text:
Interview with Congressman Tom Tancredo
Hunter is Different
Duncan Hunter Interview
Another '60s Legacy
More '60s Historical Revisionism
Interview with Congressman Tom Tancredo, candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, recorded Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 5:00 pm by Tom McLaughlin for Family Security Matters.
Thank you for calling Congressman. I'll be recording this interview if that's all right.
You were the first government official I ever heard raise the issue of illegal immigration, at least from where I live here in Maine . . .
. . . and you must be pretty gratified that ah . . .
I am. I am. It's almost a - last night when we passed the amendment that I had proposed to the Justice Department funding bill, and it said that no funding from this bill can be used for the incarceration of Messrs. Ramos and Compian, I'm telling you - that alone is the most amazing thing I have ever seen here. First of all, it's a unique undertaking that had never been tried before. And secondly, to have it pass with a voice vote because Democrats did not even want to have some of their members exposed by having to cast a recorded vote, so they could not require a recorded vote - they just passed it on voice . . .
That will mean that we'll have to watch them carefully because they're going to have to try and take it out during the Conference Committee that will occur after the Senate passes their version of the Commerce-State-Justice. But nonetheless, the point I'm trying to make is that it is an amazing change of attitude and atmosphere around here - something almost unbelievable to me.
They were pretty shook up last month when a [illegal alien amnesty] bill they thought was a sure thing went down.
That did it. That did it. It was a seismic shift there - I mean it was amazing. On Tuesday we had only thirty-six votes. On Thursday we had fifty-three and every one of them were senators who were up for reelection who changed their votes. It was only because of the massive outpouring of sentiment, and that made everybody understand what we're really dealing with here. Until then, I don't think people really believed that Americans paid attention to it or were concerned about it. They really believed they could finesse the issue, you know?
Yes. Yes.
. . . just slip it by - nobody will really care - no big issue with most Americans. Democrats looked at it as new votes coming in. Republicans looked at it as cheap labor.
Right. That about sums it up. It was quite a shift all right. Do you think the "new media" could take some of the credit for that?
You bet your life. Talk radio and the internet - those two things. The entire playing field is different here and it's because of the fact that people are willing to participate in this process we call a democracy - or more accurately, a republic - and the fact that they are getting information they would not get through the traditional media. I announced my candidacy for president on talk radio and I did so because, as I told John Michaelson on his show in Iowa, I'm doing this, in a way, because you guys are the ones who brought me to the party. I've done now almost three thousand radio shows and that's [only since] we started keeping count about five years ago. Talk radio has given me - and certainly others - given me a megaphone that I would never have had otherwise. Then what happens is you can pick it up in the blogosphere and all the rest of it. It's amazing and I just can't tell you how pleased I am about this and how important it is because, really, I must admit to you that I am fearful for the republic. When only 14% of the general public actually gives approval of the Congress - and twenty-something percent for the president - you know it's not because I'm an incumbent. The fact is I would rate us poorly also - the fact that there are 85% of the people out there who are disconnected from their government, who don't believe it works, and you know what? It doesn't work. It doesn't. And I mean people see it and they become disillusioned. That's why it's so neat that phones rang off the hook in the Senate and it changed the bill. It reaffirmed the belief that people's voices can be heard. I will tell you, I did feel at certain points in time, and have mentioned this to others who have agreed - during the debate on that bill I had the feeling, recognizing the intensity of the debate out there in the country itself . . .
. . . that had it passed, I believe there would have been violence, in a very limited - don't get me wrong - I'm not talking about a revolution with everybody in the streets with arms - but I'm talking about certain areas, small, maybe on the border, there would have been violence. It's amazing how intensely people feel about this issue. And thank God there was a revolution of sorts, a small one just the ballot box at this stage - at the email and telephone stage - of stopping legislation.
Yes, indeed. Um, I want to stop right here for a minute so I can do a check. I hope that cell phone is working. (I checked my computer recording equipment because I was getting very weak audio from him. He was in the Capitol and he took the opportunity to cast a vote. I called him back on a land line but still the signal was weak. We continued anyway, but the audio was so weak I can't make a podcast.)
I'm going to the twelve basic questions which I think Mr. Moore gave you?
Actually I don't believe I have them but go ahead anyway.
Okay. When and why did you decide to run for president?
It was about four months ago and it was because I had talked to and listened to the other people who had expressed a desire to run. I spoke personally to Romney for instance and asked him about his position on immigration and it was not satisfactory. And when I recognized there was no one there, there was absolutely no one there who was going to take this issue on, I decided that I had to do it. I have to tell you there is no allure to the office of president. Of course it's enormously powerful but there's no allure to it. I do what I do because issues need to be advanced. I articulate them as best I can, and if I'm president of the United States I will implement them. I did not begin this by simply seeking the office of president, if you know what I mean. It wasn't me saying: "What will I do today? I know. I'll run for president." I did it because I could find no one else who will address these issues in the way that I believe they need to be addressed.
Okay. What do you see as our biggest domestic problem? Probably the immigration issue as we just discussed.
Of course it is. The most serious domestic policy issue would have to be immigration.
What do you see as our biggest foreign policy problem?
The Middle East. Actually, the war on Radical Islam.
Um-hmm. I like the way you phrased that. In our struggle against Radical Islam, which is the way I phrased it here [also], how important is the propaganda aspect of it - the propaganda war?
There are two ways to fight any war: one is with the force of arms, and the other is with the force of ideas. They're equally at issue.
I'm trying to ask all the candidates the same questions and the next one is about immigraton again, but let me rephrase it: As president, what is the first thing you would do?
I'd turn to my Attorney General and tell him that he should begin a vigorous enforcement of the law against hiring people who are here illegally. Employers who are violating the law I'd want to be one of the top priorities. Then I would turn to the Homeland Security Secretary and say, you are to secure that southern border and then start securing the northern border with, first of all, a triple-layer boundary fence, and secondly the human resources behind it that need to be there in order to secure it.
Okay. How do you understand the first part of our Fourteenth Amendment?
I'll tell you what - it has absolutely nothing to do with illegal immigration. It was a response to the Dredd Scott Decision. It was made entirely for the purpose of assuring that children of slaves would have benefit of citizenship and it has nothing to do with illegal immigrants [anchor babies]. There's specific wording in there which would indicate, ah, the case. I think the phrase is, ah, "people have be in the United States and under the jurisdiction thereof," Umm . . .
And, ah, that is an important phrase.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . ."
Okay. Interesting little quote. I hadn't looked at it that way before. Would you require states and/or cities to restrict federally-subsidized social services to citizens only?
I would if I could. The social services - if they're not federally funded the federal government really doesn't play a role in this, but any social services that have federal funds attached - absolutely. Now that's almost everything to tell you the truth. I don't know that there's any county in the United States of America that doesn't administer some sort of social service benefit that's supplemented by federal funds, so yeah. Citizenship has got to mean something.
All right. What would victory in Iraq look like?
Well, it would look like a stabilized Iraq. It would not look, geopolitically like we see it today, but it would be a place of some degree of stability, and a place that is a buffer in a way between the Shia crescent and the Sunni crescent.
Okay, and how would you get there?
Ah, the first thing we would have to do is disengage as the police force in Iraq. It's not the appropriate use of our military. It must be turned over to the Iraqis and I mean now. But we cannot withdraw from the area. We will be there for a long time and I don't care who is president, there is no way we will not have troops in and around Iraq and in the Middle East - in that area - for a long time. There are national security interests that are at stake there - that keep us there - but we cannot continue to be the police force in Iraq. Impossible. That job has got to be taken over by the Iraqis - the patrolling of their streets in their own Humvees or in those we give them. I don't care. The simple police, the constabulary activities in Iraq have to be done by Iraqis and there may be a great deal of violence, I know, but there's a great deal of violence, of course, every day. And civil war? Well it could certainly be defined that way now. But one thing I do know is that civil war eventually - eventually ends in civil peace. It may be a long and ugly period of time, but we're going to have to turn the keys to the house over to the Iraqis, and we should do so as soon as possible. I mean right away.
Okay. How important do you see democracy in the Middle East?
It may not be something we necessarily picture or define that develops over there, and I didn't say democracy. I just said stability.
We have created an embryonic democracy. Whether it remains that way or not is still sort of, ah, something that is up in the air. What I want is stability. The idea of a democratic Iraq is not imperative. Preferable, but not imperative. What we want is a stable Iraq - not attached to either the Sunni or the Shia, and that dominates the world around them. That is preferable, but is it possible? Oh boy - another question entirely.
Okay. Next door - how would you deal with Iran?
Iran is a huge question mark because we don't know exactly the extent to which the internal politics of Iran are playing out. There is hope. Oh, hang on a minute. Gotta vote . . . (I waited on the line until he came back) . . . Okay. What I was saying is, a great deal of information - mixed messages - a great deal of mixed messages are coming out of Iran that would suggest we have a possibility of a transition, a regime change, a modification of the regime, all because the population there is very mixed. It's only 60% Persian. There are a lot of Sunnis even. There are a lot of Christians. There are a lot of Kurds, and it is a relatively well-educated population and, if you can believe polls taken there, Americans are thought of very well by a large percentage of the - especially the younger population - so the tricky thing is to bring about a modification of their government and not do so with boots on the ground which would be, certainly, a disaster and an embroilment in the conflict that I'm not sure we can be successful in. We have to, on the other hand, do what we can to make sure that a guy [Mahmoud Ahmadinijad] who believes he is the transition point for the return of the Twelfth Imam . . .
. . . you know in that case you'll recall there are all kinds of catastrophic events that have to occur in order for the Twelfth Imam to return - and this guy thinks he's going to bring them about. I just don't think that it's a good idea to give this guy a bomb or a nuclear weapon or let him obtain one. So it's challenging - to say the least it is challenging, but you can work with the Iranian diaspora - there are a lot of people outside of the country and a lot of people inside of the country with whom you can work . . .
"You can work with the Iranian . . ."?
Diaspora. Uh, there are the . . .
Diaspora [Iranian nationals living abroad]. Oh, okay, yes right . . .
Because they want change, believe me.
So you have diplomatic, economic and military choices, and they are sometimes enormously challenging. For instance, we need to provide support - economic and moral, if you will - to the people inside of Iran who are working to overthrow the regime. But if we announced - if we actually said that - it puts a target on their back. I mean that's exactly what the Iranian government wants to show the Iranian people - that any dissent whatsoever is like an American plot being paid for by the CIA.
So how do you get that done? You need to provide financial support, but you sure as heck cannot announce it. We've actually made this mistake. We just announced the other day we're going to have $75 million that we're putting into a variety of different accounts for "democracy in Iran" but, boy, that's putting a very big target on the back of every Iranian dissident. And so it's a tricky process, I'm going to tell you that.
Um-hmm. I'm glad you know who the Twelfth Imam is and how that's a factor in what Ahmadinijad is trying to do over there.
You're the first candidate who has voiced that and I've interviewed four of them. Ah, what do you think of the old quote: "That government governs best that governs least"?
That's exactly right. I may have mentioned in our conversation - I can't remember - our converation has gone back and forth. I may have mentioned that most people believe that, ah, the government is not working. And that's because it isn't.
And that's because it's too big. It can't do all the things that people ask of it. Everybody has got to realize that. We cannot provide health care for every American; education for every American; social services for every American. The federal government was never designed for that. Never. The Constitution is clear about what our role is. We're going to protect and defend. That's it. If we just focused on that and let the states take care of the rest of the stuff, frankly, we would be able do a better job at what we can do. But, you know, demands are constant. Every time I speak, even in New Hampshire, Iowa, the heartland - where you think you are among the folks who - you know, New Hampshire, lets say. "Live Free or Die" right?
Yeah. I'm right next door.
[People are saying] "Live free or die? I don't think I want to die, and I want to ask the federal government to make sure I don't. You know, it's going to protect me with a bubble. I don't ever want to ever be ill, and if I do I want you to pay for it." It's astounding. We get what we demand and what we get is huge government and everybody complains about the deficit or the intrusive nature of government. Well, yeah! It's take your pick. What do you want?
How would you shrink the federal bureaucracy?
Believe me. It's called veto. It's called a veto. I would veto appropriations bill for these departments until they shut down the government.
I have no qualms about that. I lived through it. I was in Reagan's Administration when we actually - I used to send him faxes because didn't have emails - I was a Reagan appointee and I worked in the US Department of Education. My task was to help bring that thing to a closure. We couldn't close it individually but our task was to shrink it as much as possible because we couldn't even get legislation passed - after only two years, we could not reverse it [establishment of the DOE under Carter]. So the task was, okay, we're going to go in - we're going to reduce it dramatically. I went from 222 people working there in a regional office to 60. It's probably 500 now for all I know, but . . .
. . . and periodically the president would veto something, like a budget bill, and it would last over the weekend into Monday. I used to fax things like: "Mr. President: Please don't open that door. Don't give in. Keep it shut. Let's see how long it is before anybody knows it's closed."
Interesting. How would you interpret our Second Amendment?
Quite literally. There are people in the country, of course, who should not be allowed to have a gun. They are in prison or they are felons or they are a danger to themselves or others - but other than that, every law-abiding American should be able to keep and bear arms. I have my own concealed-carry permit and I will feel much safer when the District of Columbia ban is thrown out - when that appeal is upheld, I mean when the appeal is thrown out. One court has already overturned the thing.
How would you handle efforts to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine?
I would kill it fast. Certainly nothing would get across my desk. I guarantee it.
Okay. Last question: Is it possible for the federal government to monitor and keep records of crimes committed by illegal aliens?
Of course we can do it. I mean, or we could ignore it just like we've ignored all the laws about immigration and continue to erode the whole concept of rules.
Thank you very much for your time, Congressman, and I apologize for the technical difficulties. I don't think I'll be able to make a podcast, but I got it clearly enough that I can hear it and transcribe it - which I'll get onto right away.
You're welcome. Good-bye.
Posted by Tom McLaughlin at 12:16 PM No comments:
Labels: politics, presidential campaign, war
This column ran in local newspapers July 19th in association with the Hunter interview posted below
