text:
tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC April 4, 2012 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
>> it was great. i got to channel my 10-year-old boy. >> you're a busy guy. >> thank you, yes. >> mark, nice to meet you. >> thanks for having me. >> first colonial high school in virginia beach, although i went to marrian. we'll talk about that. >> first colonial. >> that's "the ed show." i'm ed "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. >> good evening, ed, thank you. and thanks to you at home for staying with us at the next hour. a certain could-be, would-be first lady is breathing a sigh of relief today after what happened last night in wisconsin. >> congressman ryan, he's a great leader, a wonderful speaker, but he's not going to take ann's place, i've got to tell you that. >> whoo! in addition to joking that congressman paul ryan will never replace his wife, "the washington post" notes today in an article gushing about the chemistry between paul ryan and mitt romney, that on the campaign trail in wisconsin, mr. romney had also joked that paul ryan was not his son. which is a little less eyebrow raising than joking that paul ryan is not his spouse.
but it does remind you that there's actually a very big age difference between paul ryan and mitt romney. paul ryan is 42 years old. mitt romney is 23 years older than that. he is 65. he is the same age that george w. bush is now, which means that mitt romney is of the vietnam generation. we think of mr. romney, i think, as younger than that, in part, i think, because he's very handsome and he's very fit. but he was 19 years old at the height of the vietnam war. mr. romney was healthy, he was of the right age, and he was therefore, theoretically, quite draftable for vietnam. but he did not serve, either in the active duty military or in the guard or reserves, like george w. bush did. mr. romney, instead, lived in france during the vietnam war. he was a missionary for his church in france for nearly three years during the height of the vietnam war. now, of course, president obama did not serve in the military either, but president obama is a good deal younger. mr. obama was 5 years old while
mr. romney was not serving in vietnam. but mr. romney has, i think, quite obviously been cognizant of the fact that his service question in his biography, him not serving in vietnam, could be used against him in politics, if anybody ever decided to use it against him. there was a watershed moment in mr. romney's failed candidacy for the presidency in 2008 when a romney campaign playbook mysteriously made its way into the hands of the press. remember this? it exposed the fact that the romney campaign had thought maybe, maybe his national campaign slogan for the presidency would be, "first, not france." not france? [ speaking foreign language ] he speaks fluent french! mitt romney was living in franc campaign slogan? yes, quite deliberately. in 2012, in this year's presidential campaign, you might have noticed that mr. romney has
been talking a lot about president obama being secretly europeanish. >> he takes this political inspiration from europe, and from the socialist democrats in europe. >> he wants us to turn into a european-style welfare state. >> now, of these two guys, only one of them has lived in europe. only one of them speaks french. only one of them spent not only a formative, but an incredibly potent multi-area period of his biography in europe, and it is the one who's calling the other guy european! is barack obama european? no, of course he's not european. but it's not just a lie, it is a tactic. it is a tried and true tactic in conservative politics. it's almost a cliche. if karl rove makes entitle the encyclopedia of modern political science, this is the thing that will be in the little paragraph under his little picture. take whatever your greatest weakness is and turn it against your opponent. all right. the iconic example, of course, george w. bush, who did avoid service in vietnam, running for re-election in 2004, with
against a decorated vietnam combat veteran hero, by making it seem like he, george w. bush, was the one who'd actually gone to war while john kerry was the shirker. maybe even was a traitor. it's classic karl rove, right? this is what will define karl rove's legacy. take your greatest weakness and your opponent's greatest strength and use it against your opponent. mitt romney does this all the time. in the speech that he gave last night when he won wisconsin and in a speech that he gave today, he used this tactic like a dozen times. it's kind of his only trick. all of his weaknesses as a candidate, he now just says are the weaknesses of barack obama as a candidate. so mitt romney lived in france instead of going to vietnam. he spent years and years in europe. so now mitt romney says that is barack obama's problem. he's the european! mitt romney signed on to the paul ryan kill-medicare plan, so now mitt romney says wanting to kill medicare, that's barack obama's problem.
>> he has taken a series of steps that end medicare as we know it. >> mitt romney was 47th out of 50th in job creation when he served as governor of massachusetts and his record in private industry at bain capital is littered with all of these horror stories about shutting down factories and firing american workers. getting rid of american jobs for his own personal profit. so mitt romney opened his speech last night in wisconsin by accusing president obama of failing to create jobs. job creation? don't ask me about that! that's barack obama's problem. incidentally, we just today got an initial jobs report for march, which shows more than 200,000 jobs were added to the u.s. economy this month, the 26th straight month of private sector job growth under president obama. but job creation! that's barack obama's problem, somehow. mr. romney will always take plaque, even from his own side
of the aisle, on which all of the policy issues on which he has changed, on which he has flip-flopped. today mr. romney gave a speech to newspaper editors in washington, in which he said, flip-flopping, that's barack obama's problem. >> as president, he has repeatedly called for tax increases on businesses. now as candidate obama, he decides that a lower corporate tax rate would be better. as president, he's added regulations at a staggering rate. now as candidate obama, he says he wants to find ways to reduce them. >> now, to be fair, none of that's true. if you compare new regulations under the obama administration, say wonder the george w. bush administration, george w. bush would be the overregulator. president obama has been out on the stump this week, talking about how he has reduced taxes on businesses 17 times since he has been in office. but regardless of the truth of what he is saying, look at the tactic of what he's saying. he's saying if you're concerned about flip-flopping, president obama is the guy you ought to be worried about.
he's the flip-flopper. mr. romney also as a man who has elevators for his cars, who has a $100 million or so trust fund for his sons, who makes $10,000 bets, who says that $374,000 in speaking fees income was not very much money to him, a man whose single funniest story about the midwest is about the hilarious time that his dad closed a factory and the voters got mad about it. the man who easily talks about how much he personally likes to fire people, mitt thurston howell romney iii has been accused of being a little out of touch with the common man. but now, because this is his only political tactic, he has decided that the being out of touch problem, that is a president obama problem. >> it's enough to make you think that years of flying around in air force one, surrounded by an adoring staff of true believers, telling you that you're great and you're doing a great job, it's enough to make you think that you might become a little out of touch with that, and that's what's happened. >> see?! see?
he's the out of touch guy, not me. my favorite one, though, is of mr. romney -- did you see the speech that he gave today? the speech that he gave today had all sorts of little asides, some of which we've pointed out already. but the entire speech, the architecture of the speech today, the basic idea was that president obama has a secret plan for a second term that we are not allowed to know about until after we re-elect him. this is amazing. >> he doesn't want to share his real plans before the election, either with the public or with the press. his intent is on hiding. you and i are going to have to do the seeking. he wants to us re-elect him so he can find out what he'll actually do. >> guess who's just the one who just admitted on the record to having a secret plan to what he would do after he's elected? if you said mitt romney, you're clear on how this tactic works. this actually happened. mitt romney told the conservative magazine, "the weekly standard," in their latest issue, he told them that he has a secret plan. he said, "one of the things i found in a short campaign against ted kennedy is that when
i said, for instance, that i wanted to eliminate the department of education, that was used to suggest that i don't care about education. so i think it's important for me to point out that i anticipate that there will be departments and agencies that will either be eliminated or combined with other agencies. will there be some that get eliminated or combined? the answer is yes, but i'm not goin g now." politically. you just have to wait to see what i'm going to do. until then, it's secret. mitt romney wants to eliminate entire departments or government agencies, but he's admitting, on the record, grr, that he does not want to tell you which departments or agencies he's going to eliminate until after the election. having admitted an actual secret plan on the record, mitt romney now says that the secret plan problem, that's obama's problem. >> he doesn't want to share his real plans before the election, either with the public or with the press. >> it's amazing. now, this whole "obama has a
secret plan for his second term" thing, this is a favorite trope on the right. >> if barack obama gets re-elected, it will be a disaster for the united states of america. >> if president obama's re-elected, you will not be able to get a job. >> we simply will step into the night of european socialism. >> imagine a second term if he doesn't have to face re-election. >> you can't imagine how radical he'll be in his second term. >> we see the president's strategy crystal clear. get re-elected and with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms freedom. it's all part of a massive obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the second amendment. >> see, according to the nra, the way you can tell barack obama is going to take away your guns is that he hasn't taken away your guns yet. don't you see -- ah! this conspiracy theory thing is weird enough, but now also prevalent enough that it has
been subject to the highest order of mockery on comedy central's "the daily show with jon stewart." >> everything obama's done in his first term is just a canard, so that he can do the opposite in his second term? obama deported more illegal immigrants per year than president bush did. so that the illegal immigrants could rest up in their native land for the second term invasion? barack obama killed bin laden and dumped his body into the ocean -- to lull us into complacency, so we're unaware that a zombie bin laden is now hard at work on the ocean floor preparing a terrorist lobster army? >> jon stewart doing what only
jon stewart can do. but in mitt romney's case, accusing president obama of having a secret plan when he himself has admitted on the record that he actually does have plans that are secret, that we don't get to know about until he's elected, i think it is an interesting and an open question whether or not making fun of this as a tactic saps the tactics power. i mean, everybody knows this is how this works now, right? whatever your weakness is, according to the karl rove plan, you say that your weakness is actually your opponent's weakness. i mean, mitt romney is literally calling barack obama an out of touch flip-flopping rich guy now. next he'll be accusing president obama of maybe wanting to replace the first lady with an attractive, dark-haired, much younger congressman. i'm looking at you, heath shuler. i mean, does the transparent dishonesty and cynicism of this now well-known karl rovian
tactic make it less effective? i mean, we have been through this for a decade. everybody knows that this is what they do. everybody knows this is a transparent tactic. even the guy who is best at this, even the guy who invented this, karl rove himself isn't very good at pulling it off anymore. you may remember karl rove writing in the "wall street journal" last month, trying sort of a variation of this tactic recently. instead of just putting your own candidate's weakness on the other guy, the other side of this, right, is taking away your opponent's greatest strength. taking on whatever it is your opponent is best at and trying to make it look like a liability. mr. rove took a quote from bill clinton completely out of context, thus reversing its meaning, in order to try to portray president obama's order to kill bin laden as no big deal. he tried to say it was an easy decision that any president would have made and he deserves no credit for it whatsoever. it's classic rove, right? if president obama wants to be able to run in part on the strength of his anti-terrorist credentials for having killed bin laden, say that was no big deal.
don't just give your opponent your own weaknesses, take away his strength. but the problem for mr. rove with this is that while he now says president obama deserves no credit whatsoever for killing bin laden, here's what he told politico.com the day after bin laden was killed. "president obama did a remarkable job of leadership. it was a very tough decision." see? even karl rove can't pull this off anymore. as time goes on and we see this done over and over and over again, year after year, and we see it done in a way that makes it transparent that it is not at all about the truth of the world, or even the truth of politics, it is just a cynical and dishonest tactic, are we still susceptible to it? or have we built up sufficient immunity to this as a political tactic that it is a laugh line now and not an effective attack ad or a line in a speech? joining us now is wayne slater, an archaeologist of rovian politics of the first order. mr. slater, it's great to see you again. >> great to be with you, rachel. >> the i'm rubber, you're glue tactic here, it's a bit of a variation on the standard rove strategy of attacking your
opponent on strengths. do you think that it has lost any of its effectiveness over time? >> it certainly has the potential to lose effectiveness. remember, one of the first guys in recent years use this i've got a secret plan was someone who wanted to end the war in vietnam, he won that race. although subsequent years didn't end up very favorably. it has a real potential problem, and the reason it has a problem, is because in this case, when you're transferring your weakness to your opponent, you're operating from a position of weakness. and it's the voters that you will most will need, mitt romney if he's the nominee, most will need moderate, independent republicans and conservative democrats, those are the ones who are going to be the least likely to buy the message. people on the far right, they'll buy most anything that romney or the republican party says. you say barack obama is out of touch, they go, fine. but the people in the middle will say, that -- i don't believe that.
you say that barack obama is going to gut medicare, which is what mitt romney suggested, people don't believe that. again, the voters that romney will need in the fall don't believe that. you say that mitt romney or mitt romney in this case says that barack obama told the president of russia, i need more flexibility, the open mic episode as evidence that he is not entirely american, that he wants to sell america out, this is something that, in fact, most people on the voting constituencies that mitt romney ultimately would need, if he is going to win in november, don't believe it. so sooner or later, yes, it wears thin on a weary electorate. >> and you know, i think there's two ways to think of how this works. it is, i think it's worth talking about, because it does seem to be really the only thing that the romney campaign is doing. they are doing this over and over and over again.
