text:
by Mike Masnick
Mon, Feb 21st 2011 1:59pm
Filed Under:
budget, federal government, funding, nascar, npr, pbs
I'm sort of amazed at the silly and childish political games being played concerning attempts to cut funding here and there, but, seriously can anyone give me a logical explanation why the same folks who are so quick to demand that we stop funding NPR and PBS are so vehemently in favor of sponsoring NASCAR? Frankly, as a fan of both NPR and PBS, but not a fan of governments overspending, I actually think the complaints against pulling the funding from both are a bit overblown. I think there are some creative things that both NPR and PBS could do to make up the difference if they lost federal funding. However, if we are going to cut public broadcasting, then it seems only reasonable to cut sponsoring NASCAR as well, doesn't it? I'm curious how folks who claim to support smaller government are defending such sponsorship of a private, for-profit operation with taxpayer funding?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Fake Comments Are Plaguing Government Agencies And Nobody Much Seems To Care
- Ron Wyden Wants Federal Government To Do More To Protect Personal Devices/Accounts Used By Senators And Staffers
- Election Security Has Become A Partisan Issue As Senate Votes Down Funding
- Spending Bill Would Give Administration Direct Control Of Surveillance Spending
- How To Avoid Future Krack-Like Failures: Create Well-Maintained 'Fat' Protocols Using Initial Coin Offerings
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
AdamR (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 1:25pmIt's simple, 98% of the viewers of Sesame Street are not of voting age.
I guess its the Republicans and tea party trying its best to cut off the Democrats an liberal left before they can gain any traction before the next major election cycle.
Reply, 21 Feb 2011 @ 9:36pm
Re:It's simple, democrats want to indoctrinate children at a young age. Plus, dems have no issue claiming they care about the saftey of this great country, but really only want to see low income and under educated serve in the military.
Add to this the holier than thou attidtude of the left and this type of rhetoric is what is spewed.
No group is greater at taking money for political favors then the left. NO GROUP. The left has one agenda....take from the working class and 'rich' (as though they are evil), keep most for themselves, give a bit to the needy and keep the needy wanting more. This is the leftist way and has been for centuries. Perhaps we should take from the rcih...like the hollywood elite...a nice fat tax on their net worth...say 80%...what do they really 'need it for'? Bet that would not fly with you leftist as you buy your politicians off. Prhaps instead of asking for money to feed the poor, you could give up 80% of your money to feed the poor. Really, $1M from a hollywood liberal who has $500M and we are supposed to think they are generous.
Perhaps it is these folks who should fund the public(social) airwaves???
You left who think freedom is free sicken the rest of us.
I thought hope and change was supposed to close Gitmo, get us out of all foriegn lands and get the rest of the world to love us because we 'understood' and blah blah. Well, news flash, the rest of the world is laughing at us (again - thanks Carter), and think our leaders are weak, immature and naive. Read the news (not just listen to CNN and MSNBC) and you'll get the truth.
Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:53am
Re: Re:Seriously? Centuries?
Most of your statements are not 'the leftist way' but just what most of the right want people to think of the left. i'm not saying the left doesn't have its fair share of corruption, but its by and large not as bad as you make it out to be. if you truly believe that, you're no longer thinking for yourself. the left and the right are both corrupt.
Also, you need to work on your writing skills. To be honest, I can barely follow your thoughts. They're all over the place. The punctuation is really confusing too. I don't think you know how to use an ellipsis. Also, i don't know where you're getting this 80% number either.
then your last paragraph is just a mess as well. you must believe you're preaching to the choir because you don't bother explaining *any* point you're making. we don't necessarily believe what you're saying, so you can't just say something is true and expect to persuade or even have a decent debate with anybody.
you come across as someone who thinks that they are absolutely right. i have news for you, you're not. that's a fact. i don't know if you just want to try to insult individuals or what, but your purpose for commenting is largely lost on me. if you're not trying to persuade somebody to your point of view, then you're only doing this to convey some sense of 'holier than thou' attitude that you're right, everybody else is wrong. its completely hypocritical and in the end, devoid of any real meaning.
i could throw in a jab and say this is typical of the right... but i feel the joke would be lost.
Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2011 @ 12:35pm
Re: Re:Is that you Glenn, Rush, Sean, or are you just a mind-numbed robot spewing their garbage?
Ima Fish (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:07pm"I'm curious how folks who claim to support smaller government are defending such sponsorship of a private, for-profit operation with taxpayer funding?"
Easy. They like NASCAR and hate PBS and NPR. One of the biggest mistakes we make is to assume everyone has a logical basis for their subjective opinions.
:Lobo Santo (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:11pm
Psh, easy.NPR and PBS have both managed to become profit making
entities by way of selling advertisements, exactly as other radio/television corporations do. They have no need of public backing.
NASCAR, on the other hand, is a HUGE money making proposition for whomever hosts a race. I've seen towns of 50,000 people spring up in the middle of nowhere and persist for more than a week at NASCAR events. And everybody who goes there buys gas and snacks on their way to and from the event. It short, it means putting some money into NASCAR likely gets you even more money out of it.
Scott, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:18pm
Re: Psh, easy.So, logically, you're saying that without the Army's support of one car NASCAR would stop operating? All of this added bonus would go away? Sure...
You just made the argument that both of these items are similar when it comes to the budget. Look, it's either you get rid of the funding for both of them or you get rid of the funding for neither. Getting rid of one and not the other (no matter which of the two is removed) is just politics as usual. We need better than that right now.
:Lobo Santo (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:25pm
Re: Re: Psh, easy.Feel free to argue that with your congress-person and/or senator.
All I'm saying is there is no profit to be made by dumping money into NPR or PBS--and they have no real need of the money (for doubters, try looking at job listings for either).
There is, however, definite profit to be made from NASCAR. At the very least, we should be pleased our politicians can do simple math and tell the difference between positive and negative income.
DCX2, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:58pm
Re: Re: Re: Psh, easy.There is, however, definite profit to be made from NASCAR.
Oh no, the US Army is crowding out private investment in NASCAR!
Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:58am
Re: Re: Re: Psh, easy."NPR and PBS have both managed to become profit making
entities by way of selling advertisements, exactly as other radio/television corporations do. They have no need of public backing."
NASCAR managed to become profit making entities by way of selling advertisements (and tickets, and merchandise, ad deals, selling ads, and many more) just like every other sporting league does. they have no need of public backing.
it's really funny how ridiculously blind you are to the double standard you're making.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 8:39am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Psh, easy.Yes.....and the only public backing for NASCAR is that the army is essentially buying an ad (it happens to be wrapped around a car) same as they do during the superbowl.
Did you miss that?
Mark Murphy (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:33pm
Re: Psh, easy.
NASCAR, on the other hand, is a HUGE money making proposition for whomever hosts a race.
Please provide evidence that the US Army is hosting a race.
I've seen towns of 50,000 people spring up in the middle of nowhere and persist for more than a week at NASCAR events.
So does Burning Man. Either the US Army should support NASCAR and Burning Man, or neither.
And everybody who goes there buys gas and snacks on their way to and from the event.
Is the US Army holding a bake sale, whereby sponsoring a car will increase the number of pies that get sold?
It short, it means putting some money into NASCAR likely gets you even more money out of it.
Please provide evidence where the US Army "gets...even more money out of it".
:Lobo Santo (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:50pm
Re: Re: Psh, easy.I never suggested the Army was hosting a race--but they do normally happen in one of the continental United States. Kindly pay attention.
"Either the US Army should support NASCAR and Burning Man, or neither.""All or Nothing" is a false dichotomy. Try again.
"Please provide evidence where the US Army "gets...even more money out of it"."Sorry, I left the State multi-tiered comprehensive income database in my other pants. However, feel free to demonstrate how the Army's NASCAR investment is not a cost effective method of recruitment.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:09pm
Re: Re: Re: Psh, easy.I wondered how long it would take for recruitment to show up. IMO this is the ONLY rationalization for the Army sponsoring a NASCAR or NHRA team. I would love to see the stats on how those teams affect recruitment. Some how i doubt it would be much. I can understand the Army team(s) in college sports, but I don't get the racing teams.
The Infamous Joe (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:48pm
Re: Re: Re: Psh, easy.I never suggested the Army was hosting a race--but they do normally happen in one of the continental United States. Kindly pay attention.
I'm more interested in why you think NASCAR will stop having races in the US if they don't get free money from the government.
Kirk (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:56pm
Re: Psh, easy.You mean it transfers money to host communities from the surrounding areas. It's a broken windows fallacy to say that the same money wouldn't be spent elsewhere.
Kirk (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:07pm
Re: Re: Psh, easy.However, if your argument is that the expense is an effective use of their advertising budget, I agree.
erin, 22 Feb 2011 @ 7:07am
Re: Psh, easy.Try 200,000 people. The Texas Motor Speedway gets that easily when you count spectators and vendors. It's a HUGE economical boon to the area.
NPR has just turned into a democrat shill agency.
Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2011 @ 8:55am
Re: Psh, easy.It short, it means putting some money into NASCAR likely gets you even more money out of it.
So what kind of RoI has NASCR promised Congress?
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:13pmThere's nothing inconsistent about thinking the federal government's role should be national security and only national security (the NASCAR sponsorship is for military recruiting, whereas PBS and NPR are not).
It's (in my opinion) pretty dumb, and would be dumb even if the NASCAR sponsorship were more effective advertising, but it isn't inconsistent.
There's plenty of "keep the government away from my Medicare" hypocrisy out there in the Republican party these days, but this particular juxtaposition is fully consistent with the party's (dangerously short-sighted) philosophy.
monkyyy, 21 Feb 2011 @ 9:35pm
Re:speaking of the military ad fund wouldnt that be a good place to cut?
as someone who has no intension to ever join(wouldn't go unless this government starts doing better, no amount of money or legal treats could make me risk my life), and in the age group that they target to brain wash(late middle school to a few months till out of highschool) I CAN SAY THEY SPEND TO MUCH AND IT DOESNT WORK
Bruce Ediger (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 11:25am
Re: Re:I really have to agree. Even the visible DoD budget appears bloated and corrupt and wasteful. That doesn't include the estimate 30 to 50 Billion dollars of "black budget", which is apparently a complete and utter waste of time and money.
Seriously. Black budget should not exist. Statistically speaking there's only a very few secrets of national importance. There's huge numbers of career-ending blunders and opportunities for graft, kickbacks & etc.
Statistically speaking, the black budget is guaranteed to be all waste. That's right, all fat, and no meat. Ditch it.
Teilo (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:16pmI don't think it's that simple. Home Depot doesn't sponsor NASCAR just because they like NASCAR. They do it because it's good advertising. NASCAR = marketing. The armed forces spend quite a lot of money on marketing, and I imagine their NASCAR sponsorship is dwarfed by their other marketing expenses.
So, while you might argue that the armed forces have no business spending so much money on marketing, I hardly think this is about someone liking NASCAR.
Personally, I can't stand NASCAR, so I can understand why it would grate on your nerves that they budget dollars for it.
Branden Allmon (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:17pm
Nascar VS. PBSThe NASCAR advertising is pulled from the military recruitment budget. This is an advertising budget used to attract a specific demographic into the military. Where would you advertise ... Phish concerts?
PBS and NPR get much of their funding from the NEA. Without debating the merits of Art in our society a clear core vs. context argument can be made here.
Additionally, with the prevalence of youth cable programming and local radio stations, the historic justification for NPR and PBS are less and less compelling.
Budgets need to be cut. I would submit we need to focus on context, but not exclude core. You can argue that the military's budget needs cut, but arguing that advertising at NASCAR doesn't reach the correct audience would be a stretch at best.
Kirk (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:01pm
Re: Nascar VS. PBSIt would be worth it if the Army's car had a gunner.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 4:17pm
Re: Re: Nascar VS. PBSI might actually watch NASCAR then
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 10:22pm
Re: Nascar VS. PBSThank God the Army sponsored a NASCAR driver, I'd never have heard of them otherwise!
And who knew they were hiring?
Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:39am
Re: Nascar VS. PBSas always, killing people is more important than art.
budgets do need to be cut. cut out four JSF from the final order and fund PBS and NPR for years and years. I would suggest you would be getting a much hire ROI
Rose M. Welch (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 8:59am
Re: Nascar VS. PBSAdditionally, with the prevalence of youth cable programming .. the historic justification for ... PBS [is] less and less compelling.
Historically, the availability of cable programs for children has never impacted the segment of the population that watches PBS.
In other words, they're poor, dumbass. They can't afford Sprout.
sirprometheus (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 1:31pm
