text:
Antisemitism resurfaces
by Jonathan Rosenbloom
Published Friday August 5, 2011
from Jewish World Review
All forms of anti-Semitism are not the same. Robert Wistrich, the greatest living scholar of anti-Semitism, deals with different types of anti-Semitism in his recent 1,000-page-plus The Lethal Obsession, which frighteningly is focused almost entirely on the last 20 years. Most dangerous of all is the type of anti-Semitism exemplified by Hitler, ym"sh. Hitler was obsessed with Jews: he invested them with demonic qualities, saw Jews as the moving force behind every historical trend of which he disapproved, and viewed history as moving towards an apocalyptic struggle between Jews and Aryans, in which only one could survive.
What Wistrich terms "exterminationist" anti-Semitism is heard today from Iran — indeed it is widespread throughout the Muslim world. But apart from the context of anti-Israel demonstrations, where slogans like "Jews to the ovens," are apparently considered within the realm of poetic, or left-wing, license, it is not yet acceptable for non-Muslims to voice such sentiments in the West. Instead anti-Israel Western elites content themselves with manipulations of international law that would leave Israel incapable of defending itself.
That is not, however, to suggest that the old obsessions with Jews have not returned in force. They have. As a British lord told journalist Penelope Wyatt a decade or so ago, "Thank G-d, we can once again say what we want about the Jews." Haters of Israel feel less and less constrained not to express themselves in explicitly anti-Semitic terms. Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz was unofficially boycotted by all of Norway's major universities on a recent visit to Norway, even when he offered to waive his normal high fee entirely. The first signatory on a widely circulated academic boycott petition against the pro-Israel Dershowitz — so much for academic freedom and open-minded inquiry — wrote that "there is something immensely self-satisfied and self-centered about the tribe mentality that is so prevalent among Jews." The petition began, "Since 1948, the State of Israel has occupied Palestinian land," implying that Israel in any borders has no claim to existence.
In 2003, Jose Saramago, a Portugese Nobel Laureate in Literature, signed a petition, along with various other literary figures, accusing Israel of seeking "the liquidation of the Palestinian nation." Nor was he bashful about openly attributing Israel's "sins" to the religion of its people. Jews, he wrote in 2002, are "contaminated by their monstrous certitude that there exists a people chosen by G-d. . . . The Jews endlessly scratch their wound, to keep it bleeding, to make it incurable, and they show it to the world as a banner." He compared Israel's military campaign in Jenin, in which all of 52 Palestinians -- the majority of them combatants -- were killed, to a contemporary Auschwitz.
These elite attitudes, continually recycled by the BBC and other respectable media outlets, have permeated popular opinion to a remarkable degree. Not only do 63% of Poles answer affirmatively the question -- "Do you think Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians? — but so do 47.7% of Germans, who could be expected to know a thing or two about wars of extermination. When asked, "Do you understand why people do not like Jews?" 55% of Poles and 48.9% of Germans respond affirmatively. Several European polls over the last decade have named Israel as the greatest threat to international peace.
THE MAIN POINT ABOUT claims that Israel is waging a genocidal campaign against the Palestinians or that Israel practices apartheid is that they are demonstrably delusional. We are not talking about matters of policy about which rational people can disagree, but about claims that are obsessional in nature.
Genocide has not been eliminated from the world. The slaughter of 800,000 Tutsi tribesmen by their machete-wielding Hutu neighbors in Rwanda, in a few months in 1994, is one such example. The ongoing murder of up to 400,000 black Muslims in Darfur by the Arab janjaweed, which has left 2,000,000 in miserable refugee camps, is another example. But these have attracted relatively little attention, and in neither instance did the world do anything to prevent the genocide.
Yet at the same time, the world is obsessed with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. More Muslims have been killed by Muslims, Arabs by other Arabs, Shiite Muslims by Sunni Muslims, than the total number of Arab casualties in the Arab-Israel conflict since 1948: approximately 60,000. The total number of Palestinians killed over that same period is about 9,000, approximately the same number of Bosnian Muslims killed by Bosnian Serbs in Srebrenica in 1995 alone. The total number of casualties in all the Arab-Israel wars and battles since 1948 ranks about 50th on the list of all major conflicts over the last sixty years, with twelve or more involving over a million casualties.
Yet it is Israel that grabs all the attention. The UN General Assembly passes more resolutions against Israel annually than against all the rest of the nations of the world combined. Seventy per cent of the country specific resolutions passed by the UN Human Relations Council are against Israel. Only Israeli policies are a permanent agenda item; only Israel has its own Special Rapporteur to report on its human rights violations. Meanwhile China, North Korea, Iran, and a host of brutal Arab dictatorships escape censure nearly completely. Until very recently, Libya headed the UNHRC, and was given a favorable report for its human rights recorded. (The report has now been quietly tabled.) And Saudi Arabia was recently praised by the UNHRC for its treatment of women. Women, incidentally, are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia.
The claim that Israel is conducting genocide against the Palestinians will suffice to fully capture the total irrationality of the discussion of Israel. The following facts should be known to every Jew who cares about the fate of the six million Jews in Israel, if only to allow them to ridicule anyone who raises such a claim as a lunatic. But those same facts also demonstrate that the claim of Israeli genocide belongs to the realm of obsessional anti-Semitism, not that of rational discourse. During the course of Israeli administrative control of the West Bank and Gaza, Palestinian life expectancy increased 50% -- from 48 to 72. Infant mortality declined 75% -- from 60 per 1,000 live births to 15. Israel built seven universities in the West Bank and Gaza, and Palestinian illiteracy dropped to 14%, as compared to 69% in Egypt and 44% in Syria. Palestinian GNP rose tenfold between 1967 and the beginning of the Oslo process, and the West Bank had the fourth fastest growing economy in the world. By any standard, a genocide in which the victim population's life expectancy increases 50% over the course of three decades is a very peculiar sort of genocide.
As with genocide, there still exist apartheid-like policies in the world; in fact, the Palestinians themselves are subject to apartheid policies. But not by Israel. Arab League Resolution 1437, passed in 1959, forbids Arab countries from "granting citizen[ship] to applicants of Palestinian origin in order to prevent their assimilation into those countries." With the exception of Jordan, Palestinians are not only denied citizenship, but barred from university and learned professions in most of the Arab countries surrounding Israel, and confined to refugee camps in some.
Arab Spring has ironically revealed that the only country in which Arab citizens can freely criticize the government, even to the point of sedition, and in which they enjoy full political rights, is Israel. Arab citizens of Israel are represented in exactly their percentage of the population in Israeli universities, and they have access on an equal basis with Jewish citizens to some of the world's best medical care.
COMPARITIVE ANALYSIS SIMILARY reveals the hypocrisy behind the claims of Israel's alleged "war crimes." Within hours of any Israeli counter-offensive in response to terrorist attacks either from Hizbullah (i.e., the Second Lebanon War) or the Palestinians (Operation Defensive Shield in 2002 and Operation Cast Lead in early 2009), the international community is quick to condemn Israel's disproportionate response — a claim invariably buttressed by citation of the fewer Israeli casualties. That, of course, has nothing to do with proportionality in international law. There has never been and never will be a doctrine of warfare that an army may kill no more of its adversaries than it loses itself.
Rather proportionality refers to the collateral civilian damage measured against the military advantage of a particular action. As long as civilians are not directly targeted, virtually any legitimate military objective will suffice. Even proportionality thus defined is a new doctrine. The Allied carpet bombing of German civilian targets at the end of World War II assumed that damage to civilian targets was a legitimate means to bring the war to a swifter conclusion. The same assumption underlay the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The UNHRC resolution establishing the Goldstone Commission condemned Israel's "massive violations of human rights of the Palestinian people" in Operation Cast Lead long before the first testimony had been taken. It typifies the hypocritical treatment applied to all Israeli efforts to defend itself against terrorism. Significantly, the time frame for the investigation completely left out the 8,000 rockets fired at Israel from Gaza from 2000 through 2008, and the accelerating rocket fire from Israel's Gaza withdrawal in 2005 to Operation Cast Lead. Yet, without any context for the Israeli action how could it possibly be evaluated?
Significantly, critics of Israel's "disproportionate" responses or to the civilian casualties resulting from Israel military actions never specify what Israel could do to defend itself. And they completely ignore that in international law civilian deaths are attributed to the party that fights from amongst a civilian population and locates military targets or weapons in civilian structures. The failure to specify what Israel can do to defend itself is not just a technical objection: It goes to the heart of the criticism of Israeli actions. In the eyes of the critics, it does not matter if Israel can defend itself under international law (as they interpret it when Israel is involved). The reason is simple: They do not really believe Israel's existence is legitimate, and would prefer to see it left without means of self-defense.
Aware of this, Israel shows restraint that no other country ever has before defending itself. Not until 139 Israeli civilians were killed March 2002 — the equivalent of over 6,000 American citizens — did Israel launch Operation Defensive Shield. What other nation would have allowed such a huge number of citizens to be killed without moving to remove the terrorist infrastructure. Similarly, would any other nation have tolerated five rockets launched at its civilian population, much less several thousand, without responding, as Israel did prior to Operation Cast Lead.
Colonel Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, has said that no nation in the history of warfare has ever made the same effort to avoid civilian casualties as Israel did in Operation Cast Lead, including dropping nearly a million leaflets and thousands of phone calls to civilians warning them to evacuate in advance of military operations. Every Israeli military operation includes in its battle plan a legal analysis of the legitimacy of every potential target, and the circumstances under which they can be attacked, prepared by the legal branch of the IDF. No other army in the world does that.
By Hamas's own admission the ratio of fighters to civilians killed by Israel in Operation Cast Lead was about 7:4. And the vast majority of those civilian casualties were attributable to the terrorists' decision to fight from civilian areas. For a point of comparison, a Sri Lankan operation against Tamil terrorists, launched around the time of Operation Cast Lead resulted in 20,000-30,000 civilian casualties versus only 1,200 combatants. Russian troops killed more than 100,000 civilians in Grozny.
Yet neither of the latter operations came under international scrutiny or condemnation, as did Israeli actions in Operation Cast Lead. In the Balkan Wars of the mid-'90s, U.S. and NATO forces relied almost exclusively on air power, killing 1,200, only a small percentage of whom were combatants. In the 1989 capture of Panama's strongman, Gen. Manuel Noriega, the U.S. killed between 1,000 and 2,500 civilians according to internal U.S. army memos.
The point is that only civilians killed by Israel, even when acting to defend its citizens from a repeated threat, count in the world's eyes. Where were the European protests and mass demonstrations when Syrian dictator Hafez al-Assad's forces killed between 20,000 and 40,000 of Syria's own citizens in Hama in one week in 1984? Where are they today? Who in the West has even heard how the Lebanese army killed 300 and left 33,000 homeless in attacks on terrorist groups operating out of Palestinian refugee camps in 2007.
WHAT ABOUT THE CLAIM that Israel is the greatest threat to world peace? Not soon-to-be-nuclear Iran, which is busy testing missiles capable of reaching Europe, and is governed by an explicitly expansionist ideology; not North Korea, which continues to develop and export nuclear weaponry, even as more than a million of its own citizens live on the verge of starvation; not Pakistan, which can no longer secure its own nuclear arsenal from Islamist elements in the military and intelligence services.
In point of fact, the opposite claim — that Israel contributes more to the well-being of the world per capita than any other nation — would be far more plausible. In an increasingly parched world, Israel is the uncontested world leader in water recycling and desalinization. As described by George Gilder in the July 5 Wall Street Journal, Israel "is the global master of microchip design, network algorithms and medical instruments."
Israeli scientists developed a vaccine against juvenile diabetes, and have produced important drugs alleviating Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and multiple sclerosis. Israel hi-tech attracts more venture capital per capita than any country in the world -- thirty times the venture capital per capita as Europe, eighty times that of China. Israeli cows have the highest milk yields in the world, twice the European average, and Israeli palm trees produce over ten times as many kilos of dates as the average Middle Eastern palm.
In pure humanitarian aid, no country in the world comes close to Israel. After the Haitian earthquake in 2009, Israeli rescue and medical teams were among the first and largest contingent to reach Haiti — a fact studiously ignored by most of the world media, when they weren't claiming that Israeli physicians were harvesting body parts. Israel set up a special rehabilitation center for amputees in a country that had none. Unfortunately, Israel's many wars and terrorist attacks have given it more expertise in this area than any other country. Over 1,000 Haitians have been treated there, and 100 fitted with prosthetic devices, many in Israel itself. Israel set up the first field hospital in Japan after the recent tsunami. Israeli doctors came to the aid of Tutsis being slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands in Rwanda and ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. Whenever there is a major disaster anywhere in the world, Israel is at the helm of providing assistance.
Bottom line: the double standards applied to Israel and the claims about Israel genocide and apartheid reveal an animus to the Jewish state that is beyond the range of rational discourse. Indeed it is just a new form of obsessional anti-Semitism.
# reads: 1779
Original piece is http://jewishworldreview.com/jonathan/rosenblum_anti_semitism_resurfaces.php3


