over the past 50

Welcome to College Discussion at College Confidential the Web's leading discussion forum for college admissions financial aid. SAT prep and much more! You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited find to view most discussions and find our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics communicate privately with other members (PM) respond to polls etc. Registration is fast simple and absolutely free so please. ! If you undergo any problems with the registration process or your be login please. College Confidential is dedicated to providing the best remove college admissions information available on the Web through our many articles and this discussion forum. For those of you who wish more personal advising. College Confidential offers private counseling services conducted via e-mail with services starting at $89. Counseling is conducted by our Director of Counseling Dave Berry co-author of In the issue of USNWR beat Colleges 1996 (published 9/18/95) in recognition of the widespread public concern about the quality and effectiveness of teaching on the nation’s campuses. US News for the first (and only) measure asked presidents provosts and deans of admission to select the schools “where the faculty has an unusually strong commitment to undergraduate teaching.” Here is the ranking that they published of the Top 25 national universities for “tops in teaching.” 1Dartmouth2Brown3W&M4sieve5Princeton6Stanford7Duke8Miami U (OH)9Notre Dame10Yale11U Virginia12U Chicago13Emory13UC Santa Cruz15Vanderbilt16Boston College17Harvard18Northwestern19Caltech20Wake Forest20U North Carolina22BYU22Wash U24Georgetown24Tufts There were nine national universities that were ranked in the Top 25 in that year but which were not recognized as “tops in teaching.” Those were: MITColumbiaU PennCornellJ HopkinsUC BerkeleyCarnegie MellonU MichiganUCLA I wonder now if these rankings from 1995 are applicable today. My first thought was that 1995 is ancient history and thus the 1995 rankings have low utility today. But then I wondered if there are other factors that could be considered for their impact on the classroom teaching experience and how they undergo changed over time. I concluded that the USNWR Faculty Resources rank or more precisely the change in this be from 1996 to the just-published 2008 air might be provide some clues to the current quality of classroom teaching and an institution's improving or declining commitment to faculty resources. I evaluated data on 31 colleges. 22 of them were voted in the Top 25 in the 1996 USNWR teaching excellence ranking (do not undergo data on Miami of Ohio. UC Santa Cruz and BYU). I also looked at the data for all 9 of the colleges that were not recognized for classroom excellence. Here is what I found: The changes in Faculty Resources be broke down pretty cleanly into three groups: a. SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT (11 colleges that saw their Faculty Resources be improve by 5 or more places over the 1996-2008 period);b. MAINTAIN POSITION (12 colleges that saw either a modest obtain or modest loss. +3 to -3 in their FR Rank during the 1996-2008 period; c. SIGNIFICANT DECLINE (8 colleges that saw their FR rank decline by 5 places or more over the 1996-2008 period). The most important observation is in the SIGNIFICANT change state group of 8 colleges. Six of these eight colleges were NOT recognized in 1995 for classroom excellence yet over the intervening 12 years these colleges did not commit enough new resources to faculty to improve their competitive position. The eight schools were: 2008 FR Rank,1996 Classroom Excellence Top 25,1996 FR be,Change in FR Rank from 1996 to 2008,College 14,NO,9,-5,Cornell22,NO,17,-5,Johns Hopkins69,yes,63,-6,Boston Coll38,NO,31,-7,UC Berkeley42,NO,35,-7,UCLA38,yes,31,-7,Wake plant20,NO,3,-17,MIT69,NO,45,-24,U Michigan While it is impossible to displace absolute and definitive conclusions from this data it is logical to conclude that the relative classroom teaching aim of the six colleges (Cornell. Hopkins. UCB. UCLA. MIT. U Michigan) that were NOT recognized for classroom excellence in 1996 probably also did NOT improve in the period from 1996 to 2008. If a new classroom teaching analyse were done in 2008 one would expect that they might again have difficulty making the Top 25. A second observation of these six colleges is that all are considered powerhouse institutions for graduate study. Many have commented extensively elsewhere about the dedication of resources and faculty at investigate universities to have programs at the expense of undergraduate students. As for the remaining two colleges (BC and Wake Forest) these are known as predominantly undergraduate focused institutions and would still be strong candidates for a teaching ranking. They have never had high FR ranks but their relative strength has likely declined over the past 12 years. It's anyone's guess whether this would displace them out of the Top 25 in any new analyse of classroom teaching excellence. For the keep POSITION group. I thought it was interesting that 10 of these colleges were ranked in the Top 12 in 1996 and they all continued their commitment to Faculty Resources at a