text:
For the first time in America's history, an entire generation of her citizens are poorer, more indebted, and less employed than the preceding generations.
That generation is the millennials – our generation.
The culprit, say some social commenters, are millennials themselves. In this telling, we are a lazy cohort of entitled and narcissistic brats — the proverbial Generation Me. But this is a classic case of blaming the victim.
The true cause of this unfortunate situation is clear: It's the economy. The Great Recession stymied economic growth, halted job creation, kept older Americans in the workforce longer, and encouraged younger Americans to continue debt-financed schooling.
Moreover, the Great Recession was not merely a one-off calamity — it was a symptom of economic ills long perpetuated and ignored. And the criticism and labels that have been heaped upon millennials bear much more resemblance to the type of intergenerational stereotyping that has always existed ("darn kids these days") than to any measurable reality.
The truth: The economic tragedy of the Millennial generation was written before many of us had even learned to read — Baby Boomer parents and grandparents who, at once, genuinely love and care for us, but have also created or perpetuated institutions, policies, and economic realities that have now hobbled us.
Our generation has been called "entitled." We beg to differ. If any generation is entitled, it's our parents' and grandparents' generation: the baby boomers.
True entitlement is tripling the national debt since the 1980s and using the proceeds to spend lavishly on tax cuts and government programs that primarily provided short-term economic boosts, while refusing to raise the Social Security age of retirement or to reduce benefits, even as the gluttonous program careens toward unsustainability.
A protester at recent Australia climate-change rallies in the lead up to the UN climate summit in New York
True entitlement is allowing the reasonable minimum wage that Baby Boomers enjoyed when they were our age to deteriorate while opting to cut taxes on the gains from stocks and bonds that they accrued during periods of debt-driven economic and stock-market surges — creating an economy where wage earners at all income levels, as of 2012, receive a smaller portion of economic output at any time since 1929.
True entitlement is, for decades, enjoying the benefits of the lowest energy costs in the world while refusing to price-in the external costs of carbon emissions, exacerbating the real changes to our planet that pose profound risks to the environment and economy for which millennials will soon be the primary stewards.
These grave consequences were entirely foreseeable — but they happened. Young Americans have been fleeced in order to fund the transient excesses of the old — and yet millennials are labeled "entitled" because we were given "participation trophies" and "personal tutors" before we were old enough to vote ... ?
Give us a break. Millennials are not entitled. But we are frustrated.
We're frustrated, because the same baby-boomer bloc that created or tacitly perpetuated the policies that have hamstrung millennials now makes up almost a third of the American voting-aged population and holds nearly two-thirds of the seats of the US House of Representatives and Senate. This, during a decade-long span when incumbent House and Senate members are richly rewarded for being the most unproductive legislators in US history, respectively winning reelection 94% and 87% of the time.
Granted, many members of our generation need to learn how to vote every two years, not just every four. And we need to begin to fulfill the civic-minded label — "The Next Great Generation" — which social scientists have bestowed upon us. When we do begin to regularly share our opinions in the voting booth, not just on Twitter, you can be assured that we'll act to keep this country great. We'll make the "hard" choices the baby boomers have refused to make.
Already, we've learned how to be fiscally responsible — with the most student debt of any generation in history, we've had to. More than any other generation, we eschew expensive possessions like cars and large houses, opting instead for bikes and shared living spaces. Sure, we would like to own all that fancy stuff someday, but we realize that we can't have everything we want.
We know that our government would be better off spending more of our tax dollars on jobs and education, and not just on Social Security and defense. We overwhelmingly recognize that the war on drugs has been an embarrassing waste of money and lives, and that anyone should be able to marry whomever they love.
Perhaps we millennials are entitled: We seemed to think that baby-boomer politicians would enact much-needed changes while we fiddled with our smartphones. We were definitely wrong on that one.


text:
Did a Mega-Flood Doom Ancient American City of Cahokia?
Sediments reveal evidence of massive Mississippian flood around 1200 C.E.
One thousand years ago, on a floodplain of the Mississippi River near modern-day St. Louis, the massive Native American city known today as Cahokia sprang suddenly into existence. Three hundred years later it was virtually deserted.
The reasons for Cahokia's quick emergence and precipitous decline have been among the greatest mysteries in American prehistory, but new research suggests a possible cause of the city's demise: a catastrophic flood.
A team led by Samuel E. Munoz, a doctoral student at the University of Wisconsin, Madison and National Geographic Young Explorer Grantee, reported at the 2013 conference of the Geological Society of America that their study of sediment cores from a lake adjacent to the site of Cahokia reveals calamitous flooding of the area around 1200 C.E., just as the city was reaching its apex of population and power.
While analyzing cores from Horseshoe Lake, an oxbow lake that separated from the Mississippi River some 1,700 years ago, Munoz's team discovered a layer of silty clay 19 centimeters (7.5 inches) thick deposited by a massive ancient flood.
It's unlikely that the ancient floodwaters were high enough to inundate the ten-story mound at Cahokia's center, a structure now called Monk's Mound. (See "Cahokia: America's Forgotten City.") But a flood of such magnitude would have devastated croplands and residential areas, and may have made it impossible for a population numbering as many as 15,000 to continue inhabiting the area.
Whether the flood caused Cahokia's decline and abandonment or simply contributed to it remains a subject for future research. But this much is clear: Within 150 years of the flood, what had been the largest prehistoric settlement north of Mexico became a ghost town, a vacant landscape of earthen mounds that would confound European settlers.
Though the flood is a new wrinkle in Cahokia's story, other data from the team's research supports previous archaeological conclusions about the history of Cahokia and the Mississippian culture of which it was a part.
Core Clues
Analysis of pollen deposits in the sediment cores from Horseshoe Lake shows an intensification of farming, accompanied by rapid deforestation, starting around 450 C.E., with corn cultivation peaking between 900 and 1200 C.E. Then the cores reveal the flood event, followed by a decline in corn cultivation. By 1350 C.E., the pollen record shows, agriculture there had essentially ceased.
(Related: "Drought Led to Collapse of Civilizations, Study Says.")
Munoz, a geographer who specializes in the study of pollen records, noticed that very little pollen research had been done in the American Southeast, where the Mississippian culture flourished. "And we didn't really have any studies outside big archaeological sites," he said. So when he saw Horseshoe Lake right next to Cahokia, he thought it was worth a shot.
"These floodplain lakes have been ignored for a long time as sources of these kinds of records, and they can be really valuable," said Munoz, whose research was supported by a grant from the National Geographic Society.
But he had no idea they might find such a big piece of the puzzle. "When we realized we were looking at a flood, and that it fell right at this key time in Cahokia's history, it was very exciting."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Anaconda (1997)
Directed by Luis Llosa
Genres - Horror, Action, Adventure, Thriller | Sub-Genres - Natural Horror, Jungle Film | Release Date - Apr 11, 1997 (USA) | Run Time - 89 min. | Countries - Brazil, Peru, United States | MPAA Rating - PG13
Share on
Synopsis by Mark Deming
A group of filmmakers looking for a lost native tribe instead find a man-eating monster in this thriller. Terri Flores (Jennifer Lopez) is a documentary filmmaker on assignment to make a film about the Shirishama Indians of the Amazon, a mysterious tribe known as "the People of the Mists." As Terri and her crew -- cameraman Danny Rich (Ice Cube), sound recordist Gary Dixon (Owen Wilson), anthropologist Steve Cale (Eric Stoltz), production manager Denise Kahlberg (Kari Wuhrer), and host Warren Westridge (Jonathan Hyde) -- head down the river, they discover a man whose boat has sunk and desperately needs rescue. Paul Sarone (Jon Voight), the mysterious stranger that they save from the waters, claims to know something of the Shirishama and says he will take the crew to them. Instead, he guides the group to the hiding place of the fearsome Anaconda, a gigantic snake that swallows a man whole, vomits him up, and eats him again (no small accomplishment, that). The snake is worth a fortune if captured, but can a creature so dangerous be captured at all?
snake, killer-animal, man-vs-nature, expedition, man-eater, attack, exploration, animal, rescue
Low Artistic Quality


text:
What to do in Silom
Silom is undoubtedly one of Bangkok's most important financial districts, being home to many bank headquarters, financial institutions and office buildings. Fine hotels, modest-sized malls and great restaurants abound in the area, too. And then, of course, there's the famous nightlife scene of Patpong.
Bangkok's 2 most sophisticated mass transit systems – the Skytrain (BTS) and underground (MRT) – both have Silom connections, which are also conveniently connected by a walkway between MRT Silom and BTS Sala Daeng stations. Siam, Chidlom, Ploenchit, Sathorn, and the riverside are only a few stations away.