text:
Paul Watton
Country : Northern Ireland World Masters Quarter Final 2001
Career Earnings : £3,616 World Grand Prix Last 24 2000
WDF World Cup Singles Quarter Final 2003
WDF Europe Cup Singles Last 16 2006
Year (31/1) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
DDB Ranking 112 332 70 74 42 216 95 656 254 204 1593
04/03/2007 UK Open Southern Regional Final PDC Pro Tour Last 128 £0
02/12/2006 PDC World Championship Qualifiers PDC Q Last 128 £0
05/11/2006 UK Open Scottish Regional Final PDC Pro Tour Preliminary £0
04/11/2006 PDPA Players Championship Scotland PDC Pro Tour Last 128 £0
29/10/2006 World Grand Prix PDC Premier Last 32 £1,750
22/10/2006 UK Open Irish Regional Final PDC Pro Tour Last 16 £250
21/10/2006 PDPA Players Championship Ireland PDC Pro Tour Last 128 £0
23/09/2006 WDF Europe Cup Singles WDF 2 Last 16 £0
17/09/2006 World Grand Prix All Ireland Qualifiers PDC Q Qualifier £0
01/10/2005 WDF World Cup Singles WDF 1 Last 32 £0
01/10/2003 WDF World Cup Singles WDF 1 Quarter Final £0
02/12/2001 World Masters WDF Major Quarter Final £450
18/10/2000 World Grand Prix PDC Premier Last 24 IEP 1,500
20/02/2000 Scottish Open PDC 2 Quarter Final Unknown

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
package com.cloud.resource;

import java.net.URI;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.UUID;

import javax.ejb.Local;
import javax.naming.ConfigurationException;

import org.apache.log4j.Logger;

import com.cloud.host.HostVO;
import com.cloud.hypervisor.Hypervisor;

@Local(value=Discoverer.class)
public class DummyHostDiscoverer implements Discoverer {
    private static final Logger s_logger = Logger.getLogger(DummyHostDiscoverer.class);

    private String _name;

    @Override
    public Map<ServerResource, Map<String, String>> find(long dcId, Long podId, Long clusterId, URI url, String username, String password, List<String> hostTags) {
        if (!url.getScheme().equals("dummy")) {
            return null;
        }

        Map<ServerResource, Map<String, String>> resources = new HashMap<ServerResource, Map<String, String>>();
        Map<String, Object> params = new HashMap<String, Object>();
        Map<String, String> details = new HashMap<String, String>();

        details.put("url", url.toString());
        details.put("username", username);
        details.put("password", password);

        params.put("url", url.toString());
        params.put("username", username);
        params.put("password", password);
        params.put("zone", Long.toString(dcId));
        params.put("guid", UUID.randomUUID().toString());
        params.put("pod", Long.toString(podId));

        DummyHostServerResource resource = new DummyHostServerResource();
        try {
            resource.configure("Dummy Host Server", params);
        } catch (ConfigurationException e) {
            s_logger.warn("Unable to instantiate dummy host server resource");
        }
        resource.start();
        resources.put(resource, details);
        return resources;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean configure(String name, Map<String, Object> params) throws ConfigurationException {
    	return true;
    }

    @Override
    public String getName() {
        return _name;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean start() {
        return true;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean stop() {
        return true;
    }

    @Override
	public boolean matchHypervisor(String hypervisor) {
    	return false;
    }

    @Override
	public Hypervisor.HypervisorType getHypervisorType() {
    	return Hypervisor.HypervisorType.None;
    }

	@Override
	public void postDiscovery(List<HostVO> hosts, long msId) {
		//do nothing
	}

	@Override
	public void putParam(Map<String, String> params) {
		// TODO Auto-generated method stub

	}

    @Override
    public ServerResource reloadResource(HostVO host) {
        // TODO Auto-generated method stub
        return null;
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
REAL MADRID: Gabriel Jesus next victim of Benzema in Madrid?
Karim Benzema has scored 44 goals this season for Real Madrid and has become indispensable to the Merengue.
At the slightest absence of Karim Benzema, who fortunately has not been injured much this season, Real Madrid has constantly experienced great difficulties. It must be said that Carlo Ancelotti was not rich in the offensive sector this season, especially in the position of center forward. And for proof, it is the former Lyon striker Mariano Diaz who was the understudy of Karim Benzema, the Serbian international Luka Jovic not doing the trick in the eyes of Carlo Ancelotti. Despite the sparkling form of Karim Benzema, it is clear that Real Madrid will have to recruit a center forward this summer in order to be able to make the probable future Ballon d'Or winner blow next season. According to information from Cadena SER, Gabriel Jesus is targeted to become Karim Benzema's next competitor in the center-forward position next season.
After the recruitment of Erling Haaland, the Brazilian international is no longer in the odor of sanctity at Manchester City, where his playing time will logically be reduced. Author of 13 goals and 12 assists in all competitions under Pep Guardiola, Gabriel Jesus has not delivered an abominable season but the English champion wants to part with him to reduce its wage bill and make room for Julian Alvarez in the role of understudy to Erling Haaland. Gabriel Jesus has been offered to Atletico Madrid and Real Madrid. The Colchoneros have indicated that they are not interested, but the club of the White House is studying the conditions of a transfer of Gabriel Jesus, proof of Carlo Ancelotti's interest in the Manchester City striker. It remains to be seen whether the former Palmeiras striker will join Real and if so, whether he will be able to challenge Karim Benzema, who has already had to wear out strikers such as Gonzalo Higuain, Emmanuel Adebayor, or Raul and Alvaro Morata at Real Madrid.
FC barcelona : Laporta and his racket, revolt in the locker room!
paris saint germain : Diallo, the only satisfaction for Luis Campos
Villarreal vs Rayo Vallecano 30 January 2023
Real Madrid vs Real Sociedad 29 January 2023
Osasuna vs Atlético Madrid 29 January 2023
Real Valladolid vs Valencia 29 January 2023


Format string vulnerability in the Job Engine service (bengine.exe) in the Media Server in Veritas Backup Exec 10d (10.1) for Windows Servers rev. 5629, Backup Exec 10.0 for Windows Servers rev. 5520, Backup Exec 10.0 for Windows Servers rev. 5484, and Backup Exec 9.1 for Windows Servers rev. 4691, when the job log mode is Full Detailed (aka Full Details), allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted filename on a machine that is backed up by Backup Exec.