i mean, to the point of denouncing president obama as a flip-flopper today, i just thought, wow! what else could they do? but there's two ways in which it operates. one is that they are slinging some arrows at president obama, calling him -- making all those accusations that you just ran down, but they are also trying to break any arrows that might potentially ever been shot at mitt romney. they're trying to make it seem like, ah, all the politicians say that each other -- all the politicians say to each other that they're going to kill medicare. i'm sure it's not true about any of them. so it essentially disarms the attack against romney on that. >> and that's an old tactic, the idea of inoculation in one way or another. and again, both parties do it, smart political operatives try it. so that you anticipate what your opponent is going to say about you and you do whatever you can do, including just blame your opponent for the same thing, in order to blunt the attack. so that in the end, in the end, the voter doesn't know more about you or think more highly
of you. the idea here is, and that's kind of the tragedy of it. the idea is that the voter basically doesn't think much of either of you. a pox on both their houses. this is the goal of an operation that tries to use not what a candidate is about, but use a tactic in which you talk about what your opponent is all about, both his strengths and his weaknesses, not your strengths. >> wayne slater, senior political columnist "the dallas morning news," who has seen this tactic be born and come to fruition and then go national. wayne, it's always a pleasure. thanks so much. >> great to be with you. all right. still ahead, the bush administration, the george w. bush administration is casting a larger shadow than anyone on the republican side wants to and that got significantly worse today. that's next. rick santorum is betting ♪
[ male announcer ] how could a luminous protein in jellyfish, impact life expectancy in the u.s., real estate in hong kong, and the optics industry in germany? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing.
with investment information, risks, fees and expenses [ traffic passing ] ] ♪ [ music box: lullaby ] [ man on tv, indistinct ] ♪ [ lullaby continues ] [ baby coos ] [ man announcing ] millions are still exposed to the dangers... of secondhand smoke... and some of them can't do anything about it. ♪ [ continues ] [ gasping ] rick santorum is betting almost all his remaining presidential chips by winning his home state of pennsylvania. he might want to ask pennsylvania first.
one of mr. santorum the's top strategists is joining us live here in the studio, just ahead. an actual republican live in the flesh here. i'm so excited. we'll be right back. [ artis brown ] america is facing some tough challenges right now. two of the most important are energy security and economic growth. north america actually has one of the largest oil reserves in the world. a large part of that is oil sands. this resource has the ability to create hundreds of thousands of jobs. at our kearl project in canada, we'll be able to produce these oil sands with the same emissions as many other oils and that's a huge breakthrough. that's good for our country's energy security and our economy.
i used to not travel very much, but then i discovered hotwire. now, i use all my vacation days. i can afford to visit my folks for the holidays. and reconnect with my girlfriends in vegas. because i get ridiculously low prices on all my trips. you see, when hotels have unsold rooms, they use hotwire to fill them, so i get 4-star hotels for up to half off. now i can afford a romantic trip to new orleans. hi honey! ♪ h-o-t-w-i-r-e... ♪ hotwire.com the positions i'm taking now on the budget and a host of others issues, if we had been having this discussion 20 years ago, or even 15 years ago, would have been considered squarely centrist positions. what's changed is the center of the republican party. cap and trade was originally proposed by conservatives and
republicans as a market-based solution to solving environmental problems. there's a reason why there's a little bit of confusion in the republican primary about health care and the individual mandates since it originated as a conservative idea. now, suddenly, this is some socialist overreach. ronald reagan, who, as i recall, is not accused of being a tax and spend socialist, understood repeatedly that when the deficits started to get out of control, that for him to make a deal, he would have to propose both spending cuts and tax increases. did it multiple times. he could not get through a
republican primary today. >> ronald reagan could not get through a republican primary today. president obama speaking yesterday to the associated press about how much the republican party has shifted to the right. how republicans' own policies, its own heroes, would be denounced as too left wing by today's radicalized conservative republicans. this is a true thing about the republican party, and it is a potentially devastating thing for independent and centrist voters to realize about the republican party. and so the administration has been repeatedly making this case for a while now. when vice president biden makes the case, he says things like, this is not your father's republican party anymore. president obama himself has been throwing his own policies back into the faces of his republican critics, trying to get them to acknowledge that they, themselves, used to support
those policies. speaking at a fund-raiser last month, the president said, "in 2008, the guy i was running against, the republican nominee, he didn't deny that climate change might be a problem. he thought it was a good idea for us to ban torture. he was on record as having supported immigration reform." president obama there making the case that the policies embraced by the last republican presidential nominee, with even just in the last election cycle, are now seen as way too left-wing for today's republicans. cap and trade, the republicans in 2008, senator mccain supported that. the dream act, the republicans in 2008, senator mccain, supported that. and a ban on torture. john mccain himself a survivor of prison torture after he was shot down and captured in vietnam. john mccain led the fight within his own party to ban torture and then he won his party's nomination for president of the united states. >> well, governor, i'm astonished that you haven't found out what waterboarding is. >> i know what waterboarding is, senator. >> then i would astonished that you would think such a torture would be inflicted on anyone that we are held captive and anyone could believe that that's not torture.
it's in violation of the geneva conventions, it's in violation of existing law. >> john mccain beat mitt romney in that contest. nomination in 2008. and during that campaign, mr. romney repeatedly refused to say that waterboarding a person was a way of torturing that person. did mitt romney's point of view win out in today's republican party? is that another one of these issues in which even the politics of john mccain and sarah palin in 2008 are too left wing now for today's republicans? we may be about to find out. every time the romney campaign thinks that the george w. bush presidency no longer lurks in the shadows of mr. romney's own efforts to capture the nomination this year, out comes a sinewy hand from under the bed to grab at mr. romney's bare ankles. today, three years after the freedom of information act requests were filed for it, today the "wired" magazine reporter, spencer ackerman, and the national security a archive at george washington university finally got their hands on a
document written by this man, phillip zelikow, he ran the 9/11 commission, was condoleezza rice's lawyer at the state department. at the beginning of the obama presidency in 2009, the obama administration released memos in which the bush administration had told itself that torturing people was legal. that as they read the law, cia interrogaors couldn't be prosecuted for torturing anyone, because torture was legal, as they saw it. torture is not legal. torture is illegal. and as a top lawyer at the bush state department, philip zelikow circulated a letter within the administration saying that essentially the administration was kidding itself in trying to say that there was some way around the law here. they were trying to give a legal green light to cia interrogators to torture people, but that green light, he said, was a sham. after the obama administration released those sham memos from the bush administration, philip zelikow disclosed that he had written this dissent. he said he had written this dissent at the time, but he said that i cannot disclose it to you, because the bush
administration tried to cover it up and pretend like it never existed. >> i heard the memo was not considered appropriate for further discussion and that copies of my memo should be collected and destroys. >> philip zelikow said that the white house attempted to collect and destroy all the existing copies of this memo in which he called bullpucky on how the bush administration was trying to say torture was legal. i got a chance to ask him about that on this show. why do you think they tried to destroy every copy of the memo that they knew existed? and how did you find out that they did try to destroy copies of the memo? >> well, i found out because i was told, i mean, we're trying to collect these and destroy them, and you have a copy, don't you? but i -- the -- i know that copies were obtained in my building. i think copies still exist. why would they destroy them? that's a question they'll have to answer. obviously, if you want -- you want to eliminate records because you don't want people to be able to find them. >> am i right in thinking that
they would want to erase any evidence of a dissenting view in the administration, because it would undercut the legal authority of the advice in those memos, the advice that those techniques would be legal? >> that's what i thought at the time. i had the same reaction you did. but i don't know why they wanted to do it. >> within the george w. bush administration, they wrote a legal justification for torture. there was dissent within the administration on that. the bush administration disagreed with the dissent, they tried to eliminate evidence that dissent ever existed, and today that dissent came to the light. philip zelikow's memo, tearing apart the legal justifications for torture that the bush administration was counting on to say that torture was legal, this memo that was circulated and read in which they attempted to make disappear during the bush administration, now it is out in the light of day. and if the republican party were still the republican party of
john mccain, with this would open up a whole new can of political worms. because the obama administration, remember, looked into bush administration-ordered torture, and they decided not to prosecute any of it. they decided, effectively, that the bush administration was operating on good faith when they ordered torture? they thought it was legal. probably not, actually. it turns out they had good reason to know it was not legal. so that means it was a crime. it was probably a war crime, not to put too fine a point on it. and that is something that we are legally obligated to prosecute in this country. this reopens the whole question of the legal liability for torture that was administered by the previous administration. the democratic party will be split by this, because the white house politically doesn't want to deal with it, even if it's wrong and even if they know it's wrong. and the republican party still has to figure out who it is. is the republican party still the party of john mccain, which has now the opportunity to outflank the president on a matter of principal here.
where the white house knows what the right thing to do is, but they don't want to do it. or are the republicans still the party of george w. bush and mitt romney, who thinks torture's okay. gut check time. ♪ ♪ i can do anything ♪ i can do anything today ♪ i can go anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la la la la la la [ male announcer ] dow solutions help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything. solutionism. the new optimism. and the human element can solve anything. pop in the drum of any machine... ♪ ...to wash any size load. ♪ it dissolves in any temperature, even cold.
tide pods. a powerful three-in-one detergent that cleans, brightens, and fights stains. so all your looks pop. ♪ pop in. stand out. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 there are atm fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and the most dreaded fees of all, hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, you won't pay fees on top of fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no monthly account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and we rebate every atm fee. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck tdd# 1-800-345-2550 because when it comes to talking, there is no fee. ♪ you make me happy when skies are gray ♪ [ female announcer ] you know exactly what it takes to make them feel better. ♪ you make me happy [ female announcer ] that's why you choose children's tylenol. the same brand your mom trusted for you when you were young. ♪ how much i love you
[ humming ] [ female announcer ] children's tylenol, the #1 brand of pain and fever relief recommended by pediatricians and used by moms decade after decade. [ humming ]
the largest class size in the nation. 47th out of 50 in per-student funding. but right now, we can make history with a ballot measure to send every k-through-12 dollar straight to our schools. to every school and every child. not to sacramento. it's the only initiative that can say all that. check out our online calculator and find out how your school would benefit. visit ourchildrenourfuture2012.com today. okay, quick. you're in a crowded place. lots of people jammed together, some of them kind of angry. say it's a political convention, the kind of event that brings out plenty of ideological die-hards and a few certified nuts among them.
if the situation gets hairy, which of these items in the hands of a stranger next to you scares you more? a glock handgun, which is advertised as hard to see and tough to face, or a piece of string, with which you might pull a tooth if you could somehow pull one end to a molar and the other to mitt romney's dog. which scares you more in the hands of a stranger next to you? the handgun or a string. which would you ban people from caring into this event if you were in charge of this event? why you will be able to take your glock, but not your twine to this year's republican national convention, coming up.
mine was earned off vietnam in 1968. over the south pacific in 1943. i got mine in iraq, 2003. usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protection, and because usaa's commitment to serve the military, veterans and their families is without equal. begin your legacy, get an auto insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve.
♪ something to me ♪ that nobody else could do there were elections last
♪ ♪ that should do it. enjoy your new shower. [ door opens, closes ] there were elections last night in maryland, in wisconsin, and in washington, d.c., but rick santorum was not in any of those places last night when it came time to deliver his concession speech. mr. santorum was in pennsylvania. in part, i think, because he did the not figure that he would be winning any of those three contest last night anyway, and he really, really, really wants to win his home state of pennsylvania. >> we've got three weeks to go out here in pennsylvania, and win this state and after winning
this state, the field looks a little deferent in may. >> if mr. santorum does win pennsylvania, catching up in the delegate count will still be a near mathematical impossibility. "near" being the important word there. but it is still important, right? and mr. santorum has been very publicly confident about his surefire victory in his home state. he has gone so far as to guarantee a win. >> you agree, pennsylvania is a must-win for you? >> pennsylvania, we have to win pennsylvania. >> over the weekend, i know you said you will win in pennsylvania. but today, senator, can you guarantee a victory in your home state? >> oh, absolutely. >> you're saying that you guarantee a victory in three weeks? >> oh, no question about it. >> pennsylvania is not only a must-win for the rick santorum campaign, it is a guaranteed win. no question about it! but what if rick santorum does not win his home state of pennsylvania in three weeks? he's still ahead in the polls in pennsylvania, but his lead has