Re: Re: Nascar VS. PBSI don't know where you'd find the demographic, but I very much suspect the viewership of PBS is more affluent than the average.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 6:22pm
Re: Re: Re: Nascar VS. PBSYou really think that kids with cable choose PBS over Nickelodeon, Sprout, and DisneyXD?
I'd totally take that bet, if there were a reliable place to view the demographics.
Matt Bennett, 23 Feb 2011 @ 6:46pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Nascar VS. PBSA) It's really not like the majority of PBS is kids programming.
B) If we were talking about kids programming (we were not) I'm relatively sure that the parents that limit their kids to PBS or other "educational" programming are the more affluent ones.
C) It seems every poor family had cable and 3 TVs. I pay for it, apparently.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 24 Feb 2011 @ 11:13am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nascar VS. PBSIt's really not like the majority of PBS is kids programming.
Yes, actually, it is like that. Because not only is the majority of their programming for kids, but the programming with the highest viewership is for kids. No matter how you slice it, PBS is primarily a kid's channel.
If we were talking about kids programming (we were not)...
Actually, some of us were. Specifically, the justification for PBS.
...I'm relatively sure that the parents that limit their kids to PBS or other "educational" programming are the more affluent ones.
We weren't discussing parental limits, we were discussing economic limits. Children without cable generally don't have other choices. It's PBS or nothing.
Well, I guess talk shows aren't nothing exactly, but what was your childhood preference? Children's shows or soap operas?
Parents with cable choices may choose to limit their children to PBS, but why would they bother when Sprout runs children's programming - with many of the same shows - 24 hours a day?
It seems every poor family had cable and 3 TVs.
Really? Did you actually know any poor families? Because all of the poor families I knew, including my own, had one TV, local channels, and a limited amount of furniture space.
Of course, cable isn't even offered in many rural areas, so I really am unsure where you're getting these ideas from.
...I pay for it, apparently.
You pay for what? Their non-existent cable? Explain, Lucy.
Matt Bennett, 24 Feb 2011 @ 6:11pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nascar VS. PBSI'm sorry, it's just almost none of the things you say are true.
No, PBS is not majority kids content. (might I point out that we were really talking about funding for public broacasting company, which includes both NPR and PBS, and NPR is where most of the problem is, but hell, PBS has it's problem too.)
I think it's just silly that you think the majority of poor families give up cable TV. It would be nice if they did, that certainly should be the first thing they cut, but it isn't. And I know for a fact, that many, many, the vast majority, of families either on welfare, or in public housing, have cable. Many of them, btw, I have noticed have strangely nice cars. If you fit in these categories, and this doesn't apply to you, great, very good for you, but it just isn't the norm.
ANd lastly, I challenge your assertion that families limited to over-the-air TV by their incomes mostly watch PBS. I would think that it would be great if they did, I'm actually very supportive of PBS as an educational tool, I certainly love NOVA, and I think it could help break the cycle of poor=uneducated. But it's just not the way of it. If you are the exception, again, hats of to you, but it's just not the norm.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 24 Feb 2011 @ 7:37pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nascar VS. PBSI'm sorry, it's just almost none of the things you say are true.
That's rich coming from a guy that has asserted that Planned Parenthood is primarily an abortion service and that PBS has a liberal* slant.
*I'm non-partisan.
No, PBS is not majority kids content.
And I know for a fact, that many, many, the vast majority, of families either on welfare, or in public housing, have cable.
I challenge your assertion that families limited to over-the-air TV by their incomes mostly watch PBS.
I never stated that families without cable mostly watch PBS. I stated that children without cable are more likely to watch PBS than children with cable. I stand by this postulate, but freely admit that this opinion is anecdotal.
Atkray (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:22pmIf the Army wants to be a sponsor in NASCAR and feels it gets a return on the investment then wouldn't it make sense to let it pay for it out of the marketing budget?
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:30pm
Re:They do. It's pulled from the DoD's "recruitment" budget, which is military slang for "marketing".
Matt Bennett, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:51pm
Re: Re:Slang? I mean, it's a marketing budget, yes, but a marketing budget for recruitment. I would think either term appropriate.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:29pmSaying that the DoD sponsors NASCAR is like saying it sponsors television stations every time an Army ad runs. NASCAR is pure advertising for them, nothing more. Comparing it to NPR and PBS is apples and oranges. I agree that CPB should keep its funding and the DoD should have its funding cut but this is a huge stretch of an argument to make.
Rich, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:29pmBecause the morons in this country just love watching those cars go round and round. I have friends and family that wouldn't leave a burning building if NASCAR was on.
abc gum, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:31pmIt's just another chapter in the continuing saga called political hypocrisy. They go after one of their pet peeves using the budget as an excuse, but this and other petty attacks do not come close to achieving a balanced budget. They do not see or they fail to acknowledge the elephants in the room.
fta: "... eliminating funding for CPB, estimating that it would save the government $500 million in 2015"
This could cover an additional two days of our unfunded expenditures in Iraq & Afghanistan.
BigKeithO (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 8:27am
Re:The US military spends $250 million a day on those 2 wars?! Wow... That's sustainable.
Silly Post+1 to Brandon's point - the Army has a recruitment budget, and they do all sorts of marketing, including TV spots, print ads, brochures, and yes, sponsoring a NASCAR team, to drive recruitment.
Comparing the NASCAR sponsorship to NPR funding? You might as well say the feds are sponsoring the NY Times and NBC when they buy recruiting ads.
kaot, 21 Feb 2011 @ 2:51pmThe answer to the title is actually quite easy:
"panem et circenses"
(Bread and Games) as the roman Poet Juvenal said.
Basically, education is not essential for any government to stay in power. A distracted public on the other hand is.
Karr, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:05pm
Stupid debateI wish everyone in the media would get something straight. The Army does not sponsor NASCAR, nor do they fund NASCAR. They sponsor a team that races in NASCAR, and by that they bought the primary advertiser spot on that team's cars/merchandise. NASCAR itself could care less if they were there or not except for the fact that they might lose a team if they don't find a different sponsor.
The Army on the other hand does care because it is damn good advertising. NASCAR fans are very loyal to the sponsor's of their favortie drivers. According to Col. Crotts 46,000 out of the 150,000 leads Army recruiters get each year come through motorsport events (Google it). If you sponsor a good driver, for a couple million a year you can get a ton of air-time. A lot more than buying commercial slots.
The real question that should be asked is should the budget for advertising for the Army be cut, not who the Army is allowed to advertise with. If they want to cut that budget, then fine, do so and let the Army figure out where they want to spend the money they end up getting. This is one of the most asinine debates I have seen in a while.
Ccomp5950 (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:07pm
Easy explanation.Circuses and Bread.
ECA (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:08pm
I think it strangeI have always wondered why we dont have an accounting firm go over all the expenditures, our gov makes and Tells us in straight english Where the MONEY IS GOING.
Isnt there a Level of government that is SUPPOSED to be responsible to the tax payer(?) with this knowledge that can TELL US IN ENGLISH and simple language, where the money went?
I also find it very strange, that Many Laws/bills/.. past in congress have these ADDONS, that ask/transport/send money to OTHER SOURCES besides what the BILL IS to pay for.
Going thru all the paper work, and finally deciding WHERE the money went/is going, would be worse then the paper work for a Muti-tiered Corp and all the subsidiaries.(thats how people steal Millions and it takes years to find out)
Steven (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:30pm
Re: I think it strangeThat would be the GAO http://www.gao.gov/
It's the only arm of the government, that I'm aware of, that actually does a damn good job. The problem is they don't have any enforcement powers. They sit on the sidelines, slam various agencies for being all screwed up, and then nothing comes of it.
The really screwed up part is if we actually gave them real power instead of them actually fixing things all the other agencies would become interested in the GAO and start gaining influence and screwing it up like everything is screwed up.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:09pmCan Someone Explain How Sponsoring NASCAR Is A Good Use Of Taxpayer Funds, If Funding Sesame Street Is Not?
Sure, but your not going to like it!
Marcel de Jong (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 3:41am
Re:Go ahead then, explain it.
BTW, it's "you're" as in "you are" not "your".
Jay Flatiron, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:17pmThe difference is in the goals. PBS wants to entertain children while teaching them values, numbers, and the alphabet. NPR aims to bring "important stories, insight and delight to audiences everywhere" (Quote from their site). While the money spent on the Army racing programs ($12m total a year between NASCAR and drag racing teams) goes to machines that eat gas, rubber, and metal to recruit 46,000 of our young adults a year to be shot or exploded in foreign countries that have no direct value to their lives.
Which is more important to our current elected officials: smart, independent, and informed citizens? or more cogs for their war machine?
Matt Bennett, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:35pm
Re:OK, not that I actually wanted to argue on this level, but more cogs for the war machine, seriously. That's the prime responsibility of the federal government. The states might want to educate you, or you can pay for it on your own.
abc gum, 21 Feb 2011 @ 4:01pm
Re: Re:"That's the prime responsibility of the federal government."
The best defense is a good offense eh?
Matt Bennett, 21 Feb 2011 @ 7:01pm
Re: Re: Re:Yes....? Dur.
abc gum, 21 Feb 2011 @ 8:15pm
Re: Re: Re: Re:Pinky: Egad. You astound me, Brain.
Brain: That's a simple task, Pinky.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:50am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:Oohh, I love Pinky and the Brain! Narf!
Regadless, dude, yes, I rate convincing young men to give 4 years of their life fighting abroad (which is much, much better than them fighting here) as much more important than funding entertainment and biased journalism that there's already a market for.
abc gum, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:02am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:"4 years of their life fighting abroad "
1) Fighting for what, exactly. The fed is tasked with defense of this country, not world domination.
2) Four years is apparently not enough these days is it?
I'm in favor of the volunteer army in lieu of the draft. The fact that they have to advertise is telling in itself.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:19am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:Dude, I was in the army, trust me, the gig needs selling.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 9:02am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:Selling is different than the wholesale lies peddled by most recruiters.
Says the daughter of Air Force parents, relative of Army and Navy family, wife to a veteran Marine, living in a military town.
The Infamous Joe (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 9:31am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:Wait, you're saying I don't get to battle a dragon?
Rose M. Welch (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 6:30pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:I'm sorry, Joe. Marines do not, in fact, get to battle dragons.
I mean, it's possible that dragons will be genetically designed sometime in the future, escape their masters, and run rampant overseas, requiring Marine intervention...
...but it's not likely. :P
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:27pmNASCAR is more relatable to knuckle dragging Deliverance-style hicks that make up the Republican demographic.
Matt Bennett, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:31pmMike, you, and a good half or so of the early commenters here, just got snookered by liberal columnist at the NYT.
There's really no comparison between the two item spends, as quite a few later commenters have pointed out.
The army "sponsoring" a team in NASCAR is really a pure advertising spend, no different than any of their other recruiting efforts. It would be just as appropriate to say the military "funds" comedy central or wherever else they advertise. It's also some low millions of dollars, perfectly in line with other media campaigns. Whether that's worthwhile or not is really a pure marketing decision, no more complicated than that.
On the other hand, the government really does "fund" and sponsor PBS in the traditional sense, and perhaps more troublingly, NPR. It's ~$450 million or so, and there's actually a lot of obfuscation on this number, it could be a good bit more in total. Now, trotting out sesame street is a little like saying "we censored for the children," isn't? We all like Kermit, and I'm a huge Nova fan besides. Problem is that a huge part of that budget goes to shows that really liberal advocacy programs, especially on NPR. How would you feel if the NYT (liberal) or Foxnews (conservative) were 20% funded by the federal government? It would be a huge problem, I'm pretty sure you would agree.
It's public funding of a company in a market that is thriving quite well without the help. If PBS can't survive on it's own merits, than it shouldn't survive.
There is no equivalency between these two programs, but Gail Collins would deeply like you to think there is, and apparently she succeeded.
johaus (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 6:52pm
Re: Matt BennettI think Matt is the first to really hit this on the head: it is not hypocrisy or even confusing at all. Conservatives/Republicans dislike NPR because of a perceived liberal bias and don't want tax dollars going to fund it. NASCAR is not a political organization and does not make political comments through its official capacity � unless patriotism and the like is considered political.
Furthermore, as is mentioned above, DoD is not "funding" NASCAR anymore than Pepsi is funding NBC. I must echo the disappointment in Mike that others have said; how frequently do we discuss on this site the difference between posters and site owners? DoD is using the forum of a NASCAR car sponsorship to reach potential recruits (and very effectively as has been shown above). CPB, PBS, NPR on the other hand are analogous to the forum itself, which is funded directly by tax payer dollars.