text:
Absolute Software Announces New Nominees to Board of Directors
Absolute Software Corporation
VANCOUVER, Nov. 15, 2012 /CNW/ - Absolute® Software Corporation ("Absolute" or the "Company") (TSX: ABT), the leading provider of firmware-embedded, persistent endpoint security and management solutions, announced today the addition of Eric Rosenfeld and Gregory Monahan to the management proposed slate of nominee directors for the Company's forthcoming annual general meeting of shareholders to be held on December 13, 2012.
"I am pleased to welcome both Eric and Gregory to the proposed slate of nominee directors," said John Livingston, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. "They both bring proven financial expertise and business acumen, which will help enhance shareholder value."
"We are enthusiastic about the opportunity with Absolute and the potential to work with both the Board and the management team," stated Eric Rosenfeld, President and CEO of Crescendo Partners. "We believe there is a strong market opportunity for the Company and we look forward to working with the team to develop and execute business strategies to capitalize on that opportunity to increase shareholder value."
Mr. Rosenfeld has been the President and Chief Executive Officer of Crescendo Partners, a New York based investment firm, since its formation in November 1998. Following discussions with Crescendo Partners, the Company reached an agreement whereby, among other things, the proposed slate of nominee directors for election at the upcoming annual meeting of shareholders will consist of John Livingston, J. Ian Giffen, Terry Libin, Ian Reid, Daniel P. Ryan, Eric Rosenfeld and Gregory Monahan. In addition, the newly constituted board and Crescendo will work together to identify an additional person with appropriate industry experience to join the Board of Directors as soon as practicable.
Full information on the proposed nominees will be contained in the Company's management information circular that will be mailed to shareholders and available on www.sedar.com shortly.
About Absolute Software
Absolute Software Corporation (TSX: ABT) is the world leader in firmware-embedded endpoint security and management for computers and ultra-portable devices. The Company, a leader in device security and management tracking for more than 18 years, has over 30,000 commercial customers worldwide. Positioned as a Visionary vendor in Gartner, Inc.'s Magic Quadrant for Client Management Tools in 2012, Absolute's solutions - Computrace, Absolute Manage, Absolute Secure Drive, and Computrace LoJack® for Laptops - provide organizations with actionable intelligence to prove compliance, securely manage BYOD, and deliver comprehensive visibility and control over all of their devices and data. The Company's Computrace persistence technology is embedded in the firmware of computers, netbooks, and tablets by global leaders, including Acer, ASUS, Dell, Fujitsu, HP, Lenovo, Motion, Panasonic, Samsung, and Toshiba, and the Company has reselling partnerships with these OEMs and others, including Apple. For more information about Absolute Software, visit www.absolute.com.
This press release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements relate to, among other things, the expected performance, functionality and availability of our services and products, and other expectations, intentions and plans contained in this press release that are not historical fact. When used in this press release, the words "plan," "expect," "believe," and similar expressions generally identify forward-looking statements. These statements reflect our current expectations. They are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, changes in technology and general market conditions. In light of the many risks and uncertainties you should understand that we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements contained in this press release will be realized.
©2012 Absolute Software Corporation. All rights reserved. Computrace and Absolute are registered trademarks of Absolute Software Corporation. LoJack is a registered trademark of LoJack Corporation, used under license by Absolute Software Corporation. LoJack Corporation is not responsible for any content herein. U.S. patents No. 5,715,174, No. 5,764,892, No. 5,802,280, No. 5,896,497, No. 6,087,937, No. 6,244,758, No. 6,269,392, No. 6,300,863, No. 6,507,914, No. 7,818,557, No. 7,818,803, No. 7,945,709 and No. 8,062,380. Canadian patents No. 2,211,735, No. 2,284,806, and No. 2,205,370. U.K. patents No. EP0793823, No. GB2298302, and No. GB2338101. German patent No. 69512534. Australian patent No. 699045. Japanese patent No. JP4067035. The Toronto Stock Exchange has neither approved nor disapproved of the information contained in this news release.
SOURCE: Absolute Software Corporation
Public Relations:
Andrea Holland, HORN Group
[email protected] or 415.905.4030/805.390.0819
Marina Guy, Absolute Software
[email protected] or 604.730.9851 x107
Dave Mason, CFA, TMX|Equicom
Kristen Dickson, MSc, TMX|Equicom


text:
Watch Margaret
6.5 (17,584)
Margaret (2011) is a drama about a teenage student named Lisa Cohen. Lisa distracts a bus driver from seeing a red light and this causes a fatal accident. At first, she tries to cover it up, but eventually, she decides that she wants to set everything right. As Lisa works with the deceased's family to achieve justice, she loses her grip on her own life. She even begins to question events that occurred before the accident. As things spiral out of control all around her, Lisa makes some major decisions that change her life and her path as an adult.
Rent from $3.99 / Own from $9.99
Own from $3.99
Margaret is a 2011 drama with a runtime of 2 hours and 30 minutes. It has received moderate reviews from critics and viewers, who have given it an IMDb score of 6.5 and a MetaScore of 61.
Where to Watch Margaret
Margaret is available to watch, stream, download and buy on demand at Apple TV, Amazon, Google Play, YouTube VOD and Vudu. Some platforms allow you to rent Margaret for a limited time or purchase the movie and download it to your device.
Kenneth Lonergan
Stream Movies Like Margaret
After Ever Happy
The Fallout
Blue Lagoon: The Awakening
Also directed by Kenneth Lonergan
You Can Count on Me
Also starring Anna Paquin
Stan Lee Presents: Mosaic
The Member of the Wedding
Also starring Matt Damon
Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron
We Bought a Zoo


text:
Q: Variable resets when leaving class file I'm practicing c++ by making a hangman game. The problem is that when I set the hangman word in a class file and then move to another class file,  I find that it has been reset. When I call the variable, it's empty.
I have tried using a reference instead of the standard variable, as I understand that when you call a function, it only creates copies of the variables. I have another buildGame.h and buildGame.cpp file, but all they do is call the getPhrase(); function. This is where I discover that the variable is reset, and doesn't hold the phrase value.
This is my main.cpp file: v
#include "genGame.h"
#include "buildGame.h"

int main(){
    genGame startGame;
    buildGame build;
    startGame.genPhrase();
    buildGame();
    return 0;
}

This is my genGame.h file: v
#ifndef GENGAME_H
#define GENGAME_H
#include <string>

class genGame{
    public:
        genGame();
        void genPhrase();
        std::string getPhrase() const;

    private:
        std::string phrase;
        int randnumb;
};

#endif

This is my gengame.cpp file: v
#include "genGame.h"
#include <iostream>
#include<time.h>
#include <fstream>
using namespace std;

genGame::genGame(){}

string genGame::getPhrase() const{
    cout << phrase << endl;     //included for testing purposes
    return phrase;
}

void genGame::genPhrase(){
    cout << "Welcome to hangman!" << endl;
    string& phraseRef = phrase;     //tried setting a reference to change the variable itself, not just the copy
    srand(time(0));
    randnumb = rand() % 852 + 1;    //random number to determine which word will be pulled out of 852 words
    ifstream wordlist ("wordlist.txt");     //list of hangman words

    if (wordlist.is_open()){
        for (int i = 1; i <= randnumb; i++){
            getline(wordlist, phraseRef);       //get the word, set it equal to the phrase variable
        }
        wordlist.close();
    }

    cout << phraseRef << endl;      //output word choice for testing purposes
    cin.get();

}

When calling the phrase variable outside the class, I expect it to return the set phrase. It instead returns the default empty value.
EDIT: Thank you paddy for the help! The answer is in his comment, and the code is working now (I wasn't correctly passing by reference).

A:
I have another buildGame.h and buildGame.cpp file, but all they do is call the getPhrase(); function. This is where I discover that the variable is reset, and doesn't hold the phrase value.

With your code as currently written, I don't even need to see the buildGame class to answer.  It is impossible for either of the two buildGame objects (†) that you create in main to have any knowledge of the genGame object also created in main.
If you need to make the object identified as startGame available to a member function or similar in a buildGame object, you need to pass it as a reference.  For example, you might have this:
void buildGame::play(const genGame &startGame)
{
    std::cout << "Playing with phrase: " << startGame.getPhrase() << std::endl;
}

And in main, you would perhaps do this:
int main()
{
    genGame startGame;
    buildGame build;
    startGame.genPhrase();
    build.play(startGame);  // <=== pass reference to startGame
    return 0;
}

However you thought you were accessing startGame in your original code, you were mistaken.

(†) : Yes, you created two buildGame objects:
buildGame build;  // This constructs a buildGame identified as 'build'
buildGame();      // This constructs a buildGame and then destroys it

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
SM Gokko
SM games
SM-игры
SMごっこ
Mitsui Tsubaki
Drama Yaoi
"Go ahead. You can do anything you want to me."
Akihito woke up to find himself naked and restrained. In front of him was a young man who insisted that he himself had agreed to be in that kind of situation. Full of objections, he was told "I'll teach you how to bring out your real charm" by some man he'd met at a gay bar and with that, he thought about giving in…
Volume 0/1
Chapter 0/5
Notice: Mark all spoilers with [spoiler] tags. Chapter spoilers may be left unmarked only in their respective chapter comment threads.
You need to log in to comment.
🤩
😙
🤫
🤨
😏
😒
😬
🤥
😴
😷
🤒
🤕
🤧
😵
🤠
🧐
😟
☹
😲
😧
😰
😖
😣
😓
😫
🤡
👹
👺
👻
👽
deSade-MasochPastries
10 mo ago
This is one of my favorites because it takes S&M out of the club and into the home. It also does its best to portray the personality of a sadist and a masochist in human terms. All too often sadists are portrayed as nothing other than depraved monsters and masochists as mindless doormats. There's a lot of nuance in a relationship between a sadist and a masochist, consent being one of them. I'm just pointing out how refreshing it is to see something that defies the status quo. Don't get me started on the art. It is absolutely beautiful and does an amazing job conveying the story.
Last edited 10 mo ago by deSade-MasochPastries.
Such a beautiful story and art! It actually does a great job of portraying a real-life BDSM relationship with an emphasis on consent. A loving relationship of give-and-take. So many BL/yaoi stories include rape and assault, so it's refreshing to see a good consenting relationship. Would love to see more of this!


