text:
2014 Academy of Country Music Award Nominees Revealed
This morning the Academy of Country Music released all the nominees for this year's ACMs with Miranda Lambert and Tim McGraw leading the pack with a total of seven nominations each. Keith Urban follows Lambert and McGraw with six nominations. Lee Brice,Taylor Swift, Blake Shelton and recent Grammy winner Kacey Musgraves come in with five nominations a piece.
The full list of nominees in each category can be seen here.
Male Vocalist of the Year
Female Vocalist of the Year
Vocal Duo of the Year
Dan + Shay
Album of the Year [Awarded to Artist(s)/Producer(s)/Record Company–Label(s)]
Based On A True Story… – Blake Shelton
Producer: Scott Hendricks
Record Label: Warner Bros. Records
Crash My Party – Luke Bryan
Producer: Jeff Stevens
Record Label: Capitol Records Nashville
Here's To The Good Times – Florida Georgia Line
Producer: Joey Moi
Record Label: Republic Nashville
Same Trailer Different Park – Kacey Musgraves
Producers: Luke Laird, Shane McAnally, Kacey Musgraves
Record Label: Mercury Records
Two Lanes Of Freedom – Tim McGraw
Producers: Byron Gallimore, Tim McGraw
Record Label: Big Machine Records
Single Record of the Year [Awarded to Artist(s)/Producer(s)/Record Company–Label(s)]
"Cruise" – Florida Georgia Line
"Highway Don't Care" – Tim McGraw Featuring Taylor Swift & Keith Urban
"I Drive Your Truck" – Lee Brice
Producers: Lee Brice, Kyle Jacobs, Matt McClure
Record Label: Curb Records
"Mama's Broken Heart" – Miranda Lambert
Producers: Chuck Ainlay, Frank Liddell, Glenn Worf
Record Label: RCA Nashville
"Wagon Wheel" – Darius Rucker Featuring Lady Antebellum
Producer: Frank Rogers
Song of the Year [Awarded to Songwriter(s)/Publisher(s)/Artist(s)]
"Every Storm (Runs Out Of Rain)" – Gary Allan
Songwriters: Gary Allan, Hillary Lindsey, Matthew Warren
Publishers: Always Alone Songs (ASCAP), Crystal Beach Music (BMI), Raylene Music (ASCAP)
Songwriters: Jessi Alexander, Connie Harrington, Jimmy Yeary
Publishers: Beattyville Music (BMI), EMI Blackwood Music, Inc. (BMI), Great Day At This Music (BMI), Happy Tears Music (ASCAP), Vistaville Music (ASCAP), Watch This Girl Publishing (BMI)
Songwriters: Brandy Clark, Shane McAnally, Kacey Musgraves
Publishers: 351 Music (BMI), Crazy Water Music (ASCAP), Little Blue Egg (ASCAP), Songs of Parallel (ASCAP), Vista Loma Music (ASCAP), Warner-Tamerlane Publishing Corp. (BMI)
"Mine Would Be You" – Blake Shelton
Songwriters: Jessi Alexander, Connie Harrington, Deric Ruttan
Publishers: Doc and Maggie Music (ASCAP), EMI Blackwood Music, Inc. (BMI), Get A Load Of This Music (ASCAP), Great Day At This Music (BMI), Hopeless Rose Music (ASCAP), Vistaville Music (ASCAP), Watch This Girl Publishing (BMI), WB Music Corp. (ASCAP)
Songwriters: Bob Dylan, Ketch Secor
Publishers: Blood Donor Music (BMI), Special Rider Music (SESAC)
Video of the Year [Awarded to Producer(s)/Director(s)/Artist(s)] *(Off Camera Award) (TIE)
"Better Dig Two" – The Band Perry
Producer: Eric Williams
Director: Declan Whitebloom
"Blowin' Smoke" – Kacey Musgraves
Producer: Josh Goldstein
Director: Honey
Producers: Tameron Hedge, Chandra LaPlume
Director: Shane Drake
Producer: Karen Martin
Director: Eric Welch
Producer: Reagan Rosson
Director: Trey Fanjoy
"Two Black Cadillacs" – Carrie Underwood
Producer: Steve Lamar
Director: P.R. Brown
Vocal Event of the Year [Awarded to Artist(s)/Producer(s)/Record Company–Label(s)]*(Off Camera Award)
"Boys 'Round Here" – Blake Shelton Featuring Pistol Annies & Friends
"Cruise (Remix)" – Florida Georgia Line Featuring Nelly
Producers: Joey Moi, Jason Nevins
"We Were Us" – Keith Urban And Miranda Lambert
Producers: Nathan Chapman, Keith Urban
Record Labels: Capitol Records Nashville, Hit Red Records, RCA Nashville
The show is set to air on Sunday, April 6 at 8 p.m. on ABC.
This entry was posted in Music News and tagged ACM, Blake Shelton, Kacey Musgraves, Lee Brice, Miranda Lambert, Taylor Swift, The Academy of Country Music, Tim McGraw. Bookmark the permalink.


text:
Q: A basic question related to Hamiltonian isotopy in symplectic geometry In any standard symplectic geometry/topology textbook, the concept of Hamiltonian isotopy was introduced:
$(M, \omega)$ is a sympplectic manifold. Given a symplectic isotopy
$\phi_t : M \rightarrow M$. It is generated by a unique family of vector fields
$X_t: M \rightarrow TM$ such that $$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\phi_t = X_t \circ \phi_t.$$
The vector fields $X_t$ are symplectic vector fields.
When $$\iota(X_t)\omega = dH_t$$ for a smooth family of Hamiltonian functions $H_t: M \rightarrow \mathbb{R}, $ the isotopies above is called Hamiltonian.
My question is: How do we 'visualize' the relation between the Hamiltonian functions $H_t$ and the symplectomorphisms $\phi_t$ in the isotopy? What are some of the good contexts in which Hamiltonian isotopies are used?

