment service life and reduce replacement part costs with Quadrant Engineering Plastic Products.
TIVAR® H.O.T., UHMW Sheets, TIVAR® UHMW
Formulated -- exclusively from Quadrant EPP -- to maintain key performance properties in an extended temperature range.


text:
Negron seizing Majors opportunity with Reds
Utility player tabbed as Outstanding Player in Ohio Cup series win over Tribe
CINCINNATI -- It's been a long road to the Majors for utility man Kris Negron. But now that he's in the big leagues, he's making the most of his opportunity.
Negron, who was selected by the Red Sox in the 2006 First-Year Player Draft and traded to the Reds in '09, made his Major League debut in 2012 and appeared in four games for Cincinnati that season. Since being called up on July 10 of this season, the 28-year-old has performed well, coming on particularly strong at the plate recently.
In the Reds' Ohio Cup series win over the Indians, Negron was named Most Outstanding Player after going 7-for-13 (.538) with two doubles, a home run, five RBIs and four runs scored. He had a career-high three hits and three runs scored in Wednesday's victory.
After hitting three homers in 219 at-bats this season with Triple-A Louisville prior to his callup, Negron entered Thursday's series finale having hit three in 43 at-bats with the Reds.
"He's a guy that seized the opportunity," manager Bryan Price said. "He hasn't become a callous Triple-A player, and I think, unfortunately, that's what happens. I don't think it's uncommon. I do think it's human instinct: sometimes you wonder what you've got to do to get yourself out of Triple-A."
"You just never give up," Negron said. "I've been wanting to get up here and play my entire life, and you're not going to have a bad attitude or not give it my all. So I just told myself: 'You know what, I'm just going to play as hard as I can and leave it up to whoever's hands it's in.'"
Negron suffered a setback in 2012, his seventh season in the Minors, when he sustained ACL and medial meniscus tears in his right knee on July 5. The injury required season-ending surgery.
"Last year, the whole year, I had that big knee brace on, and I was kinda worried about it just because I had never been hurt in my life," he said. "It was a long season, but I went to Puerto Rico this offseason and I played for Caguas down there and didn't wear the knee brace. That helped me out mentally, and when I came to Spring Training, I felt healthy and rode it through Spring Training."
Price said Negron's confidence has been palpable over the last three weeks.
"I know when he's out there, he carries himself like he expects to be successful," Price said.


text:
Scott B. necesitaba un nuevo diseño de logotipo y lanzó un concurso de diseño en 99designs.
Un ganador ha sido elegido entre 16 diseños de 8 diseñadores freelance.
We need a total of four logos for our trail series. One logo for the series and then three similar logos for the three series races. This is a trail running race series held just outside the city of Chicago. We are looking for festive, bright logos that use running and nature together.
Chicago Trail Series
The Chicago Trail Series is a series of three races held at a forest preserve just outside of Chicago. We are in need of a new logo for the overall series, then three offshoots of the logo with our specific race information from the three individual races. The races take part at Deer Grove Forest Preserve in Palatine, Illinois.
Our three races:
X-Country Trail Run 8k - June 6, 2009
Renegade Trail Run 10k - July 11, 2009
XTREME Trail Run 12k - August 8, 2009
We are in the process of redesigning our website, but you can check out the website to get a better idea of who we are at http://www.chicagotrailseries.com.
Creative, fun, bright are three concepts we're looking for in our new logo.
- The image to reflect both nature and running.
- Bright colors, but not pastel colors.
- One series logo, then three race logos using the series logo, but with the race name and date included.
- The more creative the better!!!
- Dark color scheme
- Pastel color scheme
- Clip art runners
Descubre cómo funciona un concurso de diseño u obtén más información sobre nuestros servicios de diseño de logo.


text:
What You're Missing When You're Not Listening to All-American Country, U92...92.7 FM:
Absolutely the Best Country Music is here, a mix of the best of the new and the best of the gold.
Toledo Boomer Sports. Including Podcasts Of Toledo Football & Basketball Games
Every Sunday morning from 8 am until noon, Bob Kingsley's Counrty Top 40.
Sunday from Noon to 1PM: "New Music Nashville"
The Horse Show Minute, tips for the care and love of horses, weekdays With Rick Lamb at 7:15 am and 6:30 pm.
Regular Country Artist concerts and interviews with artists like Toby Keith, Faith Hill, Garth Brooks, Alan Jackson, George Strait, Martina McBride, Shania Twain.
Great personality country radio announcers- 24 hours every day, with contests, country artist information.
Local News. The only local radio news department in Lincoln County, weekdays at 7 am, 8 am, noon and 5 pm.
What You're Missing When You're Not Listening to All-American Country, U92...92.7 FM:


text:
U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission
Volume XIII, No. 3
Office of Federal Operations
Summer Quarter 2002
Disability Law - Association Provision
Disability Law - Direct Threat
Failure to State a Claim/Mootness
National Origin & Religious Discrimination
The Digest of EEO Law is a quarterly publication of EEOC's Office of Federal Operations (OFO).
Carlton M. Hadden, Director, OFO
Donald Names, Director, OFO's Special Services Staff
Digest Staff
Editor: Arnold Rubin
Writers: Dann Determan, Gerald Goldstein, Lori Grant, Navarro Pulley
Available in accessible formats for persons with disabilities. The Digest is now available online through EEOC's homepage at www.eeoc.gov. If you wish to receive a copy in print, you must send a request, in writing, to Arnold Rubin, EEOC, Office of Federal Operations, 1801 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20507.
No Abuse Found. The Commission did not find complainant's numerous complaints to be an abuse of the equal employment opportunity (EEO) process. Despite a high number of complaints filed (47), the Commission noted that merely filing a large number of complaints is not sufficient for finding abuse of process. It found no clear intent by complainant to use the EEO process for ends other than which it was designed to accomplish, and concluded that complainant had not engaged in abuse of process. Deutsch v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01A02671 (February 27, 2002).
Direct Evidence. Complainant was discriminated against on the basis of age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment (ADEA), when he was transferred to a new job location because he was considered to be a "dinosaur." The Commission also found that the agency failed to meet its burden of showing that it would have transferred complainant even absent discrimination. Harrison v. Department of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 01984868 (November 23, 2001).
Class Action Not Certified. Complainant's class complaint was rejected for failure to satisfy the prerequisites for certification. However, the individual complaints of the class members could be processed and possibly joined. Fusilier, et al. v. Department of the Treasury. EEOC Appeal No. 01A14312 (February 22, 2002).
Awards for Non-Pecuniary Damages. In a series of decisions, the Commission ruled as follows:
Association With Disabled Person. It is unlawful to discriminate against a person based on their close association with an individual with a known disability. The agency's obligation to provide reasonable accommodation, however, applies only to qualified individuals with disabilities. The Commission found no discrimination in the agency's denial of complainant's request for additional leave under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and its termination of complainant with regard to the care of her daughter who had cerebral palsy. Simms v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01992195 (May 16, 2002).
No Nexus Between Impairment and Leave Denial. Affirming the agency's Final Order declining to fully implement the AJ's finding of disability discrimination (migraine headaches), EEOC noted that complainant had failed to show a nexus between her impairment and denial of leave.
Ricco v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 07A10007 (February 15, 2002).
Complainant Not Disabled. Complainant's impairment (sinusitis/bilateral CT/contact dermatitis) neither substantially limited the major life activity of breathing nor was long-term or chronic. Washington v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01993946 (February 22, 2002). Cf. Brown v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01996312 (March 1, 2002) (condition not temporary merely because it can be corrected by surgery).
No Evidence of Direct Threat. The agency refused to hire complainant, asserting that performing the job would constitute a threat to her health due to her disabilities. EEOC found no evidence that complainant posed a direct threat and was unsuitable for employment because of her impairments (hearing, underdeveloped fingers, and metal strip in foot). Accordingly, the Commission found a violation of the Rehabilitation Act. Plambeck v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01981021 (January 2, 2002).
Suspension Did not Violate the Rehabilitation Act. The Commission held that the duty to accommodate does not require an employer to excuse past employee misconduct, so long as nondisabled employees are similarly disciplined.Contreras v. Social Security Administration, EEOC Appeal No. 01A10514 (February 22, 2002).
No Prima Facie Case. Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case when he produced no evidence that the challenged practice had a disparate impact on Haitians. Obas v. Department of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 01A04389 (May 16, 2002).
Polygraph Test not Actionable. A complaint involving a polygraph test did not state a claim, absent a resulting adverse action. Jones v. Department of the Army. EEOC Request No. 05A00428 (March 1, 2002).