Congressman Duncan Hunter is running for president and I had a chance to interview him last week for a web site I've been working at called Family Security Matters. My experience with candidates running for national office over the years has been what I'd have to call underwhelming and I was bracing myself for more of the same, but I was very pleasantly surprised to discover that Duncan Hunter is different. Here is a man who knows exactly what he thinks and he states it plainly. I wasn't ready for that, but I found it refreshing - very refreshing. If this man gets more exposure, I suspect that many other Americans will like it too. Every time I asked a question, I got a straight answer. He didn't equivocate. I don't think it's in his nature.
Hunter is a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, a former Army Ranger. He's been a congressman for twenty-six years and was chairman of the House Armed Services for four years until Democrats regained majority control last November. Although lacking in name recognition, Hunter is strongest on the two issues that have emerged as those which concern ordinary Americans most - national security and illegal immigration. I'd never heard of Duncan Hunter until I saw him debate the rest of the Republican candidates on television. He stood out and I wondered, "Who is this guy?"
Two weeks ago, the president and the Congress were trying for the second time this year to ram through an illegal alien amnesty bill. Although it had bipartisan support, a vast majority of Americans strongly opposed rewarding people who violated our laws by sneaking into the United States and giving them priority over other immigrants who waited in line and went by the rules. As a vote for cloture came up in the Senate, their switchboard short-circuited due to an unprecedented volume of calls, nearly all in opposition. Twelve senators switched their votes at the last minute and the bill failed again. I began to realize that Congressman Hunter has been out front on this issue for years - and nobody in government has done more to stop the invasion across our southern border than he has.
When I asked him how, as president, he would deal with illegal immigration, he said: "You know, I wrote the bill that mandates a border fence that was signed into law by the president. That's the 850 miles of border fence that is now mandated to be constructed across Arizona and New Mexico and Texas . . . it's a double fence with a border patrol road in between. I built the fence in San Diego which has reduced the smuggling out there of people and narcotics by more than ninety percent. The 854-mile fence is mandated to be constructed across the major smuggler's corridors in those three states . . . That will go a long way toward enforcement of the border, which is key not only to the immigration issue, but also to the security issue. So . . . I'd just simply carry out the very law that I wrote as a congressman . . .
He believes the United States will prevail in Iraq and defines victory as " a country that is a friend, not an enemy of the United States - a country that has a modicum of freedom and which will not be a state sponsor of terrorism." When I asked him how important the propaganda war is in our struggle against Radical Islam, he responded: "Here's what I would say: with the emergence of mass media since [World War II], the emergence of things like the internet, the proliferation of television stations and radio stations around the world, has minimized the ability of any one entity to shape the news. Now I would say that what I call the "American example," that is, just the basic decency and goodness of the American people that is manifested in lots and lots of activities, like the fact that we undertook - in the tsunami - we undertook an airlift that was bigger than any airlift since the Berlin Airlift. We responded with the American fleet to humanitarian requirements in a way that was totally unprecedented. I think the world takes note of that. I also think that in Iraq, al Qaeda for example, in driving these bomb-laden trucks into crowds of women and children, has damaged its image in the Muslim world. I think that's been evidenced by the new move by the Sunni population in Anbar Province against al Qaeda leadership and the turnaround that we've seen in cities like Fallujah and Hamadi."
When I asked him how he interprets the Second Amendment, he said: "Well, the right to keep and bear arms - I think that's a very important part of homeland security. The ability of a person to own and maintain a firearm and to protect his house and his community and his country is an important part of our national security. I'm also a big hunter but I think hunting is not the reason you've got a right to keep and bear arms. [It's for] personal security and the security of our community and our country."
Here is a genuine conservative candidate. Republican conservatives disappointed with their party's performance of late will find Congressman Duncan Hunter very refreshing. You can read the entire interview on my blog here.
Our Islamofascist enemies know us better than we know them. They know they're in a long war against us, but too many Americans don't realize we're even at war. Not really. For many of us the two biggest theaters of the war, Afghanistan and Iraq, are little more than inconveniences - unless you have a friend or loved one there. Then you know it's a real war. An increasing percentage of Americans just want it all to stop. Our Islamofascist enemies understand this and that's their advantage.
What's even worse is that our enemies know us better than we know ourselves. The "us" and the "we" I'm referring to here are people who comprise what used to be called "western civilization." If you're old enough to remember the courses you took way back in high school or college called "Western Civ I" and "Western Civ II" - the courses which have since been expunged at leftist campuses (which most are) - then you know I'm referring to Western Europe, the United States, Australia, Canada, etc. Islamofascists are enemies of Western Civilization. They want to take over the whole world and make it Muslim - and they're willing to die in the process. Very few westerners understand this. It's not a secret - they've declared it over and over in fatwas, in the mosques and in the madrassas - but they know westerners are so busy celebrating diversity and multiculturalism, they cannot fathom that Islamofascists seek worldwide monoculturalism.
Our enemies see us as the once-mighty coalition that won World War I, World War II and the Cold War, but has become soft, decadent, salacious, satanic and lacking will to fight. They believe they can defeat us because they believe they defeated the godless Soviet Union in Afghanistan. It took an assemblage of Radical Muslims from all over the Islamic world ten years to do it, but they did and they watched the USSR disintegrate right afterward. Critics claim Radical Islam's victory was due to the weakened state of the Soviet Union at the time more than the strength of Radical Islam. But no matter - our enemies believe it was Allah's will that prevailed over the godless communists because Muslims practiced jihad there, and they expect the same result in their war against the west.
They know Western Europe and the United Nations are paper tigers. After they attacked the United States on September 11th, they were surprised when we counter-attacked and took over Afghanistan in a few weeks - and did it from the other side of the world after the ten-year Soviet effort failed from right next door. The even quicker defeat of Iraq shocked them again and we had them on their heels. The Libyans started kissing up to us - the Lebanese and Egyptians too. Syria and Iran were isolated as terror-sponsoring states.
Radical Muslims stuck to their plan though, believing that Americans had no stomach for a long conflict. They expected leftist Democrats to undercut the American people's confidence in their commander-in-chief just as they did in Vietnam. Our enemies knew they could parade the Palestinians as Muslim, poster-child victims of western "imperialism" perpetrated by Israelis and Americans that and leftist Democrats would lap it up. They knew the American left hated its military and that hatred could be exploited just at the Vietnamese communists exploited it through leftist stooges like Jane Fonda and John Kerry. Our enemies knew that if they staged a demonstration, they could count on our liberal media to be there, to film angry, Muslim, young men burning American flags, and to lead with that footage on the evening news. They believed a steady diet of this would wear down American resolve and that weariness would be expoited by leftist Democrats in biennial elections. They believe we'll pull out of Iraq, just as we pulled out of Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.
Are they right? It looks that way so far. Every candidate for the Democrat presidential nomination demands either an immediate pull-out or a timetable for withdrawal. So do leftist Democrats in Congress. Does this encourage our enemies? Of course. Yet every leftist candidate insists (s)he supports our troops and withdrawal isn't defeat. It's "redeployment" - kind of like the old Three Stooges line: "Advance to the rear!" Americans who agree expect the result will be as it was in Vietnam - that the war would just stop for Americans, that there would be peace - in the US at least, and Radical Muslims will just leave us alone too.
Leftist Democrats aren't quite ready to cut off funding for the Iraq war as they did for the Vietnam War, but they're getting closer. They're licking their fingers and holding them up in the wind. The leftward wind is a wayward wind, and it's picking up.
Posted by Tom McLaughlin at 10:52 AM 6 comments:
Labels: History, Islam, liberal pieties, war
Telephone interview recorded on Friday, July 13, 2007 at 2:30 pm EST by Tom McLaughlin for Family Security Matters.
Hello. This is Duncan Hunter.
Thank you for calling, Congressman. I'll be recording this conversation. Is that all right with you?
Okay. Let's get started. I have twelve basic questions for all the presidential candidates, but I have one especially for you given your background. You served your country as a soldier in Vietnam. You must be having some thoughts about what happened in 1975 when the Democrats were in the majority in the United States Congress, and what is being threatened today for Iraq now that Democrats have taken control of Congress again.
Well, I think we're going to prevail in Iraq, and I think the government of Iraq is going to hold and that the army will hold. There are a hundred and twenty battalions that make up the Iraqi Army. They're being trained and equipped right now and a lot of them are getting quite a bit of combat operational experience.
In my estimation, Iraq will move along. It's an inept government as most new governments are, but I think it will mature over a period of time. I'm reminded that in Vietnam, Congress totally cut off aid to South Vietnam - which was a left-wing reaction to the Democrat, left-dominated Congress. It really, to a large degree, was a function of Watergate.
Um-hmm. Yes it was. Do you have as much confidence in our Democrat-controlled Congress as you do that the Iraqi government will hold?
Yes. There are much smaller margins and a less left-leaning Congress now than we had right after 1974. Nixon was paralyzed by Watergate in 1974.
Yes. Well, I hope you're right. Have you seen the rest of my questions? I sent them ahead of time to Mr. Tyler.
No. I haven't seen them.
Well, I'm going to them now. First of all: When and why did you decide to run for president?
Well, I've always been focused on national security issues during my entire career in congress - twenty-six years - the last four years as chairman of the Armed Services Committee. I think the next five to seven years are going to be years in which national security is a major focus for our country, and I believe that I have particular credentials, strong credentials, to commander-in-chief. I've served the country. My son has served two tours in Iraq, and I've been a member of the Armed Services Committee for twenty-six years and a chairman of the committee for four. That means I can look the American people in the eye in a military crisis and say, "We're all in this together." I think that's an important element, or dimension, to bring to national leadership. I also think the country needs a rebirth of its economic base, and particularly its industrial base. Right now we're suffering under what I consider to be very bad trade policies, in which our trading competitors benefit from an uneven playing field, in which our manufacturing industry is double-taxed when it exports, and in which our competitors pay no taxes. We're allowing China to cheat on trade right now and that unbalanced or uneven playing field is accruing to our detriment. It's caused massive trade imbalances - massive trade losses for the US and the resultant losses of jobs and business. I want to change that as president.
Okay, that's the why of it . . .
I'll stop the Chinese from cheating on trade.
Okay. When did you make the decision to run?
I thought about it over the last several years and it was a decision I made about four or five months before I announced.
All right.
So, I don't have a particular, ah, moment, but it was decision that was a long time in the making.
Okay. What do you see as our biggest domestic problem?
I think, ah, high-paying jobs and a strong economy for this next generation, so they can have the opportunity they deserve and the educational opportunity they deserve. That's going to require a strong industrial base. That's why it's so important that we renew America's manufacturing base. I think that is, in fact, our biggest problem because the manufacturing base is important to Americans for two reasons: One, it supports high-paying jobs that will allow this next generation to support an aging generation which will be dependent upon them. But secondly, a strong industrial base is important to national security. As the industrial base erodes and moves off-shore, that's going to make it very difficult for the United States over a period of time to be able to continue to have the support that it needs in the industrial base to be able to maintain all of the weapons systems and the weapons development that we need.
Basically, America's industrial base - what FDR called the "arsenal of democracy" - won World War I, World War II and the Cold War for this country. That industrial base is being fractured and moved off-shore right now. We need to stem that hemorrhage of industrial capability and bring some of it back to the United States. I think we should take down manufacturing taxes to zero in this country. We need to stop the Chinese from cheating on trade. That means passing the Hunter/Ryan bill which stops currency devaluation on the part of China - they're devaluing their currency by forty percent right now - and that will provide some stability to the manufacturing base in this country.
So, you are not against what is commonly referred to as "free trade." You would like to re-negotiate the position of the United States in that realm. Would that be a safe way to sum it up?
Yes, but in two areas: One is that China is cheating on the trade rules as they stand right now. When you devalue your currency by forty percent, that's a species of state subsidy and that allows Chinese products to undercut the costs of American products across the board. The other one is that the trade deal we signed after World War II, when most of the world was burned out, was very uneven. It gave other nations the ability to subsidize their industries by rebating their taxes to them - allowing that to take place for every nation except the United States. The United State is the only one of the top ten trading countries that cannot rebate its taxes to its manufacturers.
And that's because of some policy made domestically and not because of some international agreements?
No, that's an international deal that we made. We agreed under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade that we would be treated unequally from all the other trading countries of the world. It was almost foreign aid. We did that after World War II when the rest of the world was in pretty bad shape. Today the countries that were burned out now have robust manufacturing capability.
Indeed. Well, what do you see as our biggest foreign policy problem?
I think that, obviously, the development of nuclear weapons in Iran - the pursuit of nuclear weapons in Iran, the fact that North Korea has some now and is racing to develop the means for delivery, and the emergence of China as a new superpower stepping into the shoes of the former Soviet Union.
Um-hmm. Okay. In our struggle against Radical Islam, how important is the propaganda war?
Here's what I would say: with the emergence of mass media since [World War II], the emergence of things like the internet, the proliferation of television stations and radio stations around the world, has minimized the ability of any one entity to shape the news. Now I would say that what I call the "American example," that is, just the basic decency and goodness of the American people that is manifested in lots and lots of activities, like the fact that we undertook - in the tsunami - we undertook an airlift that was bigger than any airlift since the Berlin Airlift.
Hmm. I didn't realize that.
Yes, and we responded, with the American fleet, to the requirements - to the humanitarian requirements - in a way that was totally unprecedented. I think the world takes note of that. I also think that in Iraq, al Qaeda for example, in driving these bomb-laden trucks into crowds of women and children, has damaged its image in the Muslim world. I think that's been evidenced by the new move by the Sunni population in Anbar Province against al Qaeda leadership.
And the turnaround that we've seen in cities like Fallujah and Hamadi.
So, as president you would use the bully pulpit to call more attention to actions like that.
Yes, I'd say to what I call the American example, the example of spreading freedom and supporting humanitarian operations around the world - all the good things that are manifest in America.
All right. How will you deal with our legal and illegal immigration problems?