text:
Consumer Household Safety
If you have any questions or would like more information about consumer household safety please Contact Us. Visit our Buyers Page or Sellers Page to view more information about buying or selling a home or property.
So you've bought a new home and you're all settled in. However, when it comes to owning a new home, especially if this is your first time owning a home, you have to make sure that any risk of injury or danger is eliminated from your home. While a home inspector would clearly point out any major dangers, walking through your home and writing down anything that can be unsafe, even if it's minor, will let know what you have to change in your home.
Here some things to be aware of when you just move into your home so you can ensure that you and your family are in a safe environment:
Fire Alarms and Smoke Detectors: It's most likely that you're going to have fire alarms in your home – it is the law. But the status of those fire alarms may be in question. If your fire alarms are old you must replace them immediately, and if they have old batteries you must replace those immediately too.
Fire escape: One of the first things you should do within the first week of moving into your home is to have a fire escape mapped out. You should have multiple routes and have a safe one in the event that you and your family would be trapped upstairs. Having a fire extinguisher on every floor is good too, but make sure that you remember they expire after a certain amount of time.
Carbon Monoxide: Along with fire alarms, every household should have multiple carbon monoxide detectors. Carbon Monoxide is a highly dangerous yet odourless, tasteless and clear gas. It can be fatal. If you have an extremely old furnace – one of the few causes of carbon monoxide poisoning in a household – then you should have that replaced immediately.
Preventing theft: There are a lot of affordable ways to keep your home safe from theft, and most of it is just actions done by you. If you have a bad habit of leaving doors unlocked or your garage door consistently open and unattended, then you're just asking for burglars to come into your home. You could always invest in a security system but if you don't have the cash, continuously ensure that all windows and doors are locked when they need to be.
Keep stable: For all the staircases in your home, you should have a railing to accompany to avoid falls and trips. If you have any elderly people living with you, having a railing in the bathroom is probably a good idea too.
Storing dangerous chemicals and medicines: If you have children, storing away dangerous chemicals and medicines should be a priority. Keep them at high places and make sure that your children can never get into them.
Of course there are other minor things that can make your home unsafe. Going around and inspecting your home on an occasional basis is a good way to make sure that it's completely risk and injury free. Maintaining a safe home environment for you and your family will make things a lot more comfortable.
Once again if you have any questions or would like more information about consumer household safety please Contact Us today.


text:
If ever there was a week to make plain the writing on the proverbial wall of the personal computing world, this week has been it.
That writing, it's becoming increasingly clear, spells out the word "convergence."
First, on Tuesday, there was the news that Canonical is bringing its popular Ubuntu Linux distribution to Android phones, delivering a full desktop experience when the smartphone is docked with a monitor and keyboard.
Now, in a move that's essentially a mirror image of Canonical's announcement, it appears Google is planning to bring its Android mobile operating system onto the desktop.
'Headed for the Desktop'
That's according to Patently Apple, which recently uncovered a new patent application by Google suggesting that it may be targeting the desktop and notebook markets for its Linux-based Android.
"Android is headed for the desktop and today's report lays out Google's specific work on trackpad operations corresponding to touchscreen events," wrote Patently Apple's Jack Purcher in a Wednesday special report.
Specifically, the patent application–filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in the third quarter of last year and published this month–refers to capabilities that will allow trackpad operations to be mapped to the touchscreen events that are at the heart of touch-focused Android, permitting even computers that don't have touch capabilities to run Android and apps designed for it.
Even multitouch actions will be included, added Purcher, who also noted that several of the capabilities referred to in the filing are similar to what's now offered in some Apple trackpads.
Google and Intel are already collaborating on a project to adapt Android for x86 architectures and several other related efforts, he pointed out.
The image at right includes two figures reportedly from Google's application outlining the mapping of trackpad operations to touchscreen events.
The 'PC-Plus' Era
This is just a patent application, of course, so it remains to be seen whether any patent is actually granted or any actual products follow.
Still, it's an intriguing window into what Google is working on and planning, and it's particularly interesting given Canonical's mobile move this week.
There's little doubt left that the mobile and desktop computing worlds are converging, and operating systems are increasingly taking a multiscreen approach as a result. We've already seen a hint of that with Windows 8 and its Metro interface and now we're seeing it with both Ubuntu and Android aiming to straddle what has traditionally been the desktop-mobile divide.
Is the desktop PC going to disappear, as so many have predicted?
It sure doesn't look like it. Rather, these latest signs suggest there will continue to be a place for all these devices in our lives, along with increasingly seamless ways to move among them.
Forget the "post-PC" hype–I'm putting my money on "PC-plus" instead.