Death of Complainant Does Not Vitiate Complaint. A deceased complainant's estate's complaint was viable and not moot, where complainant had initiated EEO counseling and the agency had issued a Notice of Final Interview. Complainant's widow and executrix requested, in effect, compensatory damages for his suffering while alive. Estate of Ginter, Sr., v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01997239 (July 11, 2001).
Agencies Must Be Sensitive to Workplace Harassment. Finding that complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of harassment, noting the acts claimed were sporadic and not severe, EEOC encouraged the agency to ensure that its employees were aware of the Commission's policy regarding harassment. Obas v. Department of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 01A04389 (May 14, 2002).
AJ Remand Was Error. The AJ erred in remanding the complaint to the agency for a supplemental investigation after complainant sought to amend the complaint by adding bases. The AJ should have presided over any necessary supplementation of the record in the hearing process. Simmons v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01A21416 (April 9, 2002).
Discrimination Found. Complainant was discriminated against, based on national origin (Arab/Egyptian), and religion (Muslim), when he was not selected for two agency positions. The Commission also awarded complainant $75,000 in non-pecuniary damages and reimbursement for proven medical expense. Ghazzawi v. United States Postal Service EEOC Appeal No. 01A15327 (April 23, 2002).
Pretext Found. The Commission found that the agency's reason for not promoting complainant during his detail as a Garbage Truck Driver (a delay in paperwork and a lack of agency funds), was unworthy of belief. The agency official in charge of processing the paperwork averred that he was processing the necessary paperwork and that complainant could be paid at the higher rate. However, the agency was unable to prove that it even began processing the paperwork. Further, complainant's immediate supervisors obstructed his being paid at the higher rate. The Commission found, accordingly, that the agency discriminated against complainant based on race, color, and retaliation. Ford v. Department of the Army, EEOC Request No. 05980506 (December 6, 2001).
Consideration. EEOC found that a settlement agreement was void for lack of consideration. An agreement is void where one party receives no benefit and the other suffers no legal detriment. In this case, a hiring freeze in place during the relevant time period effectively made it impossible for complainant to receive the priority consideration for the position for which she had bargained. Lee v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01A20577 (April 25, 2002).
Enforceability. Complainant, a GS-12 employee raised a claim of hostile work environment, under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act. The parties entered into a settlement agreement which provided for the agency to recalculate complainant's disability retirement at the GS-14, step 10 level. However, subsequent to the execution of the agreement, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), as administrator of the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), advised the agency that it would not implement the provision because, inter alia, it appeared that the agreement had been drafted solely to provide complainant with an annuity in excess of that to which he was entitled. Complainant claimed breach of the agreement. The Commission found the provision to be unenforceable. It noted that the monetary relief available for hostile environment harassment under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act was an award of compensatory damages, instead of a promotion for which complainant never claimed he had applied or been denied. The Commission urged the parties to renegotiate the agreement, ratify it in the absence of the provision at issue, or continue with the processing of complainant's underlying complaints. Freeman v. Department of the Army, EEOC Request No. 05990031 (July 13, 2001).
This article, in Question and Answer format, has been designed to help the reader understand the equitable remedy of Back Pay, under the statutes enforced by the Commission.
1. When the Commission orders an award of Back Pay, what does it mean?
Back Pay is an equitable remedy that includes monetary benefits and all forms of compensation, reflecting fluctuations in working time, overtime, rates, penalty overtime, Sunday premium and night work, changing rates of pay, transfers, promotions, and privileges of employment. See Cass v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Petition No. 04A10014 (March 14, 2002).
2. What is meant by an equitable remedy?
An equitable remedy is "make whole relief" designed to restore the complainant as much as possible to the position he/she would have been in absent discrimination. See Finlay v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01942985 (April 29, 1997) (citing Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (1975)).The burden of limiting the remedy rests on the agency. Finlay supra.
3. Where does the Commission get its authority to award back pay?
EEOC's authority to award back pay is derived from the remedial provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and, by analogy, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. See Ferguson v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05880848 (May 8, 1990).
4. How is back pay computed?
Back pay is computed under the regulations of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), set forth at 5 C.F.R. 550.805; and cited in the EEOC's regulations in Subpart E of 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 "Remedies and Enforcement" (revised November 9, 1999). See 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.501 "Remedies and Relief." See also the Commission's Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO-MD-110, as revised November 9, 1999), at Ch. 9, Section VIII ("Remedies").
5. May back pay be awarded under all the statutes enforced by the Commission?
Yes. Back pay can be awarded under Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the Rehabilitation Act, and the Equal Pay Act (EPA). See the Commission's Enforcement Guidance on After-Acquired evidence and McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co, 115 S. Ct. 879 (1995), at III (A), EEOC Notice 915.002 (December 14, 1995). Prejudgment interest on back pay is not available under the ADEA. See Gross, et al. v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Petition No. 04A10034 (August 8, 2001). With regard to the EPA, a violation of the EPA is also a violation of Title VII, for which back pay with interest may be awarded. An additional award of liquidated damages may also be available in EPA cases. See the Commission's Enforcement Guidance supra, and Telford v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No 01973892 (November 2, 1999), Request to Reconsider granted in part, and denied in part, EEOC Request No. 05A00233 (June 11, 2002). However, an individual may not receive duplicative relief for the same wrong. See 29 C.F.R. Section 1620.27.
6. What are liquidated damages?
Liquidated damages are an additional dollar award, generally equal to the amount of back pay. With regard to the Equal Pay Act, an employer who violates the EPA may be liable for the "payment of wages lost and an additional equal amount as liquidated damages." See 29 U.S.C. Section 206(d). See also the Commission's regulations at 29 C.F.R. Section 1620.33. And see Telford v. Department of the Army supra. Liquidated damages are also available under the ADEA, but not in the federal sector. See, e.g., Smith v. Office of Personnel Management, 778 F.2d 258, 263-64 (5th Cir. 1985) (court refused to award liquidated damages against the federal government because Congress did not expressly provide for it), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1105 (1986); Duffy v. Halter, 2001 WL 253828, *7 (E.D. Pa. 2001) ("liquidated damages are not available in an ADEA action against the federal government").
7. Are there any limitations on back pay awards?
Yes. Back pay generally ends on the date the agency's offer of reemployment becomes effective, or on the date the offer is rejected. See McNeil v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Petition 04990007 (December 9, 1999). In addition, an award of back pay is limited to two years prior to the date on which the complaint was originally filed, in accordance with Title VII. See Stone v. Department of the Treasury (Bureau of Public Debt), EEOC Request No. 05A11013 (January 10, 2002). See also 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.501 with regard to the two-year limitation under the Rehabilitation Act. Back pay may also be limited by the concept of mitigation of damages, discussed below.
8. What does it mean to mitigate damages?
A complainant has an obligation to mitigate, or limit, potential damages. The complainant must be "ready, willing, and able" to work during the applicable time period. See Paris v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05921068 (December 7, 1992); 5 C.F.R. 550.805. Otherwise, complainant is not entitled to back pay for the period he was not ready, willing and able to work. See Schnaidt v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Petition No. 04960022 (November 15, 1996). The agency has the burden to show that complainant failed to mitigate damages. See Simmons v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Petition 04930005 (December 10, 1993); and EEOC regulations set forth at 29 C.F.R. § 1614.501(d).
9. How can it be shown that complainant failed to mitigate damages?
Generally a two-prong test is employed: An agency must show that: (1) complainant failed to use reasonable care and diligence in seeking a suitable position, and (2) there were suitable positions available which complainant could have discovered and for which he/she was qualified. See Simmons v. United States Postal Service supra.
10. Is back pay subject to deductions?
Yes. OPM's regulations require that offsets and deductions from the gross back pay award be made in a specified order, beginning with the earnings from the job from which the employee was unjustifiably separated. 5 C.F.R. Section 550.805 (e).
11. Can workers' compensation awards affect back pay?
Yes. Under the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA), compensation from the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) is deductible from back pay if it is in the form of a wage-replacement benefit. This is to avoid double wage recovery. However, the portion of the OWCP award that is paid as reparation for physical injuries is not subject to deduction because such compensation is not related to wages earned. See Sands v. Department of Defense, EEOC Petition No. 04990001 (February 25, 2000).
12. What if there is a dispute between complainant and the agency over the amount of back pay?
A complainant who feels that he or she has not been awarded the correct amount of back pay may petition the Commission for clarification or enforcement of a decision issued under the Commission's appellate jurisdiction. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(a).
