Tuesday, January 29, 2013

How well do you know 'Pride and Prejudice'?

With one of the most famous opening lines of all time ? 'It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife' ? and one of literature's most beloved love stories, as well as satire that is still admired today, Jane Austen's novel 'Pride and Prejudice' is still an acknowledged classic 200 years after its publication in 1813. How well do you know the story of Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy? Test your knowledge!

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/vrzgbBd2J6M/How-well-do-you-know-Pride-and-Prejudice

John Witherspoon george michael usain bolt Closing Ceremony London 2012 Tom Daley Leryn Franco The Campaign

Do You Know More Information About Wealth Building For Personal ...

With real estate, you typically buy a property and then make money through selling it eventually for a much higher value than its purchase price or becoming a landlord and letting the property.? One of the advantages of real estate investing is using the principle of leverage to buy an asset that you otherwise couldn?t afford.

Even already rich people have a problem obeying this principle and can sometimes end up broke as a result. So, only gratify your non-essential desires if you can do so without spending more than nine-tenths of your earnings. Wealth building requires discipline and self-control. You must continue to save one-tenth of what you bring in no matter what. This is the key to building some capital which you can then use to invest. Find something that you love to do and that solves the needs of a target market. Then sell that product or service through relentless marketing and sales. Create efficient systems to sell more, more often. And work towards growing the value of your business by making it less dependent on you so that you can eventually sell it to a new owner. Paying debts down fast and taking care of family and friends is also essential and will increase your ability to earn money.

Seek the advice of those experienced in the profitable handling of money and be wary of following friends and relatives into so-called investment opportunities. Educate yourself and research your investments thoroughly before parting with your hard-earned money. Whatever investment options you pick, you should understand that each has its own time line from start to finish that needs to be followed to fruit-ration. There is no shortcut for this. Every option has a process that needs to be followed through. If you know more information about wealth building, we can have this topic through dedicated servers or buy domain name in domain shop.

Source: http://freefinancearticles.info/do-you-know-more-information-about-wealth-building-for-personal-finance

don t trust the b in apartment 23 world financial center shabazz muhammad angela corey zimmerman charged bonobos charles manson

Friday, January 25, 2013

Guavus Buys Mobile Analytics And Data Intelligence Company Neuralitic Systems

Neuralitic SystemsFresh off raising $30 million in new funding, enterprise data-analytics company Guavus is making a key acquisition today--Neuralitic Systems. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. Neuralitic has raised a total of $20 million in venture capital from BlackBerry Partners Fund, BDC Venture Capital, Vertex Venture Capital and GO Capital LP.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/IO2escI6mmM/

sea lion si swimsuit 2012 westminster dog show abe lincoln vampire hunter xi jinping matt bomer westminster kennel club dog show

Panetta says women in combat is a strength

WASHINGTON (AP) ? Allowing women to serve in combat roles will strengthen the U.S. military's ability to win wars, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Thursday, shortly before his official announcement of the landmark change.

"Our military is more capable, and our force is more powerful, when we use all of the great diverse strengths of the American people," Panetta said at a Pentagon ceremony in remembrance of Martin Luther King Jr.

"Every person in today's military has made a solemn commitment to fight and, if necessary, to die, for our nation's defense," he said. "We owe it to them to allow them to pursue every avenue of military service for which they are fully prepared and qualified. Their career success and their specific opportunities should be based solely on their ability to successfully carry out an assigned mission. Everyone deserves that chance."

The decision to lift the ban on women serving in combat presents a daunting challenge to top military leaders who now will have to decide which, if any, jobs they believe should be open only to men.

Panetta planned to announce at a Pentagon news conference that more than 230,000 battlefront posts ? many in Army and Marine infantry units and in potentially elite commando jobs ? are now open to women. It will be up to the military service chiefs to recommend and defend whether women should be excluded from any of those more demanding and deadly positions, such as Navy SEALs or the Army's Delta Force.

The historic change, which was recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, overturns a 1994 rule prohibiting women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units.

The change won't take place overnight: Service chiefs will have to develop plans for allowing women to seek the combat positions, a senior military official said. Some jobs may open as soon as this year, while assessments for others, such as special operations forces, may take longer. The services will have until January 2016 to make a case to that some positions should remain closed to women.

Officials briefed The Associated Press on the changes Wednesday on condition of anonymity so they could speak ahead of the official announcement.