text:
Philadelphia, PA – Round seven in the Chase for the Sprint Cup championship takes place this weekend at Martinsville Speedway. The Camping World Truck Series will also be at Martinsville. Formula One heads to New Delhi for the Indian Grand Prix.
Sprint Cup Series
Tums Fast Relief 500 - Martinsville Speedway - Martinsville, Va.
It's final four time in the Chase for the Sprint Cup championship.
Sunday's race at Martinsville Speedway is not only the seventh round in the 10-race Chase but the only short-track event in the postseason as well. Texas (Nov. 4), Phoenix (Nov. 11) and Homestead (Nov. 18) follow Martinsville.
Last weekend, Chase leaders Brad Keselowski and Jimmie Johnson survived a wild race at the newly repaved Kansas Speedway. Keselowski avoided one crash after another during the 400-mile event to finish eighth and remain the points leader. Johnson wrecked midway through the race but miraculously bounced back with a ninth-place run to keep the second spot in the Chase rankings. The point separation between the two remained at seven. Denny Hamlin finished 13th at Kansas and fell 20 markers behind.
"It's pressure time; it's go time," Johnson said. "It's all that stuff with four to go. With the points as tight as they are, we expect to be one of the cars racing for the win."
Johnson, who is seeking his sixth Sprint Cup Series championship, has yet to win a race in this year's Chase. He started the postseason with a pair of second-place finishes -- Chicagoland and New Hampshire. He placed third earlier this month at Charlotte.
"If we can get points on the 11 (Hamlin) and the 2 (Keselowski), especially the 2 at this point, that would be ideal," Johnson noted. "So we're showing up, racing hard, putting in everything we have got, which is to be expected by everybody at this point, and we'll see how things turn out."
Clint Bowyer is currently 25 points behind Keselowski, while Kasey Kahne trails by 30.
Sixth through 12th in the Chase standings are: Martin Truex Jr. (-43), Tony Stewart (-47), Jeff Gordon (-51), Matt Kenseth (-55), Kevin Harvick (-59), Greg Biffle (-62) and Dale Earnhardt Jr. (-122).
Earnhardt Jr. will return to competition at Martinsville after missing the past two races due to a concussion. He was medically cleared on Tuesday, following numerous neuropsychological evaluations, including a successful test session at the half-mile Gresham Motorsports Park in Jefferson, Ga.
The points leader after the sixth race in the Chase has gone on to win the series championship five of eight times. Last year, Stewart was 19 points behind leader Carl Edwards after the sixth Chase event, but Stewart went on to win at Martinsville, Texas and Homestead to claim the title.
Statistically, Johnson, Hamlin and Gordon have the upper hand at Martinsville. All three drivers have combined for 17 wins there, including seven in the Chase (2004-10).
In 21 races at Martinsville, Johnson has an average finish of 5.8, which is tops among active drivers. He has won six times at this track but has not been to victory lane there since March 2009. He finished second at Martinsville one year ago and 12th there in April.
Hamlin has an average finish of 6.4 in 14 races at Martinsville. He has four victories there, including three in a row from 2009-10. Hamlin placed fifth at Martinsville in last year's Chase race and then sixth there earlier this year.
"The spring race is the one race where we did just not run well," Hamlin said. "We had some setup issues that we found in the car afterwards, and some mistakes that we made with our setup. Basically, putting the wrong pieces in the wrong places. So, that is hopefully why we ran so bad in the spring where we finished decent but not great. Hopefully, that's rectified. Honestly, we look forward to going back, especially as good as our short track program has been in the last few (races)."
Gordon leads all active drivers with seven wins at Martinsville, but the four- time series champion has not posted a victory there since Oct. 2005. His average finish in 39 starts at this track is not too shabby -- 7.1.
"Martinsville is just that kind of place where you get into a rhythm," Gordon said. "And it's important when you get into traffic to maintain that rhythm or get back into it as fast as you possibly can. No other track demands the kind of rhythm needed at Martinsville."
For Keselowski, Martinsville could be a roadblock in his quest for the Sprint Cup title. He has competed there just five times, scoring a pair of top-10 finishes. He placed ninth at Martinsville in the spring.
"Martinsville is just one of those tracks where it seems like there are numerous variables that we've struggled with, and I don't think they're our fault," Keselowski said. "When I look at last year, I think we were running fifth or sixth in the fall and just got caught up in a wreck on a late-race restart caused by somebody who retaliated on the track."
Chevrolet can mathematically clinch its 10th consecutive and 36th overall manufacturers' championship in NASCAR's premier series this weekend at Martinsville. The auto maker presently holds a 22-point lead. Chevrolet will guarantee a clinch if one of its drivers finishes second or better there.
Forty-five teams are on the preliminary entry list for the Tums Fast Relief 500.
Camping World Truck Series
Kroger 200 - Martinsville Speedway - Martinsville, Va.
After taking the past two weeks off, the Camping World Truck Series returns to action on Saturday at Martinsville Speedway.
Rookie Austin Dillon holds only a one-point lead over James Buescher with four races to go. Timothy Peters is 26 points behind, while Parker Kligerman trails by 34.
In March, Dillon competed in a truck race at Martinsville for the first time, as he qualified and finished second. Buescher placed one spot behind Dillon in third.
"We had a really fast truck when we came here in the spring," Dillon said. "The team has grown a lot since the last race at Martinsville. I know we have what it takes to contend for the win."
Dillon has scored top-10 finishes in each of the last five races, including his first win in the series on Aug. 31 at Atlanta.
Buescher leads the series with four wins this season. All of his victories have come at 1.5-mile racetracks -- Chicagoland, Kansas and both races at Kentucky.
"I'm happy that the off-weeks are over, and we can get back to racing," Buescher said. "Martinsville is a tough track to get a hold of. It's a totally different animal. Coming off a top-three the last time we were there, I feel good about going back. I'm just looking to keep track position and keep it up front."
Peters is the only one among the top-four drivers in points that has previously won a truck race at Martinsville. His maiden truck win came at this 0.526-mile track in Oct. 2009.
"It always gives me confidence going back there knowing that I was able to check the win box off my first time there," Peters said.
Peters has finished eighth or better in the last three races at Martinsville.
After finishing a truck race in the runner-up position five times, Kligerman finally became a first-time winner in the series on Oct. 6 at Talladega.
In August, Kligerman was relieved of his driving duties with Brad Keselowski Racing, but he quickly landed a ride with Red Horse Racing, where he has scored five top-10 finishes in seven races.
"I've always considered myself to be 100 percent focused no matter what, but anytime you can go out there and win and walk into the racetrack the next week as the most recent winner, it always gives you a little more pep in your step and a little more confidence," Kligerman said.
Kligerman has finished no better than 11th in his three truck starts at Martinsville.
Denny Hamlin and Kevin Harvick are those Sprint Cup Series regulars competing in this race. Hamlin won the truck event at Martinsville one year ago, and Harvick took the checkered flag there earlier this year.
Forty-two teams are on the preliminary entry list for the Kroger 200.
