Utah State may consider Eastern Washington's Baldwin

Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.

Source: http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page=cfoot2/news/newstest.aspx?id=4550711

presidents george washington russell westbrook horsetail falls ice t downton abbey new york knicks

Girl Talk: Motherhood & The Tragedy At Sandy Hook Elementary

I am not a mother. This fact has kept me from expressing my heartbreak over the shootings in Sandy Hook. In the aftermath of this horrifying event, I?ve watched countless friends ? mothers, all of them ? post wrenching status updates on Facebook. I?ve read them, feeling oddly ashamed inside. These moms talked of compassion for those poor little children, of the need to step up to the plate as adults, of the fear they have for the future, of roiling anger toward the government, and of utter helplessness. They posted pictures of the beautiful young faces lost to this insane tragedy. They urged others to take a stand, and to hold their own children close.

The same thoughts streamed through my head. Tears welled in my eyes, too. I texted my siblings and begged them to hug and kiss their little ones for me.

But something was silencing the part of me that wanted to join these moms in their outrage. I felt it wasn?t my place. How could I know, after all, what kind of fear these parents were expressing? How could I possibly relate to their protective instincts? I am not a mother.

But I desperately want to be one. I?m 36 years old. My husband and I met 14 years ago, and our route to marriage was a circuitous one. Once we got to that state, though, just over two years ago, we could not wait to start a family. We had both been ready for a long time. We were practically crib shopping. The months went by, and nothing happened. We soon realized that we were not going to be instant parents, just because we wanted to be. It was ? and still is ? a tough pill to swallow. Our struggles with infertility have taken the usual tolls: stress, jealousy, fear, anxiety. Every month that passes with our dream unfulfilled, we try to keep a positive attitude as female friends? bellies grow and we slowly get ever so slightly older.

My husband has the beautiful ability to see our future, and it includes children and a happy home. I don?t have quite the same steady view. Sometimes I can?t picture our children at all. Those are the worst moments. And the scariest. But other days I can see them clearly. I see us going to the library, eating pancakes, and playing outside together. If I let myself, I can believe the truth, which is that I identify as a mom. My body is aching to carry a child, to nourish her and love her as she grows into who she is going to be. I dream of putting her in cozy outfits and tickling her tiny toes. I imagine reading Beatrix Potter to her and letting her turn the pages.

I want these dreams to come true with every fiber of my being, but I have to wait.

So in the meantime I sweep my nephews into my arms and cover their sweet heads with an endless supply of kisses. I pick up my nieces and hug them with arms that don?t want to let go. I marvel at their perfect skin and their effortless ability to live in the moment. I?m struck by their innocence, by the innocence of every child in this world. They are sacred, strong, and vulnerable.

The murders in Newtown, CT, shook me to my core. I wanted to tell someone, or everyone, that I was devastated and couldn?t bear to watch the news. But what do I know about what it feels like to have a child? What could I offer to parents who have lost theirs in such an epically horrific way?

I felt like I should just be quiet, and pray for the moms and dads who have been forced to walk that cruel and unnatural path.

I am not a mother. But I will be, someday, and I want to be part of this dialogue. How could we let something like this happen? What kind of world do we live in, when little children are the victims of senseless laws and overlooked illness? I want to help. And yet I feel helpless. I can?t hold a child of my own, and I can?t do anything to bring back those whose lives have been taken.

So I whisper to my baby who hasn?t arrived. I tell her she is important. She is beautiful just as she is. She is a good person, and she will always be loved. I tell her I?ll try to protect her. These are the only things a mother can do.

Source: http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-12-21/girl-talk-motherhood-the-tragedy-at-sandy-hook-elementary/

Paige Butcher David Petraeus Petraeus Mia Love wall street journal us map Electoral Map

Facebook to roll out video ads by summer 2013

Facebook is slated to introduce video advertisements in its users? news feeds during the first half of next year, meaning we should see them by summer. This information comes from a report by Ad Age, which says that this is the latest in the social network?s attempts to score ?TV dollars? by drawing in industry advertisers. The executives responsible for providing the information don?t know all the details, they say, but what they do know gives us a decent peek into what?s being discussed behind Facebook?s doors.