There long has been opposition to putting women in combat, based on questions of whether they have the necessary strength and stamina for certain jobs, or whether their presence might hurt unit cohesion.

But as news of Panetta's expected order got out, many members of Congress, including the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., announced their support.

"It reflects the reality of 21st century military operations," Levin said.

Objections were few. Jerry Boykin, executive vice president of the Family Research Council, called the move "another social experiment" that will place unnecessary burdens on military commanders.

"While their focus must remain on winning the battles and protecting their troops, they will now have the distraction of having to provide some separation of the genders during fast-moving and deadly situations," said Boykin, a retired Army lieutenant general. He noted that small units often are in sustained combat for extended periods of time under primal living conditions with no privacy.

Panetta's move comes in his final weeks as Pentagon chief and just days after President Barack Obama's inaugural speech in which he spoke passionately about equal rights for all. The new order expands the department's action of nearly a year ago to open about 14,500 combat positions to women, nearly all of them in the Army.

In addition to questions of strength and performance, there also have been suggestions that the American public would not tolerate large numbers of women being killed in war.

Under the 1994 Pentagon policy, women were prohibited from being assigned to ground combat units below the brigade level. A brigade is roughly 3,500 troops split into several battalions of about 800 soldiers each. Historically, brigades were based farther from the front lines, and they often included top command and support staff.

The necessities of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, however, propelled women into jobs as medics, military police and intelligence officers that were sometimes attached ? but not formally assigned ? to battalions. So while a woman couldn't be assigned as an infantryman in a battalion going out on patrol, she could fly the helicopter supporting the unit, or move in to provide medical aid if troops were injured.

And these conflicts, where battlefield lines are blurred and insurgents can lurk around every corner, have made it almost impossible to keep women clear of combat.

Still, as recent surveys and experiences have shown, it will not be an easy transition. When the Marine Corps sought women to go through its tough infantry course last year, two volunteered and both failed to complete the course. And there may not be a wide clamoring from women for the more intense, dangerous and difficult jobs, including some infantry and commando positions.

Two lawsuits were filed last year challenging the Pentagon's ban on women serving in combat, adding pressure on officials to overturn the policy. And the military services have been studying the issue and surveying their forces to determine how it may affect performance and morale.

The Joint Chiefs have been meeting regularly on the matter and they unanimously agreed to send the recommendation to Panetta earlier this month.

A senior military official familiar with the discussions said the chiefs laid out three main principles to guide them as they move through the process. Those were to maintain America's effective fighting force, preserve military readiness and develop a process that would give all service members the best chance to succeed.

Women comprise about 14 percent of the 1.4 million active military personnel. More than 280,000 women have been sent to Iraq, Afghanistan or to jobs in neighboring nations in support of the wars. Of the more than 6,600 U.S. service members who have been killed, 152 have been women.

The senior military official said the military chiefs must report back to Panetta with their initial implementation plans by May 15.

___

AP National Security Writer Robert Burns and AP Broadcast reporter Sagar Meghani contributed to this report.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/panetta-says-women-combat-strength-150027932--politics.html

whitney houston autopsy dobie gray bruce springsteen grammy nominations lil boosie bobbi kristina brown new edition

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Higher Education?s Darkest Secret

With days to go before classes begin, it's not uncommon for department heads, or even deans, to ask adjunct professors to take on last-minute teaching assignments.

For one professor, this offer was tempting. She was a "part-time" professor and her husband was unemployed. She had taken on more classes at several area colleges in order to support her family and afford health insurance. Despite the extra work, she was still making under $25K per year.? The professor knew that refusing the offer could mark her as "uncooperative" and torpedo her chances for a full-time teaching position. Yet she knew there was no way she?or any of her colleagues?could take on yet another class. Better to cancel the class, she suggested to the dean, than to give students a teacher who cannot serve her students.

The dean nodded gravely and said with some urgency, "But we don't want to cancel the class. Really, all we need is a warm body in the classroom."

The dean's words reflect a grossly utilitarian managerial approach now common in higher education, one that is not well known to the public. Students are exposed to this approach when they peruse class schedules and observe that one remarkable professor seems to teach the majority of classes. This teacher is called "Professor Staff."

Professor Staff is actually the majority of the faculty known as adjuncts, lecturers, part-time profs and other confusing titles. In the U.S., they number roughly one million. These teachers work on temporary, low-wage contracts, largely ineligible for basic job protections that support academic quality in the classroom.