If Mike has a problem with encouraging military recruiting, he can feel free to espouse that, but it is not hypocritical for critics of NPR to stand behind funding of (successful) military recruitment advertising, while concurrently seeking to remove funding for political rhetoric.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 6:32pm
Re: Re: Matt BennettNASCAR is not a political organization and does not make political comments through its official capacity...
I'm pretty sure that Between the Lions, Arthur, and the like are apolitical as well.
MisterHux (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 2:49pm
NPR is only "Liberal" because it makes you think.
Conservatives don't like that cause they would rather tell you want to think.
Jake, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:41pmI couldn't stand Sesame Street when I was a kid, but I'm moderately fond of racing. Does that count?
drokkon, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:42pmBrandon, Karr and Josh are dead-on: it's impossible to compare the funding of public broadcasting with military recruiting, and this debate is asinine for a plethora of reasons (not the least of which would be that its just another lame excuse for one party to mischaracterize the other). I'd say shame on the Times for publishing such a lame opinion, but I've come to expect that; shame on Techdirt for propagating it!
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:54pm
the lie big"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." ~ Adolf Hitler
Steven (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 3:57pmI have to say I'm rather disappointed in both Mike and many of the commenters here on this one.
As pointed out by some, the Army/NASCAR relationship is one of advertising paid out of the Army's recruitment (marketing) budget. The relationship from the Army/NASCAR funding to the funding of both PBS and NPR is, at best, that federal government funds are used for both.
"I think there are some creative things that both NPR and PBS could do to make up the difference if they lost federal funding. However, if we are going to cut public broadcasting, then it seems only reasonable to cut sponsoring NASCAR as well, doesn't it?"
If we are going to cut funding for the arts it only seems reasonable to stop the Marines from making all those cool commercials right? It's the same comparison.
There are perfectly valid debates and points that can be brought up separately about both these spending items, but lumping them together is simply asking for repub vs dem flame wars with no real content because they can't be intelligently compared to each other. Mike, I know this is a free site, but I've come to expect better of you.
Personally I think the federal government massively overspends on just about everything and has it's hands in things it has no business in. I think we should have a much smaller federal government and the state governments should pick up the slack (which I would expect to involve higher taxes in most cases). The federal governments ability to royally screw up is directly proportional to it's size and power.
I'd also like to point out that no party has ever made the federal government actually smaller.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 4:23pmWhat people don't understanding about advertising with NASCAR is that it isn't all good advertising. NASCAR fans usually hate certain drivers. Let Newman's Army car hit Jr's and Jr's fans will hate Army. That's one reason lots of sponsors are leaving NASCAR.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 4:30pmI want to weigh in by saying I hate Nascar. I can live without NPR, but I did like PBS when I still had TV.
I wish there were no money to be made in it. If people stopped supporting Nascar maybe we'd have fewer people having relations with their sister/cousin/mothers and raping dogs.
Deirdre (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 5:00pmBoth the Navy and the Marine Corps stopped sponsoring NASCAR because they were not sure it worked-- http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/02/ap-military-house-vote-pentagon-nascar-021811/ So what evidence does the Army (National Guard, Air Force) have that it is an effective use of money?
Considering that NASCAR actually entered into a relationship with Harlequin Romance to produce romance novels with NASCAR theme but "Nascar has put some limits on these branded Harlequin books in order to maintain its family image: no booze, no drugs, no sex." I'm not sure who the average NASCAR fan is now.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 5:49pm
Re:I think this is due to the Army, Air Force and Navy target different demographics. Take a look at the advertising each branch uses: it's pretty obvious that "redneck NASCAR watcher" is not who the Air Force or Navy prefers in their ranks.
Matt Bennett, 21 Feb 2011 @ 7:08pm
Re:I don't think it's particularly important to this discussion whether sponsoring a NASCAR team is the best use of the army's advertising dollar, or not. I'm not a marketer, but I suspect they know their business and it is at least comparable to other options. Point is, is that it is merely a marketing strategy and that's the only level it need be evaluated on.
Crystal, 23 Feb 2011 @ 7:17am
Re:I thought Nascar and Budweiser went together like peanut butter and jelly (both of which I hate). What's this about no beer and "family image"? I'll politely refrain from my "all in the family" jokes.
Ed, 21 Feb 2011 @ 5:06pm
Spokane county bought a NASCAR raceway with taxpayer moneyHere in Spokane, Wa, our County Commissioners bid twice as much money as a private investor, there by overpaying, to purchase a money losing motor speedway. The contractor they hired to bring the site up to date then failed to pay subcontractors - another million $s ending up as a lien against the taxpayers. A construction worker on the site also ended up killed in accident.
This money losing County owned business was bought and paid for by taxpayers because the local county commissioners saw it as a way to buy "NASCAR votes" from this blue collar community. Sad but true.
PolyPusher (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 5:32pm
Why does Nascar want money from our armed forces?Wouldn't it be more patriotic for Nascar to allow military sponsorship for free?
Karr, 21 Feb 2011 @ 9:56pm
Re: Why does Nascar want money from our armed forces?NASCAR is not the recipient for the sponsorship, a car team is. They are an independent company that races at NASCAR races and that sponsorship is their primary source of funds, so no they cannot just sponsor them for free.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 5:34pmMy objection is that funding NASCAR is too close to funding religion. There are too many 3's on cars around here and the 24ers are nearly as prevalent.
Of course the real reason for the congress to fund NASCAR is that FOX runs a bunch of the races-- Just like in politics.
Dennis McDonald, 21 Feb 2011 @ 6:35pm
apples and orangesI used to be totally against federal funding of public broadcasting and believed that the vast variety of cable TV programming made such funding superfluous. Having seen what passes for "history"and "science" on so much cable TV, though, I think it's good that such quality programming as produced by public broadcasting should be encouraged, not discouraged. As a society we should encourage quality, not dumb things down, which happens on many cable TV documentaries.
As far as NASCAR is concerned, I question the wisdom of spending tax dollars to recruit there; you're talking to a convinced audience. Scarce marketing dollars should instead be channeled into markets that need more convincing.
Plus, I think anybody who believes that public broadcasting isn't being targeted for political reasons is completely out of touch; "liberal" public broadcasting has been the target of the right for years and this current political climate is an opportunity to get even, even if it means contributing to the dumbing down of the population. Public broadcasting is about as conservative as any mainstram programming source; in recent years they've bent over backwards to give all sides a voice and have really pulled punches on outing the liars for fear of being accused of taking sides. Perceptions of "liberalism," I fear, are a holdover from the 80's, like calling the Washington Post "liberal."
Matt Bennett, 21 Feb 2011 @ 7:21pm
Re: apples and orangesUH.....who said it wasn't being targeted for political reasons? It has a liberal agenda (or many programs do) and it's getting federal dollars. So, republicans want to defund it, and democrats want to pretend it's an outrage. That's a political basis. I don't think anyone's said otherwise.
But riddle me this, if they were really "as conservative as any mainstream programming source" (let's not get into what a laugh that is) then why, oh why, would republicans be so enraged by their being funded by the federal government?
abc gum, 21 Feb 2011 @ 8:27pm
Re: Re: apples and oranges"It has a liberal agenda"
That's right. Why just the other day I saw on Nova a discussion of evolution as if it were something that could really happen. I was outraged! And then they had the nerve to broadcast both sides of the global climate change thingie. Who do they think they are anyways. They even try to convince you that the earth goes around the sun - egads, that's enough to make yer head explode.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:29am
Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesIt would be easy for you if everyone that disagreed with you were a religious anachronism, wouldn't it?
Regardless, you failed to contest the point. If they weren't promoting a liberal agenda (a real one, not this "evolution" voodoo you're going on about) then why would conservatives care one way or the other?
abc gum, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:10am
Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesSort of naive aren't you?
So, which "liberal" topic found on PBS is objectionable? Please be specific.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:32am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesAlmost everything on NPR has liberal spin to it, with the possible exception of Planet Money (which I'm a huge fan of, and I almost feel tries to be liberal, but logic wins through). Do you remember the Juan Williams controversy? Were you awake that month? That's really what started this thing, btw. Tell you what, let's give Fox News $450 million in federal funds. Then we can both be equally unhappy
abc gum, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:42am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesComparing PBS to Fox News, that's rich.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 6:30am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesAre you incapable of having perspective on this? I actually think both PBS and the NYT are more biased, at least in their basic reporting, than FOX. FOX, on the other hand, has a host of conservative commenters and then straight reporting whihc is relatively fair. I suspect you have a different opinion, that's fine, but if you refuse to admit the analogy, you're basically giving up any pretense of reasonable conversation.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 6:36pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesI actually think both PBS and the NYT are more biased, at least in their basic reporting, than FOX.
Which show, exactly, is more biased than Fox? Between the Lions, Zooboomafu, the Nightly Business Report, or Nova?
AW, 21 Feb 2011 @ 9:06pm
Re: Re: apples and orangesYes it's those liberal facts...you realize that the same people who call PBS and NPR "liberal" are the same people who believe Fox "News" Channel is actually without bias. I have a 1 year old daughter so I spend A LOT of time watching PBS and sprout and I hardly think that learning languages, numbers and promoting healthy lifestyles, all of which provide long term benefits has a liberal agenda. There's no politics involved...you probably would love to do away with those liberal public schools too and those public roads...just admit you're a conservative, libertarian or tea party activist and get off your high horse. The arts and education doesn't have liberal agenda. They are underfunded because long term results don't play well with voters, plain and simple.
I mean seriously, you gloss over the huge impact that these programs can have over an entire lifetime and push kids to die in foreign wars that cost more in one day than one year of programming. What kind of monster are you?
The eejit (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 2:28am
Re: Re: apples and orangesYou mean like Planned Parenthood has a 'liberal' bias? Here's a hint - it doesn't. The Republicans are vastly overplaying their hand.
PBS is a public service, and you should be grateful that it even exists in the climate of Faux news and MSNo News Here. Yet it's being defunded to help run a 'war' that the US is losing, because it doesn't know how to cellularise the military.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:56am
Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesLook, man, I'm pro-choice, myself, but PP mostly is involved in abortions. It advocates on behalf of a pro-choice agenda, for obvious reasons. I don't have a problem with any of that, but how is that not liberal? I DO have problem with them getting gov funding.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:26am
Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesAlmost everything on NPR has liberal spin to it, with the possible exception of Planet Money (which I'm a huge fan of, and I almost feel tries to be liberal, but logic wins through). Do you remember the Juan Williams controversy? Were you awake that month? That's really what started this thing, btw. Tell you what, let's give Fox News $450 million in federal funds. Then we can both be equally unhappy.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 24 Feb 2011 @ 11:04am
Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesPP mostly is involved in abortions.
No, it's less than 1% of what they do, as a whole, and many locations don't even offer abortion services, although they can generally point you in the direction of a for-profit abortion provider.
Not a single PP in my state offers abortion, but they all offer low-cost exams, birth control, and free condoms, all of which were particularly important services when I was a teenager.
Matt Bennett, 24 Feb 2011 @ 6:16pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesAgain, ma'am there is simply no way that is in any way true, either by hours spent (not the procedure itself, you have to count the exams and consultations leading up to an abortion in the cases which do so) nor in revenue.
Your assertions are ridiculous on their face.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 24 Feb 2011 @ 7:47pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesPP mostly is involved in abortions.
Your assertions are ridiculous on their face.
My assertions are backed up by facts. Yours seem to be backed up by partisan FUD.
Contraception constitutes over a third of their services, while STD testing and treatment takes up another third. A fifth of their services are concerned with cancer screening, and a tenth of their services concern other women's health procedures, including pregnancy, prenatal, midlife, and infertility-related services.
Less than than one-twentieth of their services are abortion-related.
Now, please explain how >one-twentieth equals 'mostly'.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 25 Feb 2011 @ 5:17pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: apples and orangesLook, man, I'm pro-choice, myself, but... I DO have problem with them getting gov funding.