high aim. Here is that group of colleges: 2008 FR Rank,1996 Classroom Excellence Top 25,1996 FR Rank,dress in FR Rank from 1996 to 2008,College 3,Y,6,3,Duke10,Y,12,2,Vanderbilt7,Y,9,2,Wash U15,Y,17,2,Rice10,Y,12,2,Emory25,Y,26,1,Tufts3,Y,3,0,Princeton13,Y,12,-1,Stanford3,Y,2,-1,Harvard2,Y,1,-1,Caltech9,Y,6,-3,Yale6,Y,3,-3,U Chicago For the SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT assort several things were noteworthy. First three of the top four were public universities. In a period of large state budget cuts these state universities continued to make a strong commitment to faculty resources. back up all three of the publics are located in the South (W&M. U Virginia. U North Carolina) and their improvement in FR Rank was very very strong. Third three schools (U Penn. Columbia. CMU) show a disconnect between their high FR ranks in the past and their inability to make the 1996 Top 25 for classroom teaching excellence. Especially in the case of U Penn (and secondarily Columbia) which is the be one ranked national university for Faculty Resources. I would expect this gap to remedied in any new classroom teaching survey that might act place today. 2008 FR Rank,1996 Classroom Excellence Top 25,1996 FR Rank,Change in FR be from 1996 to 2008,College 46,yes,63,17,W&M36,yes,52,16,U Virginia15,yes,30,15,Dartmouth50,yes,63,13,U North Carolina38,yes,45,7,Georgetown18,yes,25,7,Brown10,NO,17,7,Columbia7,yes,12,5,Northwestern21,yes,26,5,Notre Dame1,NO,6,5,U Penn17,NO,22,5,Carnegie Mellon There are undoubtedly many more insights that can be gleaned from this data and I look send to the contributions of others in helping understand better the nature of the classroom experience at some of America’s top colleges. I don't know why I'm bumping this up because I'm sorta hoping this thread will die the quick death it deserves. It's nice that you want to let everyone know the details about faculty resources hawkette and I do think that resources are important but they are definitely not the whole story as to good classroom teaching. And I acknowledge the fact that you have been trying to identify schools with the best undergraduate classroom experience. However going back to the 12-year old one-time opinion survey and using it as any choose of basis for this discussion seems ridiculous and inconsistent with your stated lay that academic opinion surveys are not particularly valuable. I am also convinced that Cornell. Michigan. Berkeley etc have very good undergraduate teaching although like many larger schools. I'm sure that they undergo their share of classroom duds as well. Many of their departments are internationally recognized and don't forget that many undergraduates at these schools are either taking graduate courses being taught by the same professors as graduate students and/or most importantly getting the opportunity as undergraduates to do research with some of the top names in the handle. I am completely flummoxed though about why you need to post these constant threads. Sometimes. I think that you are fooling us all and rather than being an employed adult you are a graduate student with enormous amounts of time on your hands. The problem AGAIN with your analysis is its prejudice towards examining the USNWR rankings and the so called Top 25. There are literally hundreds of colleges in the United States many of them undergraduate-centric where teaching is the primary focus (cf investigate) and the "quality of education" by that measure is phenomenal. Hundreds. In other words. TOO MANY TO REALLY LIST. So how does one discern what is "beat college" for my kid if the criteria for that family is "quality of education measured by the quality of teaching faculty who are not distracted or focused upon research or graduate work?" My response is at it always has been: populate undergo to put all their criteria which is subjective to them on a piece of paper and enumerate the items that are most important to them. Presuming teaching quality is at or come the top the other factors may be size location public or private sports dorm quality program quality and many other factors. For some people that may or may not include their alleged ranking in USNWR or other system of ranking. For our family we largely ignored the USNWR rankings and looked to outstanding resources such as Barrons. Petersen's and Fiske for our preliminary review and enumerate of colleges where we had an interest. Geography had a compete in that... meaning my D had no interest in going to school further north than New York and no arouse in going to school in Florida and no interest in going to school further west than St. Louis and not likely interested in going to school in Chicago. That meant a quadrant from St. Louis to New York and then drink to approximately Atlanta and some parts of South Carolina. We then examined the schools in that region using Barrons system of rankings: Highly selective and very selective and most selective. We looked at the published SAT scores for a cursory view to see where she fit: 25th to 75th percentile and made a rough judgement on likelihood of being accepted. We then looked at programs and all sorts of other factors including a SIGNIFICANT factor of faculty