Did Jesus Make Alcoholic Wine?
Home » Bible Topics » Heresies » Did Jesus Make and Drink Alcoholic Wine?
Did Jesus Make and Drink Alcoholic Wine?
Bruce Lackey (1930-1988) taught at Tennessee Temple (Chattanooga, Tennessee) for nineteen years and was Dean of the Bible School from 1965 until the early 1980s. He pastored the Lakewood Baptist Church of Chattanooga for eight years, and pastored two other churches before that. During the last few years of his life, he traveled as a Bible conference speaker and authored several books. He was an accomplished musician, a highly gifted Bible teacher, and a diligent scholar who was proficient in the Greek language. Dr. Lackey, who was deeply respected and beloved by the "preacher boys" at Temple, defended the Received Text and the King James Bible as the preserved and perfect Word of God.
The following article entitled, "Did Jesus Make Alcoholic Wine?" was written by the late Dr. Lackey. Dr. Lackey did not believe that Jesus made and drank alcoholic wine; nor did he believe that the Bible endorses the moderate use of alcoholic beverages. However, the Bible is easily understood on this subject, if one has an open mind to receive what the Lord God teaches on this subject. This article is an excellent example of how the Bible is often misused and misinterpreted on this important issue. Dr. Lackey's article is on the left and the Biblical response is on the right.
1. The word wine in the Bible is a generic term; sometimes it means grape juice; sometimes it means alcoholic beverages. The following verses prove that the word "wine" can mean fresh grape juice, the fruit of the vine: De. 11:14; 2 Ch. 31:5; Ne. 13:15; Pr. 3:10; Is. 16:10; 65:8; 1 Ti. 5:23. 1. Dr. Lackey states that the word "wine" in the Bible is a generic term and may sometimes mean grape juice. However, if you look up the word "wine" in the Oxford English Dictionary, the standard dictionary of the English language, you will see that the word is not generic at all. The word "wine" always refers to alcoholic beverages, never to non-alcoholic beverages. "Wine" in the Bible refers to "the fermented juice of the grape used as a beverage." The word "wine" never refers to grape juice. Our King James Bible translators knew what grape juice was, and they knew what wine was. They chose the word "wine" throughout the Bible because they intended the established, commonly understood meaning of the word.
The verses that Dr. Lackey cites as proof that the word "wine" can mean fresh grape juice do not prove this point at all. In each instance, the word "wine" means the fermented juice of the grape. How do we know this? Because the English word "wine" never means grape juice. Just grab any English dictionary.
2. The context will always show when "wine" refers to alcoholic beverages. In such cases, God discusses the bad effects of it and warns against it. An example would be Gen. 9, Noah's experience after the Flood. Verse 21, "and he drank of the wine, and was drunken," clearly refers to alcoholic beverage. Prov. 20:1 speaks of the same thing when it warns us, "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." Alcoholic wine is deceptive; but how? In the very way that people are advocating today, by saying that drinking a little bit will not hurt. Everyone admits that drinking too much is bad; even the liquor companies tell us not to drive and drink, but they insist that a small amount is all right. However, that is the very thing that is deceptive. Who knows how little to drink? Experts tell us that each person is different. It takes an ounce to affect one, while more is necessary for another. The same person will react to alcohol differently, depending on the amount of food he has had, among other things. So, the idea that "a little bit won't hurt" is deceptive, and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise! 2. Dr. Lackey goes on to state that the context of Scripture will always show when a usage of the word "wine" means alcoholic wine. No, as we have already proved, the word "wine" always means "the fermented juice of the grape used as a beverage." No one with any meaningful knowledge of the English language ever calls grape juice wine. The two beverages are very different.
Wine by itself is not deceptive. Neither is wine a mocker or strong drink raging by itself. As this verse indicates (Prov 20:1), wine is only deceptive when it is used excessively and causes a man to disgrace himself or fall into a drunken rage. However, if wine is drunk in moderation, a man will not be mocked or shamed by his conduct, nor will he fall into a rage. The moderate man will be able to consciously enjoy the goodness of God; he will not be deceived by wine or strong drink in any way.
See the commentary on Proverbs 20:1.
Prov. 23:30-31 refers to alcoholic wine, because it tells us in the previous verse that those who drink it have woe, sorrow, contentions, babbling, wounds without cause, and redness of eyes. What a graphic description of those who "tarry long" at alcoholism. Verses 32-35 continue the same description; context always makes it clear when alcohol is meant. Dr. Lackey is correct that this passage refers to alcoholic wine since all the passages in the Bible that refer to wine are referring to alcoholic wine. Please note that the description of drinking in Proverbs 23:29-35 is only of those that "tarry long at the wine." The listed characteristics of excessive drinking are never present with moderate consumption of alcoholic beverages.
3. Scripture warns against the drinking of alcoholic wine. The Bible is consistent on this, both in the Old and New Testaments. The two previously quoted passages, Pr. 20:1 and 23:29-35, are good examples of scriptural warnings against consuming alcohol. Pr. 23:32 says "at the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder." Verse 33 shows that it will cause one to look at strange women (that is, not one's wife) and to say perverse things, or things which he would not say if he were sober. Verse 34 predicts that it will cause death, such as drowning, or loneliness, such as lying upon the top of a mast. Verse 35 warns against numbness ("they have beaten me and I felt it not") and "addiction ("when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again"). 3. We agree with Dr. Lackey that Scripture does warn strongly against the EXCESSIVE drinking of wine. But nowhere in Scripture is the drinking of wine ever prohibited. Indeed, the Bible promotes and commends the drinking of wine AND strong drink! Lev 10:9 proves beyond argument that the entire nation of Israel in the O.T. drank wine and strong drink. Notice that this verse is a prohibition for Aaron and the priests not to drink wine or strong drink when they were performing their priestly duties. They clearly drank when they were not performing their priestly duties. Num 6:3 is a prohibition against drinking for the man who had taken a vow of a nazarite. After the vow is fulfilled, he is free to drink wine and strong drink again (Num 6:20). Notice that the best of the wine was to be given to the Levites and priests (Num 18:12). God even ordained a special time of feasting which included wine and strong drink for everyone in Israel on certain occasions before the LORD (Duet 14:26). These verses prove conclusively that God not only allowed, but also commended the drinking of wine AND strong drink in the Bible. Why does Dr. Lackey ignore these verses? And even if one holds to the ridiculous proposition that wine may mean grape juice, the strong drink of the above passages can mean nothing but strong ALCOHOLIC drinks. God commends the drinking of alcoholic beverages in the Bible.
Proverbs 20:1, 23:29-35 are not, as Dr. Lackey states, prohibitions against drinking any alcoholic beverage for this would contradict the clear commendation of the Law of Moses for such beverages. These statements in Proverbs are clearly prohibiting the drinking of alcoholic beverages to excess or drunkenness.
Prov. 31:4-5 teaches, "It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink: lest they drink and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted." The danger is obvious. In like manner, Proverbs 31:4-5 is not prohibiting kings from drinking entirely. Rather this passage is prohibiting kings from drinking so much that "they drink and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted." Only excessive drinking will make a king pervert judgment.
By the way, Prov. 31:6,7 give us the only legitimate use of alcoholic wine in Scripture. "Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more." This would be using it as an anesthetic; a painkiller. But this is not for everyone; he says in v. 6, "unto him that is ready to perish." Of course, they did not have all the painkillers that we have today. In our time, it would not be necessary to do this. We have many anesthetics available for those who are dying. Then, about the only thing available to the average person would have been some kind of alcohol. Alcohol is a depressant; it is not a stimulant, as some think. After several drinks, one gets dizzy; then he will pass out. So this passage teaches that alcoholic beverage would be only for the person who is ready to die; there would be no hope for his life. All that would be possible would be to ease his pain and help him forget his misery. Proverbs 31:6-7 is not the only legitimate use of alcoholic drinks in the Bible. As we have seen above, the Law of Moses commended the drinking of alcoholic drinks for the priests and for feasting Jews before the LORD.
Another passage is Isa. 5:11. "Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame them!" Obviously this is alcoholic, because it inflames. Why does he say, "Woe unto them"? Verse 12 answers, "...they regard not the work of the Lord, neither consider the operation of his hands." Everyone knows that when one gives himself to the drinking of alcoholic beverage, he will not be more spiritual, more desirous of learning the Word of God. To the contrary, it causes a person to ignore the Lord. Verses 13-14 reveal two other serious results: people go into captivity (become slaves to something or someone) and Hell enlarges itself! The drinking of alcoholic wine has caused Hell to be enlarged! God does not want anyone to go to Hell; He has given the greatest, dearest gift that He possibly could, to rescue sinners from it. He never made Hell for people. The Lord Jesus Christ said that Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels (Mt. 25:41). However, because of evil alcohol, Hell has had an enlargement campaign. Here, then, is a clear warning against drinking alcohol, because God does not want anyone to go to Hell. Here again in Isaiah 5:11, the prohibition is NOT for all alcoholic beverages in general, but rather for the excessive use and continual pursuit of alcoholic drinks that leads to drunkenness and addiction. Only those that are drunk are inflamed with wine. Only those who drink to excess disregard the work of the Lord. If a man drinks in moderation he will not be inflamed with wine and he will not disregard the work of the Lord.
Isa. 28:7,8 continues the warning. "But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment. For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean." Again, this passage does not prohibit the general drinking of alcoholic beverages. This passage does not contradict the clear teaching of Moses as pointed out above. Isaiah 28:7-8 is referring to those who are "swallowed up of wine," those who are drinking to excess and drunkenness, and are thereby "out of the way."
What a tragic thing, that even in the days of Isaiah, the priests and prophets were engaged in the drinking of alcoholic wine! Thus we see that the problem of preachers recommending alcohol is not new. Six hundred years before Christ, demon alcohol had worked its way into religion. The tragedy in Isaiah's time was not the general drinking of alcoholic wine, but the excessive drinking of alcoholic wine and strong drink so that drunkenness resulted. Dr. Lackey is unable to separate between drinking alcoholic beverages in moderation and drinking to excess and drunkenness.
4. The making of alcoholic beverages is not a strictly natural process. Years ago I took for granted that if you took the juice of a grape and let it alone, not refrigerating it, it would automatically, in time, turn into alcoholic wine. There are several reasons why this is not true. It takes more than time to make wine. Sometimes people try to defend its use by saying that it must be good because God made it. But, the fact is, God did not make it. Man has learned how to make alcoholic liquors through processes that he has invented. Wine-makers know that one must have the correct amount of water, sugar, and temperature to make wine. Keeping grape juice in a refrigerator would prevent if from fermenting, because the temperature is not right. Likewise, hot, tropical temperature would prevent fermentation. The making of bread is, like wine, a process that man must develop. Bread does not come naturally from the field. Man must process the grain and develop the bread just like he processes the grapes to develop wine. Neither process is natural. But just because man may eat too much bread and become a glutton does not prove that God condemns the eating of bread because it is not derived from an entirely natural process. So too for wine. Just because a man may drink to excess and become drunk does not mean that God condemns all drinking since wine does not come from an entirely natural process. The "naturalness" of wine does not prove anything with respect to whether God approves it or condemns it for the same arguments can be made concerning bread. The key is what saith the LORD. And we have already shown from Scripture that the LORD God clearly commended the moderate use of alcoholic beverages.
In ancient days, before we had refrigeration and vacuum-sealing ability, people learned to preserve the juice of the grape without turning it into alcoholic wine. Many people boiled it down into thick syrup. By doing so, they could preserve it for long periods of time. When they got ready to drink it, they would simply add the water to the consistency desired, in much the same way that we take frozen concentrates and add water. In Bible days, contrary to what many believe, it was not necessary for everyone to drink alcoholic wine as a table beverage. The Bible tells us plainly that God gave wine to man even as he gave bread to man. Read Psalm 104:14-15. This verse states that God is the one who gives man food out of the earth; "and wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart." Neither wine nor oil nor bread comes naturally to man from the field. Man must process each harvest in order to develop the end product. However, as the Bible clearly states, God is the one who is giving these beneficial products to man from the earth. Wine is most definitely a good gift from the great God of heaven for man's pleasurable use and enjoyment.
I recommend the book entitled Bible Wines and the Laws of Fermentation by William Patton (Challenge Press, Emmaus, PA). More than a hundred years ago, this preacher was the only one in his town who believed in total abstinence. He saw that it was necessary to make an extensive study to see what scripture taught. This book is the result of that labor and is the very best thing I have read on the subject.
Now we come to the longest point in this entire study, but one which is most important, chiefly because so many insist that Jesus made and drank alcoholic wine.