Prepare your collective groan: the video ads are said to be autoplay, meaning you?ll be forced to deal with videos that start up automatically when you get on Facebook, causing you to pause your activities while you hunt down the noisy offenses and stop them. That is, unless they elect not to have the audio portion of the advertisement automatically kick on, which one of the two sources states is possible. The video advertisements are said to expand on the desktop variety of Facebook, but how they will be presented on mobile devices is unknown.

Any given advertiser will be able to display his or her video ad to a Facebook user up to three times per day regardless of what device is used to access Facebook. So, for example, if a single user accesses the social network from a smartphone, a tablet, and a computer all in the same say, they will not be presented with the advertisement three times per device, but rather three times total across all devices.

Little else beyond speculation and questions is known about the alleged video advertisements Facebook has planned. Note that the information comes from two unnamed executives who are said to be industry executives who have been ?briefed on the company?s plans over the past few weeks,? so take the information with a grain of salt. For now at least, Facebook has declined comment.

[via Ad Age]

Source: http://feeds.slashgear.com/~r/slashgear/~3/4k9kuJzr7lQ/

joe namath stefon diggs nazi ss naomi watts andrej pejic steve jobs fbi safehouse

Movie review: This is 40 | canada.com

This is 40

Three stars out of five

Starring: Paul Rudd, Leslie Mann, Jason Segel

Directed by: Judd Apatow

Running time: 133 minutes

Parental advisory: coarse and sexual language, sexually suggestive scenes

If you don?t remember Knocked Up, don?t feel bad. It wasn?t designed to be memorable. It was designed as laugh-friendly entertainment with a hint of earnest soul, and it succeeded to the tune of $150 million in box-office receipts.

It also cemented Judd Apatow?s place in Hollywood?s sidewalk of dreams as a smarter, more sophisticated brand of Adam Sandler because he could conjure humour without gratuitous amounts of cleavage, moronic boy behaviour or poopy pants.

But note the qualifier. He still employs these lowbrow devices; he just refrains from gratuitous quantities of this icky shtick because he?s able to fortify his formula with bona fide emotional notes.

In short, he?s a pretty good writer who understands the wobbles and wiggles of the human condition, which no doubt explains why the script for This is 40 is being promoted by the studio as an Oscar contender for best original screenplay.

Whether or not he deserves the prize is moot because any comedy that features its lead actor sitting on a toilet playing solo Scrabble on his iPad is not a front-runner. The same could be said for any comedy that employs audible flatulence, and yet, for all its infantile detail, This is 40 strikes a decidedly grown-up note.

The key is the central couple: Pete (Paul Rudd) and Debbie (Leslie Mann).

First seen in Knocked Up as the established couple with kids, Pete and Debbie were created as a dramatic and comic foil to Seth Rogen and Katherine Heigl. They were the ones who had already overcome the fading honeymoon, the bowel zone and the vomit-covered clothes of child rearing to create a true relationship and a lasting marriage.

As touchstones for the entire domestic experience, they are undeniably lovable and familiar because they look, talk, dress and behave a lot like the rest of us. And it?s a warm, fuzzy feeling to look at the big screen and feel a reality within reach, but all that recognition raises a new problem: ?Who cares??

The mundane, the banal and the everyday irritations of daily life are not the stuff of Hollywood feature films. As a tradition based in fantasy and a delusional understanding of social access, Hollywood has a very hard time with ?real people? stories and tends to leave such miniatures to the independent film world.

This is 40 offers some good insights into why Hollywood has such a hard time with the ordinary, and it comes down to ego. Like our central male hero Pete, Hollywood believes it is destined to make great, grand and meaningful works of commercial art. But like Pete, and like this movie as a whole, changing circumstance spurs truth ? and a slight deflation of self-esteem.

The cautionary plot is perfectly straightforward. Pete created a record label out of his own pocket because he?s a believer in old-fashioned talent: One of the first people he signed is an old folky who used to be a real presence, but has since faded into oblivion as a solo artist.

Pete is now bleeding cash and facing bankruptcy, but he?s too chicken to tell his lovely wife what?s really happening to their precarious finances. Meanwhile, Debbie is keeping a secret of her own: She?s pregnant.

She?s afraid to let Pete know about the new addition to the family because she knows they?re already stretched to the financial limit, and half the movie?s plot is generated through omission. Will she tell Pete, or won?t she?

