text:
There is just one change in the back line as Henry Trinder comes in for Mike Tindall in the midfield whereas the pack is where the majority of the changes take place.
Shaun Knight makes his first Premiership start at tight head and Hamilton forms a new second row partnership alongside Will James.
Meanwhile, fresh from an impressive performance in the Aviva Premiership A League on Monday evening, Andy Hazell returns at openside flanker while Tom Savage moves from the second row to the blindside flank.
Irish got off to a losing start last weekend as they finished on the wrong end of a 40-3 scoreline against Saracens at the London Double Header but Davies isn't reading too much into that performance.
"It's really about focusing on us. We've looked at London Irish and their game last weekend and they won't be taking too much out of it.
"They're definitely going to bounce back and be stronger because they're at home. They'll be disappointed with last weekend and we can't read too much into it.
"It's more really a case, and it always has been anyway, about us looking at ourselves and making sure we get our game right. If we do that, then we'll progress.
"It's been a difficult squad to select. We've got a lot of players who are performing at a similar level. It's very competitive. But that's great because they'll all drive each other on."
Gloucester Rugby:
Jonny May; Charlie Sharples, Henry Trinder, Billy Twelvetrees, James Simpson-Daniel; Freddie Burns, Dan Robson; Nick Wood, Darren Dawidiuk, Shaun Knight; Will James, Jim Hamilton (capt); Tom Savage, Andy Hazell, Ben Morgan
Huia Edmonds, Dan Murphy, Rupert Harden, Sione Kalamafoni, Akapusi Qera, Dave Lewis, Mike Tindall, Martyn Thomas


text:
Premier Foods Says First-Half Profit May Suffer on Cost Rises
Premier Foods Plc (PFD), the U.K.'s biggest food manufacturer, said first-half gross profit may suffer as the company seeks to negotiate price increases to make up for rising costs.
Percentage increases in raw materials costs are "in the low teens," the St. Albans, England-based company said in a statement on the Regulatory News Service. Also, grocery markets "got off to a slow start" this year, with first-quarter sales dropping 3.1 percent, the company said.
Global food prices are rising as demand for meat, edible oils and corn increases. Premier said that, while it was able to raise its prices to cover cost increases through the end of March, inflation "remains an issue."
"We continue to anticipate making progress in 2011, but due to the pricing lag and the slow start to the year, the profit delivery will be more weighted to the second half in 2011 than in 2010," the company said in the statement.
To contact the reporter on this story: David Altaner in London at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Colin Keatinge at firstname.lastname@example.com

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Wilson Hollow Core Tennis Strings 16G
Original Price:$12.95
To Find The Lowest Prices Click All Buttons Under Your Country Flag
Please Click All Links Above To Ensure You Find The Lowest Price!
Wilson are one of the most highly respected tennis equipment manufacturers around, and as the official racquet stringers of the US Open this clearly stretches into the field of string making. This expertise and innovation is demonstrated better than ever with the Wilson Hollow Core Pro. This string is the first synthetic gut string to include an air filled core. This innovation helps to increase the power potential of the strings, whilst also adding to the shock absorption, meaning that the strings can help to generate pace and power whilst retaining a forgiving feel. The Nylon filaments which surround the air filled core help to add excellent durability to the package. All of this makes the Wilson Hollow Core string a high performance string, which can help to add an extra dimension to your game.
Write Your Own Review
Other tennis stuff we recommend:
Wilson Stamina Tennis Strings Reel 16G
Wilson Ultimate Duo Tennis Strings 16G
Wilson Nxt Tennis Strings 17G
Wilson Enduro Pro Tennis Strings 16G


text:
What does SPPU mean in Spanish?
This page is about the meanings of the acronym/abbreviation/shorthand SPPU in the International field in general and in the Spanish terminology in particular.
Sindicato Profesional de Policía Unificado
Find a translation for SPPU in other languages:
Select another language:
Discuss this SPPU abbreviation with the community:
Use the citation below to add this abbreviation to your bibliography:
"SPPU." Abbreviations.com. STANDS4 LLC, 2018. Web. 22 Mar. 2018. <https://www.abbreviations.com/term/57155>.


text:
TUTTLE: I guess what we need to do is start out, is go ahead and stateyour name and where you're from and talk a little about your parents.
PRATHER: My parents?
TUTTLE: Yeah.
PRATHER: Well, I'm, uh, I'm Joe Prather, or officially Joseph WaynePrather, uh, I'm, uh, uh, until I was twelve years old, I, I lived in, um, on a farm in rural Hardin County. Um, and, um, moved to Elizabethtown, uh, after the sixth grade. Um, my, I was one of, uh, six children, three boys and three girls. Uh, my father, um, after he left the farm, um, worked for the, um, Olin Corporation at, uh, Brandenburg, Kentucky. And, uh, so, uh, they, uh, they had a, a 1:00facility up in Green County and he, uh, worked, uh, back and forth, uh, all along the pipeline that they had. And, uh, my mother was a homemaker. Um, and, uh, my father was a native of, uh, Meade County, Brandenburg, uh, Kentucky. Uh, and my mother was a Hardin County native. Um, she, um, grew up near Vine Grove, Kentucky, which, uh, is here in Hardin County. So, so I've been in this area all my life. Uh, I'm, uh, in the diverse community, uh, where I live, uh, I'm, uh, probably a small percentage, um, as far as being a fellow who's been here from, from the, the get-go.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And so, uh, but, you know, my parents were, um, were workingpeople. And, um, good people, but working people. So.
TUTTLE: So, like you said, before we started, you said, "It's Kentucky2:00on both sides, as far back as you can go." Um, did you, do you have any family anywhere else in the state, or anything like that?
PRATHER: Well, we, um, I think, I'm eleventh or twelfth generation--
TUTTLE: --wow--
PRATHER: --of the Prathers in this country. Um, we, we have the historythat goes back, and, um, so, in the, in the research that was done on the Prather family by, primarily by Jack Prather out of Georgetown, uh, who is a, uh, distant relative, he found that, uh, about all the Prathers who live in Kentucky are related in some way. So, uh, I have, uh, I have relatives in, um, in Jefferson County, uh, in, uh, um, I'm talking about distant relatives. Uh, in, um, Somerset, 3:00uh, a concentration of, uh, of the family is in, um, in the Somerset area. Um, we, uh, in Meade County, which is on the Ohio River, near Brandenburg, there's a real concentration of the, uh, of the Prather family there. But, uh, really scattered all over the state. But, uh, have, uh, but it goes back, uh, many, many years. Uh, back to the early days of Kentucky, as far as our family.
TUTTLE: Um, what, uh, tell me a little about school you, schools youwent to.
PRATHER: You know, that's, uh, that's an interesting question, becausemy first, uh, I'm, I'm the last generation, uh, in this area, that, who attended a one-room school, where there were at eight grades in one room. Um, I went to the Big Springs School, which was actually located in the, uh, of the corner of, uh, Breckinridge County. Uh, and we 4:00lived in Har-, in the edge of Hardin County on a farm. And had to walk through the tip of Meade County to get to the school. So, Big Springs is a community where there's a marker there where Hardin, Meade, and Breckinridge counties all come together. So, I, um, I attended school, um, for my first five years there. Um, then, um, we, in my sixth-grade year, which was the last year we lived on a farm, they, they built a new road back into, uh, the rural area where we lived, where we had really didn't have a, uh, a very good way of access prior to then. And so, suddenly they started, uh, sending a school bus then, so they took us down to a consolidated school in Hale Valley(??), which is the western part of Hardin County. Uh, so, suddenly I was in, uh, one 5:00grade in one-room, which was a new experience for me. Uh, after, um, after the sixth grade, we moved to, uh, Elizabethtown, as I mentioned earlier. Um, and I, uh, and I started to school here. Um, went to the public schools, seventh and eighth grade, and then my first three years of high school, to, uh, Elizabethtown Catholic High School, which was in existence at that time. Um, due to my father's work, he moved back to be closer to the Brandenburg where his employer primarily had its primary facility. And, uh, in my senior year of high school, I went to Vine Grove High School, which is now a part of the consolidated, uh, North Hardin High School, uh, in the north end of Hardin County, Radcliff. But, uh, I graduated from Vine Grove High School in 1957. 6:00Um, we, uh, after that, I took a job in Louisville during the day, attended some night classes at the University of Louisville, um, some business classes. Uh, but, uh, never, um, approached enough credits that I had a degree, or whatever. So, I have a few college credits. Uh, specific areas, such as accounting and economics. Uh, but, uh, that's the extent of my education. Um, when I was presiding over the Senate a lot of the times, uh, a lot of people wondered where I went to college. And were kinda amazed when I told them that I'm really a high school grad and the rest of it I just learned by doing.
TUTTLE: So, you think most people were surprised to find out?
PRATHER: Well, I think a lot of people really were. I think they've beenused to, uh, somebody who, I had a lot of people who, who would ask me 7:00where I went to law school. (Tuttle laughs) And were surprised to find that, you know, I was, I was in business. Uh, been in a business world all of my adult life and the time I was, uh, out of high school. And, uh, we, uh, had to wait until I was eighteen in order to be old enough to take a job, the, the job that I started with. And, uh, so I've been in the business world since then. But, uh, you know, it's, uh, it's interesting in, in the world today, I think people just assumed that you, uh, have a college degree. I think I ended up with, uh, eighteen or twenty credit hours and, uh, the rest of it, like I said, I, I was busy learning, uh, as I went, and, and it's worked well for me.
TUTTLE: Um, you said, you, you've been in business your whole adultlife. What, what kinds of businesses did you start out in, and then lead up to?