THE FIRST REASON IS BECAUSE OF HIS HOLY NATURE. In Heb. 7:26, we read that the Lord Jesus is "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners." No doubt, the Saviour, being God in the flesh, had an air of holiness about Himself that could be seen by even the most casual observer. For instance, the profane soldiers, who were sent to arrest Him, gave as their reason for returning without Him, that "never a man spake like this man." (John 7:46) The words of Jesus were different; He, no doubt, had a very holy appearance, character, and speech. FIRST: The Lord Jesus Christ was indeed "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners." But the Law of Moses clearly commends the drinking of alcoholic beverages as seen above. Jesus was a Jew and would have understood from Scripture that wine was a gift from God to men. He would certainly have drunk alcoholic beverages. At the same time, we can be certain that Jesus would have never misused alcohol. He would never have drunk to excess or become drunk. Being a priest after the order of Melchisedec, Jesus drank wine as he did (Gen 14:18).
Why is this so important? Consider this illustration. The word "cider" may mean an alcoholic beverage, or plain apple juice. Suppose we lived during the 1920s, prohibition days, and were approached by two people offering us a drink of cider. One of the persons, we knew to be one of the holiest men in town, faithful to the house of God, separated from the world, diligent in prayers, always witnessing to others; the other was a known liquor dealer. If each one offered us a drink of "his very own cider," we would assume that the holy person's was no more than apple juice, but there would be no doubt about our opinion regarding the liquor dealer's cider! Obviously, the character of a person influences what that one does. We know also that Jesus drank alcoholic beverages because he explicitly said he did. First, note that John the Baptist was a Nazarite for life and was expressly prohibited from drinking any wine or strong drink because of the Nazarite vows (Luke 1:15). Now look at Luke 7:33-34 to see what Jesus said about John and what he said about himself. Jesus acknowledges in verse 33 that John did not drink wine. However, in verse 34 Jesus clearly acknowledges that he DID drink wine, the very thing that John did not drink. Here we have in unmistakable language from our Lord Jesus himself that he drank the same wine that John did not drink due to his vows.
Since the Lord Jesus Christ was "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners," we may safely assume that He would not make that which is called in Scripture a mocker and deceiver of man, causing untold misery. Wine is called a mocker and deceiver of man in Scripture only when it has been used excessively. Wine only deceives and mocks a man when he is drunk. The moderate use of alcoholic beverages does not mock or deceive men.
A SECOND REASON IS THAT HE WOULD NOT CONTRADICT SCRIPTURE. In Mt. 5:17- 18, Christ made this clear, saying, "Think not that I am come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Therefore, Christ could not have contradicted Hab. 2:15, "Woe unto him that giveth his neighbor drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness!" SECOND: Yes, Jesus would never have made any one drunk with wine or strong drink. Hab 2:15 pronounces woe upon those who make their neighbor drunk in order to take advantage of them. Jesus, of course, would never have done anything like that. However, Jesus did turn water to wine at the marriage feast in Cana. While he miraculously provided wine for many of the guests at the feast, he did not make anyone drunk in order to take advantage of him. Jesus provided wine for this feast to show his power as the Son of God and so that the festivities would not be brought to a premature end due to a lack of wine.
Certainly, Jesus knew that this verse was in the Bible; He was well-acquainted with Scripture, since it is His Word and was written about Him. He did not come to violate Scripture, but to fulfill it. He could not have done so, if He had made alcoholic wine and had given it to his neighbor.
Some people object to the use of this verse by saying that it would apply only to one who would give his neighbor drink for the purpose of looking on his nakedness. But we must remember: when one gives his neighbor something which will make him drunk, he is putting himself in the very class of those who do so in order to look on their nakedness. And since the Scripture commands us to "abstain from all appearance of evil" (1 Th. 5:22), we can be sure that the Lord Jesus would not have done something that would have been associated with such an evil practice as that described in Hab. 2:15. For the same reason, no Christian should be engaged in the selling of alcoholic beverage. Dr. Lackey seems to think that giving a person a drink of wine is the same as making them drunk. This is not true. A person can drink wine or strong drink in moderation and never get drunk in a lifetime of drinking. Dr. Lackey is finding it difficult to distinguish between drinking in moderation and getting drunk. The Bible makes this distinction clear from cover to cover.
THE THIRD REASON IS THAT LEV. 10:9-11 COMMANDS THE PRIEST OF GOD NOT TO DRINK WINE OR STRONG DRINK. "Do not drink wine nor strong drink .. that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean; and that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statues which the Lord hath spoken..." Now, since Heb. 2:17 calls Christ "a merciful and faithful high priest," we would expect Him to obey all Scriptures pertaining to that office. If He had made or drunk alcoholic wine, He would have disobeyed these verses and would have been disqualified from teaching the children of Israel the statues of the Lord. THIRD: Here Dr. Lackey omits the most important words in Lev 10:9. The entire verse applies to Aaron and the priests and reads like this: "Do not drink wine or strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations:" The key words that Dr. Lackey intentionally omitted have been underlined. This verse does not prohibit all drinking for the priests. It merely prohibited them from drinking when they were in the tabernacle fulfilling their priestly duties. When not functioning as priests, they were free to drink wine or strong drink just like any other Israelite. When the entire verse is properly considered, this passage clearly supports just the opposite of what Dr. Lackey is trying to prove. The priests drank the best wine (Num 18:12), and Melchisedec drank wine (Gen 14:18).
THE FOURTH REASON IS FOUND IN A PASSAGE WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY CONSIDERED: PR. 31:4-5 PROHIBITS KINGS AND PRINCES FROM DRINKING ALCOHOLIC WINE OR ANY OTHER STRONG DRINK. IF THEY HAD DONE SO, THEIR JUDGMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN PERVERTED. It was necessary for Christ to obey these verses also, since He was Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6) and King of Kings (Rev. 19:16). In Mt. 27:11, He admitted to being the King of the Jews. He rode into Jerusalem on a donkey's colt, to fulfill Zec. 9:9, which prophesied that Israel's king would enter the city in just that way. Undoubtedly, He was king, and as such, would have had to obey Prov. 31:4-5. FOURTH: Again, Proverbs 31:4-5 is a warning to kings and those in authority not to drink to excess and thereby forget the law and pervert judgment. Used in moderation, wine and strong drink will not cause one to forget the law and pervert judgment. Because the text is focusing on forgetting the law and perverting judgment, we can know that the drinking in question in the passage is excessive drinking, drinking until one is drunk. Furthermore, the passage continues by commending and encouraging the use of wine and strong drink for those who are discouraged or in pain (Pr 31:6-7).
REASON FIVE IS THAT CHRIST DID NOT COME TO MOCK OR DECEIVE PEOPLE, yet Prov. 20:1 says that wine does both. Rather than coming to mock or deceive he came to save! FIVE: Wine and strong drink only deceive when they are drunk to excess. Wine only mocks and strong drink only rages when it is drunk excessively by foolish men who lose their inhibitions and do and say stupid things. When the Lord Jesus drank wine, he always used moderation and self-control.
REASON SIX IS THAT HE DID NOT COME TO SEND PEOPLE TO HELL. We have already seen that Isa. 5:11-14 teaches that Hell had to be enlarged because of the drinking of alcoholic beverage. Christ did not come to send people to Hell; listen to Jn. 3:17: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." SIX: We have earlier pointed out that Isaiah 5:11 is pronouncing woe upon those who drink wine continuously and excessively until they are inflamed by wine. This passage is not a prohibition against the moderate use of alcoholic beverages. Jesus came drinking the very wine and strong drink that John was prohibited from drinking due to his vow.
REASON SEVEN IS THAT CHRIST DID NOT COME TO CAST A STUMBLINGBLOCK BEFORE ANYONE; yet, Rom. 14:21 teaches that a person who gives another alcoholic wine does just that. "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak." Everyone who has studied the problem of alcoholism has learned that some people cannot handle any amount of alcohol, while others may drink one or two "social" drinks and stop. Experts do not know why this is true; various theories have been propounded, but nothing has been proved to be true regarding every person. Some say it is chemical; others insist that it must be psychological. The fact is, we do not know for certain. In any given group of people, there would be several potential alcoholics. What a shame it would be for a person, who is a potential slave to it, to get his first taste at the Lord's Table in church, then proceed down the road of misery to an alcoholic's grave! SEVEN: Romans 14:21 teaches that a Christian is responsible to protect the weak consciences of other Christian brethren. This might mean that in certain company a Christian might not be able to eat meat offered to idols or to drink alcoholic beverages. However, when at home, a Christian would not need to be concerned because the weak brother would not be there to be offended. This passage is not a general prohibition against all drinking but a prohibition against drinking when it might cause a weak brother to stumble in his conscience.
I certainly would not want my children to get their first taste of alcohol at the family meal; nor would I want them to get it at church. One or more of them could well be potential alcoholics. As evidence that this is possible, we should consider that some denominations which serve alcoholic wine in their religious services also operate homes for alcoholic priests! If Dr. Lackey is persuaded that he should not drink wine or strong drink, he is welcome to that opinion and choice. However, he should refrain from trying to use the Bible to support an argument that the Bible clearly does not support.
But we can be absolutely sure that Christ did not come to cause others to stumble!
THE EIGHTH REASON IS THAT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT WINE OF JOHN 2 BE ALCOHOLIC. Many insist that it was alcoholic, on the basis of John 2:10, which says, "Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse; but thou hast kept the good wine until now." They would say that, in those days, it was common to serve the best alcoholic wine at first, saving the worst until later, when men's tastes have been dulled by much drinking. But the point is just the opposite here! These people could definitely recognize that the wine which Jesus made was much better than what they had been served at first. This could not have been possible if they were already well on their way to becoming intoxicated! The fact is, neither the wine which they had at first, nor that which Christ made, was alcoholic. EIGHT: First, we know that the wine of John chapter 2 is alcoholic because the English word "wine" only means alcoholic. There is no other kind of wine. Grape juice is not wine! And wine is not grape juice. Secondly, Jesus said in Luke 7:34 that he drank wine, so why would he not miraculously provide some wine for a needy wedding feast. Thirdly, contrary to what Dr. Lackey has suggested, the guests at the wedding feast in Cana did not recognize that the best wine had been kept until last. Only the governor of the feast recognized this fact. John 2:10 is strong proof by itself that Jesus provided true alcoholic wine for the Cana marriage feast. Since Jesus was a son of Solomon, and since he inspired Solomon to write Ecclesiastes, he would have known that grape juice was no beverage for a feast (Eccl 10:19).
REASON NINE IS THAT THE LORD JESUS CHRIST WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN GLORY FROM MAKING DRUNK PEOPLE DRUNKER. Verse 11 is most important when it states that, by this miracle, Jesus "manifested forth his glory." Verse 10 indicates that the people had drunk quite a bit of whatever kind of wine they were drinking. If it had been alcoholic, they would have been intoxicated, or nearly so. Had Christ made alcoholic wine, He would have made drunk people drunker, or almost-drunk people completely drunk! Such a deed would certainly not have manifested any glory to Him! NINE: John chapter 2 does not give any indication whatsoever that most of the guests attending the marriage feast were drunk or almost drunk like Dr. Lackey speculates. What we do know with certainty is that the English word "wine" only refers to the fermented juice of the grape used as a beverage and that Jesus clearly acknowledges in Luke 7:34 that he did drink alcoholic beverages. Therefore we can know with certainty that Jesus miraculously provided the very finest wine for the marriage feast at Cana, not grape juice.
THE TENTH REASON IS THAT MAKING DRUNK PEOPLE DRUNKER WOULD NOT HAVE CAUSED HIS DISCIPLES TO BELIEVE MORE STRONGLY ON HIM, yet verse 11 says that, as a result of what He did in turning the water into wine, "his disciples believed on him." Jn. 1:41 shows that they had already believed on Him as Messiah; this was a deepening of their faith and a proof that they had not been wrong. Would making drunk people drunker inspire such faith? The opposite would be likely! They were not looking for a Messiah who would pass out free booze! Thus, because of the description of this miracle and its result, we can not conclude otherwise than that this wine was non-alcoholic. TEN: Another text in the New Testament that clearly indicates that early Christians used alcoholic beverages is found in I Cor 11. In this passage we learn that many of the Christians at Corinth were getting drunk at the Lord's table. But the Apostle Paul does not rebuke them for using wine instead of grape juice. He rather only rebukes them for getting drunk and ignoring those who didn't have any wine to drink. This proves that Paul did not have any problem with drinking wine, but drunkenness at the Lord's Table was a serious offence to Jesus Christ.
Another important text is Eph 5:18, which reads, "be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess, but be filled with the Spirit." Notice that this verse is not a prohibition against drinking. This verse merely prohibits drinking so much that one becomes drunk.
Notice also I Tim 3:3,8 where pastors and deacons were not to be given to wine or much wine. Again, this is in no way a prohibition against all drinking, even for pastors and deacons. They are to avoid being given to wine, that is, they are not to be drinking excessively or often. Pastors should not be given to wine. Deacons with less restriction are not to be given to much wine. Other members could drink as much as they desired short of drunkenness.