shrunk enormously in recent weeks. in a franklin and marshall poll taken in february, santorum led, but now only leads by two points. this is the state that did vote him out of office in 2006 by 18 points. as the folks at the "national journal" put it, "the makeup of the republican party in pennsylvania gives mitt romney a chance to win there," a chance to beat rick santorum in his home state. the pennsylvania demographics are a lot like other midwestern states, like ohio and michigan, where romney pulled out narrow victories. even when it comes to the conservative base in pennsylvania, there are some potential problems for mr. santorum, including the fact he endorsed the more-moderate senator arlen specter over the challenger pat toomey in 2004. the hill newspaper reports that some of toomey's supporters in
the state are still mad at mr. santorum because of that. despite his personal guarantees to the contrary, the possibility that rick santorum will lose his own home state in three weeks is real. and that possibility has given way -- is giving way to a common sense argument that if he does lose pennsylvania, mr. santorum will have to drop out of the race. and if he will lose in pennsylvania, if it looks like he's going to lose in pennsylvania, shouldn't he probably drop out before that loss in order to avoid the embarrassment of losing at home? former mike huckabee aide telling the hill newspaper today that the damage of losing in pennsylvania would be huge, "if he loses pennsylvania twice, that's going to really hobble him in the future. that would be very hard to live down." given rick santorum's guarantee that he will win pennsylvania,
his admission that he needs to win pennsylvania, and the real possibility that he might not in fact win pennsylvania, the santorum campaign appears now to be trying to reframe the importance of the contest there. "the new york times" noting that while mr. santorum has said he must and will win pennsylvania, "his aides are now casting it as a mere stepping stone, a way to provide momentum leading into may and other state contests like texas." a top santorum aide telling "the hill" newspaper that winning either pennsylvania or texas is important for the campaign to go forward. "it's going to be tough to go on without pennsylvania. we must win one or both those states." suddenly it's not, we must win pennsylvania, it's, texas, pennsylvania, tomato, tomato. it's not that rick santorum needs to win pennsylvania, it will just be tough if he doesn't. >> let me ask you this question. how important is pennsylvania? is it a must-win state? >> oh, yeah, we have to win here. >> rick santorum chief strategist joins us next for the interview. stay with us. plus veggie nutrn new v8 v-fusion smoothie.
could've had a v8.
i worked at the colorado springs mail processing plant for 22 years. we processed on a given day about a million pieces of mail. checks, newspapers, bills. a lot of people get their medications only through the mail. small businesses depend on this processing plant. they want to shut down 3000 post offices, cut 100,000 jobs. they're gonna be putting people out of work everywhere. the american people depend on the postal service.
senator, you're in a good, strong position as a runner-up. why risk an embarrassing loss in pennsylvania? rick, welcome home. >> thank you very much, john, it's great to be home. >> how important is pennsylvania? is it a must-win state for you? >> yeah, we have to win here. >> somebody ribbing former pennsylvania senator rick santorum there, calling him a good runner-up today outside a
diner in his home state. still, though, an illustration of just how much is at stake in the pennsylvania primary for mr. santorum. joining us now for the interview is john brabender, a chief strategist with the rick santorum campaign. mr. brabender, thanks for being here. >> and i've got to tell you, every time i say i am doing an interview with you, people say, what is wrong with you? look, i know i'm not going to change your mind on anything, which is a good thing. but you're always respectful and you're always fair. you ask tough questions, but they're reasonable. so tell me why i shouldn't be here? >> well, i think you ought to be. so it's nice of you to say. i appreciate you being here, and i know it's not the easiest thing to do, among republicans, you do get a hard time, but i feel like this is a real question on which i feel like i'm hearing two different things from the campaign. and as chief strategist, i want to know which side you agree with. we're hearing pennsylvania kind
of matters, but we could do it without pennsylvania as long as we get texas. and we're also hearing in part from the candidate, we need pennsylvania. if we don't have pennsylvania, there's no way forward. >> well, the candidate's right. we have to win pennsylvania. and we've said before, we have to win states like texas and we have to win almost every state, we think, in may. truth of the matter is, in almost all those states, we are ahead. i saw you put a poll up that shows us two points up in pennsylvania, there was also a quinnipiac out today that showed us six points up. there's a whole mess of conservatives in the rest of the part of the state which i think rick santorum will do very well. it's a very unique state. and the other thing about pennsylvania, don't forget, it's probably going to be a battleground state in the fall. we need a nominee that can do well here. >> if the pennsylvania race does
not got the way you want it to, if you come in second instead of first, do you make it to may? do you make it to texas? >> you re-evaluate everything. and what rick santorum said very clearly is he got into this race to beat barack obama, not just because he's going to see some cause, or this isn't just about stopping mitt romney and those type of things. if at some point we feel like mitt romney would be the nominee, we're going to rally behind mitt romney and help him beat obama. >> but mr. santorum has said that mr. romney would be the worst republican in the country to nominate to run against mr. obama because of the centrality of the health care issue. he thinks that mr. romney is essentially disarmed on that issue. >> he is very concerned. rick santorum said one of the reasons he did get into this race is because of obama care. it's deeply offensive to a lot of republicans and a lot of democrats, quite frankly, and independents as well. the problem is, as the president has said himself, that mitt
romney was basically the architect of obama care. if that is the most potent issue that we have against the president, i think it is concerning that are we taking it off the table with mitt romney? >> but that wouldn't be enough to keep mr. santorum from not just endorsing, but working on behalf of mr. romney, if he does not beat him in the primaries? >> i think -- i would look at it this way. to republicans, the great unifier in this race is barack obama. we look at obama care not just because we think it's bad medicine or bad economics, but it changes freedom in america. but it's not just limited to that. it lays out how our country is governed and not to have that respect is wrong. both sides do work hard to get their nominees on the supreme court. let's not doubt that. one of the reasons rick santorum
will tell you he worked so hard to support arlen specter is he had specter guarantee his vote for whatever judges came up which happened to be roberts and alito which right now we see why that's so important to conserve tifs. >> here's a campaign issue which is about your candidate, but it's a question about how he has handled your campaign. i have criticized your candidate on the air including last night for a couple of things that he has said that seemed to please his audiences very much that were very blatantly not true. he said this week that at the university of california, there's a number of campuses that don't teach american history. it's not available. he had also said recently that there's a huge proportion of deaths in the neter left-hand side that are attributed essentially to the government killing people who don't want to be killed under the guise of euthanasia. people wear bracelets that say "don't kill me." not true about the university california system, but he doesn't correct those things when he's called out on them. do you think that he should?
>> first of all, i don't know whether or not he said was true or not. i'll take your word for it. i know in the netherlands, i was told there were some problems there. >> not even close. >> here's the more fundamental thing that i will tell you. we don't have a pollster on our campaign. why? because rick santorum doesn't want somebody whispering in his ear what he said. he said i want to do this without a net. i want to talk from the heart. we don't use teleprompter. so there will be occasions where he may say something that isn't always accurate. you give thousands and thousands of speeches, that's not unusual. however, in some sense, it's a good thing that we have somebody who's willing to go out there, just speak from the heart, say what they really believe. the one thing i will say, rick santorum is not going to be your cup of tea. we both know that. but you know he has convictions. >> but because of that, that's the thing -- it's not that he made the error. that's not what troubles me.
people make errors. i make them all the time. what troubles me is he's been called out on it. he should know it will take you five minutes to verify what he said about the university of california is not true. same thing with the dutch. then there's no correction. so because i think he is running as a man of conviction, even though they may be things people disagree with, he has integrity. correcting something, when you put something out there that's false seems like a man of honor, and i'm surprised he doesn't do it. >> i would bet that somebody he thought was credible gave him misinformation, and i believe he was h he would be the first person to tell you i was wrong. that's the type of person he is. >> i will follow up with you on this. these are easy ones. >> by the way, i think we look good together. there's a point/counterpoint. >> that's actually a '90s thing. but you and i could do maybe something else. song and dance. >> all right. >> a regular fight at least. the chief strategist for the rick santorum campaign. i'm really glad he came on the show. see, republican, nobody's crying. we'll be right back. [ man ] hmm. a lot can happen in two hundred thousand miles... are you guys okay? yeah.
♪ [ man ] i had a great time. thank you, it was really fun. ♪ [ crash ] i'm going to write down my number, but don't use it. [ laughing ] ♪ [ engine turns over ] [ male announcer ] the all-new subaru impreza®. experience love that lasts. ♪ here's a chance to create jobs in america. oil sands projects, like kearl, and the keystone pipeline will provide secure and reliable energy to the united states. over the coming years, projects like these could create more than half a million jobs in the us alone. from the canadian border, through the mid west, to the gulf coast. benefiting hundreds of thousands of families throughout the country. this is just what our economy needs right now.
i remember the day my doctor told me i have an irregular heartbeat, and that it put me at 5-times greater risk of a stroke. i was worried. i worried about my wife, and my family. bill has the most common type of atrial fibrillation, or afib. it's not caused by a heart valve problem. he was taking warfarin, but i've put him on pradaxa instead. in a clinical trial, pradaxa 150 mgs reduced stroke risk 35% more than warfarin without the need for regular blood tests. i sure was glad to hear that. pradaxa can cause serious, sometimes fatal, bleeding. don't take pradaxa if you have abnormal bleeding, and seek immediate medical care for unexpected signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. pradaxa may increase your bleeding risk if you're 75 or older, have a bleeding condition like stomach ulcers, or take aspirin, nsaids, or bloodthinners, or if you have kidney problems, especially if you take certain medicines.
tell your doctor about all medicines you take, any planned medical or dental procedures, and don't stop taking pradaxa without your doctor's approval, as stopping may increase your stroke risk. other side effects include indigestion, stomach pain, upset, or burning. pradaxa is progress. if you have afib not caused by a heart valve problem, ask your doctor if you can reduce your risk of stroke with pradaxa. the national political conventions this summer, they're
the kinds of occasions for which people really accept that security's going to be tight, right? the good news, though, for gun lovers this august, it appears that you and your concealed handgun may find a way to have a grand old party together in tampa. this year the republican party is going to be naming its nominee in tampa, florida, so the mayor of tampa has put together a list of the many, many items he considers security threats. and he doesn't want them anywhere near his convention center that week. not on the list of items, firearms. the city is not even going to try to ban firearms from the republican national convention because of that weird and always adapting creation known as florida state law which bans local governments from placing any restrictions on carrying guns in public places. as the city attorney explained to the "tampa tribune," quote, if we tried to regulate guns, it wouldn't have worked. it just wouldn't have. i mean, come on, this is florida.
now, because the secret service is the secret service and they do not care what your state law says, the secret service is still going to ban guns from the small security zone that the secret service will be setting up around the site. but that still does leave a whole big zone around that zone that the city is responsible for. that's the so-called clean zone. and that includes where all the protesters are going to be. and in the clean zone, well, according to the list, the city of tampa's list of dangerous security items at the republican national convention? how about a water pistol. water pistol. banned or not banned from the republican convention by the city of tampa. water pistol is banned. how about a glock handgun? banned or not banned by the city of tampa from the republican convention? glock handgun, good to go. not banned. okay, next, how about a mask. any mask. should you want to embrace your inner guy fox or your inner groucho marx at the rnc, will the city of tampa let you? no. that mask will be banned from the republican convention. how about a springfield xd compact .45?
banned or not banned by the city of tampa from the rnc? that's okay. not banned. here's my favorite. piece of string. a piece of string more than six inches long, could be twine, dental floss. can you bring a piece of string anywhere near the tampa convention center the week of the republican convention? no, you cannot. that piece of string, any string longer than six inches will be banned for safety reasons. guns, not banned. but string, banned. because maybe you were going to trust the republican nominee up like a nice roast chicken? amazing. before we go tonight, i have to say something else. i got word tonight that this new book that i wrote, this book "drift," the unmooring of american military power, "drift" will debut at number one on "the new york times" best-seller list, which is a little overwhelming. and so i just want to say thank you. y
The Rachel Maddow Show
MSNBC April 4, 2012 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
News/Business. (2012)
Pennsylvania 43, Mr. Romney 18, Rick Santorum 18, Vietnam 12, Obama 11, Mr. Santorum 11, George W. Bush 10, Paul Ryan 7, Karl Rove 7, Texas 6, John Mccain 6, Romney 6, Wisconsin 5, France 5, Europe 5, Barack Obama 4, Santorum 4, Philip Zelikow 4, Obama Administration 3, Usaa 3
Virtual Ch. 60 (MSNBC)
MSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service The Chin Grimes TV News Archive
Uploaded by TV Archive on April 5, 2012