You know, I wrote the bill that mandates a border fence that was signed into law by the president. That's the 850 miles of border fence that is now mandated to be constructed across Arizona and New Mexico and Texas. I wrote that bill. They've only built thirteen miles of that fence so far. Putting up a fence across the southern border - it's a double fence with a border patrol road in between - I built the fence in San Diego which has reduced the smuggling out there of people and narcotics by more than ninety percent. The 854-mile fence is mandated to be constructed across the major smuggler's corridors in those three states that I mentioned - Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. That will go a long way toward enforcement of the border, which is key not only to the immigration issue, but also to the security issue. So enforcement of the border is something I would put a lot of emphasis on. But number one - I'd just simply carry out the very law that I wrote as a congressman and that's the Border Fence Act.
Okay. How do you understand the first part of our Fourteenth Amendment, and I quote: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside"?
(The Congressman's car was passing through a suspension bridge and there was interference as I read the question) I haven't had a legal analysis of that amendment lately but I know Bilbray's legislation, Congressman Bilbray's legislation, contemplates that there's not an absolute right to have citizenship as a result of having been born in the United States, and I think that's a substantive argument which appears to have some merit.
So as president you would, say, use the Attorney General to challenge the way that's interpreted?
Yeah, well, I don't think you want a president that makes decisions on fairly complicated legal rulings as he's driving in a car through a bridge. I would say this - what I've seen of that analysis of the Constitutional amendment [in the proposed bill] appears to have merit and I'd look very carefully at that. I don't think it makes good sense that people can simply be smuggled into the United States and having done that, acquiring citizenship for their child.
I live in a sanctuary state - right on the border between Maine and New Hampshire on the Maine side - would you require states and cities to restrict federally-subsidized social services to citizens only?
I think, generally speaking, one thing about Americans is that we don't step over people who are dying on the basis that they are not citizens. We handle emergency calls for all.
But I would say that of course you would continue emergency medical care - life-saving medical care would not be denied people - but I think I think that it's absolutely appropriate that taxpayers' benefits not go to people who are here illegally.
Okay. You've already answered some of these questions . . .
Do you remember Proposition 187 we had in California?
I supported Prop 187.
Okay. Victory in Iraq: what would it look like? You pretty much described that in answer to the first question.
I would say a country that is a friend, not an enemy of the United States - a country that has a modicum of freedom and which will not be a state sponsor of terrorism.
Hmm. How important do you think democracy is in the Middle East?
Having a modicum of representative government, which I think Iraq has right now, is an important element of the seed that we've planted in that part of the Middle East. It is, I think, an important thing, and hopefully something that will - as difficult and as tough as this is - will lead to stable governments that will have a benign relationship with our nation. That should accrue to the long-term benefit of the United States and our interests in that region.
Do you think it would be . . .
It's not something that comes easy, but I think it's something that's worth working for. I think we do that - I think we pursue a modicum of democracy - understanding that it's being done in a culture that's been trained to accommodate dictators, and that the change is not easily delivered.
Hmm. Hopefully it will be contagious.
Yeah. Well, we saw little ripples in Lebanon and in Egypt after we, after the elections in Iraq.
We did. We did. How would you deal with Iran? You already partially answered that question as well, but . . .
Yeah. I think Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear devices.
And in my administration they would not be allowed.
All methods of persuasion on the table . . .
Okay. What do you think of the old quote: "That government is best that governs least"?
Attributed to Thomas Jefferson, but I guess he didn't say it. I guess it was Henry David Thoreau of all people, but . . .
I think that's generally a good statement. Of course all those statements are subject to exceptions. There are certain times when you need strong national leadership, especially in time of war, and there are times, for example when you need to enforce your borders and you need to have strong federal action.
Would you shrink our federal bureaucracy, other than the military?
I think we can bring the bureaucracy down markedly. We can even bring down some of the bureaucracy in the military.
All right. How would you interpret our Second Amendment?
Well, the right to keep and bear arms - I think that's a very important part of homeland security. The ability of a person to own and maintain a firearm and to protect his house and his community and his country is an important part of our national security.
Okay. Last question . . .
I'm also a big hunter but I think hunting is not the reason you've got a right to keep and bear arms.
Hunting is not the reason? More personal security.
Personal security and the security of our community and our country.
You know, especially when we've been invaded recently with the attack on 9-11, if there had been a ground attack that had accompanied the aerial attack in a city like New York where all the good people had been disarmed, it would have been devastating.
Certainly. Last question: How would you handle efforts as president to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine?
Well, I think the attempt to muzzle talk radio under the so-called Fairness Doctrine is a reflection of the fact that liberals don't like that most Americans are conservative. Talk radio is generally conservative because it reflects the views of the American people. The idea that you have to inject liberal views on talk radio [broadcast] to a community that is not liberal is, I think, an invalid concept. I think we're going to have to protect the free speech of talk radio from the objects of its criticism, and that is - liberal politicians.
Um, if I could ask one more - I saw on your web site that you would increase the size of our military. You were specific about Marines.
Yeah, about ten extra battalions for the US Marine Corps. We made this recommendation when I was chairman of the Armed Services Committee. You'd have to go back and look at the paperwork, but I believe it was ten battalions for the Marines and something like about eight additional Army brigade combat teams.
How big is a brigade?
A battalion is actually about 800 folks, so a brigade is maybe, ah, 3000 folks.
And you made that recommendation about four years ago?
We made it a recommendation two years ago to increase the size of the Army and the Marine Corps over the objection of the Pentagon which said they didn't [need them] - and I actually increased the size of the Marines over the last couple of years to 180,000 people.
You wrote a bill that was passed that would do so?
The Administration came back this year with a proposal that's in agreement with that. They do recommend now increasing the size of the Marine Corps and the Army. As a matter of fact, over the last couple of years we've increased the in-strength of the Army by 30,000 persons and we've increased the size of the Marine Corps to 180,000. I did that by putting in provisions for additional in-strength in the Marine Corps over the last several years.
Well Congressman, I really thank you for your time and Family Security Matters thanks you as well.
And best of luck with your campaign.
Posted by Tom McLaughlin at 8:55 AM 2 comments:
Labels: politics, presidential campaign
Again I assert that however baby boomers remember the sixties determines their view of the world today. If they believe changes in American life resulting from the sixties have been positive, they're liberal. If they have a negative view, they're conservatives.
One legacy of the early sixties - the civil rights movement for black Americans - is regarded almost universally as positive regardless of where one is on the political spectrum. Conservatives, however, don't agree with liberals that civil rights should morph into a "constitutional right" for women to abort their babies, or into a "constitutional right" for homosexuals to sodomize each other as Supreme Court decisions since the sixties have asserted.
Having commented in two previous columns on the sixties legacy in the areas of drugs and then sex, marriage and family, I now turn to how that legacy has affected America's view of its military. Sixties slogans such as "Make Love, Not War" or "Drop Acid, Not Bombs" or "What If They Gave A War And Nobody Came?" or the more recent derivative "War Is Not the Answer" are purported alternatives to military action. While many liberal boomers have thankfully stopped dropping acid, they still abhor the military.
Liberals have believed since the Johnson Administration that crime is caused by poverty, and if we can eliminate poverty we can eliminate crime. That Johnson's $2 trillion "War on Poverty" was a failure and crime rates skyrocketed does not affect their belief system. They apply the same flawed rationale to war, believing firmly that our present conflict with Radical Islam results from "oppression" of poor Muslims by British and American oil companies in the Middle East. How many times have you heard someone insist that "It's all about oil"?
Liberal boomers saw the Vietnam War as a struggle of poor peasants, championed by the communist National Liberation Front (the "Viet Cong" as our soldiers called them) against neo-colonial oppressors backed by the United States. Many like Jane Fonda openly cheered for the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese. Others like John Kerry depicted American soldiers as murderers and rapists in the tradition of Genghis Khan. I remember people insisting that oil had been discovered under the South China Sea and that's why the United States was fighting.
Liberal boomers who comprise most of the mainstream media today believe they stopped the Vietnam War, and they're not entirely wrong. They certainly undermined America's confidence in its military and in itself. Many believe they can stop war forever. If only the Wall Street Warmongers would stop exploiting other countries, then poverty would be eliminated and there would be no reason to fight. Everybody would get along. Conservatives know it's an impossible dream this side of heaven, but liberals believe it fervently.
That they sympathize with our current enemy, Radical Islam, puzzled me at first. Islamofascists stone adulterers and homosexuals to death. They degrade women. They impose sharia law - far harsher than any Republican get-tough policy ever was. They force conversions. All this is antithetical to social policies precious to liberals, so why support them? Then I realized: the '60s mindset of today's liberals holds that Islamofascists are victims of US imperialism. Their dogma of multiculturalism preaches that it's heresy to criticize Radical Islam because all cultures are equal. All, that is, except for conservative American culture which is the root of all evil. Islamofascists call America the "Great Satan" and that fits the '60s world view pretty well. Islamofascists may say they want to kill us all right now, but when they discover how nice and tolerant liberal boomers are, they'll lighten up.
Point out that Bin Laden, Zawahiri, Atta, the eight British doctor/terrorists and many others are (were in the case of Atta) affluent Arab Muslims from privileged backgrounds and not poor or oppressed. It won't change their minds.
Eliminate the military and you eliminate war, they think. They apply the same philosophy to guns - eliminate guns and you eliminate killing. Point out that cities with the highest murder rates are also the ones with the strictest gun control laws and it doesn't sway their thinking, if you can call it thinking. Point out places like Maine and New Hampshire with the lowest murder rates and also the loosest gun control laws and that won't sway them either.
Liberal boomer President Clinton "loathed" the military, remember? His supporters believed we have wars because we have a military, so he cut it back drastically. Al Qaeda blew up our embassies? Our ships? Exploded a truck bomb under the World Trade Center? Then shoot a few missiles at them but don't send any troops. That's what we did in Vietnam and look what happened. Good thing we pulled out of there, huh? Now we should pull out of Iraq too because "War Is Not The Answer." Send UN Peacekeepers with blue helmets and talk about the problem. When we fight them we only create more terrorists.
That's the mantra of the new Democrat majority in Congress and the Democrat presidential candidates for 2008. It's also the predominant theme in Humanities departments on college campuses where '60s liberals dominate faculties and write the multicultural history books used in our schools.
Islamofascists are aware of how America has changed since the sixties. They know we still have a powerful military, but they're banking on our lack of will to use it. Bin Laden said as much when he declared war against us in 1996. Perhaps our enemies know us better than we know ourselves.
Posted by Tom McLaughlin at 8:32 AM No comments:
Labels: History, Islam, sixties, war
As I wrote in a recent column, how baby boomers remember the sixties often determines how they view the world today. If they're nostalgic over the fortieth anniversary of the "Summer of Love" in San Francisco's Haight/Ashbury district and believe that changes in American culture resulting from the sixties have been largely positive, they probably consider themselves liberal and vote Democrat. If they have a generally negative view of those changes, they probably consider themselves conservative and vote Republican.
Most middle and high school textbooks offer a generally favorable view. No surprise because they tend to be written by boomers who are now liberal/left history professors. The following paragraph from Prentice Hall's "American Nation" - the most widely used text in American middle schools - is a good example:
Many young Americans became involved in the counterculture movement. Like the Beat Generation of the 1950s, members of the counterculture rejected traditional customs and ideas. Young people protested against the lifestyle of their parents by trying to be different. They developed their own lifestyle. They liked to wear torn, faded jeans and simple work clothes. Women wore miniskirts. Men often wore beards and let their hair grow long. Many listened to new forms of rock music. Some experimented with illegal drugs. Members of the counterculture adopted new attitudes and values. They criticized competition and the drive for personal success. They questioned some aspects of traditional family life.
I already debunked the claim that "Some . . . experimented with illegal drugs" as historical revisionism. Drug use was in fact widespread, habitual, highly destructive of countless American lives, and has been ever since. (So did Ted Nugent in a piece yesterday) That the counterculture "questioned some aspects of traditional family life" is just as laughable. They did far more than "question some aspects." They scorned and trashed nearly all of them.
It would be more accurate to say the counterculture staged a full-scale attack on the very institution of family that is the basic unit of any society, and that the results have been disastrous. Consider just one function of family common to almost all cultures everywhere - that of marriage. Every successful society has regulated it - most by encouraging monogamous, lifelong coupling between one male and one female which recognizes/sanctifies the basic life-creating function of human sexuality. Marriage creates the nuclear family which generates children, nurtures them, and thereby sustains the culture itself. The nuclear family is the best environment in which to raise those children while it also prolongs the life span and general health of mothers, fathers, grandmothers and grandfathers who remain faithful to it. Research studies prove it.
The counterculture's "Sexual Revolution" has resulted in a divorce rate of more than fifty percent, and that figure doesn't take into account cohabiting couples who join and split with dizzying frequency. An offshoot of the Sexual Revolution - the "Gay Rights" movement has further eroded traditional family life with its all-out push to redefine marriage itself - separating it completely from its primary procreating function.
The family has been so weakened that one in three children today are born to single mothers. Among blacks, it's three out of four. The "Women's Liberation" movement claimed "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" as if fathers were superfluous. The effect of fatherlessness is seen most tragically as increasingly violent crime among unsupervised young men. Without positive male role models in the form of fathers who protected and supported their wives and children, the young men (especially young black men) didn't learn respect for women either. Their hip-hop subculture treats them as if they were sex slaves.
The biggest issue pushed by the Women's Movement - another counterculture creation - has been abortion. Liberal women's groups spend most of their political capital promoting abortion. Feminists, as they call themselves, seem to believe American women cannot lead fulfilling lives unless they're able to abort their babies. More than forty million have been aborted since abortion was legalized - first in liberal states, then in the whole nation by 1973.
The counterculture's assault on the American family occurred simultaneously with the Johnson Administration's "War on Poverty" initiatives. Fatherless families were subsidized heavily and they proliferated for decades, pushing them further into poverty rather than lifting them out of it. The results have been nearly lethal for the "traditional family life" as the history books call it. The black family had been making steady gains for a hundred years before the Johnson Administration attempted to "fix" it. Now it's in the roughest shape since before Emancipation.
The sixties counterculture arbitrarily tossed out lessons learned from millennia of human experience and "liberated" itself from all societal constraints as if that were a wonderful thing. Talk about hubris! Liberal Democrat baby boomers think all this has been terrific. History textbooks written so far seem to agree with them.
This history teacher, however, begs to differ.
Labels: History, liberal pieties, sixties