We're delighted to announce the 10 TED Translators who've been invited to attend TEDGlobal 2017! The conference, which will delve into the theme of Builders. Truth-tellers. Catalysts., is set to take place in Arusha, Tanzania, from August 27 to 30. Read on to learn more about these remarkable folks.
Driven by his deep-seated passion for translation, Riyad has worked as a freelance translator since he graduated university with a degree in leather technology. He sees infinite potential in Sudanese youth to enhance their communities, themselves and even the world, and so he's been an active participant in an array of youth initiatives in Sudan that aim to realize younger generations' power to enact enlightened change. In addition, Riyad was an organizer and speaker at TEDxOmdurman, and he's a cofounder of kushsudan.sd, a new organization whose goal is to increase and enrich positive Sudanese online content.
A lifelong Moroccan, Lalla lives in Casablanca at present. She works in business development and marketing, and has been a prolific TED Translator for several years. Recently, she joined the TEDx organizers community as the licensee for TEDxCasablanca. Lalla is a frequent traveler, a voracious reader (in Arabic, English and French) and a new yoga convert.
Ingrid is a longtime TED Translator and Language Coordinator whose professional work focuses primarily on effective writing and presenting, visual communication and multilingualism. In recent years, she's added German-to-English translation to her CV. Ingrid hails from South Africa, but she's lived in Japan and Estonia, and she currently resides in Berlin. Though a cosmopolitan, she keeps her native Afrikaans polished mainly through TED Talk translations.
Since graduating from the University of Dar es Salaam with degrees in computer science and statistics, Joachim has channeled his expertise into using technology and its attendant data to address a range of common problems faced by underserved Tanzanian communities. Translating TED Talks into Swahili, Tanzania's native language, is just one of many ways Joachim works to empower people in his home country.
Ahmed's work focuses on popularizing ideas, particularly in so-called Third World countries, that empower people in those regions to sustainably improve their living standards—whether that's through adopting new agricultural methods or fighting poverty and injustice, to name but a few ways. For Ahmed, ideas equal information, and information is one of humanity's most vital assets.
Born and raised in Yemen, where she taught linguistics and phonetics at Taiz University for seven years, Nada holds several graduate and postgraduate degrees, including an M.A. in audiovisual translation. Obtaining this master's degree enabled her to hone her subtitling, dubbing and voiceover skills, including for blind, hard-of-hearing and deaf audiences—skills which then helped Nada earn her current position as an expert translator for the Qatari government. In addition to these bona fides, she maintains a deep interest in gender dynamics, particularly as they pertain to women in the Arab world. An ardent believer in the power of dialogue to build solidarity among people the world over, Nada is committed to doing her part to build a viable, sustainable global community.
Based in Morogoro, Tanzania, Nelson holds a university degree in electrical and electronics engineering. He's a cofounder of Zeal Luminance, a Kickstarter-launched business that crafts indoor lampshades with African fabrics (such as ankara, dashiki and kitenge) and recycled materials (plastic, for example), and also produces ebony wood sculptures.
Ghalia is the founder of Magma, a Syrian social organization that develops projects to enable Syrians in their college educations and careers. She's also president of World Merit Syria, an outfit whose mission is to increase awareness of sustainability and foster achievement of UN Sustainable Development Goal 4 (or SDG4, which strives to ensure inclusive and quality education for all people and promote lifelong learning) in Syria. A freelance translator and blogger as well, Ghalia hopes to eventually channel her work into the reconstruction of her war-ravaged country.
Fatima currently studies at the YaLa Academy's Aileen Getty School of Citizen Journalism, a non-traditional educational enterprise that trains youth from across the Middle East and Africa in various modes of citizen reportage, always with an eye toward dialogue, storytelling and peace-building. Intensely interested in web development, too, Fatima volunteers as a content writer and manager at an Indian news startup.
it's very bad for me because y don't speak well English linguage! But y have can any things!! y like to know anothers persons who work around the world ! than the Katar, arabian saoudi, and some ladys! It's vry good!
I want to translate my blog posts from turkish to english. How much is this?
I want to translate articles on my site to russian. how much is the price ?
TED Translators is a volunteer-driven project that exclusively translates TED, TEDx, and other TED-affiliated talks; we don't translate for outside parties or charge for our work.