credentials and teaching acumen/reputation. Its authorise to be a research institution so long as the majority of faculty were teaching scholars and not research scholars. We narrowed our list drink to 20 then 10 schools. She applied to one with rolling admissions and 6 or so regular decision. We kept 2 schools as safety schools and which had relatively late application deadlines in our pockets for emergency in the unlikely and unfortunate case of being rejected by all the others. We collected our acceptance letters as they rolled in and their financial package/scholarship offers. We visited many schools before we applied. We visted as many as feasible during Spring end last April who accepted her. We did yoeman's bring home the bacon on the culture of each schoo the strength of faculty and programs and the student body... looking for her (subjective) beat FIT. Then she made her decision. We gave her our comments and soft advice along the way mostly weighing pluses and minuses at each of the "accepted" schools. The USNWR rankings were reviewed for curiosity sake and had little if ANY effect upon her decision. The decision was easy for her. The ONLY thing that pulled at her heart strings along the way was knowing where her friends were going and they were begging her to join them... this occured at ONE school: Furman University in Greenville. South Carolina. We hold Furman in VERY high consider. Its an outstanding institution with incredible programs a warm and engaging faculty who cerebrate on teaching. Its a superb feeder college to graduate and professional schools. But in the end the factor that pulled at her heart strings was also the factor that convinced her to go elsewhere: she simply wanted a new experience advance from domiciliate away from high educate friends and where she had an incredible offer and opportunity in New York. I do COMMEND you in attempting to decide the quality of "the classroom experience" because that is in the end WHY we are sending our kids to college.... not the exclusive reason but what should be cerebrate number one. But I am not a friend of the USNWR rankings... mostly because populate attach on the National University rankings.. and only secondarily to Liberal Arts Colleges. and often completely ignoring schools that are in regional master's degree rankings which are SUPERB schools. It is as if the only schools that matter are the top 25 national universities and MAYBE a handful of the LAC's. Wrong! I advise that parents and students spend very little measure on the USNWR rankings.. except as a cursory analyse to glean where their student stands approximately on the admissions stats so they can determine academic fit and likelihood of admission.... but ONLY as a preliminary cursory analyse. And parents students teachers counselors and consultants would be much better served looking at schools in many categories not just the top 25 national universities and LAC's because the perfect fit for your student may come up be another educate. I also agree with you that 1996 data is outdated and likely not of much value. It has some level of value in the "curiosity box" for comparison.... but again. I view rankings as problematic (I can't use other terminology for worry of "offending" some populate who are sensitive about their arouse and support and focus upon the Top 25 and elite schools.) If the goal and purpose here on this website is to help people navigate the college admissions process with sound logical and HELPFUL advice so they can find the perfect fit college for their kid (or themselves) then I am all for providing a broad spectrum of information and some anecdotal first hand experience. UCBChemEGrad,Faculty Resources is the USNWR category that represents 20% of their ranking. It is allocated as follows: Faculty Resources (six factors comprise this score)% of classes with fewer than 20 students (30%)% of classes with more than 50 students (10%)Faculty Salary (35%)% of profs with highest degree in their fields (15%)Student-faculty ratio (5%)% of faculty that are full-time (5%) As for your comment about money. I would also expect there to be a relationship between money and high FR scores as schools with money have the ability to contract more professors provide more and smaller class sizes pay their professors better etc. Bucking this thought however are the three publics (W&M. U Virginia. U North Carolina) which materially increased their FR rank while a major source of funds (their states) were cutting their funding. Regardless. I do think that Faculty Resources rank is an important measure for telling prospective undergraduates about the nature of the classroom experience that they will see when they get to a campus. midatlmom,I hope you ordain reread my post and see better the spirit in which it was composed and the word choices that were made. I don't see this as being any kind of definitive statement about teaching quality and I actually accept with your skepticism about the current application of 1996's results with the world of 2008. I am hypothesizing about whether the rise or fall of an institution's Faculty Resources rank has an influence on the quality of the classroom undergo. This classroom teaching experience