13. May a complainant receive back pay as part of a settlement agreement, even without an agency admission of discrimination?
Yes. See Barrington v. Department of Transportation (FAA), EEOC Appeal No. 01990183 (May 21, 2002); see also EEO MD-110, Chapter 12 "Settlement Authority."
In 1992, Congress amended the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, incorporating the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) into the Rehabilitation Act, in order to promote consistent application of the two laws.(1) The EEOC has now published a final rule clarifying the application of the employment provisions of the ADA to federal government workers.(2) The rule incorporates by reference the EEOC's ADA regulations, found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1630, into the federal sector EEO complaint processing regulations, found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614.
Among the most significant changes resulting from this final rule is the deletion of the regulatory limits on reassignment of federal employees with disabilities as a reasonable accommodation, formerly found at 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.203(g). For example, under the prior regulation, reassignment was not an available accommodation for a probationary employee. Under the revised regulations reassignment is a possible accommodation so long as the employee adequately performed the essential functions of the position, with or without accommodation, before the need for reassignment arose, regardless of the probationary status of the employee. The Commission points out in the preamble to the new rule, however, that if a probationary employee has never adequately performed the essential functions of the position, s/he is not entitled to reassignment because s/he was never "qualified" for the original position.
The new rule also eliminates the limitation in 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.203(g) of the scope of the search for reassignment to the local commuting area. Under the new rule, the scope of the search may be agency-wide, which could extend beyond the local commuting area. The Commission points out in the preamble to the new rule, however, that the duty to consider reassignment, like any other reasonable accommodation, is limited by a showing of "undue hardship." Undue hardship takes into account the operational, financial and legal relationships between components of large organizations. As such, an employer seeking to demonstrate undue hardship would have to demonstrate why, in light of the resources, operations, and constraints of its particular organization, the reasonable accommodation of reassignment would result in significant difficulty or expense.
The Commission pointed out that the Supreme Court has held that "ordinarily" it will be unreasonable to reassign an employee with a disability as an accommodation if doing so would violate the rules of a seniority system. U.S. Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 122 S. Ct. 1516 (2002). This is true for both collectively bargained seniority systems and those unilaterally imposed by management. However, if there are "special circumstances" that undermine employee expectations of consistent, uniform treatment, it may be a reasonable accommodation, absent undue hardship, to reassign an employee despite the seniority system.
In applying this rule, practitioners should be aware that the effective date of the change is June 20, 2002. This means that the new regulations apply to conduct occurring on or after that date. For example, in Hampton v. U.S. Postal Service,(3) the complainant alleged that the agency failed to reasonably accommodate her disability (Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy) when she was not offered reassignment to a light duty position. In examining reassignment as a means of reasonable accommodation, the Commission noted that the regulations found at 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.203(g) which governed and limited the obligation of reassignment, had been superseded and no longer applied. However, because the case arose prior to June 20, 2002, the effective date of the change in the regulations, the Commission applied 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.203(g). It noted that the complainant had the burden in a reassignment case of showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there were vacancies during the relevant time period into which s/he could have been reassigned. The complainant could do this, the Commission explained, by producing evidence of particular vacancies. Absent this type of evidence, the Commission continued, the complainant could meet his/her burden by showing: (1) s/he was qualified to perform a job or jobs which existed at the agency; and (2) that there were trends or patterns of turnover in the relevant jobs so as to make a vacancy likely during the relevant time period. In this case, the Commission found that the complainant had failed to meet her burden. The agency had shown that there were no positions available for reassignment in the complainant's Carrier craft, and the complainant had failed to argue or show that there were vacancies outside her craft available for reassignment. The Commission concluded that the complainant was not a qualified individual with a disability, as she had not shown that the agency would have found a vacant position to which she could have been reassigned. Accordingly, the Commission found that the complainant had failed to show that she had been denied a reasonable accommodation.(4)
1. Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, Pub. L. 102-569, 106 Stat. 4344 (1992) (codified as amended at 29 U.S.C. Section 791(g)).
2. 67 Fed. Reg. 35732 (May 21, 2002), to be codified at 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.203. The text of the final rule can be found at EEOC's web site, www.eeoc.gov.
3. EEOC Appeal No. 01986308 (July 31, 2002).
4. For other recent cases applying the reassignment provisions of 1614.203(g) to cases arising before June 20, 2002, see: Key v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 07A20001 (August 2, 2002); Barnard v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 07A10002 (August 2, 2002).


text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guests: Howard Fineman, Mark Halperin, Sue Herera, Joe Klein, Dayne Walling, Dee Dee Myers, Chip Saltsman, Diana DeGette, Majorie Dannenfelser
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Rick versus Romney.
Let`s play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I`m Chris Matthews up in New York. And what an evening
it`s going to be. Tonight we stand watch again at the political abyss of
Mitt Romney. He may win tonight and avoid a devastating fall, but if he
loses, the fall could be deadly.
How does Romney explain losing in Michigan? How does a candidate who
outspends a rival 2 to 1 explain rejection? And more importantly, how does
anyone explain losing to a candidate who makes himself so challenging to
vote for as Rick Santorum?
This may be as big a night as we`ve had in this political season, and
we have it covered tonight now until the dust settles. We`ll be back in
two hours with a new edition of HARDBALL. Then at 8:00 o`clock Eastern,
Rachel Maddow and I will be joined by the Reverend Al Sharpton, Ed Schultz,
Lawrence O`Donnell and Republican strategist Steve Schmidt or full coverage
of the Michigan and Arizona primaries.
We begin our coverage tonight right now with "Time" magazine`s Joe
Klein and the HuffingtonPost`s Howard Fineman, who`s also an MSNBC
political analyst.
I want to start with you, Joe. Tonight, this thing about Mitt Romney
-- I just want your general sense. I`ve been tough on him. I don`t think
he`s a good politician. I don`t think he has the human touch, the bedside
manner, whatever you want to call it. He`s not what we think of as a good
politician. And that`s his problem.
JOE KLEIN, "TIME" MAGAZINE: That`s true. And today -- today was an
incredibly significant day in the history of Mitt Romney. He finally
admitted that there was something that he wouldn`t do to get this
MATTHEWS: What`s that?
KLEIN: He would not set his hair on fire--
KLEIN: -- to get the nomination. Now, you know, as much as I`d like
to see Romney set his hair on -- what a sight that would be. The fact is
that throughout this process, he has sold his soul to the devil time and
time and time again.
And finally today, he said that he wouldn`t criticize the president in
the outlandish way that Santorum and Newt and others have been doing.
MATTHEWS: Well, let`s show that right now. Here`s Mitt Romney saying
what he won`t do. Well, we`re finally hearing what he won`t do, what he`s
not even willing to do. Let`s watch it.
MITT ROMNEY (R-MA), FMR. GOV., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It`s very easy
to excite the base with incendiary comments. We`ve seen throughout the
campaign that if you`re willing to say really outrageous things that are
accusative and attacking President Obama, that you`re going to jump up in
the polls. You know, I`m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and
get support.
MATTHEWS: Howard Fineman, is this the same candidate who fairly
recently again and again has said if President Obama is president next
year, Iran will have nuclear weapons, if I`m president, they won`t? I
mean, I think that`s a pretty strong statement in terms of incendiary. But
your thoughts.
Well, he`s already set his hair on fire many times, it`s just not
MATTHEWS: Howard, quote of the day. Now we move on.
FINEMAN: OK. But looking at it from the other way, how much guts
does it take as a politician to stand up for a college education or to
stand up for the separation of church and state? Is that as far as Mitt
Romney is willing to go to take issue with Rick Santorum?
If that`s only as far as he`s willing to go, with that mild and sort
of vague denunciation of incendiary rhetoric, does he deserve it? You`ve
got to have a little bit of guts in politics. Why not take him on.
Santorum -- and that`ll force Santorum even farther to the right. But Mitt
Romney refused to do it.
MATTHEWS: Well, here are the numbers. He`s on the abyss, I said
right now. The latest poll, the PPP poll out today, has Santorum with a
slim edge right now of 38 to 37 in Michigan. So that`s how close they`re
dancing on the edge of the cliff right now. Romney could lose tonight.
KLEIN: He could lose. And even if he wins tonight, what has he won?
Because next week, we have super-Tuesday, which isn`t looking all that
terrific for him now. He`s going to have a tough road in probably the most
important state, which is Ohio. And it`s going to be near impossible for
him down South.
I think he has two little blocks, that little block up in New England
-- he`ll win Massachusetts next week -- and kind of the Mormon stripe in
the west. Idaho has a lot of Mormons.