Carly Cushnie's first show sans et Ochs (her partner Michelle Ochs departed the brand in February) was a celebration. A celebration of family, of diversity, of culture; it was a show full of soul, with her Caribbean roots playing out in riotous colour across beautiful women of all shapes, sizes and races.
When it came to beauty, Cushie looked to another woman of colour to inspire her. Sade – the British-Nigerian singer / songwriter with a treacle-like tone – played hair muse, as slicked-back braids were the ultimate smooth operator.
Led by TRESemmé NYFW Stylist Ursula Stephen, hair revisited the plait with nostalgic glory. Pulled back entirely off the face and parted directly down the middle, Stephen slicked and sprayed hair simultaneously, brushing and spritzing TRESemmé Repair & Protect 7 Pre-Styling Spray between strokes. "Spray hair with the TRESemmé Repair & Protect 7 Pre-Styling Spray at the same time as you are brushing hair straight back into the ponytail. This will make hair very smooth and shiny while protecting it from any breakage or damage from the braiding," she explained backstage.
Lofty ponytails sat just above the nape of the neck, then were plaited deftly by the TRESemmé team into one chunky braid and secured by a coil of hair. Accompanied by a slick of sticky red lipstick and huge hoops, the look was a glorious homage to Sade's iconic beauty look – a sleek braid, red lip and gold hoops.
Braids which sang of soul; it was a retro redux of a trend that continues to dominate the runway. Here's how to become the ultimate smooth operator with TRESemmé.