Colonoscopic colorectal cancer screening in average-risk population in a Community Hospital of Argentina.
Introduction: The role of colonoscopy in screening for colorectal (CR) neoplasia in average-risk population, remains to be determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of colonoscopy for screening in asymptomatic adults, with average-risk of CR neoplasia.
Methods and Procedures: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the patients that underwent colonoscopy for CR cancer screening. Screening was defined as examination performed in asymptomatic adults, older than 50 years, without personal and familiar risk factors. The patients were classified on the basis of their most advanced lesion in order to determine the prevalence of pathological features. The colon was divided in proximal and distal to the splenic flexure. Advanced neoplasia was defined as an adenoma higher than 10 mm, or with at least 25% of villous component, or an adenoma with high-grade dysplasia or carcinoma in situ, or invasive cancer.
Results: Of 2520 colonoscopies performed between March 2005 and August 2006, 469 (18,6%) were for screening. 454 (96,8%) patients that underwent complete examination of the colon were evaluated. The mean age of the patients was 59,6 (50-79) years. 237 (52,2%) were men. In 116 (25,5%) patients, a total of 210 polyps were removed. In 54 (11,8%) patients the most advanced lesion were hyperplastic polyps. CR neoplasia (adenoma of any type and invasive cancer) were founded in 62 (13,6%) patients. 32 (7%) had advanced neoplasia. In 22 (4,8%) the colonoscopy showed at least an adenoma higher than 10 mm or with villous feature, in 7 (1,5%) an adenoma with high-grade dysplasia or carcinoma in situ and in 3 (0,6%) invasive cancer, therefore the combined prevalence of invasive cancer and carcinoma in situ was 2,2%. Twenty patients had advanced distal lesions, including 4 cancer (3 carcinoma in situ and 1 invasive cancer), and 12 had advanced proximal neoplasia, including 6 patients with cancer (4 carcinomas in situ and 2 invasive cancer). The prevalence of advanced proximal neoplasia among patients without distal polyps was 1,4% (5 cases among 343 patients). The prevalence of advanced proximal neoplasia among the patients with distal hyperplastic polyps, distal tubular adenomas and advanced distal lesions was 4,5%, 16,6% and 14,2% respectively. Five of twelve patients with advanced proximal neoplasia (41,6%) had no polyps of any type in the distal colon. There were neither colonoscopy related complications nor mortality.
Conclusions: Colonoscopy is an effective tool for CR cancer screening.


Despite the name having originated much later, there's no better term to use to describe and name this garment then as a Roman Kilt with Scarf. This kilt and scarf combination is made from woven cotton and looks great in roman and medieval looks. This simple ensemble is fully lined, making it quite comfortable wear. The kilt is traditional in length but does not feature the tartan pattern. Rather, this one is a single, plain color and is accented by four free-hanging strips of fabric that decorate the front and back, two per side. These decorations are attached at the top of the kilt and are decorated themselves with a round metal medallion. The scarf will match the color of the kilt, while an accent band set with a metal medallion will match the color of the accents on the kilt. The Roman Kilt with Scarf is pictured here with a belt, which is not included. The Roman Kilt and Scarf would look fantastic paired with any sort of Roman look. Combine it with Roman armor, like the segmentata, to create a sleek, Centurion-styled look or with a tunic to create a look fit for any roman citizen. This kilt is made from our woven cotten fabric and can be custom made in any color combination you wish. If you don't see the color combination you would like to order in the drop down menu, please contact us to set up a custom order. Please see our Fabric page and click on cotton to see the available colors.


text:
Q: How can I return a string from an async function? google-spreadsheet async function getAddressStreet(rowNumber) {
    const doc = new GoogleSpreadsheet('1yoalYKIQD7hpKPnaDweTuZQo2X28Z1gk79VNWc3_l9s');
    await doc.useServiceAccountAuth(creds);
    await doc.loadInfo();
    const sheet = doc.sheetsByIndex[0];

    await sheet.loadCells('A:A');
    const cell = sheet.getCellByA1('A' + rowNumber);
    const address = cell.value.split(' ');
    address.shift()
    let street = address.join(" ");

    return street;
}

Hi all, I'm trying to take a list of addresses from google sheets and use it to scrape on a website. I need to split the address into the number and street as there are two input boxes. I can see this is returning a promise, which will not work as an input. I'm trying to return the street number as a string and plug it in to puppeteer like this.
async function scrapeProduct(i) {
    const addressStreet = getAddressStreet(i);
    await page.type('#street_name', addressStreet);

Any help would be greatly appreciated :)


settings overrides.yaml file Shows you how to modify your cluster configuration file, which defines properties for the runtime plane services such as the Synchronizer, Cassandra, and MART.
data_usage Data collection Describes the primary types of data: metrics, logs, analytics, and deployment status. This section also describes how the data are collected and how you can access the collected data.
apps Service configuration Describes how to configure and use runtime services such as the Synchronizer, Cassandra, and MART.
settings_system_daydream Cluster configuration Provides information on cluster-wide processes such as adding multiple environments and scaling your services.


Allow me to present my new singleplayer shooter game Shadow of Orkdoor.
12 levels, 8 boss enemies and some sarcastic humor, and only 1 commercial inside (when you exit the game).
Free to play, single player, with no pesky item shopping or other form of taking money.
Is the company that made this relatively well-known? Or is this like an indy game?
Also, do you know if it'll ever be made for iOS?


Professor Grant Neimann is a full-time faculty member at Flinders University School of Law in Adelaide, Australia. From 1994 – 2000, he was first Senior Trial Attorney of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). During that time, he conducted the first trial before the International criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia of Dusko Tadic. Other trials he conducted including Zejnil Delalic et al. ("Celibici"), Slavko Dokmanovic, Drazen Erdemovic and Zlatko Aleksovski. He also litigated a number of appeals before the ICTY Appeals Chamber.
Professor Neimann has written extensively in the area of international criminal law, in particular the International Criminal Court. He has published in the Journal of International Criminal Justice, the Encyclopedia of Criminology and the Criminal Law Journal. His book, Foundations of International Criminal Law, was published by LexisNexis Buttersworth in 2014. HE has presented papers at Harvard Law School, the American Bar Association, Duke University and the London School of Economics.
In 2004, Professor Neimann authored a Major Report to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the validity of international criminal law trials in Timor Leste and Indonesia. In 2005, he trained prosecutors for the Iraq Special Tribunal in preparation for the prosecution of former President Saddam Hussein.
Professor Neimann received his undergraduate degree from the University of Sidney and his law degree from the University of Adelaide.


When you are preparing your house to sell, it's a good idea to have the inside rooms staged. What about the outside? Think of us as your "outdoors home stager!" We can suggest to you cost-effective ways to provide more curb appeal so that your house sells faster.
When it comes to maintaining a home landscape, there's nothing to compare with a full-service professional landscape maintenance program. Homeowners who value their weekends and evenings, or simply don't have a green thumb, depend on Giant Landscaping to keep their yard manicured at all times.
Do you have better things to do with your time? Try our residential landscape maintenance services for one year. We guarantee you'll like it!