Sports are one thing that we show more interest from our childhood. Playing, watching, and sharing sports news with friends everything is bliss. Everyone in this world loves to update themselves with the current sports details on their life. In the last decade, you have to use the magazines and sports news to update yourselves or sit in front of the television for hours. When the life changes not many people have the time to update them with the current information. If you are one amongst them, then internet is the salvation for your need. It encompasses everything you need and there are no longer necessary to reach the right one.
Portals that encompass the sports details and latest news are high but not all of them are quality providers. Most of the website writes the speculations so as to reach more number of people. It might be interesting to read but not the truth is hard to find on those website. Certain websites on internet gives certain sports news to the people where you can find the details in depth. Spending time on such blogs will increase your knowledge about the sports and you can be well aware of what is happening on different matches, competitions. You will get the minute details on your life. They have been the choice of many people around the world. Discussing the sports with the other people like with your friends, family or colleague will gives you the bliss.
You can also get the stories about the players, teams, coaches and there are many more things are explained by the people. It is possible to reach the details you are waiting for. If it is hard to reach the most relevant one, then you should consult the people with the experience. With their experience, they can tell the websites with speculations and website to choose for truth. Make use of such people around you. Make use of them and reach the target. The CentSports.com is one of the reputed website on internet for sports news. Numerous of people around the world do follow this websites again and again. Thus you can prefer them without any doubts and hesitations. Subscribing the website will sends you the notification once they import any new information. Make use of this website and update yourself with the latest and trending news on the sports.