At the community college where I teach, the percentage of "part-time" professors has gone from 14.1 percent in 1995 to 77.7 percent in 2009, according to a database maintained by the Modern Language Association.

The shift in faculty employment from secure, living-wage jobs to temporary, un-benefited, low-wage work is consistent with what is occurring in the economy. The National Employment Law Project calls it a "good jobs deficit."?

At colleges and universities, this deficit has existed for decades. It has gone unnoticed only because faculty regularly make enormous sacrifices to shield their students from its worst effects.

Those effects, documented in a report I cowrote with the grassroots Campaign for the Future of Higher Education and based on a fall 2011 nationwide survey of adjunct professors, include teaching assignments with three weeks or fewer to prepare and scanty access to critical campus resources, from phones, computers, and other technology to offices, textbooks, orientation, and professional development.?

Adjuncts prepare to teach on their own dime, knowing that their classes can be, and often are, canceled or reassigned at the last minute, for any reason. Generally denied benefits or retirement unless they are part of the 30 percent of all adjuncts who are unionized, these faculty have found themselves in increasingly dire economic circumstances.?

The Chronicle of Higher Education reported in May that the percentage of graduate degree holders who receive food stamps or some other aid more than doubled between 2007 and 2010. While there are no statistics indicating exactly how many of those people are adjuncts, the documented average annualized income that adjuncts receive likely qualifies them for various forms of assistance. However, they are often reluctant to take advantage of it. In two recent cases, students and colleagues extended private aid to adjuncts in the form of fundraisers and food drives.

Meanwhile, colleges and universities regularly misrepresent their employment status to federal and state agencies, thereby blocking their access to economic lifelines like unemployment insurance, student loan forgiveness, and now, the healthcare meant to be provided under the Affordable Care Act.

Professors without independent financial support work elsewhere to make a living, lessening the time they have for students. This creates an odd twist on class-based access in higher education: A professor's individual economic circumstances, rather than her dedication or qualifications, becomes disproportionately important in determining her effectiveness.

Our report calls these practices "just-in-time" (JIT) hiring, after the business model that higher education has adopted so uncritically. Treating faculty as an interchangeable, inventory of warm bodies is an example of the harm the approach inflicts on both faculty and students.

As a faculty member, I have experienced this shockingly unprofessional treatment firsthand. When I've spoken up against it, I've been told that if I don't like it, I should simply leave. Instead, I have dedicated myself to exposing and reforming these practices by cofounding and building the New Faculty Majority and the New Faculty Majority Foundation, national nonprofits that work exclusively on improving the quality of? higher education by improving the working conditions of the majority of its faculty.? I do this work not just because I am a professor, but also because my children, including one with Asperger's Syndrome, are future college students, and because I believe firmly that faculty working conditions are student learning conditions.

JIT faculty hiring means students cannot plan to take classes with adjuncts they know or were recommended. Without offices or time to meet, these professors are hard pressed to provide the help and mentoring that research shows is crucial to student success. They can be hard to track down for letters of reference.

We cannot expect college students to learn the skills of the future if we treat the majority of their professors with the dehumanizing managerial practices of the past.

Students seem to understand the problem. In a recent Gates Foundation-funded survey, community college students said introductory courses, the ones most likely to be taught by adjuncts and subject to JIT hiring, "are not offered in a way to help them succeed." Faculty who give their support and guidance are in high demand but "hard to come by."

Many administrators understand the problem too. In 2008, the then-vice president for human resources at the University of Akron, A.G. Monaco, declared, "Wal-Mart is a more honest employer of part-time [faculty] than are most colleges and universities."

Those who pin their hopes for a more robust economic recovery on higher education need to pay attention to the lessons "Professor Staff" is teaching us. Higher education needs to be more transparent about its adjunct faculty employment practices?and correct them. We cannot expect college students to learn the skills of the future if we treat the majority of their professors with the dehumanizing managerial practices of the past.

These are solely the author's opinions and do not represent those of TakePart, LLC or its affiliates.

Related Stories on TakePart:

? 10 States Where Colleges Will Make You Go Broke

? 2012 List: The Most Expensive Colleges in America

? 10 Shocking Truths You Need to Know About Student Loan Debt


Maria Maisto is a once and future adjunct professor, president of the national nonprofit advocacy group New Faculty Majority and the executive director of the New Faculty Majority Foundation. She is co-author of the report ?Who is Professor ?Staff? and how can this person teach so many classes?? as well as several other publications on the effect of faculty hiring practices on the quality of higher education.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/higher-education-darkest-secret-203800964.html

Olympic Games Dana Vollmer phillies phillies Ryan Dempster Phelps NBC Olympics Live

Can I legally make a personal backup copy of my DVDs?