PRATHER: I, um, in 1965 was my first, uh, business that I actually8:00owned, an independent business. And, um, I, um, I started Prather Realty and Auction Company. Um, I'm a, I remain today, um, a, um, a licensed realtor, real estate broker, and, and an auctioneer. I had that company for, um, twenty-plus years. Um, and, in nineteen-, um, but in 1981, I headed a group that had the opportunity to buy a community bank, which was the Bank of North Hardin in Radcliff, Kentucky. And so, we entered the banking business. And, um, then a few years later, I, I left real estate, uh, active participation, in order to, to be a fulltime banker. Um, in 1985, we purchased what was the Farmers Deposit Bank, which is a community bank in Brandenburg, in Meade County. So, we had a holding company that owned two banks. 9:00Um, in 1993, we, um, sold, or did a stock exchange and sold those banks to, uh, Liberty National Bank out of Louisville, and, uh, which subsequently, uh, merged Bank One, which subsequently merged with, um, J.P. Morgan's. So, we've, uh, we've been, um, we've been investors in, uh, a number of those banks as a result of all those mergers. But, uh, after leaving the banking business in 1993, um, I was, um, was and remained in, even to the present, uh, uh, a, um, uh, a partial owner of a warehousing and distribution business in E-town Industrial Park. Um, I presently, uh, am a part of a company that, uh, develops, uh, 10:00commercial, uh, real estate, and, uh, we have eight or nine residential subdivisions going today, so. Uh, I attempted a couple of times to retire. I found that that just was not my thing.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And so, I, uh, I don't have anywhere I have to be at eighto'clock in the morning any longer. But, uh, but I still work hard. And that's by choice. And, uh, so, uh, it's, uh, it's worked well for me. My, uh, my uncle, who had a great influence on my life, always, who worked hard all of his life, always said, "You're better, you're better off to wear out than to rust out." (Tuttle laughs) So, I've always kept that in mind.
TUTTLE: That was one thing that stood out to me as I was trying to do abit research about you before I got up here. Um, it seemed like that you tried to retire multiple times from state government. It was like, 11:00I'm not, okay, now, I'm retired, and then this governor calls you back and the party calls you back and--(laughs)--and these things over and over and over. And I, I, I just keep thinking, This guy must be pretty hardworking.
PRATHER: Well, we, uh, we grew up, uh, being, uh, with a, with a strongwork ethic. Um, my mother, who was a, the probably the predominant influence on my life, was, uh, was a genuine person, who, who taught the real values of life to her children very well. And, uh, who, um, taught us the, the advantages and the desirability of having a strong work ethic. And, uh, so, I think she instilled all those qualities in, in, not only me, but my siblings. And, uh, so, I carried it through to today and I've tried to impart that onto, to my children. So, um, I, I believe that, uh, that that will always serve a person well. And, uh, 12:00but it has allowed to, to do a lot of things, uh, in life, and, um, um, that were exciting for me, and the area of business, uh, and in public service. But, uh, but also to enjoy them as I went.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: So, uh, it's, it's been a great ride.
TUTTLE: Um, how was it that you first came to a career in public service?
PRATHER: You know, uh, I, I'm not sure how all that came about, butas I look back, um, even as a youngster, and I'm talking about really young, I, I had an interest in, in, um, politics and government. Uh, I remember, um, I think I was eight years old, um, about to turn nine, 13:00um, when I first was interested in a presidential race. And we, we lived in a rural area where, um, you, you know, you're, the news you got was sketchy, but I remember the Truman/Dewey race. And, uh, and I, I loved Harry Truman. Um, I thought he was an amazing fellow, because he, you know, he was a fellow that pulled himself up by the bootstraps. And, uh, he, uh, he just was, just a true American at its best, I thought. And, uh, but at an early age, I was interested in that race. And, um, then I remember carrying that on to nineteen-, um, um, I guess, it was '56, when, um, Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected president, I remember, um, I remember listening on the radio, uh, every 14:00time I had the opportunity to, uh, it was fifty-, it'd be '52, because we were still on the farm, when, uh, he was first elected, I think. Um, and then again in '56, but in '52, the nominating conventions, uh, they, uh, the Democrats and, uh, Adlai Stevenson and he, when he was nominated to oppose, uh, Eisenhower and, uh, and President Eisenhower who was then General Eisenhower. He was, uh, uh, the nominating convention where Robert Taft and Harold Stassen and Earl Warren were, all them, all of them were, uh, nominated from the floor. And, uh, but Eisenhower ended up with enough delegates to be the nominee. And, uh, I paid close attention then. Uh, my grandfather, my, my father's father had been, uh, , uh, a county official in Meade County back in, 15:00he died the year before I was born, so I never did know him. But, uh, but my family always paid to, uh, who was in government. And, uh, uh, but it seemed as though it some, that was an interest that I, I guess was born with that, because from an early age I had that. And, uh, I remember after we moved to Elizabethtown, I remember sitting on the courthouse lawn in 1955, uh, when, uh, uh, Governor, uh, Happy Chandler was running for his second term as governor. And, uh, uh, the thing in those days was for the candidates to travel the state and to, uh, to speak at central points. And I remember down at the Hardin County courthouse, how he spoke in the circuit courtroom, but they had speakers set up all on the square. And, uh, and, uh, and I remember being outside and listening to those speeches. And so, I've always had 16:00that interest. But fast forwarding to where I real-, where I really came to be involved, in 1967, when I was twenty-seven years old, um, I was in the, already in the real estate and auction business in Vine Grove. And, uh, and there was an incumbent who, uh, was, um, um, I'm sure was a good man, but didn't seemed to work at the, at the, uh, at being state representative as hard as some other people did.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And, and, um, we, some of us had paid attention to that. And,and, um, there was some people who were interested in having, um, somebody, uh, make that race. And, uh, so anyway, through, through some discussions with people whose judgments I respected, I decided to, uh, I decided to make that race. And, um, I started back in, uh, 17:001966, uh, we charted the district; uh, we knocked on almost every door; um, we had a well laid-out plan. And, uh, so in May of '67, uh, I, I defeated the incumbent who, uh, and, um, was the Democratic nominee. And I had a, uh, a strong race in the fall, because that was the year that Louie Nunn was elected, uh, governor. And in November, he carried the dist-, the district, which was Twenty-Sixth District of Hardin County, uh, he carried that district by a big margin. So, I had to overcome that. But was able to do that, and get my margin, and go to the legislature, and, um, served my first term in '68. So, that's how I ended up in Frankfort. (laughs)
TUTTLE: Um, was the legislature different then from it is today, very18:00much, I mean, in, and it clearly it was a biannual and things like that, but?
PRATHER: It was, it was a great deal different in those days. We, um,when I first arrived, there was discussion going on when I arrived on the scene, um, prior to 1968, and in the interim between the '68 session and the '70 session, the only time committee functioned was during a session.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And there were like forty-plus committees. And I think, uh, Ialmost think that, uh, the committee structure was such that it allowed most everybody who had any seniority at all to be a committee chairman, and to, you know, tell the folks back home, "Well, I'm a committee chairman." And truth is the committees didn't meet. Uh, occasionally, the appropriations and revenue committee would meet and they'd say, 19:00"Well, the governor's budget is here; he wants it out in the next thirty minutes. So, so he can get it on the floor." And bam, it was gone. But we in the '68 session adopted new rules that, um, set up the, um, interim committee system. And I think that was in, in a small way, was the beginning of legislative independence, what would end up being a more independent legislature.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And at that point I had very little to do with that in 1968,but as years went on, as far as moving, uh, causing that movement to become stronger, then I was able to play a role in that, along with some other really, people who were, who thought that the legislature should be more independent than, than having received a list from 20:00downstairs in the governor's office about which bills would pass and which wouldn't pass. And, uh, so it evolved from that time to where we, um, um, were able to cause those committees to meet more in the interim and to actually then allow for pre-filed bills, looking forward to the next session. And, um, there were just, uh, numerous things that happened that, uh, that I, it would take me, uh, probably longer than I have today to, uh, to talk that, that lead to the legislature's, uh, independence. Um, then, um, in, um, I, after I moved from the House over to the Senate in 1976, I, I moved in '74, became president pro temp of the Senate, uh, which was, uh, the top elected position, 21:00but the lieutenant governor still was the ceremonial head of the Senate as, as presiding officer. So, anyway, the president pro temp then is what the president is today.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: Um, when we look at in 2006, but, uh, Speaker Bill Kenton andI, who was then the speaker of the House, newly elected, he and I, uh, talked about and made the decision to move forward with televising sessions of the General Assembly. And we sat down with Lynn ------- --(??), who was then, uh, heading up, uh, KET. And devised a way that we were able to start bringing and shedding the light of day more on the General Assembly than ever happened before. And I think that was really one of the real turning points in causing the legislature to become something that meant more to the average Kentuckian than, up to 22:00that time, it had been, you know, the governor was just all powerful.
TUTTLE: Yeah.
PRATHER: Now, again, we could, there's another chapter to that book--(laughs)--we could talk about how sometime I think, uh, that pendulum swings too far and toward, uh, the legislature wanting to be, prove their independence so much that, uh, they overact to something that the governor has going, but that's another story for another day. But, uh, yes, the legislature changed dramatically during my nineteen years there and even since I've, I've seen it change even more.
TUTTLE: How do you think that, um, that televising changed behaviorat all? Do you think it changed legislators' behavior on the floor if they knew that they were on television, a constituent might see them or something like that?
PRATHER: There is absolute no question and there was real resistance toimplementing that. It was not a slam-dunk when we did it. Uh, there 23:00were people who did not want to be televised. You know, they really kinda enjoyed the, the freedom of, um, of not being as accountable as, uh, as we thought that legislators should be. And, and there's little doubt that it changed, uh, it changed how the, uh, proceedings, uh, were conducted and individual, uh, it changed, uh, the individual actions on the floor. And, um, when I first was there as a, as almost a youngster, uh, I was twenty-seven when I elected; I was twenty-eight when I took office the first time. And in my, uh, session, um, the, it came the last night of the session. And, of course, the, at midnight, uh, you're supposed to have everything wrapped up. Well, somebody 24:00climbed a ladder and unplugged the clock at one minute to midnight. (laughs) And, uh, and by that time, um, you know a number of people had, uh, had, they had taken a break for dinner and, uh, a lot of them came back and, uh, you know, had, uh, been, uh, I guess in the bars and wherever. And, uh, they were feeling, feeling pretty good. (Tuttle laughs) And, uh, so, it was, it was, it was interesting sight. Well, and, but, you know, I don't want to give the impression that that's everything that went on because there were a lot of good solid people in the legislature at that time. But, but I found out that that had been just the norm up to that time.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: That, uh, it was, it was accepted, and, uh, it was acceptedbehavior, and it was an accepted way of, of doing business was stop the 25:00clock, and go onto three-, four-, five-, six o'clock in the morning, uh, if you had something that somebody still wanted to consider that hadn't been considered. But, uh, I think that opening the General Assembly up to the TV cameras probably changed the legislature as much or more than any one thing that I saw happen while I was there. Because it did, it did change, uh, the way people, uh, individual actions and collectively it caused the legislature to suddenly become more serious because, uh, they realized that accountability was coming into play more than ever before.