MATTHEWS: Well, one of the most interesting things tonight, Howard,
is the fact that Rick Santorum, as many things as people in the mainstream
world have said are unacceptable, incorrigible, if you will -- I haven`t
said that, but most people have, and you pointed them out -- he`s still
running head to head with this guy in the guy`s native state.
That to me is the most devastating shot at Mitt Romney. He can`t beat
a guy who has stuck his chin out on so many cultural issues, including
going after JFK in a state that JFK obviously carried back in `60 and has a
lot of Catholic followers to this day, and making these other comments that
most people would say are 1953, at best.
FINEMAN: Well, a couple things. First of all, yes, Rick Santorum in
certain respects has made it difficult for himself to reach out to Catholic
Democrats. I mean, you don`t want to trash Jack Kennedy when you`re
reaching out to Catholic Democrats.
But I think what you`re going to hear from the Romney campaign, on the
off chance that Romney loses tonight, or in the very real chance that
Romney loses -- if he does lose -- and I`ve already been talking to some of
his people about this -- they`re going to blame the Democrats.
They`re going to say that if you look at the numbers, Mitt Romney has
a decent lead among Republicans, but Rick Santorum is going to the
Democratic side to get the Democrats in.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
FINEMAN: Romney will blame everybody else. But the problem is -- and
Joe and I have all -- we`ve covered I don`t know how many campaigns between
us -- and you, too, Chris -- I`ve not seen Mitt Romney improve as a
candidate or as a campaign.
This last week or so in Michigan and down at the NASCAR event for Mitt
Romney was a nightmare. You had Ford Field, you had him making fun of the
people with the cheap rain slickers, you had him bragging about the NASCAR
owners that he`s friends with, just one disaster after another for both him
and his campaign.
And for the professional Republican politicians, they`re wondering,
Wait a minute, we thought this guy was at least technically competent. But
he isn`t even that right now.
MATTHEWS: And what`s wrong with -- what`s wrong with being able to
prove you can reach across the aisle and get some Democratic votes? What`s
so awful about that?
KLEIN: I`d go Howard one further. I think that he`s gotten worse as
a candidate.
FINEMAN: I agree.
KLEIN: When he first came out, he was making a very disciplined case
against Obama in terms of the economy, in terms of jobs, in terms of
regulations, and so on. He -- he -- he`s become a mess.
MATTHEWS: Well, here he is.
FINEMAN: That`s true.
MATTHEWS: Let`s take a look. He`s done -- you made your point here,
guys. Here`s Mitt Romney conceding he has made some mistakes during the
campaign. Let`s watch him.
ROMNEY: I`m very pleased with the campaign, its organization. The
candidate sometimes make some mistakes. And -- and so I`m trying to do
better and work harder and make sure that we -- we get our message across.
I think in the final analysis, I anticipate becoming the nominee
because I think what people want to be talking about is the economy and--
MATTHEWS: Are these mistakes, Howard, or are they disclosures? A
mistake, according to Michael Kinsley years ago, was when you tell
something you really believe. This guy`s -- I think they`re disclosures
about him. The reason we have campaigns is to learn who the real Mitt
Romney is.
The real Mitt Romney looks at the world -- I like being able to fire
people, My wife`s got a couple Caddies. He made fun of a person at Daytona
the other day for not having sort of upper-class raincoats on, made fun of
them for wearing ponchos. That`s him. That`s not a mistake, that`s him.
He may be a mistake.
FINEMAN: Well, it`s a mistake if you`re running a campaign designed
to show you have a connection to real people by going to NASCAR event and
then you make fun of the clothes that the people are wearing.
FINEMAN: I mean -- and it`s a mistake to--
MATTHEWS: I have never heard of a politician making fun of people for
the clothes they`re wearing.
FINEMAN: Yes. And you know, so they had a $3 poncho on, you know,
they can`t afford -- they can`t afford a Brooks Brothers or a Barbour coat,
you know?
MATTHEWS: One reason why Romney may be going after Santorum for his
snob comment is that he has his own image problem as a snob. Here`s what
he did say to that group of fans wearing plastic ponchos at the Daytona
Speedway. Quote, "I like those fancy raincoats you bought. Really sprung
for the big bucks, the big bucks, didn`t you?"
He`s making fun of people wearing those clear, see-through plastic
ponchos you buy, usually when you get caught in the rain.
FINEMAN: And they`re already in a bad--
MATTHEWS: And he`s wearing this very sporty kind of abbreviated--
FINEMAN: Chris--
MATTHEWS: -- raincoat.
FINEMAN: Plus, they`re already in a bad mood because the race is
being delayed.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
FINEMAN: I mean--
MATTHEWS: I don`t get it.
Anyway, on Sunday, Rick Santorum said John Kennedy`s historic speech
on religion back in `60 made him, quote, "throw up." Well, today he
backtracked it. But he was on Laura Ingraham`s radio show today. Let`s
listen to his backtrack. This is Rick.
LAURA INGRAHAM, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I probably wouldn`t have gone
down that road with JFK and I was going to throw up. I mean, I think -- we
don`t generally want to hear presidential candidates talking about throwing
up at all in any context. So that`s -- that`s -- you know what I mean?
RICK SANTORUM (R-PA), FMR. SEN., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I would
agree with that. I -- you know, that -- that -- I wish, you know, I had
that -- that particular line back. If you read President Kennedy`s text,
while there were certainly some very important things and good things he
said in that, there were some -- there were some things that triggered, in
my opinion, the privatization of faith. And I think that`s -- that`s a bad
MATTHEWS: Well, I don`t know why he went after Kennedy on what many
people believe to be the best speech of his campaign, which is to try to
explain the fact although he`s a Catholic, he wasn`t going to take his
religion into the office and become a theocrat.
KLEIN: Well, you know, the thing about Santorum is that he`s the
exact opposite of Mitt Romney.
MATTHEWS: And the exact opposite of Jack Kennedy.
KLEIN: You know, I was out in Michigan over the weekend. And you
know, Mitt Romney is those wonderful kind of sterile suburbs that surround
Detroit. And--
MATTHEWS: Wonderful, sterile.
KLEIN: Yes. Santorum is Hamtramck (ph) and Lincoln Park--
MATTHEWS: Right.
KLEIN: -- and the places -- you know, and -- and so he doesn`t
premeditate this stuff, he just lets it -- let`s it rip. And he really is
kind of the Legion of Decency 1953 Republican--
MATTHEWS: OK, my question to -- to those who are on the other side --
Howard, speak for them, those in the center and on the left, the
progressives out there. What should they fear more, Romney`s elitist
attitude towards the economy, where he looks at everything from the top
economically, or Santorum`s sort of gut sense that his religion should
trump the Constitution, if necessary?
FINEMAN: Well, I think Rick Santorum is posing a more fundamental
challenge to the modern world. So -- and on the assumption that it`s going
to probably be a tight race regardless -- and I think it will because of
polls showing that there`s still a lot of unhappiness with President
Obama`s leadership, especially on the economy -- I would say be careful
what you wish for, if you`re wishing for Rick Santorum, because the
campaign, I think, would be one of surpassing ugliness probably on both
sides, and something even more divisive than anything we`re already
prepared to expect in this coming election.
MATTHEWS: Could he win the presidency, Howard?
FINEMAN: Yes, he could win the presidency. If you get in the finals,
if you get in the big game, you can win. It`s -- I wouldn`t say no.
I wouldn`t say no because as we all know, we`re talking about the area
of, you know, 10 states. You`re talking about 10 battleground states. You
could say it`s unlikely, but I don`t think you can say it`s impossible, by
any means. And of course, you never say that in politics.
MATTHEWS: Joe, you agree? He could win the general?
KLEIN: Probably not, but -- but of course, he has a shot, as Howard
The thing about Romney`s campaign that`s so crazy is that if you run
on electability, which is a stupid thing to run on in the first place, you
have to prove that you can be -- that you`re electable to the people in the
middle who are going to put you over the top. And he has done none of that
in this campaign going back to the very first thing we started with.
MATTHEWS: What I`ve learned in this business is that when people hear
the word "Santorum," for better or worse, they listen. They`re interested.
When they hear the word "Romney," they`re bored. There`s something
fundamentally boring about that name and what he has to say.
Anyway, thank you, Joe Klein. Thank you, Howard Fineman.
Coming up: The Santorum campaign is robocalling -- that`s automatic
calling -- all kinds of people, especially Michigan Democrats, urging them
to vote for him in the open primary today. He`s looking for Democratic
votes. It`s driving Romney crazy.