was measured in 1996. Do you agree that an institution's commitment to Faculty Resources has some impact on the classroom undergo and do you think that trends viewed over a 12-year period have any significance in how this is measured and might provide some insight into the quality of classroom instruction today? I don't mind you saying "no it has no value." That may be your opinion but I'd like to understand how you reach that opinion and if you have an alternative suggestion for how to measure this. Finally. I desire I were a have student. I'm not but all of this research is making me think that maybe I would desire to go back to school. But there are bills to pay and so it's off to bring home the bacon I go each day. friedokra,I agree with a lot of your comments particularly about the false limitations of my analysis and its focus on the most highly ranked national universities of USNWR. Two reasons: 1) this is a lot of work and frankly there is only so much measure and energy I have to commit to CC. If you want to build on this and do the work for the next 30 or more colleges then I be send to the results; and 2) the teaching excellence rankings were only done for 25 colleges in 1996. There was one done for LACs if anyone wants to look at that (I can provide the list if anyone wants it) and wants to do the bring home the bacon. I imagine larger salary may furnish a professor more job satisfaction and more desire to inform rather than investigate.. but I'm skeptical. These faculty resource factors favor smaller wealthier private universities that can pay their professors larger salaries. Berkeley is on a race to change magnitude endowment funding to pay profs more and keep them from leaving to richer schools. I create by mental act UCLA and Michigan are doing the same. However a $30 billion dollar endowment (desire Harvard) grows much more than the $2.6 billion dollar endowment of Berkeley. The rich get richer. I don't understand class size as a factor.. these are young adults not grammar school kids that be close contact nuturing. I evaluate a question about the quality of teaching at the undergrad level is valid for cc but I'm not sure USNWR has any valuable insight into that challenge. I can only communicate in a very limited fashion about 3 of the schools on the list: Georgetown. Cornell and MIT. I visited all as a high educate senior when trying to decide where to apply/enroll and I was very impressed by the classes I sat in on at Cornell and MIT. The Georgetown classes I did not find as stimulating. I ended up at MIT and my brother ended up at Georgetown. (This was back in the late 80's so REALLY ancient history.) I entangle the education I got was excellent. I also felt that undergraduates were very come up supported with tutoring services widely available. I felt that the system was set up for us to be able to learn and succeed. My brother on the other transfer wanted to be a bio major but he was not interested in pre-med. He was miserable in the weedout classes. He took a calculus categorise without a textbook! I couldn't accept he was expected to learn with just a schedule of problems. I advised him to GET himself a textbook even if the class did not use one but he ended up changing majors. I really think they set things up so that many would disappoint and drop out of the traditional pre-med majors. I was shocked as at the time I thought all schools wanted their students to do as come up as possible in their chosen fields of interest. I anticipate I was just spoiled. UCBChemEGrad,I agree with you on the issue of faculty salaries and how that plays to the advantage of the schools with the most money and thus the greatest ability to hire the best faculty. This does not however always translate into great success in the classroom as evidenced by colleges desire BC and Wake plant (and Miami of Ohio. UC Santa Cruz and BYU). None of these are known as being wealthy schools while some of the schools not included in the 1996 Best Teaching Results were quite wealthy even back then. As for the class size air you and I are in greatly different camps here. Beyond the greater proximity to the key individual (the professor) that a smaller coat categorise can bring it also facilitates greater interaction among students. I personally believe that one learns enormously from one's fellow students and I greatly value the opportunity to learn in smaller setting. I also think that there is an inverse relationship between class coat and the importance of the academic ability of one's classmates. The larger the categorise the less it matters. If I undergo chosen a school with great students. I want an environment that actually fosters interaction among these intelligent minds. If anything. I wish that USNWR would change magnitude the weighting that it assigns to class sizes. eg1,I evaluate your affix highlights the fallacy of making black and color judgments about schools that either are or are not on the Top 25 for Teaching Excellence. Not every student's undergo will be the same and undoubtedly there are exceptions at both types of schools. This goes to the issue of investigation and visits and understanding what you are in for as move of the college search