TUTTLE: Um-hm. Well, when you first came in, um, I'm sure you had anidea of how you thought government should work and what government 26:00should be doing. And I wonder if that's any different from today.
PRATHER: I think, I think I had an idea, but, but in reality, I, I reallydon't suppose that I, that I knew until I was actually a part of it.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And, uh, you know, I, I was always, I always grew up tothink that reasonable people could sit down and, and seek reasonable solutions in, in normal ways and, uh, and that you could come away with a consensus. Well, I found that it was not that easy. And that, when you find, uh, particularly where I started in the House you find a hundred different people who are there from one hundred different areas. Um, they have, um, and you find that, uh, some of 27:00those, um, were interested in looking, uh, um, at the state in total, but you had a significant number who were only interested in how something was going to affect them and the small district that they represented. And, uh, I, I think the frustrations that I found that I didn't envision was that you, you had trouble particularly in the earlier days getting someone to look beyond their district lines, and to consider what was good for, and the politics of it, and, um, and I found, uh, I found people there who were, who were always, uh, hearing those footsteps behind them, uh, because if you had to make those tough votes, uh, uh, the main consideration was, uh, you know, how, uh, what's it gonna do to my chances of being reelected. But I think 28:00as time went on, after, uh, after the interim committee system was put into effect and after there was more time to consider issues in the interim, which cause, uh, more groups, uh, who were, had, uh, various interests, uh, from around the state to become a part of the system, because they'd be called to, um, they'd be called to come in and, and give information and testimony before the committees. And then when it was opened up, uh, through KET, all of that had a way of, of breaking down that old system of just wanting to have a limited vision and kinda forced, uh, the hand of, uh, people, uh, who were reluctant to become more apart of considering what was good for all of Kentucky. And so, you still have some of the former, but I think that we've made great 29:00strides toward, uh, causing issues to be considered in a way that, uh, beyond just being, um, some parochial decision.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: So, um. But I, it, it'd always been my hope that we couldget to the point where, um, where that would be the case. Um, if there's one disappointment I have seen in recent years, and some of that occurred, uh, while I was still there, but it seems to be more pronounced, uh, uh, today is that, uh, it seems that so much that goes on today is adversarial in nature as far as the consideration and it's the scorched earth policy, prevail at all cost. And, um, I know that, uh, I was fortunate during my years in the legislature in that regardless of what party you were, there was a recognition that 30:00you did re-, all, everybody represented the same number of people and there were certain considerations that you were due because you were an elected representative. And while we were all aware of parties, it was not so partisan.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And I think that in that way, it seems to me that we havedigressed in the last, uh, twenty years, uh, in that it's, it's more partisan and more adversarial than I've ever seen it. And, uh, that is not a source of pride for me as I speak today.
TUTTLE: Hm. What do you think brought that adversarial tone?
PRATHER: Oh, I think it, um, I think that it goes back to the way thatpolitical races are run, and it carries over. Um, and it's jockeying 31:00and, and then during, uh, the time in the General Assembly, it's, it's jockeying to, to, uh, set up either individuals or backers of, uh, some candidate for governor, or whatever, to pose themselves to have the advantage once the next race starts. Uh, I think it gets back to, uh, the, what probably started, um, in earnest in Kentucky, uh, , uh, along about, oh, nineteen seventy-, well, it would've been early eighties, I guess, which goes, which is back again in the last roughly twenty years, where the, the first, uh, race that I saw in Kentucky where suddenly it was more of a no-holds-bar, was probably the 32:00McConnell/Huddleston, uh, U.S. Senate race in, uh, that would've been '83, I guess, early eighties, anyway.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: When Senator Huddleston, uh, lost the U.S. Senate to MitchMcConnell, that was the first race. And, and, uh, but I think it had come because suddenly there's a lot more money raised to finance campaigns. And, uh, and, uh, it has been proven over however many years that you can win with thirty-seconds spot, if you can raise the money to do that. And, and, uh, you can, uh, say about what you want to say and it's difficult for somebody to rebut that, but the more, the more, um, the attempt is made to rebut, uh, those accusations, if you will, charges, uh, uh, some of it misinformation, uh, then the more, uh, the battle's on. And, uh, and I think that mood then carries over 33:00after people are elected, because it's suddenly it becomes an accepted norm as far as behavior. And, uh, it's, um, so, I really think it goes back to the ex-, expensive campaigns and, uh, uh, media wars and races. And so, it's just the prelude, prelude to the next political race, is what, I think that's the reason you see the mean spirit in this that you see, uh, in the halls of the legislature, and the halls of Congress, and, and the whole bit.
TUTTLE: Sort of the same way that people say about the Bushadministration that, that they don't govern so well, that they can campaign like nobody's business.
PRATHER: Somebody who can, uh, somebody who can make, uh, John McCainout in South Carolina, in that contest there, to be unpatriotic, uh, anything can be done with enough money, uh, uh, I'm convinced. And 34:00so, uh, how that could happen, uh, with, uh, with a guy who, uh, is a proven, genuine war hero is beyond me, but it was carried out with success. And, uh, so I, I've quit being amazed at anything since I saw that. (both laugh)
TUTTLE: Well, I guess, next question would be, uh, what stands out asthe biggest issues that you had to, grapple with while you were in the legislature?
PRATHER: Well, I think, um, you know, there were a lot of issues that,uh, we had all the hot button issues that you have today. You know, those social issues, uh, emotional issues that we dealt with that, uh, still you hear about constantly in campaigns today. And, uh, you know, you hear about, uh, you hear about, uh, the, uh, guns, and guns and God. 35:00And, uh, now they've added, I think, uh, the three Gs, uh, gays have been added. But that was not the issue in my day. When I say God I'm talking, uh, I'm talking about abortion, I'm talking about gun control, I'm talking about the death penalty; all of those issues we dealt with.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: But probably the biggest challenge that we had starting, uh,uh, early in my career, and lasting the whole way through, and we made, we made great strides and then, uh, and that was in the area of education. And since that time there've been even greater strides made since I left the Senate. But, um, we, we are able to make steady 36:00success in causing education to be put on the front burner and not being something that was viewed almost as, uh, a nuisance to be dealt with by the legislature, and suddenly to become, uh, an issue that, that deserved the attention of all good-thinking Kentuckians, and realizing that if we were ever going to be all we could be as a state that we had to elevate our young people. And that we had to from, um, from preschool all the way up to, uh, the, uh, uh, doctorate level. And that we had to cause people to value education and that we had to have the system in place that allowed them to be able to stay in Kentucky and get that education. And in a way that we didn't allow the brain drain that occurs with young people who, uh, who were motivated but, 37:00uh, in years past that had to leave Kentucky to find, uh, what, uh, find what they were seeking. That's one of the biggest problems that Kentucky face for years and years and years, was, uh, was the, the most valuable asset we had, which was our young people, were having to flee the state in order to have the opportunities. And we still have some of that. But it isn't nearly as pronounced as it was, uh, going back, uh, almost forty years now since I first went into the legislature. So, then in 1987, uh, the session after I left the legislature, you had some people that I had served with and a lot of people that I have, had a great deal of respect for, and still have a great deal of respect today, who made those tough calls, and, uh, and KERA was a result. And, uh, and then you, to give, uh, with all the problems of, of other 38:00governors and you look past that and you go to Governor Patton, who was really put the emphasis on higher education, made tough decisions.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: Probably politically unpopular. And, uh, but all apart ofcausing Kentucky to be able to poise itself to be something more than it had ever been. So, that was the biggest challenge I saw. Budget is always the biggest thing you face. (Tuttle laughs) And, uh, but, you know, you have to get beyond that, letting everybody just protect their turf and get basically a continuation budget. Something has to catapult you into the new age.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And I think we were able to make steady progress and I thinkthat the crowning jewel in that, uh, in, in that crown was, uh, that '87, and, uh, you know, I've often, as I look back, uh, maybe regretted 39:00that I didn't stay one more session. So, I had the opportunity to, or more term, because I chose to retire and, uh, and didn't run again in '86 and, uh, and as I look back, uh, if I had served one more term and had been able to be a part of that, uh, it would've exciting for me. But I'm excited it happened.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And, uh, we've made great progress and that was the biggestissue I think that I faced as a legislator. And I'm not formally, uh, highly educated myself. But I've never, uh, I've, once I started serving in office and gaining perspective, I've realized that education was, that's the name of the game, if you, if you want to, if you want to move forward.
TUTTLE: So, you think, um, you were in favor of all the, um, theunconstitutional case and all the KERA reforms then? You thought that, 40:00you were happy to see that happened?
PRATHER: I was happy to see, I was happy to see KERA come. I was happyto see it come. And I was, I've been happy to see the emphas-, uh, the emphasis on higher education, because, you know, it's easy, it's easy to, and I know years ago, that the emphasis seemed to be on just, uh, elementary and, uh, uh, secondary education. I mean, it was, um, everybody that, um, I won't see everybody, but a, a lot of people thought, Well, you know, if you, if you can graduate high school, you can make it.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: Well, you can make it, but you, uh, higher ed was kinda alwayson the backburner. And so, and you had the, you had the address, uh, elementary and secondary first, and then, uh, I was glad to see in later years that the legislature and the governor moved onto higher education and did what needed to be done there.
TUTTLE: What did, um, what did you think about the, all that community41:00college business? I know that it wasn't too popular outside of Lexington and Frankfort, in a lot places, but, um, what are your thoughts and experiences of that?