There?s not all that much suspense behind this plot line, mostly because we trust Pete and Debbie?s loyalty to one another. They?re grown-ups, not pubescent sexpots. So even when the caked eyelashes of infidelity flutter, we?re pretty sure they?re solid enough to elude the tendrils of temptation.

If we didn?t, we probably wouldn?t like them as much as we do because we?d feel the edge of unpredictability and looming betrayal. We never get there, which is good for the overall empathy score, but essentially means we?re watching one very long sketch steeped in observational comedy.

Watch poor Pete with his legs in the air and a mirror up his derriere as he discovers he has a hemorrhoid. Watch poor Debbie hold her nose as she enters the bathroom after Pete?s morning toilette. Watch the whole family clash over musical taste, with Dad forever defining rock ?n? roll greatness while everyone else?s eyes glaze over.

It?s cute, but it?s fluff. Moreover, it?s fluff steeped in lowest common denominator sensibility.

There is nothing artful about Apatow?s script. It?s frequently crass and feels irritatingly over-thought as it tries to balance the challenges of marriage with the abstract beauty of being alive and in a loving, secure relationship.

The only redeeming feature is the film?s tender, human heart ? but even that feels exploited in Apatow?s awkward hands as he tries to explain his whole generation through two highly specific examples.

Pete and Debbie are believable as people, but they aren?t the Everyman. They are affluent and entitled and represent a narrow slice of America?s demographic pie. If Mann and Rudd weren?t so warm and comically adept, we could easily reject them as chronically self-absorbed whiners.

Luckily, they hold up as they reluctantly enter middle age because they find the small, subtle moments that mirror our own insecurities and unspoken phobias.

Apatow?s film seems to be going for something larger and more meaningful, stretching a decent comedy script into a meandering and frequently dreary two-hour drama with comic flourishes. In short, he wanted to grow up, but This is 40 proves Apatow?s appetite for fart humour is practically ageless.

CAPSULE REVIEW: This is 40 ? Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann reprise their roles from Knocked Up in this dramatic comedy that attempts to take the mickey out of middle age. While the spirit of the film is genuine and heartfelt, Apatow?s lowbrow humour and love of fart jokes leaves the script a little soggy. Still, the movie has heart ? and enough giddy moments to transcend the self-indulgent, two-hour running time. Rating: Three stars out of five. ? Katherine Monk

Source: http://o.canada.com/2012/12/19/embargoed-to-dec-19-movie-review-this-is-40/

albert nobbs a star is born oscar nominees oscar nominations 2012 kombucha tea separation of church and state dale earnhardt

Sue the Gun Makers, and the Sellers, Too

A Glock pistol similiar to the one used by Adam Lanza. The gun manufacturer faced a lawsuit in 2003 until Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

Photo illustration by Joe Raedle/Getty Images.

The horror of Newtown has finally snapped us out of our delusional reverie about guns. Swiftly, a barrage of promising proposals have been thrown on the table: Close the gun-show loophole, which allows guns to be sold to anyone without the simple safeguard of a background check. Ban assault weapons. Ban or control the sale of large ammunition clips. Increase funding for mental health awareness, services, and surveillance.

Like any major public health problem, stemming gun violence will require multiple, overlapping strategies. Let me offer another one, overlooked until now, but potentially a dynamo: Repeal the little-known, but pernicious, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. In other words, reopen the door to lawsuits against gun sellers for wrongful conduct in the design and marketing of their weapons. ?

In 2005, at a high point of the NRA?s control of the national agenda on guns, Congress passed this breathtakingly broad and virtually unprecedented law. Overriding states? power to regulate harmful conduct within their borders, the PLCAA eliminated most tort claims anyone might bring against the manufacturers and other sellers of guns, and did so for past and well as future misconduct.

Until that point, with my colleague Jean Eggen at Widener University School of Law, I?d been developing an argument that, under certain limited conditions, people injured by gun violence, and cities bearing the financial cost of that violence, should be able to sue sellers. David Kairys at Temple Law School was making similar arguments. And courts had started to see things our way.