text:
The indoctrination of the Concept of Racial Hygien
e: The Begining of tThe Indoctrination of the Concept of
Racial Hygiene: The Beginning of the End
The idea of biological degeneration had been studied by doctors, psychiatrists, and scientists many decades before the 1930's and the Nazi regime were ever in power. The idea that the integrity of populations was being undermined by behaviors of alcoholism, criminality, or mental deficiency was a topic for researchers before anyone even knew who Adolf Hitler was. In this essay I will discuss the evolution of a concept that would become known as racial hygiene. In my examination of this idea I will explore the educational tools, the propaganda machine, and the eventual mobilization of a nation towards this ideological organization of a supreme race in Nazi Germany.
The aforementioned idea that nations were being undermined by increasing cohorts of unfit individuals has some scientific and political significance. Cell biologist August Weissman coined the term defective germ plasm' and contended that it was this defective plasm that was to blame for these unfit individuals' behaviors. In the early 1900's there were a rising number of eugenic pioneers that would try and continue the study of the ideas of Weissman. There was a gene race,' much like the more contemporary space race, that occurred between various countries around the turn of the century.
As these studies became better known, their political implications became magnified. In 1909 the world's first professorial chair in eugenics was established. Now as international scientists begin to explore the possibility of a defective germ plasm existing political divides begin to form. As the studies became more and more intense the idea that a nation could be improved by selective breeding became the focus. This would eventually become the premise for eugenics theorists.
The debate over the validity of the theory of eugenics was the question posed by "ethically aware and responsible" scientists to prove eugenics without using pseudo-scientific assumptions.2 Although the challenges to eugenics were strong the post World War I depression would bring the rise to more intense challenges against the conservation of people who were burdensome both biologically and economically to a nation. A number of nations that were suffering mass depression would look to eugenics as one of the reasons for their pain and suffering.
As the debate over eugenics continued to keep scientists on both sides of the argument hard at work, discussions of euthanasia would begin to surface. One of the main arguments that arose was that there could be an opportunity to reduce costs. This idea would be granted exposure in Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche's book Permission for the Destruction of Life Unworthy of Life, which was published in 1920. Along with this book came quick dissent to his ideas. In May of 1920, the chairman of the German Psychiatric Association Karl Bonhoeffer stated:
It could almost seem as if we have witnessed a change in the concept of humanity. I simply mean that we were forced by the terrible exigencies of war to ascribe a different value to the life of the individual than was the case beforeBut in emphasizing the right of the healthy to stay alive, which is an inevitable result of periods of necessity, there is also a great danger of going too far: a danger that the self-sacrificing subordination of the strong to the needs of the helpless ill, which lies at the heart of any true concern for the sick, will give ground to the demand of the healthy to live.
The anxieties that were raised by Bonhoeffer had a great deal of validity. There definitely is a concern when we begin to challenge people's rights to live due to incapacities that exist within them.
As the complexities of this theory of eugenics were battled out by scholars, doctors, and politicians the conditions in German life were still in a state of depression. A depression is exactly what an idea that challenged the basic values of human life needed to be considered and granted any sense of legitimacy. The destitution of the German people was beginning to wear on the psyche of the nation. Ewald Meltzer who was an advocate of sterilizations would test the fate of the vulnerable. By the mid 1920s Meltzer had documented the desire of some parents to be disburdened of their mentally incapable children to relieve them of the emotional and financially responsibilities of raising such children. This introduced to Germany the idea that it could be considered a possibility to dispose of the less capable in order to free resources for the strong.
We start to see more exposure to this idea of eugenic infanticide as the post WWI decade of the 1920s nears a close. Hitler touched on the subject in a speech at the 1929 Nuremberg Party rally:
If Germany was to get a million children a year and was to remove 700-800,000 of the weakest people then the final result might even be an increase in strength. The most dangerous thing is for us to cut off the natural process of selection and thereby rob ourselves of the possibility of acquiring able people. The first-born are not always the most talented or strongest peopleAs a result of our modern sentimental humanitarianism we are trying to maintain the weak at the expense of the healthy.
This speech by Hitler would mark the beginning of a long public campaign in an attempt by Hitler to give salience to the idea of a necessity for racial cleansing in Germany. This campaign would be multifaceted. One of the most important facets for gaining legitimacy to this idea was gaining scholarly backing.
When the Nazis came to power they restructured the school system to try and instill some of this racial ideology in their students. In order to for this to be effective there needed to be a concerted effort to coordinate the teaching profession in order to gain political commitment and reliability to the Nazi ideology. A group called the national Socialist teachers' Association (NALB) was established in 1929 for the purpose of indoctrinating teachers into the ideological principles of such topics as eugenics. It was extremely important to the party to get as many teachers as possible to endorse the ideas of the party.
This effort was successful as by 1932 there were 320,000 members of the NSLB, which constituted 97 percent of all teachers. Most of the teaching guidelines were derived from Hitler's ideas on education where he professed that the "rearing of healthy bodies" was more important than the learning of "pure knowledge." The subject of German was altered to focus on "German awareness" and the importance of strong German qualities. The teaching of biology lent itself to include the necessity to cultivate "racial health" by choosing the correct spouses of Aryan decent. The importance of bearing large families within a racially healthy relationship was also stressed.
As this initial exposure to the early ideas of eugenics and racial health became prevalent in the schoolhouses and universities, they also became a larger topic for the political forum of the Nazi party. The speech given by Hitler at the Nuremberg rally in 1929 was only the beginning of what would be a political onslaught that would be aimed at the heart of the German psyche. One of the most important features of this campaign to cement the ideology of eugenics was the anti-Semitic policies and opinions that were aimed to demonize the "lesser classes" in Germany.
In 1933 the first step was taken in this war against Jews in particular with the initiation of a boycott on Jewish businesses on April 1. This would only last two days but it would mark the beginning of a host of laws between April and October that would be enacted to exclude "non-Aryans" from the civil service, the legal profession, judgeships, the medical profession, teaching positions, cultural and entertainment enterprises and the press. There would also be acts that would limit the number of "non-Aryans" that would be allowed to matriculate in secondary schools and universities to 1.5 percent of the total enrollment.10
The idea of a "Law to Protect German Blood" was introduced to Hitler by the Reich Doctors' Leader Gerhard Wagner. Hitler embraced this idea, and shortly thereafter he enacted the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor. This law would prohibit the marriage between "Jews and citizens of German or kindred blood" and would forbid "sexual relations outside marriages between Jews and nationals of German or kindred blood. This law would be included in a slew of racial laws that would become known as the Nuremberg Laws introduced at the annual Nazi party rally in Nuremberg on September 15, 1935. "The Nuremberg laws' effectively separated the Jews from the Germans politically, legally, and socially.
The Nuremberg laws were definitely a sign of the beginning of the end for the Jewish population. Hitler was effectively establishing his idea of a pure Aryan race and nation. After the passage of this notorious set of laws the propaganda campaign of the necessity to rid the nation of impurity' would escalate. By November 1938, the persecution of non-Aryan individuals would reach a new height. On November 7, an official at the German embassy in Paris was shot. The assassin was Hirschel Grynszpan who was the son of a Polish Jew who had been recently expelled from Germany. Two days later Hitler's propaganda Chief Joseph Goebbels called for a nationwide revenge against the Jews.
This would call for the drastic actions that occurred on November 9th and 10th of the Kristallnacht, or night of glass. The assassination of the third secretary would lead to the burning of synagogues, violent encounters with people of Jewish decent, and the destruction of Jewish businesses and homes. These actions would leave one hundred Jews dead, seven thousand Jewish businesses destroyed, and many thousands more that were tormented in the events of the Kristallnacht. One description of these horrible acts and the scene in Leipzig were given by Nora Levin:
Jewish dwellings were smashed into and contents demolished or looted. In one of the Jewish sections, an eighteen-year-old boy was hurled from a three-story window to land with both legs broken on a street littered with burning beds and other household furnitureJewish shop windows by the hundreds were systematically and wantonly smashed throughout the city at a loss estimated at several millions of marksthe main streets of the city were a positive litter of shattered plate glassthe debacle was executed by SS men and Storm Troopers, not in uniform, each group having been provided with hammers, axes, crowbars and incendiary bombs.
This was the most audacious systematic act of anti-Semitism to this point in the campaign. The aftermath of this event would leave scars for many and was the indication of many more acts of persecution that would be felt by the Jewish and non-Aryan community in Germany.
As war broke out the stakes of the anti-Semitic campaign would increase. World War II would provide Hitler the major case that he needed to solve' the problem of the Jews. There would be an important relation between the war and the annihilation of the Jews made by Hitler. Since Hitler had always associated Soviet bolshevism with the Jews, he made the case that it was important to destroy the enemy wherever he could be found. Furthermore, a war against Soviet bolshevism was a war against the Jews.14 Hitler would bring a key player into this war against the Jews. This man was Heinrich Himmler. He shared many of the ideological views of Hitler's development of a pure Aryan race. The main responsibility of Himmler, who was the leader of the SS, was to carry out a "final solution" to the Jewish threat.
When Germany invaded the Soviet Union, the mass murders of the Jews begin. It was the role of Himmler and the SS to lead these killings but the ordinary police would also take part. The killings would take place on a massive scale. In September 1941, over 33,000 Jews were massacred in two days. "They were mowed down by machine gun fire and fell into a large ravine, which was then covered with earth to hide the bodies. " There would be many more like this in the hundreds of towns that Germany would occupy in the Soviet Union.
For the Nazi regime, the killings that took place in the Soviet Union would mark the start of the extermination of the Jews of Europewhich was Hitler's Endlosung (or "Final Solution). The actual systematic attempt to exterminate non-Aryans in Europe is a topic for another essay. It is important, however, to note that the events and ideas presented in this essay laid the groundwork for the holocaust. Furthermore, it is extremely important that we learn a lesson from the events of over half a century ago that it is possible for a nation to get so far from normal human decency that the genocide of the masses can take place.
"One cannot afford sentimentality in a situation such as this.
The Jews would kill us if we did not defend ourselves. It's a life and death struggle between the Aryan race and the Jewish bacillus. No other government, and no other regime, could summon the strength for such a
general solution to this question ."
Joseph Goebbels (1942)
Breitman, Richard. The Architect of Genocide. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 1991.
Burleigh, Michael. The Third Reich: A new History. Hill and Wang, New York. 2000
Dwork, Deborah. Holocaust: A History. Norton & Company, New York. 2002.
Grant, R.G. The Holocaust. Steck-Vaughn Publishers, Texas. 1988.
Fischer, Klaus P. Nazi Germany: A new History. Continuum, New York. 1995.
Spielvogel, Jackson J. Hitler and Nazi Germany. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 1996.
With Appropriate Examples, Discuss the Concept of Job Design and the Core Dimensions That Define a Job, and Discuss the Pros and Cons of Job Rotation
Previous: Previous post: Love, Lust And Obsession In The Great Gatsby
Next: Next post: Global Intelligence Community


The integration of financial markets and optimal portfolio allocations and diversification strategies remain subjects of intense interest in international finance. Yet, fixed income markets have taken a backseat compared to equity markets in the field. This is largely undeserved; given the size and prominence of these markets and the asset allocation share fixed income assets hold in the portfolios of investors, particularly with institutional investors. Given that the recent financial crisis originated in a subpart of fixed income markets (subprime and mortgage bonds), and has via the balance sheets of financial institutions rolled into a sovereign bond crisis, the urgency for more research on the financial integration and institutional investor behavior in fixed income markets is greater than ever. The research subjects of international financial integration and portfolio diversification are strongly interrelated. Integrated financial markets are a prerequisite for diversified international investment portfolios. In turn, the extent in which portfolios are diversified is indicative for the degree of financial integration that has been achieved. The desire to increase financial benefits from more optimal portfolio allocations is often a leading force in the further breakdown of any remaining barriers between national financial markets. In this sense there is an ongoing dynamic interaction between financial integration and international diversification. New techniques have in the past decade been developed in the dual study of international financial integration and the benefits of international portfolio diversification. Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) is at the forefront of applying these new techniques to fixed income markets in an econometric-empirical research setting. The novelty in this research is that new and promising techniques in the field are adapted and applied to fixed income markets.