PRATHER: Well, I have been a longtime proponent of the community collegesystem being an independent system. And I think that the crux of the problem when it, and it was a political problem--
TUTTLE: --um-hm--
PRATHER: --that came in causing that to happen was that you had, youhad a structure in place. Uh, however many community colleges we had and that number escapes me today, but a number of them out across the state, and I think that, I think that the faculty of those colleges 42:00and I think some of the, uh, leadership and some of the communities and people who served on community college boards probably liked the idea of being considered, uh, a part of the University of Kentucky. It was a pride thing. But the truth was that the community colleges did not seem to get the emphasis that many of us thought that they deserved from the University of Kentucky because the, it got back to dollars and the emphasis seemed to be on the University of Kentucky Lexington campus.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And I remember years ago how difficult it was when we, when Iwas there that we decided to make the community college appropriation 43:00a line item in the budget. It had just been a part of U.K.'s general budget and U.K. decided how much to allot to the community college system. And it was, uh, there was real resistance from the hierarchy at University of Kentucky in making, in even making it a line item in the budget. So, the community colleges would get this much money. Now, you decide how to allocate it among the community colleges but it was actually then a line item where you defined exactly what the colleges would be receiving. So, that's, um, uh, but the movement and the, that's one of the things I was referring to in higher education reform, uh, when Governor Patton made the stand he did, and when there was absolute resistance, and when Chuck Wethington basically staked, 44:00staked his, uh, presidency on stopping that, and challenged, a direct challenge to the governor, which was unheard of.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: For a, uh, a university president. And, you know, he, herolled the dice and he lost. And, uh, now, have there've been some, have there've been some growing pains with the, uh, with the community college system and, uh, particularly now since, uh, there's been a subsequent, uh, movement that has merged then with technical colleges, sure. There have been. There're some here in my own community of Elizabethtown. But it's the right thing to do. And there's more emphasis now on, on community colleges than I think has even been and they're out there where people can look at them and they have to stand on their own and they have to succeed on their own, where before they 45:00were comfortably tucked into, under the U.K. umbrella and, uh, it has hard to get a yardstick that would measure them.
TUTTLE: Hm. Um, you talked a little bit about, well, you mentioned theuniversity, um, what sort of weight did the University of Kentucky have in the legislature when you first got there?
PRATHER: It was like a big four hundred pound gorilla. (both laugh)And, um, it was, it was obviously, and still is today, the dominant, uh, institution of higher learning in the state. But I think the battle over the community colleges got more back to maintaining those tentacles into every community.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And the community colleges allowed U.K. to be politicallystrong, because they had, uh, because they have that presence in all these communities, and Glasgow, and E-town, and Madisonville, and Hopkinsville, and wherever else, Paducah, I mean, all across the state. 46:00And, uh, I think that was the reason that, uh, President Wethington decided to, uh, to make the stand that he did. But traditionally, uh, University of Kentucky had a great amount of clout in the General Assembly. And through higher education reform, where you have, you had a more clearly defined mission for all the various universities, I think you find today that even though U.K. is still very strong, that they do not dominate as they did a few years ago.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And so, and you have a defined mission for U.K., and suddenlyyou have a, you, you have a realistic opportunity and a possibility--
[Pause in recording.]
PRATHER: --who can, in certain areas of research, through the Bucks for47:00Brains program and all that, that it has a defined mission and that it can be as a metro-university that it can excel in a way that, and, and everybody understands that. And, and there are certain defined roles for the regional colleges. And, uh, I just think that that's so much preferable. But it took the, it took somewhat diminishing the political clout of the University of Kentucky to do that, and in order to, I don't think that anybody said, "Well, now, we're gonna set out to diminish U.K.'s influence," but it just makes sense that if you have one institution that's all powerful, that others are gonna suffer somewhat. And, but in order to accomplish every bit of that, uh, there was a two-fold effect with the, uh, community colleges being spun-off, if you will: one is that they were allowed to have a vision of their 48:00own and flourish, and, and the other is, that it, it, that was the mechanism by which, uh, that power of higher education was somewhat distributed more evenly rather than being so concentrated at U.K.
TUTTLE: Um, you mentioned Dr. Wethington and his contentiousrelationship with the governor. Um, and I know that Dr. Singletary and Jack Blanton had a sort of close relationship with Frankfort, can you talk a little about the university administration dealing with the General Assembly?
PRATHER: Well, I think that, you know, every president, uh, everypresident at U.K. I think had a different way of, of dealing with Frankfort. Uh, you know, it's, it's a management style. And, um, I think, um, President Singletary was a, was a person who probably, 49:00he was, he was a generalist when he was dealing with Frankfort, and he probably dealt in a, in a different way, in that, uh, he was not a person who could, uh, pound his, uh, fists on the desk, and, and demand that, "Thus and so, be done." Um, I do think that he would try, uh, to rally those people who were connected all over the state. He did that effectively, he was able to rally those people to influence individual legislators in order to accomplish whatever. But, but he was, he was a more of a generalist, I think. Um, than, um, and I know, uh, Jack Blanton, uh, had, uh, a lot of alliances with people in state government in key spots. Uh, during that time had, uh, he had relationships with legislators that on a very personal basis, they were 50:00able to make case. Um, and then when, I, uh, when Chuck Wethington moved, he had been the chancellor of the community college system, I know, and I, I worked very closely with him, because I had a, uh, an abiding interest in community colleges since we had one here. And, and since I realized that community colleges have always been the biggest bang for, for the buck that we have in Kentucky. And, uh, and I recognized that. So, I worked with Dr. Wethington very closely, and during, uh, many years, uh, because of that belief that I had. But Chuck Wethington was a fellow who was, uh, he, he came up through the, through the trenches. And he came, he, he started at the bottom and worked his way up. He wasn't brought in as president from, uh, from, uh, out of state, like Singletary was. I mean, he was a guy who worked 51:00his way up. He knew the players. He, uh, he was, uh, and I don't mean this in a bad sense, he was street-smart.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And, uh, he just had a different style. And, uh, but he, hecould, uh, he could be demanding and, and, uh, a little more combative than, uh. So, you had people who either worked well with him or you had people that, um, would just soon not work with him. And so, it was a two-head sword.
TUTTLE: Um, what sort of presence did the athletics administration havewith the General Assembly?
PRATHER: Well, there again, uh, you know--(laughs)--primarily U.K.basketball was, was a big tool for the administration. I mean, you know, all legislators received tickets to U.K. ballgames. There were, uh, receptions, there were, and, and a lot of it surrounded, uh, U.K. athletics. I think you found, though, that in recent years 52:00and, and I've been a University of Kentucky athletic fan all my life, I grew up, uh, down in the country, from the first time that, uh, I ever, uh, heard of, uh, turn the radio on. You know, I remember, uh, the U.K. ballplayers going way back, when, when I was a little child. And, and even people that have never been Lexington, they were big U.K., uh, sports fans. And, and so, that carried forward, uh, to where predominantly you found most legislators were, uh, U.K. fans and, you know, some I supposed paid, uh, attention to football, but it was primarily basketball, because that's what every little community in Kentucky had, going back years and years. And so, it, uh, again it, it was just a part of the power that U.K. was able to accumulate through things like the community colleges, and, uh, and they used 53:00that athletic program very effectively, and played to the pride that, uh, that legislators had in that program, in order to carry over into whatever else they had an interest in. So, oh, it had a, it had a big, uh, uh, it had a big influence on, uh, probably far beyond what athletics should have frankly. But, but it did. That was just a part of the overall, uh, arsenal, uh, that U.K. brought to the battle.
TUTTLE: What sort of arsenal do you think they have now compared to whatthey did?
PRATHER: Well, I think they still have a great number of people, um,um, out across the state who, uh, who are very pro-U.K. You have that here. Uh, but I, I do believe that it has advanced from, uh, being able to persuade based on individual issues that pertained to 54:00just certain interests that individual legislators have, to a more broad sense they have to sell the university because of its ability to excel, its ability to carry out the mission that has been laid out for it, and, um, and its vision for the future. I just think that, I think they have to come armed with information more than just, uh, raw influence today.
TUTTLE: Um-hm. Um, to jump back a little bit, you were talking about,uh, in the early days, uh, you'd get basically a, a, a read, of, of being told by somebody else, I don't remember, "Here, it is," you'd get a binder basically from the governor, saying, you know, "You should vote this way on this." When did that start to change a little bit? 55:00
PRATHER: That started to change, um, well, each individual legislatordidn't get a binder. But one came up to leadership.
TUTTLE: Okay.
PRATHER: And leadership then would had the ability to put togethera majority of the members for any one vote that they wanted. And leadership had the ability through the rules committee, which is the committee that, uh, has, uh, totally authority over what bills are going to be posted for passage. They had the ability to not post a bill for consideration. Um, through the committee on committees, which is, again, made up of leadership, um, which assigns the bills to various committees; they had the ability to assign, uh, a bill to a committee that would give it, uh, a thumbs-up, or to assign it to a 56:00committee where it was a black hole.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And so, the governor exerted enough influence on leadershipelections that usually governors were able to have a leadership that was loyal to, to, to whoever was governor, and then they got the word on what bills should go, and which should not go, and they had all those ways of dealing with that. So, it, uh, you could got to a friendly committee or an unfriendly committee with a bill. I was trying to think, I became a, I came to the Senate in '74; I was elected president pro temp just prior to the '76 session. And the election in, the election that brought a lot of new members happened right at that 57:00same time.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And you saw the, and that was during Julian Carroll'sadministration. And I don't know that it had a great deal with do with, with Governor Carroll; I think that it was just the time that you had a great number of independent people who were elected to the General Assembly. And as a result of that election, you had some people, you had a few people that had been there all along who were independent-minded, and then you had people who were elected, like Lowell Hughes and John Berry, and, uh, and some of those people. You already had Mike Moloney there. And, uh, you know, Joe Wright from Breckinridge County. And, uh, uh, there were others. But, uh, as a result in the, in the mid-seventies, uh, you had, uh, what become, 58:00uh, affectionately known as the Black Sheep Squadron. And during the '78 session, you saw that that movement started to take hold, and it was in the Senate where it started. And the, they joined together and they didn't have a majority but they had enough numbers that they, they had demanded to be heard and they had to be heard. And, uh, and they were bright fellows. And, uh, all of that really came, uh, to a head in the, you can call it famous or infamous, special session that, uh, that Thelma Stovall called when, uh, Governor Carroll was out of town, uh, in, I guess that was early '79, as I recall. And but by that time, 59:00I had been working with, uh, some of those fellows on some ideas that would allow more independence and allow them to be heard. And, and during that, uh, during the, uh, '79 special session and during '78, uh, the regular session in '79, I was, even though I was president pro temp, and a part of leadership, I really made some decisions and was a part of some decisions that allowed the Senate to become even more open during that time. And in the '79 session, I joined with them on a critical vote that, that allowed the Senate to hear the deliberations on the tax issues and the budget amendments, uh, as a committee of the 60:00whole, where that did not go to a committee where it could be bottled up, or, uh, changed, waylaid, whatever word you want to put. So, it, it was on the floor; it was a, the Senate was a committee of the whole. So, in the Senate chamber is where all the committee work was done on, on that, the bill that was presented during that time. And, uh, so I think that, uh, it was during Governor Carroll's term. But it, again, wasn't anything maybe in particular that he did; he had been, he was doing whatever governor before had been doing. And he was making the effort to dominate the legislature, but you just had people who, uh, suddenly enough people came together who said, "You know, it's time we did it differently."