You`re watching HARDBALL`s coverage of the Michigan and Arizona
primaries today, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: For those who like to follow the money, look at this. Mitt
Romney and his allies have outspent Rick Santorum 2 to 1 in Michigan. The
Romney campaign and the Restore Our Future super-PAC have spent a total
$4.1 million in that state, versus $2.1 million for the Santorum campaign
and the pro-Santorum Red White and Blue Fund super-PAC.
And not to be left out of the action, Newt Gingrich, who got another
big money infusion from casino mogul Sheldon Adelson -- Newt`s super-PAC is
spending that money on TV ads in seven states this week, hoping to win a
few contests on super-Tuesday, a week from today.
We`ll be right back.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. In Michigan, Democrats are able
to walk up to the polls and vote in today`s Republican primary, something
Rick Santorum hopes to use to his big advantage.
Listen to this robocall that went out to Democrats today in hopes of
getting them out to vote.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Michigan Democrats can vote in the Republican
primary on Tuesday. Why is it so important? Romney supported the bail-
outs for his Wall Street billionaire buddies but opposed the auto bail-
outs. That was a slap in the face to every Michigan worker, and we`re not
going to let Romney get away with it.
On Tuesday, join Democrats who are going to send a loud message to
Massachusetts Mitt Romney by voting for Rick Santorum for president.
This call is supported by hard-working Democratic men and women and
paid for by Rick Santorum for President.
MATTHEWS: Well, tonight, we can report new exit poll data on just who
voted in Michigan today. Ten percent of the voters in the Republican
primary say they`re Democrats, 31 percent say they`re independents, 59
percent say they`re Republican. And that Democratic number hasn`t changed
a whole lot since 2008.
But take a look at the combined number of Democrats and independents
and the decline in Republicans from four years ago. And that`s notable.
Today in Michigan, 27 percent of voters say they`re moderates, 13
percent say they`re liberals, and 14 percent say they`re members of a
union. Those numbers are about on par with those that were there four
years ago in the balloting.
But are these Democrats the kind of Reagan Democrats who honestly want
to pick an Obama alternative, or are they toying with the vote, hoping to
nominate the most electable -- or actually, the most beatable Republican
for the presidency?
Mayor Dayne Walling is the Democratic mayor from Flint and Mark
Halperin writes for "Time" magazine and is MSNBC`s senior political
Mayor, I want your thoughts about this. I don`t know -- Romney`s
throwing around the word -- the term "dirty tricks." It seems to me that
under Michigan law, you`re perfectly within your rights to pick up a
Republican ballot, if you choose to do so, under the law and sign for it.
Is that a dirty trick for a Democrat or an independent to vote in the
Republican primary today?
MAYOR DAYNE WALLING, D-FLINT, MICHIGAN: No. This is how it`s been
in Michigan for a long time, and Governor Romney knows that well. There
are Democrats and independents, and vice versa, in the primaries in
Michigan for president. And I think he`s just trying to prepare for a
shock tonight and find someone to blame.
MATTHEWS: What do you think of that, Mark? Is that a fair
assessment, that dirty tricks are in the eye of the beholder and maybe it
was a clean trick, get the other side to vote if you can`t win with
Republican votes?
MARK HALPERIN, "TIME," MSNBC SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: I`m going to do
my best Fred Armisen doing Joy Behar. Who cares? Who cares?
HALPERIN: It doesn`t matter. If Romney loses, that`s all anybody`s
going to care about. Some Democrats are going to vote for Santorum because
they`re Reagan Democrats and they like his message and there`s no contest
on the other side. I think some will be mischief makers driven by unions.
It doesn`t matter. The robocalls, as far as I`m concerned, are
totally fine. If you want to become president of the United States and
you`re a Republican running in the Michigan primary, you want Democratic
votes because you`re going to need them if you`re going to win the general.
MATTHEWS: Well, you know, Mayor, back in 2000, when I was very much
happy with the candidacy of John McCain, I was thrilled he won up in
Michigan. And I thought a lot of those Catholic voters went over to the
Democratic (sic) side, independents, because they liked him. He was a war
hero. They didn`t have a war hero running on their side, they had one
running on the other side. So they did what most people do, vote for a
hero. What was wrong with that? In other words, there`s a precedent for
WALLING: Yes. There`s nothing wrong with it. This is how elections
work. People go to the polls, they get to vote for who they like for
whatever reasons that they choose. And I think for Governor Romney to
suggest that anyone is somehow hijacking the process just shows his
disrespect for how our democracy works.
MATTHEWS: OK. Well, back in that 2000 Michigan primary, John McCain
had a lot of crossover votes who took part in the primary to vote for him.
Seventeen percent of the voters who came out for him were Democrats. 35
percent were independents. And among the Democratic voters, McCain
trounced George W. Bush 82 percent to Bush`s 10 percent.
Let me ask you -- I might as well have some fun here.
Mark, what does it tell you that looking at the numbers coming in
right now, does it like it`s good for the crossovers to have a pronounced
effect here?
MARK HALPERIN, MSNBC SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It could. Although,
if you`re focused on the mischief makers, it`s hard to know how they have
answered the exit poller`s question, right? They may not answer absolutely
MATTHEWS: Let`s go with the legitimate conservative Democrats.
HALPERIN: It`s good enough -- it`s good enough for Santorum, I think,
particularly if he gets the bulk of them, which I suspect he will.
Now, I asked someone who works for Rick Santorum, senior official in
his campaign. You clearly want the Reagan Democrats, but how do you feel
about the mischief makers? If Rick Santorum is getting votes from Michael
Moore supporters, union members, how do you feel about that?
And his answer amounted to homina, homina, homina. They don`t really
have a good answer for that.
MATTHEWS: Well, do they have to answer to The Daily Kos?
HALPERIN: Well, I think the state party has denounced them. I think
Rick Santorum probably will and should denounce them in the sense of party
You don`t want to come out of this having got elected on the back of
Michael Moore and Daily Kos. But I don`t think we will know what
percentage is that. And these Reagan Democrats, Mitt Romney would have
welcomed them under different circumstances.
MATTHEWS: Well, this is news flashing right before us with these
exits now. After the robo-call news broke on "Hannity" last night,
Santorum defended the robo-call and brought up [Romney`s campaign tactics
as defense. Let`s watch this.
Boy, what goes around comes around Mitt. Let`s watch.
RICK SANTORUM (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You mean when he runs a
robo-call of my voice from four years ago saying good things about him,
that`s not a low moment? It`s interesting that we criticize me for
attracting Democrats, because one of the things that Governor Romney and
his people say is, oh, he can`t attract Democrats.
Well, guess what? We will wait and see.
MATTHEWS: Mayor, there`s so many goes around, comes around pieces,
it`s hard to keep track of them.
Romney defended himself for having voted for Paul Tsongas back in `92
in a Democratic primary by saying he was basically mischief making. He
wasn`t even defending voting for the lesser of two evils or for the more
moderate Democrat, Tsongas. He was saying he was over there to screw with
the other party. He`s admitting his behavior in the past is the worst
possible interpretation of voting today if you`re a Democrat for Santorum.
Isn`t that amazing?
WALLING: Right. He`s trying to flip-flop again on this. It`s right
for him in one case and now it`s wrong for somebody else.
And I think the voters at the end of the day, when you have a million-
and-a-half people go to the polls, you`re going to see them vote for the
people who they think are best positioned to lead this country forward.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about something in the gut out there.
In the gut, when you talk to UAW families and people who care about
whether in the supply business or the auto business itself or they just
care about the economy of your state -- is there a sense that Romney is
particularly guilty because he voted to bail out Wall Street and not the
auto industry?
WALLING: Yes.
Governor Romney should have known better. He talks about his
connections to Michigan. His family obviously has deep roots here. He
should know how important the American auto industry is to our country, to
our state. And for him to get into that overheated rhetoric and talking
about letting Detroit go bankrupt, that sent a clear and strong political
message that he just has disdain for the voters and the working families in
Michigan. And it`s coming back to haunt him.
MATTHEWS: By the way, if he loves Michigan so much, why doesn`t he
live there?
WALLING: Yes, that`s a good question.
MATTHEWS: It`s a free choice. It`s not like he has a job somewhere
Your thoughts, anyway, about the whole question of the bailout. How
does it work politically out there?
HALPERIN: I think there are some people who vote in the process who
agree with him about markets and the way it should have been handled.
Clearly, though, to the extent he does win this on the backs of
independents and Democrats flocking to Santorum, I think the bailout issue
is such a hot button.