It is the unknown God that science is struggling with today: his name is Jesus of Nazareth. By him are all things held together, and all power in the natural world comes from him.
Most of the letters that Paul wrote to the churches were written to those that he had started himself. But he did not begin the church at Rome, nor did he begin the church at Colossae. It is not certain who started the church at Colossae, but it is very likely a man mentioned in certain of Paul's other letters -- Epaphroditus, or, since that was too long a name for even the Greeks to say, Epaphras. He is mentioned in this letter as being from Colossae, and is very likely the one who founded the church. Where he had heard the Gospel we do not know, but he had evidently taken it to his own home town and had begun to proclaim Christ. Out of that proclamation had come the church at Colossae.
Epaphroditus had gone to Rome to see the Apostle Paul, who was then a prisoner, carrying with him reports of the church at Colossae. Another man had also gone to Rome to see Paul during his first imprisonment, and he too brought reports of the church at Colossae. So it was to these new Christians who had never met the apostle face to face that Paul wrote the letter from Rome.
It was written at about the same time as the letter to the Philippians, and you will notice that it is very similar in its structure and content to the letter to the Ephesians. They were probably written at about the same time, during Paul's first imprisonment, and are therefore called the Prison Epistles of the Apostle Paul. The primary difference between the Ephesians and Colossians is that the Colossians had a problem, and it is on this problem that the apostle is primarily focusing. They were on the verge of losing their understanding of the power by which Christian life is lived. Therefore, this letter is the great proclamation and explanation of the power of the Christian's life through Christ as the resource of the individual.
Since Paul had never been to Colossae, he begins the letter with certain references to himself as an apostle and with greetings to these people, with thanksgiving for the faith that he has heard is prevalent among them, and for their love and joy and for other evidence that these people have heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ and have been radically transformed.
Beginning on that note then, he sets forth for them the source of all power in the Christian life -- Jesus Christ himself.
Perhaps you have had the experience of finding a couple on your doorstep with little green books under their arms, announcing themselves as Jehovah's Witnesses and asking if they may come in and tell you the truth about life and the Bible. If you let them in, sooner or later they turn to this passage to show you that Jesus Christ was not God, but he was essentially a creature -- the highest of the creatures of creation -- and they use this term the first-born of all creation to bolster their argument. They say that this means that Jesus was the first one ever created. (There is, of course, a sense in which this word first-born does have that meaning. In referring to our children, we say that the oldest one is the first-born because he or she appeared first on the scene.) That is one of the slick devices by which the cults propagate their errors. It is very subtle because it seems to be logical and scriptural.
But what they are doing is giving the term a modern meaning, which is quite different from the usage in the New Testament. Here, the word "first-born" means the heir, or the chief -- the principal one, the owner. This phrase, "the first-born of all creation," means that the Lord Jesus stands in relationship to creation just as an heir stands in relationship to his father's property. He is not part of it, but rather, he is the owner of it, the heir.
If you look carefully at the Jehovah's Witnesses' little green translation of the Scriptures, you will notice that in order to substantiate their lie about Jesus Christ, they've inserted the word "other" in these phrases. "All other things were created by him. In him all other things were created." But there is absolutely no warrant whatsoever in the Greek text for the insertion of the word "other." This is a clear instance of the kind of deceitfulness to which these people will stoop in order to propagate their lies.
Now it is one of the puzzles of science why things hold together. We know that everything we can touch is made up of tiny atoms that consist of electrons buzzing around a nucleus. And anything that rotates or revolves has a force that projects outward -- centrifugal force. Therefore, things ought to be blowing up. Because of this centrifugal force, every atom ought to be flying apart. Well, what holds it together? Science cannot answer. Scientists say it is an unnamed force. That always interests me, because it reminds me of Paul's experience in Athens when he found the people worshipping an unknown god. It is the unknown God that science is struggling with today: his name is Jesus of Nazareth. By him are all things held together, and all power in the natural world comes from him.
Twice he uses this term, the first-born. He is the first-born of the old creation; he is the first-born of the new creation -- the resurrection -- the first-born from the dead. Now that does not mean that he was the first one ever to be raised from the dead, because scripture records others who preceded him. But he is the One who is the heir, the Lord of all the new creation. He is the head of the new creation, as the apostle tells us, and we are part of a new body, the new race of men that God is forming through the centuries, and of that body, Jesus Christ is the head. From him, then, flows all power -- resurrection power.
It is my increasing conviction that the problem with most Christians is that they do not understand what the Bible teaches about resurrection power. If they had any idea what this power is like and how it operates, and the areas and situations in which it is intended to operate, they would never again live as they live now. They would be entirely different. I do not mean that they would be dazzling people, making great displays of power and moving mountains. It does not take resurrection power to do that.
Resurrection power is quiet. It is the kind of power that was evident in the Lord Jesus. It was not the fact that he came from the tomb that dazzled the eyes of the soldiers there, nor that it produced the earthquake. He came from the tomb absolutely without a sound. The stone was rolled away, not to let him out, but to let people in, so they could see that the tomb was empty. There was no sound, no demonstration. There was the quiet, inexorable power of a risen life which no mechanical or natural power can possibly resist. This is what God has released to us. A (quiet power that changes hearts and lives and attitudes, making everything over from within. That is resurrection power. It flows to us from the head of the new creation, the risen Christ, the source of all power.
That includes us all, doesn't it? We all belong in this category. And we are the ones through whom this power is now to operate.
You will not find it explained in the Old Testament. It was experienced there, but it was never explained.
Christ living in you. This is the supreme declaration of the Christian church. You have never preached the Gospel until you have told men that not only will their sins be forgiven when they come to Christ, but that he, himself, will live within them -- to do through them everything they are expected to do. He died for us, so that he might live in us. This is the full glory of the Christian Gospel.
Christ in you! The hope of glory. Now that is why I say if Christians would begin to understand what it is that God has made available to them, they would never be the same again. We would never have to plead with people in the church to take on needed enterprises, ministries, or teaching Sunday School. We would not be met with the excuse, "Oh, I just don't have the strength to do it. I don't have the energy." You see, here is a source of energy, Paul says, that is constant and consistent and which flows through him, created by the Spirit of God indwelling him. As he saw the task, he moved to meet it with energy which God gave. That is resurrection power.
Now, in chapter two, we have the warning against certain false powers which would woo us away from the true power Christ has given us. These warnings are as valid and relevant today as they were when Paul wrote them. Certain things among men are always regarded as sources of power. If you can obtain these, you can be a powerful individual; your personality will be strong and radiant. You will be a dynamic leader of men. You have seen advertisements in which this kind of language appears; "For just ten dollars you'll get a course that will transform you within fifteen days into a dynamic leader. You'll never be the same again."
You have got what it takes, now live it out, let it show.
I do not know how many instances of this kind of kidnapping I have seen, or how many failures of faith on the part of young people going to college to study. Young people who have been raised in Christian homes, but who have been exposed to the wily, subtle teachings of human wisdom, have lost their faith and turned away from the things of Christ, often going off into wild and riotous living. Why? Because no one warned them, or else they did not heed the warning to avoid being made a prey of human knowledge. Now this sounds, at first, as though the Gospel is anti-intellectual. But the Bible is not against knowledge. It is against knowledge that does not come under the judgment of the Word of God.
The apostle analyzes what is wrong with human knowledge. There are many things that are right. There is much truth in what man has discovered through the centuries. This we must readily admit. But Paul points out first that the source is suspect, because it comes from tradition. Tradition is the gradually accumulated body of knowledge built up bit by bit through the centuries and passed along from one generation to another. Consequently, human knowledge is made up of great quantities of truth mingled with error, with no way of distinguishing between the two. Those who accept it uncritically are bound to accept as much error as they do truth. It will lead them, therefore, into mistaken concepts and erroneous and injurious ideas.
In the second place, he says, human knowledge is according to the elemental spirits of the universe. What does that mean? Paul is referring here to the dark powers that, as he brings out in other letters, govern the minds of men, darken their intellects and limit their understanding. Human knowledge, then, is essentially rudimentary. That is, it is elementary. It stays on the periphery of truth, never getting to the real heart of things. That is why you can have a university community, saturated with the highest exponents of human knowledge, and yet filled with vileness, corruption, unrest, distress, with a high suicide rate and evidences of decay and deterioration on every side. Human knowledge does not go to the heart of things as the Word of God does. The two complement each other, but there must be a critical evaluation of the words, as they are subjected to the wisdom of God.
The final objection Paul makes is that it is not according to Christ. Therefore, human wisdom lacks the ability to insert the great positives into life. It is essentially negative. It does not produce the qualities of love, truth, joy, peace and power that come only from Jesus Christ.
He shows us, then, that the answer to the lure of human wisdom is the judgment of the cross. The cross has delivered us and cuts us off from trust and admiration for human wisdom as such. We are brought to the place where we can judge these things and see their moral values properly in the light of the Word of God.
You see, you can wear a hair shirt and be filled with lust. You can beat your body black and blue and still be guilty all the time of thinking lascivious thoughts. These things provide no check to the indulgence of the flesh. Therefore, there is no power here to lead the kind of life that we must live.
What does he mean here? We are hearing a lot about this these days. If you get in touch with the invisible spirits, you will have power. If you contact the dead, and get messages from them, you will have an unseen source of power which will enable you to live as other people cannot live. These Colossians were troubled with these influences as we are troubled with them today. We are seeing a great increase on every hand of this turning to the occult -- to astrology, to the black and devious arts, to magic, to seances. All of this is a satanic substitute for the power of Jesus Christ -- the indwelling power of Christ.
That does not mean that we should go around constantly thinking about heaven. There is nothing super-pious about this. He is simply saying, "Don't let your desires and your attitudes be governed or directed by desires for earthly fame or power. Instead, let your desires be shaped by the word of God." We are to have a desire to exhibit love, truth, faith, and patience -- the qualities that mark the life of the risen Lord. That is what he's talking about. We are not to go around thinking about heaven all the time. We are to go around manifesting heaven in the situations in which we find ourselves.
Underline those words. That is where resurrection power is made manifest. The world cannot produce that kind of living. It does not know how to take trials with a smile, to endure hardships with faith and patience and joy. As far as the world is concerned, this takes an unknown kind of power the power that is resident only in Jesus Christ. This power will transform our hardships and our difficulties into joyful experiences, not just phony manifestations of joy. They are genuine. We learn things from these trials. If our heart is right with Christ, if we are putting off the old and putting on the new we discover that these experiences, instead of producing grumbling, griping, and complaining provide a basis for joy, as we are "strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might."
Thank you, our Father, for this first-century book that speaks to our twentieth century lives, and shows us that not one thing has changed. Not one thing in our world is different from the world these early Christians faced. Not one thing is different about our relationship to Jesus Christ. We, too, can live as they lived, in joy, gladness and thanksgiving in the midst of this life. We pray that we may discover this truth by acting upon these admonitions which Paul has given us. We pray in Jesus' name Amen.


