text:
In the U.S., heating and cooling a home accounts for the largest percentage of residential energy use. Although there has been a slight decline over recent years, these two areas still accounted for nearly half (47.7%) of the energy use in the home in 2009 (the most recent year for which data is available), according to the Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The good news is that because heating and cooling systems are the biggest energy consumers in the home, they are the perfect areas to target for reductions in energy use and expenses.
The easiest way to conserve energy is by setting back the thermostat to lower temperatures, a few degrees during the day, and even more while you are sleeping or away from home. The U.S. Department of Energy points out that setting the thermostat back 10° to 15° for 8 hours can reduce annual heating bills by 5% to 15%, noting that homeowners can save as much as 1% for each degree for an 8-hour setback period. Surprisingly, the DOE reports that the savings gained from thermostat setbacks can be even greater for homes in mild weather climates, than in regions with more severe climates.
While this may sound like a good idea in theory, actually remembering to make these adjustments, perhaps multiple times per day, may seem to be too much of a hassle to be worth the effort—but it doesn't have to be.
Today, highly functional, energy-efficient technology can be found in a single, small appliance—the humble thermostat. The Adoption and Usage of Home Automation Technologies report by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), Arlington, Va., found that 47 percent of online U.S. households indicate they have a programmable (42 percent) and/or smart (12 percent) thermostat currently installed in their homes.
Programmable Thermostats
Programmable thermostats, such as the WarmlyYours SmartStat™ Programmable Thermostat , feature a digital display that indicates the exact temperature, auto and manual settings for adjusting the heating comfort level, and the ability to program multiple setting changes for each day of the week.
The SmartStat™ can be programmed to automatically set back the temperature when you are asleep or away from home, allowing for hands-off, hassle-free operation that can save money on heating and cooling bills.
Because radiant heating systems inherently have a slower response time — up to several hours — manually setting temperature setbacks during the day while the homeowner is away may not always be practical. This problem is easily overcome with features like the Early-Start mode of the SmartStat™, which allow the thermostat to "learn" when to activate the system to get the room temperature to the desired level at a specified time.
Technology Gets Smarter
Programmable thermostats go a long way toward managing energy use and expenses. The next generation of "smart " thermostats goes even further. Smart thermostats, like the Nest Learning Thermostat , can adapt the heating requirements of the home and the schedule of its occupants based on energy use patterns and "learn" to operate more efficiently.
Daily or seasonal variations in temperature also impact a home's heating needs. Nest's Weather Aware feature uses a Wi-Fi connection to monitor current and forecast weather conditions, enabling the system to adapt to changes in weather and become even more efficient.
Nest's True Radiant feature can further optimize the use of radiant floor heating systems. Because heat generated by radiant floor heating systems is stored in the mass of flooring material, heat is retained and the room remains warm even after the system shuts off. Once the desired room temperature is attained, True Radiant uses information form the system's heating history, to determine when to turn off the heating system to avoid overheating the room or running the system longer than necessary. In doing so, Nest keeps the room comfortably warm while eliminating excess energy consumption.
Residential heat management moves to the next level as smart thermostats can now integrate multiple heating systems. For situations that demand a supplemental heat source--such as extremely cold winter weather or rooms that, by design, have excessive heat loss—the Nest thermostat not only regulates the primary heat source (the electric floor heating system), but also automatically determines when a supplemental source (such as forced air) is needed. This takes the guesswork out of operating multi-stage heating systems and ensures that the secondary source operates only when necessary.
A Greener Bottom Line
Ultimately, homeowners must decide which type of thermostat and features that best meets their needs. Both programmable thermostats and smart thermostats offer convenient, hands-off operation and more efficient energy use. A modest investment in replacing a thermostat has the potential to yield big savings, making these appliances an attractive option for both homeowners and the professionals who sell them. " Products that can offer energy efficiency…with the ability to save money are serving as a key motivators for purchases," reminds Kevin Tillmann, senior research analyst, CEA.
A little green can go a long way.
We won't share your information and you can unsubscribe at any time with a single click.


text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guest host: Mike Barnicle
Guests: Chuck Todd, David Gregory, Jamie Rubin, Ron Brownstein
MIKE BARNICLE, GUEST HOST: Iran's secret underground nuke site. Let's play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I'm Mike Barnicle, in tonight for Chris Matthews. Leading off tonight: Caught red-handed. Iran admitted to building a second secret underground plant to enrich uranium, and President Obama demanded that Iran open nuclear sites for inspection or be held accountable.
We are awaiting President Obama's press conference at the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh. NBC News White House correspondent Chuck Todd will break down what this disclosure means for the president a week before the six-nation talks with Iran are set to begin.
Plus: Why are Democrats seeing a significant drop in fund-raising, and how can they convince big donors to open up their checkbooks ahead of the 2010 mid-term elections?
And remember the conservative outcry over President Obama's back-to-school speech a couple of weeks ago? well, A student performance at a New Jersey public elementary school is now drawing fire from some conservative critics. Check it out.
BARNICLE: Conservatives charge that the school and the teacher was attempting to indoctrinate and brainwash the students in support of the president. Are they right?
Also, "MEET THE PRESS" moderator David Gregory will preview his interview with Bill Clinton.
And finally: Ousted Illinois government Rod Blagojevich just can't help himself on his never-ending media tour. He now claims he's the anti-Nixon. We'll have more of what he said in the HARDBALL "Sideshow."
But we begin with the disclosure of Iran's secret underground nuclear facility and President Obama's response. NBC News White House correspondent and political director Chuck Todd is on the phone with us from the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh, Ed Schultz is the host of "THE ED SHOW," and MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan is also with us. And Jamie Rubin is a former State Department spokesman. He'll be with us a bit later.
Let's start with Chuck Todd out there in Pittsburgh. Chuck, what's the mood within the White House over this latest development with regard to Iran? They have Iraq to worry about, they have Afghanistan choices to be made coming up very shortly, and now this revelation.
CHUCK TODD, NBC POLITICAL DIR./CORRESPONDENT (via telephone): Well, it's a little bit frenetic. I mean, there's no doubt they have been—this is the issue that has dominated the week, and we in the press corps obviously didn't find out about it until 4:00 o'clock this morning when this thing went public in "The New York Times."
So we're now learning what the week was really like for this White House behind the scenes with the Russians, behind the scenes with the Chinese. It was all about letting them know what was going on with Iran and this nuclear facility. They briefed the Russians, they briefed the Chinese, all in an attempt to try to get everybody on the same page because they knew that this thing—the Iranians had found out that we had known their secret.
And so it became a race to sort of get each side of the—to get this side of the story out, to get their case together in front of the international community, because we now knew what's—we obviously knew what was coming next week, on October 1st, which is this meeting of the P-5, which in this case is the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, China, Russia, Great Britain, France and the U.S., plus Germany, get them all on the same page when they sit down with Iran.
Now, what has happened today, and what makes White House feel pretty good about what's going on, is, one, they feel like they have good intelligence. They feel like they made a strong case to the Russians. And now they're just sitting here, waiting on the Chinese. And if they can get everybody on the same page, they think they can actually have (INAUDIBLE) have some leverage over the Iranians on the sanctions front.
Of course, now, though, the fact we're learning all this—and this is the third time that the administration said—the third time the Iranians have been caught lying about their nuclear ambitions, third time that they've been caught cheating—how much more diplomacy can the president pursue before he's got to just say, You know what? That's it. But the question is, what is the "That's it" if it's not just sanctions?
BARNICLE: Pat Buchanan, the images of street unrest in Teheran are still fresh in a lot of people's minds from the election that was held earlier this summer. What do you figure this says, if anything, about political unrest within the Iranian administration? Ahmadinejad, the mullahs, who is running Iran?
PAT BUCHANAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, that's the—you've touched on the basic question here. What the United States is saying to the Iranian people is, Your government, Ahmadinejad and the ayatollah, are lying to you and they are lying to the world when they say that all their nuclear facilities are for peaceful purposes.
Up to now, Mike, all the revelations we know about, even though some of them are secret, are consistent with a peaceful program. If the United States is correct that they are upgrading the uranium, enriching it to 90 percent, that can only be for one thing, an explosive device. So the Americans are saying, You've lied to your people about this and you've lied to the world about this. You do have facilities there that are exclusively or only can be for nuclear weapons.
I think Ahmadinejad and the ayatollah are going to have to come clean with the IAEA, with the world and with their own people on this and prove, if they can, that this is not a weapons facility.
BARNICLE: Ed Schultz, I mean, you talk to the country a couple of times a day every day. What do you think goes through people's minds out there in the middle of the country in Iowa and the great Northwest, up in Seattle, way up in Portland, Maine, when they hear the phrase "U.N. sanctions"?
ED SCHULTZ, HOST, "THE ED SHOW": Well, they'd rather have that than
another confrontation, Mike. But I really think that this revelation today
and the revealing of this secret facility that has been denied in the past
· this is a great political opportunity for this president to show that this is the man that he talked about on the campaign trail, that he can bring people together, that he can lead, that he can bring coalitions together.
I think it's very encouraging for the White House to hear what Medvedev is saying from Russia about how they've got new relations with the United States. It was very cold at the end of the Bush administration. I thought President Obama did a tremendous job today, his demeanor, his academic approach to this, his willingness to work with other leaders.
This is a very crucial test for the president. During the campaign, a lot of people were talking about, He didn't have the experience. He didn't have the international experience. We're seeing it right now. This is the president of the United States on the international stage, having to perform, to bring in Great Britain to talk about a line in the sand, to get some tough words out of Sarkozy, to bring on the Germans, and now getting positive reaction from the Russians. The Russians play a big key in all of this because of the business dealings that they've had over the years with the Iranians. And now, of course, the Chinese are telling the Iranians they need to back off.