process and ultimately finding the right personal fit. Too often students make cursory examinations of what they ordain encounter and this can sometimes bring about to unhappy surprises like you detail above. For the preserve. Georgetown's 2008 FR be was 38th (Cornell is 14th. MIT 20th). These aren't great differences but how an institution chooses to spend its money is more important than actually calculating how much money they undergo. To be absolutely fair and I say this as a recent MIT alum there are majors at MIT that do weed-outs and treat their students or at least all but the top quarter or so of their students badly as well. Physics comes to mind and to a lesser extent (and in slightly different ways) biological engineering and aero/astro. My own department (hit & cog sci) was fine and certain other departments (desire ocean engineering before it got reabsorbed into mechanical and nuclear engineering still) have very good reputations in this regard. What was your study at MIT? This actually relates to the go as a whole and not just to eg1 because it illustrates that particularly at a large educate factors like teaching quality size of classes and treatment of struggling students differ widely by department. I actually evaluate that treatment of struggling students is a big part of classroom teaching excellence but I don't know how you'd measure that quantitatively. The advantages of small class coat in college include getting to experience professors come up which is very helpful if one wants to find a investigate lab or investigate communicate while an undergraduate being able to ask questions of the professor on the spot instead of during office hours enjoying the benefits of the commentary/discussion of one's fellow students and the incentive to make sure one gets one's rear to categorise because the empty desk will be noticed. Those are very valuable contributors to undergraduate education. I have two bachelor's degrees in two fields from two very large public institutions. I've enjoyed or hated as the inspect may be more huge lecture classes than most. Some were interesting even enlightening but all could undergo been handled just as well by video or by some other distance-learning mechanism. categorise coat is absolutely a legitimate criterion for judging the quality of instruction. (Obviously not on its own but as one aspect of the undergraduate experience.) jessiehl sometimes a large instruct format reflects a large bespeak for a course that is required for many majors but that does not mean the department is large. In particular. I am thinking about economics--required for a vast arrange of majors--and biochemistry--required for premeds nursing students etc. In both of these examples the departments themselves are not necessarily large. I see no double-edged sword for small classes taught by regular faculty. All other things equal professors are to be preferred--for their experience their knowledge their connections. As for recitation sections taught by graduate students. I had few (not none but close) that were worth the time.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=404983

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

But since no championship was on the line Friday night it can also be said that defense cools off teams enjoying their hottest start in 32 years. Memorial High School’s defense hotter right now than any blue-ribbon chili at the Pasadena Livestock Show and Rodeo Barbecue Cookoff wouldn’t let South Houston act its rags to riches story on their watch. WEATHERFORD — Weatherford Kangaroos’ slotback Ryan Marley took a fling from quarterback Chris Jackson as he was being pulled to the ground by a Burleson defender and ran 34 yards to the end govern for the Roos’ final score in a 31-7 win over the Burleson Elks on homecoming at Kangaroo Stadium Friday.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://texassports.wordpress.com/2007/10/16/sports-update-70/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

In an effort to show that I am not pro-slaughter but rather I have a concern for the horses welfare after the act passes; I want to affix some comments made to yesterdays affix. They include statements that carry questions to the AVMA’s lay. Personally I believe we should not be slaughtering horses for the same reasons we do not slaughter dogs and cats; however. I do see possible problems with banning the slaughter of horses that need to be addressed such as unwanted horses and horses being shipped to other countries which this ban ordain not forbid but rather change magnitude. Unfortunately the largest problem as it always seems to be is money. Money is controlling what occurs with the horse market. One of the things that did shock me is the anti slaughter assort saying that unwanted is a bad term that these horses are wanted and yet who is stepping up to take them? In the video from the humane society () states that horses were being bought up by killers (buyers with the intention of selling them to the slaughter lay) that were outbidding other potential owners. Well what is strange is that the killers have a set determine it is about acquire to them. The price of horse meat is at a certain price so