Indian Grand Prix - Buddh International Circuit - New Delhi, India
Separated by just six points, Sebastian Vettel and Fernando Alonso take their Formula One world championship battle to India.
Just four races remain, with Abu Dhabi (Nov. 4), Austin, Texas (Nov. 18) and Brazil (Nov. 25) following the Indian Grand Prix.
Vettel, the two-time defending F1 champion, will attempt to win his fourth consecutive grand prix. Since his retirement in the Sept. 9 Italian Grand Prix due to a mechanical problem, the Red Bull driver has returned to the same winning form he had last year by scoring victories in Singapore, Japan and Korea. He has gained 45 points on Alonso in the past three grand prix.
"The spirit is perfect in the garage, the atmosphere is great and I think we all want to do our best and to really try and win the race on a Sunday," Vettel said. "I think we've been pushing very hard all season. We have tried lots of stuff. Sometimes it was more successful than other times."
Vettel won last year's inaugural Indian GP, doing so in dominating fashion. He started on the pole and led all 60 laps around the newly built 3.192-mile Buddh International Circuit.
"I loved the track layout last year, but not just because I won the race," Vettel said. "With an average speed of 235 kph (146 mph), the course is the second quickest of the year after Monza (Italy). There is a lot of elevation change around the lap, which adds to the fun, from as much as eight percent downhill and up to 10 percent uphill. It's like a roller coaster. It really has emerged as one of the most challenging circuits on the calendar for the drivers."
Alonso has finished third in three of the past five grand prix, but his retirements in Belgium and Japan due to accidents on the opening lap have been costly for the Ferrari driver in his bid to win a third F1 title. Alonso has three victories this season but has not won since the July 22 German Grand Prix.
Can he get back to his winning ways in India, as well as Abu Dhabi, Austin and Brazil?
"We will see." Alonso said. "It will depend obviously on the updates in the car. I think we will see in India if there are any new parts. If there are, we will need to test them. For sure, the other teams will also bring new parts, maybe more than us, so we need to see which of them are working, which of them are not working and for who they work."
Alonso started and finished third in last year's Indian GP. He has yet to win in Abu Dhabi and Brazil. F1 will compete in Austin for the first time this year.
"We just need a little last step to be as competitive as Red Bull, and I think it will be a beautiful last four races to the end," Alonso added.
Narain Karthikeyan from HRT is the only Indian driver currently in F1. Last year, Karthikeyan replaced Vitantonio Liuzzi in the HRT car for the Indian GP only. He finished three laps behind in 17th.


text:
With talk of orchestrating a Yemen-style transition in Syria through agreement between Russia and the United States, it may be useful to address the question of what the legitimate goals of the international community in Syria should be.
To start the discussion, the following goals are suggested:
1. Immediately halt the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity;
2. Ensure that any transitional regime fully respects the international "responsibility to protect" as set forth in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1674 (2006).
3. Establish an interim government committed to immediately respecting the fundamental human rights of the citizens of Syria, of all sects including Alawites, Christians and other minorities.
These fundamental human rights are set forth in the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights, and further articulated in the U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the U.N Convention Against Torture, and other international human rights treaties.
(The Security Council, through adoption of a mandatory resolution under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, could provide that even those of these norms that have not become customary international law will be binding on Syria.)
4. Within this context of the interim government's guarantee of respect for fundamental human rights, provide for the organization of political parties, the election of a constituent assembly to draft a constitution, and the subsequent holding of elections to a National Assembly followed by presidential elections to select a new, legitimate government to replace the interim transitional government.
5. Establish a Truth and Reconciliation process through which those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity will be held morally, and potentially legally, responsible for the crimes they have committed. This process could involve creation of a National Truth and Reconciliation Commission, with optional referral to domestic judicial authorities or to the International Criminal Court, depending on the whether the individual concerned cooperated fully with the Commission and acknowledged the crimes he or she may have committed. (The South African and Argentine models might be taken into account in designing the appropriate truth and reconciliation process.)
6. Establish a United Nations Authority in Syria with a mandate to assist Syria in developing mechanisms designed to ensure observance of "the responsibility to protect", and with residual powers to ensure compliance with the goals set forth in paragraphs 1-5 above.
7. Establish a United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria for an interim period of 1-2 years to ensure the safety and security of all citizens of Syria, incuding in particular the members of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria.
Any discussion of a possible Yemen-style "solution" to the situation in Syria should be measured against the 21st century goals set forth above.
The outcome of the actual negotiated, transitional "solution" in Yemen is far from evident, with al-Qaeda operating through large portions of the country's territory and a revival of earlier civil wars between diferent regions of the country remaining a realistic threat.
Moreover, Syria obviously represents an entirely different political and social reality than Yemen, with a recent history of barbarism on a wholly different order of magnitude than anything done by the Saleh regime in Yemen.
The goals of the international community do not include maintenance of Russian control of the port of Tartus, just as they do not include agreement with the U.S. that it can conduct drone strikes on targets in Syria. These issues can only be decided by the interim government and then the elected government of Syria.
Instead of giving al-Assad more time to commit atrocities against his opponents as diplomatic negotiations continue, and to help focus his mind and those of his inner circle on what is to come, it will be essential to develop and if necessary undertake vigorous military actions to halt the crimes referred to in paragraphs 1-3 of the list of suggested goals above.
These options should be developed–and if necessary exercised–even in the absence of Security Council authorization. Russia must not be allowed to use negotiations as a cover for supporting al-Assad's continued commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
It is time for the international community to act on an urgent basis to halt the atrocities in Syria, and to commence the transitional process that will lead to a future government based on respect for fundamental human rights, implementation of the "responsibility to protect", and the establishment of a process that will lead to a government that reflects the aspirations and desires of the Syrian people.
The Trenchant Observer
For links to other articles by The Trenchant Observer, click on the title at the top of this page to go to the home page, and then consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.