This is—this situation is putting Barack Obama in, I think, a great position to show that the United States wants to go to the moral high ground and reestablish itself as a world leader.
BARNICLE: Chuck Todd, can you give us any internal background in the White House about the president's dealing with Russia and China to get them on the same page with regard to Iran?
TODD: I'm going to be very quick here because it does look like we're a few minutes away. But here's the best I can tell. This was news to the Russians, and it really ticked off the Russians. They did not know the Iranians were doing this. This is based on—look, this is based on sources I've talked to that sort of was reading body language. They really believe this was news to the Russians.
And the reason that's important is the Russians feel like they were out there defending the Iranians to us both behind the scenes and publicly, and they feel burned. And that's why that's important. And that's why the White House contingent here at the G-20 feels pretty good about the statement. That's why they think they got a stronger statement out of the Russians than, for instance, they would have expected a week ago. And that's because the Russians feel like that they were basically sold a bill of goods by the Iranians.
The Chinese—they play coy, but they usually—you know, they're not going to be there by themselves. And if the Russians are with us, the White House believes the Chinese will eventually go along.
I'm going to get in my seat here, guys...
BARNICLE: OK, go ahead.
TODD: (INAUDIBLE) when you see Reggie Love (ph) come out near the podium...
BARNICLE: We don't want you to lose your seat, Chuck.
BARNICLE: Pat, I might have to interrupt you for the president of the United States.
BUCHANAN: Sure.
BARNICLE: I'm sure you'll understand. But weapons-grade plutonium—if it can be proved that the Iranians are developing weapons-grade plutonium in this new nuclear facility that we're talking about, wouldn't that prove that the Israelis were right? And wouldn't that give Israel a stronger leg up on saying, Hey, we're going to have take care of this ourselves at some point perhaps?
BUCHANAN: Look, if it is, as the Americans are saying, they're enriching up to 90 percent, that's weapons-grade uranium. It's the type of uranium which was used in one of the atomic bombs, a gun-type (ph) bomb that we dropped over it was either Hiroshima or Nagasaki. There's only one use that I know of for uranium enriched to 90 percent.
And Chuck makes a very important point. It's not only Ahmadinejad and the ayatollah were lying to their country and lying to the West. If this is true, they lied to the Russians, who have been out there fronting for them by telling them, Look, it's all for peaceful purposes. So they've sandbagged every friend they've got that's been out there.
And you are correct. If this is true, the Israelis, who have been saying, Look, the Iranians are much further along, they're much more determined to build weapons than you Americans are saying, when you said they canceled their plans in 2003, you got a high confidence. The Israelis will have been proven correct, I think, if this is true.
This is a central point, I think, Mike. The Iranians are going to have to explain that this is not weapons-grade uranium coming out of this plant, that this is simply a back-up for Natanz in case the Israelis or the Americans blew it up, which would be illegal but understandable. I mean, they're not going to put all their centrifuges in there and get them all blown up in one place. Nobody would do that.
BARNICLE: Hey, Ed, we have less than two minutes until the president appears at the podium here. We're watching that. But listening to Chuck and listening to Pat, I want to go back to what you were saying earlier. This could be potentially a very positive development for this very young Obama administration.
SCHULTZ: I don't think there's any doubt about it. And I've talked to military people over the last five years on the radio, retired admirals, that have told me that the Russians play a big key in dealing with the Iranians.
And if I could, Mike, go back to a story that "The New York Times" carried back in January of 2005 -- and I brought up earlier today, What is the Israeli reaction going to be to this ? Former president (SIC) Dick Cheney was quoted in a "New York Times" story as saying back in January 2005, that, You never know, the Israelis may take action on the Iranians before anybody else because they've known that this stuff was going on.
So this is, I think, the big picture point here, a real opportunity for the president and for the United States to show some leadership, not overreact, take the academic approach, be very strong, keep this coalition together, operate with the facts, take the moral high ground and show that we've got a great direction. This is really an opportunity for the Obama administration to show that there's a new sheriff in town running the United States of America.
I mean, there's always the political reaction to everything, but this is a chance for the United States and the Russians to move forward with a new, positive relationship.
BARNICLE: We're looking there at a picture on the scene, Ed, right now, as you speak, of Rahm Emanuel, chief of staff, Robert Gibbs, the press secretary, and David Axelrod, senior adviser to the president of the United States, who has already had a hugely important day.
And here he is now coming on the stage in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, President Barack Obama.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Good afternoon.
Let me, first of all, thank Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, County Executive Dan Onorato, and the people of Pittsburgh for being just extraordinary hosts.
Last night, during the dinner that I had with world leaders, so many of them commented on the fact that sometime in the past they had been to Pittsburgh—in some cases, it was 20 or 25 or 30 years ago—and coming back, they were so impressed with the revitalization of the city. A number of them remarked on the fact that it pointed to lessons that they could take away in revitalizing manufacturing towns in their home countries.
The people here have been just extraordinary, and so I want to thank all of you for the great hospitality.
I will tell you, I'm a little resentful, because I did not get to Pamela's Diner for pancakes, although Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama of Japan did get pancakes. And I don't know how he worked that, but he was raving about them.
Six months ago, I said that the London summit marked a turning point in the G-20's efforts to prevent economic catastrophe. And here in Pittsburgh, we've taken several significant steps forward to secure our recovery in transition to strong, sustainable and balanced economic growth.
We've brought the global economy back from the brink. We laid the groundwork today for long-term prosperity, as well.
It's worth recalling the situation we faced six months ago: a contracting economy, skyrocketing unemployment, stagnant trade, and a financial system that was nearly frozen. Some were warning of a second Great Depression.
But because of the bold and coordinated action that we took, millions of jobs have been saved or created, the decline in output has been stopped, financial markets have come back to life, and we stopped the crisis from spreading further to the developing world.
Still, we know there is much further to go.
Too many Americans are still out of work and struggling to pay bills. Too many families are uncertain about what the future will bring. Because our global economy is now fundamentally interconnected, we need to act together to make sure our recovery creates new jobs and industries, while preventing the kinds of imbalances and abuse that led us into this crisis.
But Pittsburgh was a perfect venue for this work. This city has known its share of hard times, as older industries like steel could no longer sustain growth, but Pittsburgh picked itself up and it dusted itself off and is making the transition to job-creating industries of the future, from biotechnology to clean energy. It serves as a model for turning the page to a 21st century economy and a reminder that the key to our future prosperity lies not just in New York or Los Angeles or Washington, but in places like Pittsburgh.
Today, we took bold and concerted action to secure that prosperity and to forge a new framework for strong, sustainable and balanced growth.
First, we agreed to sustain our recovery plans until growth is restored and a new framework for prosperity is in place. Our coordinated stimulus plans played an indispensable role in averting catastrophe; now we must make sure that when growth returns, jobs do, too. That's why we will continue our stimulus efforts until our people are back to work and phase them out when our recovery is strong.
But we can't stop there. Going forward, we cannot tolerate the same old boom-and-bust economy of the past. We can't grow complacent. We can't wait for a crisis to cooperate. That's why our new framework will allow each of us to assess the other's policies, to build consensus on reform, and to ensure that global demand supports growth for all.
Second, we agreed to take concrete steps to move forward with tough new financial regulations so that a crisis like this can never happen again. Never again should we let the schemes of a reckless few put the world's financial system and our people's well-being at risk.
Those who abuse the system must be held accountable. Those who act irresponsibly must not count on taxpayer dollars. Those days are over.
That's why we've agreed to a strong set of reforms. We will bring more transparency to the derivatives market. We will strengthen national capital standards so that banks can withstand losses and pay for their own risks. We will create more powerful tools to hold large global financial firms accountable and orderly procedures to manage failures without burdening taxpayers. And we will tie executive pay to long-term performance so that sound decisions are rewarded instead of short-term greed.
In short, our financial system will be far different and more secure than the one that failed so dramatically last year.
Third, we agreed to phase out subsidies for fossil fuel so that we can transition to a 21st century energy economy, an historic effort that would ultimately phase out nearly $300 billion in global subsidies.
This reform will increase our energy security. It will help transform our economy so that we're creating the clean-energy jobs of the future. And it will help us combat the threat posed by climate change.
As I said earlier this week in New York, all nations have a responsibility to meet this challenge, and together we have taken a substantial step forward in meeting that responsibility.
Finally, we agreed to reform our system of global economic cooperation and governance. We can no longer meet the challenges of the 21st century with 20th century approaches. And that's why the G- 20 will take the lead in building a new approach to cooperation. To make our institutions reflect the reality of our times, we will shift more responsibility to emerging economies within the International Monetary Fund and give them a greater voice.
To build new markets and help the world's most vulnerable citizens climb out of poverty, we established a new World Bank trust fund to support investments in food security and financing for clean and affordable energy.
And to ensure that we keep our commitments, we agreed to continue to take stock of our efforts going forward.
Now, we have learned time and again that in the 21st century the nations of the world share mutual interests. That's why I've called for a new era of engagement that yields real results for our people, an era where nations live up to their responsibilities and act on behalf of our shared security and prosperity.
That's exactly the kind of strong cooperation that we forged here in Pittsburgh and earlier this week in New York. Indeed, on issue after issue, we see that the international community is beginning to move forward together.
At the G-20, we've achieved a level of tangible global economic cooperation that we have never seen before, while also acting to address the threat posed by climate change.
At the United Nations Security Council, we passed a historic resolution to secure loose nuclear materials, to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek the security of a world without them.
And as we approach negotiations with Iran on October 1st, we have never been more united in standing with the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany in demanding that Iran live up to its responsibilities.
On all of these challenges, there is much more work to be done, but we leave here today more confident and more united in the common effort of advancing security and prosperity for all of our people. So I'm very grateful to the other world leaders who were here today.