text:
Lessons from Past Referendums
January 10, 2016 HaroutLeave a comment
The current discussion on electoral reform in Canada (led by current elected MPs and the media coverage they affect) is on whether a referendum is required if we are to fundamentally change the way we vote. Last week, I wrote about why it is absolutely required. This post discusses past referendums and what we can learn from them.
Provincial referenda on electoral reform have taken place in BC (in 2005 and again in 2009), PEI (2005), and Ontario (2007). Other First Past the Post systems that have held referenda include New Zealand (1992 and 1993) and the United Kingdom (2011). The referenda themselves had some similarities and differences.
1. Results and Thresholds
In 2005, BC voted 58% in favour of adopting electoral reform. However, a threshold of 60% of the total vote was required, as well as a simple majority in at least 60% of the ridings in the province (97% of the ridings did achieve this). Because of this result, they voted again in 2009 with the same thresholds. This time, 60% rejected the reforms.
In PEI and Ontario, 64% and 63%, respectively, voted against their version of electoral reform in referenda with the same thresholds as BC.
New Zealand did vote to change their system with 85% and 54% majorities in a twin referendum system I'll explain below. The election was held on the basis of a simple majority (50% + 1 vote required to win).
The UK voted 68% against their version of reform. The election was on the basis of a simple majority. An amendment to require a 40% voter turnout for the vote to be valid was presented in Parliament but was not ultimately required.
2. Voting yes/no on one electoral reform alternative
In all four Canadian provincial referenda as well as the UK, the question posed to voters was to choose between the existing system and one alternative system. The actual alternative that was presented as an option varied (Single Transferable Vote in BC, Mixed Member Proportional in PEI and Ontario, and Alternative Vote in UK).
Of note, BC and Ontario developed their (different) alternatives through the use of Citizens' Assemblies (choosing random average citizens similar to jury duty). PEI came to their alternative through a government-appointed commission. The UK's alternative was chosen directly by elected politicians.
New Zealand was the only jurisdiction to use a different approach. They held one referendum in 1992 where voters answered two separate question. In the first they voted on whether to retain the First Past the Post system or change the system (without specifying what would replace it). With their second ballot, they voted on which of four alternatives they would prefer. Sixty-five percent of voters chose Mixed Member Proportional.
Before changing the system, New Zealand held a second referendum in 1993 asking voters to choose directly between FPTP and MMP. This vote passed by 54% in favour of reform, a smaller margin than the year before.
3. Concurrence with general election
Among the referenda mentioned above, the 1992 New Zealand referendum and the 2005 PEI referendum were the only ones where electoral reform was the only item to be voted on at the polling station. BC and Ontario timed their referenda to take place together with provincial elections. The UK referenda coincided with local (municipal) elections, as well as national elections in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The 1993 New Zealand referendum coincided with their national election.
In a two-option ballot (FPTP or One Specific Other Approach), many voters who do want electoral reform may disagree with the specific alternative being presented to them. For example, in Ontario, the implementation of Mixed Member Proportional being proposed would have resulted in a 25% increase in the number of MPPs. Some voters (I personally know several) voted against it based on that one feature alone. Interpreting the 63% FPTP result as meaning that the majority do not want any change is not accurate.
Secondly, holding the referendum at the same time as a regular election, although much more cost-efficient, may serve to limit discussion and education on the subject at hand. In Ontario, many voters (I personally know several) did not even know they would be faced with a referendum in 2007. When they went to vote for their MPP, they were given a second ballot and needed to decide on the spot. Many chose the status quo because they just hadn't been told what the alternative was.
This effect of a dominant election overshadowing a less-publicized concurrent one can be seen in Ontario municipal elections, where mayors and councillors are chosen at the same time as school board trustees. Typically, you would think it is rare for someone to show up at the polling station without having already decided how they will vote. However, it can be quite common. As people show up to vote for the mayor, they realize they also need to choose a school board trustee. They may well choose a name at random, or based on how it sounds. As a test ask a friend which party they voted for in a past provincial election, who they voted for mayor in the last municipal election, and who they voted for trustee.
A referendum is absolutely required to dramatically change the way we vote and how our representatives get elected.
The referendum itself should be by ranked ballot where voters get to identify their preferences, including the status quo, in order. (Only one election required, as opposed to New Zealand's approach.)
Any citizen should be able to propose a system of electoral reform and gain ballot access through petition drives. For example, 10,000 signatures are required to be included as one of the choices that gets voted on.
The threshold for adoption should be a simple majority to avoid the controversy of a potential result greater than 50% but below an arbitrary super-majority. (Why didn't BC choose 55% or 61%?)
Reform proposals that require constitutional changes (including my proposal for the Senate) should be handled separately, following the established formula.
The referendum should not take place together with a general election. It should have its own set date with a one year proposal submission period and a six month campaign period.
Or… we could just leave it completely up to politicians elected under the current system, who have majority control of the parliament with only 39% of the vote, who said at campaign that they would change something but still haven't told us what that change would be. Which would you prefer?
The Politician's Self Interest
January 2, 2016 January 3, 2016 HaroutLeave a comment
This week, Ottawa wrapped up 2015 by starting a public debate on one aspect of electoral reform. The Conservative Party announced that they would use their majority in the Senate to block any electoral reform legislation that does not include a referendum on the issue. The entire discussion should serve as evidence for how what I'll call "Big Politics" lobbies for its own interests when it comes to electoral reform.
First, a comment on lobbying: Whenever legislation is proposed, you can expect one part of the public to support it and another to oppose it. Sometimes, the issue can present a significant economic impact on one subgroup. You can expect taxi license holders to oppose Uber, Big Tobacco to oppose smoking restrictions, teacher unions to encourage more education spending, factories to solicit subsidization, failed companies to want bailouts, etc. To the extent that these groups conduct their lobbying by making information available to decision-makers, they play an important role in the democratic process. As long as they are not resorting to intimidation, extortion, or bribery tactics, they should be allowed to have their voice heard as long as their message is taken in context.
One must understand that electoral reform can have a significant economic impact on politicians who put food on their family's table by winning elections. Accepting this fact will help to understand the positions that the different parties have taken on this issue.
Throughout the 1990s, when the federal Liberal Party won landslide majority governments and controlled the Senate, you didn't hear a word from them about changing how people vote. It was only after the 2011 election, where they were reduced to 34 (out of 308) seats and third party status, with their future existence in question, that electoral reform appeared on their platform.
The NDP and Green parties, who have never formed a government under the existing rules and who consistently win less seats than their percentage of the popular vote, absolutely want to change the way elections are run.
The Conservative Party campaigned in the most recent election opposing any changes to the current First Past the Post system. At the time, they were sitting on a majority government earned with only 39.62% of the popular vote (in the 2011 election). With vivid memories of the Reform/PC days, they understood that vote splitting was now working in their favour and had provided them with several unlikely seats in large urban centres… and wanted to keep it that way.
Now that we understand where the parties were coming from in October, let's look at their positions since then. The Liberals, ironically, ended up winning a majority government with… wait for it… 39.47% of the popular vote. When the Conservatives had achieved the same result in 2011, it was evidence of how the system was broken. This time, however, the Liberals interpreted this result as a strong mandate from the Canadian people. Almost immediately after the election, there were murmurs from party insiders that maybe they should leave the system alone. Instead of breaking their promise, however, Trudeau has indicated that he personally prefers a ranked ballot (without the accompanying proportional elected Senate in the Manougian model). He hopes to be the second choice for NDP and Green voters, solidifying an advantage over the Conservatives.
The Conservatives, under interim leader Rona Ambrose, have taken a good position for a bad reason. They argue that any change to the electoral system should be subject to a referendum by the population. The Liberal response is that no referendum is required because almost 70% of voters chose parties that wanted reform.
I wish I could slap both dominant parties' wrists. If Trudeau really thinks that he has no need to consult voters and that his 40% majority grants him the right to alter our democratic system according to his choosing, he is already showing the Liberal arrogance that almost led to his party's extinction. Would he feel comfortable giving the Bank of Montreal the final say on Canada's financial regulations?
And the Conservatives have not yet abandoned their position that no reforms are required to our current First Past the Post system. They are only demanding a referendum because three similar provincial referendums have failed in the last 10 years. They are hoping to maintain the status quo where they do get a shot at governing every once in a while. For their own sake, they better realize that pinning their hopes on splitting the left-wing vote is not a sustainable long-term strategy.
A referendum is absolutely required as validation that the new system serves voters and not the ones who came up with it. It is more important than ever for you to make your voice heard and hold the politicians accountable. Next week, I'll be going into more depth about electoral reform referendums that have taken place in Canada and other English-speaking countries.
December 19, 2015 Harout1 Comment
What "Real Change" in the Senate should look like
December 7, 2015 Harout1 Comment
It's one of the impossible issues for a Canadian Prime Minister. Everybody knows Canada's Senate is broken but when it takes seven out of ten provinces to amend the Constitution, the issue becomes a hot potato.
The NDP wants to abolish it, as did the Conservatives in 2006, before they gave up on it. Actually abolishing the Senate requires unanimous consent from all ten provinces, however, which is next to impossible to obtain. I actually think there is a role an Upper House can play in a parliamentary democracy… but not without amending the Constitution.
First, let's review what happened last week. On the new Parliament's opening day, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau proposed to implement the Liberal Party's election policy on the Senate: avoid it like the plague. Quite quickly, he was called out by BC Premier Christie Clark on the fact that this barely qualified as "reform" and certainly not as "real change". The two tweaks proposed were:
He will ask other people for help in choosing who gets appointed.
He will not let the Senators, old or new, sit in his party's caucus.
One can understand the political logic behind trying to distance yourself from high-visibility personalities who have few accountability measures placed on them (and absolving yourself of responsibility for their conduct). Stephen Harper's Senate appointees caused him much embarassment, arguably playing a role in removing him from 24 Sussex Dr. It is disingenuous, however, to tell Canadians that the solution is to remove the tenuous accountability measure that did exist: to their party leader.
In Canada, Senators, once appointed by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister, keep their seat until age 75. They never need to face the public in an election. The system is a remnant from colonial times to secure the privileges of the upper class, giving them a veto in case the commoners tried anything too drastic. A telling feature is the requirement to own property to be eligible for appointment. Many of the provinces also had Upper Houses but they were all abolished as unnecessary many decades ago.
Around the world, where there are bicameral legislatures (two Houses of Parliament), the Upper House does tend to imply a collection of more experienced elder statesmen who can bring a perspective that may be absent among the winners of the local election races that make up the Lower House. In the US, Senators were appointed by state legislatures (for six year terms) until the 17th Amendment came into effect about 100 years ago. Now, they are chosen by statewide popular elections.
What might a better system for Canada look like? People like having a local representative that they can contact, whose office is within a drivable distance, whose phone number is not long distance, who understands the needs and mindset of their community. For that reason, we have electoral districts which elect MPs to the House of Commons. However, this arrangement tends to favour a two-party system (a phenomenon nerds like me call Duverger's Law), which makes it more difficult for like-minded individuals from across the country to push issues overlooked by the main parties. If they don't have a sufficient concentration in any one riding, they may be completely shut out of Parliament. Also, parties who get less than 50% of the total vote may end up getting majority governments without the consent of the majority of the people.
To address this issue, varying groups (usually supporters of smaller parties) call for more proportional representation, which assigns seats in accordance with total vote results beyond a single-member constituency. The actual formulas and systems of proportional representation proposed vary widely. You can check some of them out at www.fairvote.ca.
The Manougian Model, however, proposes something new. At every general election, allow voters to cast two ballots. One is a preferential ballot for their local MP, which I discussed in my last post. The second would be a vote for the Senate, where they vote for one party. Ahead of the election, the party will make public a ranked list of candidates for Senate seats. The intention is for these candidates to be accomplished in a field of importance to federal decision-making. The total number of votes that a party obtains nation-wide in the Senate election would be tallied. That absolute number would then be divided by a quotient, ignoring the remainder, to decide how many Senate seats they will get (assigned to individuals in the previously identified order).