MATTHEWS: If he loses.
HALPERIN: If he loses, the bailout issue is such a hot button, not
just because of the Michigan angle, but just he had no Michigan roots, the
fact that he`s supporting opposing the bailout the way he did.
MATTHEWS: He will have the brand on him of a guy who lost Michigan --
if he loses -- we don`t know what will happen tonight -- when we get the
full results, we will know.
If he loses Michigan tonight, he will have the brand on him of a guy
who had basically betrayed the auto industry.
HALPERIN: And even if he becomes the Republican nominee, he will have
that in the general election too. David Plouffe salivates over that every
MATTHEWS: Salivates. Wow. There`s a thought.
Anyway, thank you, Mark Halperin, who does know about these guys, even
to the point of their salivation.
Anyway, thank you, Mayor Walling. Thanks for joining us from Flint.
Please come back again throughout the election.
Up next, Steve Colbert on Mitt Romney`s obsession with the height of
trees. This is really bizarre. This guy said this now twice. I like the
height of the trees in Michigan. Is this Chauncey Gardiner from "Being
You`re watching HARDBALL, live coverage of the Michigan and Arizona
primaries, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Back to HARDBALL. Now for the "Sideshow."
First up, making their case. With Romney out measuring the height of
trees and Santorum calling Obama a snob for pushing college, who has done
the better job of convincing voters they should be calling the shots in the
Oval Office?
Well, here`s Stephen Colbert last night first taking on the number of
empty seats at Mitt Romney`s speech at Ford Field on Friday.
STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, "THE COLBERT REPORT": Yes. I mean, there were
a lot of empty seats, but the important thing is, Mitt really connected
with those empty seats by also being plastic and uncomfortable.
MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This feels good being back
in Michigan. The trees are the right height.
COLBERT: If he wants to win, he should do more of this regular guy
stuff that he obviously loves.
COLBERT: I mean, he should eat hot dogs and say, I love hot dogs,
they are just the right length.
COLBERT: The mustard is yellow. That`s the right color. The bun has
the right breadiness.
Rick Santorum is confident. He`s already looking past Michigan to his
real opponent, President Obama.
SANTORUM: He wants everybody in America to go to college. What a
COLBERT: Yes, what a snob.
COLBERT: Obama thinks everybody should go to college like he did.
Well, pardon me, your highness, but some of us weren`t handed a ticket to
Harvard by being the biracial son of a single mother on food stamps.
COLBERT: Must be nice.
MATTHEWS: Great. That`s right, another banner week for the clown
But if that`s not enough, how is this for a negotiation? You can`t
have a successful campaign rally without the right music to amp up the
crowd, right? Well, Mitt Romney wanted to bring it to them live at an
event last night and called on Michigan native Kid Rock.
Apparently, Romney had to make a hard sell to get the rock musician to
sign on. Here`s Romney recounting the ordeal last night.
MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: He said, Mitt, if you`re
elected president, will you help me help the state of Michigan? I said I
would. He said, if you`re elected president, will you help me help the
city of Detroit? And I said I would.
I turned to him and I said, by the way, given the fact that I`m
willing to do those things, would you come here and perform a concert
tonight for my friends?
Well, I`m happy to introduce a son of Detroit, Kid Rock.
MATTHEWS: That just makes it worse, doesn`t it?
Anyway, and now for the "Big Number." We have heard rumblings about
the bromance, if you will, between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. Well,
ThinkProgress took a look back and here`s its accounting.
Ron Paul leveled a total of 39 attacks at his Republican rivals over
the past 20 debates. How many were a direct hit at Romney? Zero. Compare
that to the 22 times he went after Santorum, the 39 attacks and zero
against Mitt Romney. It sounds like an antitrust to me.
And that`s tonight`s "Big Number."
Up next, regardless of who wins tonight, Democrats feel pretty good
about President Obama`s reelection chances right now, especially after the
barn-burner of a speech he gave today to the United Auto Workers. Wait
until you hear it. It`s about the rebirth of the American auto industry.
And he did better than in a long time. Do the Republicans have an answer
to this argument? He saved that industry.
You`re watching HARDBALL`s coverage of the Michigan and Arizona
primaries tonight, only on MSNBC.
SUE HERERA, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Sue Herera with your CNBC "Market
The Dow gains 24 points to close above 13000 for the first time since
May of 2008. The S&P 500 up five points, and the Nasdaq adds 21. Apple
says it is holding an event in San Francisco next week, leading many to
believe the company will unveil its new iPad. Shares rallied on that news.
And an index of consumer confidence hit its highest level in a year.
However, orders for durable goods slid 4 percent last month, the biggest
decline in almost three years.
And that`s it from CNBC. We`re first in business world -- and now
back to HARDBALL and Chris.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I got to get inside a
brand-new Chevy Volt fresh off the line -- even though Secret Service
wouldn`t let me drive it.
OBAMA: And five years from now, when I`m not president anymore, I
will buy one and drive it myself.
AUDIENCE: Four more years. Four more years. Four more years.
OBAMA: All right.
AUDIENCE: Four more years.
MATTHEWS: Well, look who has wheels on his feet.
Welcome back.
That was a fired-up President Obama being cheered on -- cheered on, I
should say, during a barn-burner of a speech at the UAW meeting in
Washington earlier today.
While Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum were out fighting to win Michigan,
the president was reminding everyone out there that he rescued the auto
industry. Can this fiery, populist message fuel Obama`s chances in the
2012 race? You betcha.
Dee Dee Myers is a former press secretary for President Bill Clinton.
And Chip Saltsman is a former strategist for Mike Huckabee`s presidential
Dee Dee, the man has wheels on his feet, if not wings right now. He
thinks this issue will help him. Can you tell from the razzmatazz if it
DEE DEE MYERS, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, it
certainly puts him in a good position at the moment. You would much rather
be playing President Obama`s hand than other of the Republican candidates
at this point in Michigan.
Certainly, it was fortuitous that he was at the UAW today talking
about how he saved the auto industry. And you still have the two
candidates, the two top candidates in Michigan fighting each other over who
would have let Detroit go bankrupt more quickly.
So that`s a very good place for the president to be. You can see him
feeling quite confident and having a good time and getting a lot of love
back from those UAW members, many of whose jobs he saved.
MATTHEWS: Well, Chip Saltsman, he has an ally out there campaigning
like mad who may well do well tonight, who knows, in Michigan, in the home
of the auto industry especially, Michigan, saying that Romney was dead
wrong in bankrolling Wall Street and basically dissing Detroit.
CHIP SALTSMAN, FORMER MIKE HUCKABEE CAMPAIGN MANAGER: Well, I
disagree with that obviously.
MATTHEWS: You disagree with Santorum?
SALTSMAN: Well, I disagree with -- I wanted to say I want to disagree
with the president talking about his Chevy Volt. I want to get him to that
Chevy Volt as quick as possible, not in five years, maybe next year. I
would be happy to buy it for him if he`s out of a job. I would be happy to
pitch in and help the Chevy Volt.
MATTHEWS: OK. Nice rhetoric. But bottom line, let`s get back to the
facts, Chip.
Do you think Santorum is right when he said it was a bad move for Mitt
Romney to bankroll Wall Street and give nothing to Detroit? That`s what
he`s saying in the campaign today and all the last several weeks.
SALTSMAN: Well, and I`m not Santorum`s spokesperson. I`m trying to
call this like I see them.
And I think it`s important to talk about the bailout kind of in more
general terms. As you know, Chris, I wasn`t for the bailout on any level,
a Wall Street bailout or an auto bailout, simply for this reason. I think
it`s government choosing winners and losers.
And I think the president probably made a good political move in
talking to the UAW tonight and kind of getting some of the TV time as we
talk about the Michigan primary. But I think it`s a short-term gain, not a
long-term gain, because why is a union worker in Michigan more important
than perhaps a non-union worker in Tennessee who didn`t get a bailout?
MATTHEWS: Dee Dee.
MYERS: The bailout, as President Bush said, that sometimes you have
to put ideology aside and do what`s in the best interests of the country.
That`s 1.4 million jobs that were saved. Those aren`t just
autoworkers, but they`re people who support the autoworkers, whether they
are supply companies or the restaurant on the corner that provides lunch
for those workers. So certainly, there`s that. And it would have had a
devastating effect not just on Michigan, but on the auto industry around
the region.