text:
month : 07/2014 3 results
Screenwriter Jeff Howard on PLANES: FIRE & RESCUE
Screenwriter Jeff Howard is making quite a name for himself in the world of animation. He's written two Tinker Bell movies, as well as The Pirate Fairy, the first Planes and Pixie Hollow Games. But he wasn't always part of the "story trust," as it's called at Disney, now that they've adopted the Pixar story development process known ...
Director Steve James on Roger Ebert documentary LIFE ITSELF
Roger Ebert was one of the most beloved film critics of all time. He served the public with his eloquent film reviews in the Chicago Sun-Times for more than four decades. He was co-host of popular TV show At the Movies. He wrote more than 20 books. He won a Pulitzer Prize for criticism, and he made the term "thumbs up" a household name. When ...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


How to properly perform many pest control functions as you age especially rodent stations maintenance.
The One Sales Skill Everyone Needs is how do you get the ball rolling to get into a sales presentation.
Peering into the back of most pest control trucks I get to see lots of pest control equipment, keeping your pest control equipment in top working order is vital to keeping it in top performing order.
Learning how to take quality photos for your wildlife business and records.


text:
Q: Draw A Double Arrow My Latex code is below:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{geometry}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{arrows,decorations.pathmorphing,backgrounds,positioning,fit,matrix}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,0)--(0,4);
\draw (0.5,0)--(0.5,4);
\draw(-0.5,1.5)--(0.25,2);
\draw(0.25,2)--(1,1.5);
\draw(1.5,1.6)--(2.5,1.6);
\draw(1.5,1.9)--(2.5,1.9);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

It works well. The result is like that:

How can I draw this picture using double arrow?
Thank you.

A: The resolution on your dropbox image is a little low, but I think that you are trying to make something like this:

If this is what you want then you can get it using the double option to the \draw command. This draws "double lines" rather than single lines. You can control the distance between the lines using double distance. Here's the full code:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{geometry}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{arrows,decorations.pathmorphing,backgrounds,positioning,fit,matrix}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,0)--(0,4);
\draw (0.5,0)--(0.5,4);
\draw[double,double distance=1mm](-0.5,1.5)--(0.25,2)--(1,1.5);
\draw(1.5,1.6)--(2.5,1.6);
\draw(1.5,1.9)--(2.5,1.9);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

Notice that I also combined your two \draw commands for the left and right hand side of the "arrow" into one command because \draw accepts a series of coordinates.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


PackagingDelivery microfiber blind cleaner 1.chenillemicrofiber head and PP handle 2.the most charming feature of the carhome washing duster. 3.its shape of ellipse makes it more different than those normal ones. 4.multi-colorful chooses shine your eyes.


Summary: It seemed like a good idea at the time.
Summary: The best part of "believe" is always the "lie." A Sara/Greg/Nick kind of train wreck.
Summary: Greg didn't really know - but he should have.
Summary: #20 in the Sofia Couleur series. Pejic puts the squeeze on Sofia. Cameos by Nick Stokes and Catherine Willows.
Summary: #28 in the Sofia Couleur series. Sofia runs into Brass.
Summary: Two members of the "team" realize how much they would sacrifice for someone they love - and the others learn a whole new lesson about what love is.
Summary: A case of passion, some temporary team reshufflings, a few emotional revelations, and enough jealousy and unrequited love to satisfy a teenager.
Summary: Since Gil can't pick who he wants, they'll all have to do it for him.