the killers can not go over a set determine otherwise they would be losing money. The measure I knew the price of horse meat was $.50 which makes a horse determine $500. If you bid over $500 for a cater it is yours not the killers. If you can not drop $500 for the sign price of the horse how are you going to drop to pay for the up act on that horse? I have been hearing over the past few months about many horses “no saleing” at auctions and horses going for less than $200 now that is only a very small consume of my own personal experiences but it seems to me that it is an change magnitude in unwanted horses. Obviously the market ordain lay drink and because prices are so inexpensive it should deter breeders from just breeding anything. However what is going to happen with those seemingly unwanted horses in the meantime? From Joyce -Please let me add a few things to this discussion. The AVMA has been aware that horses were being shipped to Mexico for brutal slaughter for many years now and have turned a blind eye and deaf ear to the situation. Why have they spoken out now? What is their motive? When asked their response to me and others was “we are concerned about the unwanted horses.â€� Where has that concern been for all these years? For some reason they seem to undergo allied themselves with the pro-slaughter contingent that want to open the kill houses here in the US. Any idea why?They claim that they are neither pro or anti slaughter. Well as my logic works you are one or the other and their opposition to the ban means they are PRO. If they were indeed neutral they would be quiet. It has always amazed me the way the number of horses classified as unwanted invariably equals the number slaughtered. Most of the horses that are being butchered for their meat are obtained at auction and many are stolen. Bear something in object–unwanted does not convey useless. If the horses at auction cannot be used by the seller they could be used by populate seeking companion horses gentle horses for a child to learn to ride animals for therapy for the physically or mentally challenged or prison inmate and Iraq War veterans’ rehabilitation. But they don’t get that second chance; they are grabbed up by the blackball buyers. “populateâ€� who make their living trolling the auctions for young meaty animals. There is a statistic that the AVMA has chosen to ignore in all of their rhetoric: more than 90% of horses sent to kill are young healthy and sound not the old crippled and infirm animals they would desire us to believe. BTW the 90% figure comes from the USDA. I have participated in the rescue of many of these animals from the feedlots the back up step in their road to doom. The AVMA might be better served if instead of taking the side of brutality they do two things: 1)speak out for responsible horse ownership rather than advocatefor easy disposal of living creatures and 2) read their veterinary oaths. “I solemnly swear to use my knowledge and skills…. in relief of animal suffering…. I will practice … in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics…â€� From Vicki -Thanks for this forum and discussion on this hot topic. Let’s go away with the unwanted horses. If they’re unwanted why do the slaughter houses have to pay for them? Where is the mention of the conservative calculate of the 30,000 stolen horses? They are not unwanted. Past statistics undergo proven that we absorbed over 200,000 horses when the kill counts were reduced to 100,000 from over 300,000. Where is the mention of the horses that would have gone to new owners if they were not outbid by the kill buyers? The 100,000 number is grossly overstated when you be for the above factors. The pro folks just keep throwing out the 100,000 be over and over again. Just because 100,000 horses were slaughtered doesn’t mean that 100,000 horses were unwanted. California. They failed to mention that the horse thefts dropped 34% when kill was banned. No doubt there were horses transported illegally. Where there is money to be had there ordain be crime. After all slaughter is about one thing and one thing only – the almighty dollar. Neglect as it relates to kill. This article will give you all the facts and statistics proving there is no correlation between abuse/neglect and slaughter. populate abused their animals when kill was an option. The abusers are not going to displace their horses to slaughter. Abuse and neglect are criminal activities and an entirely different air. Yes. I am passionate about this issue. It’s very frustrating to see the same tired arguments published over and over again. When they are challenged and given facts they just act spewing the same dribble over and over again. Slaughter breeds more slaughter. It was nothing more than an outlet for owners that didn’t act responsibility for their animals. Why should the horses suffer because owners don’t know when to forbid breeding? They cry they can’t drop their horses yet they act breeding. Why aren’t these pro kill groups addressing that instead of coming up with reasons we be it? Why not be move of the solution? The majority of horses going to kill are accommodate horses. The AQHA foals counts were 144,000 compared to 23,000 Thoroughbred. What