So clearly the president did the right thing. And the results speak
for themselves. GM is back. It`s the biggest auto company in the world
now, Hugely profitable, as is Chrysler. And Ford is doing great. So the
auto industry is looking better has it has in quite a while, thanks to the
president`s willingness to take a political risk and do what he thought was
MATTHEWS: Well, Obama did take advantage today of Michigan`s primary
battle to remind everyone he was fighting for the bailout of the industry
while Republican candidates were not.
OBAMA: The other option was to do absolutely nothing and let these
companies fail. And you will recall there were some politicians who said
we should do that.
OBAMA: Some even said we should let Detroit go bankrupt.
OBAMA: You remember that?
MATTHEWS: Chip, suppose it had gone bankrupt. What would you be
saying right now? What would Republicans be saying?
SALTSMAN: I don`t think -- I don`t think Detroit would have gone
Look, I think if you`re going to a free market person, you should
believe in the free market. If you believe that government should take
care of everybody`s problems, then you do a government bailout, which Obama
Look, we don`t know what it would have been like on the other end
because we didn`t get a chance to go through that. President Obama made
the decision to put in $80 billion of the government`s money into Detroit.
I would have much preferred, I know a lot other more conservative folks
would have concerned -- to let the free market work, working through a
managed bankruptcy.
I know the Democrats say that didn`t work, or what -- we don`t know
that because we didn`t have an opportunity. And again --
MATTHEWS: Who was out there to loan money? Who was out there to
loan -- we had Rattner on, Steve Rattner, who was the auto czar, the other
night. He said where was the money you guys? Was anybody out there who
want to offer $80 billion to save the industry that you know of? Private
sector money, where was it?
SALTSMAN: I think at the end of the day, if you would have put this
up for the private sector, I think the money would have been there. It may
not been exactly what it looked like today. It wouldn`t have been a $80
billion check, because nobody`s got that much money. I don`t think you
have $80 billion, Chris.
But I think at the end of the day, you got to let -- if you believe
in free market, private sector philosophy, you`ve got to let the market
work itself out. And you can`t have government picking winners and losers.
It`s unfair for the government to pick a winner or loser in Detroit
and let somebody fail in Atlanta, Georgia, or Nashville, Tennessee.
MYERS: So, you know, I think that`s the creative distraction that
sometimes comes with the markets.
Look, what the people who worked on that auto restructuring will tell
you is that they were mostly from the equity business. They -- private
equity business, they called everybody. They went to everybody they knew.
And they know everybody in the business. All the money was on the
So, there was not going to be, you know, a lot of private, you know,
partners jumping in to save the industry.
And so, I think -- Chip is exactly right. It looked very different,
as in 1.4 million people would have lost their jobs.
So, I think it`s just fantasy as Steve Rattner has said that there
was going to be some kind of a managed bankruptcy process. It wasn`t going
to happen.
SALTSMAN: I couldn`t disagree more.
MATTHEWS: Let`s listen to the president here. He`s stated what
sounds like his general election strategy. Let`s see how he plays this
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I promise you this.
As long as you have an ounce left of fight in you, I will have a ton of
fight left in me.
We`re going to keep on fighting to make our economy stronger, to put
our friends and neighbors back to work faster, to give our children even
more opportunity, to make sure that the United States of America remains
the greatest nation on earth.
MATTHEWS: Chip, here`s your party`s conundrum right now. You had a
very shot at winning Michigan this time, as well as right across the Rust
Belt. We know that. Dee Dee and I, everybody has been watching this
thing. It`s a very difficult time for that part of the country.
And now you got a situation where the latest polling out of Michigan
is something like a 17-point spread for the president. Doesn`t that answer
the political analysis right there? He`s won on that issue out there.
SALTSMAN: Again, Chris, I think it`s a short-term win for the
president. Look, he gave a great speech today. He`s a great speech giver.
But at the end of the day, I think when you talk about the economy
and the private market, you`re talking about jobs being created by private
industry as opposed to government. People are going to rally around the
conservative message, not the president`s, which is government picking
winners and losers. It`s a long-term loss for our country if we do that.
MATTHEWS: You know what you`re holding in terms of the poker right
now, Chip? You know what you got in your hand?
SALTSMAN: I think I know what I have in my hand, but I`m not going
to show, Chris.
MATTHEWS: A couple of threes. Anyway, thank you very much.
Dee Dee Myers, you`ve got four aces. Thank you so much, Dee Dee
Myers, for playing your hand very well.
And, Chip, to you.
Up next: one big reason President Obama is doing so well among women
is the Republicans have turned hard right on issues like birth control and
abortion rights. That`s ahead.
This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Here`s a big chance for the Democrats to pick up a seat in
the United States Senate. Republican Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine said
today she will not seek reelection this year. Snowe has been a moderate
voice, one of the last in her party. And she was thought to be a lock for
reelection up there in Maine despite Tea Party opposition there. Well, the
Republicans were counting on her as they made plans to try to win control
of the Senate.
We`ll be right back.
Congressman, I think that the issue of religious liberty is one that I and
one that the president take very, very seriously. The issue of women`s
health coverage is also one that I take very seriously.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDALL.
Again today, the white hot issue of religious liberty and women`s
right was fought on the Hill today. And that was HHS secretary, of course,
Kathleen Sebelius, testifying earlier today in front of the House Ways and
Means Committee.
We just learned, by the way, on Thursday that the Senate will vote on
the Blunt amendment this Thursday. It`s a bold challenge the Obama
administration`s birth control rule and would allow all employers, not just
religious based ones, to reject parts of the health care law that run
counter to their religious and moral believes.
What are the politics in play here and who benefits from a fight?
Today`s "New York Times" headline says Democrats see benefits in battle on
contraception. And adds, quote, "This is a fight Democrats are perfectly
pleased to have."
Well, a new "Associated Press" poll shows President Obama`s approval
rating among women has gone up 10 points since December among women. How
much did women`s health issues play a part in that rise and how will this
fight affect the politics of 2012?
Well, joining us right is Democratic Congresswoman Diana DeGette of
Colorado, who`s co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus. And
Marjorie Dannenfelser, who is president of the Susan B. Anthony List, an
organization who works to elect pro-life candidates.
So, I`m going to pull back here and let both of you discuss this
issue. I want to start, as I always do, with elected officials, with
Congresswoman DeGette. Let me ask you why it looks like to the press
covering this, the Democrats are not running away from this fight. They
are quite willing to get out there at the edge of this fight and face it
REP. DIANA DEGETTE (D), COLORADO: Well, Chris, the last I heard, it
was 2012 -- a year when 99 percent of American women have used or use right
now birth control. They use birth control for family planning. They use
birth control to do things to, like, prevent ovarian cancer.
And really, out there in the hinterlands, out where I live in
Colorado, and every place else around the country, women are saying, of
course, birth control family planning are part of my health care services.
Not just for family planning, but also for a whole variety of other
And they are really kind of surprised that anybody would say that
they shouldn`t be provided that as part of their regular medical care.
MATTHEWS: Let`s go to the other side.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, I assume you are here to make the case for
these moral amendments, these opportunities by Blunt and the others on the
House, both sides of the Hill, to offer the opportunity for employers to
say, no, they don`t have to pay for this kind of health coverage for women?
MARJORIE DANNENFELSER, SBA LIST: That`s right, Chris. You know, the
gender war machine is revved up whenever is possible. But this is an
inappropriate time because really, actually, the language that the feminist
movement used to use, who decides, is a very appropriate question to ask
here. Should be a small group of federal bureaucrats along with President
Obama that decide what religious institutions and private institutions, for
that matter, define as conscientious and a good thing to provide? Should
they be dictating what an appropriately formed conscience looks like?
Look, 2,000 years of religious doctrine have gone behind the Catholic
Church`s view that abortive drugs, which this includes, and sterilization
and contraception, is not within those moral bounds? No one is getting --
no one is getting in the way of women having contraception.
DANNENFELSER: It is only a question of whether institutions should
be required to provide that. And for Sebelius to say you get a year to
adapt to -- adapt your thinking to us is not in any way --
MATTHEWS: Congresswoman, what do you think is the politics of this?
Who do you think wins this argument with the American people? And it is an
election year, it is 2012.
What do the American people want to come out of this debate, do you
DEGETTE: I think the American people want reasonable health care for
everybody. The Institutes of Medicine concluded that on a scientific
basis, birth control was part of a women`s regular medical care and that`s
why it was ordered to be part of every insurance plan.
Now, listen, the Obama administration made a very wise compromise, I
think, and they said religious institutions don`t have to pay for
But the question is, who`s decision is it? I agree in one way with
Marjorie. She says she doesn`t want a small group of people making
decisions on women`s health.