What is the quotient? It is a number chosen such that a typical voter turnout would result in a desirable number of total Senators (there are currently 105 seats). Note that it is the absolute number of votes that matters, not the percentage share that is used in many other proportional systems. The effect would be that a lower voter turnout would result in fewer individuals sitting in the Red Chamber. It adds an incentive to each voter to perform their electoral duty even if they are confident that their party will win. It provides a clear incentive to parties to motivate their base.
Ultimately, it provides a much needed check and balance to a Prime Minister who has a majority in the House of Commons obtained without a majority of the popular vote.
Our colonial past officially ended in 1982 when Canada earned the right to change its own Constitution without Britain's involvement. Let's roll up our sleeves and truly make it ours. Now that's real change.
The Ranked Ballot
November 29, 2015 December 19, 2015 Harout1 Comment
It has many names: ranked ballot, preferential voting, instant-runoff, alternative vote, etc. It's a small, simple change that makes voting more fair. In addition to voting for your favourite candidate, it allows you to indicate who your second, third, (and more) choices are.
If, after the first choice votes are counted, no candidate receives a majority (more than 50%) of all the votes cast, the candidate with the least first choice votes is eliminated, and those votes are redistributed to the other candidates according to their indicated second choices. This process continues until one candidate has an absolute majority of the total votes.
A non-optional preferential ballot is the system already used in voting for the Australian federal House of Representatives. The video below explains how the ballots are counted in that jurisdiction and how it ensures that the "most-favourable" candidate ends up winning the seat.
Note that, in Australia, the voter must rank every single candidate on the ballot. Making it mandatory to rank every candidate is not necessary for the system to work. As a rule, the election results should attempt to include as many votes as possible. For that reason, I suggest an optional preferential ballot for the Canadian House of Commons, as one part of the Manougian model. If a voter stops ranking the candidates and all their choices have already been eliminated, it simply drops off the tally of total votes in the next round. (Note that I think it is essential to include a Declined option to differentiate between indifference and opposition to the remaining voters but that is a topic for another post.)
With this system, if a person marks just one "X" next to just one name, the same way they do now and have for many years, the ballot should not be rejected but count as having voted for a first choice only.
The main issue that this solves is known as the "Spoiler Effect". You can probably guess what it is but CGP Grey does a great job of explaining it in this video:
So a ranked ballot (alternative vote, etc.) is a great idea and only helps ensure an outcome that the most people would be happy with. In fact, the First Past the Post system it would replace is so inadequate that Canadian political parties themselves do not trust it when they are deciding on a new party leader or voting to nominate a party candidate in a given riding. These political parties themselves use either a ranked ballot or require all the voters to return round after round until one candidate does obtain an absolute majoriy. (Separate runoff elections are expensive and annoying to conduct and that is why an instant runoff is so superior.)
Much groundwork has already been done to ensure that a ranked ballot is the system the City of Toronto will use to elect its mayor in the 2018 municipal election. A group called the Ranked Ballot Initiative of Toronto (RaBIT: http://www.123toronto.ca/) has led the charge to get City Council to ask the Queen's Park to amend the Municipal Elections Act to allow its use by municipalities who would like to opt in. You can see their 11 minute explanation of the change at the following video:
What are your thoughts about the ranked ballot?
Franchise Expansion: Minors are persons, too
November 22, 2015 Harout1 Comment
Who should get to vote? That question has been answered differently throughout history. When Athens invented democracy in the fifth century BC, it looked very different. Many posts were filled "by lot" (yes, as in lottery) and the participants included only free adult male citizens who had completed military training. Notably, women, slaves, and foreigners were excluded. Citizenship, which was based on lineage instead of birthplace, could also be revoked for failing to pay debts.
In British colonies, representatives were chosen (without a secret ballot) by the propertied class. It was during the ratification of the United States Constitution that property requirements were reduced or eliminated as an acknowledgment that the Revolutionary War was fought by all. It was after the US civil war that slavery was abolished in North America and the franchise was extended to African-Americans in recognition of the role they played in the Union Army.
Fortunately, post-confederation Canada did not need any conflicts to understand that "All men are created equal." It did take a World War, however, to acknowledge that women were also equal and deserved the right to vote. As late as 1928, the Supreme Court of Canada had ruled that women could not be appointed to the Senate because they were not "persons". On October 18 every year, we celebrate Persons Days to mark the overturning of that ruling in 1929 by our British masters.
The 1960s ushered in cultural shifts and opened new debates. The voting age at the time was 21 even though younger Canadians could get married, serve in the military, and earn a living. The UK and Canada lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 in 1970, the US followed in 1971, and it is now the most common age requirement for voting rights across the world.
Certainly, some sort of age requirement is reasonable. A two-month old infant cannot be expected to cast a ballot. However, is the citizen whose 18th birthday is the week after the election not mentally capable of making an informed choice? Under what pretense are they denied a say in their country's future? (Full Disclosure: Although a university student at the time, I could not vote in the 2004 federal election.)
In 2007, Austria lowered its voting age to 16 for all elections. Scotland moved to give 16 and 17 year olds a vote in its 2014 referendum on independence. Here in Canada, MP Mark Holland introduced Bill C-261 in 2004 to reduce the voting age to 16, arguing that it would turn the tide of youth voter disengagement. It was defeated… by MPs who governed on behalf of Canada's youth but were not elected by it.
What is the official policy of the ruling Liberal Party on the matter? It straddles pages 27 and 28 of their "Real Change" platform available here. In case they remove the file, it says:
Obviously, I don't think that goes far enough but I'm also not in favour of a straight reduction in the voting age, either. In the third pillar of the Manougian model for Canadian electoral reform, I spell out an alternative system to ensure that young Canadians are appropriately represented in the halls of government. It is a concept borrowed from Ontario school boards, where student trustees, elected annually by secondary students, sit alongside trustees elected, once every four years, by citizens over 18. They have full participation rights in Board meetings and committees (except during staff appointment decisions) and even get to cast their vote on final Board decisions. Their vote is recorded but does not count toward deciding a motion's passage or defeat.
My suggestion is to add Student Parliamentarians to the House of Commons, elected by 14-17 year-old citizens and permanent residents, from among candidates aged 14-17 who are Canadian citizens. New, separate constituencies should be created for them, which span several regular ridings, such that the youth demographic is represented in equal proportion to the general population in the average electoral district.
Elections should take place annually, where one Student Parliamentarian is elected for a two year term. Thus, each constituency would be represented by two Student Parliamentarians, who would learn from their senior partner in the first year, and mentor their junior partner in the second. Just like student trustees in Ontario school boards, they would have the right to speak and vote in the House of Commons but their votes would not be counted towards the passing or defeat of a bill or motion.
In this way, youth are given a seat at the table while acknowledging that their education in how countries should be run is not yet complete. The annual election exercise would give them all a wealth of experience in the voting process and facilitate their registration to the general election list of voters when they turn 18.
You may have noticed that I included permanent residents as eligible to vote in this process. Most immigrants to Canada apply for citizenship shortly after meeting the three-year residence requirement. At least in Toronto, there is a movement to extend voting rights for municipal elections to permanent residents even before they obtain citizenship. Personally, I think it is reasonable to ask a newcomer to spend one election observing the process before getting to cast a ballot of their own. I am not recommending that the citizenship requirement for voting rights be abolished. However, in the scenario of a Student Parliamentarian, who is there as a barometer of future public opinion, and an annual election that plays an educational role, I believe it would be fair to include permanent residents as voters but not candidates. It is as inclusive as possible without creating potential complications if a non-citizen Student Parliamentarian were to lose their residency status. (Full Disclosure: I was a Canadian citizen at birth.)
To those who would say that a 14 year old is not mature enough to have any say in the democratic process, I want it to be clear that they are already eligible to become members of the major political parties, within which they are already eligible to vote for riding association executives, local candidate nominations, and even during leadership races. In those scenarios, their vote is equal to a 44 year-old's. Also, you do not need to be a citizen to join the major Canadian political parties.
This reform is just the first of many that I will write about on this blog. Check back often and let me know what you think. Remember, you are the one who gets to decide if it becomes a reality.
The Manougian Model for Canadian Electoral Reform
November 16, 2015 November 16, 2015 Harout3 Comments
During the recently-completed Canadian federal election season, the Liberal, NDP, and Green parties all suggested that major reforms were required to the way in which Canada elects its Members of Parliament. The ruling Conservatives had refused to appoint new Senators to fill vacant seats out of frustration with the status quo system for the Upper House. Everyone agrees the federal parliament can be improved.
You have probably already heard about why the First Past the Post system is flawed. Instead of having me repeat it all, let's review by watching this video by CGP Grey:
The winner of the 2015 Canadian federal election was the Liberal Party, led by Justin Trudeau. They made their stance on electoral reform very clear. You can read it on Page 27 of their platform at: https://www.liberal.ca/files/2015/10/A-new-plan-for-a-strong-middle-class.pdf. In case they remove the file, it says
They were sworn in on November 4, 2015. Unless they break their promise, a bill with proposed changes will be introduced by May 4, 2017.
I started this blog to have my say on how I think the country should choose its legislators. Ultimately, you, as a Canadian citizen, are the final decision-maker. I plan on posting weekly to go into depth into various aspects of electoral design, defending the different pieces of my proposal, which I'll call the Manougian Model.
For now, with no accompanying explanation or defense, here it is:
Make the Senate an elected assembly using the fully proportional method of closed party lists.
Senate elections to be held concurrently with the House of Commons.
Senators to have no geographically-subdivided constituency. They would be elected from the entire country-wide vote tally. (Constitutional amendments required.)
Allocate seats not from the usual method of vote share percentage, but by absolute number of total votes. That is, a lower voter turnout would result in less total Senators.
Elect MPs to the House of Commons using an optional preferential ballot.
Maintain the current 338 electoral districts and their boundaries (until the next census).
Include a "Declined" option on the ballot, which does not drop off the final count.
Allow for a seat to remain vacant for 12 months if the "Declined" option obtains a majority. (By-election to follow.)
Add Student Parliamentarians to the House of Commons
Elected by 14-17 year-old citizens and permanent residents.
Candidates must be aged 14-17 at the time of the election and be a Canadian citizen.
Two representatives per constituency, elected for two year terms on a staggered basis, separately from the regular general elections.
Constituencies would be much bigger than the regular 338 electoral districts to reflect a similar number of eligible voters.
Student Parliamentarians would have the right to speak and vote in the House of Commons. Their votes would be recorded but not counted towards the passing or defeat of a bill or motion.
Introduce a term limit of two consecutive general elections within the same House.
Allow MPs to run for the Senate immediately after two terms in the Lower House and vice versa.
Allow returning to a House after a one term absence.
Maintain the freedom to not vote without penalty.
Maintain the requirement to cast a paper ballot.
No on-line voting option.
Machine-assisted voting available for accessibility needs only.
Check back often to get more details of what I mean, and why I think this way.
You are the Government
November 8, 2015 HaroutLeave a comment
In a democracy, the people are the decision-makers. If you live in Canada and are a Canadian citizen, you are a decision-maker. Sometimes, though, we may not quite feel that way. We may vote once every election cycle but leave the act of governing to those representatives that end up getting elected. Often, we don't keep on top of everything they are doing. We're busy. Sometimes we hear they are doing something we don't agree with. In that case, we might be motivated to give our representative a piece of our mind, maybe even attend a protest. Most of the time, though, we keep our opinion to ourself and take a fatalistic view that nothing we do will change the outcome.
The truth is that the average Canadian is very powerful. Voting is important, but it's just the tip of the iceberg. You have the freedom of expression and the freedom of peaceful assembly. You have over 30 million compatriots that care about living under the rule of law and will listen to reasonable arguments. Whereas in other countries, citizens need to arm themselves and risk their lives to influence their country's direction, all you really need to do is show that you care.
This blog is about building an even better democracy. If you think it's useful, come back often. If you don't agree with it, I'd love to exchange ideas. The philosopher Joseph de Maistre first said "Toute nation a le gouvernment qu'elle mérite." (Every nation gets the government it deserves.) I started this blog today because I think we deserve the best.