text:
Jack Balkin:
jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman
bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres
ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider
corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak
mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin
joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber
mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin
sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz
jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler
jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman
akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman
msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson
slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban
david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca
gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone
mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain
lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail
mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale
pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily
npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen
michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein
dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes
rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen
dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus
raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph
alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel
siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super
david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha
btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe
nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet
mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler
winkler at ucla.edu
Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases
The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC
The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic)
Recent Posts
On Zelikow
Sunday, June 03, 2007
On Zelikow
Stephen Griffin
Philip Zelikow is a well-informed scholar of public policy and his recent speech in Houston (referred to by Marty in a previous post) is worth close attention. Perhaps he is best known as the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, but he has been in and out of government since the first Bush administration as well as being a faculty member at Harvard and Virginia. His speech provides some insight into how government officials have understood their role since the outbreak of the "war against terror." O'Neill understood that the crime model was just one way to deal with terrorism,
O'Neill understood that the crime model was just one way to deal with terrorism,
Professor Griffin: Zelikow thus makes a common error by ruling out the criminal model from the beginning.
Amen. My first attempt at ridiculing that choice was a fantasy bumper-sticker, "War on Terror? Splint on Smallpox!" Turns out that was a little subtle for most folks. Since then I've put effort into repeal-aumf.org trying to point out the fallacious nature of "war" in response to nine-one-one. Your observation, then, is most welcome.
Turning to policy prescription, Zelikow argues that we can't respond to the threat posed by al-Qaeda in purely criminal justice terms. I have some sympathy for this argument, but all of the points Zelikow makes about the difficulty of criminal prosecutions apply with equal force to the terrorist attacks that occurred pre-9/11. And the trouble there is that criminal prosecution did work successfully, despite some long odds...
Although al-Qaeda posed a far greater challenge to law enforcement than the Mafia, or any criminal enterprise, had, the alternatives – military strikes, CIA assassination attempts – had accomplished nothing except to aggrandize bin Laden
in the eyes of his admirers. The twenty-five convictions, on the other hand, were genuine
and legitimate achievements that demonstrated the credibility and integrity of the American system of justice.
We need to define the end result which we are seeking to achieve before we can determine the relative success of the competing means or achieving that end.
The short term end result we need to achieve is to deny al Qaeda the operational capability to murder our citizens and the long term result is the surrender or elimination of al Qaeda.
The criminal justice model and its 23 after the fact convictions was a complete failure in achieving these goals. The operational capability of the al Qaeda network was not degraded in the least prior to 9/11 using law enforcement assets. al Qaeda operated with near impunity in several foreign countries which our FBI could not reach and had the capability to launch international attacks from those bases.
It was not until we treated al Qaeda's nearly decade long war against the United States as a real war and sent in our military assets to engage and destroy the enemy where they lived that al Qaeda's operational capability to launch international attacks against US citizens was almost completely degraded.
I have no idea to which military strikes against bin Laden that John O'Neil is referring. The Clinton Administration declined to use the military to kill bin Laden and his officers on multiple occasions. While we can only speculate as to whether killing bin Laden in the 90s would have stopped 9/11, we can be sure that foregoing the military options did not enhance our defense against 9/11 or any of the previous attacks.
That being said, our domestic law enforcement agencies have a key defensive role to play in stopping attacks which are a launched within our country as the impressive operations against the planned attacks against Ft. Dix and JFK airport have recently demonstrated. However, domestic law enforcement cannot be reasonably expected to project US power against al Qaeda in foreign countries where they live.
Bart: We need to define the end result which we are seeking to achieve before we can determine the relative success of the competing means or achieving that end.
Actually, Bart, here in America we try to work under the principle that there is more to selection of means than merely the end we have in sight. In particular, war powers are clearly intended only to be invoked for existential threats to the nation. Likewise for breaches of civil rights such as the suspension of habeas.
I understand fully that you and your partisans want no part of such an America. That's fine, we don't really want any part of you either. It's just that our principles require us to defend your rights as well as anyone else's.
A little armchair psychology here, but is it possible earning your keep defending guilty drunks has made you jaded, is part of what prompts your insane and inane support the evil, as in un-American and certainly un-Christian, policies of this imperialist administration? Or is it just that "born to follow" attitude which makes a good grunt?
So here's the question:
Aside from the fact that Zelikow is demonstrably wrong, is he incompetent? Or is he intellectually dishonest?
Robert Link said...
Actually, Bart, here in America we try to work under the principle that there is more to selection of means than merely the end we have in sight. In particular, war powers are clearly intended only to be invoked for existential threats to the nation.
Did you actually mean to say that we may not use the military to defend the nation against al Qaeda attacks until they manage become an existential threat to the US by perhaps detonating a nuke in your city?
Although I recently wrote about the amazing level of denial that we are even in a war with Islamic fascism, fresh examples of this denial such as your post continue to amaze me.
Bart pisses on truth yet again --
"Although I recently wrote about the amazing level of denial that we are even in a war with Islamic fascism, fresh examples of this denial such as your post continue to amaze me.
"# posted by Bart DePalma : 9:45 AM"
The Islamic radicals to which you refer are religiofanatics, Bart, but they are not state actors. Not being state actors, they cannot be "fascists". They can be, of course, like you, thugs.
Nor is it "war," Bart, as wars are conducted between and among states. Not being states, or state actors, terrorists -- actual or alleged -- are not a party to "war". 9/11 was, in fact, a mass murder, properly prosecuted under the police power, exactly as was done under Clinton to those who bombed the WTC in 1993.
Oh, right: Clinton didn't use the military against the religiofanatics in that instance, and that was his failing: He should have bombed and invaded and occupied New Jersey.
And Spain doesn't know how to deal with terrorism either. In response to the Madrid bombings, it worked through international police agreements to identify, find, have arrested, and extradicted the perpetrators, instead of bombing and invading Italy.
The proper approach is, of course, to use all relevant tools, including that of inter/national criminal law, instead of stupidly limiting oneself to only one of the several available. But that's not how Bushit works -- he only knows how to bully, and he especially loves to beat up on those too weak to fight back -- so that's not how lock-step fool Bart works.
Mark Twain quit the Republican party because it's notion of thinking for oneself was to adopt the party line. As Bart demonstrates, the Republican party still requires that groupthink, that brainwashing, of its religionut adherents.
JNagarya said...
The Islamic radicals to which you refer are religiofanatics, Bart, but they are not state actors. Not being state actors, they cannot be "fascists".
Are you actually claiming that the Nazis were not fascists until they took power over Germany?
Nor is it "war," Bart, as wars are conducted between and among states. Not being states, or state actors, terrorists -- actual or alleged -- are not a party to "war".
Under this reasoning, rebellions, revolutions and conflicts between states and non state groups like the Indian Wars are actually cases of murder?
Under this reasoning, we are not really at war in Iraq of Afghanistan because the enemy is not a state?
In reality, we have been involved in several war with non state groups over the past two centuries, including this current war. The war against the Barbary Pirates most closely matches our current war with Islamic fascism.
John Yoo (who Zelikow calls "a brilliant scholar")
Speaking as someone not in the legal community, if Yoo's work is brilliant, I think we've had just about all the "brilliance" we can stand.
Have you actually studied history? I mean, I know you stated in a previous post that you are self taught, but this statement stands out:
Under this reasoning, rebellions, revolutions and conflicts between states and non state groups like the Indian Wars are actually cases of murder?
IIRC, the Indian nations were officially sovereign peoples. That you choose not to acknowledge that bodes poorly for your opinions of the Iraqis, Afghans, and any other nations occupied by the American Empire. You have to acknowledge them as people, with rights, before you will stop treating them as subjects.
Prof. Zelikow makes some great points about interrogation, but I question his conclusions about the role of law and lawyers and about why (and whether) the U.S. has had difficulty selling the world on an armed conflict paradigm for its counter-terrorism efforts.
First, he mentions that the lawyers were brought in to do post hoc justification of the administration's interrogation practices, but then he does a 180, blaming bad interrogation behavior on the results of legal analysis - an almost unintended consequence of mistakenly placing lawyers (who do "can" and "cannot") in the role of policymakers (who do "should" and "shouldn't"). The how and why of the Justice Department's "torture memos" make quite clear that Zelikow got it right in the beginning, but then lost the thread of his own argument. The lawyers were not merely asked to give an opinion on the outer limits of interrogation legality. Instead, it all began with interrogators who were getting nervous that the techniques they were authorized to use constituted torture or lesser degrees of abuse amounting to war crimes. They did not want to risk being scapegoated, and so, the Department of Justice was called upon to provide them with legal cover.
The legal justifications for torture put forth by the "brilliant" (according to Zelikow) Justice Department lawyers such as John Yoo, are almost universally recognized by constitutional scholars as sophomoric. But criticism of the legal analysis misses the point. The official (and then secret) justifications of torture did not have to be correct. They served their purpose – to provide legal cover to interrogators who would rely on them – merely by existing. Zelikow's flawed analysis effectively, even if unintentionally, rationalizes a cover-up of war crimes.
Zelikow's analysis of whether the "war on terror" is law enforcement or armed conflict is also flawed. First, let me make clear that unlike some law of armed conflict experts, I do not doubt that a state can be at war against a transnational, non-state sponsored armed group, e.g., that the U.S. can be at war against al Qaeda. But Zelikow's approach is conclusory.
Rather than ask whether or not the indicia of armed conflict - the facts requisite to triggering the application of the law of armed conflict - are present, he begins with a series of statements alleging the inconvenience of a criminal justice approach, but not really analyzing the pros and cons. In a similar vein, he then chides other states for declining to accept the armed conflict paradigm (without citing evidence that they have indeed done so) because they are pacifists, or because they are hard-wired to do the opposite of what the U.S. does, or because they have not suffered like we have suffered. Still no discussion of whether or not the factual criteria for armed conflict are present: who are the parties? what is their level of organization? what territory is implicated? what is the frequency and severity of attacks? And if the law of armed conflict does apply because the requisite criteria are present, then what might be the temporal and geographic limits of its application?
When Zelikow addresses how the U.S. might have contributed to the reticence of other states to accept the idea of armed conflict, he focuses on antipathy to the unilateralist approach taken by the U.S. But he makes no mention of the possibility that other states, especially ones with more recent war experience on their own soil than the U.S., may be reluctant to climb on the "war on terror" bandwagon because they have a somewhat more respectful attitude for the laws of armed conflict than that exhibited by the U.S.
There is a familiar sub-textual suggestion in Zelikow's presentation: the law is unclear, or it is quaint, or the issues are not really legal ones. Yes, there are difficult issues: when does violence become armed conflict? how, if at all, do different legal regimes such as the law of armed conflict and human rights law and domestic law apply to targeting, detention, treatment and trial in transnational situations of armed violence that do not pit state A against state B? And within the U.S., who gets to decide these things? But there are answers to these questions for those willing to give the rule of law its due. And the lawyers who know this stuff can also articulate why the rules are the way they are, what policy imperatives they serve, and what the consequences of choosing to ignore them are. Prof. Zelikow, by seeming to divorce policy from law, or by elevating policy over law, misses an important step of first determining whether true comportment with law can suggest and inform rational policy options.