If you're a liberal, you should be perfectly fine with government funding for abortions because forcing women to bear children is flat-out wrong.
If you're a conservative, then you should be perfectly fine with government funding for abortions because they're a fraction of the cost of prenatal care, welfare, or any number of programs that we offer for poor children.
If you're non-partisan, you should be perfectly fine with government funding for abortions because a lack of legal, affordable abortion services leads to the Kermit Gosnell's of the world popping up all over America.
Tina Louise, 21 Feb 2011 @ 6:39pmBecause Sesame Street doesn't bring in young men to join the army to die in illegal and immoral foreign wars, that's why.
johaus (profile), 21 Feb 2011 @ 7:06pm
Techdirt is being hypocriticalOne of the the most consistent themes of Techdirt is that government-backed monopolies for legacy business models should be done away with. MPAA, RIAA, etc. should be brought into the future, instead of using laws to maintain their obsolete business models. The market has spoken and the old ways of doing business are no more.
Public broadcasting has more in common with the legacy media groups than is being highlighted here. The successful enterprises, like Sesame Street, will have no trouble surviving any government cuts. While those properties that fail in the marketplace will no longer be produced. This may be disheartening to those who think America is being "dumbed down," but it is entirely consistent with the Techdirtian view of economics.
It seems to me hypocritical to support the use of the power of the federal government to confiscate money from Americans to fund television and radio programs that cannot survive the free markets. Techdirt is constantly talking about alternative business/funding models for content creation - surely these highly prized Public Broadcasting properties can find sponsorship through one of these models. If not, I don't think they will be missed, since no one will be engaging with them anyway.
The eejit (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 2:29am
Re: Techdirt is being hypocriticalI agree with the sentiment you make. However, you're not seeing it completely - the program is being defunded to advertise in NASCAR. And that's the main problem.
abc gum, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:25am
Re: Techdirt is being hypocriticalThe RIAA & MPAA are for profit business, PBS is not. To compare the two as if they were in the same market is dishonest at best.
In addition, I do not see educational material coming out of either the RIAA or the MPAA. Determining what should be made available as educational material should not be left to the market.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 6:55am
Re: Re: Techdirt is being hypocriticalI believe the point that many, many people are making is that PBS should be a for profit business, that has to survive on it's own. Or hell, it can be a non-profit that survives on viewer contributions, that's generous I think, but fine. They're fond of saying that's where most of their funding comes from. Point it, they should stand on their own merits.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 24 Feb 2011 @ 11:23am
Re: Re: Re: Techdirt is being hypocriticalOr hell, it can be a non-profit that survives on viewer contributions, that's generous I think, but fine. They're fond of saying that's where most of their funding comes from.
Wow, you are really stupid. The tagline about 'Viewers Like You' doesn't mean that 8-year-old children give their pocket money to PBS. It means that your tax money funds them.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 24 Feb 2011 @ 11:21am
Re: Techdirt is being hypocriticalOne of the the most consistent themes of Techdirt is that government-backed monopolies for legacy business models should be done away with.
I disagree. Techdirt has a problem with government-backed monopolies for legacy business models that are interfering with innovation and/or competition. PBS and NPR (and libraries, which they've previously defended) aren't interfering with innovation or blocking competition.
In fact, you can't even call public broadcasting a monopoly, since the market has provided so much quality competition that some people believe that PBS and NPR are no longer needed. That certainly doesn't sound like a monopoly to me.
It seems to me hypocritical to support the use of the power of the federal government to confiscate money from Americans to fund television and radio programs that cannot survive the free markets.
So you think Techdirt should also support defunding prenatal care, public schools, public roads, and libraries because they can't survive the free market? That's certainly interesting.
I think you're confusing Mike Masnick's belief in what the market can do with his belief in what people should do. There is a difference, you know.
Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 7:49pm
The answer is amazingly simple...Neither PBS or NPR have box-seats.... NASCAR most certainly does... and offers them to sponsors!
Junket anyone? (after all the taxpayers funded it - we should get to use them)
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:39am
Re: The answer is amazingly simple...So......I wouldn't discount that as a reason, either.
Rocco, 22 Feb 2011 @ 6:39am
Re: Re: The answer is amazingly simple...I have the answer. Sesame Street needs to provide in product placement of the Army, then Sesame street could go after these add dollars. One episode could be the sesame street animals enlist. Another could be them fighting in a war in such a way that people watching want to join the army. That way PBS is funded and the army gets advertising. Everyone will be happy.
Marcel de Jong (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 3:37amSesame Street encourages kids to think for themselves and to learn.
NASCAR is just entertainment for which you don't have to think.
Just sit there and watch those drivers make left hand turns, eat your popcorn, drink your beer, and get fat.
AnoNY, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:22am
EasyThis is an easy explanation: The Army is sponsoring a NASCAR car for the same reason that any other organization does it, advertisement. The car will reach the Army's core audience of potential military men and women.
On the other hand, how much of an uproar would there be if the Army started branding a kid's show like Sesame Street? Liberal parents would be writing daily letters in opposition!
AnoNY, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:22am
EasyThis is an easy explanation: The Army is sponsoring a NASCAR car for the same reason that any other organization does it, advertisement. The car will reach the Army's core audience of potential military men and women.
On the other hand, how much of an uproar would there be if the Army started branding a kid's show like Sesame Street? Liberal parents would be writing daily letters in opposition!
Rose M. Welch (profile), 26 Feb 2011 @ 2:53am
Re: EasyAnd by inference, conservative mothers wouldn't mind?
AnoNY, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:22am
EasyThis is an easy explanation: The Army is sponsoring a NASCAR car for the same reason that any other organization does it, advertisement. The car will reach the Army's core audience of potential military men and women.
On the other hand, how much of an uproar would there be if the Army started branding a kid's show like Sesame Street? Liberal parents would be writing daily letters in opposition!
Jimr (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:14am
If you want government funding you cater to the politicians not what is best for the peopleNASCAR most likely lobbies and when the politicians come to an event they get special treatment.
Sesame Street is often to confusing to most politicians, the words are big and the concepts are difficult to understand - Especially that silly sharing concept. The Math makes no sense at all as all politicians know that 1 + 1 = 3 for sufficiently large values of 1.
It is obvious if you want government funding you cater to the politicians not what is best for the people.
Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2011 @ 5:56am
It's not that simpleA lot of comments about how the Army sponsorship is advertising while PBS and NPR are "funded", without any mention of the difference in costs, or the alternative means for either. If the Army stopped sponsoring a NASCAR car, they still have MANY avenues for advertising and recruitment. If NPR and PBS go un-funded, they have ONE WAY to raise capital, fund raising. So while they aren't really in the same realm of expense category from the governments perspective, they are comparable under the umbrella of "what should we be spending money on". Personally, I think the armed forces commercials are pretty darn cool (and can't be cheap to produce), and are VERY effective at raising the interest of the young people they're targeting. The NASCAR only hits NASCAR fans, not a wider audience, so from a cost-benefit perspective, it's not the most cost effective, and isn't that what we're after?
NASCAR does raise a lot of interest and money, but it has it's downside too. Gateway Speedway in St. Louis has closed recently, completely.. why? Because after 5+ years of being promised a cup-series race by NASCAR, they took the race to Arkansas (or Oklohoma, don't remember which).. The track here couldn't cover expenses after that and closed. So everyone in the area loses NASCAR, NHRA, SCCA and club racing. Yep, they sure deserve my tax dollars...
AC, 23 Feb 2011 @ 3:36am
Re: It's not that simpleIt's advertising money fot the military. If Congress where to ban them from sponsoring NASCAR due to this rhetoric, it would still be spent elsewhere. This entire discussion is rhetoric trying to get people to buy the idea that the GOP are a bunch of NASCAR-loving idiots who hate education, the arts, and women. I call BS.
erin, 22 Feb 2011 @ 7:09am"although given car racing�s sinking popularity,"
This past Daytona 500 set viewership records, actually.
Brian Schroth (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 8:26amI hate NASCAR and like NPR/PBS, but this article is ridiculous. The Army isn't "funding" NASCAR. It is buying a product (advertising) from NASCAR.
Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2011 @ 10:37amI disagree with having my taxpayer money go to NPR. I'd rather hurt myself with a penny than giving it to NPR. They are liberal biased as all hell, even if they were conservative i would disagree with giving money. They need to be neutral and do what they are supposed to: be a public radio not a propaganda machine. Same goes to NASCAR, no money for them either.
Joe L'Amarca, 22 Feb 2011 @ 12:03pm
info for youIf you dont like the rules of the Roman empire ! then dont go to Rome !!! if you dont like what they do with your tax dollar dont give them any more money !!!
atalexa (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 12:39pmBecause with cuts to NASCAR sponsorship you get death threats
M J Cowan (profile), 22 Feb 2011 @ 1:32pmIf we are so in debt as a nation that we have to cut health programs and veteran's benefits, why can't we cut out the $12 million+ spent on car sponsorships? Does that money really gain any recruitment over tradional methods? How many people join just because Ryan Newman, someone who ranked 15th last year, drove the Army car?
Maybe we ought to take care of the veterans this country currently has instead of trying to get new recruits.
Matt Bennett, 22 Feb 2011 @ 4:56pm
Re:That kinda misses the point. Military budget is going to $X, and thus the recruitment budget will be $Y. Is it really for us to micro-manage how that budget is spent? I assume they have competent marketers, and they probably know better than us what is or is not effective. Is NASCAR inherently offensive? Why do you want to dictate where that is spent? Do you care, particularly, how Coco-Cola spends it's ad dollars? I don't.
Rose M. Welch (profile), 26 Feb 2011 @ 2:54am
Re: Re:Do you care, particularly, how Coco-Cola spends it's ad dollars? I don't.
What does this have to do with how our tax dollars are spent?
ClueBy4, 22 Feb 2011 @ 3:36pm
We always seem to forget Right of WayI thought NPR\PBS funding was part of the abysmally small compensation that public receives for granting right of way access (eg land and spectrum usage).
Besides..., 23 Feb 2011 @ 11:54amIn all reality, what's the overall percentage for NPR/PBS versus the INCREDIBLE waste going on in our government? .001%? .00001%? Seriously, THIS is the most CUTTING you could do?!?!?!?
It's just sad. They aren't elected reps, they aren't even politicians, they're individuals who have figured out how to make money of the "people" they claim to represent. Do you think ANYONE of them, their families, or their friends are affected by ANY of the cuts they're making? Hell no, their families/friends are doing just fine, making millions, it's off the backs of the "everyman" they make their money, and will continue to do so as long as the "everyman" screams "dirt liberals!" whenever we try to make them see the truth.
At this point I'm seriously considering going Tyler Durden on the whole bunch. Who's with me?
Matt Bennett, 24 Feb 2011 @ 6:19pm
Re:It's not the only thing I want to cut, by any means.
TC, 24 Feb 2011 @ 8:22am
NASCARThink about it folks. Driving 500 miles in a circle at 200 miles an hour. Where you can see 2-20 vehicle car crashes and not not be involved in it, while you swill beer and throw chicken bones at the track and/or tv. Now look at what Sesame Street promotes. Big yellow bird and some muppets that don't swear, fight, and are fiends on grammar and pronunciation. Which one would you fund for the sheeple to be mesmerized with?
Mark (profile), 14 Mar 2011 @ 10:47am
Marketing Budget? Its still my tax dollarsI keep hearing the defense that the monies going to NASCAR teams is part of the Pentagons marketing budget...as if that changes anything or makes it right. It is still MY taxpayer dollars being spent on SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT at a time when our society is crumbling under economic strain.
The GOP is slashing funding for The National Weather Service and NOAA, Planned Parenthood, National Education Association, healthcare for women, etc. etc., all valuable needed services, yet think it logical to continue giving our tax dollars to NASCAR racing teams (I don't give a flip if its marketing or not).....its still my money!!! Come on people. Lets please get our priorities straight!!
Mike, 23 Dec 2011 @ 11:11pm
AdvertisementYour not jumping all over the army for the millions they spend annually on TV ads, that is what nascar sponsorship is a targeted ad at a specific group. 7 million annually for the amount of advertisement that comes with the sponsorship is not that bad of a deal, and nascar fans then by merchandise and wear army gear which provides more ads. You can argue that the army doesn't need to advertise but it chooses to and nascar is just one of those many forms
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2013 @ 9:11amI am a diehard Nascar fan and a moderate republican. I find federal funding for nascar raceteacks offensive and unamerican. Rep and Dems should be ashamed for allowing this type of funding to be added to the tax bill. This is how our country got into the fiscal mess. We must address the debt.
Jim Lynde, 14 Jan 2013 @ 12:01pm
Nascar - PBSThe writer of this article criticizes people who want the gov to sponsor NASCAR but not PBS.
I have known PBS gets money from the gov for a long time. I did not know NASCAR was also getting gov. freebies.
I believe the majority of Americans have no idea where the Gov. is spreading it's largess. Do you know that the Queen of England has farmland holdings in the United States and receives a US Government Farm Subsidy check each year.? The politicians of both parties are guilty of these outrageous subsidies to special interests. Fire the bastards and bring in some "NEW' bastards.!!!!!