A: Why not look at it in specific examples? Say the height function $H$ on the sphere $S^2\subset\mathbb{R}^3$. Or how it doesn't work for the obvious rotations on the torus.
The canonical context in which these are used is Classical Mechanics on cotangent bundles... Hamilton equations! In other words, the Hamiltonian is the energy of your system, and your symplectomorphisms describe the physical motion in phase space.
In terms of visualization: Note that the vector field $X_t$ preserves $H_t$ (using Lie derivative, noting that $\omega$ is skew-commutative), and so the integral curves $\lbrace\phi_t(x)\rbrace_{t\in\mathbb{R}}$ are contained in level sets of $H$, i.e. $\phi^*_tH_t=H_t$.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
April 1995 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1995 > April 1995 Decisions > G.R. No. 118861 April 27, 1995 : EMMANUEL M. RELAMPAGOS vs. ROSITA C. CUMBA, ET AL.:
[G.R. No. 118861. April 27, 1995.]
EMMANUEL M. RELAMPAGOS, Petitioner, v. ROSITA C. CUMBA and the COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondents.
DAVIDE, JR., J.:
This special civil action of Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court revives the issue of whether or not the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has jurisdiction over petitions for Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus in election cases where it has exclusive appellate jurisdiction. In the split decision of 4 March 1992 in the consolidated cases of Garcia vs. De Jesus and Uy vs. Commission on Elections, 1 this Court ruled in the negative because of the absence of any specific conferment upon the COMELEC, either by the Constitution or by legislative fiat, of jurisdiction to issue such extraordinary writs. It held that jurisdiction, or the legal power to hear and determine a cause or causes of action, must exist as a matter of law, whether the jurisdiction is original or appellate, and since these two classes of jurisdiction are exclusive of each other, each must be expressly conferred by law. One does not flow, nor is inferred, from the other. This Court proceeded to state that in the Philippine setting, the authority to issue the aforesaid writs involves the exercise of original jurisdiction which has always been expressly conferred either by the Constitution or by law. It is never derived by implication. Although the Constitution grants the COMELEC appellate jurisdiction, it does not grant it any power to exercise original jurisdiction over petitions for Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, unlike in the case of this Court which is specifically conferred with such authority in Section 5(1) of Article VIII. It also pointed out that the doctrine laid down in Pimentel vs. COMELEC 2 — that neither the Constitution nor any law has conferred jurisdiction on the COMELEC to issue such writs — still finds application under the 1987 Constitution.
In the decision of 29 July 1992 in Veloria vs. Commission on Elections, 3 this Court reiterated the Garcia and Uy doctrine.
In the challenged resolution at bench, the respondent COMELEC adhered to the affirmative view of the issue, citing as authority therefor its own decision of 29 July 1993 in Dictado vs. Cosico and the last paragraph of Section 50 of B.P. Blg. 697, which reads:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
SECTION 50. Definition. -
xxx xxx xxx
The Commission is hereby vested with exclusive authority to hear and decide petitions for Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus involving election cases.
The petitioner herein pleads that this resolution be set aside and nullified for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. He contends that while the COMELEC's position is inherently compelling, it deserves scant consideration in view of Garcia and Uy and Veloria and the nature and purpose of B.P. Blg. 697 which was to govern solely the Batasan Pambansa election of 14 May 1984; hence, it was a temporary statute which self-destructed after such election.
The antecedent facts that led to the filing of this action are uncomplicated and undisputed.
In the synchronized elections of 11 May 1992, the petitioner and private respondent Rosita Cumba were candidates for the position of Mayor in the municipality of Magallanes, Agusan del Norte. The latter was proclaimed the winning candidate, with a margin of only twenty-two votes over the former.
Unwilling to accept defeat, the petitioner filed an election protest with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Agusan del Norte, which was assigned to Branch 2 thereof in Butuan City.
On 29 June 1994, the trial court, per Judge Rosarito F. Dabalos, found the petitioner to have won with a margin of six votes over the private respondent and rendered judgment in favor of the petitioner as follows:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing results, the court hereby declares the protestant as having won the mayoralty election and as duly elected Mayor of the Municipality of Magallanes, Agusan del Norte in the local election held on May 11, 1992, the protestant having obtained six (6) votes more than that of the protestee's votes. nadchanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Copies of the decision were sent to and received by the petitioner and the private respondent on 1 July 1994.
On 4 July 1994, the private respondent appealed the decision to the COMELEC by filing her notice of appeal and paying the appellate docket fees.
On 8 July 1994, the trial court gave due course to the appeal.
On 12 July 1994, the petitioner filed with the trial court a motion for execution pending appeal, which the private respondent opposed on 22 July 1994.
On 3 August 1994, the trial court granted the petitioner's motion for execution pending appeal. The corresponding writ of execution was forthwith issued. Thereafter, the private respondent filed a motion for a reconsideration of the order of execution and the sheriff held in abeyance the implementation of the writ. This motion was denied on 5 August 1994.
The private respondent then filed with the respondent COMELEC a petition for Certiorari to annul the aforesaid order of the trial court granting the motion for execution pending appeal and the writ of execution. The petition was docketed as SPR No. 1-94.
On 9 February 1995, the COMELEC promulgated its resolution granting the petition. 4 The dispositive portion thereof reads as follows:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Commission RESOLVES that is [sic] has exclusive authority to hear and decide petitions for Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in election cases as authorized by law, and therefore, assumes jurisdiction of the instant petition for Certiorari which is hereby GRANTED. The Order of the court a quo of August 3, 1994 is hereby declared NULL and VOID and the Writ of Execution issued on August 4, 1994 LIFTED.
Accordingly, petitioner Rosita Cumba is ordered restored to her position as Municipal Mayor of Magallanes, Agusan del Norte, pending resolution of the appeal before this Commission in the case of Relampagos vs. Cumba in EAC No. 108-94.
In upholding its jurisdiction in Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus cases, the respondent COMELEC maintains that there is a special law granting it such jurisdiction, viz., Section 50 of B.P. Blg. 697, which remains in full force as it was not expressly repealed by the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881), and that it is not exactly correct that this law self-destructed after the May 1984 election. It further reasoned out that in the performance of its judicial functions, the COMELEC is the most logical body to issue the extraordinary writs of Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus in election cases where it has appellate jurisdiction. It ratiocinated as follows:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
It is therefore clear that if there is a law which specifically confers jurisdiction to issue the prerogative Writs, then the Commission has jurisdiction.
Such a law exists. Section 50, BP Blg. 697 is that law.
BP Blg. 697, approved on March 14, 1984, is entitled "AN ACT TO GOVERN THE ELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE BATASANG PAMBANSA ON MAY 14, 1984 AND THE SELECTION OF SECTORAL REPRESENTATIVES THEREAFTER, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES." Section 50 provides:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
"SECTION 50. Definition. - Pre-proclamation controversy refers to any question pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of the Board of Canvassers which may be raised by any candidate, political party or coalition of political parties before the board or directly with the Commission.
The Commission on Elections shall be the sole judge and shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all pre-proclamation controversies.
The Commission is hereby vested with exclusive authority to hear and decide petitions for Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus involving election cases." (Emphasis Supplied).cralaw
We have debated among ourselves whether Section 50, BP Blg. 697, has been repealed. We have come to the conclusion that it has not been repealed. The repealing provision in the Omnibus Election Code (BP Blg. 881, December 3, 1985), provides:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
"SECTION 282. Repealing Clause. — Presidential Decree No. 1296 otherwise known as the The 1978 Election Code as amended is hereby repealed. All other election laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and regulations or parts thereof, inconsistent with the provisions of this Code is hereby repealed, except Presidential Decree No. 1618 and Batas Pambansa Blg. 20 governing the election of the members of the Sangguniang Pampook of Regions IX and XII." (Emphasis supplied).cralaw
BP Blg. 697 has not been expressly repealed, and Section 50 thereof is not inconsistent with the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code. Besides, in the cited Garcia/Uy cases, as reiterated in the Veloria case, the Supreme Court itself said, reiterating previous cases, that implied repeal of statutes is frowned upon, thus:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
"Just as implied repeal of statutes is frowned upon, so also should the grant of original jurisdiction by mere implication to a quasi-judicial body be tabooed." (Garcia/Uy/Veloria Cases: Emphasis supplied). nadchanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
"It is equally clear that Executive Order No. 90 . . . did not modify or repeal, whether expressly or impliedly, Section 23 of P.D. No. 1752. It is common place learning that implied repeal ere not favored in law and are not casually to be assumed. The first effort of a court must always be to reconcile or adjust the provisions of one statute with those of another so as to give sensible effect to both provisions (Jalandoni vs. Andaya, 55 SCRA 261 (1974); Villegas vs. Subido, 41 SCRA 190, 196-197 (1971); National Power Corporation vs. ARCA, 25 SCRA 931 (1968); U.S. vs. Palacios, 33 Phil. 208 (1916); and Iloilo Palay and Corn Planters Association, Inc. vs. Feliciano, 13 SCRA 377 (1965). Only when there is clear inconsistency and conflict between the provisions of two (2) statutes, may a court hold that the provisions later in point of time have impliedly repealed the earlier ones" (Philippine American Management Co., Inc. vs. Philippine American Management Employees Association, 49 SCRA 194 (1973); and Villegas vs. Subido, 41 SCRA 190 (1971). (Larga vs. Ranada, Jr., No. L-7976, August 3, 1984, 164 SCRA 25).cralaw
It was even suggested that Batas Pambansa Blg. 697 self-destructed after the Batasang Pambansa elections of 1984, because of the provisions of Section 1 (Title and Applicability) which provides: "This act shall be known and cited as 'The Law on the 1984 Batasang Pambansa Election.' It shall govern the election for the regular Batasang Pambansa which shall be held on May 14, 1984, and the selection of sectoral representatives thereafter as provided by the Constitution."
While that may be true with most of its provisions which were applicable only for the particular election (like election and campaign periods, voting constituency, etc.) most if not all of the remaining provisions could be applicable to future elections. It is not lost to the Commission that BP Blg. 697 was passed also "for other purposes."
But the important consideration is that the authority granted to the Commission under BP Blg. 697 is not inconsistent with our election laws. It should be mentioned that the provisions of Republic Act No. 6636 which governed the local elections of January 18, 1988, as to the number of councilors in specified cities (Sec. 3) and the number of Sanggunian members in different provinces and cities (Sec. 4) are still applicable up to this day. In fact, it became one of the important controlling provisions which governed the May 11, 1992 elections. If provisions of Republic Act No. 6636 which are not inconsistent with the present election laws did not self-destruct, why should Section 50 of BP Blg. 697?
Another provision which did not self-destruct is that which provides "that any city or municipal judge, who includes or excludes any voter without any legal basis in inclusion and exclusion proceedings, shall be guilty of an election offense," although this provision is found in Section 10 of Executive Order No. 134 supposedly with limited application as the enabling act for the elections for Members of Congress on May 11, 1987 and for other purposes. nadchanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Clearly, the intent of the law was to give Certiorari jurisdiction to the Commission on Elections because the Pimentel case said there was none, to fill a void in the law, and avoid an incongruous situation.
"A statutes's clauses and phrases must not be taken separately but in its relation to the statue's totality. Each statute must, in fact, be construed as to 'harmonize it with the pre-existing body of laws.' Unless clearly repugnant, provisions of statutes must be reconciled. . ." (Commissioner of Customs vs. ESSO Standard Eastern, Inc. L-28329, August 7, 1975, 66 SCRA 113).cralaw