And with that, let me take a few questions. I'll start with Ben Feller of A.P.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. The Iranian president said today that your statement of this morning was a mistake and that your mistakes work in Iran's favor. What gives you any sense that you can genuinely negotiate with him? And also, when you talk about holding Iran accountable, is the military option growing more likely?
OBAMA: I think it's important to see what happened today, building on what happened in New York. You had an unprecedented show of unity on the part of the world community saying that Iran's actions raised grave doubts in terms of their presentation that their nuclear program was for peaceful purposes. Not only did the United States, France, and the United Kingdom who initiated the intelligence that brought this to light stand before you, but you had China and Russia, as well, issue statements calling for an immediate IAEA investigation.
That kind of solidarity is not typical. Anybody who's been following responses to Iran would have been doubtful just a few months ago that that kind of rapid response was possible.
So I think Iran is on notice that, when we meet with them on October 1st, they are going to have to come clean and they are going to have to make a choice. Are they willing to go down the path which I think ultimately will lead to greater prosperity and security for Iran, giving up the acquisition of nuclear weapons, and deciding that they are willing to abide by international rules and standards in their pursuit of peaceful nuclear energy, or will they continue down a path that is going to lead to confrontation?
And as I said before, what has changed is that the international community, I think, has spoken. It is now up to Iran to respond.
I'm not going to speculate on the course of action that we will take.
We're going to give October 1st a chance.
But I think you've heard that even countries who a year ago or six months ago might have been reluctant to even discuss things like sanctions have said that this is an important enough issue to peace and stability in the world that Iran would make a mistake in ignoring the call for them to respond in a forthright and clear manner and to recognize that—that the choice they make over the next several weeks and months could well determine their ability to rejoin the international community or to find themselves isolated.
Last point I'll make, specifically with respect to the military, I've always said that we do not rule out any options when it comes to U.S. security interests, but I will also re-emphasize that my preferred course of action is to resolve this in a diplomatic fashion. It's up to the Iranians to respond.
QUESTION: You said a couple of months ago that the war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity. Do you think it's possible to meet U.S. objectives there without an extra infusion of U.S. troops? And as you consider this, how does the public's lagging support for the war affect your decision-making now? And how has your review process been affected by the allegations of election fraud? Thank you.
OBAMA: First of all, let me be clear on our goals. We went into Afghanistan not because we were interested in entering that country or positioning ourselves regionally, but because Al Qaida killed 3,000- plus Americans and vowed to continue trying to kill Americans.
And so my overriding goal is to dismantle the Al Qaida network, to destroy their capacity to inflict harm not just on us, but people of all faiths and all nationalities all around the world, and that is our overriding focus.
Stability in Afghanistan and in Pakistan are critical to that mission. And after several years of drift in Afghanistan, we now find ourselves in a situation in which you have strong commitments from the ISAF coalition, our NATO allies. All of them are committed to making this work, but I think there's also a recognition that after that many years of drift it's important that we examine our strategies to make sure that they actually can deliver on preventing Al Qaida from establishing safe havens.
Obviously, the allegations of fraud in the recent election are of concern to us, and we are still awaiting results. We're awaiting the IEC and the ECC issuing their full report.
What's most important is that there is a sense of legitimacy in Afghanistan among the Afghan people for their government. If there is not, that makes our task much more difficult.
In terms of the review process that we're going through, we—the minute I came into office, we initiated a review and, even before that review was completed, I ordered 21,000 additional troops into Afghanistan because I thought it was important to secure the election, to make sure that the Taliban did not disrupt it.
What I also said at the time was that, after the election, we are going to reassess our strategy, precisely because so much of our success has to be linked to the ability of the Afghan people themselves to provide for their own security, their own training, the Afghan government's ability to deliver services and opportunity and hope to their people.
So we are doing exactly what I said we would do in March. I put in a new commander, General McChrystal, and I asked him to give me an unvarnished assessment of the situation in Afghanistan. And he has done that, as well.
But keep in mind that from the start my belief was—and this is shared with our ISAF allies—that our military strategy is only part of a broader project that has to include a civilian component, has to include a diplomatic component, and all those different factors are being weighed and considered at this point. And I will ultimately make this decision based on what will meet that core goal that I set out at the beginning, which is to dismantle, disrupt and destroy the Al Qaida network.
With respect to public opinion, I understand the public's weariness of this war, given that it comes on top of weariness about the war in Iraq. Every time we get a report of a young man or woman who's fallen in either of those theaters of war, it's a reminder of the extraordinary sacrifice that they're making. I know that our partners in Afghanistan feel that same pain when they see their troops harmed.
So this is not easy, and I would expect that the public would ask some very tough questions. That's exactly what I'm doing, is asking some very tough questions. And, you know, we're not going to arrive at perfect answers. I think anybody who's looked at the situation recognizes that it's difficult and it's complicated.
But my solemn obligation is to make sure that I get the best answers possible, particularly before I make decisions about sending additional troops into the theater.
John Dellna of KDKI (ph). Is John around?
QUESTION: Right here.
OBAMA: Good to see you, John.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. Let me ask you, while we were inside this very safe and secure and beautiful convention center, some 5,000 -- at least—demonstrators were on the outside. Some caused some property damage; others just shouted their messages, much of which had to do that, while you believe the G-20 summit was a success and represents a positive sign, they see it as something devilish and destructive of the world economy, and particularly the economy of the poor. What's your response to those who are demonstrating and those who oppose this summit?
OBAMA: Well, first of all, I think it's important just to keep things in perspective for the people of Pittsburgh. If you have looked at any of the other summits that took place—I mean, in London, you had hundreds of thousands of people on the streets. In, you know, most of these summits, there has been a much more tumultuous response.
And I think the mayor and the county executive and all the people of Pittsburgh deserve extraordinary credit for having managed what is a very tranquil G-20 summit.
You know, I think that many of the protests are just directed generically at capitalism, and they object to the existing global financial system, they object to free markets. One of the great things about the United States is that you can speak your mind and you can protest. That's part of our tradition.
But I fundamentally disagree with their view that the free market is the source of all ills.
Ironically, if they had been paying attention to what was taking place inside the summit itself, what they would have heard was a strong recognition from the most diverse collection of leaders in history that it is important to make sure that the market is working for ordinary people, that government has a role in regulating the market in ways that don't cause the kinds of crises that we've just been living through, that our emphasis has to be on more balanced growth, and that includes making sure that growth is bottom up, that workers, ordinary people are able to pay their bills, get—make a decent living, send their children to college, and that the more that we focus on how the least of these are doing, the better off all of us are going to be.
That principle was embodied in the communique that was issued. And so, you know, I would recommend those who were out there protesting, if they're actually interested in knowing what was taking place here, to read the communique that was issued.
Laurent Lozano? Is Laurent here? There he is.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to follow up on Iran. Since Iran seems to be so blatantly in breach of its international obligations and with some of your allies, main allies, obviously, growing impatient, why even meet with the Iranians on—on October 1st? And can you also explain to us what happened between the end of 2007, when an intelligence estimate cast doubts on the fact that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons and this year? What credit should be given to such intelligence?
Well, first of all, with respect to the intelligence that we presented to the IAEA, this was the work product of three intelligence agencies, not just one. These intelligence agencies checked over this work in a painstaking fashion precisely because we didn't want any ambiguity about what exactly was going on there.
And I think that the response that you saw today indicates the degree to which this intelligence is solid and indicates the degree to which Iran was constructing an enrichment facility that it had not declared, contrary to U.N. resolutions and contrary to the rules governing the IAEA.
In terms of meeting, I have said repeatedly that we're going to operate on two tracks, that our preferred method of action is diplomatic, but if that does not work, then other consequences may follow.
I also said—and this was debated extensively here in the United States, because there were some who suggested, you know, you can't talk to Iran, what's the point—that, by keeping the path of diplomacy open, that would actually strengthen world unity and our collective efforts to then hold Iran accountable.
And I think you're starting to see the product of that strategy unfold during the course of this week. What we saw at the United Nations in the Security Council was a strong affirmation of the principles of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. And as a consequence, the IAEA is strengthened and those countries who follow the rules are strengthened when it comes to dealing with countries like North Korea and Iran that don't follow the rules. And that means that, when we find that diplomacy does not work, we will be in a much stronger position to, for example, apply sanctions that have bite.
Now, as I said, that's not the preferred course of action. I would love nothing more than to see Iran choose the responsible path. Whether they do so or not will ultimately depend on their leaders, and they will have the next few weeks to show to the world which path they want to travel.
I'm going to take one last question. Yeah, I've got to call on one of these guys. You know, they're my constituency here. All right.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. You just mentioned sanctions that have bite. What kinds of sanctions—and I know you can't get into details—but what kinds of sanctions at all would have bite with Iran? Do you really think any kind of sanction would have an effect on somebody like Ahmadinejad?
Secondly, some of your advisers today said that this announcement was a, quote, "victory." Do you consider it a victory? And if so, why didn't you announce it earlier since you've known since you were president-elect?
OBAMA: This isn't a football game, so I'm not interested in victory. I'm interested in resolving the problem. The problem is, is that Iran repeatedly says that it's pursuing nuclear energy only for peaceful purposes, and its actions contradict its words. And as a consequence, the region is more insecure and vital U.S. interests are threatened. My job is to try to solve that.
And, you know, my expectation is that we are going to explore with our allies, with the P5-plus-one, a wide range of options in terms of how we approach Iran, should Iran decline to engage in the ways that are responsible.
You just told me I'm not going to get into details about sanctions, and you're right. I will not. But I think that, if you have the international community making a strong, united front, that Iran is going to have to pay attention.
In terms of why we didn't come out with this sooner, I already mentioned to Laurent that it is very important in these kinds of high- stakes situations to make sure that the intelligence is right. And we wanted all three agencies—the French, the Brits and the Americans—to have thoroughly scrubbed this and to make sure that we were absolutely confident about the situation there. We are, and now it's up to Iran to respond.