British Expat Forum • View topic - You are partner of an expat?
You are partner of an expat?
You have accompanied your partner on his/her expatriation?
Then you are the right person to help me!
I am a student from Germany, needing your opinion for my final master thesis.
I want to know about YOUR needs! I want to find out, what type of support you would have wished to receive, in order to feel integrated & happy while abroad.
The aim is to give companies recommendations on how they can support YOU better.
- you can always skip questions, if you prefer. I am happy for any answered question.
- your answers will remain confidential and anonymous.
Many thanks for your support with my project!
I've shifted your post from "Families and Pets" to here, which is the correct place for "Research Students".


Miti-001 Log Grill - Canadian Outdoor Equipment Co.
The MITI-001 log grill (Miti means "log" in the Atikamekw language of the Atikamekw Nehirowisiwok First Nation) is an ingenious device that speeds up and improves the use and creation of the Swedish fire torch (aka Canadian candle) method of fire for cooking. Whereas a traditional Swedish fire torch requires one to not only saw a log suitable for use, but to also saw down the log in the direction of the grain multiple times (difficult with crosscut saws), the MITI-001 allows one to use an axe to split the log in quarters.
The MITI-001 also increases stability of the cooking surface, and allows for adjustment of fire intensity by adjusting the spread of the supporting quarters. Essentially operating like a large stick stove, and directing heat up into pots and pans on it's surface, the MITI-001 enables the heating of large quantities of water in very short order, or the cooking of large meals for groups with minimal firewood, and without constant feeding of the stove.
The MITI-001 is made from heavy duty 1/8" 304L stainless steel, and includes 4 steel stabilizing rods.
This is a quality system that works! Made out of heavy duty Stainless Steel and excellent finish! Highly recommend!!!
Good design, but use caution!
It's exactly what I wanted, but I was so excited when I opened it that it cleanly sliced open my finger... I've ended up using a rasp to dull the edges.
Such a unique and useful item. Superbly crafted as well. Looking forward to trying it this winter.