The statutory construction rule is: "When the Legislature enacts a provision, it is understood that it is aware of previous, statutes relating to the same subject matter and that in the absence of any express repeal or amendment therein, the new provision should be deemed enacted pursuant to the legislative policy embodied in the prior statutes." (Legaspi vs. Executive Secretary, L-36153, November 28, 1975, 68 SCRA 253).cralaw
The Commission is the most logical body whenever it performs judicial functions to take jurisdiction of petitions for Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus because it has appellate jurisdiction in election cases granted by the Constitution itself. The Court of Appeals has no more appellate jurisdiction over such cases. And in the case of the Supreme Court, Justice de Castro in the Pimentel case pointed out, in his dissenting opinion, that under the Constitution the Certiorari jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in election cases should properly be limited to decisions, orders or rulings of the Commission on Elections, not from lower courts.
It was of course different under the Election Code of 1971 (R.A. No. 6388, September 2, 1971) because the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals then had appellate jurisdiction in election cases decided by the lower courts.
In the Veloria case, it now appears that only the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals have Certiorari jurisdiction over election cases from the lower courts because after reiterating the ruling in the Garcia and Uy cases, the Supreme Court said:
"In view of this pronouncement, an original civil action of Certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against a regional trial court in an election contest may be filed only in the Court of Appeals or in this Court, being the only courts given such original jurisdiction under the Constitution and the law." (Emphasis supplied).cralaw
While these two appellate Courts do have the jurisdiction under the Constitution and the law, it is most logical for the Commission whenever it performs judicial functions to have the authority to issue these prerogative writs. . .
In traversing the first issue, we are citing our decision laid down in the case of Antonio Dictado vs. Hon. Rodrigo N. Cosico, and Emilio Tiongco promulgated on July 29, 1993. In this case, the Commission en banc had occasion to rule on the question of whether or not the Commission has the authority to hear and decide petitions for Certiorari in election cases.
The Commission En Banc, speaking through Hon. Commissioner Regalado E. Maambong, ruled that there is [a] law which grants the Commission the exclusive authority to issue special writs of Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in election cases, and there are also Supreme Court decisions, recent in fact, which declare that the Commission has no such authority precisely because, according to the decisions, there is no law granting such authority, and without any hint whatsoever of the existence of Sec. 50 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 697.
As gleaned from the case of Dictado, respondents were arguing that Sec. 50 of BP Blg. 697 was repealed by the Omnibus Election Code (BP Blg. 881, December 3, 1985). Furthermore, in their answer, Respondents.cited Supreme Court decisions where it was declared that, indeed, the Commission has no jurisdiction to issue special writs of Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
It is still the position of this Commission that Sec. 50, BP Blg. 697 has not been repealed.
As defined in the Constitution, "Judicial power" includes the duty of the Courts of Justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government (Sec. 1, par. 2, Art. VII).
Since the COMELEC, in discharging its appellate jurisdiction pursuant to Sec. 2 (2), Art. IX-C, acts as a court of justice performing judicial power and said power includes the determination of whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, it necessarily follows that the Comelec, by constitutional mandate, is vested with jurisdiction to issue writs of Certiorari in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. 5
It set aside, for having been issued with grave abuse of discretion, the trial court's order of execution pending appeal and the writ of execution because.
[a]t the time the Motion for Execution Pending Appeal was filed on July 12, 1994, the court a quo had already lost jurisdiction over the case for as early as July 8, 1994, it had already acknowledged through its order issued on that date, the perfection of the appeal of petitioner as in fact it ordered the elevation of the records of the case to this Honorable Commission. 6
Aggrieved by the resolution, the petitioner filed the instant special civil action.
In the resolution of 21 February 1995, the Court required the respondents to comment on the petition and issued a temporary restraining order enjoining the respondent COMELEC to cease and desist from enforcing its challenged resolution.
As naturally expected, the private respondent, in her Comment, opposed the petition by invoking the very arguments adduced by the respondent COMELEC in its challenged resolution and the dissenting opinion in the Garcia and Uy cases.
In its comment filed by the Office of the Solicitor General, the respondent COMELEC postulates that it issued the said resolution after it had taken cognizance of the appeal interposed by the private respondent from the RTC decision, unlike in the Garcia and Uy cases, and therefore, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, thus:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
it cannot be gainsaid that [it] possesses inherent powers to employ means necessary to carry into effect the powers conferred upon it by law (Sec. 6, Rule 135 of the Revised Rules of Court) and verily, there was no need for any statutory grant for that purpose. Indeed, in annulling the Order of Execution of the Regional Trial Court, public respondent did not exceed its jurisdiction since its action in this regard was necessary to preserve the subject of the appeal and to maintain the status quo of the parties pending the final outcome of its review of the correctness of the appealed decision. 7
It tried to show that in Pimentel and Garcia, the trial courts still had jurisdiction over the cases unlike in the instant case where the trial court had already given due course to the appeal and elevated the records of the case to the COMELEC which had taken cognizance of the appeal. nadchanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
This Court resolved to give due course to this petition and to decide it on its merits.
The contention of the respondent COMELEC as advanced by the Office of the Solicitor General is unacceptable. It goes against its theory in the assailed resolution and is not supported by the facts. The challenged resolution involves a case which the COMELEC docketed as a special relief case (SPR No. 1-94). Under Rule 28 of its Rules of Procedure, the special relief cases are petitions for Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and contempt proceedings. The ordinary appeal from the RTC decision was, as disclosed in the challenged resolution, docketed as EAC No. 108-94, 8 Clearly then, the COMELEC had recognized and taken cognizance of two cases: one, the ordinary appeal from the RTC decision (EAC No. 108-94), and two, the special civil action for Certiorari docketed as SPR No. 1-94. The two cases were not consolidated. The dissimilarities between them need no further elaboration. Since it issued the challenged resolution under the latter case, it cannot now be heard to state that it issued it as an incident in the former, the ordinary appeal. This erroneous contention of the Office of the Solicitor General notwithstanding, the position taken by the COMELEC in its resolution now in question paves the way for a re-examination of this Court's pronouncement in the Garcia and Uy cases.
As earlier stated, in Garcia and Uy, 9 and later, in Veloria, 10 this Court ruled that the COMELEC has no jurisdiction over the extraordinary writs of Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus because there is no specific constitutional or statutory conferment to it of such jurisdiction.
The respondent COMELEC, however, points out that Section 50 of B.P. Blg. 697 expressly granted it such jurisdiction. Indeed, it did. Nevertheless, considering that the said law was, per Section 1 thereof, "to govern the election for the regular Batasang Pambansa which shall be held on May 14, 1984, and the selection of sectoral representatives thereafter as provided by the Constitution," and in view of the passage of the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881) by the regular Batasang Pambansa, 11 this Court is then confronted with the twin issues of whether said B.P. Blg. 697 became functus officio after the 14 May 1984 election of members of the regular Batasang Pambansa or the selection thereafter of the sectoral representatives at the latest, and whether it was repealed by the Omnibus Election Code.
The Court agrees with the respondent COMELEC that there are provisions in B.P. Blg. 697 whose lifetime go beyond the 14 May 1984 election or the subsequent selection of sectoral representatives. In fact, by the very wording of the last paragraph of its Section 50, to wit:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
The Commission is hereby vested with the exclusive authority to hear and decide petitions for Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus involving election cases. (Emphasis supplied).
it is quite clear that the exercise of the power was not restricted within a specific period of time. Taken in the context of the conspicuous absence of such jurisdiction as ruled in Pimentel vs. Commission on Elections, 12 it seems quite obvious that the grant was intended as a remedial legislation to eliminate the seeming incongruity or irrationality resulting in a splitting of jurisdiction pointed out in the dissenting opinion of Justice De Castro in the said case.
But did not the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881) repeal B.P. Blg. 697? The repealing clause of the latter reads as follows:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
SECTION 282. Repealing Clause. - Presidential Decree No. 1296, otherwise known as The 1987 Election Code, as amended, is hereby repealed. All other election laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof, inconsistent with the provisions of this Code are hereby repealed, except Presidential Decree No. 1618 and Batas Pambansa Blg. 20 governing the election of the members of the Sangguniang Pampook of Regions IX and XII.
The second sentence is in the nature of a general repealing clause. It has been said:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
An express general repealing clause to the effect that all inconsistent enactments are repealed, is in legal contemplation a nullity. Repeals must either be expressed or result by implication. Although it has in some instances been held to be an express recognition that there are acts in conflict with the act in which it is included and as indicative of the legislative intent to repeal such acts, a general repealing clause cannot be deemed as express repeal because it fails to identify or designate any act to be repealed. It cannot be determinative of an implied repeal for it does not declare any inconsistency but conversely, merely predicates a repeal upon the condition that a substantial conflict is found under application of the rules of implied repeals. If its inclusion is more than mere mechanical verbiage, it is more often a detriment than an aid to the establishment of a repeal, for such clause is construed as an express limitation of the repeal to inconsistent acts. 13
This Court is not unaware of the equally settled rule in statutory construction that in the revision or codification of laws, all parts and provisions of the old laws that are omitted in the revised statute or code are deemed repealed, unless the statute or code provides otherwise expressly or impliedly. 14
By the tenor of its aforequoted Repealing Clause, it does not evidently appear that the Batasang Pambansa had intended to codify all prior election statutes and to replace them with the new Code. It made, in fact, by the second sentence, a reservation that all prior election statutes or parts thereof not inconsistent with any provisions of the Code shall remain in force. That sentence
predicates the intended repeal upon the condition that a substantial conflict must be found on existing and prior acts of the same subject matter. Such being the case, the presumption against implied repeals and the rule on strict construction regarding implied repeals apply ex proprio vigore. For the legislature is presumed to know the existing laws so that, if repeal of particular or specific law or laws is intended, the proper step is to express it. The failure to add a specific repealing clause particularly mentioning the statute to be repealed indicates that the intent was not to repeal any existing law on matter, unless an irreconcilable inconsistency and repugnancy exist in the terms of the new and the old laws. 15
This being the case, the Court painstakingly examined the aforesaid last paragraph of Section 50 of the Omnibus Election Code to determine if the former is inconsistent with any of the provisions of the latter. It found none.
In the face of the foregoing disquisitions, the Court must, as it now does, abandon the ruling in the Garcia and Uy and Veloria cases. We now hold that the last paragraph of Section 50 of B.P. Blg. 697 providing as follows:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary
The Commission is hereby vested with exclusive authority to hear and decide petitions for Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus involving election cases.
remains in full force and effect but only in such cases where, under paragraph (2), Section 1, Article IX-C of the Constitution, it has exclusive appellate jurisdiction. Simply put, the COMELEC has the authority to issue the extraordinary writs for Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus only in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
The jurisdiction of the COMELEC having been settled, we now proceed to review the substance of the challenged resolution.