OK? Thank you very much, everybody. I hope you enjoyed Pittsburgh.
Thank you.
BARNICLE: You've been watching President Barack Obama at the G-20 on a day when Iran revealed a previously secret nuclear facility used for enriching uranium. The president said he prefers to resolve the dispute with Iran diplomatically, but he did not rule out any options.
Let's bring in Jamie Rubin, former spokesman for the State Department. Jamie, according to several reports we've heard prior to this press conference—and I think things that the president alluded to during his Q&A session with the media—Russia was kind of surprised with the revelation of this new nuclear development in Iran.
If—A, do you believe that? And B, if they were surprised, does that make our position vis a vis dealing with Iran stronger? And why?
JAMIE RUBIN, FMR. STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: First of all, I doubt the Russians will end up surprised when they have finished absorbing all the information that has been provided and what the Iranians say back. In the end, this will be another enrichment of uranium facility, very similar to one that has already existed. The Iranians will make the same arguments. And in the end, the Russians will have to come to the same judgments.
In a tactical sense, in a sort of today, tomorrow, the next day sense, the Russians probably did not expect this to become a public issue right now. And they may not have had the same intelligence that we had. But when you examine very carefully the White House fact sheet about this facility, they make clear that it doesn't change the intelligence community's assessment that Iran has not begun an actual nuclear weapons program.
So we're back to the same dilemma that we've been facing for quite some time now. This revelation today is important. It has highlighted the dilemma we've been facing for quite some time. But it doesn't change that dilemma.
The dilemma is that Iran is going full board for the ability to enrich uranium to a level that is not weapons grade. But they will have the capability inherently to increase that, an inherent breakout capability.
Meanwhile, the U.S. intelligence community doesn't think they have a nuclear weapons program right now. So that difference between having an inherent capability, having a peaceful so-called nuclear energy program, and actually building weapons is something where countries like the United States, France and Britain are extremely worried, and they take a tougher stance.
Countries like Russia and China, as long as they don't believe the Iranians have begun enriching uranium to weapons grade, as long as they believe that the Iranians are still not actually engaged in a nuclear weapons program, their response is going to be limited.
So we're going to be in the game that the president was talking about in the last question, which is some form of sanctions.
BARNICLE: You say the same dilemma. You just mentioned sanctions. The UN has been rather a toothless tiger when it comes to sanctions. Has it not? We've been talking about sanctions as a country vis a vis Iran for thirty years.
RUBIN: In the last three years, President Bush and now President Obama have gone to the Security Council and sought some form of economic sanctions. They're quite limited. They affect certain industries, certain individuals. They're not the kind of embargo, say, that we have on Cuba.
I don't think we're going to get that kind of embargo. This information doesn't dramatically transform the case the Iranians have, or the case the Americans have. It is very effective tactical intelligence that will put the pressure our Russia, put the pressure on China. But it's not going to change their fundamental position. We are not going to see an economic embargo, some sort of blockade on Iran, or something like that.
The truth is—this is what the last question brought out. Most experts, most people involved, have a hard time seeing why this particular regime, now that it has become even more extreme with the recent election and the crack down, will capitulate in the face of an economic sanction of some kind. So this dilemma is going to become even starker in the coming months for the president.
BARNICLE: You know, you have lived within the diplomatic world for a large part of the—
RUBIN: You're about to throw one at me, I think.
BARNICLE: I'm not. I think the average person listening to you might say to themselves, you just referenced the embargo in Cuba. The average person might say, how crazy is this? The only missiles they have in Havana are cigars, you know, Robustos. And these people in Iran, the government of Iran, might be capable of assembling a nuclear warhead. And we can't provide tougher sanctions on Iran than we provide on Cuba? That's like crazy stuff.
RUBIN: I agree that the Cuba embargo is something that most people will never understand, why they are singled out for this extreme economic sanction. I certainly agree with you that that has always been an outlier in term of why the U.S. has taken such an extreme stance.
But the bottom line, Mike, is that we're going to have limited economic sanctions posed against Iran. There perhaps will be some form of restriction on certain oil products. Maybe gasoline, if we're very lucky, but I doubt that.
And in the end, this regime, particularly one now run by the more extreme version of the Iranian revolution, those who have been left after this terrible crackdown which involved many of the members of the government and the elite and the establishment there breaking from the Revolutionary Guard that seems to be in large part in control. That's—what's left of the Iranian government is the least likely to be subject to economic sanctions.
All I'm saying here is that the president and his team have done a great job of highlighting the tactical situation, to put some pressure on Russia. But now this is a major international issue. They themselves have highlighted it, have brought it to supersede the entire economic summit in Pittsburgh that has taken place.
And yet, the result, as you saw in that last question, is no closer to achieving the Iranians stopping this program. And we're headed for, in the coming months, some big questions. Do we learn to live with this inherent capability or do we do something much more drastic?
BARNICLE: We're joined now by Chuck Todd, who was in Pittsburgh at the press conference. Chuck, Jamie Rubin, you just heard him talking about the answer to the last question the president gave about sanctions. And Jamie seems to feel—he'll correct me if I misinterpret it—that while Russia and China will be on board, he thinks, for sanctions, they are tip-toeing into the realm of sanctions, and might not end up agreeing with tougher sanctions, nearly as tough as we would want.
What is the feeling within the White House and the administration about how hooked into this Russia and China happen to be?
CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Right now, they're very bullish on the fact that they think Russia is on board. The statement that Russia put out today was tougher than they would have thought they would have gotten out of the Russians even just a couple of days ago. So they're bullish on this idea that the Russians privately really do feel a little bit burned by the Iranians, in the fact that the Iranians were concealing this.
The US folks that I've talked, some sources I've talked to indicate it is pretty clear to them the Russians didn't know about this site. And that bothers them. Not on the intelligence front, that bothers them in that relationship. They've been out there defending Iran.
In many ways, China has been hiding behind Russia in this divide between British—Between Britain, France and the U.S. and where China and Russia stood on this issue. Suddenly, if you've got Russia aboard, the hope among those in the White House is that that will bring a reluctant China.
They're still acting very reluctantly. And that's where I think Jamie could be very right. China might not be ready to go with its toughest sanctions, as the U.S. would hope for.
I'll tell you, on the one hand, they talk about North Korea. They'll sit there and say, you know what, we have the Chinese on board, some of the toughest sanctions against North Korea that anybody has gotten out of the Chinese in a long time. That's fine.
Iran, though, is going to turn into a domestic political fight in this country. The pressure the president is going to feel on this front is so much different than North Korea. You're going to see Congressional Republicans and a lot of Democrats. Today, Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh put out joint statements today about their feelings on Iran. It was a very hawkish statement, very sort of a message to the president about getting tough.
There could be bipartisan bills that come out of Congress with a lot of teeth, a lot of sanctions in it, that could just pop up as a bill for the president to sign, before he can make headway, frankly, when it comes to what he's trying to do in the P-5 plus One.
Then you have this line in the sand that the president sort of drew for next week, but then said, well, they have a few weeks. So, you know, look, it depends on what the Iranians do. Do they snow up, number one? And do they agree to some basic things that these six nations have been asking for them for, starting with allowing for some inspections by the International Atomic Agency.
BARNICLE: Speaking of the testing and the sites, let's take a look at these pictures of the alleged uranium enriching facility in Iran. They were released by the Institute for Science and International Security.
The first is from March 2005. And the second is from January of 2009. I don't know what we can tell from that. I certainly can't tell anything from that. But Jamie, let me ask you, Chuck was talking about the domestic politics aspect of it here in the United States. Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh.
Let me ask you, what do you think the situation is in Tehran? They've gone through a summer of unrest, based upon the elections and the street riots. Who's in charge in Iran? Is it Ahmadinejad, who is no longer the craziest guy in town? We saw that the guy from Morocco—Libya is even crazier this week. Or is it the Ayatollahs in Iran? Who runs that country?
RUBIN: Well, two points, first of all. After this crackdown this summer, it's clear that President Ahmadinejad has more power than he did in his last term. The collective leadership that existed in Iran for many, many years, decades, has now split, with the most extreme members of that collective leadership, led by the leader Mr. Khameini, and now President Ahmadinejad, fully in charge, and the more moderate, so-called conservative, true conservatives, some of the clerics, a number of the businessmen, et cetera. The more reasonable ones are now in opposition to this government.
So this is the most extreme government in Iran that's ever existed. People will argue they've always been extreme. I think it's clear this is the most extreme government.
It's clear to me, at least, what is going to happen at this meeting next week. Iran has already made clear, they're going to go in there; they're going to allow inspections of this facility, sooner or later. And they're going to say, this is another example of our peaceful nuclear energy. This is an enrichment facility that the White House paper makes very clear is not a military facility. It's enriching up to five percent, which is the energy level.
It happens to be, and this is quite interesting, at a Republican Revolutionary Guard facility. So it's showing the potential military capabilities here.
But the dilemma hasn't changed. They say they can do enrichment at this five percent level. And the international community says no. And that's the problem.
BARNICLE: OK. Jamie Rubin, as always, thank you. Chuck Todd, as always. Thank you.
Up next, much more on Iran's newly revealed nuclear site and how President Obama is handling this major test on the world stage. This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
OBAMA: I've always said that we do not rule out any options when it comes to US security interests. But I will also reemphasize that my preferred course of action is to resolve this in a diplomatic fashion. It's up to the Iranians to respond.
BARNICLE: We're back. It's time for the politics fix, with David Gregory, moderator of NBC's "Meet the Press" and Ron Brownstein, political director for Atlantic Media. David, we just saw the president on a stage in Pittsburgh, but it's really a world stage for him now. Does this change the dynamic of what his presidency is all about and who he is? Is he now more of a leader of the Western world than just the United States?