The award is presented annually to a leader in the fields of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) for transformation, ingenuity and excellence.
"STEM education opens the door to help solve the world's most pressing challenges. It encourages people to think big and to pursue new ideas, and it allows a company like ITT to develop new, practical solutions that impact all of our lives," said Ramos.
Ramos received the award at NYSCI's annual gala in New York City. The event marked NYSCI's 50th anniversary.


text:
What is the Prepublication Data Service?
Why should I use the Prepublication Data Service?
Am I legally required to use the Prepublication Data Service?
What types of publications are included in the Prepublication Data Service?
When will my book be catalogued?
Where should I print the cataloguing statement in my book?
What should my imprint page look like?
How does this service relate to copyright?
What should I do after my book is published?
What is the difference between an ISBN, an ISSN and an ISMN?
How long will it take for the National Library to process my application?
Can I make changes to my book details once I have submitted the application?
Why does the National Library need my contact details?
Do I have to have an ISBN?
How can I get more/different subjects for my book?
My book has more than four creators. How can I add them?
Why do you want to know the creator's life dates?
I need help with my application. Who can I contact?
The Prepublication Data Service is a free service offered by the National Library of Australia.
This service is for Australian publishers and self-publishing authors who want the details of their upcoming publications made available to Australian libraries, library suppliers, and other members of the book industry for acquisition purposes.
Information about your upcoming publication will be made available to libraries and library suppliers around Australia via Libraries Australia and Trove, creating greater exposure for your book, and increasing the potential for book sales.
There is no legal requirement to use the Prepublication Data Service.
One of the main benefits of this service is that the data is discoverable by over 1,000 Australian libraries and library suppliers, who can use the information for selection and acquisition activities.
See our eligibility criteria.
Once your application is submitted, a brief prepublication catalogue record for your upcoming book will be automatically generated. This prepublication catalogue record will be uploaded to Libraries Australia and Trove within 48 hours.
The prepublication record will be upgraded to full cataloguing standards once the National Library has processed the legal deposit copy of your published book. The full catalogue record will be uploaded to Libraries Australia and Trove, with the information that your book has been published.
You should print the Prepublication Data Service statement on the imprint page with the publication details and copyright information. This is usually located on the reverse side of the title page. See cataloguing statement for more information.
Your imprint page is usually on the reverse side of the title page, and is also known as the copyright page. It may contain as little or as much information as you like.
We recommend that you print your publisher details, the publication date, copyright information, and the ISBN.
You may also choose to print the cataloguing statement on this page. This is optional.
In Australia, copyright is automatically granted upon creation of a work. There is no direct relationship between the Prepublication Data Service and copyright.
However, registration of an ISBN (if you have one), an application for the Prepublication Data Service, and Legal Deposit may assist with proving copyright.
Copyright information can be obtained from:
Copyright Council of Australia
Copyright Agency Limited
You are legally required to deposit a copy of your book with the National Library of Australia and the relevant state deposit library(s).
Further information can be found on the legal deposit web page.
An ISBN (International Standard Book Number) is a unique identifier for books. See Thorpe Bowker for more information.
An ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) is a unique identifier for serial publications. A serial is a publication made up of a number of parts issued in sequence and linked by a continuous title. Annual reports, newspapers, journals, and magazines are some examples of serial publications. To find out more, see The Australian ISSN Agency.
An ISMN (International Standard Music Number) is a unique identifier for notated music publications. See The Australian ISMN Agency for more information
Once you have submitted your application, it is processed instantly. The prepublication catalogue record for your book is automatically generated, and will appear on Libraries Australia and Trove within 48 hours.
Publications receive full catalogue records upon deposit. Please ensure Prepublicaton applications have the most accurate and up-to-date information possible as we do not make changes to PDS records.
Your details are collected so we can contact you about your application, if necessary.
We do not disclose personal information contained in your Prepublication Data Service application to any external third party. See our Privacy Policy.
No, you do not have to have an ISBN to use the Prepublication Data Service.
If you want to sell your book, or make it easier to find, we do recommended that you get an ISBN. See Thorpe Bowker to obtain an ISBN.
Once your book is published, and the legal deposit copy has been processed, the catalogue record is upgraded. At this point, the cataloguer will perform subject analysis, and may add more detailed Library of Congress Subject Headings if appropriate.
The subject field in the Prepublication Data Service form is optional, so you may leave it blank if you choose.
You may list up to four creators in the Prepublication Data Service application form. These creators will be listed in the prepublication catalogue record.
When we process the legal deposit copy of your published book, the prepublication catalogue record is upgraded. All creators listed on your book's title page will be added to the full catalogue record.
We use life dates to distinguish between creators with the same, or similar names. You can also provide middle names to help with this. For example, there are hundreds of authors named John Smith, but there is only one author named John Hazel Smith, who was born in 1928.
This information helps library readers find books if they only know the author's name.
All enquiries must be submitted via an online form. We can no longer be contacted directly by telephone. You will receive a response within 10 working days.
We are closed on public holidays.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
from bs4 import BeautifulSoup
import urllib2
import re
import sys
import csv
from slimmer import html_slimmer
from HTMLParser import HTMLParser