That the trial court acted with palpable and whimsical abuse of discretion in granting the petitioner's motion for execution pending appeal and in issuing the writ of execution is all too obvious. Since both the petitioner and the private respondent received copies of the decision on 1 July 1994, an appeal therefrom may be filed within five days 16 from 1 July 1994 or on or before 6 July 1994. Any motion for execution pending appeal must be filed before the period for the perfection of the appeal. Pursuant to Section 23 of Interim Rules Implementing B.P. Blg. 129, which is deemed to have supplementary effect to the COMELEC Rules of Procedures pursuant to Rule 43 of the latter, an appeal would be deemed perfected on the last day for any of the parties to appeal, 17 or on 6 July 1994. On 4 July 1994, the private respondent filed her notice of appeal and paid the appeal fee. On 8 July 1994, the trial court gave due course to the appeal and ordered the elevation of the records of the case to the COMELEC. Upon the perfection of the appeal, the trial court was divested of its jurisdiction over the case. 18 Since the motion for execution pending appeal was filed only on 12 July 1994, or after the perfection of the appeal, the trial court could no longer validly act thereon. It could have been otherwise if the motion was filed before the perfection of the appeal. 19 Accordingly, since the respondent COMELEC has the jurisdiction to issue the extraordinary writs of Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, then it correctly set aside the challenged order granting the motion for execution pending appeal and writ of execution issued by the trial court. nadchanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED and the challenged resolution of 9 February 1995 of the Commission on Elections in SPR No. 1-94 entitled "Rosita Cumba vs. Manuel M. Relampagos, et al." is AFFIRMED.
The temporary restraining order issued on 21 February 1995 is hereby LIFTED.
No pronouncement as to costs.
Narvasa, C.J., Feliciano, Padilla, Regalado, Romero, Bellosillo, Quiason, Puno , Vitug and Mendoza, JJ., concur.
Melo, Kapunan and Francisco, JJ., are on leave.
1. G.R. No. 88158 and G.R. Nos. 97108-09, respectively, 206 SCRA 779 [1992]. The voting was 7-6. Per Melencio Herrera, J., with the concurrence of Cruz (who wrote a separate opinion), Padilla, Griño-Aquino, Regalado, Romero, and Nocon, JJ.; and with Bidin, J., dissenting, with whom Narvasa, C.J., Gutierrez, Jr., Feliciano, Medialdea, and Davide, Jr., JJ., concur. Paras, J., took no part.
2. 101 SCRA 769 [1980].
4. Annex "A" of Petition; Rollo, 20-43. By a 4-2 vote.
5. Rollo, 25-30, 39-41.
6. Id., 41.
7. Rollo, 67 et seq.
8. Dispositive portion of the Resolution; Rollo, 42. EAC is the docket designation for appealed cases, while SPR is for special relief cases (Section 4, Rule 7, COMELEC Rules of Procedure).cralaw
9. Supra note 1.
10. Supra note 3.
11. Passed on 28 November 1985 and approved on 3 December 1985.
13. C. DALLAS SANDS, Sutherland, Statutes and Statutory Construction, § 23.08 (Vol. 1A, 4th ed. 1972).cralaw
14. RUBEN E. AGPALO, Statutory Construction 284 [2nd ed. 1990], citing People vs. Benuya, 61 Phil. 208 [1935].
15. AGPALO, op. cit., at 292, citing Iloilo Palay and Corn Planters Ass., Inc. vs. Feliciano, 13 SCRA 377 [1965]; City of Naga vs. Agna, 71 SCRA 176 [1976].
16. Section 3, Rule 22, in relation to Section 20, Rule 35, COMELEC Rules of Procedure.
17. Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Far East Molasses Corp., 198 SCRA 689 [1991].
18. Fortune Life & General Insurance Co., Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 224 SCRA 829 [1993].
19. Eudela vs. Court of Appeals, 221 SCRA 546 [1992].
April-1995 Jurisprudence
Adm. Case No. 2125 April 3, 1995 : ENRIQUE M. REYES vs. LEOPOLDO T. MAGLAYA
G.R. No. 108017 April 3, 1995 : MARIA BENITA A. DULAY vs. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 102969 April 4, 1995 : GENERAL TEXTILE, INC., ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 109910 April 5, 1995 : REMEDIOS G. SALVADOR, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 114250 April 5, 1995 : DOMINICO C. CONGSON vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 115644 April 5, 1995 : GOLDEN FLAME SAWMILL vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. 92-7-360-0 April 6, 1995 : IN RE: INDORSEMENT OF FERNANDO DE LEON
Adm. Matter No. 93-2-037 SC April 6, 1995 : IN RE EMIL "Emiliano" P. JURADO
Adm. Matter No. P-93-942 April 6, 1995 : JOVITA R. CASAL vs. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR.
G.R. No. 80914 April 6, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. AMABLE FLORES, ET AL.
G.R. No. 108747 April 6, 1995 : PABLO C. FRANCISCO vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 114222 April 6, 1995 : FRANCISCO S. TATAD, ET AL. vs. JESUS B. GARCIA, JR., ET AL.
G.R. No. 115504 April 6, 1995 : ANTONIO R. DANAO vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 116801 April 6, 1995 : GLORIA G. LASTIMOSA vs. CONRADO VASQUEZ, ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. MTJ-95-1018 April 18, 1995 : ROGELIO L. SULE vs. JONATHAN S. BITENG
G.R. No. 104133 April 18, 1995 : SPS. EMILIO AND MILAGROS ABINUJAR vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 112889 April 18, 1995 : BIENVENIDO O. MARQUEZ, JR. vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. RTJ-95-1305 April 21, 1995 : DAN ALCANTARA vs. CAMILO E. TAMIN, ET AL.
G.R. No. 69203 April 21, 1995 : ENRICO MANUEL vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.
G.R. No. 80611 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. GIL PARICA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 95711 April 21, 1995 : CITY FAIR CORPORATION vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 102981-82 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. TEODORO ESMALE, ET AL.
G.R. No. 105998 April 21, 1995 : F.R.F. ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 108997 April 21, 1995 : LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 111944-47 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. EDUARDO G. MONTEFALCON
G.R. No. 112087 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ALEXANDER B. SOAN
G.R. Nos. 112178-79 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. AIDA HONRADA
G.R. No. 112518 April 21, 1995 : CARLOS CABALLERO vs. ANTONIO P. SOLANO
G.R. No. 114714 April 21, 1995 : MARITIME MANNING AGENCIES, INC.ET AL. vs. POEA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 116637 April 21, 1995 : COCA-COLA SALESFORCE UNION, ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-962 April 24, 1995 : FERNANDO MARCELINO vs. MARIANO M. SINGSON, JR.
G.R. No. 118861 April 27, 1995 : EMMANUEL M. RELAMPAGOS vs. ROSITA C. CUMBA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 116246 April 27, 1995 : BENJAMIN R. ERNI vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-914 April 10, 1995 : DOLORES ALFORTE vs. RUTH C. SANTOS
Adm. Case No. 2125 April 3, 1995 - ENRIQUE M. REYES v. LEOPOLDO T. MAGLAYA
G.R. No. 108017 April 3, 1995 - MARIA BENITA A. DULAY v. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 102969 April 4, 1995 - GENERAL TEXTILE, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 109910 April 5, 1995 - REMEDIOS G. SALVADOR, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 114250 April 5, 1995 - DOMINICO C. CONGSON v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 115644 April 5, 1995 - GOLDEN FLAME SAWMILL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. 92-7-360-0 April 6, 1995 - IN RE: INDORSEMENT OF FERNANDO DE LEON
Adm. Matter No. 93-2-037 SC April 6, 1995 - IN RE EMIL (Emiliano) P. JURADO
Adm. Matter No. P-93-942 April 6, 1995 - JOVITA R. CASAL v. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR.
G.R. No. 80914 April 6, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMABLE FLORES, ET AL.
G.R. No. 108747 April 6, 1995 - PABLO C. FRANCISCO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 109713 April 6, 1995 - JOSE M. MERCADO v. BOARD OF ELECTION SUPERVISORS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 114222 April 6, 1995 - FRANCISCO S. TATAD, ET AL. v. JESUS B. GARCIA, JR., ET AL.
G.R. No. 115504 April 6, 1995 - ANTONIO R. DANAO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 116801 April 6, 1995 - GLORIA G. LASTIMOSA v. CONRADO VASQUEZ, ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-914 April 10, 1995 - DOLORES ALFORTE v. RUTH C. SANTOS
Adm. Matter No. RTJ-94-1160 April 10, 1995 - ALEXANDER VITO v. TEOFILO BUSLON, JR.
Adm. Matter No. MTJ-95-1018 April 18, 1995 - ROGELIO L. SULE v. JONATHAN S. BITENG
G.R. No. 104133 April 18, 1995 - SPS. EMILIO AND MILAGROS ABINUJAR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 112889 April 18, 1995 - BIENVENIDO O. MARQUEZ, JR. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. RTJ-95-1305 April 21, 1995 - DAN ALCANTARA v. CAMILO E. TAMIN, ET AL.
G.R. No. 69203 April 21, 1995 - ENRICO MANUEL v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.
G.R. No. 80611 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GIL PARICA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 95711 April 21, 1995 - CITY FAIR CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 102981-82 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO ESMALE, ET AL.
G.R. No. 105998 April 21, 1995 - F.R.F. ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 108997 April 21, 1995 - LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 111944-47 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO G. MONTEFALCON
G.R. No. 112087 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEXANDER B. SOAN
G.R. Nos. 112178-79 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AIDA HONRADA
G.R. No. 112518 April 21, 1995 - CARLOS CABALLERO v. ANTONIO P. SOLANO
G.R. No. 114714 April 21, 1995 - MARITIME MANNING AGENCIES, INC.ET AL. v. POEA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 116637 April 21, 1995 - COCA-COLA SALESFORCE UNION, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.
Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-962 April 24, 1995 - FERNANDO MARCELINO v. MARIANO M. SINGSON, JR.
G.R. No. 118861 April 27, 1995 - EMMANUEL M. RELAMPAGOS v. ROSITA C. CUMBA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 116246 April 27, 1995 - BENJAMIN R. ERNI v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Perceptions of pregnancy during medical training are changing
September 5, 2016 HealthShahid Mehmood
05 Sep, 2016 7:55 pm
WASHINGTON – Trainee doctors are finding a more supportive attitude from superiors and colleagues toward their pregnancies, a small study suggests.
In the U.S., women entering medicine face many barriers to childbearing, including a persistent negative stigma surrounding pregnancy during years-long training programs, said senior author Dr. Marissa Tenenbaum of Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri.
"In surgery you're standing all day, you don't eat regularly, don't hydrate yourself, and throw pregnancy into there, it can be challenging," she said.
Becoming a surgeon takes four years of college, four years of medical school and an average of five years of residency, so women spend their mid-20s to mid-30s in training, Tenenbaum told Reuters Health. It doesn't make sense to wait to have children until your residency is over, she said.
"They're really in their prime years of fertility while in surgical training, and historically it's been incredibly difficult to become pregnant and parent during residency training," she said.
Accommodations vary by specialty but tend to be very restrictive in the U.S., she said. The American Board of Plastic Surgery, for example, only allows residents four weeks of time off per year, which includes vacation, traveling for meetings or conferences – and maternity leave.
In 2008 and 2015, the researchers sent a 10-minute survey designed to be filled out anonymously online to female resident physicians at Washington University. Both surveys assessed the demographics, pregnancy status, attitudes and influences on childbearing of female residents.
In 2008, 107 female residents in surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, internal medicine and anesthesia responded to the survey, representing nearly 75 percent of invited participants. In 2015, 96 female residents responded, representing a 50 percent response rate. In both years, respondents were an average of 29 years old and 99 percent were heterosexual.
In both years, about 25 percent of the women said they had ever been pregnant. In 2008, about 35 percent of respondents were considering pregnancy during residency, which dropped to 20 percent in 2015.
Women strongly disagreed in both years with the statement "it is easy to be pregnant during residency" and agreed that there is a negative stigma attached to being pregnant during residency training.
"There potentially is a perception that if you take time away to become pregnant or have maternity leave, your coworkers or peers or residents have to pick up the slack," Tenenbaum said.
In both 2008 and 2015, female residents did not feel unfairly burdened by pregnancies among other female residents. In 2015, there was also a significant drop in feeling unfairly burdened by male residents' taking of paternity or spousal leave.
In both years, survey respondents rated the supportiveness of other female residents and female faculty and program directors higher than that of male residents or superiors. And the supportiveness of program directors and chiefs overall was rated higher in 2015 than in 2008, according to the results in The American Journal of Surgery.
In Canada, residents can take three months maternity leave and return to the program, Tenenbaum noted.
"When we have happy balanced surgeons they tend to be better surgeons," Tenenbaum said. "I think that we should have reasonable rules in place that allow for a maternity leave." –Reuters
Legal marijuana begins in Washington as 'green rush' is on
Genetics study seeks South Asian health clues in East London
Germany reports first death from MERS virus
Heaviest smokers may face biggest weight gain after quitting
Doctors puzzle over severity of defects in some Brazilian babies
Well-timed exercise might improve learning
'Inflammatory' diet linked to higher risk of colon cancer
Low-sodium lunch meats often contain extra potassium
← Pro-Altaf banners removed from outside SHC, three held Govt announces three holidays on Eidul Azha →