text:
Pipelines and the National Forests: A Conflict of Values
Posted on October 1, 2018 Categories: The Highlands Voice No comments yet
By Lewis Freeman, Executive Director, Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance
It has been over four years since the first proposals were set forth to build two natural gas pipelines that begin in the Marcellus shale fields of central West Virginia, both designed principally to provide fuel for public utility electricity generation. The proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline would go south through West Virginia, then cross east into Virginia, traversing the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Appalachian National Trail, including cutting through a portion of the Jefferson National Forest. The project would be 300 miles in length.
The second project, proposed in May 2014, is the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP). A joint venture led by Dominion Energy and Duke Power, the 600-mile project would end in southern North Carolina, with a spur over to the Norfolk, Virginia area. Questions have abounded about both projects over the intervening four years, including: the need for the projects, given unused capacity in existing natural gas pipelines and declining projections for electricity demand in the markets to be served; the environmental impact of the projects, particularly as they are built through the mountains; and the use of eminent domain to acquire private property from owners who would not benefit from the projects, yet would have their land taken from them against their will.
Among the most prominent questions raised about both projects, particularly the ACP, concern the impact on the National Forests. The ACP would cross approximately 21-miles, combined, of the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests. An earlier proposed route would have doubled the amount of Forest lands traversed.
The Forest Plans of both the Monongahela (MNF) and George Washington (GWNF) contain strict provisions governing whether a project like the ACP could be built. In recognition of that, Forest Service officials began asking the ACP for specific information on how the project could be built through the two Forests without causing serious environmental damage. Of paramount concern to the Forest Service was how the ACP could be built over the steep mountain slopes dominating portions of the MNF and GWNF without causing serious, permanent damage. Much of the proposed construction would involve effectively removing the tops of steep mountain ridges in the Forests, thus causing serious threats of permanent, ongoing erosion.
Representative of the Forest Service's concerns was an October 24, 2017, request it made to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the federal agency with overall responsibility for granting approval for the ACP, to require site-specific design of stabilization measures in selected high-hazard portions of the ACP route. The Forest Service letter stated:
The route for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline Project (ACP Project), proposed by Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC (ACP) would cross some very challenging terrain in the central Appalachians. Potentially difficult situations include steep slopes, presence of headwater streams, geologic formations with high slippage potential, highly erodible soils, and the presence of high-value natural resources downslope of high hazard areas. These hazards are exacerbated by high annual rates of precipitation and the potential for extreme precipitation events.
Similar hazards on other smaller pipeline projects in the central Appalachians have led to slope failures, erosion and sedimentation incidents, and damage to aquatic resources. Therefore, the Forest Service (FS) is concerned that crossing such challenging terrain with a much larger pipeline could present a high risk of failures that lead to resource damage.
To address these hazards, ACP has proposed implementing "best in class" slope stabilization and erosion/sedimentation control measures. ACP provided general descriptions and conceptual drawings of these methods in its resource reports and other filings. In comments on resource reports and in other formal and informal communication, the FS has asked ACP to provide documentation of the effectiveness of these techniques.
Both the George Washington and Monongahela National Forests contain Forest Plan standards that limit activities in areas that are at high risk for slope and soil instability. To facilitate the acceptance of ACP's Special Use Permit application for further processing, the Forests need to be able to determine that the project is consistent or can be made consistent with this Forest Plan direction.
To further clarify the likelihood that the ACP can be constructed through the George Washington and Monongahela National Forests without undue risk of resource damage, the Forest Service is requesting that ACP develop site-specific stabilization designs for selected areas of challenging terrain.
Consultations between the Forest Service and Dominion Transmission, Inc., managing partner for the ACP project, regarding the development of acceptable stabilization measures for the project continued over the ensuing months. In July, 2017, however, before the Forest Service's concerns were satisfactorily addressed by Dominion, the agency approved a proposed amendment to the Monongahela and George Washington Forest Plans that in effect provided an exemption for the ACP from Forest Service standards. In November, a Special Use Permit for the project was granted.
The Special Use Permit for the ACP by the Forest Service was challenged in a law suit filed February 5, 2018 by a coalition of several member organizations of the Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance (ABRA). In its press release announcing the legal action, the ABRA stated:
The Forest Service repeatedly requested additional information from developers yet moved ahead and approved this risky project with its questions unanswered. The pipeline is slated to cut through miles of steep, rugged mountainous regions of national forest land in West Virginia and Virginia. Much of this land provides habitat for rare and endangered species and is land that is regularly used by hikers and campers.
Pipeline developers have yet to receive all the permits needed for this project, including a water certification from Virginia meant to ensure protection of sensitive waterways. The Forest Service should not allow any work to move forward on national forest lands until this project is fully permitted.
On Monday, September 24, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ordered a stay of the Special Use Permit that had been issued by the U.S. Forest Service for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP).
The Order was the third time in four months that the Fourth Circuit has vacated or stayed federal authorization for the ACP. The Court had issued on May 15 and reaffirmed on August 6 an order vacating the incidental take statement from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), pursuant to requirements of the Endangered Species Act. Also, on August 6, the Court vacated the right-of-way permit issued by the U.S. Park Service (NPS) to permit the pipeline to cross the Blue Ridge Parkway and Appalachian Trail.
Four days later, on September 28, the Fourth Circuit heard oral arguments on the challenge to the Forest Service Permit. During the arguments on the case, the presiding judge observed that the Forest Service seemed to have suddenly changed its mind in mid- 2017 and proceeded to approve the requested Special Use Permit. He inquired of the Justice Department attorney representing the Forest Service what the circumstances were that caused the agency to change course. The attorney responded evasively, prompting the judge to interrupt him again and ask: "When?" The attorney tried to continue with his non-responsive response, and Judge Gregory again interrupted with: "When?" The judge's "When?" question was asked twice more, but never received a response, prompting the judge to thunder: "Who's running the train station? Is it the private company?"
When the Forest Service issued in November 2017 the Special Use Permit for the ACP to cross the Monongahela National Forest and the George Washington National Forest, ABRA issued the following statement to the media:
"We firmly disagree with the decision announced today by the U.S. Forest Service to allow construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline through publicly owned forest lands – valued by millions of visitors and the source of drinking water for thousands of people. We believe this decision is based on seriously deficient and incorrect information. The action imperils some of the nation's most treasured natural resources and reflects a rush to judgment that is contrary to the standards of deliberation that we have a right to expect from the Forest Service. The decision should be strongly challenged."
The decision has indeed been challenged and ABRA and its members will continue to challenge any decision that adversely affects the integrity and diminishes the value of one of our nation's most treasured assets: its National Forests.
The Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance, is a coalition of over 50 conservation and environmental organizations in Virginia and West Virginia concerned with protecting the heritage, resources and economy of the Allegheny-Blue Ridge region and leading opposition to the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. The West Virginia Highlands Conservancy is a founding member of ABRA.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: How to add additional columns using tidyr group_by function in R? This question is a follow up to my post from this answer.
Data
df1 <- structure(list(Date = c("6/24/2020", "6/24/2020", "6/24/2020",
"6/24/2020", "6/25/2020", "6/25/2020"), Market = c("A", "A",
"A", "A", "A", "A"), Salesman = c("MF", "RP", "RP", "FR", "MF",
"MF"), Product = c("Apple", "Apple", "Banana", "Orange", "Apple",
"Banana"), Quantity = c(20L, 15L, 20L, 20L, 10L, 15L), Price = c(1L,
1L, 2L, 3L, 1L, 1L), Cost = c(0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.6, 0.6)),
class = "data.frame", row.names = c("1",
"2", "3", "4", "5", "6"))