text:
Electronic Arts reported quarterly earnings Tuesday that beat Wall Street's estimates and revenue that hit the target but its guidance for the current quarter was much lower than expected.
The videogame maker reported a net loss of $381 million, or $1.21 per share, compared with $340 million, or $1.03 per share a year ago.
Excluding items, EA posted a profit of 15 cents per share, p from 5 cents a share in the year-earlier period.
Revenue increased to $1.08 billion from $1.03 billion a year ago.
Analysts had expected the company to report earnings excluding items of 11 cents a share on $1.08 billion in revenue, according to a consensus estimate from Thomson Reuters.
For the full year, EA said it expects earnings to be between $1.00 and $1.15. This range's midpoint is above the consensus estimate of $1.05 a share. It expects revenue of $4.05 billion to $4.2 billion. This revenue midpoint is in line with analysts' estimate of $4.12 billion.
But the company's guidance for the current quarter missed analysts' estimates. It expects earnings per share of 50 cents to 60 cents, well below consensus estimates of 71 cents. It guided for revenue of $1.25 to $1.35 billion, which was lower than the consensus estimate of $1.38 billion.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|2009-06-13, 18:10
|Link #22
|2009-06-13, 18:10
|Link #23
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 34
he was PLANNING to do something to her that is JUST AS HORRIBLE as what he ACTUALLY did
it may not be as horrible to the OTHER PEOPLE who died as a result of the massacre
but for EUPHIE there would be no difference
she would be utterly and completely destroyed
in the end the only thing that kept him from doing it is that euphie showed him JUST HOW FAR she was willing to go to achive it
the fact that it was EUPHIE he was destroying wasnt, in itself, enough to stop him
|2009-06-13, 18:18
|Link #24
Wielder of Cucumbers
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
... good point. But I dunno, planning isn't exactly the same as going through with it --- and as we know, he never did actually go through with it. He did love her though, which he freely admits to. Whether or not he stopped loving her when he was older doesn't stop me from adoring it XD
Also, he felt a great deal of guilt for her death all through the second season. And what he did eventually do to her led him to abandon the Black Rebellion... I think he was rather selfish in whatever affection he held for her. He didn't mind painting her as the villain and making her angry with him, so long as it kept her out of his business. He had not been prepared to kill her and destroy everything she stood for.
Last edited by snowdevil_crow; 2009-06-13 at 18:20. Reason: ALSO
|2009-06-13, 18:26
|Link #25
Srsly ?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Age: 31
I loved my cousin when I was a child. And I can recognize him as my first love (Ok no my first love was Atreyu from the neverending story :'D) but it was that; First love in childhood. Lelouch never show ay hints that he may have this kind of feelings for Euphie in the present when he retrieved her.
On another not, ships like Nunally/Lelouch creeps me out. Shipping in geass is killing all those things I believed in. Friendship, sibling love...everything is twisted. I don't think I ever saw an anime with so many twisted relationship :/
|2009-06-13, 18:33
|Link #26
Wielder of Cucumbers
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
DON'T LOOK AT PAPA TO KISS IN THE DARK is all I'll say XD
Yeah, Lelouch/Nunnally... I gotta admit, I don't really like that one. In fact, I don't like most incest ships, but something about LuluEuphy just... draws me... lol.
|2009-06-13, 18:35
|Link #27
|2009-06-13, 18:58
|Link #30
Shameless Fangirl
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 28
Actually, I think it's already quite something that Lelouch didn't go through with his plan of making Euphie shoot him. He thought of what she was doing as a complete destruction of his life long ambition, after all.
His reaction when she figured out he was Zero was also pretty cute...
So yes, I'd say he definitely cared for her. A lot, considering he even wrote to her after he was sent to Japan and never was one to easily let go of the past.
I also have no problems letting his feelings for her pass as something with "much potential for being considered borderline romantic", exactly because they didn't interact that much. Lelouch didn't really have the time to decide how he felt about her after all those years - their relationship had been put "on hold" for too long.
Incest... you know, actually, I'm very peculiar when it comes to that. There's just no way I'd ever be able to enjoy NunallyxLelouch, but there was a time when I thought SchneizelxLelouch was pretty weird and ClovisxLelouch even weirder (don't ask me why - I don't even think it was because of the incest).
Now... now, I think Lelouch and Schneizel can be hot together, and when it comes to Lelouch and Clovis, I just want them to interact, no matter in what way. I always love them. xD
So... yeah, tastes. I'm a sucker for platonic relationships, and I wouldn't want to have them any other way in the anime, but other than that? Bring it on. xD
|2009-06-13, 19:05
|Link #31
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 34
and yet you wont accept the romantic angle in the relationship that lelouch has with the girls who are the ACTUAL romantic interests of the show
if lelouch not being able to go along with the plan is enough to suggest romance
i guess suzakallen also gets bonus points for suzaku not being able to drug kallen in the end
|2009-06-13, 19:08
|Link #32
Shameless Fangirl
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 28
I already consider Lelouch's relationship with Shirley and Kallen "borderline romantic". I think we established that a long time ago.
And if Suzaku had ever admitted that Kallen was his first love, I'd agree - bonus points indeed.
|2009-06-13, 19:14
|Link #33
|2009-06-13, 19:16
|Link #34
Shameless Fangirl
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 28
|2009-06-13, 19:36
|Link #35
Wielder of Cucumbers
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Kind of?
|2009-06-13, 19:56
|Link #36
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 34
even though the REASON he couldnt do it had nothing to do with kallen ?
he just couldnt lower himself to lelouch's level
i'd say that letting her kick his ass over it is a better example at a bonus points
since that actually IS something he does for no other reason then trying to ask for kallen's forgiveness
|2009-06-13, 22:28
|Link #38
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: U.S.A.
Age: 30
Honestly though, I never thought much of Lelouch/Euphie, Lelouch/Nunnally or what-have-you since I don't think the writers were seriously aiming for that and plus, you know, incest is icky.
As for the SuzaKallen thing, yeah you raise a good point blade. I have to agree. Not that I consider SuzaKallen all that likely to happen anyway.
@Kid Ying: As I've said before, I just want to give everyone a chance to say whatever they've been holding in or any manifestos they want to deliver before I give my surprise. But hey, if no one has anything major to say then I'll gladly get on with it.
|Thread Tools


text:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Support the Glass Message Board by finding a book via book-seek.com
Support the Glass Message Board by finding glass through glass-seek.com
The cane puller who headed the team at Wick left around the end of 2001 and Caithness decided to move cane pulling for their jewelery from Wick to Perth, in order to rationalise the making of canes for paperweights and for jewelery into one place. This resulted in a shortage of certain skills at Perth, and John Deacons was contracted to make canes for their jewelry from mid 2002 until about Christmas 2002
Stones made by: Paul Ysart 1970-73 Peter Holmes 1973-75
Page created in 0.652 seconds with 28 queries.


text:
1977 Ford Mustang--Blue--Front--1280x960
Image Copyright Ford Motor Company
Standard Catalog of Mustang 1964-2001 With comprehensive pricing for the first 30 years of Mustang and thorough coverage of all 1964-2001 models, this first-ever book is the perfect reference for devotees of the pony car legend. Everything the Mustang owner, restorer, or potential buyer is looking for is here, including identification data, engine and chassis specs, original factory prices, body types and their numbers and model production totals. 8 ˝ x 11, 256 pages, 300 color pictures
Motional Memories


text:
Maldives election another chance at unity
MALE, Maldives (AP) — The Maldives — more than 1,100 islands scattered across the Indian Ocean — are sharply divided along political lines. The first democratically elected president insists his former deputy helped force him out in a coup d'etat. And the brother of the longtime dictator of the country, where widespread unemployment exists alongside some of the world's most expensive beach resorts, now wants to be president himself.
Few hope that Saturday's presidential elections will soothe the divisions that have inflamed the archipelago since last year, when former President Mohamed Nasheed resigned amid a standoff with security forces and widespread protests.
"Even families are divided and some are not on talking terms," said Mohamed Visham, editor of local English daily Haveeru. He said the new leader will have to shift attention away from the political divide and toward issues like economic development and infrastructure.
The Maldives had its first democratic presidential elections just five years ago, after 30 years of dictatorship under Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Most of its public institutions, from the police to the public service commission and the courts, are widely seen as political partisan, and it is believed that most government workers continue to support Gayoom.
"This could be the key election for democracy and institution-building-up," said Aiman Rasheed, a spokesman for Transparency Maldives, an independent political monitor. "There are tensions between the security forces and the opposition, and the judiciary is being called into question."
Some in the Maldives question whether democracy has helped at all.
"We had been a united country working together," before 2008, said 18-year-old Mohamed Shahudan. "It's no longer so."
Known to the outside world for its luxurious resorts and beautiful beaches, the country made political headlines last year when Nasheed resigned in the face of public protests, and after losing support from the military and police.
The day after his resignation, Nasheed claimed he was forced to step down at gunpoint as part of a coup backed by Gayoom. In protests that followed, some of Nasheed's supporters were injured in a police crackdown.
Though a domestic commission of inquiry has dismissed Nasheed's claim, the country has been in political turmoil ever since. Nasheed has repeatedly dismissed as illegal the government of his former vice president — now President Mohamed Waheed Hassan.
While there is little reliable polling in the Maldives, Nasheed and Yaamin Abdul Qayyoom, Gayoom's brother, are thought to be the two leading candidates.
Hassan is also running, but his party is smaller. He was elected vice president in the first democratic election in an alliance with Nasheed. A fourth candidate, Qasim Ibrahim, is a wealthy businessman.
The next president must form a credible government, build up public confidence in government institutions and deal with pressing issues including high unemployment, increasing drug addiction among young people and improving transportation among the far-off islands.
Nasheed and Gayoom hope to win in the first round by securing 51 percent of the vote. If no candidate wins 51 percent, the top two will face one another in second round of voting on Sept. 28.
Some 240,000 people are eligible to vote this year.