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And that's when the horse got out of the barn. And then when,61:00uh, then after Governor Carroll, John Y. Brown came into office, and he could care less. (Tuttle laughs) He didn't want to dominate anybody. And so, I mean, the, the horse was running around the track full speed by that time. (both laugh) And so, during Brown's administration the legislature moved into a different era full speed, and it's never, it's, it's never gone back. Sometime, I, as I mentioned earlier, it think, uh, almost, uh, the pendulum almost swings too far sometime, and that, uh, you know, the, the governor is not, on some issues, is not given enough consideration.
TUTTLE: Um-hm. Um, what was it that pushed you to, uh, to go along withthese guys?
PRATHER: Well, I had become increasingly, uh, I had to come really, arealization increasingly that, uh, that one man, regardless of who he 62:00was, couldn't be right all the time.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And that people were elected to do a job, and that you havepeople who elect, were elected from, and, you know, the best government is local government, and you had people in Senate districts or House districts who were elected by the local people who had come together, and that they had right to be heard, and had a right to not have, uh, their, uh, everything they were interested in just derailed by, because you had a, a governor who may or may not have, uh, the right vision and, uh, the right reasons for wanting to maintain control. And that there needed to be a balance. And, um, it, uh, and I don't want to sound as though I was the only, I was not; there were a number of people who had 63:00an interest and had an increasingly had an interest in seeing something happened. But it was, it was just during that time that it appeared that we had reasonable chance of success. I took a lot of criticism from some of the people I had worked closely with who, uh, some called it disloyal to the governor. I didn't view it that way. You know, I think that every man has a right to think for himself. And, uh, but I think generally I think it was accepted, uh, in an okay way. And there were, there were some others that, uh, had been there awhile who were just like I was, who joined that effort, and I can't sit here and name them. Um, but, uh, it took, uh, it took several of us to, to join with the newcomers to, to make a majority. But we made some critical votes in the '78 session and in the '79 special session that, that I think, uh, caused, uh, the legislative page to not be, uh, able to be turned 64:00back. Um, and, um, I think it, uh, has had a significant impact, uh, on just how open government is today.
TUTTLE: How do you think the LRC played into this? I mean, like, how didthey help you all out with trying to open up the General Assembly?
PRATHER: Well, of course, I think it, I think that when you, the LRC,um, of course, obviously was the leadership, uh, dominated the LRC. But you had, you had, uh, the majority, the vast majority of the staff of the Legislative Research Commission. But they don't have a political agenda; they're there to prepare information, they're there, and, and probably, I've always thought that probably the, the biggest part of 65:00the LRC staff, uh, in their minds, felt that, uh, that openness and more involvement on behalf of all members was probably a good thing.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: But, uh, they didn't involve themselves in espousing, uh,a position on that. But I, I remember that they were always very responsive to all members who, uh, sought to be armed with information when you had deliberations going on. And, of course, I was in a unique position because I was, uh, I was in the, uh, uh, president pro temp's office and co-chairman of the LRC, and I was able to cause, uh, a great deal to be done in that regard. Um, so, you know, I don't recall the LRC being, uh, playing a, a role in trying to move that forward, other than that they, they were excellent in the information they provided, 66:00and, you know, if you're ever going to do anything like that, you have to come armed with knowledge, and you'd have to be, you have to have real basis for what you're trying to sell. Um, and otherwise, you know, you're not gonna succeed. So, LRC has come a long way from the days when I first went there, when it was a place to hire the buddies of, uh, of, a lot of, a lot of governors and leadership, to the point where, by that time, we had an extremely, extremely professional staff in place, which, which was very helpful to the, to the new breed of legislator.
TUTTLE: Um, there's been talk about, about a mountain caucus and aLouisville caucus existing in the General Assembly, mostly in the House, I guess. But, um, do you see any truth in, in those sort of labels?
PRATHER: I think it's counterproductive. Um, I don't, um, I'm a great67:00one to think that you represent a district and an area but you also represent all the people of Kentucky. And to set up these artificial lines and say, "We're just going to be proponents of something that's on this side of a line," counterproductive to the greatest degree I could express in my mind. They've tried a western Kentucky caucus. Well, you define for me what western Kentucky is. Some, to some people it's the Purchase.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: To other people it stops at Madisonville. And to otherseverything ea-, uh, west of Lexington, or west of I-65. You know, it's, um, an east Kentucky caucus, you know, what is east Kentucky? Everything east of Lexington, and, um, going down to Somerset, uh, I don't know what that is.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.68:00
PRATHER: And, and a Louisville caucus, you know, all, I think all that'skinda counterproductive. And, uh, um, I don't believe it's worked very well.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And, um, I think you've thankfully have had enough people,uh, serving who lived in those regions who wouldn't just blindly be bound by some decision made by a few people who, who's bond was they happened to live in a, in a region. Uh, you've had enough people who had a broader vision that, uh, that I think that it just, um, it hasn't worked very well, nor should it.
TUTTLE: Um, let's see here. (pause) Do you have any mentors in yourpublic service career? Anybody you looked up to or anybody that sort of showed you around Frankfort or showed you around the Assembly? 69:00
PRATHER: Well, you know, when I first went to Frankfort, I was, I wasa, I was a part of, in my first session, um, I was a part of electing, uh, Julian Carroll, speaker of the House. And, um, I, um, and, and that was a, um. And Julian, at that time, represented a new breed of folk in, in the, in the House of Representatives. And, um, it was, uh, suddenly, you had a Republican governor on the first floor, and you had, um, um. So in, as far as electing leadership, the General Assembly for the first time in no telling how many years was able to basically elect its own leadership. And, um, so, it, um, Julian Carroll was elected, 70:00uh, over the existing, um, speaker, who was Shelby McCallum, out of, um, one of the western Kentucky counties. And, um, so, I was a part of that youth movement, so to speak, uh. And it, um, we had some great years, and I was affiliated with, with Julian, and, and Terry McBrayer, who was a floor leader in the House. And, um, they, uh, um, and we were able to, uh, during that time, I was, I was able to learn very rapidly to where the, my second, uh, my second session in the House of Representatives I was elected majority whip. So, starting in, I went in '68, and starting in '70, uh, I was the, uh, majority whip in the House of Representatives. So, I moved along pretty quickly with 71:00the, uh, um, um, being, uh, teamed up with Julian Carroll. I moved on across to the Senate. And frankly benefited from the system. I moved to the, when Dee Huddleston was elected, uh, United States senator in '72, then in '73, I made my first, uh, race for the Senate, and, um, managed to win that, and went to the Senate in '74. Um, and, and just prior to the '76 session was elected president pro temp of the Senate. And, um, but with, uh, with the help of, uh, again of, uh, of Governor Carroll, then Governor Carroll. So, you know, I can understand why some people would think that when I decided that maybe it was time to, I be a part of saying, "The governor shouldn't dominate as much as he had in the past," that, uh, that maybe that was disloyal. But it, uh, 72:00but to me, it was being more of a think-for-yourself fellow than it was being disloyal. You know, you can gauge that with any yardstick. But, uh, but Julian and I were probab-, and he had been there a few years. And, and we were very close, when, when, uh, I first went to the legislature. And so, it helped moved me along, uh, fairly quickly.
TUTTLE: Um, did your relationship change at all when, uh, the specialsession and the Black Sheep Squadron and all that started happening?
PRATHER: Well, I think, to say it didn't change at all would, would notbe, uh, being candid. I think it, I think it did change somewhat. Uh, we did not become enemies nor have we ever been. In fact, I saw him not long ago, and, you know, we're still on good terms. Um, and, um, 73:00you know, but the, but it was a matter of, uh, it was a matter of who should've been upset with some of the things were happening during the Carroll administration. You know, there were, there were some things that, uh, happened during the Carroll administration that I didn't like that Julian was involved in. And I, I was, um, I was very, um, candid with him about that at the time. So, but we didn't, we never, uh, we always stayed friends even though we had a number of disagreements. And, uh, some of them had to do with, uh, with what I did; some of them had to do with things he did. And, uh, then I made the lieutenant governor's race in, uh, 1979, and, uh, leading up to that race, uh, Julian, uh, they were trying to, making the effort to slate Terry 74:00McBrayer at that point, with, uh, with a, um, a candidate for, for lieutenant governor. And Julian, uh, called me over to the mansion one day, and said, uh, "Joe, you can't make that race, because you don't, uh, you already affiliated with us, and you don't bring anything to Terry." And I said, "Well, I'm not looking to bring anything to Terry; I'm just interested in being lieutenant governor. And, uh, so, you know, you figure out what you need to do, and I'm gonna do what I need to do."
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And so, I made the race. And, uh, and, you know, I didn'twin, but I ran a solid race. And, um, and, and was leading in the polls until an hour and a half before the filing deadline. Uh, the, an arrangement was made that put, uh, Todd Hollenbach in the race that, uh, just really wiped out my numbers in Louisville, Jefferson County.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And so, we, uh, we still were within a few thousand votes in75:00a very close race. But, uh, Martha Layne Collins won that race. And, um, I think the design was the Bill Cox would be lieutenant governor, which, uh, he was ally of Julian's. And, um, but it worked out that Martha Layne was lieutenant governor. Um, and then the next year I was her state chairman in the, in the governor's race. Uh, so, politics takes interesting turns.
TUTTLE: (laughs) You've been in, involved in, in a lot of campaigns.Um, like said, you ran for lieutenant governor, ran for governor for a little bit, um.
PRATHER: For a short time, yeah. Until I realized that, that I couldn'tcompete in the dollar derby.
TUTTLE: Um, what, what is the campaign, what did you miss aboutcampaigns, and what, what, what did you, what did you most enjoy about campaigns, I guess?