Can I legally make a personal backup copy of my DVDs?Great discussions are par for the course here on Lifehacker. Each day, we highlight a discussion that is particularly helpful or insightful, along with other great discussions and reader questions you may have missed. Check out these discussions and add your own thoughts to make them even more wonderful!

Discussion of the Day

Other Great Discussions

Get Involved

Great Discussions Any Time

To join or start great discussions on any topic, be sure to visit the Openthread forum.

If you've got a cool project, inspiration, or just something fun to share, be sure to let us know in our Tips forum.

Happy Lifehacking, everybody!

Source: http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/lifehacker/full/~3/kgw9AL4T7Oo/can-i-legally-make-a-personal-backup-copy-of-my-dvds

super bowl coin toss madonna super bowl halftime kelly clarkson super bowl giants super bowl 2012 half time show halftime show 2012 kelly clarkson super bowl 2012

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Protests mark anniversary of landmark abortion ruling

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Americans on Tuesday marked the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, even as battles over the contentious issue have largely shifted from the federal courts to statehouses.

Dozens of protesters braved frigid temperatures to gather in front of the Supreme Court on the anniversary of the landmark January 22, 1973, Roe v. Wade ruling that made abortion legal in the first three months of pregnancy. With a companion ruling, the decision declared abortion a constitutional right.

Anti-abortion activists spread 3,300 flowers out on the Washington sidewalk to represent the number of abortions they said took place daily in the United States.

Away from Washington, about two dozen abortion rights activists rallied in front of Mississippi's sole abortion clinic, the Jackson Women's Health Organization in Jackson.

The supporters, including the National Organization of Women, said they wanted to celebrate the ruling and show that the fight to preserve women's rights continued.

"Choice is good," said Alex McInick, 18, a student at Millsaps College in Jackson. "Nobody should be able to tell someone what they should do to their body."

Across the street, Roy McMillen, 69, an anti-abortion activist, said the procedure led to social ills that cost everyone.

Surrounded by graphic posters of aborted fetuses, McMillen said, "The worst thing that happened in the 20th century was the advent of birth control and the legalization of abortion."

The protests and others this week come in the wake of a Pew Research Center poll which found that most Americans remained opposed to overturning the decision, with opinions little changed over two decades.

"Millions of women have been bruised and diminished. Our country has violated the principles on which it was founded," the Reverend Patrick Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition told reporters outside the Supreme Court.

Mahoney was nearly drowned out by a handful of abortion rights activists who chanted "Abortion without demand and without apology" and profanity-laced slogans.

Mahoney said the anti-abortion movement had been energized by the re-election of President Barack Obama, who favors abortion rights and backs Roe v. Wade.

Despite his abortion rights stance, Obama has been a "silver lining" since he had helped move anti-abortion campaigns to the state and local level, away from federal policy-makers, he said.

The highlight of Washington events is expected to be a March for Life rally near Capitol Hill on Friday, with former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum among the scheduled speakers.

The rally, which has drawn thousands of protesters in past years, will be followed by a march on the Supreme Court building.

Separate prayer services also are scheduled in Washington by the National Pro-Life Religious Council and the U.S. Catholic bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities.

Among other anti-abortion events, the conservative Family Research Council is hosting on Friday its yearly ProLifeCon, which gathers bloggers, activists and lawmakers.

Abortion rights campaigners have few Washington events scheduled around the anniversary, with NARAL Pro-Choice America promoting "Blog for Choice Day" on Tuesday.

The Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health and rights organization, said this month that 2012 brought the second-highest number of state-level restrictions, trailing only 2011.

"More than half of all U.S. women of reproductive age (15-44) now live in a state that is hostile to abortion rights, whereas fewer than one-third did a decade ago," the group said in a statement.

Recent Washington fights over reproductive rights have centered on Obama's healthcare law. The Senate in March rejected a Republican measure that would have let employers opt out of birth control coverage and other services on moral grounds.

(Reporting by Ian Simpson in Washington and Emily Le Coz in Jackson; Editing by Paul Thomasch, Nick Zieminski and Dan Grebler)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/prayers-marches-mark-anniversary-landmark-abortion-ruling-172759584.html

notre dame notre dame football Bcs Bowl Chuck Hagel ncaa football irs CES