text: Hero: 108 Online is a massively multi-player online game (MMOG) inspired by the like-named Cartoon Network series, Hero: 108. The storyline for Hero: 108 Online was created as a unique graphic interpretation of the 14th Century Chinese novel "The Water Margin Stories", an epic clash of spirits, outlaws and emperors. In the core storyline of Hero: 108, humans and animals lived together in harmony until High Roller, a malicious character, was unceremoniously banished from the Eastern capital. Fate, often a playful catalyst, intervened and High Roller was struck by lightning - in turn bestowing him with the amazing ability to speak to animals. With his new powers, High Roller brainwashed his new furry friends into believing that humans are evil - and began his plans to take revenge against those who exiled him.


text:
NEW YORK, NY- September 13, 2013 – The Computer Center for Visually Impaired People (CCVIP) at Baruch College is hosting an interactive presentation on new and recently updated GPS and OCR apps that help people with visual impairment. Participants can choose from two workshops held on Wednesday, September 25.
Apps that will be discussed offer location information and help identifying streets, intersection and points of interest. Featured apps include the new Seeing Eye GPS, Sendero GPS and Blind Square. Other apps to be demonstrated include Text Detective, which reads text that can be copied into other documents, emails or apps, and MoneyReader, which identifies currency denominations.
WHAT: "Help Me…I'm Lost"
Demo Center Presentation
WHEN: 1 p.m. – 3 p.m. or 6 p.m. – 8 p.m.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Baruch College, Information and Technology Building, 151 E. 25th St,
(between Lexington and Third Avenues), Room 655
Admission is free, but registration is encouraged. Call (646) 312-1420 to register. A live stream of the workshop will also be available online at ustream.tv/channel/ccvipdemo.
About Baruch College:
Baruch College is a senior college in the City University of New York (CUNY) with a total enrollment of more than 17,000 students, who represent 160 countries and speak more than 100 languages. Ranked among the top 15% of U.S. colleges and the No. 4 public regional university, Baruch College is regularly recognized as among the most ethnically diverse colleges in the country. As a public institution with a tradition of academic excellence, Baruch College offers accessibility and opportunity for students from every corner of New York City and from around the world. For more about Baruch College, go to http://www.baruch.cuny.edu/.
Manny Romero, (646) 660-6141, firstname.lastname@example.com
Celene McDermott (646) 660-6134, email@example.com


text:
Libraries' Media Center screens Films from the Vault
Contact: John Vallier
Head, Distributed Media Services
(206) 616-1210
Media Contact: A.C. Petersen
Libraries Communications Officer
(206) 543-9389
More Information
Educational Media Collection (EMC)
May 19, 2010
Libraries Media Center screens and digitizes Films from the Vault, May 26
Join in the fun as the UW Media Center in Odegaard Undergraduate Library shows 22 short films and simultaneously digitizes them for preservation, May 26, 9am – 5pm in Odegaard Undergraduate Library (OUGL) room 220. FREE
See lazy woodcutters being mocked. Potential marriage partners being evaluated. Olympic marmots being introduced. Czechoslovakia being historicized.
UW films are scheduled from 12-2; titles include a documentary on the Village Potters of Onda, produced by Prof. Robert Sperry;and Felicia, filmed by a young woman in her neighborhood in Watts, California.
For a complete schedule, see <http://uwmediacenter.blogspot.com/>
Media Center technicians will be on hand, rolling out wizened 16mm film from the Educational Media Collection bunker and then projecting them in all of their deteriorating analog glory. While films are projected, they will simultaneously be digitized for preservation at the UW Libraries. Films will be played on a telecine, which looks like a traditional film projector but converts the film signal into a video signal, which goes through a computer, and is digitized.
These films (and about 4000 other titles) are part of the Educational Media Collection (EMC) which were previously held by UW's Classroom Support Services in Kane Hall but were transferred to the Libraries Media Center in late 2008.
"The Media Center has been digitizing since mid-2009, as many UW professors, and researchers from afar, still want access to many of these titles," said John Vallier, Head of Media Services. "While most of them were published and distributed some time ago, it is now extremely difficult to track down titles. In many cases we appear to have the only remaining copies."
The University of Washington Libraries is a network of more than 17 libraries serving three campuses: Seattle, Bothell and Tacoma. Major facilities include Suzzallo and Allen Libraries, Odegaard Undergraduate Library and the Health Sciences Library, as well as subject-oriented libraries. For Libraries news, events and exhibits, visit http://www.lib.washington.edu/about/news
# # # # # # # # # #
contact: A.C. Petersen, Libraries Communications Officer


text:
Ref: GerArr92705
Apartment for rent from € 46/day in ArrachName/Address: Am Hohen Bogen
Image disclaimer: It is the responsibility of the hotel chain and/or the individual property to ensure the accuracy of the photos displayed. Dream Home Shop is not responsible for any inaccuracies in the photos.
3 2
Interior3-room apartment 75 m2: living room with satellite TV. 1 room with 2 beds. 1 double bedroom. Open kitchen (oven, electric coffee machine) with dining table. Bath or shower/WC. Balcony or terrace. Terrace furniture. Facilities: children's high chair (extra). Maximum 2 pets/ dogs allowed.
OutsideFamily-friendly an child friendly holiday village "Am Hohen Bogen". In the district of Kummersdorf, on the outskirts, 3 km from the centre of Arrach, in a quiet, sunny, elevated position on a slope, 100 m from the lake. For shared use: lawn for sunbathing. Table tennis, children's playground. In the complex: reception, restaurant, bowling (extra). Washing machine, tumble dryer (for shared use, extra). Bread roll service possible. Central parking spaces. Supermarket 2 km, railway station "Arrach" 4 km, outdoor swimming pool 10 km, indoor swimming pool 10 km, bathing lake "Arracher Seepark" 3 km. Golf course (9 hole) 6 km, tennis 10 km, riding stable 100 m. Nearby attractions: Bayerwald-Tierpark Lohberg 15 km, Spielbank Bad Kötzting, Hochseilpark Lam, Fun-Park Neukirchen, Tiergarten Straubing, Pullman-City. Well-known ski regions can easily be reached: Eck 6 km, Am Hohen Bogen 7 km, Arber 20 km. Hiking paths: Arberregion. Please note: car recommended. Fishing [permit required]. Loading and unloading of baggage is possible at the holiday house. The photograph shows a typical example. All houses/apartments are individually designed/furnished. Hiking paths from the park. Swimming 100m, boating, fishing 500 m. The holiday park comprises 2-floored houses, all including shared lawns and play areas. The apartments are furnished according to the owners' individual tastes.
- Pets allowed
- Cots
- Addition Beds
- Washingmachine
The position on the map may not be accurate
No info provided


text:
Ida Szczupakiewicz
Born: May 15, 1930
Malkinia, Poland
Ida was the oldest of three children born to a Jewish family in northeastern Poland in Malkinia, a town situated on the right bank of the Bug River. Ida's father was a grain merchant and her family lived in the same house that her grandfather had owned.
1933-39: I was 9 when Germany invaded Poland. At once my family hid on some nearby farms but a few weeks later we returned home. When our neighbor, my father's best friend, became a Nazi informant, my father had us each pack a small bag--we were going to my uncle's house in the Soviet zone. My father felt it would be better to got to the Soviet side. Luckily our town was on the border between German- and Soviet-controlled Poland.
1940-44: We stayed with my uncle for a few months but it was so crowded we had to leave. We decided to go east. The Soviets packed us in cattle cars and for 16 days we rode in the freezing cold. We were given water, but when we asked for food we were always told, "Next station." Finally we arrived in Sverdlovsk, in the Urals. We were herded into large halls and given food and told that things would be like "heaven." Later, we were sent to a logging camp with one-room shacks and no fuel. My parents were put to work at the logging camp.
Ida and her family spent the rest of the war in the Soviet Union, where her sister Bessie and brother Josef were born. In 1951 Ida immigrated to the United States.