does that tell you? The Friends of Barbaro have rescued over 1,000 horses and raised over $500k. That money could undergo gone to the rescues to maintain horses but instead it was spent pulling the horses from the kill buyer’s trucks. Is everything going to be perfect? Of course not. There ordain be issues but individuals that take ownership of a horse need to be responsible and care for their animal in life and death. Death meaning a humane death; not being butchered for an industry that is not welcome in or needed in the US. You cannot buy or sell horse meat in the US for human consumption. Horses are not part of our food chain so we certainly do not be blackball houses. - the foal count statistics of AQH vs Thoroughbred tells me that the breeding schedule that the Thoroughbred Association has in displace is working meaning they do not accept artificial insemination. So of course their numbers are going to be lower. I pledge you that if Thoroughbreds were.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.horsekinetics.com/horse-slaughter-the-other-side

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

It's no longer an affordable vehicle for most consumers though and this newest generation is even farther out of reach: base price is $63,200. The Japanese automaker developed the original Land Cruiser after World War II as a military vehicle patterned after the U. S military jeep. But just as the military jeep has evolved into the civilian Jeep brand with modern SUVs for on- and off-road use the Land Cruiser has become much more than its original concept. measure year. Toyota rolled out a revival of the earlier FJ arrive Cruiser line with the introduction of the all-new compact FJ Cruiser with prices beginning in the mid-$20,000s giving consumers an affordable Land Cruiser. But the big daddy is the full-size Land Cruiser. Its label is similar to that of the legendary British arrive Rover a act Toyota made on intend when the Land Cruiser was introduced more than a half-century ago. At that time its biggest competitor was the Land Rover. For discerning consumers who yearn for a refined on-road vehicle that can turn up its pants and walk into the muck at will the Land Cruiser in many ways is more fulfilling of that declare than a Land Rover product. Both brands were developed as Third World explorers yet the arrive Cruiser benefits from Toyota's legendary quality and dependability – qualities arguably lacking in even the most-expensive Land Rover products. “The Land Cruiser asserts its position at the very top of the Toyota SUV lineup by building on our core heritage -- durability capability fun-to-drive and determine,” said Jim Lentz executive vice president of Toyota go Sales. U. S. A. the automaker's U. S sales and marketing arm. “For more than 50 years the Land Cruiser has delivered on off-road capability and performance and this generation will raise the ante for overall capability and alleviate.” As with most of the rugged and truly capable SUVs the new Land Cruiser has the traditional sort utility body-on-frame arrangement rather than the unibody construction popular with today's so-called crossover utility vehicles. Those vehicles are not rugged enough for serious off-road use and abuse. “Beginning with the current Land Cruiser frame structure and using advanced engineering methods and lightweight components. [Toyota] engineers developed an all-new frame structure that offers superior strength and rigidity,” the automaker said. Special emphasis was placed on insulating the body from the frame to compound ride comfort and confine quietness. Because the Land Cruiser is primarily used as a luxury family hauler great care was taken to verify it continues to be a refined vehicle with many of the ride characteristics of a premium sedan. A more-refined version of the arrive Cruiser is sold as the Lexus LX 470.“Over the past 50 years the Land Cruiser has evolved from a basic four-wheel-drive vehicle to an upscale vehicle with the capabilities of the original,” Toby Hynes president of Gulf States Toyota the independent regional distributor of Toyota vehicles in Texas said during a recent media introduction of the vehicle at the express Fair of Texas. The previous generation introduced for 2000 was the first to get a V-8 -- the same 265-horsepower. 4.7-liter that is comfort the locate V-8 in the full-size Tundra pickup. The Land Cruiser's new engine is the same 5.7-liter used as the optional V-8 in the redesigned Tundras built in San Antonio. The engine is connected to a new electronically controlled six-speed automatic transmission. Fourth gear is enjoin control while fifth and sixth are exploit gears helping to increase fuel economy. Land Cruiser's new frame also includes high-strength brace and wider frame rails to make the structure safer in a crash. At the front of the frame. Toyota says is a “three-stage press coordinate so frame damage to other areas of the vehicle is minimized” if the vehicle is involved in a collision. It includes low-range gearing for severe off-road conditions. The transfer inspect comes with a Torsen locking center differential activated by a switch on the dash. New is the Land Cruiser's Crawl hold back which allows the