DAVID GREGORY, MODERATOR, "MEET THE PRESS": Inevitably in a presidency, there are events that are thrust upon the president, that he has to respond to, shape. And he has to shape it not just for himself but, as you say, for the western world, for the western allies. That's what the president is in the middle of doing right now.
This is the moment of confrontation, of challenge with regard to Iran. This is the moment when he is able to say to the Iranians, got you. We got you. We see what you're doing. Now you either sit down and talk and negotiate away nuclear weapons, or there's going to be a different track that you're not going to like.
So stop haranguing, stop negotiating, stop saying one thing one day, and something else another. Let's talk. And let's talk about the potential for a real relationship, because I, President Obama, is somebody who wants to engage with you.
All of that is coming up for a test right now.
BARNICLE: Ron, the back story here—it's not really the back story. It's a major one—involves the president and his relationship with and his discussions with the Russians and the Chinese over this very issue. How, if at all, does this help him domestically in politics here?
RON BROWNSTEIN, ATLANTIC MEDIA: Well, first of all, your point is correct, Mike. I think a lot of things that have happened up to this point in his presidency have put him in a stronger position to organize a kind of unified response from the world. The overall trajectory of his discussion of international organizations, the fact that he has made clear he was willing to have a negotiation with Iran, a more direct kind of engagement, and also, frankly, the decision on missile defense that removed some hurdles to the relationship with Russia.
Those all put him in a stronger position to try to organize an international coalition here. The hard truth is that this is one of those problems in which even the combined influence of a unified outside world may have limited capacity to change the trajectory of policy in Iran. This is going to be a difficult and frustrating problem for Obama, in all likelihood, as it was for President Bush.
So, on the one hand, I think it does elevate his stature in the world. That cannot help but help him at home. On the other hand, it is going to be a persistent headache, and one that is unlikely to lead to the equivalent of a VE Day any time soon.
BARNICLE: OK. Ron Brownstein, David Gregory, thanks very much.
Chris Matthews returns Monday at 5:00 and 7:00 Eastern for more HARDBALL.
Right now, it's time for "THE ED SHOW" with Ed Schultz.
Transcription Copyright 2009 CQ Transcriptions, LLC ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon MSNBC and CQ Transcriptions, LLC's copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.>
Transcription Copyright 2009 CQ Transcriptions, LLC ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research.
User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user's
personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed,
nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion
that may infringe upon MSNBC and CQ Transcriptions, LLC's copyright or
other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal
transcript for purposes of litigation.>

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Inspired by "Spiced Cider" from designer Jan Ragaller
Quiltmaker: Laura Boehnke
18x22" piece (fat quarter) white tone-on-tone (blocks)
10" square each mottled purple and mottled red (blocks)
7" square mottled orange (blocks)
9x22" piece (fat eighth) lime green print (blocks)
18x22" piece (fat quarter) pink print (blocks, middle border)
1/3 yard purple print (blocks, middle border)
1/2 yard light pink print (middle border)
1/8 yard dark pink print (middle border)
1/3 yard brown print (inner border)
1-1/8 yards brown-and-pink print (outer border, binding)
2-1/2 yards backing fabric
46" batting
Finished quilt: 40" square
Finished blocks: 6" square
Quantities are for 44/45"-wide, 100% cotton fabric. Measurements include 1/4" seam allowances. Sew with right sides together unless otherwise stated.


text:
MGM Products>> Free UK Delivery on All Orders >>
Login to enhance your shopping experience.Login or Create an Account
Search the Store
Store Info Menu
Store Menu
Online Store Search
Menu: Store Home | Advanced Search | Shopping Cart | Checkout
Interactively search the online store for items below.
All required fields are marked with a star (*). Click the 'Submit' button at the bottom of this form to proceed.
Allow Cookie Saving
The MGM Products Ltd would like to place cookies on your computer to help us make this website better. To find out more about the cookies, see our privacy notice.
Shopping Cart
There are no items in your shopping cart.
Your Account Menu


text:
Home >
Early Bird Limited Offer
Buy RE800, get HM700 32G+RE400 FREE!
This free HM700 is only available in US & Canada.
While the order processing system will accept and process orders for elsewhere they will not be shipped. Your card, however, will be charged and it will require a manual cancellation. The process to refund may take up to 7 working days.
So please only U.S & Canada customers for this item, please.


text:
She offernded the Egyptian flag because she was wearing red bra and black skirt? These are so common colors! Or was the armband? I don't understand..
Anyway, I won't express my opinion about this law. Since a law has passed, it has to be respected. But I have to comment that it seems a bit generic, at least as presented in the article, and considering that the (non-egyptian) dancer did such great and fast success, i suspect that the accuse against her was not that innoccent. Perhaps someone found a cever way to stop her success..


text:
One of the headline features of Windows 8 is the introduction of apps, and the Windows Store is the Google Play and App Store of the Microsoft world.
As many competitors have seen, having a packed app store is the only way to compete with the likes of the iPad, and Google's rapid expansion of its Play store has been a huge driving force of its recent success.
Unfortunately, Microsoft has not been able to launch Windows Store with anything like enough apps to call its store a success.
We have no doubt that soon Windows Store will be a thriving metropolis of new releases and with a huge install base predicted by the end of the first year, developers should be scrambling over themselves to be a part of Windows 8.
However, we can only review what's in front of us, and at present, the Windows Store is not good enough. The big-name brands just aren't present, and while the store grows every day, the poor selection hobbles Surface's potency as a great tablet.
The staggering part of the problem is that this is basic functionality.
Microsoft is reported to be putting $1bn behind the marketing of Windows 8, but a fraction of this money could have been used to pay for the big name apps to be made: Sky Go, BBC iPlayer, Instagram, VLC, Google Chrome; they're just not there, and it's to Surface's detriment.
There's no shame in putting money behind this kind of project, but allowing early adopters to experience this kind of app abyss is inexcusable.
As a gaming device Microsoft Surface could be potent. While we have highlighted performance questions, there's no evidence of this manifesting in games so far, and as Windows is historically a gaming platform, this could mean an exciting future for tablets such as Surface.


text: bonesiii Report post Posted November 10, 2012 (edited) Welcome to The Perfect Cage, the second epic in the second Saga of the Bionicle Paracosmos, an Adventure Mystery series that mirrors official story but is often different, for reason that are central to the plot. As always, feel free to jump right in without reading past story; if you would like a brief summary see the review topic. My collection topic is here: Tapestry of Time.This story centers on Toa Onua, during early 2003 story, as well as a Ko-Matoran fisherwoman named Nijire, and Toa Kopaka. It has 48 chapters plus a prologue and epilogue. The beginning takes place just after the defeat of the Bahrag, before the Kal attack. To followers of my blog, it should be no surprise that the shaky alliance the Paracosmos Toa and Kal have may be challenged -- expect to see winners of the Bohrok Kool contest here. :biggrin:Enjoy! [Review Here]PART ONEPrologueOnua walked alone through the savannah land of Kini-Wahi. His eyes were barely focused on what was in front of him.All he could think about was how unfair all this was, that this burden was on him.Onua only.Those were the words that had appeared on a mysterious tablet moments ago, as the Turaga concluded their meeting with the Toa and others who were helping them. The tablet had been found the day before, and it was blank. But then messages kept appearing... and changing...The Turaga believed the messages came from the mysterious people who called themselves the 'Unknown.'Along with these words were a map to a spot deep in the Fau swamp, and three more words.Claw of Strength.What did that mean? The right-hand one of his glovelike Toa Tools was missing. Maybe this would replace it? But why couldn't he bring help?Onua was nearly where he wanted to enter the jungle, when he heard loud sounds to his right.Looked.Saw nothing.More. It sounded like huge stones crumbling.Looked up.Saw nothing on the slopes of the volcano to the north. Higher still, at the very top.Huge orange threadlike tendrils were cutting into the rocky ring of the Mangai's caldera. Pulling the rock inward.Sewing.From the caldera, a constant river of lava flowed into a lava tube, to the east. Ta-Koro sat on an island inside the tube, and the river parted around it, though from here all you could see was the glowing orange hole in the roof of the tube over Ta-Koro. Several other holes along the path hinted at the river, and at the ocean, a constant cloud of steam rose, and faded into the sky.Now, Onua could see hole after hole going dark.Something's choking the flow off.Ta-Koro's hole went dark.The sounds stopped. The tendrils disappeared, but something that looked like a huge orange-glowing spiderweb now held the rock dome in place where the caldera should be.Something that's inside the volcano.A twig snapped in the jungle.He whirled.Eyes.Eyes everywhere.Pairs of eyes. Watching him.He looked left, to the east. Eyes dotted the front of the forest for as far as he could see.Looked right. The same.He knew who those eyes belonged to, though nobody had managed to see – or remember – their actual forms. For they had arrived on the island a few days ago and attacked mysteriously from the shadows, kidnapping some. But one thing they did not keep secret. Their name.Kuambu.