PRATHER: Well, I, um, I guess I enjoyed campaigns because, uh, you know,76:00I'm a people person. Um, I've always been a fellow that, uh, whether I was structuring a business deal, or, um, being a part of running a campaign, uh, uh, I always liked take the, the parts and be able to put the puzzle together. Um, it's, um, you know, I came back, um, that's what brought me back, uh, to be the state chairman for Brereton Jones when he ran for governor in 1991. Um, I was, um, I was very much in, by that time entrenched back in the business world. And, and a happy camper. And, um, then I had, uh, had some people approach me about that idea, and then later Brereton called me, and, uh, there's a certain excitement about, about a race. And, um, you know, as I 77:00sit here today, uh, um, I have zero interest in ever being in another race myself. But, but I still, uh, I still have not lost my love, um, for the give and take that takes place in the public arena and in the political arena. And, uh, we, um, so, and I have really no abiding interest in, uh, being a part of ad-, administrations. If I do, I want to be very flexible. Uh, and, uh, so, you know, I told, uh, I know during Brereton Jones's administration, I told him, "If there's someplace I could be helpful, I'm willing to give you a year."
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And so, he came back, and said, "I'd like for you to be financesecretary," and I, so I went and gave him my year. And, uh, then I 78:00moved over, as a dollar-a-year man, for, um, a couple of years, uh, over in the governor's office, just, uh, meeting and talking about issues and that kind of thing, which, you know, that's the kind of, uh, politics I like to be involved in today.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: I like to talk about issues, uh, I like to meet people. And,uh, I, um, I probably, if there's one thing I miss about being in the legislature, it would be dealing with issues, the give and take on the floor. But I don't miss what you have to do to be elected. I don't miss, uh, what you have to do to get, uh, somebody's road built, or their, uh, brother a job. Or, uh, that part I don't miss, even though I love helping people still. But, uh, um, so, do I miss it? Yes. Uh, do I dwell on that? No. Uh, I try to live life to its fullest. Uh, 79:00and I'm able to do that, uh, presently, in a lot of different ways. Um, we, uh, I still, uh, I was involved without title, uh, in Ben Chandler's race for governor as an advisor. Realized that, uh, after thirty-two years of the Democrats, that that was an uphill battle from the beginning. And, um, so, um, but, uh, that pendulum swings, swings fast sometimes. And so, you know, I'm sure I'll be involved in another race in some way.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: But, uh, I'm not looking for titles or publicity these days.It just, uh, the satisfaction of, of being a part of it, uh, on occasion still, that fire's still there.
TUTTLE: Um, Kentucky was always known for a long time to be a solidDemocratic state. And at least in state government, not really federal government. Um, and in recent years, there's been the upswing of 80:00Republicans and the Fletcher administration and David Williams and all this business. Um, and you talk a little bit about hard campaigns earlier. Um, to what do you attribute this big Republican upswing? Nationally and state wise, too, I guess.
PRATHER: Well, I think nationally you had a lot of players who havecontributed to that, including, um, Senator McConnell, who's been a player at the national level and who's the dominant Republican figure in, in the state. And, but I really, I really think that, um, that the Republicans have become very adept at seizing on those hot button issues. And, uh, um, I think I alluded to it, uh, a little bit earlier. Uh, they're, they're very adept at talking about, uh, uh, God, guns, and gays. And, um, and making it sound as though the 81:00Democratic Party has become a party that is morally bankrupt, because they, of whatever stand they may or may not have, and, uh, and I think through being able to raise a huge amount of money, have been able to define the Democrats in this state, uh, um, in, in a way that, uh, uh, has caused the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates trouble, whether, uh, and they define Democrats before they allow Democrats to define myself. And the Democrats have not been, uh, very effective in fighting back. And, um, and I think the person that has orchestrated that, and beginning with his race for U.S. Senate, which he did very effectively, uh, that we talked about earlier, has been Mitch McConnell. And I think he's had an impact, uh, and been a part of that effort 82:00nationally. And, uh, so I think that's what happened in Kentucky. But, and the Democrats had enough, uh, enough of a reservoir of strength to overcome all of that until it reached the, it reached the boiling point probably, uh, in the last governor's race when suddenly, uh, Ben Chandler, who is an excellent candidate, uh, uh, could not withstand the barrage of, uh, the negative ads. And, uh, so, Governor Fletcher, uh, was elected. Um, but since that time, uh, obviously a lot of things have happened to where it seems to me that the pendulum has swung back frankly more quickly than I expected it to. And, um, so, the Democrats have the opportunity to seize that advantage and to 83:00have control of state government and a lot of local offices that have been moving in the other direction, they have that opportunity now. Now, it, it depends on how they handle that opportunity and react to suddenly having that opportunity. Uh, that will determine whether they're able to, uh, um, be reelected in all these various offices, from governor on down, and, and then probably have many more years when you have a state, uh, like Kentucky, which has always been Democratic, uh, that's moved the other way, well, now I think the, it's on the, uh, verge of moving back. But, but the Democrats are gonna have to be smart enough to take advantage of the opportunity. Time will tell. 84:00And it's gonna take fresh faces, uh, a mixture of the old and the new, and it's going to, uh, you, you're gonna have to excite people, you're gonna have to quit apologizing for being a Democrat, you're gonna have to, uh, you're gonna have to cause, um, uh, people to realize that you can still be a Christian and be a Democrat, which many of us are. And, uh, so those are these messages that are gonna have to be put out there. The opportunity is there now in abundance to get that message out. If the Democratic Party and the Democratic candidates don't do that effectively now, then this state will, once again, will kinda reverse again and keep moving toward, uh, Republican dominance.
TUTTLE: Um, just got a few more questions, and then we'll cut loose.All right.
[Pause in recording.]
PRATHER: Well, I hate to, cause you to have to hurry or anything.85:00
TUTTLE: Well, if--
PRATHER: --seems like we, I'm probably wordy for one thing.
TUTTLE: Well, no, you just, you just have, you have a lot to, um, thatto tell us.
PRATHER: I get to rambling.
TUTTLE: Um, well, what we'll probably do is, um, take these back,and transcribe it, luckily I don't have it. And then see what we've got. And if there's a more need for more information from you, or if there's anything that that, we'll see if we can set up a second one, something like that.
PRATHER: That'd be fine.
TUTTLE: Fill the blanks. Um, I just want to ask you about three or fourmore things here. Um, one thing that, um, that people tend to, uh, forget about government and public service is the amount of lobbying and lobbyists that are involved. And, um, I was just wondering if you could talk a little about, um, the sort of experience you've had with 86:00lobbyists, and, um, the main, uh, lobbying organizations, whether it's KEA, or the coal industry, or tobacco industry, or something like that.
PRATHER: When I first, um, when I first to Frankfort, in fact, um, um,we had a pre-legislative conference. And, um, I was a young fellow. We went to Kentucky Dam Village, that's where in back in the late sixties and seventies, that, uh, leadership was elected, was, uh, in, um, at a pre-legislative conference. Usually was held down at Kentucky Dam Village, um, in western Kentucky. And, um, and so, I went in and frankly didn't know what to expect, but I know, uh, we had a, we had 87:00some kind of meeting, and, um, everybody, uh, said, came out, and some of the old veterans and, and invited all of us first-termers to, um, to go to, uh, said, "Well, we're gonna take a bus," said, "We're going over to Paducah." Said, "Why don't you go with us?" Said, "We, we're gonna over there to meet some friends and whatever." And so, we got on the bus. Well, the next thing I knew it pulled into a, a club of some kind in Paducah, the next thing I knew, the, it was all written up in the, in the newspapers about how, uh, lobbyists take new--so I learned a quick lesson. (Tuttle laughs) And, uh, I did a quick study as a result of that. Back in those days, um, a big part of the lobbying was done on the first floor. And through, uh, and they would, I think 88:00lobbyists would, uh, they weren't very great in number in those days. And they represented the normal interests, uh, that you think of. Um, uh, education, um, labor, um, the industry, the associate industries of Kentucky, those type things, um. Um, if you had a, a big lobby for the coal industry. Um, you had somebody representing the horse racing industry back in those days. But you had a very few lobbyists. But when I, I, and I stayed in the legislature nineteen years, and as I recall, by the time I left the legislature, and a lot of this had to do with the shift of power to where suddenly the lobbyists had to start 89:00dealing with, uh, 138 legislators, as opposed to one governor.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: But you found, if I recall correctly, I think they were overfive hundred lobbyists registered--
TUTTLE: --wow--
PRATHER: --in the session that I, uh, before I left the GeneralAssembly. And if you divide that by 138, you know, you, you have, uh, four or so per, whatever. However that divides out. Close to four lobbyists per legislator. So, it's, um, but at the same time, it advanced over the years from providing, uh, uh, food and drink and a party atmosphere, which I found when I first went to Frankfort, is that was kind of the extent of the lobbying. You rarely saw a lobbyist ever appear before a committee. They, uh, they met with the governor. But, 90:00but suddenly after a few years of having a committee that, uh, grew and finally became of age, you found that lobbyists, uh, had to come armed with information. And they had to make sense. It wasn't just cutting some political deal to get what they wanted. And as a result, uh, I think that, uh, uh, that's a result of the committee system working; it's a result of exposing the legislature to the public by, uh, televising sessions; it was as a result of, of the press, uh, reporting on the legislature in a substantive way. Uh, as a opposed to, uh, the news that was carried back, uh, uh, in the very early years that I went there, I think the, the press, uh, reported in a very detailed 91:00way compared to what they had previously. And, and suddenly you had more people who realized that if you were gonna have a true committee system, and if you had a 138 legislators who were gonna makeup their, uh, their own minds, that we'd better get up there and protect our interest. And so, here they came. And, and I think that's been good. It, it works out to be a real problem for an individual legislator giving time to that many people. But fortunately each individual legislator does, does not have to talk every one of those people on a daily basis; they, uh, some of that goes on, but, but it primarily is directed to the committees where their area of interest is being heard. But, uh, it's gone from being a lobbying, uh, using whatever political influence to, uh, being a more of a mix of some political influence 92:00but primarily being armed with knowledge. And legislators have soon found among all those lobbyists who are on the scene today, and I've lost track of how many would be there, uh, in 2006, but, uh, I'm sure it's probably grown. But you soon find out who's, whose information you can trust, and who will, who's a straight shooter. Just like the lobbyist find out which legislators, uh, are straight shooters, and who you can depend on, and, and who can, uh, be counted on to get the job done. We find the same thing with lobbyists. But you have more people coming who are just citizens who don't necessarily represent any group, who are taking part in the process. Or they're under a looser umbrella of, uh, um, retired teachers, of , uh, the various retirees associations, of, uh, people who are interested in, uh, uh, a 93:00whole myriad of, uh, issues, and, uh, they form a group and they were registered, represented, many of them volunteer. So, it's changed from being on the first floor to being a few people on the third floor suddenly to now where, I mean, it's open for everybody. And you have much more participation today by a wide range of people in the, uh, lobbying process. I think that's good.