His invocation of the spirits of Stimson, Marshall (George), Roosevelt and Churchill – tough guys in tough times – to denigrate law is both inaccurate and ill-advised. In the First World War soldiers hors de combat (those injured, sick or who had surrendered) were likely to be killed on the spot or badly abused in captivity. In contrast, during the Second World War they stood a much better chance of being taken captive and treated more humanely - by the Germans as well as by others. The difference between the two wars was the promulgation, after World War I, of the Third Geneva Convention on the treatment of PoWs.
In 20th and 21st century warfare, lawyers in the U.S. and in other countries have played a pivotal role even on the battlefield. They vet target selection for comportment with the principles of distinction (military objectives: OK; civilian objects: not OK) and proportionality (weighing military advantage against civilian harm). This protects their own troops from exposure to war crimes liability and promotes the overall mission by controlling damage in the battle for hearts and minds.
Zelikow warns about the danger of letting hypothetical-wielding lawyers rush in where wise policy gurus should be making the calls. But the Administration has created such a harmful mess by ignoring the advice of its career military lawyers and instead, allowing its "policy" consiglieres to trump long-standing practices and rules that faithfully implement international legal obligations in armed conflict, such as AR 190-8, the regulation that implements the procedure for distinguishing between combatants and civilians in armed conflict.
There's something suspect in the phrase I once heard from Vladimir Putin - something about establishing a dictatorship of the rule of law. But while slavish kowtowing to law may be creepy, I'd still rather take my chances with a bunch of lawyers arguing it out in daylight, than with policy mavens who don't know the law, don't understand the effect of the law, and don't appreciate the larger purposes that it serves. And just because those policy ideologues use lawyers as their secret cloak, it doesn't make law the culprit.
Call me quaint.
@Fraud Guy: Just a nitpick, but people can be sovereign without organizing themselves in the institutional form of a state. Denying statehood is not the same as denying sovereignty.
Nevertheless, I think you're on target with your criticism.
I think the more important point to me was sovereignty, especially since the attempts of some Indian nations to create states was brushed aside, most notably the Cherokee.
I agree, though--give Bart a nit, and he will pick (even if he can't see the lice infesting his own position).
Gabor Rona,
Perhaps you subscribe to the "quaint" notion that policy must conform with law or, put differently, that policy decisions are choices of which lawful action to take. If what you say is correct, Zelikow is saying that breaking the law is a legitimate policy decision. I, too, am "quaint" enough to disagree.
Fraud Guy said...
IIRC, the Indian nations were officially sovereign peoples. That you choose not to acknowledge that bodes poorly for your opinions of the Iraqis, Afghans, and any other nations occupied by the American Empire. You have to acknowledge them as people, with rights, before you will stop treating them as subjects.
The American Indian tribes were hardly nation states with sovereign governments and territory as we define that term and we never recognized them as such. The United States used the term "nation" in their treaties with individual Indian tribes but never recognized them to be sovereign.
In stark contrast, Iraq and Afghanistan have sovereign governments and territory which are internationally recognized. Thus, the slur American Empire has no merit.
Fraud Guy [to the "Bartster"]:
IIRC, the Indian nations were officially sovereign peoples.
Well, you see, who is the "sovereign" of other lands is who we decide is the "sovereign". See, e.g., Iraq, Afghanistan, ... umm, oh yeah, Iran, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, El Salvador, Chile, the Dominican Republic, anonanonanonanon. If they're a bunch of raghead goatf*ckers (and what's our oil doing under their sand, anyways?), or a bunch of naked savages with some pretty little golden statues and such, we'll provide an appropriate "sovereign". The "White Man's Burden" and all, yaknow.... That's what "empire" is all about, after all.
Bart said (whopper alert):
The American Indian tribes were hardly nation states with sovereign governments and territory as we define that term and we never recognized them as such.
Wow, just wow. About 150 years of American history just went poof. Bart, when the first British and other northern European colonists got to the future United States, the Indians were the sovereign peoples. And if those colonists hadn't come as supplicants (not even equals), they likely wouldn't have lasted more than a handful of years (e.g. Roanoke and Vinland), even with the reverse decimation caused by diseases brought by European colonists.
Of course, it also seems that you are making another statement here. All treaties entered by and with the United States (and IIRC my Constitution correctly) and the various tribes were the law of the land. And they were agreements between the US and sovereign nations (e.g. WHEREAS the treaty made and concluded on Holston river, on the second day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-one, between the United States of America and the Cherokee nation of Indians, has not been fully carried into execution by reason of some misunderstandings which have arisen http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/ntreaty/chr1794.htm
Hmm, that was from almost the first years of us as a nation, and "we" were entering into treaties with an Indian "nation". So 200+ years ago, "we" defined things very differently than "we" do now.
Now, Bart, you may have a point in power politics, in that we rarely honored those treaties--shall we say laws of the land--with regards to the Indian nations. But that leads me to think that you believe that "the [Indian] has no rights that a[n American] is bound to respect". Because that is really the only way you, as an attorney, could ignore the law in hundreds of cases. Apparently you honor the law and the Constitution more in the breach than the observance.
So which is it, Bart? Do we honor the law and the Constitution, or ignore them because it allows us to fulfill our Manifest Destiny?
(circadas chirping)
fraud guy:
Once again, a nation state requires a sovereign people controlling defined sovereign territory. Show me where the Europeans or the Indians themselves recognized Indian nation states with defined borders and a single sovereign government ruling over such states. The Indians had no recognized borders and rarely if ever had a single government above the local tribal level.
Bart: The Indians had no recognized borders and rarely if ever had a single government above the local tribal level.
This is beneath even you, you cowardly, lying cheat. Do you really contend that the folks who were here first basically had it coming for not having the good sense to have organized along European lines with citified nation states? I knew they still taught Manifest Destiny and White Man's Burden in history, but not as modern ethical principles.
Makes your blind support of all things xenophobic a little easier to understand, it's untrammeled bigotry. I should have recognized the stench sooner. None of them wogs really had any rights to begin with, just us God-fearing free white men, eh?
Now, Bart, you are ignoring several hundred years of North American history.
Once again, a nation state requires a sovereign people controlling defined sovereign territory. Show me where the Europeans or the Indians themselves recognized Indian nation states with defined borders and a single sovereign government ruling over such states. The Indians had no recognized borders and rarely if ever had a single government above the local tribal level.
You obviously are ignoring the Six Nations, whose government arguably influenced our own. You also ignore Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831) and Worcester v. Georgia (1832), just like your pre-Bush hero Jackson who felt he could ignore the law ("John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"). You ignore the website I cited above, and the treaty that clearly states that the tribe was a nation, and the borders that the treaty (and the previous treaty) had set.
You claim that a tribe does not constitute your view of what a proper nation should be, and therefore does not have to be treated as such. This does not change the law; it ignores it (admittedly, just like the US government ignored its own laws for years by breaking its treaties with the Indians). Now I understand why you love Bush's policies so much--you have that in common with him.
You are embracing and reveling in some of the worst in American actions, and if millions of Indians, or hundreds of thousands of Iraqis die because of it, at least you feel good about your defense of nation states. I think you need to stop trying to cover your favored illegalities with the veneer of the law, because it is obvious that to you the law is a tool to be manipulated and ignored when it suits you or your cause.
Robert, et al:
The professors have been good enough to invite us here and only ask that we stay on topic. If you want to discuss another topic with me, show some consideration and go over to this open thread I have set up for that purpose over on my blog.
You opened up the discussion re the Indian Wars, and now refuse to answer. Do you need the page hits that badly?
The blogwhoring "Bart" DePalma makes this 'generous' invite (here, and just about every thread on Balkin's blog):
If you want to discuss another topic with me, show some consideration and go over to this open thread I have set up for that purpose over on my blog.
"Bart": Let's be clear on this. You don't 'discuss' anything.
You mouth your crapola, and ignore it and run to the next thread the moment someone pounces your snotty a$$ with any criticism or couter you can't deal with. You're even more of a chicken than Dubya. And that's saying a lot.
Arne: The blogwhoring "Bart" DePalma...
Give the devil his due, he hardly ever mentions his blog. And he's one of the few folks around here who actually has a publicly viewable profile. I can even remember naively visiting his blog, way, way back when, and thinking he might be the kind of right-wing opponent who could teach me a thing or two. No, really, I had the stoopid fantasy about dialectic and honing my game by engaging a worthy adversary. Well, I've learned all right...
Anyway, getting his hits up ain't the motivation, and we all know it. It's simple cowardice.
"Bart" DePalma:Post a Comment
The Clinton Administration declined to use the military to kill bin Laden and his officers on multiple occasions.
"Bart" us a veritable font of RNC "spin" and Freeperville paranoia/lies. Useless, of course, except to pacify the DodoHeads that listen to His Emanence Rush or Ins-Hannity and Co.....
Books by Balkinization Bloggers
Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023)
Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023)
Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin's Press, 2022)
Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022)
Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022)
Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021).
Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021).
Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020)
Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020)
Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020)
Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020).
Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020)
Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020)
Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020)
Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019)
Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018)
Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018)
Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018)
Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017)
Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017)
Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016)
Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015)
Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015)
Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015)
Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014)
Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution
Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014)
Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013)
John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013)
Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013)
Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013)
Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013)
James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013)
Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues
Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013)
Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012)
Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012)
Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012)
Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012)
Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011)
Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011)
Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011)
Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011)
Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011)
Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010)
Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010)
Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic
Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010)
Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010)
Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010)
Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009)
Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009)
Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009)
Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009)
Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009)
Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008)
David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007)
Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007)
Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007)
Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006)
Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006)
Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006)
Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006)
Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006)
Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005)
Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004)
Balkin.com homepage
Cultural Software
The Information Society Project
Useful Links
Syllabi and Exams