b. 18 Apr. 1802, 1st s. of George Howard†, 6th earl of Carlisle, and Lady Georgiana Dorothy Cavendish, da. of William, 5th duke of Devonshire. educ. privately by Rev. Richard Roberts, Mitcham, Surr. 1811-13; Eton 1813; Christ Church, Oxf. 1819; continental tour 1823-4. unm. styled Visct. Morpeth 1825-48. suc. fa. as 7th earl of Carlisle 7 Oct. 1848; KG 7 Feb. 1855. d. 5 Dec. 1864.
Chief sec. to ld. lt. [I] Apr. 1835-Sept. 1841; PC 20 May 1835; chief commr. of woods, forests and land revenues July 1846-Mar. 1850; chan. of duchy of Lancaster Mar. 1850-Feb. 1852; ld. lt. [I] Feb. 1855-Mar. 1858, June 1859-Aug. 1864.
Ld. lt. Yorks. (E. Riding) 1847-d.; rect. Aberdeen Univ. 1853-d.
Holland suggested to Fox, 8 Feb., that Morpeth might come in for the current vacancy for Oxford University, but Carlisle explained to Lady Holland, 12 Feb., that he would have 'no chance', as 'the anti-Catholic prejudice is too strong' and that it was the same in Northumberland.35 Devonshire was the official British representative at the coronation of Nicholas I in Russia and, as he was no longer required to fight an election, Morpeth accepted his invitation to be his attaché and was said to be 'much pleased with the prospect of his Russian trip'.36 Townshend reported to Fox, 21 July, that 'Morpeth as usual is bursting with joy and happiness ... and puffing through many a dance, as if his legs had no connection with his body'.37 After the coronation, 3 Sept. 1826, he came home via Berlin and Paris.
We will not consent to receive the vote as an eleemosynary grant to posthumous necessities, not as the boon of pity or compassion, but as a public debt, due to a highly meritorious public servant.
Lord George Cavendish Bentinck* told Lady Canning, 14 May, that it was 'a beautiful speech', while John Backhouse informed her, 15 May, that it was 'beyond all praise'.52 Irredeemably influenced by Canning's view of foreign policy, Morpeth welcomed with 'unequal satisfaction' Peel's announcement that the government would do all in its power to effect the pacification of Greece, 24 Mar. In April his verse tragedy The Last of the Greeks; or the Fall of Constantinople, inspired by the Greek war of independence, was published. On 30 June he urged Peel to pledge the government to a policy of 'fair neutrality' over Portugal. He voted for repeal of the Test Acts, 26 Feb., presented multiple petitions for Catholic relief, 29 Apr., 6 May, and divided thus, 12 May. Welcoming what he saw as 'hopeful signs of progress', he hoped 'that another session of Parliament will not be allowed to pass over without some measure [to] grant the claims of the Catholic to the fullest extent', 12 June. He voted against the extension of the East Retford franchise to the hundred, 21 Mar. He objected to the scale of corn duties proposed by government, 31 Mar., and voted for a pivot price of 60s. rather than 64s., 22 Apr. He divided for the production of information on civil list pensions, 20 May. He contended that 'the present system of game laws is an evil that ought no longer to be tolerated', 13 June. His motion to reduce the grant for the Royal Cork Institution by £500, 20 June, was rejected by 66-22. That month he was listed by Lords Palmerston* and Colchester among the Canningite rump. Before voting to reduce the salary of the lieutenant-general of the ordnance, 4 July, he warned that 'the country will certainly have much reason to be astonished if this House was, on the first opportunity, to nullify its own [finance] committee, in respect of a reduction which they have recommended'. He divided against the grant for North American fortifications, 7 July 1828.
On 24 Oct. 1828 Morpeth set out on his first visit to Ireland. His trip generated controversy when the Catholic Association invited him to a public dinner in his honour, through its 'Friends of Civil and Religious Liberty' offshoot.53 Richard Sheil* and Daniel O'Connell* presented the invitation, 6 Nov., and although he was initially unsure whether to accept, Morpeth concluded in a letter to his mother that 'English liberals' had nothing to gain by being 'backward and lukewarm'. Abercromby advised him, 22 Nov., that, considering his family connections, a refusal could have been politically embarrassing, and told Carlisle, 24 Nov., that whatever their reservations, 'in this case there was no alternative but to act as he has done'.54 In a widely reported speech at the dinner, 27 Nov., he alluded to his own family's association with Catholicism, praised Ireland and the Irish, urged the laying aside of jealousies to fight for a common cause, and, although he was in no doubt as to their ultimate success, urged 'those amongst you who suffer under the odious disabilities' to 'use every effort that human nature is capable of, but resistance' and 'to strive to conquer reluctant Protestantism, by a display of Catholic virtue [mixing] temperance with zeal'.55 Before the 1829 session a rumour arose that he was to contest the vacant Cumberland seat, but there was no truth in it.56 In the House, 10 Feb., he said that although he was willing to accept the supression of the Catholic Association to secure emancipation, he believed that the only effective way of disbanding it was to grant that relief, for 'to talk of the other only seems a piece of tautology'. 'George spoke well the other night. He has gained in self-possession and manliness prodigiously by his journey last summer to Ireland', Lady Holland told Fox, 14 Feb.57 He of course voted for the ministry's concession of emancipation, 6, 30 Mar., and he presented a number of favourable petitions that month. On 20 Mar. he stated that while he objected 'in principle' to the disfranchisement of the 40s. freeholders, he saw no option 'but to make virtue out of necessity, and with one hearty gulp, swallow [the securities] ... because we think we are contributing to help, to hasten, and to secure Catholic emancipation'. He reluctantly 'found himself unable to vote in support of the claim' of O'Connell to be allowed to take his seat without swearing the oath of supremacy, 18 May; but he welcomed the 'fair and legitimate' opportunity afforded by making an amendment to the bill, 21 May, which would allow O'Connell to take his seat. He voted to transfer East Retford's seats to Birmingham, 5 May, but when this was defeated declared that he must vote for the issue of a new writ rather than to 'transfer the franchise into the well known dukery of the already sufficiently represented county of Nottingham', 7 May. He was in the minority of 12 for a fixed duty on corn imports, 19 May, seconded Hobhouse's motion for a bill to regulate the working hours of children in factories, 21 May, and divided to reduce the hemp duties, 1 June 1829.
The state of the country has undergone a great change within the last few years. The people are everyday acquiring intelligence, and with this intelligence they obtain moral power ... but they are at the same time becoming more distressed ... In my opinion a temperate and timely reform ... while it forms a safeguard against any virulent expression of popular feeling, is at the same time recommended by every consideration of justice, policy and prudence.
He voted for Russell's reform motion, 28 May. He divided for the production of papers on the Bombay judicature, 8 Mar. Speaking before voting in favour of Palmerston's critical motion on the interference of British troops in Portugal, 10 Mar., he condemned the government's actions and their explanation of it, declaring it an 'illiberal and retrograde policy'. He secured the appointment of a select committee to investigate the condition of the London to Edinburgh road, 10 Mar. Presenting its report and moving the first reading of the Northern roads bill, 20 May, he recommended the appointment of a commission to study the proposals and said that 30 miles could be saved from the existing route. On its second reading, 3 June, responding to criticism, he emphasized that the route alteration would occur on the Northern stretches, would not affect the Midland and Southern counties and would involve no expenditure. He was strenuously opposed by Lord Lowther, who claimed that it would only benefit the Scots at English expense, but the bill was committed. Morpeth presented petitions in its favour from the royal burghs of Scotland, 7 June, Ayr, 5 July, and Inverness and Nairn, 9 July, but petitioning by the various interested turnpike trusts and inn owners in the south led to its falling at the close of the session. He voted for Jewish emancipation, 5 Apr., when he asserted that 'every person who contributes to the exigencies of the state, who pays its taxes and defrays the wages of its public servants, has an equal right to all the privileges and distinctions of the constitution', and 17 May. He presented four petitions from Yorkshire against the East India Company's monopoly, 27 Apr., when he voted to alter the laws governing Irish vestries. He voted for abolition of the Irish lord lieutenancy, 11 May, and endorsed a Dublin petition against the assimilation of Irish and English stamp duties, 14 May. He divided for abolition of the death penalty for forgery, 24 May, 7 June, and for reform of the divorce laws, 3 June. On 22 Feb. he had given notice of a motion to repeal the banishment clause of the Libels Act, which made those convicted of a second offence liable to transportation, but he postponed it, 3 May, and reluctantly again, 18 May, after Sir James Scarlett, the attorney-general, agreed to introduce an amendment to remove the clause, but also to raise by £100 the security that newspaper printers must provide, which Morpeth promised to oppose. Proposing his amendment, 6 July, he said that he did not seek to defend the excesses of the press, but that there were already adequate laws to deal with them. Although he triumphed by 26-21, Scarlett gave notice that he would seek to overturn the vote, and the penalty increase was reinserted on the third reading by 68-46, 9 July, when Morpeth again opposed it. He presented a petition from the printers of London and Westminster for reduction of the duty on newspapers and advertisements and promised to introduce his own measure to deal with the latter, 2 July. He seconded Brougham's motion for the abolition of slavery, 13 July, and brought up a relevant Leeds petition, 20 July 1830.
Would it really be an advantage to Morpeth to have it? I have always a scruple about his taking a seat which is inconsistent with his holding office ... To be sure it may be said that to represent Yorkshire is a distinction equal to that of a cabinet minister, if the election is obtained by the voice of the people, and the duties are well performed ... [but] I have always thought Morpeth was a very unlikely person to be thought of. He has all the requisites to please Whigs and people, except money. They may be shy of making an overture after what happened before, but they may make it, and it is right to be prepared.
Morpeth joined Althorp at Brougham's, 29 Oct., and again at a larger meeting of leading Whigs in early November, when it was decided that Brougham would move for reform early in the session.80 On 3 Nov. he spoke against the address, telling ministers that an improvement, not an overthrow, of national institutions was needed and warning them that unless there was a reform of Parliament he feared for the welfare and safety of the country. He presented the petition of Andrew Lawson, whose family were seeking to restore their interest at Boroughbridge, against the return there, 4 Nov., and Stapylton's petition demanding that all Members be required to swear an oath that they had acted on principles of purity at their elections, 9 Nov. He presented his first anti-slavery petition of the session, 4 Nov., when he said that its object was the most anxious desire of Yorkshire, another 254 from the county, 11 Nov, and many others that month, including one from Leeds with 15,000 signatures, 23 Nov. He had of course been listed by the ministry as one of their 'foes' and he voted against them in the crucial division on the civil list, 15 Nov. During the construction of Grey's ministry Lansdowne asked if Morpeth would take office, but he declined 'on account of Yorkshire'.81 Carlisle entered the cabinet as minister without portfolio, while Agar Ellis became chief commissioner of woods and forests. Welcoming the new appointments, 23 Nov., Morpeth hoped that ministers would 'place slavery on its proper footing and be friends of retrenchment and reform ... pursuing a liberal and enlightened policy with respect to commercial affairs, and that the principle of their foreign policy may be summed up in the short, but comprehensive word - peace'. Brougham (whom Morpeth would have liked to have been lord privy seal) had accepted the great seal, thereby precipitating a by-election for his Yorkshire seat.82 Johnstone emerged as the favourite, but at the nomination Strickland declared against him, forcing a brief contest that Johnstone won. Morpeth, a friend of both, felt obliged to support Johnstone after his efforts on his behalf at his own election, and accompanied him on his canvass.83 Morpeth presented a Menlogh petition praying that Catholic freeholders be placed on an equal footing with Protestants, 2 Dec., and several other Irish petitions in similar terms during the Parliament. He gave his 'entire approbation' to the regency bill, 9 Dec., denied that there was any resemblance between the conditions of labourers in the south of England and those of slaves, 13 Dec., and said that despite his support for reform, he could not back the Tory call for inquiry into the Evesham election. He presented two Yorkshire petitions for repeal of the assessed taxes and abolition of 'all useless offices' and defended Plunket's appointment as Irish lord chancellor, 20 Dec. 1830.
During discussion of the proposed increase in the army, 21 Feb., Morpeth denied accusations that he had abandoned his belief in the need for economy and said that he looked on 'this augmentation of our military force as a necessary, but temporary evil'. He presented several Yorkshire petitions for and against the numerous road and railway bills affecting the county, as well as steering through the Sheffield and Manchester railway bill. He presented 76 Yorkshire petitions against slavery, 28 Mar., and when Fowell Buxton's motion for abolition came before the House, 15 Apr., claimed to have presented in excess of 500, warning that 'if we forbear much longer to pronounce the sentence of emancipation, it will accomplish itself in the most appalling manner'. He presented a Leeds petition with 17,000 signatures for reform, 26 Feb., and several others, including one from Sheffield Political Union, that day. In a long speech welcoming the ministerial reform bill, 2 Mar., he insisted that there was 'nothing in it which need alarm the friends of order and existing establishments'. He presented multiple constituency petitions in its favour, 16 Mar., when he paid tribute to the non-resident freeholders of York for indicating their willingness to sacrifice their rights, and 21 Mar. He voted for the second reading of the bill next day. Bringing up another favourable petition, 28 Mar., he insisted that despite Yorkshire's size and diversity of interests, it had met with unanimous support, and defended the planned division of the county. When a hostile one from Doncaster was presented by Duncombe, 19 Apr., he protested that it did not represent majority opinion. He voted against Gascoyne's wrecking amendment, 19 Apr. Responding to Duncombe's assertion that ministers could not appeal with credit to the country, he declared that a dissolution would show 'spirit and wisdom' and admonished Duncombe for criticizing measures which he had shied from voting against, 21 Apr. 1831.
At the ensuing general election he offered again as a reformer. He was joined by Johnstone, Ramsden and Strickland, and, facing no opposition, they made a triumphant tour of the West Riding. At the nomination he declared that the bill would not only give the right of election to Leeds and Sheffield but would bring 'freedom of election to Newark and Knaresborough, and purity of election to Beverley and Pontefract', and that he 'fondly anticipated ... an increase of good understanding and a return of confidence between the different classes and various interests mixed up in our body politic'.85 He celebrated his unopposed return by taking a three-week sojourn in Paris. He voted for the second reading of the reintroduced reform bill, 6 July 1831, and thereafter was a consistent and regular supporter of its details, casting no known wayward vote. On presenting a Bradford petition for annual parliaments, universal suffrage and the ballot, 11 July, he said he would always 'oppose those wishes of my constituents ... which appear to me to be impolitic and dangerous'. When Milton moved an amendment for two Members to be given to the boroughs in schedule D, 4 Aug., Morpeth said that although he agreed with the principle that two representatives were better than one, and that Bradford, Halifax and Huddersfield ought to have two, he must resist the proposal because 'the bill was intended as an adjustment between the two great interests, the agricultural and the commercial'. He supported the suggestion of Farrand that the town rather than the township of Bradford should form the borough, and denied Wrangham's assertion that Huddersfield would become a nomination borough, since the property there 'is all let out on building leases, which will, I think, effectually prevent nomination'. When Goulburn proposed that Sculcoates should have representation separate from Hull, 9 Aug., Morpeth said that although he would not oppose its having its own Member, he doubted whether it had a 'sufficient separateness and distinctness' from Hull, and pointed out that Goulburn had furnished the strongest argument against his own proposition when he had said that he had never heard of the place until the bill was brought in. He dismissed Wrangham's suggestion that Yorkshire should have ten, rather than six, county Members, 10 Aug., explaining that he supported the division of the county, with two Members for each Riding 'because I consider it a matter of necessity ... although I cannot adopt such a course without some feelings of regret'. He voted twice with government on the Dublin election controversy, 23 Aug. As a member of the committee investigating corruption at the Liverpool election, he described the motion to issue a new writ as merely a question of expediency, 5 Sept., and, holding out the reform bill as the cure for abuses, said that Liverpool ought to have both its Members in the House when 'a question of great and general importance is under consideration'. On Thomas Duncombe's attempt to disfranchise Aldborough, 14 Sept., he observed that while there were other places in Yorkshire which he would prefer to return Members, notably Doncaster, as Aldborough legitimately fell within the criteria laid down for the retention of one Member, he would 'not give a vote which will have the effect of placing it in a worse situation'; he was a teller for the hostile majority. In a long and wide-ranging speech, 19 Sept., he defended the principles and objectives of the reform bill, attacked those who predicted nothing but doom, and was particularly scathing of the criticisms of Scarlett. He was a majority teller for the third reading that day, voted for its passage, 21 Sept., and the second reading of the Scottish measure, 23 Sept. He divided for Lord Ebrington's confidence motion, 10 Oct. When Althorp presented a favourable Yorkshire petition of 40-50,000 signatures, 7 Dec. 1831, Morpeth said he had attended the meeting which produced it and declared it to be 'the strongest argument that can be adduced in favour of reform'.
Throughout this Parliament he acted as the principal medium for many Yorkshire petitions expressing local grievances and played a part in the passage of a number of regional road and railway bills. He led the opposition from Yorkshire to John Campbell II's general register bill, requesting that the county, which already had its own registration, be exempted from the bill's operation, 30 June 1831. Campbell appeared to agree, but when the bill came before the House, 4 Oct., no such exemption was included. Morpeth complained, and after Campbell had conceded that the change could be made in committee if it was still the wish of Yorkshire, he said he would consult his constituents. On 7 Dec. 1831, however, Campbell refused to leave out Yorkshire, and after a number of the county's Members had declared their hostility to the bill, Morpeth informed Campbell that he would bring in a motion of exemption. He presented dozens of Yorkshire petitions against it thereafter and was appointed to the select committee on it, 22 Feb., but Campbell abandoned it, 16 July 1832. He presented a West Riding petition from the magistracy and clergy complaining of the Beer Act, 3 Aug. 1831, but although he shared many of their concerns, he cautioned against 'taking any step which may infringe upon the comforts of the working classes'. On 10 Aug. he presented a Yorkshire petition for the introduction of a system of Irish poor relief, observing that while the English system could not 'with advantage' be introduced there, 'if the people are starving, the people must be fed'. He presented and endorsed three Yorkshire petitions in similar terms, 12 Aug., contending that 'the destitute [of Ireland] ought not to be supported by perpetual drains on English charity'. He welcomed Sadler's motions for the introduction of a system of Irish poor laws, 29 Aug., and his factory regulation bill restricting child labour, 15 Dec. 1831, and was ordered to bring it in with Sadler and Sir Richard Vyvyan that day. Over the ensuing months he brought up numerous Yorkshire petitions on the issue and on the bill's second reading, 16 Mar. 1832, approved its referral to a committee, to which he was appointed. Fearing that the committee would be unable to complete its work that session, he observed that 'sufficient evidence has been given there to convince me of the necessity of the legislature agreeing to some measure of regulation', 27 June. Sadler managed to present the report, 8 Aug. 1832, but there was insufficient time for further progress before the dissolution.
He voted for the bill's third reading, 22 Mar. Before voting for Ebrington's motion for an address calling on the king to appoint only ministers who would carry it unimpaired, 10 May, he said that as a representative of the largest constituency in the kingdom, who had refused office in order to remain so, he applauded Grey's ministry, believed that Peel would be unable to carry a satisfactory measure, and feared the 'victory of more extreme options' if Grey, the only man who could 'tread the path of safety', was not permitted to carry on. He presented multiple West Riding petitions for the withholding of supplies until the bill passed, 22 May, and voted for the second reading of the Irish reform bill, 25 May, and against a Conservative amendment to increase Scottish county representation, 1 June. He presented a Leeds petition for the relief of Ireland, 23 Jan., and a Dewsbury one supporting the new plan of Irish education, 28 Mar. He voted with ministers on the Russian-Dutch loan, 26 Jan., 12, 16 July, when he spoke of their 'debt of honour', and 20 July. He was reappointed to the select committee on the East India Company, 27 Jan., presented an 'enlightened' petition from the physicians and surgeons of Leeds in favour of the anatomy bill, 2 Feb., and spoke and acted as a majority teller against Courtenay's critical motion on relations with Portugal, 9 Feb. He presented and endorsed a petition of Leeds merchants claiming compensation for losses suffered in Brazil, 16 Apr. Acknowledging his 'personal prepossession in favour of Russia', 28 June, he nevertheless criticized its intervention in Poland. He welcomed the budget, 27 July 1832, but urged the chancellor to consider the reduction of duties on bills of exchange during the recess.
In 1870 a bronze statue was erected in Phoenix Park, Dublin, paid for by public subscription. He published a number of books, including a Diary in Turkish and Greek Waters (1854) and The Second Vision of Daniel: a Paraphrase in Verse (1859), and was a frequent contributor in prose and verse to various journals. By his will, dated 23 Aug. 1864, he left annuities of £2,000 to his surviving brothers and sisters and a number of smaller ones to his nephews and nieces. The rest of his personalty was placed in trust with the Castle Howard and Naworth estates. He never married, although he had briefly courted Lady Anne De Grey, daughter of the first Earl De Grey, in 1833, and was succeeded in the family estates and earldom by his younger brother, the Rev. William George Howard (1808-89).
See D. D. Olien, Morpeth, A Victorian Public Career (1983).
1. Countess Granville Letters, i. 11.
2. Lady Lyttelton Corresp. 124.
3. Lady Holland to Son, 52.
4. Castle Howard mss J19/1/2/25.
6. Smith Letters, i. 414.
7. Countess Granville Letters, i. 25.
10. Add. 52010; Castle Howard mss.
14. Castle Howard mss J19/1/2/27.
16. Lady Holland to Son, 40.
17. Castle Howard mss J19/1/3/4.
20. Leeds Mercury, 30 July 1825.
27. Castle Howard mss, Abercromby to Carlisle, 25 Dec. 1825.
29. Ibid. Althorp to Milton, 1 Jan. 1826.
30. Castle Howard mss J19/1/3/27.
31. Ibid. J19/1/3/28, 29, 30; Leeds Mercury, 21 Jan. 1826.
36. Add. 51580, Carlisle to Lady Holland, 2 May 1826.
38. Newcastle Chron. 10 June; Tyne Mercury, 20 June 1826.
40. Ibid. Morpeth to Lady Carlisle [Jan.1827].
41. Add. 51580, Carlisle to Lady Holland, 21 July 1826; Castle Howard mss.
42. Add. 52017, Townshend to Fox, 5 Mar.; Castle Howard mss, Canning to Carlisle, 6 Mar. 1827; Broughton, Recollections, iii. 173; Lady Holland to Son, 60.
43. The Times, 8 June 1827.
45. Add. 47226, f. 90.
46. Castle Howard mss, Morpeth to Percy, 28 Aug. 1827.
47. Ibid. Lady Carlisle to Huskisson [Dec.], same to Morpeth [12 Dec. 1827].
49. Add. 48406, f. 147.
50. Castle Howard mss, Morpeth to Lady Carlisle [c. May 1828].
53. Morning Chron. 22 Nov. 1828.
55. Morning Chron. 1 Dec. 1828.
56. Castle Howard mss, Abercromby to Carlisle, 14 Dec. 1828.
57. Lady Holland to Son, 98.
60. A. Mitchell, Whigs in Opposition, 228.
61. Wentworth Woodhouse mun. G83/95, Strickland to Milton, 14 Oct. 1829.
62. Sheffield Mercury, 10 July 1830; Castle Howard mss.
63. Wentworth Woodhouse mun. G2/23.
64. Castle Howard mss J19/1/5/3.
68. Leeds Mercury, 31 July 1830.
70. Chatsworth mss 6DD/1961; Castle Howard mss.
72. Wentworth Woodhouse mun. G2/23.
75. Leeds Mercury, 7 Aug. 1830.
79. Leeds Mercury, 25 Sept. 1830.
80. Howard Sisters, 151; Mitchell, 244.
81. Howard Sisters, 165-6; Chatsworth mss, Brougham to Devonshire [18 Nov. 1830].
83. Castle Howard mss, Morpeth to Lady Carlisle, 19 Jan. 1831.
84. St. Deiniol's Lib. Glynne-Gladstone mss 197, T. to J. Gladstone, 17 Feb. 1831.
85. Leeds Mercury, 7 May 1831.
86. Add. 51583, 10 Mar. 1832.
87. Le Marchant, Althorp, 447.
88. Holland House Diaries, 357.
89. Leeds Mercury, 15 Dec. 1837.
90. Life of Campbell, ii. 210.
91. See R. Brent, Liberal Anglican Politics, passim; B. Hilton, 'Whiggery, Religion and Social Reform: The Case of Lord Morpeth', HJ, xxxvii (1994), 829-59.
92. H. Martineau, Biog. Sketches, 369.
93. Baring Jnls. ii. 203.