I agree. I don`t think that the U.S. bishops should be able to say
whether millions of Americans make the conscientious choice themselves to
say I want birth control or not.
And, by the way, 98 percent of Catholic women have used birth control
in their lives, too. So, that`s really what the issue is.
I`m sorry that -- that it`s being politicized too, because the way I
feel, the way my daughters feel, the way every woman I know feels is that
birth control/pregnancy prevention, is part of a women`s regular health
care. We should be able to get it as part of our insurance.
MATTHEWS: Explain this part to me, Marjorie. Suppose the CEO of a
major American corporation was against birth control. He didn`t believe it
should be covered by health insurance.
Could he decide on the behalf of his corporation that they wouldn`t
provide health care coverage of this kind, under your proposal?
DANNENFELSER: At this point, the only exemptions would be for --
MATTHEWS: No, but under your proposal?
DANNENFELSER: Under the -- under the Blunt bill in the Senate?
MATTHEWS: Yes.
DANNENFELSER: CEOs would still -- they would be -- the exemption
would be provided for anyone within any institution.
MATTHEWS: Any president, any CEO could just say --
DANNENFELSER: The answer --
MATTHEWS: I just want the fact here. Any CEO could say because I
don`t like birth control, nobody that works for me is going to get that
coverage. You think that`s fair legislation?
DANNENFELSER: I don`t think that`s actually what the legislation
MATTHEWS: What is it?
DANNENFELSER: Right now, the exemption is for, and this what the
Blunt bill does, it provides religious and privately -- private
institutions to exempt themselves.
MATTHEWS: Right. That`s what I`m saying.
DANNENFELSER: I do not believe this applies to corporations. Let me
just say this.
DEGETTE: Then, it applies to anybody.
DANNENFELSER: Let me just say this -- no matter what the
institution, it should --because if you --
MATTHEWS: OK. Fine.
DANNENFELSER: I`m just saying that the --
MATTHEWS: I think the public understands this issue. Ladies, thank
you so much. I think they get it right now.
Thank you, U.S. Congresswoman Diana DeGette for coming on. And,
Marjorie Dannenfelser, as always.
When we return, "Let Me Finish" with the trouble Mitt Romney is
having with Mitt Romney.
You are watching HARDBALL`s live coverage of the Michigan and Arizona
primaries tonight, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: "Let Me Finish" tonight with this:
What is a politician? Is he or she someone who has the natural touch
with people, someone who can get people to go along with them, or is it a
person who will say anything to get along, someone who will hide their
beliefs, their strongest commitments in order to get people to like them?
Now, think about who meets that first definition, a person who can
get other people to go along with them, because he`s so good with people,
they find themselves liking what he has to say. Well, I`d say Bill
Clinton, wouldn`t you?
Nothing of the second definition, a politician being someone who will
say anything and admit nothing about their beliefs in order to get people
to accept them, who doesn`t want to lead voters, just get by them? Mitt
Romney. Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney.
I think this is the reason why he is having so much trouble getting
anyone excited about him. He doesn`t like this thing, this campaigning,
this asking people to vote for him. He wants to be back in the board room
where he can talk the way he normally talks, about having a couple of
Cadillacs, about liking being able to fire people who don`t deliver for
him, or he can rib somebody for wearing some cheap raincoat when he is
sporting something just right.
Look, this campaign is a real teaching moment -- and not just for
Republicans, it is teaching all of us the way these candidates look at
things, the way Ron Paul doesn`t believe in government, the way Newt
Gingrich calls himself cheerful, even if he basks in his imaginings of
world calamity, the way Rick Santorum sees the dominion of religion over
the state, the way Mitt Romney sees the country from a comfortable seat in
the board room.
Politics isn`t for everyone. Some learn to lead, some learn to be
led. Romney spends these days learning not how to lead the voter but
struggling to get by him and that has made all the difference.
It`s why President Obama, who has led this country through difficult
times and taken the heat for tough decisions, will never be taken for a
Mitt Romney.
Politicians at their best use their skills to lead. They let you
know who they are, not who they are not, because only if you get to know
someone, with all their faults, will you take their word on those matters
important to us all.
And that`s HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.
"POLITICS NATION" with Al Sharpton starts right now.
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>


text:
Door-to-door composting pilot program starts
BRIDGEWATER -- Standing outside Burnham School, fourth-grader Evan Woerner shouted out "We're No. 1 in the country."
Maybe not in the country, but in Connecticut, definitely: Bridgewater is the first town in the state to offer residential curbside pickup of food waste -- material like lettuce leaves, table scraps, moldy bread and chicken bones.
"You're taking us into the 21st century," Macky McCleary, deputy commissioner for the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, told the elementary school students outside the school in a kickoff ceremony for the program. "You shouldn't just do this because your parents and teachers tell you to this. You're helping to make the world get greener."
The six-month pilot project is the result of a collaboration by the town, the Housatonic Resources Recovery Authority and All-American Waste, the town's main garbage collector.
If the pilot program succeeds, it may become a model for other towns in the state.
The program is the brainchild of Jen Iannuci, the authority's assistant director. Because she lives in Bridgewater, she knows the territory.
"It's the smallest town in the region in terms of population, so I know we'd have a smaller group to work with," Iannuci said. "And All-American has 90 percent of the routes in town."
Under the voluntary system, town residents can collect their food wastes in a counter collection bin, then transfer to a larger curb-side container.
All-American will pick up the food wastes once a week and bring them to one of two area composting facilities -- New Milford Farms or New England Compost in Danbury.
At the end of the six-month pilot program, the 130 families who participate will get a bag of compost material, which they can use to build up the soil in their yard, completing the circle.
"We're a small town, but we're ahead of the rest of the state in turning food waste and returning them to our yards and gardens," Iannuci said.
The state would like to see this happen in more places. It's already beginning to require businesses that produce a high volume of food waste to recycle it.
The reason behind this is simple: If you send food waste to an incinerator, it's wet and soggy and requires more energy to burn that other wastes. If you bury it in landfills, it produces methane, a greenhouse gas.
If you compost it, however, it becomes reusable as mulch or topsoil.
According to DEEP, the state produces about 300,000 towns of food wastes a year. Combined with soiled paper and items like pizza boxes, that accounts for about a third of the state's waste stream.
Nationwide, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates the country produces about 36 million tons of food wastes a year, with only 5 percent of that composted.
There are several large cities -- San Francisco, Seattle, Portland and San Antonio -- where food waste collection is mandatory.
Eric Frederickson, All-American's director of operations, said what makes Bridgewater's program interesting is that it is voluntary -- the people who are participating want to do so.
That, he said, may lead to "organic growth" with people joining the program because of local enthusiasm, and not a top-down requirement.
"You want people who want to do this," he said.
Jim and Patty Snodgrass, who were at Friday's ceremony, are two of those people. They've been active recyclers and have composted garden wastes.
"We've been recycling for decades," Patty Snodgrass said.
But the food waste composting program will allow them to get rid of bones and fat and old dog food -- things they used to be afraid to throw in their compost pile, lest they attract varmints.
"Now, the amount we're throwing away as garbage is really small," Jim Snodgrass said.
firstname.lastname@example.com; 203-731-3345


text:
You have a question?
For any questions or if you wish to make, confirm or modify your booking:
Call our travel experts:
- From UK: 0870 0267 145 (National rates from landlines)
- International number: +33 (0)1 73 01 85 66 (English speaking advisor)
Monday to Friday: From 8am to 6pm (BST)
Saturday: From 8am to 4pm (BST)
Frequently asked questions
Unable to call? Then you may find the answer to your question in our FAQ section.
52 reviews including 5 available reviews from Pierre & Vacances holidaymakers *
* The reviews below are those of our Pierre & Vacances customers. Please visit the Tripadvisor website for all reviews for this destination.


text:
Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread: Detecting Midi keyboard
Detecting Midi keyboard
When I started with Reason 8 I was sold the wrong midi keyboard Yamaha DX 61. It is programmed for Cakewalk, Cubase, Presonius and a few others but not Reason. We managed to get it working properly by playing with the settings in Preferences (no its not in the drop down list). That's all we did, we didn't fiddle with the keyboard itself.
My computer power supply died suddenly and was too expensive to repair for a 4 year old computer. I bought a new one but I couldn't check the midi controller settings before the old one died. I'm not sure how we did it and who helped me.
If I cant get it working can you please recommend midi controllers/keyboards that Reason can currently detect so I don't waste more time with an unsuitable one.
10-22-2018, 02:35 PM #2Daw's are just a tool. Learn The VSSL In Reason - Learn How to Mix
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)