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A few hours ago...Onua sat heavily down at the table in Kini-Nui Hall.The Turaga and others had gathered here to discuss recent events and plans for the immediate future. Most importantly, proof had been found that Makuta Teridax had been captured alive by a mysterious villain named Vaurukan. A team of loyal servants of Makuta were planning to free him.The Toa could not let that happen. They had to find that villain's prison and stop the servants. But so much had gone wrong lately, and they'd put off dealing with things that normally would be emergencies. Could they put it all off any longer?The others in the room discussed this vigorously.But Onua couldn't focus.All their words sounded like background noise to him. Occasionally he managed to listen long enough that he could add a tidbit to the discussion, but not much.Onua had been singled out by the cryptic shapeshifter named Surkahi twice with prophetic statements. The first time, Surkahi said Onua would have to leave the island soon.And then Surkahi – along with all the Unknown – had disappeared, saying they would not be seen again for a long time.Except possibly by Onua, he'd added.He hoped he would see the shapeshifter soon. He had a thousand questions.He felt off-balance. Not only because just after the defeat of the Bahrag, the Toa's bodies had been changed in mysterious ways, but literally off-balance due to his missing glove-Tool.And maybe for a reason more psychological, but he wasn't sure. He had a quiet wisdom, or so he thought of himself, but the great mystery to him had always been himself. Why he chose to keep quiet when a word of advice could have helped, why he was more interested in the scenery than the endless debates of his fellows.Why he was different.He had started to gain some confidence as the Toa defeated Makuta and then the Bahrag. But then the Kuambu had swept through in a raid too one-sided to really call a battle. They had knocked everyone unconscious. The Toa fell first, and others saw blue sparkling light from strange lanterns be shone upon them.They had changed form. The rules were different now. Onua still wasn't sure he knew what those rules were. And Lewa kept muttering that this wasn't how it was supposed to be."Onua, are you ready, then?" Turaga Vakama asked.Onua looked up. He remembered the deal he and Rathoa – a villain they were in a temporary alliance with – had made, and assumed that was what they meant.Nodded."Good. Let's get going, then."Everybody stood up, and walked out, as if they all had a purpose and a clear plan. He wished he'd paid attention.Rathoa walked up to him. He was huge, colored black – he was, in fact, a Makuta, though not naturally. Once he had been a mere Matoran. "I'll meet you at the Seahopper when you've got it." Then he nodded in farewell and walked out. Five of the Turaga left too.Whenua lingered, as did Onua. "What island are you on right now?" the elder asked.Onua shrugged. "Sorry. Just… all of this is too much to absorb so fast.""Did you even hear, about the tablet?"He frowned. "The what?"Whenua held up the gray rectangular stone. The last contact with the Unknown. It was apparently able to change the message inscribed on it, though he had no idea how.Now, it displayed only five words. Onua slowly absorbed what it said. Only he could come? What was this 'Claw of Strength'? And shouldn't Lewa and Gali come along if he had to go to the horrid Fau swamp?But he had already agreed, hadn't he?------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Kopaka ran out of Kini-Nui.Pohatu came with him. Kopaka thought the Toa of Stone looked very strange now. The transformation had made him much bulkier than before, and even changed his secondary color to yellow. His main Tools were still attached to his feet and now were silver. His hands each had two silver claws, plus he carried a long brown sword, currently stored on his back.Of course, Kopaka looked strange himself now, he realized. He wasn't much bulkier, but he was more heavily armored, his shield was larger, and he now had two silver skate-tools in addition to his sword.The first thing the Toa had discovered about their changed bodies, besides the different shapes, was that all the other masks they had previously collected were gone, except one per Toa.Each Toa was left with only the one mask they originally had, and one other. Their other powers had previously been fused into one gold-rimmed mask, but now they had two distinct masks only. And the shape of their main mask was changed slightly.On the plus side, they could now share the powers of their main masks with others. That could come in handy, but they all commented that it was disappointing to work so hard to collect so many only to have them disappear.Kopaka especially missed having his own Mask of Speed. He'd learned his lesson about the value of Unity, but he still preferred to work alone.Especially for this trip.Instead he was stuck with the 'Kanohi Nuva', as Rathoa called it, of Vision... and a normal mask of Translation.Not a problem, they had thought.Easily fixed.For recently they had collected many extra masks from a ghostly enemy, including Great Masks, and stored them in Kini-Nui Hall. They walked down the stairs, went to the storeroom...And found it empty.Someone had stolen the extra masks.But they had reason to believe something far more important had been stolen. Really, not things... but people.Now Kopaka and Pohatu arrived at the gates of Ko-Koro.It was deserted.This morning, when the Toa had awoken from being knocked unconscious and changed by the Kuambu – they'd discovered that all the Ko-Matoran who had joined the battle against the Bahrag were gone.Tahu retained perhaps the most valuable mask of all – the one remaining Mask of Telecommunication. He'd tried to contact Ko-Koro, but nobody answered.Gukko scouts had already flown near and confirmed no sign of an enemy, nor of inhabitants.Kopaka turned to the Toa of Stone. "If you don't mind… I want to go in alone."Pohatu had an especially serious look on his face, for him anyways. "Understood."The Toa of Ice tried to ready himself... but there was no readying for this. His own people...So he just took a breath, gripped his sword and his shield firmly, and walked in.The first thing he wanted to see was someone – anyone – perhaps cowering in a corner, perhaps running out to report who had taken the others, or which direction they had gone.This turned out to be a vain hope.The second thing was footprints.The Kuambu's appearances were kept carefully secret. They'd swept over all their footprints in sand, and tried to walk on plants wherever they went so far. It didn't surprise him now that he saw no footprints.But he was surprised to not even see any hint that footprints had been erased.And there were little pockets of ice here and there in the snow, where ice shouldn't be. Looking closer, he saw they were tiny holes that had melted snow, which had later refrozen.In the center of the village, there was a single larger hole, large enough for a Matoran to fit inside. He looked down.Strange threads of glowing orange seemed to be worked into the ice and rock walls of the hole. Down about fifty feet the sides of the hole had collapsed in, sealing it.So... the Kuambu's one rule – no killing – seemed to have held. His people were not dead. He could not be sure, though, so he didn't allow himself to relax. And being captured was nothing to brush aside."What could do this?" he whispered to himself."Vaurukan's creatures," a voice answered.Kopaka whirled, lifting his sword and shield defensively.There was a small dark red being with wings hovering there.Next to him stood a tall blue and white titan with goat-like hooves, and carrying a sword that looked like Kopaka's."Sairiph!" Kopaka exclaimed to the small being, who had spoken. "And Toggler. What are you doing here?""We heard what happened," Toggler said. "Sairiph said he had a hunch what did it. He was right.""What hunch?"Pohatu walked up. "What do you guys want?" He looked on the defensive too.There was something about these two, especially Sairiph, that was disturbing, though they claimed to be on the side of good. They had come to the island as crewmembers of the ship named the Seahopper, and friends of its Captain, the reptilian Bhukasa, on his voyage to investigate the Kuambu, which ended last night."This orange, this hole," Sairiph said. "It's a trademark of Vaurukan's creatures.""Who's Vaurukan?" Kopaka asked."Weren't you listening in the meeting?" Pohatu scolded him. "The ruler of the island where Makuta is being held." Kopaka had meant the question to be more about the person, not the name, but Sairiph's eyes flashed at the word 'Makuta' and he spoke before Kopaka could."Makuta Teridax, yes. Vaurukan is… a collector.""But the Kuambu did this!" Kopaka exclaimed. "We have several witnesses who saw Kuambu take Ko-Matoran away at the northwest prison island, and on the Bahrag battlefield.""Oh, Vaurukan wouldn't be involved here unless the Kuambu had hired him," Sairiph said. "The Kuambu are to blame, but surely by now you realize they prefer to work through others?"That made sense. They wanted to keep as much about themselves secret as they could, except that they were the rulers of the surface ocean.The Seahopper crew had dealt with mercenaries already. And when the Kuambu did let you see them, they hit you with energy spheres that blurred your memory of their appearance. Kopaka had such a blurred memory himself from the battlefield."So, the Ko-Matoran were taken to Vaurukan's island?""I'm afraid so," Sairiph said, though his tone was off – he almost seemed happy about it. "They won't be easy to free.""But we will try," Toggler assured him. For these two, as well as Onua and Rathoa, were all going to try to go there on the Seahopper, though only Sairiph knew the way, to make sure Teridax stayed contained."If you fear that the Rahunga," Pohatu said, referring to the Matoran servants of Makuta who used a black mutagen called rahudermis to become powerful, "can free Makuta, then that means it's possible to free the Matoran too. And you'll need all the help you can get, so—""You mustn't come," Sairiph said. "One Toa Mata… or Nuva, or whatever you're calling yourselves now, leaving this island is risky enough.""Rathoa said it's a volcanic island," Kopaka said. "My power will be a great help.""I have every ounce of your power," Toggler said, holding up the sword.Just like Kopaka's sword, it was fused with a Btou staff, which granted the user the elemental power of whatever Toa normally used a Toa Tool. Such Tools looked fancier than their unmerged versions. Toggler's was strangely identical to Kopaka's."How did you get it?" Kopaka asked, unable to hold back the question any longer."I found it. At home. In the mountains."Not helpful. "But it's just the sword for you. The power is in me, even if I lose the sword, as I have before. You might lose it.""It shall not happen," Sairiph insisted.Kopaka stepped forward three times, getting in Sairiph's face. "Who are you to deny me this? They're MY people!"Sairiph's red eyes flashed. The little winged being hovered a little higher. "I have the authority, Toa. There was once a time when I said go, and you went. You may have forgotten, and Teridax may have corrupted it, but the title of Makuta still means 'you obey me, by the will of Mata Nui.'"As he said it, a crackling sphere of blue electricity appeared in one hand.Kopaka couldn't help himself – he stepped back in surprise and more than a little fear. "You're a… you're…""My name is Spiriah – I go by Sairiph, for I was exiled from Teridax's corrupted Brotherhood and to use my real name is more dangerous. But I am true to what we were. Loyal to the Great Spirit, the one you serve."He was so little, though! How could someone so—Sairiph's face curled up in anger. "You think size defines strength. I could destroy everyone on this island if I wanted to."Did he just read my mind?"You said creatures," Pohatu said, as if this little… disagreement wasn't happening. "What kind of creatures?""Creatures that eat molten rock for breakfast, that shimmer with the heat of a thousand suns, that reek of sulfur, that clothe themselves in smoke, before whom the very ground trembles in terror. Creatures neither of you would stand a chance against.""I've heard tales," Toggler put in. "If the rumors are right, your Matoran friends are lucky the creatures were in obedient moods, to kidnap instead of kill."Kopaka turned and started marching out. "That's it. I'm going. I will NOT leave them to the likes of you as saviors.""Stop!" Sairiph barked. "That's a direct order."He kept going, shouting over his shoulder, "Come on, Pohatu! I don't remember any rank system that says I have to obey a Makuta!""Uh, maybe we should…"Light and pain.Blue crackling electricity.All over his body."Wait!" Pohatu objected.Kopaka's vision faded.Faded back in, to see snow obscuring his vision – he must have fallen on his face.Heard more crackling, but didn't feel it. Heard someone else – Pohatu, he realized – fall to the ground.He tried to get back up.But more lightning wracked his body.This time, his vision faded to black. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Nijire awoke.Ow…There were pains all over the Ko-Matoran's body, as if she'd been burned and dragged through a long, narrow tunnel.Which she had, she remembered, grimacing. Thankfully the burns weren't bad, though she'd seen the glowing orange tendrils melt ice before capturing her. Whatever had grabbed her had been holding back its heat.The room she was in shook.She jerked to her feet, looked around.Heard a terrifying roar, so deep it shook her bones.She was in a room made of metal, protobronze by the look of it, but with corners made of cool gray stone. A strange green crystal at the top apparently was recycling the air, as she felt a fresh breeze wafting off of it – instantly telling her the room was airtight.Roar again. The room shook so violently she fell on her side.She rolled off of whatever she'd fallen on – the floor was littered with tons of objects of all types. Gearwork clocks, fishing nets, shovels, lightstones, torches with proto-flint lighters, candles, and unlit proto-oil lanterns, and just about anything else you could imagine, if it was small enough to hold with one hand. She recognized all of it from Ko-Koro.A rapid, repeated scraping sound on the other side of the wall in front her.A powerful thump, rocking the room again. In the exact moment the sound rang out, a part of the wall bent inward.Again, and bent in more.The metal started to glow.Orange.She felt heat radiating from it. The chilly room warmed quickly.The fisherwoman turned around, looking at the walls. No sign of a door. The metal portions strongly braced around the rock portions.Trapped.Why am I always getting trapped?Now the monster moved to the left.Pounded now on the stone instead of metal.A piece broke, fell on the floor. She heard more breaking off on the other side.The creature sped up the attacks then, roaring louder. Eager.She looked around frantically. She'd been trapped by enemies before. Twice – and she'd found a way out both times. She was confident she could again, especially with so many tools here of various uses.Shovel?Too slow compared to that. But she grabbed it anyways and slammed it into the opposite rock corner.It bounced off and slipped from her grasp.Not a dent in the rock, but the shovel was badly bent.She picked it up, tried again.This time the scoop bounced right into her face. "Ow!" she cried aloud.ROAR in response, and the creature rammed harder and faster still.No! No!Tried the shovel on metal. It didn't give.Tried a miner's pick. Nothing!Tried object after object. Threw a clock with all her might at the metal, smashing the clock, and leaving the metal smooth as a puddle in Ko-Wahi.Nijire turned and stared at the breaking wall, horror frozen on her face, crouched defensively, clutching a proto-iron rod the wall had just snapped in two.There was nothing she could do.Review here Edited November 13, 2012 by bonesiii 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites


text:
KrishnaPineapple explains why asking a woman about her pubes could lead to some interesting conversation:
I think that this guy (I am disinclined to say this "man" for some reason) might be well served to ask his girlfriend why she likes to wear her pubic hair in a natural style. She might have a good and interesting reason. For example, if she were to say, "Because my pubes are so sharp and coarse and if I don't let them grow natural, the tips of the regrowth will make your gums bleed and put your eyes out," he might reconsider asking her to shave at all.
Not that we know anything about this at my house.
Submit nominations to the Comment of the Day tag page. Click on the comment's time stamp, and post the comment's URL to the forum. (Replying to a comment with "#cotd" does not work; you need to go to the forum.) For meetups, use the meetup forum!


text:
Some notes on Visual Urban Astronomy
Posted 19 January 2013 - 08:50 AM
By Tom Bryant
Posted 19 January 2013 - 09:33 AM
Finally, many galaxies that are not point sources look great from the city. You just have to experiment with optimmum magnification, which can vary a lot, and wait for the object to be as well placed in the sky as it gets.
Great article.
Posted 19 January 2013 - 12:09 PM
Keep looking up!
Posted 19 January 2013 - 12:31 PM
I enjoyed your article very much. The link to the dark sky map was also helpful.
Regarding the Night Assistant program, I have Windows Vista and downloaded the recommended files, but could not find the "BrightStarsDB.zip" file. Is this the "naData12.zip" file?
Ran "java GetParams" via command line in the "classes" subdirectory, to test the program, and just got a blank observing screen, not a configuration screen.
Did not see a ".bat" file anywhere.
What am I doing wrong?
thanks, Phil
Posted 19 January 2013 - 04:51 PM
Posted 19 January 2013 - 04:59 PM
It works fine on my Linux box, so the broken interface never became apparent!
I'm going to fix it over the next couple of days, so watch this thread for updates.
Sorry for the inconvenience!
Posted 19 January 2013 - 07:52 PM
I immediately had very similar thoughts as Uncle Rod. That is; the only thing I don't agree with, is the part about some filters not being useful. I've been an urban observer for a while. And, see, I love nebulae filters. And, if loving nebula filters is wrong, then I don't wanna be right
Seriously, though, in my opinion they are (all) must have's. Even the lowly, barely useful, SkyGlow/Broadband types.
I wish you Good Seeing!
Posted 20 January 2013 - 07:34 AM
Thanks for a VERY interesting article - APPRECIATED!
Am guessing the 'bug' you mention is reason why when trying to configure / set-up version <nightAssistant09_62.zip> I only get blank screen?
As an aside, I also assume (very dangerous!) that naming convention for the database file differers between article and the Source Forge listing? The title of the required files reflecting the Bright Star (naData12.zip 2012-12-26 312.7 MB) or Feint (naData16.zip 2012-11-10 2.9 GB) data?
Awaiting 'fixed' Windows release soon!
Posted 20 January 2013 - 09:59 AM
I've made several improvements to Night Assistant, and neglected to update the documentation, which many of you have pointed out. Many thanks for this. I've again updated the documentation, and it now reflects the current version of Night Assistant.
I *think* the Windows interface is right now, but won't be testing it until my Windows Guru (Kathie) tries it on her machine. I'll keep you posted...
Night Assistant was written because, 5 years ago, none of the available "Planetarium" programs did what I needed for my observing program. Things like finder charts to 12mv (now 16mv, mostly because Tom Corbin has an Obsession 18) and accurate double and variable star information at the click of a mouse. There are things it doesn't do, like control your telescope (My C-11 does a fine job on its own, and my C-8 has no computer interface), or show solar system objects (I can easily find the bright planets in my Telrad).
As I say in the notes, the source code *is* included, and you are encouraged to expand the program.
As to the notes about filters. Based on your comments, I'll be buying a UHC filter soon. Lumicon, TeleView, Celestron, or Baader? I'd like to hear what you think about these. Based on my experience with Tom C's O-18 with and without the UHC, I've concluded that the filter really helps emission nebulae, but little else. If we called them "nebular filters" it might be a bit more accurate. Again, I'm interested to hear your take on them.
Posted 20 January 2013 - 07:48 PM
Posted 21 January 2013 - 12:15 PM
A quick Google search did not find an easy answer. I'll keep working on it.
So much for the Oracle/Sun/Java claim of "Write once, run anywhere"
Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:53 PM
There's nothing like software development to allow you ample opportunity to make a chump of yourself.
I've got it working in command line mode on Windows. From the classes folder, run "java GetParms" and it should come up. I'll revise the documentation tomorrow. Promise!
You'll need to download the latest version, 09_7:
Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:58 AM
TLM = 9 + 5 * log10(D_in) - LN((6.5/NEML)^2.512) giving a TML loss of about 2mag for an 8" scope with NEML of 3.
This formula does not base on any optical theory and is only an approximation based on own observations under heavy light pollution so it might very well be possible to do better under specific conditions but when it comes to split double stars you will have a hard time with companions fainter than this value.
Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:33 AM
Ed D
Posted 22 January 2013 - 12:43 PM
With the most recent download and info I was able to get the Night Assistant program to run on Windows. "java GetParams"
Thanks for your hard work and patience.
I'm sending a pm.
thanks again, Phil
Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:26 PM
rkk_529 (At sign) hotmail.com
Many thanks in advance and Clear Skies to All!
Posted 25 January 2013 - 11:35 AM
The sky brightness is only one concern. Other factors include (and I may be leaving some out):
--altitude of star
--cleanliness of optics
--extinction factor (related to altitude of site and transparency of the air)
--color of the star
--experience of the observer
--age of the observer
--magnification used
So the limiting stellar magnitude of an 8" scope can reach as deep as 16 in a pristine site with all other parameters optimum, or as little as 12-13 if conditions are not optimum.
My normal limit in an 8" (I used Roger Clark's excellent star cluster charts) was 15.1-15.3 in a dark, but not pristine, site, and I reached 15.6 once in a near-pristine site.
So I was interested in seeing how deep I could reach here in L.A. in my backyard (a "white zone" light pollution area) and I regularly discovered that though the sky measured (with a Sky Quality Meter) between 3.5 and 4 full magnitudes brighter than my dark site, the dryness of the air and the often excellent transparency of the bright sky air enabled me to get to magnitude 13.5-13.8, or 1.5-1.6 magnitudes poorer than my dark site.
What it usually meant was that I had to use higher magnifications in the city than were needed in the dark site to see fainter stars. And Seeing conditions often interfered with that. Poor seeing can make the faintest stars invisible by smearing them out.