Earlier today Dillon Francis released the official music video trailer for his hit single Without You feat. T.E.E.D. (Totally Enormous Extinct Dinosaurs). The video is set to premiere on MTV on September 16th and will be officially released on September 17th!
Next ArticleArmin Van Buuren: "Everything's About The Drop"


Relying exclusively on government documents, statements from the best witnesses available, and the words from the mouths of the killers themselves, Dark Legacy produces a thoroughly substantiated criminal indictment of George Herbert Walker Bush, establishing beyond a reasonable doubt his guilt as a supervisor in the conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy.
But this film really got into some stuff I never heard.
The CIA can truly get away with murder - in plain sight in the middle of the day.
Thank you Stand Up...Watching it now.
Already passed it on to others as well.


text:
Boclips for Publishers
What curriculum are the clips aligned to?
Video clips have been tagged to all topics in the UK curriculum and a version of the USA Common Core. We can ingest any curriculum onto the Boclips platform and semantically match videos to topic descriptions and learning outcomes. Please contact us if you would like to find out more about uploading your own curriculum.
Boclips offers single clip sales on a PAYG basis and yearly subscriptions with volume-driven discounts. To request more information about a subscription model, contact us.
What license do I get with my subscription?
You will get an education license only. You will also need to sign our license agreement. Licenses can be different in geographical coverage or duration. Our standard license is worldwide for 5 years.
What are your licensing terms and conditions?
When you license our footage, you will be asked to sign a license agreement. Please contact us for a copy of our license agreement.
What is stock footage, news, instructional clips, or TV clips?
Stock footage is generally between seven seconds and thirty seconds long, either mute or with natural sound. It is ideal for bespoke content creation.
News footage comes from a news bulletin or documentary and is generally voiced. It offers real-life and up-to-date context for learning.
Instructional clips are specialized videos pedagogically tailored to learning outcomes. They contain insights from experts and educators.
TV clips are bitesize branded programming usually cut from longer broadcast documentaries.
What is "education use"?
Educational Use refers to Boclips' right to license the Licensed Material to an Educational Publisher so the Educational Publisher may use the Licensed Material in a Publication (i.e.: a digital textbook, DVD, a closed network e.g. password-protected website, intranet and Learning Management System) and may exploit this Publication by selling the Publication to schools, colleges, universities and at home learning ("End User"). End User shall have the right to stream or otherwise access the Licensed Material as it is incorporated in the Publication i.e. on DVD), but may not download, edit, alter or distribute the Licensed Material in any way without the content owner's express written consent. Licenses are provided on a non-exclusive basis. Promotional usage is not included.
Do I still need to clear footage?
All the rights for our footage are clearly labelled with each clip. All our footage is rights-ready and doesn't require any additional clearances.
Can I use the footage for promotional usages?
Our videos cannot be used to promote or advertise your product in any way.
Do you have a research service?
We're always here to help. If you can't find the clip you're looking for please contact us and our research team will provide some suggestions.
How often is your content updated?
We have daily API feeds from some content partners and we are constantly adding new collections and content partners to our library, but if you can't find what you're looking for, please contact us.
Cookies are very small text files that are stored on your computer when you visit some websites. We use cookies to help identify your computer so we can tailor your user experience, track folder contents and remember where you are in the order process. You can disable any cookies already stored on your computer, but these may stop our website from functioning properly. The following is strictly necessary in the operation of our website.
Remember what is in your folder.
Remember where you are in the order process.
Remember that you are logged in and that your session is secure. You need to be logged in to complete an order.
The following are not strictly necessary but are required to provide you with the best user experience and also to tell us which pages you find most interesting (anonymously).
Track the pages you visit via Google Analytics Targeting Cookies.
This website will not:
Boclips for Teachers
As Boclips is now working directly with schools and districts to serve teachers, we no longer offers individual accounts. Contact us to schedule a demo to see how Boclips can help teachers at your school improve learning and engagement with our video platform.
I work with schools/students, but I'm not a teacher. Can I use Boclips for Teachers?
Yes. We recognize that there are many professionals who work within education but they may not be employed by a school. As long as you use the videos in an educational setting, with students or teachers, you are able to use the platform. Talk to your school administrator and schedule a demo with us to learn more.
If you would like to use any of the videos in a commercial context, as part of an online course or as marketing/advertisement for your services, for example, you will require a license to use the video. We can take care of that for you. Visit Boclips for Publishers to learn more.
Can I download videos or save them offline?
Boclips for Teachers is a video streaming service only at this time and we do not offer the ability to download videos.
What subjects do you cover?
Our goal is to provide deep curriculum coverage in all subjects across global education systems. Right now we have thousands of videos that give us strong coverage and a dedicated content team looking for the best new videos every day. You can see some sample collections for our subjects here.
We also include additional video content on the platform that sits outside of the curriculum but may still have educational value. This includes historical archive footage, news footage, recorded speeches, and professional development videos.
What languages do you cover?
At this time, the majority of our videos are in English although we do have a limited content selection in Spanish, French, Arabic, and Mandarin.
Can I add a quiz, trim, or edit the videos to make them more interactive for my class?
At this time we're working hard to create an amazing video library of content that covers every subject and is educational, engaging and classroom appropriate. This has left us with little time to add additional functionality, but this is something we plan to explore in the near future.
How do I embed a video?
At present, it's not possible to embed Boclips for Teachers videos. But don't forget that you can copy the link and share it with students in your favorite Learning Management System or online class environment.
Where do your videos come from? Do you make the videos yourselves?
One of our goals is to make the world's best educational video content easy for teachers to find and access. We don't produce any content ourselves and instead work with globally recognized content partners to bring their videos to you. We work with more than 160+ content producers and you can find out who these are here.
What age/level/phase of education are the videos suitable for?
Our videos cover early childhood, K12, and higher education as well as professional development and adult education.
The video I want to use is not available?
On Boclips for Teachers, you can find thousands of educational videos including specialist instructional videos, news reports, and historical archive footage.
As a global company, we work with over 160 content partners. Each of these content partners has specific agreements with us and not all content is available globally at present.
Please drop us a note at support@boclips.com and let us know which content provider you would like to have access to in your country.
Can I upload my teacher created videos to Boclips?
At present, we only host videos from our curated content providers. If there is content you are looking for that you can't find, please get in touch via the live chat or at support@boclips.com.
I'd like to set up student accounts on Boclips.
Boclips for Teachers is designed so that educators can easily find and share videos without having to create individual accounts for each student.
All that students need to view a video or playlist is a link from the teacher and an access code, then they can watch any time, anywhere.
How can I suggest a new feature for Boclips?
Teacher feedback is very valuable and drives development here at Boclips. If you have a suggestion, please get in touch via the live chat or at support@boclips.com.
How can I suggest new content for Boclips?
Can't quite find what you're looking for, or do you know of an amazing producer of educational videos that you'd love to see on Boclips?
Please get in touch via the live chat or at support@boclips.com.
Pricing for Publishers
Pricing for Teachers
US: 101 Arch Street, 8th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts, 02110, United States of America
UK: Scott House, Waterloo Station London SE1 7LY United Kingdom
+44 (0)20-7183-4257
Copyright © 2020 Knowledge Motion, Inc.


text:
Q: Unable to change Hotmail password, but can log in I logged into my hotmail account and went to change the password. However every time I try, it tells me "password invalid" for my existing password (which works). I think this is because it is an old account and the current password does not match their current criteria of "> 8 chars, upper lower case and numbers". I think this is why I cannot proceed on this screen (some regex is stopping me). Other accounts can have their passwords changed just fine.
Any thoughts as to how I can resolve this?

A: I would suggest you to contact microsoft over their support-website.
You may have to show some informations, that you are the owner of that account.


text:
Q: clear all from Simulink S-function I am trying to call clear all from a simulink Level 1 S-function. I've take a look over  doc mexCallMATLAB but I do not know how to use it. I've wanted to clear the work space after my function is called.

A: Are you sure that you're writing a level-1 S-Function?  If you are, then you shouldn't.  These days both m-code and c-code S-Functions should all be written as level-2.
You haven't specifically indicated whether you are writing in m-code or c-code, but since you've mentioned mexCallMATLAB it's assumed that you are using c-code, in which case you should use
mexEvalString("clear('all');");

If you're using m-code, then just use
evalin('base','clear all');


text:
Intentional balloon releases banned in Maryland as of October 1
Health, Sci-Tech
Posted on October 1, 2021 October 1, 2021 by Chris Montcalmo
BALTIMORE, MD—The Maryland Department of the Environment and Maryland Department of Natural Resources on Friday reminded Maryland residents that a new state law prohibiting intentional balloon releases goes into effect on October 1st.
The new Maryland law bans the releasing of balloons that, upon landing, create litter and threaten the health and safety of animals on the land in the water, effective October 1. MDE is responsible for enforcing the law, and DNR is joining in raising public awareness through participation in a regional campaign funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
"In Maryland it's now illegal to be a plastic balloon litterbug and that's good news for our land, water, and wildlife," said Maryland Department of the Environment Secretary Ben Grumbles. "With the rising tide of plastic pollution, this new law is an important and timely step for the health of our Chesapeake Bay, coast, and ocean."
"Balloons can be a great way to commemorate a special occasion, but when they are intentionally released into the air, they can harm and kill livestock and wildlife. They can also cause electric outages when caught in power lines," Maryland Department of Natural Resources Secretary Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio said. "The key is to find other ways to celebrate or honor a loved one or if you have balloons, be sure to 'pop them and drop them' in the trash rather than releasing them into the air on purpose."
The law bans people aged 13 or older from intentionally releasing a balloon or organizing or participating in a mass release of 10 or more balloons. This legislation follows similar bills in other states, including neighboring Virginia and Delaware, and certain municipalities within Maryland.
Biannual surveys of mid-Atlantic beaches consistently find balloons and related debris such as ribbons. These items can be mistaken by wildlife or even domestic animals as food, or animals can become entangled.
The law does not apply to a balloon that is released for meteorological or scientific purposes on behalf of a state or federal agency or in accordance with a contract with an agency, or by an institution of higher education conducting research. It also does not apply to: a balloon that is attached to a radio tracking device and released by a person who holds an amateur operator license issued by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission; a hot air balloon that is recovered after launch; or the negligent or unintentional release of a balloon.
A person who violates the law may be subject to penalties of up to $100 per violation, community service, or watching a video about environmental pollution. MDE is charged with enforcing the law, but may delegate enforcement to local governments.
DNR is currently involved in a regional campaign, funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Marine Debris Program, aimed at reducing intentional balloon releases. Part of this campaign offers litter-free alternatives to releasing balloons for various occasions. For celebrations, blowing up balloons or using sparklers create a festive atmosphere, while, for memorials, installing a bench or planting trees or wildflowers offer long lasting tributes to loved ones. Other alternatives to balloon releases include the release of bubbles, flying kites, or tossing eco-friendly "confetti" like bird seed, flower petals or dried leaves.
MDE is reaching out to the public and the regulated community, including the balloon distribution industry, event planners, and event venues, to advise them of the new requirements to ensure compliance and reduce the risk of unintentional violations
Balloon releases prohibited under the law can be reported to MDE by telephone at 410-537-3315 or by email ([email protected]).
Click to access Ch_610_hb0391E.pdf
Ben GrumblesChesapeake BayDepartment of Natural ResourcesFCCFederal Communications CommissionJeannie Haddaway-RiccioLawsMarine Debris ProgramMarine Debris Work GroupMaryland Department of Natural ResourcesMaryland Department of the EnvironmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNOAA
Second annual Walktober begins in Maryland
Olszewski announces legislation to expand Baltimore County's humane approach for stray, feral cats
Three seriously injured after car crashes into utility pole, house on Belair Road [PHOTOS]
Belair Road shut down after car crashes into house in Perry Hall
Baltimore man claims $50,000 Powerball prize after buying winning ticket in Nottingham
Crews responding to fire alarm at White Marsh hotel
Councilman Marks: Floor & Decor to fill vacant K-Mart space at North Plaza Shopping Center