Solution
library(dplyr) # 1.0.0
library(tidyr)
df1 %>%
    group_by(Date, Market) %>%
    group_by(Revenue = c(Quantity %*% Price),
             TotalCost = c(Quantity %*% Cost),
             Product, .add = TRUE) %>%
    summarise(Sold = sum(Quantity)) %>%
    pivot_wider(names_from = Product, values_from = Sold)
# A tibble: 2 x 7
# Groups:   Date, Market, Revenue, TotalCost [2]
#  Date      Market Revenue TotalCost Apple Banana Orange
#  <chr>     <chr>    <dbl>     <dbl> <int>  <int>  <int>
#1 6/24/2020 A          135      37.5    35     20     20
#2 6/25/2020 A           25      15      10     15     NA

@akrun's solution works well. Now I'd like to know how to add three more columns for quantity sold by salesmen to the existing results so the final output will look like this:
Date        Market  Revenue Total Cost  Apples Sold Bananas Sold    Oranges Sold    MF  RP  FR
6/24/2020   A       135     37.5        35          20              20              20  35  20
6/25/2020   A       25      15          15          25              NA              25  NA  NA

A: One option would be to do the group by operations separately as these are done on separate columns and then do a join by the common columns i.e. 'Date', 'Market'
library(dplyr)
library(tidyr)
out1 <- df1 %>%
           group_by(Date, Market) %>%
           group_by(Revenue = c(Quantity %*% Price),
                    TotalCost = c(Quantity %*% Cost),
                     Product, .add = TRUE) %>%
          summarise(Sold = sum(Quantity)) %>%
          pivot_wider(names_from = Product, values_from = Sold)
out2 <- df1 %>%
          group_by(Date, Market, Salesman) %>%
          summarise(SalesSold = sum(Quantity)) %>%
          pivot_wider(names_from = Salesman, values_from = SalesSold)

left_join(out1, out2)
# A tibble: 2 x 10
# Groups:   Date, Market, Revenue, TotalCost [2]
#  Date      Market Revenue TotalCost Apple Banana Orange    FR    MF    RP
#  <chr>     <chr>    <dbl>     <dbl> <int>  <int>  <int> <int> <int> <int>
#1 6/24/2020 A          135      37.5    35     20     20    20    20    35
#2 6/25/2020 A           25      15      10     15     NA    NA    25    NA

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Pallenis maritima — вид айстроцвітих рослин родини айстрові (Asteraceae).

Морфологія
Прибережна, від 5 до 40 сантиметрів багаторічна рослина або чагарник. Стебла грубі, волохаті, більш-менш прямі, деревні основи, часто з багатьма гілками. Листки чергові, ланцетно-лопатчаті, до 3 см завдовжки і 1 см завширшки з кудлатим волоссям. Жовті квіти, довжиною 9 мм. Жовті квіточки, 5-лопатеві, гермафродити. Плоди до 1,5 мм у довжину. 2n = 12. Цвіте майже цілий рік, особливо з весни до кінця літа. Розмножується насінням або живцями влітку.

Поширення
Населяє Західне і Центральне Середземномор'я на схід до Греції. Є в Північній Африці, Канарських островах. Росте у скелястих районах поблизу узбережжя. Живе в лісовому районі на скелястому або піщаному ґрунті, добре дренованому, в тріщинах, старих будівлях в помірному або напівзасушливому кліматі. Витримує високий рівень інсоляції, літньої посухи і засолених ґрунтів. Помірно морозостійкий.

Джерела
 Flora Vascular

Галерея

Айстрові (підродина)
Флора Європи
Флора Північної Африки
Флора Канарських островів
Рослини, описані 1832

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Fire phone comes with a built-in flashlight that can be easily activated if you ever need more light or find yourself in a dark place.
Let's learn more about this extra useful feature.
You can find the flashlight icon in the Quick Actions Panel (click here to learn more).
All you need to do activate the flashlight is to tap on its icon. When its grey it's turned off, when orange, it's ON.
Here you can see the Fire phone flashlight ON.
Here it's OFF. To turn the flashlight off, just tap on it once again.
Take a look at this extra short movie where I show you how to turn the flashlight on and off.
If the Flashlight in your Fire phone remains on for a long time, your Fire phone will warm up. Remember not to leave your Fire phone with the flashlight ON because you can destroy your device.


Alvies Gateway Grille (2033 Ontario St ) - Diner NEW!
Charlies Restaurant ( 5100-5198 Broadview Rd near Broadview Rd & Brookpark Rd) - Diner NEW!
Denny's (6850 Brookpark Rd near Ridge Rd & Brookpark Rd) - Diner NEW!
Denny's (4331 W 150th St near Puritas Ave & 150th St W) - Diner NEW!
Denny's (11377 Bellflower Rd ) - Diner NEW!
Eat'n Park (2075 Snow Rd ) - Diner NEW!
Gabe's Family Restaurant (2044 Broadview Rd ) - Diner NEW!
Mom's Family Restaurant (6512 Clark Ave near Clark Ave & 65th St W) - Diner NEW!
Monte's Little Diner (5772 Ridge Road near Snow Rd & Ridge Rd) - Diner NEW!
Nick's Diner (4116 Lorain Ave near 38th St W & Lorain Ave) - Diner NEW!
Sammy's Grille (629 Euclid Ave near 6th St E & Superior Ave) - Diner NEW!
Somer's Place (4197 W 150th St near 150th St W & Terminal Ave) - Diner NEW!
Steak 'n Shake (3294 Steelyard Dr ) - Diner NEW!
Steve's Lunch / Steve's Hot Dogs (5004 Lorain Ave near 50th St W & Lorain Ave) - Diner NEW!
The Diner on Clifton (11637 Clifton Blvd near Clifton Blvd & 117th St W) - Diner NEW!
The Diner on E55th (1328 E 55th St ) - Diner NEW!