class MLStripper(HTMLParser):
    def __init__(self):
        self.reset()
        self.fed = []
    def handle_data(self, d):
        self.fed.append(d)
    def get_data(self):
        return ''.join(self.fed)

def strip_tags(html):
    s = MLStripper()
    s.feed(html)
    return s.get_data()

def urlread(url):
	f = urllib2.urlopen(url)
	p = f.read()
	return p

restaurants = ["tottisalmi", "arcanum", 'assarin-ullakko', 'brygge', 'delica', 'deli-pharma', 'dental', 'macciavelli', 'mikro', 'myssy-silinteri', 'nutritio', 'ruokakello']
restaurants_lunchlists = {}
for restaurant in restaurants:
  html = urlread("http://www.unica.fi/fi/ravintolat/" + restaurant +"/")
  html = unicode(html, 'utf-8')
  parsed_html = BeautifulSoup(html)
  try:
    lunchlist = {}
    lunchlist_html = parsed_html.body.find('div', attrs={'class':'menu-list'})
    for day_div in lunchlist_html.find_all('div', attrs={'class':'accord'}):
	if(restaurant == "arcanum"): print day_div
	day = day_div.find('h4').text
	tmp = []
	try:
	  for lunch in day_div.find_all('tr'):
	      lunch_name = lunch.find('td', attrs={'class':'lunch'})
	      lunch_limitations = lunch.find('td', attrs={'class':'limitations quiet'})
	      lunch_price = lunch.find('td', attrs={'class':'price quiet'})
	      lunch_limitations = (re.sub('\n', ' ', re.sub('\t', '', lunch_limitations.text))).strip()
	      lunch_price = re.sub('Hinta:', '',(re.sub('\n', ' ', re.sub('\t', '', lunch_price.text)))).strip()
	      tmp.append([lunch_name.text.encode('utf-8'), lunch_limitations.encode('utf-8'), lunch_price.encode('utf-8')])
	  lunchlist[day] = tmp
	except:
	  lunchlist[day] = [["Ei lounasta", " ", " "]]
	  pass
    restaurants_lunchlists[restaurant] = lunchlist
  except:
    pass

for restaurant in restaurants_lunchlists:
  lunchlist = restaurants_lunchlists[restaurant]
  with open('lunchlist/' + restaurant + '.csv', 'wb') as csvfile:
    writer = csv.writer(csvfile, delimiter=',', quotechar='"', quoting=csv.QUOTE_ALL)
    writer.writerow(['DAY', 'LUNCH', 'LIMITATIONS', 'PRICE'])
    for day in lunchlist.keys():
      for lunch in lunchlist[day]:
	writer.writerow([day] + [lunch[0]] + [lunch[1]] + [lunch[2]])
  """
  print "Tällä viikolla herkkuruokaa tarjoaa: " + restaurant.capitalize()
  print "\n"
  print "Katsotaanpa mitä hyvää on tarjolla.."
  print "\n"
  for day in lunchlist.keys():
    print day
    print "\n"
    lunches = lunchlist[day]
    for lunch in lunches:
      print lunch[0] + ' - ' + lunch[1]
      print "Hinta " + lunch[2]
      print "\n"
    print "\n"
  print "-------\n"
  """

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


In the Bohri style of community dining, the family gathers around the thaal, eating the meal in courses that alternate between sweet and savoury.
One of the staples of the Bohri thaal is Dal Chawal Palidu – a dish with rice, lentils and moringa that is so beloved in the Bohri repertoire that no meal, no celebration, is complete without it. Gently boiled and spiced, the lentils are layered between freshly steamed rice, and cooked on dum, served with a side of tempered moringa. Read more about the Bohri thaal here!


text:
The Bush Theatre is located in the Passmore Edwards Public Library, Shepherd's Bush, in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. It was established in 1972 as a showcase for the work of new writers. The Bush Theatre strives to create a space which nurtures and develops new artists and their work. A seedbed for the best new playwrights, many of whom have gone on to become established names in the industry, the Bush Theatre has produced hundreds of premieres, many of them Bush Theatre commissions, and hosted guest productions by theatre companies and artists from across the world.