*Orders may take up to 10 days to ship.
Bronze Polarized CR-39 lenses manufactured by Carl Zeiss Vision.
100% UVA/UVB protection and 6 base curve.
*Box includes a premium vegan 100% polyester sunglass case and custom printed polishing cloth.


text:
Fools On The Hill
It is truly hard to know what to say, beyond uttering something like "fools" when forming a thought about our representatives in the House, Senate, and White House, who are all, of course, fools. Aside from the interesting statistic that for the first time in history the aggregate IQ of the House and Senate equals the exact number of members in Congress, there isn't a single element of the government shutdown that doesn't have you pulling your hair out in frustration or hiding under the bed out of fear. With a government operating like this, who needs third party terrorist threats?
You could hear America groan as the news broke on the first of the month. A chorus of "fools" swelled from breakfast tables to commuter trains as we all dropped our heads into our hands and bemoaned this most recent political obscenity.
But as I eavesdropped on fellow riders on the ever luxurious bus commute into the Port Authority, I began to realize with a sort of chill, that this chorus of "fools" was anything but a chorus. Behind every "fool" there was a "they." And "they" were definitely divided between an "us" and a "them." As it turned out, I was witnessing the only true byproduct of our government these days – a rift fanned with uncertainty and fear and a nation divided by hyperbole. Our parties (an ironic name when you think about it) have polarized us and themselves to such an extent that nothing can get done outside of pumping up the rhetoric to a level that drowns out even he remotest whimper of reason. Black. White. No grey. Dare to take the middle ground, and you will be branded by both sides as an extremist.
At the risk of presenting a thought we can all violently agree on, I do not have a great political mind. Defining my political acumen as "good" might actually be a stretch. And quite frankly, anyone can and practically everyone has expressed some version of what I led with – that our Representatives are fools. It's easy, cathartic and safe. It accomplishes nothing.
And that's when it hit me. There is a distinct possibility that we are the fools.
I mean, how stupid can they be? Our representatives lavish in positions of great wealth and influence. Despite a government shutdown, which many/most of them must want, they are still being paid and are catered to by enormous loyal staffs that are not being paid. They have the best health care plans in the world. As a unit they get nothing done. They have substituted "role models" with "poll models." And they all have us in a lather, blathering about the ineptitude of our government in general, while somehow buoying up their individual positions as blameless, the single voices of reason in a sea of fools. Fund me, blog for me, tweet your support, rally your friends so we can protect us and beat back them, who unchecked will destroy the universe as we know it.
Well, as the two sides frenetically entrench themselves, cast blame and call for reinforcements, I'm suggesting all of us – regardless of our affiliations – put the vitriol on hold and take a bold and quiet step into the center. We firmly demand "QUIET" and calmly present our elected officials with a very simple amendment: Keep the government running. That's why we hired you. If you fail to do that, each and every one of you loses his or her job. 535 pink slips and then one special one for the president. You will be fired, allowed to loiter on The Hill only until new elections are held (which none of them would be eligible for) within a six week time frame.
There is not an employer in the country who wouldn't fire an employee (or employees) responsible for shutting down the business. Let's hold our officials to that same incredibly low and common standard. We are, after all, their employers.
Only a fool would settle for anything less.
If this piece resonates, please click here to sign my petition: http://chn.ge/165t1jP
4 thoughts on "Fools On The Hill"
apgp@aol.com says:
How about 536 pink slips?
Ed Manning says:
jack weafer says:
Pink slips do not reflect that each are part of a dysfunctional process that conceals
the underlying disease.
james townsend says:
It's just the beginning Ed. BTW, any advice on how I can get a tax refund for the days I paid taxes and the government was shut down?
About Ed Manning
Father. Husband. Writer. Songwriter. Pianist (careful how you say that). Market research, Technology Biz Dev and Sales. Aspiring (aspirating) Triathlete.
A Rusty Nail


This privacy statement outlines the type of data collected by shannonside.ie /northernsound.ie and how it used.
By using shannonside.ie /northernsound.ie you are accepting the terms of this privacy statement. Any external websites that may be accessed throughshannonside.ie /northernsound.ie are subject to their own privacy statements and are not the responsibility of Shannonside / Northern Sound.
By using shannonside.ie /northernsound.ie, you consent to the collection, storage and processing of the data we collect outlined in this statement. Any changes to this notice will be posted here and your continued use of shannonside.ie /northernsound.ie will be subject to the then-current policy.
When you visit shannonside.ie /northernsound.ie, there are two types of information that we may collect on you, personal and non-personal.
Shannonside / Northern Sound collects personal data submitted through shannonside.ie /northernsound.ie contact forms to respond to enquiries and track further correspondence. Personal information collected from these general enquires is not used for any other purpose.


The Rochdale Canal is just over 32 miles (52km) long, with over 100 bridges, 2 major aqueducts and only 2 short tunnels. When it was built there were 92 locks – 36 climbing 350ft (107m) on the eastern side, and 56 climbing 520ft (160m) on the western side of the Pennines, reaching the Summit pound at 600 ft (182m) above sea level.
The Rochdale Canal was built as a 'broad' canal, with a lock size of 74ft X 14ft (22.5mX4.25m).
A lot of water was needed to keep the canal open, and this meant the building of 8 reservoirs, including Hollingworth Lake, and over 20 miles of drainage works.
The total cost was around £600,000 – the equivalent of over £20 million in 2011.
It was the first canal to cross the Pennines, followed in 1811 by the Huddersfield Narrow Canal and in 1816 by the Leeds and Liverpool.