Register enter Vashikaran samrat baba Ji whose entire family is in the same service of astrology while serving the world with dignity. If you believe in astrology and want to get your love back by spiritual Vashikaran samrat then only meets baba Ji, a gold medalist in making astrological predictions accurate and precise. For Vashikaran samrat astrologer in India then baba Ji is on top with reliable service in astrology and the horoscope future forecast, where it is used to read and analyze planetary positions at the time of birth, reading the signs of the horoscope chart analysis and much more, as it represents the future of prognosis.
If you put light on Vashikaran samrat , then baba Ji has something to prove his credentials. In the last decade; which it is at the service of love vashikaran brine until a few true loves back to the home of real people? She is a man of honor, who brings happiness and success of several lives filling your life with vibrant colors of passion.
In astrology, she became a subsidiary of Love Birds, known as Vashikaran samrat to help those looking for the love of their lives through bad phases. The script of this time is not acceptable that your partner gives you more attention and care to Vashikaran samrat is the best choice to save his family life. The method of Vashikaran samrat is short and easy to use that you can easily realize the person, artist and succeed as they want; reaction technique is love vashikaran long term specialist.


text:
Drive-by shooters spray Duck Dynasty star Willie Robertson's estate with bullets
Greg Hilburn Monroe News-Star
Published 3:40 PM EDT Apr 26, 2020
"Duck Dynasty" star Willie Robertson stated his household was the sufferer of a drive-by capturing Friday the place eight to 10 pictures have been fired from the highway into his estate in West Monroe.
One of the pictures went by way of the bed room window of the house the place son John Luke Robertson lives with his spouse Mary Kate McEachern and their toddler youngster, however no one within the household was injured.
"We were pretty shook up," Robertson stated in a Sunday interview with USA Today Network. "It looks like they were just spraying bullets across my property."
The property and homes on it are behind a fence and gate and positioned far off of the highway. No arrests have been made.
Robertson stated a number of witnesses noticed the truck during which the suspects have been using move by the property a minimum of as soon as earlier than firing the pictures at 2:33 p.m.
"It was broad daylight," Robertson stated.
More: 'Duck Dynasty' star Sadie Robertson marries fiance at mother and father' Louisiana dwelling
The actuality TV and outdoor star stated he believes the suspects knew they have been capturing at his property.
"I'm 100% certain, but I don't know why," he stated.
'They have been simply spraying bullets throughout my property'
Robertson stated many family members live at his and spouse Korie's dwelling throughout the coronavirus disaster, amongst them daughter Sadie Robertson, who additionally starred on "Dancing with the Stars," and her new husband Christian Huff.
"Nobody was outside at the time, but everybody had been out about 5 minutes before," Robertson stated. "I had just gone to the store when it happened."
More: Rappers' argument results in faculty car parking zone capturing
The Ouachita Parish Sheriff's Office is investigating the capturing.
Witnesses described the car as a white over brown or beige Ford F-250 with giant aftermarket tires and rims.
The car driver was described as a younger white male in his teenagers or early 20s. Other occupants have been within the car, however an outline is not obtainable.
The car was captured on a surveillance digital camera.
Anyone within the space on the time that will have seen the car or have any info as to the id of the suspects or the car proprietor is requested to contact OPSO at 318-329-1200.
"I've been in close contact with the investigators," Robertson stated. "It seems local to me, but I can't be sure."
Follow Greg Hilburn on Twitter @GregHilburn1.