text:
My only problem with the description is that the picture on the box shows two ribbons of caramel that aren't blended as they just look piped into the ice cream. I know I'm nitpicking but when you say blended I think of something that's swirled and not straight. Though I do love the regal purple they use to depict their limited edition flavors. It's a lot more eye catching than just the words "limited edition" on the box.
Hey Haagen-Daaz, make these a permanent flavor please.
Verdict? Redefining the standards for sweet and salty combinations
Buy Again? There's already another box in my freezer


text:
MacDougall Ancient Accessory - Full Plaid Tartan Beanie Hat A31
MacDougall Ancient Accessory - Full Plaid Tartan Beanie Hat A31 and other MacDougall Ancient Accessories are custom made just for you!
- Fabric: 95% polyester and 5% spandex.
- Regular fit.
- The production size: the circumference is 56cm and the height is 40cm.
- With high-tech graphic printing or engraving, MacDougall Ancient designs take the main stage, giving our Tartan Beanie Hats a fresh, modern twist that exudes undeniable style.
- Please ensure the best fit by referring to our Size Chart.
- We do our best to ensure accurate measurements, but kindly understand there may be ±5% deviation due to manual measuring and production processes.


text:
There are few things more frustrating than getting to the airport and realizing your suitcase is over the airline's weight limit. Getting hit with a hefty baggage fee can spoil your trip before it even starts.
If you're not a naturally light packer, having a luggage scale can save you time and money when you travel. Whether you choose a digital model or an old-school manual scale, it can help you keep an eye on your bags' weight and make you more decisive about the things you're packing.
Tarriss Jetsetter Digital Luggage Scale
This lightweight luggage scale has a clear, easy-to-read LCD display that lets you see your bag's weight at a glance. It's made of durable stainless steel and has an auto-shutoff to preserve the battery. It also offers a 110-pound capacity with an accuracy of 0.2 pounds.
Sold by Amazon
Latitude 40N Digital Travel Scale
With a 100-pound capacity and large, backlit display, this luggage scale is easy to use for any trip. It runs on easy-to-replace AA batteries and features a contoured plastic handle that's comfortable to hold.
Sold by Bed Bath & Beyond
This convenient luggage scale offers an accuracy of 0.1 pounds to ensure you get the correct weight for your bags. It's compact enough to fit in your pocket and automatically locks the weight measurement for user-friendly operation. It also has a thermometer to record the temperature in both Fahrenheit and Celsius.
Sold by Amazon
Amazon Basics Portable Digital Luggage Scale
Offering a max weight of 110 pounds, this compact digital luggage scale provides user-friendly operation. You can switch between measurement units with the push of a button, and the Tare function automatically resets it to zero. It has low-battery and error indicators too.
Sold by Amazon
Travel Inspira 110LB Digital Luggage Scale
This digital luggage scale offers a backlit LCD that's easy to read even in low light. It has a rubber handle with a comfortable grip that feels good in hand too. The overweight warning lets you know when your bag is too heavy, and the included carrying case protects the scale in your carry-on bag.
Sold by Amazon
This highly accurate luggage scale has a rubber handle that's comfortable to hold, but it's still small enough to fit in a pocket. It has an auto-shutoff feature to preserve the battery life and automatically locks the results when you weigh a bag. It's made of durable ABS plastic to hold up to regular travel too.
Sold by Amazon
Samsonite Manual Luggage Scale
This lightweight, compact luggage scale can measure up to 80 pounds. It offers a comfortable grip handle and an adjustable strap to make it easier to use. It features a built-in tape measure to check that your bag isn't oversize too.
Sold by Amazon and Bed Bath & Beyond
With its simple, one-button operation, this is one of the most user-friendly luggage scales on the list. It can display weight in both pounds and kilograms and has a 100-pound weight capacity. Best of all, it's backed by a 5-year limited warranty.
Travelon Stop & Lock Luggage Scale
Another manual luggage scale, this model can weigh up to 75 pounds. It has a sturdy hook to hang your luggage from that's durable enough to hold up to regular use. You only need to twist the scale to reset it too.
Sold by Amazon
Luxebell Digital Luggage Scale
This easy-to-read digital luggage scale has accuracy within 0.1 pounds, so you can always trust the measurements you get. It has an auto-shutoff to preserve the battery and an auto-lock feature to record the weight. It offers a capacity of 110 pounds and has a tare button to reset the scale to zero too.
Sold by Amazon
Travel Smart by Conair Compact Digital Luggage Scale
This compact luggage scale offers a weight capacity of 80 pounds and beeps to let you know if your bag is overweight. It measures in both pounds and kilograms and features a lock mode that records the weight. Its durable hard plastic construction allows it to hold up to years of use too.
FREETOO Luggage Scale Portable Digital Hanging Scale
This battery-powered digital luggage scale has an auto-shutoff feature to conserve its life. It measures up to 110 pounds and offers a sturdy hook to hang your bag on. It comes with a backlit LCD display, making it convenient to read the measurement in dark.
Sold by Amazon
Samsonite Electronic Luggage Scale
This highly portable digital luggage scale can weigh up to 80 pounds. It has a comfortable grip handle and adjustable strap, so it's straightforward to use. It also has a built-in measuring tape to help make sure that your bags also meet dimension requirements.
One of the smallest, most lightweight luggage scales available, this digital model has an auto-shutoff feature that turns it off after 60 seconds when not in use. It also has a red light that illuminates when the weight is locked. Best of all, it weighs less than .25 pounds, so it's easy to tuck in your bag.
Sold by Amazon
Escali Velo 110-Pound Weight Limit Portable Luggage Scale
This highly portable, lightweight luggage scale utilized stringent military measurement standards, ensuring its accuracy. It offers a user-friendly one-button operation and an ergonomic handle that's comfortable to hold. It can also weigh up to 110 pounds and has a strong, durable stainless clasp for years of use.
Sold by Bed Bath & Beyond
These lightweight, compact scales come as a set of two, so you never have to worry about paying overweight baggage fees. They offer a 110-pound capacity and can switch between grams, ounces, kilograms and pounds. It also has a Tare function to reset the scale to zero with the push of a button.
Sold by Amazon
Want to shop the best products at the best prices? Check out Daily Deals from BestReviews.
Sign up here to receive the BestReviews weekly newsletter for useful advice on new products and noteworthy deals.
Jennifer Blair writes for BestReviews. BestReviews has helped millions of consumers simplify their purchasing decisions, saving them time and money.


text:
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. >> Ford Motor Co. is recalling 1.1 million pickup trucks because the gas tanks can fall off and cause fires.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Monday on its website that the metal straps holding the tanks can rust, allowing them to fall, rupture and catch fire.
The defect has been blamed for eight fires, three of which spread to the rest of the truck. One person was injured, suffering first- and second-degree burns, Ford spokesman Wes Sherwood said.
The recall affects certain 1997 through 2004 Ford F-150 models, as well as some 1997 through 1999 model year F-250 pickups. Also affected are Lincoln Blackwood pickups from the 2002 and 2003 model years. They were sold in cold-weather states where salt is used to clear roads. The salt corroded straps holding the tanks and they broke, NHTSA said.
The trucks were originally sold or are now registered in Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Washington, D.C.
Sherwood said the company will notify owners in September to bring their trucks to dealers who will replace the straps with new ones that are coated to resist corrosion. Parts to fix the problem, he said, won't be widely available until then.
People with questions should contact their dealer, who can install a cable to hold the tanks in place until the replacement straps arrive, Sherwood said.


text:
Huge brood of wild turkeys at Rancho San AntonioLate last week in the field next to the parking lots at Rancho San Antonio we had a chance to watch a wild turkey family foraging in the dry grass. Two adults and twenty chicks -- that's quite a brood!
Two of the chicks got into a scuffle and kept it up the whole time we watched them. The adults didn't seem interested, but some of the other chicks gathered round to see what was going on.
Photos: Wild turkeys.
Meanwhile, in other nature news, the hot weather has brought the odd
unidentified chlorine smell back to the redwood forests. On the weekend,
when we were having 90-degree days, the smell was very noticable around
Purisima and El Corte de Madera, and on a few parts of Highway 9.
Today, though the weather is cooler, the smell was everywhere on the
Skyline trail at the top of Sanborn. Still no idea what's producing it.
[ 20:23 Jul 07, 2010 More nature/birds | permalink to this entry | ]


text:
Originally appearing here. Recreational use of the illegal drug known as ecstasy is associated with long-term changes in brain chemistry, a small, new study reveals. Based on research with women, it appears that the so-called "rave" drug can induce a drop in serotonin levels that can last up to two years. Serotonin, the research team noted, is critical to the regulation of mood, appetite, sleep, learning and memory. "We've always known that ecstasy produced transient effects, but with the suggestion that there would be recovery over time," explained study co-author Dr. Ronald Cowan, an associate professor of psychiatry in the department of psychiatry with Vanderbilt University Medical Center's School of Medicine in Nashville, Tenn. "But here we find that these effects may be sustained over time with no evidence of reversal," he added. "Now this is an observational study, so we can't do really any more than suggest causation," Cowan noted. "But I would say that this is nevertheless the strongest evidence we have that there is chronic change in serotonin levels for those who use the drug." Cowan and his colleagues report their findings in the Dec. 5 online issue of the Archives of General Psychiatry. The authors noted that nearly 16 million Americans aged 12 and older have reportedly used ecstasy at some point in their life. As described by the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse, ecstasy (otherwise known by its chemical name, MDMA) is a psychoactive stimulant that is similar in structure to methamphetamine and mescaline. The drug increases serotonin levels in the brain, and users feel a sense of euphoria and emotional warmth. On the downside, the institute notes that the drug prompts a potentially problematic increase in both heart rate and blood pressure, and can lead to sleep disturbance and lingering feelings of confusion, depression and anxiety. On the other end of the spectrum, some researchers have pointed to the therapeutic potential for the controlled, clinical use of MDMA to help patients struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or dysfunctional social skills. Cowan's team focused on 24 women, including 14 who were described as MDMA users. The study was confined to women to avoid the complication of gender-specific serotonin level differences between men and women. The average age of the women was 22. Cowan noted that those who were MDMA users had taken ecstasy for a period of between three to four years, with the number of pills taken ranging from just five to roughly 375 overall. At the start of the study, all had abstained from ecstasy use for a minimum of 90 days, with the average length of abstinence hovering at the two-year mark. The team used positron emission tomography (PET) scans to assess levels of serotonin receptors in the participants' brains, noting that receptor levels are known to go up as serotonin levels go down. Those women who had a history of taking ecstasy had higher receptor levels than women who hadn't, suggesting a drop in serotonin levels among MDMA users. What's more, the team observed a dose-dependent impact: The more ecstasy a woman had taken in her lifetime, the higher her receptor levels. "We don't actually know what the implications are," acknowledged Cowan. "There is some evidence in prior research that a drop in serotonin leads to sleep apnea, depression, anxiety and memory loss. But in our work we didn't find evidence of mental health issues. No increased anxiety, impulsivity or depression. And the IQs of the women who took the drug were identical with those who had never taken it," he stated. "We also have no proof that a drop in serotonin levels would be forever," Cowan noted. "Animal studies have indicated that there could be as much as a seven-year duration in such dips. But we don't know. So, this work raises serious concerns and questions, but more research is needed." Michael Mithoefer, a clinical researcher in the field of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for PTSD, stressed "the importance of not jumping to conclusions." "You have to be careful with research like this," Mithoefer cautioned. "There have been some other similar studies suggesting the possibility of some long-term changes with ecstasy use. But the problem with retrospective studies based on self-report is that there are other factors at play that might not be accounted for. Did these people take other drugs at the same time? Was it really MDMA that they took? Exactly how much did they take? What really was the dose taken? That kind of thing can become very unclear when you're asking people to remember past behavior," he explained. "It's also the case that in clinical research conducted with a few different doses of pure MDMA we have no found evidence of these kinds of problems," noted Mithoefer. "I do, however, think it's important that people not think that MDMA is without risk," he added. "Especially with recreational use in an uncontrolled setting. Whether that will lead to mental health issues or not is unclear. But it is certainly something that bears further study."
A new study shows an association between long-term illegal Ecstasy use and long-term changes in brain chemistry. The researchers note, however, that they did not find any associated changes in mental health or cognitive functioning, nor do they know whether the chemical changes last forever. The study's implications are also limited for other reasons, as MDMA-assisted psychotherapy research Michael Mithoefer, M.D., points out in his response. The study fails to ask the crucial methodological questions addressed in a study published in February 2011 by Harvard University's John Halpern, M.D., which found no evidence of cognitive changes in long-term Ecstasy users. The HealthDay article appeared on Health.com, U.S. News and World Report, and other news sources.