TUTTLE: Um, there's, during the, the race against Lewis, there were alot, um, really dirty ads.
PRATHER: Hm. (laughs)
[Pause in recording.]
TUTTLE: Yeah, there it is, it's works. Mark this real quick. Okay,94:00so, the question was, before the tape decided to stop, was, um, how do, um, I, I don't know how to ask but in a really general way, how do you react and, and, and deal with really dirty politics like that? Like the, like the ads that had your face, like morphing into Clinton's face and all that stuff like that.
PRATHER: Well, you know, that is, that gets back to earlierconversations about the scorched earth policy in campaigns that carries over to, to service.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: Once someone's elected. Uh, it's, uh, win at all cost. Wefound in that race that, um, we found in, in that, in the 1994 race 95:00for Congress that when we polled, we had, uh, we had a significant lead going in. We also found that in our polling that, that any Democrat in this district, and maybe in any district in the country, was, uh, was vulnerable because of the animosity that existed at that time, um, with, uh, with President Clinton. And so, you know, I found in the political arena that timing can be everything. And if, if the timing had been that the '94 race was being run in 2006, I think we would've 96:00been the, uh, able to not only maintain but broaden that lead.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: But in '94, the mood of the country was that they were downon Clinton. The many, many reasons, one of which had to do with his personal character; the other had to with, with his involvement in par-, promoting universal health care, which probably alienated a great number of professions and people who were a traditional Democratic constituency. Uh, they were, he was a very convenient, uh, whipping boy, if you will, that's, that's probably a bad term, but for, uh, his 97:00stands on many of the, uh, the hot button issues, such as abortion, and, um, um, gun control, um, gays in the military, "Don't ask; don't tell," all of that rolled into, if, at that time it was possible to be able to paint someone with that brush, he was a Democrat, no matter what Democrat, then it didn't matter what, uh, it really didn't matter what Joe Prather stood for, the message was lost in the shuffle.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And the message was lost in, the message was lost in, uh,the big bucks that were spent in the matter of the last two or three weeks. I found that basically in the last month of the campaign that 98:00a, a, uh, campaign manager was brought in who took control of, of the Republican effort. Um, he, that candidate was basically hidden. He was not allowed to speak. If so, he was scripted.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: Who, that coupled with huge amounts of dollars and primarilyrunning against Clinton. And, uh, so, it's, um. And was it fair? Absolutely not. Was it accurate? Absolutely not. Um, but it is, it was indicative of what was to come, uh, more so than ever before, uh, in, in the political arena, and, of course, we've seen that carry forward to, to the present day. And then you contrast that to somebody 99:00who grew up in my era, who had basically been in positions where it, where your creditability was riding on you're being fair with people, and being straight up with people, who frankly didn't have the ability nor the will to change that. And so, you just get caught in the crossfire. And that's what happened to me.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: Now, did that take a personal toll on me, on my family, anddid I resent it? Yes. But I have found that, um, when a door closes, a window opens in life.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And that those people who are really going to live life to100:00its fullest have to be able to bounce back and have to be able to, you know, I've always said, "The mark of the man depends on how he handles adversity."
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And I believe that today. And, um, so, as a result, um, youknow, my life is, is great the way it is. Um, um, Congress would have been something I would've enjoyed. I think, I'm not positive how much I would've enjoyed the Washington scene or how long I would've stayed. Um, I think that even though I did not embrace term limits and my opponent made that a, uh, a foundation block in his campaign and later ignored it, uh, but I feel that I probably would do just what I did in the State Senate, and what I felt as though I'd been there long enough I wouldn't run again. You know, I, I made a decision to leave the 101:00State Senate when I was forty-six years old, because I thought that I was losing a little of my zest for the position, because I'd been there quite a while. And I'd like to think I would've done that with a congressional seat and I think I would have. But, you know, the thing that probably sustained me through all that is that being a congressman was not something that I had to have in order to live life to its fullest. And after initially dealing with the resentment because of all the unfairness and the dirty tactics in that campaign, I realized that I was not diminished; the people who were willing to do that were in the end going to be diminished. And I, I hope that that's not a naive idea.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: But, you know, that's, that's kinda how I look at it, as I look102:00back. And, you know, you have frustrations, and I, I don't want to sound presumptive when I say that. Um, there are frustrations involved when you, uh, in, whether it'd be in that race or other races where you see somebody is, um, who is a follow-, follower, who's willing to yield to leaders who take control of an effort, and catapult you into something that. And, and people like that remain a follower; they never become a leader, because they gave up their ability to be a leader going in. And then you realize that you think that you have leadership talents that never had an opportunity to work, uh, because of, uh, being, uh, uh, ambushed. Sure, you, you think about that. But I know, it's no longer an issue that I think about very much. And when I do, it's in perspective. And, uh, do I wish that, uh, do 103:00I wish that it was different? Yes, I do. And it has nothing to do with Joe Prather, you know, my days are gone as far as being a candidate. And, uh, I'm happy about that. But, uh, we need more leaders who are willing to pay the price. But find the system causes more good people not to be willing to bother.
TUTTLE: Hm. The thing that stood out to me as I was trying to read upon that race was I saw somewhere where it was, came out in a book or something, that McConnell went to Newt Gingrich--
PRATHER: --that happened--
TUTTLE: --at President Nixon's funeral. And said, "This is still apossibility. We need to, to shove some money(??) over." And it's just, it's, it really put in perspective, and the way you're talking about it does, is it, it wasn't, it was, it was a, where it seems to, in 104:00retrospect, it seems to have been an early piece in a national campaign.
PRATHER: Oh, it was, it was really the second piece. You had one, youhad one shortly before that in, uh, in, um, Oklahoma. We tried, we, there were several of us that talked, including me, talked to Governor Jones about calling that special election.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: As quickly as he could. Which would've been three weeksbefore. And was there a selfish interest? Well, maybe somewhat because our numbers were good. Um, it would've, it would've worked fine. Um, we had it won. Uh, but he said, "Well, you know, it doesn't make any sense to me. We'll wait and hold it at the regular election at," uh, 105:00what the fourth Tuesday in May at that time. Well, that gave, that gave the Republicans with all that money and with all that machinery the chance to finish up in Oklahoma and then move that whole effort to Kentucky, to do what they did in the last three weeks. And, um, but they were preoccupied in Oklahoma prior to that.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: And so, they moved, they moved all that whole machinery, alongwith the accompanying dollars in, in here on us. And, um, and, you know, it got nasty, as everybody knows. And, uh, but I can tell you that, um, my creditability in, in this community is intact. And, um, it's, um, and I, without compensation nor credit, uh, neither of which I seek, uh, these days, I still am very, very involved in, in positive 106:00way and a lot of ways in this community. And, and everybody knows that. And so, you know, that's my payday.
TUTTLE: Um-hm.
PRATHER: So, this family, we're, we're well off. And, um, you know,we're big family people. And, uh, our life's good.
TUTTLE: Um, I guess just two more questions. Yeah, go ahead.
PRATHER: If you'd wait about ten minutes, I'll go with you.
TUTTLE: We can, we can go ahead and--
UNKNOWN: --okay, I'll wait--
TUTTLE: --and stop. All right. Um, let me just ask you real quickabout, um, about the Super Tuesday bill. Um, to move the election to, uh, --
PRATHER: --yeah--
TUTTLE: --to Super, uh, Tuesday--
PRATHER: --that was my baby.
TUTTLE: Yeah, yeah. (Prather laughs) Tell me about that a little bit.
PRATHER: Well, we just, uh, there were several of us in the southeasternstates who suddenly realized that the South in presidential politics 107:00was losing its clout. And, um, that, um, we, uh, we saw Iowa and New Hampshire get an inordinate amount of, uh, of power as a result of just being first. So, we had the idea that we could, um, if we could cause a southeastern states to all come together on one day, that suddenly early in the process that, um, that the, um, um, um, the South would have to be dealt with in more reasonable way. And so we set out to do that. And I, uh, that was late in my time in Frankfort. And we were able, I was able to pass that bill, as you know. And, uh, I think it was in effect for, what, for one, maybe one race, one nomination 108:00process. And, um, but after I left Frankfort for, and I never had, and, and, you know, I just, I didn't even go back and get involved in it, but for some reason, Bob Babbage, who was in secretary of state, took the lead in repealing that, for whatever reason, I've never figured out. And I still don't know to this day. And I, I never asked him about it. But I, it's, um, but, you know, when I left Frankfort, I've never gone back up. I, I've, I haven't been back in the Senate chambers since I left.
TUTTLE: Really.
PRATHER: Have not been back. You know, I'm a, I'm a fellow that doesn'thang it up anywhere until I'm ready to hang it up, and I never look back.
TUTTLE: Hm.
PRATHER: And so, they didn't need me up there meddling. (Tuttle laughs)And, I, um, but, you know, when I was finance secretary, I've appeared before legislative committees as finance secretary. But I've never been back in the chambers. Some people go in just to take a bow, be 109:00introduced, you know. Not my thing. I just, you know, I look forward, not back. And, uh, but why that was repealed, it, and it was, uh. You know, of course, it fell apart. But I remember Max Cleland and I, uh, the Vietnam vet who was in the U.S. Senate, um, he and I testified together on that bill before congressional subcommittee. And, uh, it, uh, it was a, it was an interesting fight to get that done, and we thought we had done something good. But, you know, it fell apart.
TUTTLE: Max Cleland got his share of the Republican machine, too.
PRATHER: Yeah, I'd say.
TUTTLE: Unfortunately.
PRATHER: They made him look unpatriotic too. A guy with one arm andno legs.
TUTTLE: Yeah. (laughs)
PRATHER: So, you tell me.