text:
Robert Mueller indicts three members of Trump's campaign in almost unprecedented day of White House drama
The President dismissed the investigation as a 'witch hunt'
Alexandra Wilts
,Andrew Buncombe,Clark Mindock,Kim Sengupta
Monday 30 October 2017 21:36
Trump-Russia investigation: who has been charged in the Mueller probe
The Special Prosecutor probing alleged links between the Trump campaign and Russia has indicted three former members of the President's team – sharply escalating the political stakes and raising the prospect of more charges to come.
Five months after he was appointed to lead the investigation after Mr Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, Robert Mueller announced 12 charges, including money laundering and conspiracy to defraud the US, against former campaign manager Paul Manafort and associate Rick Gates.
Both subsequently pleaded not guilty to all counts when they appeared in a federal court in Washington DC and were set bonds of $10m and $5m respectively, with Mr Mueller's office asking for home arrest as condition of their bail. The charges could mean decades of prison time for the pair if they are found guilty, with the money laundering charges alone carrying up to 20-year sentences. That is not to mention the potential for hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.
Mr Mueller's investigation also unsealed documents that revealed a former presidential foreign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos, had admitted lying to the FBI when being questioned about his contact with two Russians with apparent close ties to their government. Mr Papadopoulos's guilty plea – coming hours ahead of Mr Manafort's and Mr Gates's court appearance – made him the first Trump campaign official to face charges relating to links to Russian contacts. The FBI said that his "false statements" had slowed their investigation.
The indictment said Mr Papadopoulos admitted discussing obtaining "dirt" about Hillary Clinton with an unnamed Russian professor, while he also met with a woman calling herself the "niece" of Russian President Vladimir Putin. However, it is the "dirt" allegation that many critics of Mr Trump will claim proves collusion between his campaign and Moscow.
The developments mark an important milestone in the investigation and are a worrying turn of of events for Mr Trump, who has always denied that his campaign in any way cooperated with Vladimir Putin. He has said the various investigations amount to a witch hunt and has claimed the campaign of his rival, Ms Clinton, ought to instead be investigated.
Democratic Senator Mark Warner – the vice chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, which is also investigating Russian meddling – called the charges "a significant and sobering step in what will be a complex and likely lengthy investigation by the Special Counsel". Other leading Democrats, including Chuck Schumer, called on Mr Trump not to interfere in Mr Mueller's work. Meanwhile, a number of Republicans, including New York Representative Peter King, said the indictments put Mr Trump and his campaign in the clear.
Mr Trump was also quick to distance himself from the announcement of the indictments and pointed out that the charges against Mr Manafort and Mr Gates related to events said to have taken place between 2006 and 2015, a period when the pair were not associated with his campaign.
"Sorry, but this is years ago, before Paul Manafort was part of the Trump campaign. But why aren't Crooked Hillary & the Dems the focus?????," he wrote on Twitter.
Mr Papadopoulos's admission related to events after he became an adviser on foreign policy issues to the Trump campaign in March 2016, according to the FBI, despite Mr Papadopoulos's initial insistence that they did not relate to his time connected to the campaign. Yet White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters the incidents of Mr Manafort and Mr Gates predated their association with the President.
The biggest names involved in the Trump-Russia investigation
1/17The biggest names involved in the Trump-Russia investigation
Paul Manafort
Mr Manafort is a Republican strategist and former Trump campaign manager. He resigned from that post over questions about his extensive lobbying overseas, including in Ukraine where he represented pro-Russian interests. Mr Manafort turned himself in at FBI headquarters to special counsel Robert Mueller's team on Oct 30, 2017, after he was indicted under seal on charges that include conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading US Foreign Agents Registration Act statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts.
Rick Gates
Mr Gates joined the Trump team in spring 2016, and served as a top aide until he left to work at the Republican National Committee after the departure of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort. Mr Gates' had previously worked on several presidential campaigns, on international political campaigns in Europe and Africa, and had 15 years of political or financial experience with multinational firms, according to his bio. Mr Gates was indicted alongside Mr Manafort by special counsel Robert Mueller's team on charges that include conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading US Foreign Agents Registration Act statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts.
George Papadopoulos
George Papadopoulos was a former foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign, having joined around March 2016. Mr Papadopoulos plead guilty to federal charges for lying to the FBI as a part of a cooperation agreement with Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Mr Papadopoulos claimed in an interview with the FBI that he had made contacts with Russian sources before joining the Trump campaign, but he actually began working with them after joining the team. Mr Papadopoulos allegedly took a meeting with a professor in London who reportedly told him that Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. The professor also allegedly introduced Mr Papadopoulos to a Russian who was said to have close ties to officials at the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Mr Papadopoulos also allegedly was in contact with a woman whom he incorrectly described in one email to others in the campaign as the "niece" to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The President's eldest son met with a Russian lawyer - Natalia Veselnitskaya - on 9 June 2016 at Trump Tower in New York. He said in an initial statement that the meeting was about Russia halting adoptions of its children by US citizens. Then, he said it was regarding the Magnitsky Act, a US law blacklisting Russian human rights abusers. In a final statement, Mr Trump Jr released a chain of emails that revealed he took the meeting in hopes of getting information Ms Veselnitskaya had about Hillary Clinton's alleged financial ties to Russia. He and the President called it standard "opposition research" in the course of campaigning and that no information came from the meeting. The meeting was set up by an intermediary, Rob Goldstone. Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort were also at the same meeting.
Mr Kushner is President Donald Trump's son-in-law and a key adviser to the White House. He met with a Russian banker appointed by Russian President Vladimir Putin in December. Mr Kushner has said he did so in his role as an adviser to Mr Trump while the bank says he did so as a private developer. Mr Kushner has also volunteered to testify in the Senate about his role helping to arrange meetings between Trump advisers and Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak.
Rob Goldstone
Former tabloid journalist and now music publicist Rob Goldstone is a contact of the Trump family through the previously Trump-owned 2013 Miss Universe pageant, which took place in Moscow. In June 2016, he wrote to Donald Trump Jr offering a meeting with a Russian lawyer, Natalya Veselnitskaya, who had information about Hillary Clinton. Mr Goldstone was the intermediary for Russian pop star Emin Agalaraov and his father, real estate magnate Aras, who played a role in putting on the 2013 pageant. In an email chain released by Mr Trump Jr, Mr Goldstone seemed to indicate Russian government's support of Donald Trump's campaign.
Aras and Emin Agalarov
Aras Agalarov (R) is a wealthy Moscow-based real estate magnate and son Emin (L) is a pop star. Both played a role in putting on the previously Trump-owned 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow. They allegedly had information about Hillary Clinton and offered that information to the Trump campaign through a lawyer with whom they had worked with, Natalia Veselnitskaya, and music publicist Rob Goldstone.
Natalia Veselnitskaya
Natalia Veselnitskaya is a Russian lawyer with ties to the Kremlin. She has worked on real estate issues and reportedly counted the FSB as a client in the past. She has ties to a Trump family connection, real estate magnate Aras Agalarov, who had helped set up the Trump-owned 2013 Miss Universe pageant which took place in Moscow. Ms Veselnitskaya met with Donald Trump Jr, Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort in Trump Tower on 9 June 2016 but denies the allegation that she went there promising information on Hillary Clinton's alleged financial ties to Russia. She contends that the meeting was about the US adoptions of Russian children being stopped by Moscow as a reaction to the Magnitsky Act, a US law blacklisting Russian human rights abusers.
Mike Flynn
Mr Flynn was named as Trump's national security adviser but was forced to resign from his post for inappropriate communication with Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. He had misrepresented a conversation he had with Mr Kislyak to Vice President Mike Pence, telling him wrongly that he had not discussed sanctions with the Russian.
Sergey Kislyak
Mr Kislyak, the former longtime Russian ambassador to the US, is at the centre of the web said to connect President Donald Trump's campaign with Russia.
Mr Stone is a former Trump adviser who worked on the political campaigns of Richard Nixon, George HW Bush, and Ronald Reagan. Mr Stone claimed repeatedly in the final months of the campaign that he had backchannel communications with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and that he knew the group was going to dump damaging documents to the campaign of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton - which did happen. Mr Stone also had contacts with the hacker Guccier 2.0 on Twitter, who claimed to have hacked the DNC and is linked to Russian intelligence services.
The US attorney general was forced to recuse himself from the Trump-Russia investigation after it was learned that he had lied about meeting with Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak.
Carter Page
Mr Page is a former advisor to the Trump campaign and has a background working as an investment banker at Merrill Lynch. Mr Page met with Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak during the 2016 Republican National Convention in Cleveland. Mr Page had invested in oil companies connected to Russia and had admitted that US Russia sanctions had hurt his bottom line.
Jeffrey "JD" Gorden
Mr Gordon met with Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak during the 2016 Republian National Convention to discuss how the US and Russia could work together to combat Islamist extremism should then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump win the election. The meeting came days before a massive leak of DNC emails that has been connected to Russia.
Mr Comey was fired from his post as head of the FBI by President Donald Trump. The timing of Mr Comey's firing raised questions around whether or not the FBI's investigation into the Trump campaign may have played a role in the decision.
Preet Bharara
Mr Bahara refused, alongside 46 other US district attorney's across the country, to resign once President Donald Trump took office after previous assurances from Mr Trump that he would keep his job. Mr Bahara had been heading up several investigations including one into one of President Donald Trump's favorite cable television channels Fox News. Several investigations would lead back to that district, too, including those into Mr Trump's campaign ties to Russia, and Mr Trump's assertion that Trump Tower was wiretapped on orders from his predecessor.
Sally Yates
Ms Yates, a former Deputy Attorney General, was running the Justice Department while President Donald Trump's pick for attorney general awaited confirmation. Ms Yates was later fired by Mr Trump from her temporary post over her refusal to implement Mr Trump's first travel ban. She had also warned the White House about potential ties former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn to Russia after discovering those ties during the FBI's investigation into the Trump campaign's connections to Russia.
"There were no activities or official capacities in which the Trump campaign was engaged with Russia," Ms Sanders said.
As for Mr Papadopoulos, she said the 30-year-old was only a volunteer on the campaign and had little influence.
"He asked to do things [and] he was basically pushed back or not responded to in any way," she told a news briefing. "Any actions that he took would have been on his own." That is despite the FBI indictment indicating that Mr Papadopoulos had mentioned his conversations concerning Russia to a number of campaign staff.
Mr Trump himself had announced Mr Papadopoulos's appointment as a foreign policy adviser in March 2016, describing him as "an excellent guy". The charges which Mr Papadopoulos accepted as accurate as part of his guilty plea said Mr Trump was present at a meeting of national security advisers where Mr Papadopoulos boasted of his Russian connections and said he could help organise a meeting with Mr Putin.
Ms Sanders also tried to minimise Mr Manafort's role in the months he was in the White House, a claim somewhat underminded by the fact Mr Manafort was no doubt part of Mr Trump's inner circle for a time.
Asked if hiring Mr Manafort and Mr Gates was a bad idea, Ms Sanders said: "These were seasoned operatives, not regular offenders." She said she was unable to answer whether Mr Trump regretted hiring them.
Asked about possible pardons for anyone convicted, she added: "I haven't had any conversations with him about that. I think we should let the process play through before we start looking at those steps."
The court documents released on Monday – without a word of the details leaking, other than an initial report by CNN last Friday that someone was to be charged – revealed that while Mr Manafort and Mr Gates may have pleaded not guilty, Mr Papadopoulos has been cooperating with investigators for months. He was arrested as long ago as July 2017.
Steve Bannon says the firing of James Comey was the biggest mistake in modern political history
This may be of concern for other members of Mr Trump's campaign team who are worried that they could be implicated by information he provides to Mr Mueller's team.
The documents say Mr Papadopoulos had close interactions with "foreign nationals" who he thought had links to senior Russian government officials. Those interactions included speaking with Russian intermediaries who were attempting to line up a meeting between Mr Trump and Mr Putin.
The 14-page indictment against Mr Mr Papadopoulos, who once studied at the London School of Economics, reveals several meetings with an unidentified "professor", who he believed has a close association with Moscow. At one meeting with the professor, Mr Papadopoulos was told the Russian government had incriminating material about Ms Clinton.
"They have dirt on her," he told Mr Papadopoulos, according to the documents. "They have thousands of emails."
Trump campaign aide pleads guilty to lying to FBI agents
Ex-Trump aide Manafort 'ordered to surrender' in first Mueller charges
Robert Mueller set to reveal first charges in election hacking probe
A few months later, Mr Trump's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr, his son-in-law Jared Kushner and Mr Manafort attended a meeting with a Kremlin-linked lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya. They did so after Mr Trump Jr said he was offered incriminating material on Ms Clinton.
When Mr Trump Jr was told about the prospect of dirt on his father's rival, he responded by saying: "I love it."
Mr Papadopoulous would also be of interest for any information he may have provided about Carter Page, also a Trump foreign policy adviser, and who has also been under investigation by Mr Mueller. Mr Papadopoulous and Mr Page had been in London at the same time.
The indictment filed against Mr Manafort and Mr Gates accused them of funnelling payments through foreign companies and bank accounts as part of their political work in Ukraine.
The indictment laid out 12 counts, including conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, acting as an unregistered foreign agent, making false statements – and several charges related to failing to report foreign bank and financial accounts. The indictment alleged the men moved money through hidden bank accounts in Cyprus, St Vincent and the Grenadines and the Seychelles.
Mr Manafort, 68, was fired as Mr Trump's campaign chairman in August 2016 after allegations that he had orchestrated a lobbying operation on behalf of pro-Russian interests in Ukraine. Mr Manafort denies any wrongdoing as part of his work in Ukraine.
In the charges laid out in a district courtroom in Washington DC on Monday, it is alleged two men worked extensively for political figures and parties in Ukraine and laundered millions of dollars in payment for that work by channelling it through a web of companies, mostly in the US and Cyprus. They are accused of constructing elaborate schemes to hide their earnings from the US government, and failing to register the foreign interests for which they were lobbying.
The indictment alleges $75m in payments flowed through offshore accounts, of which Mr Manafort laundered more than $18m to buy property, goods and services in the US, hiding the income from the government. It says Mr Gates transferred $3m from the offshore accounts to other accounts he controlled.
The drama in the courtroom attracted visitors from all over America, with one family from San Francisco cancelling part of their afternoon activities to attend the hearing. Both Mr Manafort and Mr Gates walked into the courtroom with their hands behind their backs before their not guilty pleas were logged and the issue of bail tackled. Mr Manafort walked in wearing a black suit and royal blue tie, while Mr Gates wore a navy suit with no tie.
The attorney for the Justice Department said the government was having trouble ascertaining the value of Mr Manafort's and Mr Gates's assets, making it difficult to set bail. He called both individuals a "flight risk", meaning they could easily flee the US because of their "significant ties abroad".
Mr Manafort's lawyer said, Kevin Downing, said he disagreed with the strength of the indictment. However, he said his client was willing to accept home confinement.
Mr Gates, was represented by a public defender, which are generally appointed to represent people who cannot afford to hire a lawyer. With Mr Gates' assets valued to be worth up to $30m by the Justice Department. Mr Gates's court-appointed lawyer said Mr Gates planned to hire private counsel.
Outside court after the hearing, Mr Downing said: "I think you all saw today that President Donald Trump was correct. There is no evidence that Mr Manafort or the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government".
"Mr Manafort represented pro-European Union campaigns for the Ukrainians and ... was seeking to further democracy and to help the Ukraine come closer to the United States and the EU," Mr Manafort's lawyer said. "Those activities ended in 2014 over two years before Mr Manafort served in the Trump campaign."
A spokesman for Mr Gates, Glenn Selig, said: "Rick Gates pled 'Not Guilty' today. He welcomes the opportunity to confront these charges in court. He is not going to comment further until he has had a chance to review the lengthy indictment with his legal team... This fight is just beginning".
Robert MuellerDonald TrumpPaul ManafortGeorge PapadopoulosRick Gates
1/1Mueller indicts three members of Trump's campaign in day of rare drama
Mueller indicts three members of Trump's campaign in day of rare drama