Artistic Directors
 Jenny Topper (1977–88), jointly with Nicky Pallot (1979–90)
 Dominic Dromgoole (1990–96)
 Mike Bradwell (1996–2007)
 Josie Rourke (2007–12)
 Madani Younis (2011–2018)
Lynette Linton (2019–present)

History

On Thursday 6 April 1972, the Bush Theatre was established above The Bush public house on the corner of Goldhawk Road and Shepherd's Bush Green, in what was once the dance studio of Lionel Blair. It was established by a maverick actor, Brian McDermott, who used to tour the Fringe. The venue, despite its fame and massive output, was intimate, with a maximum audience of approximately 80. The first production was an adaption of The Collector by John Fowles, directed by John Neville and starring Annette Andre and Brian McDermott.

Throughout 1992, the Bush Theatre celebrated 20 years at the frontier of new writing. "What has held the Bush together for 20 years? Blind faith, youthful commitment and a tenacious belief in new writing: above all, perhaps, the conviction that new work deserves the highest standards in acting, direction and design," The Guardian. The Bush won The Empty Space Award for the year's work, which included Billy Roche's Bush plays A Handful Of Stars, Poor Beast in the Rain and Belfry playing in repertory as The Wexford Trilogy, which toured to Wexford Opera House and the Abbey Theatre, Dublin.

In November 2010, the Bush Theatre announced it would be leaving its home of nearly forty years and moving to the former Passmore Edwards Public Library building, round the corner from its first home, on Uxbridge Road.

The relocation took place in 2011 and the new venue opened with the "Sixty-Six Books" project. This was a celebration of the anniversary of the publication of the King James Bible, which used 66 writers, many of whom were veterans of the Bush.

That same year, Artistic Director Josie Rourke announced her departure from the Bush to take up the position of Artistic Director of the Donmar Warehouse. The Board appointed Madani Younis as her successor from January 2012. In 2013, he programmed the theatre's most successful season to date, which saw the theatre play to 99% capacity.

In Spring 2016, the Bush Theatre relocated its plays to found spaces around Shepherd's Bush and Notting Hill, as the former library building closed for the largest capital project in the theatre's history. Borrowing new and iconic spaces with their own histories and tales of the local community, this season of work welcomed new audiences and residents by offering a number of free and subsidised theatre tickets to local people.

In March 2017, following a landmark year of taking plays into the communities of West London, the Bush Theatre returned home following a £4.3m revitalisation of the venue. The year-long redevelopment was driven by the aim of realising Younis' vision for a theatre that reflected the diversity and vibrancy of London. Upon reopening, the building was to be more sustainable and entirely accessible, with a new entrance, front-of-house area and exterior garden terrace to the main street.

Lynette Linton became Artistic Directory in January 2019, following Younis' appointment as Creative Director at the Southbank Centre. That same year, the theatre was named London Theatre of the Year by The Stage.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bush Theatre filmed several of its productions and offered them to online viewers.

Venue
Following the 2016/17 redevelopment, the Bush Theatre has two performance spaces:
 The Theatre, a reserved seating venue with a maximum capacity of 180. It has remained in its original location and can be configured in a thrust, end on or in the round layout.
 The Studio, an unreserved seating venue with a maximum capacity of 70, is a home for emerging artists and producers. Similarly, this space can be configured in a thrust, end on or in the round layout.

The building also contains an Attic rehearsal space and Writer's Room, along with a Café Bar, garden terrace and playtext library, which is the largest public theatre reference library in the United Kingdom.

The redevelopment of the venue was 'Cultural Project of the Year' finalist at the AJ Architecture Awards 2017, and 'Highly commended Cultural Building' at the AJ Retrofit Awards 2017, and selected by the Hammersmith Society as winner of their Conservation Award for 2017.

New writing
The Literary Department at the Bush Theatre is committed to discovering the best new plays from playwrights from the widest range of backgrounds and therefore seek unsolicited submissions throughout the year in dedicated script windows. The Bush is a proud champion of playwrights, with a keen interest in those voices not often heard, and reflecting the contemporary culture of London, the UK and beyond. The Department receives nearly 2000 scripts a year from new and established playwrights, all of which are read and considered for production or development at the Bush.

Awards
1977 – George Devine Award to Robert Holman for German Skerries1979 – George Devine Award to Jonathan Gems for The Tax Exile 1982 – Samuel Beckett Award for Coming Clean by Kevin Elyot1986 – Laurence Olivier Award Nomination for Outstanding Achievement to Robert Holman for Making Noises Quietly1989 – John Whiting Award for Handful of Stars by Billy Roche1993 – Laurence Olivier Award Nomination for Outstanding Achievement to Billy Roche for The Wexford Trilogy1993 – Susan Smith Blackburn Award to Jane Coles for Backstroke In A Crowded Pool1993 – John Whiting Award for The Clearing by Helen Edmundson1994 – John Whiting Award for Beautiful Thing by Jonathan Harvey1995 – Laurence Olivier Award Nomination for Beautiful Thing by Jonathan Harvey1996 – Susan Smith Blackburn Award to Naomi Wallace for One Flea Spare1997 – Meyer-Whitworth Award to Conor McPherson for This Lime Tree Bower1998 – George Devine Award to Helen Blakeman for Caravan1998 – Meyer-Whitworth Award to Daragh Carville for Language Roulette1999 – George Devine Award to Mark O'Rowe for Howie the Rookie2005 – Meyer-Whitworth Award to Stephen Thompson for Damages2006 – Susan Smith Blackburn Award to Amelia Bullmore for Mammals2007 – Susan Smith Blackburn Award to Abbie Spallen for Pumpgirl2013 – Pulitzer Prize for Disgraced by Ayad Akhtar

Books
To celebrate 40 years of the Bush Theatre, "Close-Up Magic": 40 Years at the Bush Theatre was published, charting the history of the theatre and including contributions from past directors, actors, writers and audience members.