TUTTLE: Yeah. All right, well.
[End of interview.]


text:
OT Eric Fisher (5), DE Tank Carradine (36), CB Blidi Wreh-Wilson (65), OG David Quessenberry (128), RB Christine Michael (132)
For the Lions, this is a needs-based class that manages not to really reach anywhere. Fisher and Quessenberry can start on their OL right away, and help protect Matthew Stafford, who they've allowed to get hit way too much.
Carradine isn't the pass rusher that Cliff Avril was, but he can play LDE for the Lions in base situations, at least.
Wreh-Wilson is a good player to add to their CB mix, which has a bunch of nickelback types at this point.
Michael has talent, but the reputation of being an unfocused clown. He should fit right in with the Lions.
Continue reading "2013 IAOFM Rational Actor Mock Draft - NFC Analysis"
Margus Hunt, aka 'The Eastern Block', is one of the most colorful stories in this year's draft. His journey from being a Estonian junior track and field champion to a potential NFL defensive end is compelling.
Hunt also has the kind of body that's often referred to as a 'freak of nature' - he's 6-8 and 277 pounds, has an 92-inch wingspan, runs like a safety, and is incredibly athletic. He's also very new to the sport, having only begun his training in it in 2009. He has a reputation as one of the hardest workers around.
When I turned on the film, Hunt's good and bad sides quickly became crystal clear. Eventually, two contests really stood out in my mind. His good side was clearly demonstrated in the 2012 Hawaii Bowl against Fresno State; the 2012 game against TCU showed off his weaknesses.
Continue reading "Scouting the 2013 Draft: SMU DE Margus Hunt"
As they look to fill the void created by Elvis Dumervil's departure, it was reported last week that the Broncos have been researching Florida State defensive end Cornellius "Tank" Carradine.
But if Denver is to acquire the pass rusher, they may have to move up from the #28 pick, following an impressive workout today by the 6-4, 276-pounder.
His senior season was cut short by a torn ACL suffered in late November, but an intense rehabilitation with the same trainer who helped Adrian Peterson to his remarkable 2012 comeback season has Carradine nearly back to form.
Continue reading "Broncos attend workout by FSU's Carradine"
Now that we've completed our rundown of this year's top offensive tackle prospects, let's take a moment to revisit whether it makes sense for the Broncos to take one of them in next week's draft.
David Fleming recently did a nice job of laying out some of the realities of the current pay levels for the differing positions along the offensive line. The advent of NFL free agency in 1993 started a run on increasing the salaries for offensive linemen and especially tackles, benefiting the left tackles in particular. Teams were consistently putting their best rusher on the offensive left, so the blind side protector soon got more money.
Tackles are harder to find, and that may keep their pay somewhat higher - but not stratospherically so.
Continue reading "Why the Broncos have to consider taking a tackle next week"
According to Aaron Wilson, the Broncos and Dolphins have expressed interest in Old Dominion safety Carvin Powell.
Listed at 6-1, 205 pounds on his school profile, Powell was not invited to the combine, but performed at ODU's pro day on March 21 in front of representatives from a reported nine or ten teams.
Continue reading "Broncos reportedly interested in ODU safety Carvin Powell"
Here are our previous columns on tackle prospects:
We'll conclude our examination of tackle prospects with a look at David Quessenberry, a 6-5, 302-pounder out of San Jose State (NFL, NFLDS).
Continue reading "Scouting the 2013 Draft: SJSU tackle David Quessenberry"
According to Aaron Wilson, the Broncos are one of four teams (Tennessee, Chicago, Detroit) scheduled to host Wisconsin Badgers redshirt junior Travis Frederick in an official pre-draft visit.
The 6-4, 312-pound native of Sharon, WI, posted some ugly 40 times at the combine, but his agility and powerful blocking ability have him ranked among the top center prospects, and one expected to be selected on Day 1 or 2 of the upcoming draft.
Continue reading "Broncos will host Wisconsin center Travis Frederick"
ESPN's paid Insider section posted a collaboration on the Broncos' draft needs this morning. Here are a few key points:
Here are our previous columns on tackle prospects:
I've noticed that with the increasing tendencies of offenses and defenses to 'flip-flop' their lines, TEs and edge rushers are often on either side of the OL.
Continue reading "Scouting the 2013 Draft: Offensive Tackles, Part 6"
According to Tony Pauline, the Broncos are one of seven teams who are hosting or have hosted Virginia Tech tackle Vinston Painter. Also listed are the Chargers, Lions, Bucs, Giants, Jaguars and Bengals.
The 6-4, 306-pound right tackle, who is seen as a late-round pick at best, did not see significant playing time with the Hokies until his senior season, when he started all 13 games and was named an All-ACC Honorable Mention.
Continue reading "Report: Broncos visiting with VT tackle Vinston Painter"


text:
|Member Since:
|Track This Author:
|Stories Posted:
|Reviews Posted:
|Favorite Author of:
I'm been an avid reader of the site and thought it would be fun to submit a story. It has been fun and I look forward to continuing my story.
|< 1>|
: Magic of the Heart by SpellWeaver
Chapter 17 submitted! This story begins with our gang at the end of their sixth year. Read to find out about their summertime adventures then follow them through their final year at Hogwarts, that has romance, adventure and humor. I lay no claim to any of the JK Rowling characters, just the following story that I hope you like. This is a story in progress. Everybody give a cheer for danfan4ever for the great banner!
Genres: Romance, Action, Humor Characters: Draco, Dumbledore, Fred/George, Ginny, Harry, Hermione, Luna, M. McGonagall, Neville, OC, Remus Lupin, Ron, Snape, Tonks, Voldemort Pairings: Harry/Hermione
Advisory: Mild Language, Strong Language, Mild Violence, Scenes of a Sexual Nature
Published: 2005.02.12 Latest Chapter: 2005.09.07 Updated: 2005.09.07 Status: WIP (30148 words)


text:
It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
You can even see the faint circle they used as a template.
Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
reply to post by draknoir2
yea man funny but the only thing! it was made by an ad firm in broad day light!
Originally posted by Unknown Origin
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
You can even see the faint circle they used as a template.
That's the first thing that jumped out at me. It proves it's man made.
Originally posted by draknoir2
No HUMANS are capable of such complex designs. It's obviously the work of extra terrestrial beings beings.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
Nice design.
Expect some real stunners in the next 3-4 weeks.
Originally posted by nobodysavedme
reply to post by seanizle
Seems a lot of effort would be required seeing how big it is...Is the corn missing or just bent over?
Does the farmer incur a loss? Is the crop/corn damaged?
Why has no one applied the science of forensics to this?
Even with boards you will leave easily identifiable forensic evidence that it was done by boards.
This evidence will be on the board and but also on the corn or wheat or whatever.
Pushing the corn down will leave marks on the corn and signs of pressure from a particular direction.Also in wet ground other impressions would be left as well.
Quite a few criminals have been caught with a lot less evidence.
These corn circles should have have abundant evidence that it was done using a board and it was done manually...
So question why has no one sitting at their computers thought of applying forensics to this?
Any Answers?


text:
It seems that HTTP/1.1 is being develpoed now, right? I find that if I want the lib to send the HTTP/1.1 request, I need modify the definition in httputil.h : #define HTTP_VERSION "HTTP/1.1". Now I want to know, if the Miniserv support HTTP/1.1? The reason I want to use HTTP/1.1 is that it has a good push model: PUT method. -- Tao Jiang Visiting Scientist, CECI, MIT email: email@example.com URL: http://ceci.mit.edu/staff/jiangt/Received on Monday, 4 March 1996 15:02:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:33:46 UTC


text:
taken care of for many seasons, as
Williams has several years of useful
ness yet before him.
Here's a prediction. Larry Cheney
or one of the recruits, Adams and
Standridge, will pitch the first local
game of the National league sched
ule. Cheney, as usual, is showing a
lot of early season effectiveness, and
Bresnahan is grooming him to start
off with a rush and put the team up
in the first flight, just as Larry did
two years ago. And the two rookies
are showing just about as much stuff
as the veteran.
Their effectiveness, remember, is
being developed against big league
teams like the Mackmen and Phillies,
The latest picture taken of Georges
Carpentier before he went to the
front to fight for France. The Euro
pean heavyweight champion has not
been shot, as periodical reports will
have it, and is still at the wheel of his
car whisking officers about along the
firing lhie.
and strong minors, such as LouisvilleJ
They are not displaying their wares
before Class C organizations. It is
probably that Vaughn and Humi?
phries wil lbe held bacK, and ZabeLj
will go in early. Vaughn, ot course,)
will do some early duty, but he need,
not be hurried, as Bresnahan seemsat
to have better luck than usual in his;,'
young men. cf
Louisville was trimmed, 4 to 2,
mainly through the good pitching ofn
Cheney and Adams and the hard bat-u
ting of Williams and Hargraves. Cy
swatted a triple and double and Har-o
graves got a triple. All Cub runai
were scored in one inning. ?
Coast league critics, we under-n
stand, are boosting the work of Tonwl
my Quinlan, the new lead-off man
of the White Sox. But it is hard to
see where a place is to be found forn
the young outfielder. If he s regu-ii
larly employed it means a vacations!
for Felch, Collins or Fournier, and')
it doesn't seem possible to keep onev
of that trio out of the daily fray. '
Collins is a veteran gardener. Hal
can bat, field and run bases. Felch
is a fine-looking youngster, and oiu
the coast has been batting lustily!
Fournier is a .300 hitter who haSl
made his mark, and if a White Soxv
team can afford to keep a natural .300i
hitter on the bench, then all the dope-v
sheets can be tossed away. Jack iSw
the first regular in quite some time
who has batted over .300 for a sea-
son while wearing a Sox uniform. "i
And we venture the remark thati
the leadoff position isn't giving Row
land much worry. He has Buck
Weaver for the job, and Buck proved!
last year that he can do the work inl
ship-shape manner. Quinlaiyeay ben
retained, but we'd hate to HI him
face Walter Johnson with three men"
on base, and know that Jack Four
nier and his bat were useless on the-"'
Sox beat Modesto, 8 to 1, Russell
allowing four hits. Reb batted a
homer, double and single. Brief andu
Ed Collins each cracked two hits,
t jgJgOSb -v- - azs.
xml | txt