Reflective Auto Decals, Ribbon, 5-3/4" x 1-7/8"
Linen Lee Cards, 7" x 5-1/8"
Make a statement people will remember with these custom Linen Lee cards! Measuring 7", these cards are perfect for announcements or invitations. Featuring your choice of three high quality linen card stocks and an optional decorative panel.


text:
Former Ohio State Golfer And Open Champion Tom Weiskopf Dies At 79
By Braden Moles Golf, Sports
Tom Weiskopf, former Ohio State golfer and winner of the 1973 Open Championship, died on Saturday at 79 after a two-year battle with pancreatic cancer, according to Golf Digest.
I send my deepest sympathies to the family of Tom Weiskopf. Will miss you and your stories. RIP my friend. PC has struck again..
— Tom Watson (@TomWatsonPGA) August 21, 2022
Weiskopf, a native of Massillon, Ohio, played his first season at Ohio State immediately following Jack Nicklaus' run with Read More
Men's Golf: Moldovan And Hoag Qualify For The 2022 U.S. Open
By Chase Brown Golf, Sports
Ohio State rising junior Maxwell Moldovan and former Buckeye Bo Hoag — now on the professional tour — punched their tickets to the 2022 U.S. Open on Monday at the U.S. Final Qualifier at the Springfield Country Club in Springfield, Ohio.
Moldovan is the first Buckeye amateur to make the Read More
Women's Golf: Strom Begins Two-Year Term As WGCA President
Lisa Strom's career has been full of new beginnings.
After starting her Ohio State coaching career last summer, Strom will take on a different task this offseason when she begins her two-year term as the Women's Golf Coaches Association president.
"What a great honor it is to serve as the Read More
NCAA Announces Violations For Ohio State Fencing, Women's Golf and Women's Basketball
By Braden Moles Basketball, Fencing, Golf
The NCAA announced Tuesday several penalties for the Ohio State fencing, women's golf and women's basketball programs due to multiple NCAA violations.
A release from the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions noted one Level I and several Level II and Level III NCAA violations, including ineligible participation as a Read More
Rosie Jones and Meg Mallon Inducted Into Ohio Golf Hall Of Fame
Former Ohio State women's golfers Rosie Jones and Meg Mallon are now a part of the Ohio Golf Hall of Fame, adding another achievement to their decorated careers.
It was announced today that LPGA Tour legends Meg Mallon and Rosie Jones will be inducted into the Ohio Golf Hall of Fame this year. 👏
MORE ⬇ https://t.co/wdxkIRIVjl
— LPGA (@LPGA) April 26, 2021
Jones golfed at Ohio State from 1978-1981, earning All-America honors as a senior. She won an individual Big Ten Championship and Read More
Ohio State Announces Lisa Strom As Head Women's Golf Coach
Ohio State announced Lisa Strom as the sixth head coach in the history of the women's golf team, following her time leading the Texas State and Kent State programs.
Strom returns to Ohio State for the third time in her career. She played for the women's golf team from 1995-1999 Read More
Ohio State Women's Golf Adds Arizona Transfer Kailie Vongsaga
By Joe Dempsey Golf, Sports
Kailie Vongsaga, a women's golf transfer from Arizona, joined the Ohio State women's golf team via transfer, as announced by head coach and director of golf Therese Hession.
Vongsaga will have three years of eligibility remaining after competing in 2019 for the Wildcats.
"We are thrilled to have Kailie Read More
Ohio State's Felix Kvarnstrom Named To PING All-Midwest Region Team, Extending 12-Year Streak
Felix Kvarnstrom, a graduate transfer for the Ohio State men's golf team, was named to the PING All-Midwest Region team.
Kvarnstrom, who is a native of Sweden native, played in every event and led the Buckeyes with a 72.94 scoring average with four top-20 finishes in his first year after Read More
Three Buckeyes Named All-America Scholars
By Joe Dempsey Golf
Three members of the Ohio State men's golf team were named Srixon/Cleveland Golf All-America Scholars, the GCAA announced.
The senior trio of Will Grimmer, Will Voetsch, and Daniel Wetterich, who all recently graduated, received the honor for excelling both in the classroom and on the course.
In order to be Read More
Seldemirova, Shears Named WGCA All-American Scholars
Two members of the Ohio State women's golf team were named Women's Golf Coaches Association All-American Scholars.
Sofia Seldemirova and Adeena Shears received the honor, exceeding the minimum of a 3.50 grade-point average.
Seldemirova, who became a WGCA All-American Scholar for the first time, was also an Academic All-Big Ten Read More


text:
body {
    background: #fff;
    font-family: 'Source Sans Pro', sans-serif;
    font-weight: 300;
}

strong { font-weight: 700; }

a, a:hover, a:focus {
	color: #888;
	text-decoration: none;
    -o-transition: all .3s;
    -moz-transition: all .3s;
    -webkit-transition: all .3s;
    -ms-transition: all .3s;
    transition: all .3s;
}

h1, h2 {
	margin-top: 10px;
	font-size: 42px;
    font-weight: 700;
    line-height: 54px;
}

img { max-width: 100%; }

/**
::-moz-selection { background: #b44e4a; color: #fff; text-shadow: none; }
::selection { background: #b44e4a; color: #fff; text-shadow: none; }
**/

/***** Top content *****/

.logo {
    margin-right: 20px;
}

.company-heading {
    text-shadow: 2px 2px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.6);
}

.top-content {
    margin: 0 auto;
    text-align: left;
    color: #fff;
    -webkit-background-size:cover;
    background-size:cover;
    width: 100%;
    height: auto;
}

.top-content a {
    color: #fff;
    text-decoration: underline;
}

.inner-bg {
    padding: 80px 0;
}

.top-content .phone {
	text-align: center;
}

.top-content .text {
	padding-top: 100px;
}

.top-content .description {
	margin: 40px 0 10px 0;
    font-size: 22px;
    line-height: 36px;
}

.top-content .top-button {
	margin-top: 80px;
}

/***** Features *****/

.features-container {
    margin: 0 auto;
    padding-bottom: 60px;
    color: #888;
    text-align: center;
}

.features {
    margin-top: 60px;
    padding-bottom: 10px;
}

.features h2 {
    color: #333;
}

.features p {
	margin-top: 30px;
	padding: 0 120px;
    font-size: 22px;
    line-height: 36px;
}

.features-box-1 {
	margin-top: 30px;
}

.features-box-1 h3 {
	font-size: 26px;
    font-weight: 700;
    color: #333;
    line-height: 30px;
}

.features-box-1 p {
	font-size: 18px;
    line-height: 32px;
}

.features-box-1 .features-box-1-icon {
    margin: 0 auto;
    font-size: 56px;
    color: #333;
}

/***** Single feature *****/

.single-feature-container {
    margin: 0 auto;
    text-align: center;
}

.single-feature-text {
    margin-top: 60px;
    padding-bottom: 10px;
}

.single-feature-text p {
	margin-top: 30px;
	padding: 0 120px;
    font-size: 22px;
    line-height: 36px;
}

.single-feature-img {
	margin-top: 30px;
}

.single-feature-img-description {
	margin-top: 70px;
	font-size: 18px;
    line-height: 32px;
	text-align: right;
}

.single-feature-img-description p {
	margin-bottom: 30px;
}

.single-feature-bg {
	color: #fff;
}

.single-feature-no-bg {
	color: #888;
}

.single-feature-no-bg h2 {
	color: #333;
}

.single-feature-no-bg .single-feature-img-description {
	text-align: left;
}

.single-feature-no-bg .single-feature-img-description strong { color: #333; }

/***** Call to action *****/

.call-to-action-container {
    margin: 0 auto;
    padding-bottom: 60px;
    color: #888;
    text-align: center;
}

.call-to-action-text {
    margin-top: 60px;
    padding-bottom: 10px;
}

.call-to-action-text h2 {
	color: #333;
}

.call-to-action-text p {
	margin-top: 30px;
    font-size: 22px;
    line-height: 36px;
}

.call-to-action-button {
	margin-top: 40px;
}

/***** Footer *****/

footer {
	padding: 30px 0;
	background: #333;
	text-align: center;
}

.footer-copyright {
	margin: 15px 0 0 0;
	font-size: 18px;
    line-height: 32px;
    color: #fff;
}

.footer-copyright a {
	color: #fff;
	border-bottom: 1px dashed #eee;
}
.footer-copyright a:hover { border: 0; }

/* Email Sign Up Form */
#mc_embed_signup {width: 500px; padding-top: 10px; margin-right: auto; }
#mc_embed_signup input {border:1px solid #999; font-size: 16px; color: #333; font-weight: bold; -webkit-appearance:none;}
#mc_embed_signup input[type=checkbox]{-webkit-appearance:checkbox;}
#mc_embed_signup input[type=radio]{-webkit-appearance:radio;}
#mc_embed_signup input:focus {border-color:#333;}
#mc_embed_signup .button {clear:both; background-color: #333 ; border: 0 none; color: #FFFFFF; cursor: pointer; display: inline-block; font-size:15px; font-weight: bold; height: 32px; line-height: 32px; padding:0; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: top; white-space: nowrap; width: auto;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color:#999;}
#mc_embed_signup .small-meta {font-size: 11px;}
#mc_embed_signup .nowrap {white-space:nowrap;}
#mc_embed_signup .clear {clear:none; display:inline;}

#mc_embed_signup label {font-size:16px; padding-bottom:10px; font-weight:bold;}
#mc_embed_signup input.email {padding:11px 0; text-indent:5px; width:58%; min-width:130px;}
#mc_embed_signup input.button {width:35%; min-width:90px; height: 45px;}