Productions
A list of selected productions of the Bush Theatre.
 2019 The Arrival by Bijan Sheibani
 2019 Strange Fruit by Caryl Phillips
 2018 Misty by Arinzé Kene
 2018 Leave Taking by Winsome Pinnock
 2018 Dismantle Festival by Project 2036
2017 The Hijabi Monologues by Amal Abdi, Hanan Issa, Sahar Ullah and Nimmo Ismail
2016 The Royale by Marco Ramirez
 2016 Boys Will Be Boys by Melissa Bubnic
 2016 Right Now by Catherine-Anne Toupin
 2016 Pink Mist by Owen Sheers
 2015 Forget Me Not by Tom Holloway
 2015 RADAR 2015
 2015 F*ck the Polar Bears by Tanya Ronder
 2015 The Invisible by Rebecca Lenkiewicz
 2015 The Angry Brigade by James Graham
 2015 The Royale by Marco Ramirez
 2015 Islands by Caroline Horton
 2014 Visitors by Barney Norris
 2014 Albion by Chris Thompson
 2014 RADAR 2014
 2014 Perseverance Drive by Robin Soans
 2014 Incognito by Nick Payne
 2014 We Are Proud to Present a Presentation by the Herero of Namibia, formerly known as South West Africa, from the German Sud-Ouest Afrika Between the Years 1895 – 1915 by Jackie Sibblies-Drury
 2014 Ciphers by Dawn King
 2013 Jumpers for Goalposts by Tom Wells
 2013 RADAR 2013
 2013 The Herd by Rory Kinnear
 2013 Josephine and I by Cush Jumbo
 2013 Disgraced by Ayad Akhtar (Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Drama)
 2013 Three Birds by Janice Okoh
 2013 Money the game show by Clare Duffy
 2012 Straight by D. C. Moore
 2012 Snookered by Ishy Din
 2012 Chalet Lines by Lee Mattinson
 2012 The Beloved by Amir Nizar Zuabi
 2012 Mad About the Boy by Gbolahan Obisesan
 2012 Fear by Dominic Savage
 2012 Our New Girl by Nancy Harris
 2011 The Kitchen Sink by Tom Wells
 2011 Sixty-Six Books by Sixty-Six Writers
 2011 This is where we got to when you came in by non zero one
 2011 Where's My Seat? by Dierdre Kinahan, Tom Wells and Jack Thorne
 2011 In The Beginning by Nick Payne
 2011 Moment by Deirdre Kinahan
 2011 Little Platoons by Steve Waters
 2011 The Knowledge by John Donnelly
 2010 My Romantic History by D C Jackson
 2010 The Aliens by Annie Baker
 2010 The Great British Country Fete by Russell Kane and Michael Bruce
 2010 Like A Fishbone by Anthony Weigh
 2010 A Little Gem by Elaine Murphy
 2010 Eigengrau by Penelope Skinner
 2010 The Whisky Taster by James Graham
 2009 The Contingency Plan by Steve Waters
 2009 The Stefan Golaszewski Plays by Stefan Golaszewski
 2009 If There Is I Haven't Found It Yet by Nick Payne
 2009 Sea Wall by Simon Stephens
 2009 2 May 1997 by Jack Thorne
 2009 suddenlossofdignity.com by Zawe Ashton, James Graham, Joel Horwood, Morgan Lloyd Malcolm & Michelle Terry
 2009 Apologia by Alexi Kaye Campbell
 2009 Stovepipe by Adam Brace
 2009 Wrecks by Neil LaBute
 2008 50 Ways to Leave your Lover at Christmas by Leah Chillery, Ben Ellis, Stacey Gregg, Lucy Kirkwood, Morgan Lloyd Malcolm & Ben Schiffer
 2008 I Caught Crabs in Walberswick by Joel Horwood
 2008 Broken Space Season by Neil LaBute, Bryony Lavery, Simon Stephens, Declan Feenan, Mike Bartlett, Nancy Harris, Lucy Kirkwood, Ben Schiffer, Jack Thorne & Anthony Weigh
 2008 Turf by Simon Vinnicombe
 2008 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover by Leah Chillery, Ben Ellis, Stacey Gregg, Lucy Kirkwood & Ben Schiffer
 2008 2,000 Feet Away by Anthony Weigh
 2008, Tinderbox by Lucy Kirkwood
 2008 Artefacts by Mike Bartlett
 2008 Helter Skelter/Land of the Dead by Neil LaBute
 2007 ! by Mike Packer
 2007 How To Curse by Ian McHugh
 2007 Flight Path by David Watson
 2007 Trance by Shoji Kokami
 2007 Elling by Simon Bent
 2007 Tom Fool by Franz Xaver Kroetz
 2007 I Like Mine With a Kiss by Georgia Fitch
 2007 Product: World Remix by Mark Ravenhill
 2007 What Would Judas Do by Stewart Lee
 2006 Whipping It Up by Stephen Thompson
 2006 Bones by Kay Adshead
 2006 Pumpgirl by Abbie Spallen
 2006 Cruising by Alecky Blythe
 2006 Crooked by Catherine Trieschmann
 2006 Trad by Mark Doherty
 2006 Christmas Is Miles Away by Chloe Moss
 2006 Try These On For International Size by Reg Cribb, Jón Atli Jónasson, Abbie Spallen, Shoji Kokami
 2006 Monsieur Ibrahim and the Flowers Of The Qur'an by Eric-Emmanuel Schmitt
 2005 When You Cure Me by Jack Thorne
 2005 Bottle Universe by Simon Burt
 2005 After the End by Dennis Kelly
 2005 The Obituary Show by The People Show
 2005 Kingfisher Blue by Lin Coghlan
 2005 Mammals by Amelia Bullmore
 2005 Take Me Away by Gerald Murphy
 2005 Bites by Kay Adshead
 2004 Going Donkeys by Richard Cameron
 2004 How Love Is Spelt by Chloe Moss
 2004 Damages by Steve Thompson
 2004 Adrenalin...Heart by Georgia Fitch
 2004 One Minute by Simon Stephens
 2004 Christmas by Simon Stephens
 2003 The God Botherers by Richard Bean
 2003 Airsick by Emma Frost
 2003 Nine Parts of Desire by Heather Raffo
 2003 Little Baby Nothing by Catherine Johnson
 1999 Howie the Rookie by Mark O'Rowe
 1998 "Martin and John" by Sean O'Neill adapted form Dale Peck's novel
 1998 "Love Upon the Throne" by Patrick Barlow
 1997 Disco Pigs by Enda Walsh
 1997 Love and Understanding by Joe Penhall
 1997 St Nicholas by Conor McPherson
 1997 All of You Mine by Richard Cameron
 1991 The Pitchfork Disney by Philip Ridley
 1988 A Handful of Stars by Billy Roche
 1987 Dreams of San Francisco by Jacqueline Holborough
 1987 It's A Girl by John Burrow
 1987 Tattoo Theatre by Mladen Materic
 1987 The Mystery of the Rose Bouquet by Mauel Puig
 1987 Effies Burning by Valerie Windsor
 1987 People Show No 92 Whistle Stop by People Show
 1987 Love Field by Stephen Davis
 1987 More Light by Snoo Wilson
 1987 An Imitation of Life by Abbie Spallen
 1986 The Oven Glove Murders by Nick Darke
 1986 Making Noise Quietly by Robert Holman
 1985 Kiss of the Spider Woman by Manuel Puig
 1983 Hard Feelings by Doug Lucie
 1980 Duet for One by Tom Kempinski
 1972 The Relief of Martha King by David Parker
 1972 Christmas Carol by Frank Marcus
 1972 Plays for Rubber Gogo by Christopher Wilkinson

Bibliography

References

External links

Pub theatres in London
Theatres in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
Producing house theatres in London
Shepherd's Bush

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Mrs. B., A North Korean Woman
Biography • 1h 11m
Directed by Jero Yun • Documentary • 2016 • 71 minutes
"There are five kinds of families that buy us," says Mrs. B over dinner and drinks with fellow North Korean exiles living in China. "The first type, either the father or the mother is missing and the son can't get married. Then there are the very poor families, like my husband's. In the third type, the man is handicapped... mentally handicapped too. They're all poor. We're sold to families like that."
Mrs. B (we don't learn her real name) is something of an expert when it comes to the trafficking of North Koreans. In 2003, at age 37, she left her husband and two sons behind in North Korea, crossed the icy Tumen River into China, and was sold into marriage. When we meet her a decade later, she's running a robust trafficking business from her home on a small farm in northern China. While her husband fixes equipment and brings in the harvest, she's on her cellphone negotiating with people smugglers, bringing in karaoke girls, and advising newly smuggled clients on how to avoid detection and deportation.
MRS. B, A NORTH KOREAN WOMAN is a closely observed verite portrait of a world-weary woman who finds herself between countries, between worlds, and between families. Unable to bring her North Korean family to China, Mrs. B eventually arranges to get them into South Korea (where her husband was originally held under suspicion of espionage). Now, she plans to return to Seoul herself, seek refugee status, see her Korean husband and sons again, and then send for her Chinese husband and his octogenarian parents.
"Reveals sentiments very much out of sync with the mainstream representations of North Korea, its people and its relationship with its neighbors ... Powerful."—The Hollywood Reporter
a north korean woman, abuse, area studies, asia, asian studies, china, doc, east asia, exile, expository, gender studies, geography, human geography, human rights, human trafficking, icarus films, korea, migration, mrs. b., north korea, ovid, poverty, s_0122, s_0150, s_0198, s_0290, s_0311, s_0426, s_0428, s_0635, seoul, social issues, sociss, south korea, title_m, women's rights, women's studies, world regions
Up Next in Biography
Algren
Directed by Michael Caplan • Documentary • 2021 • 85 minutes
The new feature documentary ALGREN is a journey through the gritty world, brilliant mind, and noble heart of Nelson Algren. Exploding onto the national scene in 1950 after winning the first-ever National Book Award for The Man with the...
Ursula von Rydingsvard: Into Her Own
Directed by Daniel Traub • Documentary • 2020 • 57 minutes
URSULA VON RYDINGSVARD: INTO HER OWN is an artistic biography of one of the few women in the world working in monumental sculpture. Von Rydingsvard's work has been featured in the Venice Biennale and is held in the collections of some of...
On the French Riviera with Man Ray an...
Directed by François Lévy-Kuentz • Documentary • 2021 • 53 minutes
A group of friends meet up in the country to spend the summer together. They go to the beach, play cards, and take day trips in the surrounding region. But these aren't everyday city folk on vacation. The hosts are Pablo Picasso ...


Nick Castellanos, the 44th-overall pick in the 2010 First-Year Player Draft by the Detroit Tigers out of Archbishop McCarthy High School (Florida), has been on a roll as of late for Triple-A Toledo in the International League.
In his last ten games, Castellanos has batted .450 (18-for-40) with three home runs and 10 RBI, along with an impressive OBP/SLG/OPS line of .521/.750/1.271. Castellanos' recent success has capped a strong season in which he has batted .300 (81-for-270) with 10 home runs and 38 RBI in 69 games.
In all, Castellanos has had 23 multi-hit games this season, 10 of those in which he registered three or more hits.
Coming into professional baseball, Castellanos was slotted as a third baseman, but has since transitioned to the outfield as means to focus attention on his offensive game…and what an offensive game that is.
Castellanos is one of, if not the best pure hitter in the minor leagues, as he is able to effectively adjust to different pitches and rake the ball to all fields with ease. He has a strong frame (6-4, 210) and the bat speed to possess above average power at the next level, which will come with time.
Castellanos has improved in terms of plate discipline, hitting variability, and adding pop to his bat with Toledo, as his strikeout rates are slightly down and power numbers are up from last season at both High-A Lakeland and Double-A Eerie.
Detroit does not appear to have any plans or apparent space for Castellanos at the moment; however, if Detroit loses confidence in their current outfield core, Castellanos may receive a call-up to platoon with Don Kelly, Matt Tuiasosopo, and even Andy Dirks, which may also give a cushion for everyday veteran Torii Hunter and Austin Jackson, who recently rejoined Detroit following a month-long stint on the DL.
Either way, Castellanos looks poised to continue tearing apart International League pitching and cementing his status as the best pure hitter in the minor leagues.


text:
/* http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/css/reset/
   v2.0 | 20110126
   License: none (public domain)
*/
/* line 18, ../sass/reset.scss */
html, body, div, span, applet, object, iframe,
h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, p, blockquote, pre,
a, abbr, acronym, address, big, cite, code,
del, dfn, em, img, ins, kbd, q, s, samp,
small, strike, strong, sub, sup, tt, var,
b, u, i, center,
dl, dt, dd, ol, ul, li,
fieldset, form, label, legend,
table, caption, tbody, tfoot, thead, tr, th, td,
article, aside, canvas, details, embed,
figure, figcaption, footer, header, hgroup,
menu, nav, output, ruby, section, summary,
time, mark, audio, video {
  margin: 0;
  padding: 0;
  border: 0;
  font-size: 100%;
  font: inherit;
  vertical-align: baseline;
}

/* HTML5 display-role reset for older browsers */
/* line 28, ../sass/reset.scss */
article, aside, details, figcaption, figure,
footer, header, hgroup, menu, nav, section {
  display: block;
}

/* line 31, ../sass/reset.scss */
body {
  line-height: 1;
}

/* line 34, ../sass/reset.scss */
ol, ul {
  list-style: none;
}

/* line 37, ../sass/reset.scss */
blockquote, q {
  quotes: none;
}

/* line 41, ../sass/reset.scss */
blockquote:before, blockquote:after,
q:before, q:after {
  content: '';
  content: none;
}

/* line 45, ../sass/reset.scss */
table {
  border-collapse: collapse;
  border-spacing: 0;
}


Each of these exciting stories, told in the voice of one of the 11-year-old volunteers at the Wild at Heart Animal Clinic, offers a first-hand account of animal emergencies and rescues. This series is sure to win the hearts of readers who are wild about animals!The clinic is swamped with sick and abused puppies. Maggie suspects they've come from an illegal puppy mill, and she's determined to find it and shut it down. But Gran has too many other things to worry about -- like Maggie's grades and a new houseguest, Zoe. Can Maggie find the puppy mill on her own?
Isabel and her sister, Ruth, are slaves. Sold from one owner to the next, they arrive in New York as the Americans are fighting for their independence, and the English are struggling to maintain control. Soon Isabel is struggling too. Struggling to keep herself and her sister safe in a world in which they have no control.
With a rare and compelling voice, this haunting novel tells not only the story of a remarkable girl and her incredible strength, but also of a time and place in which slavery was the order of the day and lives were valued like weights of meat or bundles of vegetables.