But it pointed out, as was pointed out to me by other observers, that you don't actually lose exactly the same magnitude in stars at the limit as the difference in magnitude between a dark site and a brighter one.
That's stars, however. Extended deep sky objects like galaxies are wiped out by small amounts of light pollution, reducing contrast, in many cases, to zero and making the objects invisible.
Narrowband filters can make many many nebulae and planetaries visible in even the brightest skies, but don't expect miracles--the faint outer envelopes of many nebulae simply disappear. Even in the extremely narrow bandwidths of those filters, contrast is reduced by the brighter skies. But I have seen, and viewed, the Orion Nebula in a sky so bright the stars in the sword could not be seen at all! And though M57 doesn't really need a filter at a dark site, it's still amazingly good with a filter in skies so bright <100 stars are visible in the sky and it looks like early twilight AFTER it's gotten "dark".
The point is that you should never take for granted that any object is invisible in a city environment. Many factors influence the limits we see, and Tom rightly pointed out that there is still a universe of objects to look at. There are over 5500 star clusters that are named, in the Milky Way, and the vast majority of them will be seen in an 8" scope. And don't forget the "star clusters" that aren't really clusters but appear to be (there are thousands of these and hundreds have names), called asterisms.
One could spend every clear night observing and barely dip into what's visible in even the brightest of cities.
Good summary Tom. Hopefully you've encouraged others to go looking from their urban backyards.
Posted 25 January 2013 - 07:07 PM
I also enjoyed looking at your log book. I write in a log book and have always been disappointed that my log is more a diary and I cannot quickly compare objects observed on different nights (and years) with different scopes. Your log allows you to add an observation made in 2012 between one made in 2006 and 2010. I like that very much. My only suggestion is that you write more, make it more enjoyable to read. What was the night like? Cold? Hot and Humid? What were some of your thoughts while observing? I suspect your kids and grand-kids and others down the line would be interested in your thoughts while you were out there observing.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:38 PM
For all of you who've tried, and failed, to get Night Assistant working, my apologies! It had been 2 years since I had upgraded the documentation, and changes had been made.
I've reintroduced the "Help" button, and tried to upgrade both the FAQ:
and user's manual:
There have been several tweaks to the program as well. You no longer have to click a button to display a preformatted list or make a finder chart of a named object. Just fill in the text box and hit the Enter key.
Please try using it again, and I'd appreciate any feedback you can give, either in this forum or directly to me:
rkk_529 (at sign) hotmail.com
PS: What is the technical term that Microsoft uses for their test team?


text:
CHESTER – The Philadelphia Union entered Wednesday night's game worried about ending one long, unsightly drought. It was the halting of another that made it possible.
Goals by Conor Casey, Sebastien Le Toux and Fred, the latter his first in MLS play in exactly 45 months, helped the Union end their home-field hoodoo, notching a 3-1 win over the New York Red Bulls.
The win is the first at home for the Union (5-8-7, 22 points) in MLS play in four months and one day, dating to the encounter with New England March 15. The club had gone winless (0-2-5) in seven matches at PPL Park since.
New York, which saw a five-game unbeaten streak come to an end, got a goal thanks to MLS leading scorer Bradley Wright-Phillips and looked dangerous in the second half, but they couldn't overcome the deficit fostered by a sleepy first half.
The Union's return to the win column at home was aided by the 51st-minute goal from Fred, his first in his second stint with the club. Fred's last goal in MLS came exactly three years and nine months ago on Oct. 16, 2010 – in a Union jersey at PPL Park against New York.
Casey opened the scoring after nine minutes with a superb combination of dogged work and delicate touch on the ball in what was the club's first organized foray forward.
Off a Zac MacMath goal kick, Casey beat defender Jamison Olave on an aerial duel, controlled the ball and played Andrew Wenger out wide. Wenger put a hopeful ball into Casey's path, and the bulky striker took a precise touch around a befuddled Matt Miazga and finished low and to the right of Luis Robles.
Fred's goal came courtesy of Casey's discretion, the striker dummying a look at a deflected cross from Sheanon Williams for the Brazilian substitute to latch onto it and blister one past Robles. Fred had come on for injured Cristian Maidana late in the first half.
The Fred goal seemed to awaken both teams in the way Casey's hadn't, turning up the heat in a meeting of the two most prolific scoring teams in the Eastern Conference. Within nine minutes, the Red Bulls' tried and true combination of Thierry Henry to Wright-Phillips struck, the Frenchman's MLS-leading 10th assist of the season setting up the Englishman's 16th goal and 15th in the last 12 matches.
Just as the Red Bulls were ramping up the pressure, Le Toux was able to relieve it by converting from the penalty spot, his 11th successful spot kick in 11 attempts in a Union kit. Eric Alexander horse-collared Maurice Edu in the box on a corner kick, forcing referee Baldomero Toledo to point to the spot. Le Toux made no mistake, and though Robles guessed correctly, there was no stopping the effort Le Toux pounded into the roof of the net.
The goal is the Union's 22nd in the last nine MLS matches and 29th in the last 12 matches in all competitions. It takes their goal tally to 32 on the season, leap-frogging New York into the Eastern Conference lead.
The win also moves the Union one point behind the Red Bulls for the fifth and final playoff spot in the East.
The Red Bulls (5-6-8, 23 points) threatened to tie the game before Le Toux's tally, but a combination of MacMath and the assistant referee prevented that. The Red Bulls had the ball in the back of the net in the 64th off a header by Tim Cahill, but the linesman ruled that Wright-Phillips, from an offside position, interfered with the play despite not touching the ball.
MacMath repelled chaos in the box in the 71st, stretching a hand to barely reach Alexander's effort and smothering Wright-Phillips' follow from in close. A follow by Henry was cleared off the line by Williams.
Five minutes later, MacMath was in the right place to deny a diving header from fullback Ambroise Oyongo.


text: NBC is pulling the fourth episode of Hannibal, "Ceuf"scheduled to air next Thursday, April 25 because its subject – children who are brainwashed into committing murder – has been deemed inappropriate in light of the Boston bombings and other recent violent incidents. The fifth episode, "Coquilles" will air in its place. The omission of one episode from the series will move the season finale up a week to June 20 from June 27. According to Variety, showrunner Bryan Fuller made the decision not to air the episode. NBC will make selected clips for the episode available online. The episode will be shown outside of the United States.


text:
NYTimes Values Tracking Over Visitors; Keeps Freakonomics Feeds Crippled
from the partially-ineffective deptIt appears that despite the massive amount of reader backlash against the NY Times for switching the Freakonomics blog to partial RSS feeds rather than full feeds, the powers that be have decided to keep the feeds partially crippled. In the long explanation, Stephen Dubner references my own post about why full feeds actually increase page views, but basically says that it wasn't convincing enough for the money watchers at the Times. The reasoning behind the decision is pretty tortured, and Scott Karp does a fantastic job ripping it apart:
"Sure, you can't place tracking cookies in these people's browsers or serve behaviorally target ads. But HOW IS THAT BETTER THAN NOT REACHING THEM AT ALL??? The idea that publishers, under pressure from advertisers, can put the horses back in the barn and get people to consume content through channels that publishers fully control, just like in old offline monopoly media, is so reactionary that it really does amount to betting against the Internet. It's true that adoption of RSS is still relatively low, but when you take the case of the Freakonomics blog -- where MOST of the readers read it via RSS -- the idea that you could somehow change ALL of their behavior, i.e. force them to come to the New York Times, is just ludicrous. There's no other word for it. Really, what's the point of "partnering" with the Freakonomics blog only to alienate the vast majority of the readers? How is that creating value for advertisers? So you can show ads to the few angry, resentful readers who reluctantly come to the New York Times?"The NY Times' reasoning reminds me of the ridiculous reasoning that many newspapers (including the NY Times!) gave for many years about why they had to put up registration walls to get to their content. They insisted that they needed much better data about their readers to give to advertisers -- not recognizing that in doing so they were getting a lot fewer readers and the data they were getting was often bogus anyway. It's this same mistaken belief that leads the NY Times to insist it needs partial feeds to give advertisers better tracking data -- even if it means fewer of the type of readers that the NY Times should specifically be aiming for. How could that possibly make sense?
Filed Under: freakonomics, full feeds, partial feeds, rss
Companies: new york times


text:
- Home
- News
- Sports
- Opinion
- Obituaries
- Features
- Special Sections
- Classifieds
- Public Notices
Finally, after two weeks of absurdly stupid run-ups, the Peyton Manning sweepstakes appears to be over.
He's coming to Denver at the expense of Tim Tebow, apparently.
The question on the floor is -- what are your thoughts?
I'll start. It's no surprise to me that the Broncos want to shop Tebow. The present coaching staff did not draft him.
As for anything else -- stand up on the box and spout off.
Add new comment
Read and share your thoughts on this story


text:
Left-hander John Lannan has agreed to a one-year, $2.5 million contract with the Phillies, Senior Vice President & General Manager Ruben Amaro Jr. announced today. The contract includes performance bonuses.
Lannan, 28, went 4-1 with a 4.13 ERA in six starts for the Washington Nationals last season. He also made 24 starts for triple-A Syracuse, going 9-11, 4.30 ERA in 148.2 innings. Since the beginning of the 2011 season, Lannan is 13-13 with a 3.77 ERA in 39 major league starts.
"Clearly we have a familiarity with John and his past performance and success in this division helps us add depth to our rotation," said Amaro.
Originally selected by the Nationals in the 11th round of the 2005 First-Year Player Draft, Lannan is 42-52 with a 4.01 ERA in 134 career games (all starts). A native of Long Beach, N.Y., Lannan has made at least 30 professional starts in each of his last five seasons (2008-12), averaging 187.2 innings per season over that span.