#mc_embed_signup div#mce-responses {float:left; top:-1.4em; padding:0em .5em 0em .5em; overflow:hidden; width:90%;margin: 0 5%; clear: both;}
#mc_embed_signup div.response {margin:1em 0; padding:1em .5em .5em 0; font-weight:bold; float:left; top:-1.5em; z-index:1; width:80%;}
#mc_embed_signup #mce-error-response {display:none;}
#mc_embed_signup #mce-success-response {color:#529214; display:none;}
#mc_embed_signup label.error {display:block; float:none; width:auto; margin-left:1.05em; text-align:left; padding:.5em 0;}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Tag: texas great debate
NHI to team up with longtime partner Austin College for 2023 Texas Great Debate
Posted: September 30, 2022 at 9:37 pm / Great Debate, NHI Programs
Once again, the road to the National Hispanic Institute's fabled Silver Cup will go through Sherman. NHI's Executive Vice President, Nicole Nieto, was at Austin College on Friday to meet with Michael Deen, the school's Dean of Students, in advance of the school resuming its host role for the vital Texas Great Debate competition. For […]
Tip of Texas wins fifth straight title at revived, energized 2022 Texas Great Debate
Posted: June 15, 2022 at 6:45 am / Great Debate, NHI Programs
In National Hispanic Institute parlance, Tip of Texas refers the region highlighting talent from Cameron County, especially Brownsville. But it's also become synonymous with winning the Silver Cup. The Tip of Texas team won the 2022 Texas Great Debate at Schreiner University in Kerrville, which ran from June 11-14, making it five straight titles and […]
Texas Great Debate kicks off NHI's full summer of in-person programming
Posted: June 12, 2022 at 5:47 pm / Great Debate, NHI Programs
With the fabled Silver Cup on a table next to him, National Hispanic Institute senior vice president Chris Nieto led team after team in a roll call at Saturday's opening ceremonies for the 2022 Texas Great Debate. In a ballroom at Schreiner University, along with co-educational director Mercedes Mercado, he called on students from all […]


text:
Can You Still Eat Lettuce When It Turns Red?
Is rusty lettuce safe to eat? Yes, the salad is still good, so don't waste it. It may look unappetizing (much like the white stuff in eggs or the white stuff on oranges), but the situation is easily salvaged. All you have to do is cut off the rusty spots with a chef's knife.
Can you eat lettuce when it turns red?
Is it OK to eat pink lettuce?
When should you not eat lettuce?
Can you get sick from eating old lettuce?
Why is my bagged salad red?
Why does my iceberg lettuce turn red?
Why does bagged lettuce turn pink?
What does lettuce gone bad look like?
Is discolored lettuce bad?
How can you tell if salad has gone bad?
How long can lettuce last in the fridge?
Thrive Cuisine confirms that rotten lettuce is still safe to eat. The enzymes present at this stage don't harm your digestive system at all, but the lettuce has lost a good amount of flavor and nutritional value. It's also not exactly appetizing to look at.
Although discoloration is generally a sign of stress and age, pink lettuce is safe to eat as long as it doesn't show any signs of decay, such as wilting or slime (via Mental Floss). Pink lettuce is associated with pink ribs – a stress response that causes the lettuce ribs to turn from white to pink.
Slimy or soft leaves. When the whole thing is soft and wet and the leaves are darker than usual, throw it out. That's why 99 times out of 100 you'll throw away your lettuce.
An unpleasant smell. If it smells bad, it's over.
This is because germs can stick to the surface of leaves and even penetrate them. If you eat contaminated leafy greens without first cooking them, e.g. B. in a salad or on a sandwich, can make you sick. CDC estimates that germs on products eaten raw cause a large percentage of foodborne illness in the United States.
What's that red stuff on lettuce? It's really a pretty simple explanation. The red-brown stuff that appears on your lettuce, often near the root, is what most professional chefs refer to as "rust". It's a pretty apt name, when you think about it. p>
Another reason why lettuce will "rust" or turn red is exposure to ethylene gases. Lettuce is particularly sensitive to ethylene gas, which causes reddening of the stalk or rib of lettuce. Ethylene is a common gas that is abundant in ripening fruits and vegetables.
Too much ethylene gas: Ethylene gas is produced naturally when certain fruits and vegetables ripen, and it can cause your lettuce to turn pink. Bananas, avocados, and apples in particular give off a lot of ethylene gas, so make sure your salad is stored away from them in the fridge.
To tell if your lettuce is spoiled, look for brown or black spots on its leaves, which indicate it has started to rot. The leaves may also be slimy, soft, drooping, or wrinkled if they've gone bad. Fresh lettuce usually has little to no smell. So if it smells bad or pungent, it's best to throw it away.
A-The brown spots on lettuce may be cosmetically undesirable, but they do not render the lettuce inedible. The stains can be the result of high storage temperature. Lettuce should be stored in an airtight container at a relatively low temperature.
Some common hallmarks of bad lettuce are discoloration, a damp texture, and a foul smell. A green lettuce has gone bad when green lettuce turns brown. A great way to keep lettuce crisp and fresher for longer is to place it in the Tupperware salad container.
Loose leaf lettuces can last for seven to 10 days if stored properly, but lettuce will last much longer. Unwashed and unwashed, lettuce will keep in the refrigerator for one to three weeks. However, compared to other leafy greens, lettuce is the champion for long shelf life.
https://www.tastingtable.com/679593/heres-why-your-lettuce-is-turning-red/
https://www.healthdigest.com/457536/is-it-safe-to-eat-pink-lettuce/
https://www.doesitgobad.com/does-lettuce-go-bad/
https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/communication/leafy-greens.html
https://www.rd.com/article/red-stuff-on-lettuce/
https://www.garden.eco/why-does-lettuce-turn-red
https://www.eatingwell.com/article/7966566/why-does-lettuce-turn-pink/
https://www.wikihow.com/Tell-if-Lettuce-Has-Gone-Bad
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1991-05-27-9102170410-story.html
https://www.eatbydate.com/vegetables/fresh-vegetables/salad-shelf-life-expiration-date/
https://www.tasteofhome.com/article/tips-tricks-keep-lettuce-fresh/
1What Is Mr Congeniality?
2Who Was the Cartoon Aardvark?
3How Did Chloe From Siesta Key Lose Weight?
4How Do You Clean a Buffalo Nickel?
5Is Sam Winchester Worthy of Mjolnir?
6How Do I Pair My Bose Acoustimass 300 Subwoofer?
7What Is Foot Lever?
8What Batteries Does a Leappad Take?
9How Do You Get a Girl Actor on Hs Story?
10How Do You Convert Amps to Mega Amps?
10How Do I Add Webroot Extensions to Firefox?


text:
Arsenal vs Burnley Live Score and Live Stream
Arsenal are playing Burnley at the Premier League of England on January 23. The match will kick off 14:00 UTC.
ScoreBat is covering Arsenal vs Burnley in real time, providing the live stream and live score of the match, team line-ups, full match stats, live match commentary and official video highlights. We cover all matches of England Premier League in real time and provide live streaming whenever possible.
URL: https://www.scorebat.com/arsenal-vs-burnley-live-stream/
You can watch Arsenal vs Burnley live stream here on ScoreBat when the official streaming is available. We will provide only official live stream strictly from the official channels of England Premier League, Arsenal or Burnley whenever it is available. Live streaming will begin when the match is about to kick off.
Arsenal (also known as Arsenal FC) and Burnley (commonly referred to as Burley) are football clubs from England and they are playing this match of Premier League on Sunday. Make sure to follow it live here on ScoreBat.
We are updating team formations and line-ups for Arsenal - Burnley in real time.
Explore stats from Arsenal vs Burnley on ScoreBat - we are updating the numbers on this page every second of the game.
Arsenal and Burnley have met 6 times since May 2019. Arsenal have won 3 times, 2 matches ended in a draw while Burnley have won once. The most recent match between them took place on September 18, 2021 at the Premier League of England where Arsenal won 0-1. Arsenal have scored 7 goals in these 6 head-to-head matches in total while Burnley have scored 4. So, overall, Arsenal have a better head-to-head record against Burnley in their recent history.
Arsenal have won 11 of their 20 matches in Premier League, drawing 2 and having 7 defeats this season. They have scored 33 goals - 1.65 per match, conceding 25 - 1.25 per match. Burnley have won 1 of their 17 matches in Premier League, drawing 8 and having 8 defeats this season. They have scored 16 goals - 0.94 per match, conceding 27 - 1.59 per match.
Arsenal have played a draw with Liverpool in their previous match while Burnley are on a losing streak - they have lost to Huddersfield, Leeds and Manchester United in their previous 3 matches. Overall, Arsenal have won 13 of their last 20 matches, losing 5 and drawing 2, while Burnley have won 3 of their last 20 matches, losing 9 and drawing 8. In their most recent 6 matches Arsenal have won 3 times (0-5 against Norwich City on 26th of December, 5-1 against Sunderland on 21st of December and 1-4 against Leeds on 18th of December), lost twice (1-0 against Nottingham Forest on 9th of January and 1-2 against Manchester City on 1st of January) and drew once (0-0 against Liverpool on 13th of January). In their most recent 6 matches Burnley have lost 4 times (1-2 against Huddersfield on 8th of January, 3-1 against Leeds on 2nd of January, 3-1 against Manchester United on 30th of December and 1-0 against Newcastle United on 4th of December) and drew twice (0-0 against West Ham United on 12th of December and 0-0 against Wolves on 1st of December).
Arsenal haven't played a draw in their previous 10 home matches.
Burnley have failed to keep a clean sheet in their previous 3 matches.
Burnley have gone 3 consecutive away matches without a draw.
As always, England Premier League's live standings are availble and updated in real time. Arsenal are 5th in the table with 35 points after 20 matches, while Burnley are 20th with 11 points in 17 matches.
We are adding goal videos and full video highlights of the match between Arsenal and Burnley in real time. The videos of the goals are added usually minutes after the actual event if there are any official videos available. Full video highlights of Arsenal - Burnley are being added as they become available on the official social media channels of the league or the teams.
Scheduled For Sunday