A year later, support in Trump counties craters as voters admit America is "worse off"
Counties that flipped for Trump are abandoning him as his presidency flails and the Russia investigation tightens around him.
One year after flipping from Democrat to Republican and supporting Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, voters in those counties across America have buyers remorse and think America is now "worse off" than when Barack Obama was president.
Just 32 percent of voters in flipped counties "believe the country is better off now than it was before Trump became president," according to a new NBC/WSJ poll. A plurality, 41 percent, says the country is "worse off" one year later.
The poll sampled residents in more than 400 counties that either flipped from voting Democratic in the 2012 presidential election to Republican last year, or saw a significant surge for Trump last year.
The counties in Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, are generally "whiter, more rural, less educated and older than the nation as a whole," according to NBC.
In order words, they represent Trump's base, and they're not impressed with his presidency.
Trump received especially bad marks among "Trump county" voters for helping to unite the country (60 percent are dissatisfied) and improving the U.S. health care system (59 percent dissatisfied).
The findings are just the latest in a mountain of polling data released in the last week that suggest the Trump presidency is in a slow-motion collapse, and that the revelations of special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation have gravely damaged Trump.
His overall approval rating continues to hit new lows in poll after poll (Fox News, NBC/WSJ, ABC News, CNN), as more and more independent voters flee Trump. According to the recent ABC poll, Trump's approval rating dropped to 37 percent, the lowest of any president at this point in office since 1946.
The Russia investigation that continues to envelope the White House appears to driving Trump's falling fortunes. More Americans are paying attention to the story and think it's morphing into a very big deal. In fact, 64 percent believe the Russia scandal is "a serious matter that should be fully investigated," according to a recent CNN poll.
Trump's strategy in recent weeks, to distract from the Russia scandal by trying to criminalize Hillary Clinton, appears to be a colossal flop, as more and more Americans tell pollsters that Trump is a failure, and the country's worse off for having him in the White House.


Odoo is a business suite of enterprise management applications. Used by many companies across the world of all sizes due it's opensource architecture and highly customizable modules that fits into every category of business. Odoo implementation is absolutely Free and there are no license costs compared to other proprietary ERP softwares. Odoo modules include billing, accounting, manufacturing, purchasing, warehouse management, project management, finance, CRM, POS, ecommerce CMS and over 100 others that support various business processes across the enterprise.
An ERP system helps to integrates all the departments of organization like finance, human resources and warehouse management into a single, integrated software program that runs off a single database so that the various departments can more easily share information and collaborate. An Open source ERP Odoo can be the best option to have for your organization.


text:
Home / Ensemble: Iris Chamber Orchestra / American Classics - Zwilich: Violin Concerto, Rituals
American Classics - Zwilich: Violin Concerto, Rituals
Ellen Taaffe Zwilich's 1998 Violin Concerto is a marvelous work that communicates immediately to the heart, yet at the same time stimulates the intellect. It begins with an excited shimmer in the orchestra's high register, introducing the violin's arching, wide-interval theme. The serene, ecstatic character of the violin writing is reminiscent of Szymanowski, though throughout the score there also are hints of Prokofiev and Bartók. That said, this is undeniably Zwilich's music, and the fact that this work is a product of our neo-romantic, post-minimalist era is evident in the two shattering orchestral crescendos that frame the first movement. The second movement is based on Bach's Chaconne in D minor, here expanded and augmented by modern harmonies and jazzy ornamentations. Jazz also figures strongly in the finale where, like Bernstein before her, Zwilich seamlessly incorporates its stylistic elements into the orchestral fabric. None of this poses any problem for Pamela Frank, who gives a masterful and passionate performance of the entire work, handsomely accompanied by Michael Stern and the Saarbrücken Radio Symphony Orchestra.
Rituals (2002) is a celebration of percussion as used in various world cultures, and is so different a work from the violin concerto that it hardly sounds from the pen of the same composer. Nevertheless, it's a total delight, from the opening Invocations, with its stunning pageantry of bells, gongs, and cymbals, to the dancing Ambulation, to the electrifying Contests, where groups of percussionists engage in a thrilling musical combat, set against an orchestral backdrop of increasingly alarming freight-train chords. Under Michael Stern's leadership, NEXUS/IRIS Chamber Orchestra members play magnificently as they build to a frenzied, exhilarating conclusion. Naxos' recording reproduces all of this with satisfying presence and impact, although the Concerto, which was taped live for broadcast, has noticeably less warmth and depth. The bottom line: This is one highly enjoyable disc, enthusiastically recommended!
--Victor Carr Jr, ClassicsToday.com
Label: Naxos
Composer: Ellen Taaffe Zwilich
Conductor: Michael Stern
Orchestra/Ensemble: Iris Chamber Orchestra, Nexus (Ensemble), Saarbrücken Radio Symphony Orchestra
Performer: Pamela Frank
Concerto for Violin
Ensemble: Saarbrücken Radio Symphony Orchestra
Performer: Pamela Frank (Violin)
Ensemble: Iris Chamber Orchestra, Nexus (Ensemble)


My Little Prince collection includes a variety of decorations that can be used for prince themed baby showers and birthday parties. Almost all of my items can be customized. If your shade of baby isn't pictured, email me with your preferred shade and I will make it for you. Contact me with all your custom requests!


text:
NEW Book: A Formative Decade: Ireland in the 1920s
Date: March 5, 2015Author: Dr Ciara Meehan 0 Comments
The new book that I co-edited was — rather fittingly, given that it's world book day — published by Irish Academic Press today. Co-edited with Mel Farrell (Maynooth University) and Jason Knirck (Central Washington University), it brings together established and upcoming scholars to explore Ireland in the 1920s.
In the aftermath of the Great War, Europe's empires crumbled and a patchwork of new nation states emerged across the continent. As the map of Europe was being redrawn after 1918, Ireland too stood on the threshold of great change. The 1920s were a formative decade for Ireland politically and economically, both north and south of the border, but the decade is all too often dismissed as one of stagnation. In contrast, the contributors to this timely collection provide a refreshingly alternative view of such events as the Shannon hydro-electric scheme, and the workings of the Church of Ireland and of the Senate – all serving to reignite the debate about how modern Ireland was fashioned and how statehood collided with national identities and allegiances. The relationship between policy and the emerging state is also explored in chapters focusing on Free State election posters, loyalty and treason, the 1923 Land Act, the Irish Farmers' Party and parliamentary democracy. Other dynamic contributions look at how economic policy shaped the lives of ordinary Irish citizens and continues to have an impact today, long after Ireland won its struggle for independence.
Purchase for €22.45 (PB) or €49.95 (HB) from Irish Academic Press.
Mel Farrell, Jason Knirck and Ciara Meehan ……………………………………………… 1
Politics Pictorialised: Free State Election Posters
Ciara Meehan ………………………………………………………………………………. 12
Cumann na nGaedheal: A New 'National Party'?
Mel Farrell……………………………………………………………………………………36
A Unique Experiment in Idealism: The Irish Senate 1922–28
Elaine A. Byrne……………………………………………………………………………..59
'Harnessed in the Service of the Nation': Party Politics and the Promotion of the Shannon Hydroelectric Scheme 1924–32
McKayla Sutton ……………………………………………………………………………. 86
Redefining Allegiance: Loyalty, Treason, and the Foundation of
the Irish Free State 1922–32
Justin Dolan Stover………………………………………………………………………108
The 1923 Land Act: Some New Perspectives
Terence Dooley and Tony McCarthy ………………………………………………… 132
Reframing the Republic: Republican Socioeconomic Thought and the Road to Fianna Fáil 1923–26
Timothy M. O'Neil………………………………………………………………………. 157
'A Regime of Squandermania': The Irish Farmers' Party, Agriculture and Democracy, 1922–27
Jason Knirck………………………………………………………………………………..177
'A Cold House for Catholics'? The consolidation of the Northern
Ireland State in the 1920s
Sarah Campbell……………………………………………………………………………197
'Ireland's destiny is in the making': The Impact of the Centenary Celebrations of 1929 and 1932 on the Religious Atmosphere in Ireland
Miriam Moffitt …………………………………………………………………………… 225
1920s IrelandCumann na nGaedheal
Previous Previous post: Crowd-Funding as an Alternative to Research Grants: Some Reflections
Next Next post: A Fine Gael – Fianna Fáil Coalition?