text:
E! Orders Elizabeth Hurley's The Royals to Series
Mar 6, 2014 5:47 PM EST
E! has given a series order to The Royals, the network's first-ever original scripted series. The Royals, starring Austin Powers' Elizabeth Hurley as Queen Helena and 300's Vincent Regan as King Simon, is a contemporary drama about a fictional Britis… Read more


text:
Special meeting of the Government Accountability Board to consider challenges to candidates and certify ballot access for the May 8 Recall Election.
The Board unanimously denied challenges to the "fake Democrat" candidates in the recall primaries. See news release here explaining the Board's decision.
Attached below are the Board materials and the challenge/complaint filed against "protest candidates" recruited by the Republican Party of Wisconsin. The Board will consider the challenge at this meeting. The deadline for replies to the challenge is 4:30 p.m. Monday. The staff memo/recommendations on the challenge have been posted in the 4 17 12 Supplemental Open Session materials.pdf attachment below.
Some Board members may appear by teleconference.
There will be no scheduled public comment at this meeting.
A. Call to Order
B. Director's Report of Appropriate Meeting Notice
C. Personal Appearances on Ballot Access Issues
(Limit of 5 minutes per individual appearance)
D. Staff Report on Ballot Access Issues Regarding Recall Elections
E. Challenges to Nomination Papers
F. Director's Report
G. Closed Session
5.05 (6a) and 19.85 (1) (h) The Board's deliberations on requests for advice under the ethics code, lobbying law, and campaign finance law shall be in closed session.
19.85 (1) (g) The Board may confer with legal counsel concerning litigation strategy.
19.851 The Board's deliberations concerning investigations of any violation of the ethics code, lobbying law, and campaign finance law shall be in closed session.
19.85 (1) (c) The Board may consider performance evaluation data of a public employee over which it exercises responsibility.
The Government Accountability Board has scheduled its next meeting for Tuesday, May 15, 2012
at the Government Accountability Board offices, 212 East Washington Avenue, Third Floor in
Madison, Wisconsin beginning at 9:00 a.m.


text:
Views: 127
Replies to This Discussion
hi i have time this weekend let me know if you still want to hit
Hello! I live in Smyrna (right at 75 and 285) and I am interested in playing weeknights any time after 6. I work off of 85 and Clairmont so if you are in the Tech area perhaps we could meet up some time this week or next and try and play a bit.
My name is Ashley and my number is xxx.xxx.xxxx. Let me know!
hi Ashley if you want to hit today around 6:30 at any court you want let me know or this weekend
© 2019 Created by Mark / The Mayor. Powered by


text:
Mansion Global's Listing of the Day series highlights standout homes on our site. Tell us which home you like the most in the poll below.
Previously: View Last Week's Winner
Write to Gina Faridniya at firstname.lastname@example.com
Follow Mansion Global:Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | LinkedIn | Messenger
Write to us: email@example.com
Stay up to date with Mansion Global newsletters


text:
Hi all!
As you may know, we recently switched to a new server with CreeperHost that runs everything associated with the IndieSquish community - our website and all our servers. It's very cheap for a large dedicated server, but the price is in GBP and we live in South Africa, where the value of the local currency - the rand - has taken a downturn recently, making the server pretty expensive for us.
Below is a playments link for our monthly server invoice. If anyone is able, could you contribute just a little bit to the outstanding amount? We'd greatly appreciate it. If you currently have a recurring donation (though I think only one or two people do), you can feel free to cancel that and instead put the amount directly into Playments.
Thanks guys!
Here's the link:http://playments.creeperhost.net/di


text:
Hedge Fund All-Stars Stand Out in Another Bad Year
They are the few. The proud. The hedge-fund managers making a killing this year. Greg Zuckerman tells who they are on Markets Hub. Photo: Bloomberg.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.
... I ... one man ... a great year for hedge funds ... but a couple of guys have done very very well great to meet you all about so um ... hi it's it's over then she has read your article about this one in ... the the revisions for these guys doing so well or very Barry ... I started thinking that way so he did a little flavor of all the ways to make money to share the strode are different way so a guy like David Tapper was more of a trader ... I in on the March kit and long stocks wind was right airline stock and some others ... on were as somebody like I'm ... alone time Steve Mendell who has a consumer oriented confirmed ... they were up because of gas ... because Apple's among the stocks ... and fixed income guys were bidding on subprime bonds betting on housing turnarounds ... and housing unproven the math work so they are having giveaways to a make money big money they should drop all around twenty five or thirty percent share of total but the Tapper tummy what he's ... so David Tepper's Nolan as a distressed debt investor buying I it's hard to pigeonhole of these is the smart investors in the mean a lot of money betting on Bancshares into thousandnine about seven billion dollars ... of Pursell ... on that now the question is um can you keep that going for now he's being right at calling things ... on the big game that turns right so he got bearish a great time in Europe earlier this year again when the merit right the guy I'm was was it uses a single word and give it to support the euro ... and pepper belief in and got water I he's too please leave my understanding is investors than leaning bullish right now ... so ... I'd to her mom were ... killed in ... a close range a day made money awful and wealth that ... they did the right number of firms that hedge funds that were on the sidelines well including Burma number but the changing tide because his when these guys then in two thousandsix was really bullish on housing ... and doing the wrong way and then his ankle the fact that the time and then they turn on a dime in early two thousand seven David Viniar the ... CFO things to come said hey guys with the Dylan here so he was among those putting on those traits more ... bearish trades ... for Goldman Sachs then you know were were controversial subsequently ... I'm a lot of money and ironically he's been bidding on housing this year ... and doing quite well ... so the new home sales this morning ... Michael hands over to seek U S The of twenty seven percent yet there are among those ... abroad aren't that many actually on in in the European model and maybe in some ways ... is hurting little more on that than by combine Goldblum debt ... and equity but I I pod is another guy a lot of ... ice remain on buy one get one ... which is up dramatically about forty percent this year and is done quite well the past few years in if they can raise much money ... on because they really open with investors and they say hey we saw the leverage ... you know many people working at the firm in all kinds of the bubble with an eleven reasons ... not to invest with them I have ... a IIa brutal honesty yet that of Truman ... and are up forty percent this year write to the big money would be kind of fighting these guys honesty pays writes on a lot of people are still suspicious of relative value which is the strategy that long-term capital blow up on several years ago ... aam Bob doesn't use the same time a strategy in some ways that he holds more cash but it's all relative value strategy with a lot of leverage the people you know ...


text:
Canoe Battleship
Sunday, November 18, 2012, 7 am to Monday, December 3, 2012, Noon
Current Students
Get 4 people together, make a team, jump in a canoe, and sink other canoes with bucketsful of water. This is a free tournament and will take place on Monday, Dec 3rd. sign up on imleagues.com. For more information, contact email@example.com


text:
Machine Safety: More on shared responsibilities
In the November issue of Control Engineering, Steve Wright wrote a great article explaining the broad responsibilities of designing and building a safe machine. Steve is directly on point from the supplier perspective. Now, let's take this discussion one step further.
I've often wondered, given the U.S. model for enforcement, why we write safety standards for machine design but enforce safety via OSHA who only looks at the users of machines? By default, I've heard several people state that machinery OEMs in the U.S. are not regulated (by OSHA) to build safe machines. It seems that OSHA will go into an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) facility and cite worker safety issues but they don't evaluate the machine they're manufacturing.
Having said that, the reasons (in my opinion) that Steve's article is so relevant is that OEMs need to build safe machines because:
- Company policy
- Industry best practices
- It's right to reduce points of hazard
- Global compliance for export
- Compliance to customer specifications
- Potential fault in litigation
These are some of the points which can easily be realized by reviewing the model comparisons between Europe and the USA in the graph on the left. You can readily see that it's considered illegal for an OEM to build an unsafe machine in Europe.
So, I believe the reason Steve's article is so important here in the U.S. is for OEMs comply with the safety standards, which helps users purchasing safe machines to provide a safer place for employees to work. Additionally, OSHA's enforcement of the user community for installed machines further helps to provide a safer environment for employees.
Your comments or suggestion are always welcome so please let us know your thoughts. Submit your ideas, experiences, and challenges on this subject in the comments section below.
Related articles:
Machine safety: Shared responsibility
Inside Machines: Does adopting ISO 13849-1:2006 change the U.S. model for compliance and enforcement?
Machine Safety – does OSHA reference consensus standards for compliance?
Machine Safety: Is OSHA okay with my 'acceptable' risk mitigation?
Contact: www.jbtitus.com for "Solutions for Machine Safety".


text:
"It's challenging and fun trying to make your way through the levels and it always feels awesome when you go in and more...
"It's challenging and fun trying to make your way through the levels and it always feels awesome when you go in and out undetected. The graphics remind you of a old sega game gone HD which are very nice. " -outpostech.com
Exciting sneaking missions and superior brave strategy game, hard to forget! - best10apps.com
As an expert in sneaking missions. Your job is to get in, blend in, finish the mission and you disappear. This is VR Mission.
Your skills of Stealth, Intelligence, Bravery and full weapon knowledge will be putted to the ultimate test in this brand new stealth action packed real time strategy game as you lead an one man army into the very deep of the enemy's heart, your failure is not acceptable.
Your mission: to sneak in and gather enemy intel.
Your task: finish the mission and leave no trace.
Your back ups: none.
Your weapons: are all around you.
Your enemies: Everywhere
Use them wisely and survive the mission.
Become the best in the business, challenge the legends and be truly the master of all ghosts. Dare to unlock all the challenges?
If you get any problem of the game,feel free to contact us:
email: info[at]sphinxjoy[dot]com
Thank you for understanding.And enjoy the game!
▶ Visit us: http://www.sphinxjoy.com
▶ Like us: http://facebook.com/sphinxgames
▶ Follow us: http://twitter.com/sphinxgames
▶ Watch us: http://youtube.com/sphinxgames


text:
Discover one of the world's premier military aviation collections at the Air Force Museum of New Zealand; from aircraft, engines and assorted parts to medals, pin-ups and parachute-silk wedding dresses.
Come and marvel at our collection of classic aircraft, be inspired by the bravery of present and past servicemen, servicewomen and their families, fly a simulator, take a guided tour and step back in time Captured, Prisoners of War. Your journey through the Air Force Museum of New Zealand will be something very special.
Enjoy it more on our tours! You can explore the Air Force Museum yourself, but the best way to enjoy it fully is on one of our guided tours. For family fun sign on for the Air Force Adventure at the weekends or catch our aircraft Restoration Projects in action on our daily behind the scenes tours.
Free admission, donations appreciated.
Open daily 10am to 5pm, tours available.