Most experts agree that the future of authentication and authorization infrastructures depends on Open ID Connect standard. The forces of giants like Google and Microsoft behind this emerging standard are as impressive as the promise of a scalable and lightweight single sign-on (SSO) protocol is lucrative.
However, the currently dominant protocol for web SSO, SAML, is not quite dead yet and will remain so for some time. There are thousands of SAML based services in operation world wide catering for tens of SAML based identity federations. These will not go away overnight, although new Open ID Connect based services will soon start popping up. I believe we are headed in a future where SAML dinosaurs and Open ID Connect mammals will live side by side for some time.
To serve the research infrastructures today, the service providers need to know SAML. This is why the AARC project organized a hands-on workshop on SAML Service Provider installation and configuration in Manchester, UK on March 15 and 16. 2016. The audience consisted mainly of organizations that provide resources and services for the ELIXIR (life sciences) research infrastructure. The workshop was very well received by the audience, which encouraged the AARC project members to take a evolutionary step and do an improved version based on the same concept and training material in June 1 and 2 when DAASI International GmbH, a partner in AARC project, will arrange a service provider workshop in Tübingen, Germany for organizations that provide resources and services for the DARIAH (art and humanities) research infrastructure. The aim of the workshop is to help the service providers to make their resources and services available to the users of DARIAH throughout Europe.


Transformers, more than meets the eye. They could be anything, anywhere; even on your head. The Transformers Capbots – Captimus Prime finally takes the Transformers franchise into clothing. Sure, this version of Prime might not be as tough, or as big, as his semi-rig cousin, but he's a cute little guy, isn't he?
Captimus can transform from his robotic figure into a baseball cap, but I honestly don't know if it's a full-size cap that can be worn on your head, although I'm not sure if hard plastic would be the most comfortable form of headgear so it might not be a big deal to you.
If you prefer Decepticons over Autobots, you can also grab the Transformers Capbots – Capticon figure.
The new line of cap bots features fully transformable baseball caps that transform into your favorite Transformers characters! Picture is of an unpainted prototype and subject to change. Note: We do not believe these to be the full size of a baseball cap, but a scaled down replica. When more information is known we will update the site.
You can pre-order Captimus or Capticon for $25.95 at TFsource.com in preparation for their December 15 release date, or you can order both of them for $49.95, saving a whole whopping $1.95 with the combo pricing.


Ever dreamed or wanted to get into a sports car? Ever dreamed of driving in style with a fast car? Maybe you cannot pay for the fastest and most extravagant sports cars, however, there's a solution out there, and that solution is a sports car rental in Los Angeles. Whether your looking to rent a sports car for travel, business, or just to have a great lifetime experience. Renting a sports car in Los Angeles is a great option.
Maximize your Los Angeles getaway and pamper yourself to the finest in sports cars available today. Regency Car Rental provides travelers with the capability to rent an array of a luxury sports car that ranges to affordable yet luxury class models to nimble sports car made with to make your heart race. It doesn't matter if you are travelling in Los Angeles for business, or taking a vacation, or planning an extensive stay and like to boost your trip with the best as well as most exciting to drive sports car available. Regency Car Rental is the name you can depend on when it comes to sports car rental Los Angeles.
The choice is all yours with Regency Car Rental! Our customers have the choice of renting the model of sports car they want and we can assure that the sports car you will book is the one you will drive. In case you have a specific car in mind don't hesitate to contact us for free at 800-847-6493 and our customer service assistance desk will be more than happy to help you. If you don't have any idea about what kind of sports car you want to rent, please feel free to browse our extensive portfolio of sports car available.
A memorable trip to Los Angeles deserves the finest and greatest vehicles avalilable and at Regency Car Rental, we pride ourselves on our capability to provide our clients fantastic sports cars in Los Angeles at the best price in the industry. It doesn't matter if you are searching for a sports car for special events such as reunion or weddings to have a remarkable statement or just want to experience driving a high-end sports car, trust Regency Car Rental. We make sure that you will have a good and memorable experience without breaking your wallet. Renting a sports car at Regency Car Rental will enhance your tourism and any special occasion.
We, at Regency Car Rental, believe that you deserve only the best in the world. So, we look forward to assisting everyone with an experience which they will never forget for the rest of their lives. Browse the wide selections of sports car available and make an appointment now. For a lot of people, high end sports cars are owned only by the privileged few. If you have been dreaming of driving those highly engineered machines that cost more then then average house. Stop your dreaming, with Regency Car Rental your dream of driving a sports car is within your reach. You don't need to break the bank or mortgage your house. All you need to do is visit our site, choose the sports car you want to hire and make an arrangement. We can help everyone find and rent the sports car of your dreams at prices that are incredible!


text:
Q: Django: can "double" 'render_to_response' be unified into only one view? I have defined two functions in views.py to obtain first prova.html with certain elementimenu and then, after clicking over one of them, I obtain again the page with elementimenu and elementi associated to elementimenu with the same id i.e.:
another_app.model.py
...
class ElementiTab(models.Model):
    author = models.ForeignKey('auth.User', null=True, blank=False)
    des = models.CharField(max_length=30)
    x = models.FloatField()
    y = models.FloatField()
    res = models.FloatField(default=0)
    created_date = models.DateTimeField(default=timezone.now)
...

And here the code that I like to get better:
views.py
from another_app.model import ElementiTab

def show_elementi(request):
        elementimenu = ElementiTab.objects.all()
        return render_to_response('homepage/prova.html',{'elementimenu': elementimenu, 'user.username': request}, context_instance = RequestContext(request))

def show_detail(request,id):
        elementimenu = ElementiTab.objects.all()
        detail = get_object_or_404(ElementiTab, pk=id)
        return render_to_response('homepage/prova.html',{'elementimenu': elementimenu, 'detail': detail, 'user.username': request}, context_instance = RequestContext(request))

urls.py
...
      url(r'^homepage/prova/$', views.show_elementi),
      url(r'^show_detail/(?P<id>\d+)/$', views.show_detail),
...

prova.html
...

    {% for elementi in elementimenu %}
    {{elementi.des}}
    {% endfor %}

                                 NOME
                                 DATA CREAZIONE
                                 AUTORE

                                {% if detail %}

                                        {{detail.des}}
                                        {{detail.created_date}}
                                        {{detail.author}}

                                {% endif %}

    ...

I had used this "trick" in show_detail view so that I can see elementimenu even after calling this function.
Is there a more elegant way to do this?

A: Yes, you can use the single view.  Add the default None value for the id (or pk) argument:
def show_elementi(request, pk=None):
    elementimenu = ElementiTab.objects.all()
    detail = get_object_or_404(ElementiTab, pk=pk) if pk else None
    return render(request, 'homepage/prova.html',
                  {'elementimenu': elementimenu, 'detail': detail})

And then map both urls to this view:
url(r'^homepage/prova/$', views.show_elementi),
url(r'^show_detail/(?P<pk>\d+)/$', views.show_elementi),

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
The Buffalo Bills
My Life on a Special Team
Part of Tales from the Team
By Steve Tasker and Scott Pitoniak
Foreword by Jim Kelly
In eleven seasons with the Buffalo Bills, the diminutive 5-foot-9, 175-pound Steve Tasker was a huge contributor as the Bills strung together an unprecedented four consecutive Super Bowl appearances in the early 1990s. Along the way, Tasker earned seven invitations to the Pro Bowl, and during the National Football League's seventy-fifth anniversary celebration, he was named the greatest special teams player of all time. In this newly revised edition of Tales from the Buffalo Bills Sideline, the football star turned network television analyst takes a behind-the-scenes look at the franchise's most glorious era. Tasker provides readers with insightful vignettes of colorful Bills personalities such as Marv Levy, Jim Kelly, Bruce Smith, Thurman Thomas, and Ralph Wilson. Tasker takes the reader inside the helmet of NFL players, describing everything in great detail for the most devoted Bills fans.
Steve Tasker
Scott Pitoniak
Publisher: Sports Publishing (August 1, 2013)
Sports & Recreation > Football
Sports & Recreation > Coaching > Football
Book Cover Image (jpg): The Buffalo Bills
More books in this series: Tales from the Team


I'm planning a (my first ever!) solo trip from the Hetch Hetchy Backpacker's camp toward Rancheria Mountain through to Glen Aulin via Pleasant Valley--hoping to get a permit for next week. There seem to be zero posts anywhere on the web about this trail (other than the hundreds on the Hetch Hetchy Loop, which pop up due to mention of Rancheria). Has anyone gone this route? I'm most concerned about current water access past Pate as, even though the trail follows the GCT, the Tuolumne River I'm pretty sure is out of reach.
From Pate up to Glen Aulin, water won't be a problem. You do have access to the river there at regular intervals.
But that long climb up and over Rancheria Mountain is another question. While it won't be as hot as it is in summer, that's a long dry climb from Rancheria to Pleasant Valley.