text:
Restaurant Week Beef Pits Luke vs. Journal
Kevin L. Hoover
Eye Editor
HUMBOLDT – When hungry diners sit down to dinner this fall at the many local eateries participating in the second annual Humboldt County Restaurant Week (HCRW), they'll partake of fine food, tasty beverages and lively conversation.
Among the topics of discussion might be the bitter dispute between the culinary genius who initiated Humboldt County's version of the event and the enterprising publisher who promoted and expanded it with a comprehensive multimedia push.
Luke Patterson, founder of Luke's Joint on the Plaza and The Other Place on K Street, initiated Humboldt County Restaurant Week last year, formulating plans in July and August, he said, for the late-September/early October event. It promotes participating local restaurants of all kinds, from formal, "white tablecloth" dining facilities to food carts, all of which offer specially discounted meals to entice new customers to sample their fare.
Similar Restaurant Week promotions in other areas have helped stimulate restaurant business for years. New York's Restaurant Week is entering its third decade.
Patterson acknowledges that he didn't invent the concept. "By no means am I claiming that the idea of Restaurant Week is mine," he said.
But, he maintains, he did first initiate HCRW in Humboldt last year. He says that when he was first getting it off the ground last year, he mentioned it to someone on the North Coast Journal's staff. "Let's team up and do something," he says he suggested to the staffer. The response, he said, was "nothing, nothing, nothing."
Patterson says he mentioned HCRW again to the Journal, and again elicited no response.
Instead of a traditional advertising push involving print media, Patterson promoted the event via a "guerilla marketing" approach, which included the humboldtcountyrestaurantweek.com website, a Facebook page and flyers.
Arcata Main Street did send out a press release, which was published at no cost in the Arcata Eye and possibly other periodicals.
Patterson said the unconventional approach – charging nothing for restaurants to participate, then promoting it without advertising expenditures – was successful.
"We did so well last year, we don't need to advertise it," he said. "It will feed on last year's success."
So it was with some dismay that Patterson received a proposal from the North Coast Journal to be part of its advertising campaign for a slightly-renamed "Humboldt Restaurant Week," slated for October.
The Journal's ad proposal includes a full-page ad in its annual Menu of Menus publication, five weeks of ads in advance of the event in the Journal's print edition, a special pull-out section the week prior and a special website loaded with logos, links and other Humboldt Restaurant Week information.
The proposal would charge participating businesses $4,000 for what it claims is a $9,106 value.
Patterson was outraged. "They're hijacking my idea, using my intellectual property," he said. "They're taking my idea and selling it back to me to make money off it."
The Journal's approach doesn't just appropriate his concept, he said, it perverts it by turning Restaurant Week into a profit center for a newspaper rather than a cooperative effort among foodies.
"It looks like, to someone who doesn't know, that we have endorsed this incredible fee," Patterson said. "It makes us look exceptionally greedy."
He noted that his NCRW was endorsed by the City of Arcata with a City Council proclamation, and has partnered with other area businesses. Unwary readers could conflate the two different Restaurant Weeks and assume the City and HCRW partners are tied in with the Journal's effort.
"There's so many wrong things about this, depending on what ethical prism you want to look through," Patterson said. "It's a kaleidoscope of wrong."
He said he is planning legal action against the Journal, beginning with a cease-and-desist letter from his attorney. "It gives me no pleasure to do this," Patterson said. "I feel nauseous and physically ill. It's only come to this after at least six times declining their insistence to commandeer this idea and run with it for profit."
The Journal view
North Coast Journal publisher Judy Hodgson offers a vastly different perspective and sequence of events. She said she developed the idea separately from Patterson, if somewhat simultaneously.
In a letter to Patterson, Hodgson explained that she told her staff about her idea for Humboldt Restaurant Week in June of last year after attending the annual Association of Alternative Newsweeklies conference in Detroit.
She then approached Patterson, she said, but was rebuffed. "We gave him a proposal to help publicize it and he got all upset and said, 'no.'"
Hodgson extolled her business as uniquely able to magnify the Restaurant Week concept far beyond what it would otherwise be, benefitting restaurants throughout the county.
"We are a media company with the largest circulating newspaper in the county (48 percent market penetration rate)," Hodgson told Patterson in the letter. "In May we are launching a new state-of-the-art print+web+mobile website listing every restaurant with maps, photos, menus, and a food & drink blog."
Patterson's response, she said, has been inordinately hostile from the outset. When she heard of his Restaurant Week effort, "We went to him and said, 'This is great. We are planning our own generic Restaurant Week to launch in 2013. Can we partner?'" Hodgson said Patterson "blew up" and became "not just rude, but verbally abusive to me and my employees."
The opinionated Patterson is known as something of an enfant terrible among other local restaurant and business owners. He is regarded as brilliant and innovative, but also temperamental. More than one associate has fallen short of his stringent standards and felt the sting of a sharp retort.
"He's gone off on everyone," said another Arcata restaurant owner who asked to remain anonymous.
"He's a fabulous chef and a genius when it comes to food," Hodgson said. "We're a media company. We have a perfect right to do our own Restaurant Week if we want to. I don't think he speaks for all Arcata restaurants."
"What's it all about, anyway?" asked the local restaurateur. "Restaurants can advertise wherever they damn well please."


text:
(partial listing)
- Principal Investigator: Molecular Determinants of Virulence of Porcine Circovirus-2 (1 R21 AI53120 01A1). NIH, PHS, $250,000 direct costs, 2004-2008.
- Co-investigator: Assessment of performance and PCV2 load in naturally infected and immune stimulated pigs pre- and post- CIRCOVAC vaccination. John Harding, principal investigator, Department of Veterinary Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada. Merial SAS $264,700 direct, $5,000 to OSU, 2006-2007.
- Co-investigator: Assessment of viral load in PMWS clinical and subclinical pigs from PCV2-422 and PCV2-321 affected farms. John Harding, principal investigator. National Pork Production Council, $56,000 direct, $10,000 to OSU, 2006-2007.
- Co-investigator: Antimicrobial and Systemic Immunization for Bacterial Gastritis, SBIR, grant no. 1R43 A10600280-01, phase I, Amarillo Biosciences (Joe Cummins, principal investigator). 2005-6, $35,000 to OSU.
- Principal Investigator: A Clinical Trial to Assess Potentiation of PCV-2 Related Wasting Disease by Parenteral Vaccination of Young Gnotobiotic Swine with Commercial Swine Biologicals. Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc., Ames, IA, $23,700, 2005.
- Principal Investigator: A Clinical Trial to Assess Potentiation of PCV-2 Related Wasting Disease by Parenteral Vaccination of Young Gnotobiotic Swine with Commercial (Fort Dodge/Weyth) Swine Biologicals. Fort Dodge/Wyeth (Canada), 2004-5, $34,245.
- Principal Investigator: The X chromosome-linked Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Disease (XSCID) Defect in Beagle/Basset Dogs: Replacement of Canine T cell Function by Bone Marrow Engraftment with Human CD43+ Hematopoietic Stem Cells. The State of Ohio Canine Research Funds. $24,846, 2004-2005.