In one prominent California case in 2003, Ileto v. Glock Inc., an appellate court allowed a negligence claim against several gun manufacturers, distributors, and dealers. The claim was that they?d been part of the chain of gun distribution that led to the deaths of a postal worker and injuries to three young kids in a 1999 shooting spree. The killer was carrying at least seven firearms, all bought illegally. The suit argued that Glock and the other defendants intentionally placed into the market more firearms than could reasonably be sold legally, and that these strategies created a substantial risk that the guns would fall into the hands of criminals. But then the PLCAA came into effect, and the judge had no choice but to throw the case out.

Around the same time in the late 1990s, a bunch of cities?including Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, and Gary, Ind.?hit hard by the human and financial cost of gun violence, brought suits against prominent gun manufacturers, including Smith & Wesson, Baretta U.S.A., and Glock. The suits generally alleged that the defendants? illegal marketing and misleading advertising of their guns had caused the city to spend substantial money on crime fighting, depleting resources. The Chicago case was filed after a sting operation revealed that many retailers were engaging in all manner of illegal sales, multiplying the risk of deadly outcomes.

When a state or city can convince a court that an activity threatens the safety of its citizens, it can require the nuisance-causer, like a toxic waste dumper, to stop, and to pay for the cost of clean-up. The cities argued that the gun sellers were creating a nuisance. And some of these lawsuits?notably, those brought by Gary and Cincinnati?successfully advanced through the courts. But the PLCAA stopped them cold, too.

To be fair, these cases faced difficulties before the PLCAA. Suits like Ileto, based on bad marketing and advertising practices, are controversial, in part because it?s hard to prove that the marketing led to a particular injury. And while the cities? claims show the power of public nuisance theory, they also suggested that cities could effectively regulate guns right out of the market.

But the law evolves by testing theories, discarding some and ultimately embracing others. And until the NRA got Congress to choke off these suits, no industry got a free pass on the whole litigation process. Even with vaccines?where untrameled access clearly benefits the public?drug manufacturers got only a partial shield: If you can show you?re injured by a vaccine, you win compensation from a federal fund (paid for by a small excise tax on each dose of vaccine). People who are injured or killed by guns, or cities saddled with the financial costs that gun violence causes, by contrast, are without recourse.

We should care about preserving the right to sue not only for those who are injured or killed, but because litigation is a useful supplement to regulation. Especially for guns, given that regulation is anemic in the first place. Often, defendants will change their behavior?self-regulate, in other words?rather than risk liability. ?Faced with the public nuisance suits, Smith & Wesson agreed to limit retail customers to no more than one gun within a two-week period and threatened dealers with cancellation of their contracts if "a disproportionate number" of crimes were committed with guns they sold. S&W also began installing safely locks on its weapons. That last bit is particularly important because the Consumer Product Safety Commission is forbidden from regulating firearms.

Source: http://feeds.slate.com/click.phdo?i=90e9bf28adc8654f8030c1d5e85503fd

billy crystal oscars 2012 angelina jolie oscars chardon high school christopher plummer viola davis school shooting in ohio shooting at chardon high school

Thank Goodness for the WSJ iPad Edition | AllFinancialMatters

Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.

Source: http://allfinancialmatters.com/2012/12/19/thank-goodness-for-the-wsj-ipad-edition/

mark sanchez scarlett johansson instagram amber alert bruno mars Samantha Steele Richard Engel

??? ??? ? AutoCAD 3D - 35 ????? - ????? ???????????? ...

???? ??????? ??????? ?????!
?????????? ?????? ? ??????? ???????????? ??? ??? ? AutoCAD 3D. ?????? 35 ????? , ? ???? ?? ?????? ????? ???????,???? ????? 23 ??????, ???? ??? ????? ??????? ??? ?????????? ??? ?????????? ? ? IPS. ?????????? ???, ??? ??? ???????, ? AutoCAD ?? ??????? ???? ?????????? ???????, ?.?. ?????? ? ?????? ?????????????? ??????? ???????????. ????? ????????? ? ?????? ????? ?????? ?? ????, ? ??????????? ???????? ????? ????? ?????? ??????? ??????-???? ????????.
??????? ???????!

????????? ?????????????? bvxcz88: ?????, 11:01

Source: http://forums.ferra.ru/index.php?showtopic=53576

dr. seuss dr seuss the temptations rush limbaugh sandra fluke green book some like it hot whale shark