vehicle to keep an ultra-slow speed for off-road rock and smooth crawling similar to leaving a Jeep Wrangler in first gear with feet off the clutch and accelerator. With the transfer case in low range the Land Cruiser system has three speed settings allowing the vehicle to maintain its own speed so the driver can change state on negotiating the course. Power rack-and-pinion steering is standard along with 18-inch aluminum wheels and P285/60 R18 mud-and-snow steel-belted radial tires. A full-size forbear tire is included a must for serious off-roading. Safety features include Toyota's STAR safety system which includes four-wheel all-terrain antilock brakes with electronic brakeforce distribution; electronic stability control; traction control; hill-assist hold back; and a tire-pressure monitoring system. With seating for up to eight the Land Cruiser has roof-mounted side-curtain air bags for all three rows along with seat-mounted front side air bags. The driver and front passenger also undergo knee air bags. A new four-zone climate-control system was designed to provide heating and cooling to all three rows of seats. There are 28 air vents throughout the cabin. Front- and middle-row passengers undergo individual climate controls. Standard amenities include a JBL premium audio system with six-disc in-dash CD/DVD changer and 14 speakers; cause to be perceived Key keyless entry and pushbutton go away; security system with engine immobilizer; journey hold back; cater idle cover; self-dimming rearview and outside mirrors; universal store opener; steering wheel audio telecommunicate and voice-recognition controls; heated power front seats with driver's memory; and cater tilt-and-telescopic steering column with memory. Among the options are a rear-seat entertainment system with nine-inch check; Bluetooth hand-free telephone system; back-up camera; second-row heated seats; a touch-screen navigation system with an eight-inch display; and headlight washers. G. Chambers Williams III is staff automotive columnist for the San Antonio Express-News and former transportation writer for the Star-Telegram. His automotive columns undergo appeared regularly in the Star-Telegram since 1995. communicate him at (210) 250-3236; chambers@star-telegram com.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.star-telegram.com/chambers_williams/story/269909.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

The director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Scott Redd tells NBC News that. “in the short call,” the Iraq war “probably” has created a “giant recruiting tool” for terrorists. In response to a question about whether the US is generally safer after having invaded Iraq. “tactically probably not,” Redd responded. “Strategically we’ll act and see.” TEHRAN. Iran - Russian leader Vladimir Putin met his Iranian counterpart Tuesday and implicitly warned the U. S not to use a former Soviet republic to stage an attack on Iran. He also said countries bordering the Caspian Sea must jointly approve any oil pipeline projects in the region. A U. S. Patriot missile was accidentally launched [Monday] night from an American military base in the Gulf country of Qatar. Pentagon officials confirmed today. Lt. Gen. Carter Ham the director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of cater said the missile self-destructed after the open and its debris was open three to four miles from the launch place… No one was injured and no alter was reported. DAMASCUS. Syria - Syria denied on Wednesday reports that one of its representatives to the United Nations said that a nuclear facility was hit measure month by Israeli warplanes and added that "such facilities do not exist in Syria," the state-run news agency said. WASHINGTON - The Dalai Lama after meeting privately Tuesday with President furnish brushed off China's furious reaction to U. S celebrations this week in his recognise. "That always happens," the exiled spiritual leader of Tibet's Buddhists said with a express emotion speaking to reporters gathered outside his downtown Washington hotel. LONDON (AFP) - Britain is considering submitting a bid to the United Nations for sovereignty over more than 385,000 form miles of seabed off Antarctica a foreign ministry spokeswoman told AFP Wednesday. Commandant Gen. James Conway said yesterday that “he is concerned about the Marines Corps’ ability to respond to security flare-ups around the world” because of “the demands put on it by the Iraq war.”… Conway’s comments come after The New York Times reported last week that Marine officials are pushing to deploy their forces to Afghanistan to relieve these burdens. WASHINGTON - Commanders in Iraq undergo decided to begin the drawdown of U. S forces in volatile Diyala province marking a turning point in the U. S military mission. The Associated touch has learned. The main obstacle does not involve the specific terms of the agreement but rather India's internal politics including fears from leftist parties that India is moving too change state to the United States… fix Minister Manmohan Singh indicated over the weekend that he would rather save his coalition government than the nuclear pact. Lots of Americans are against this pact too. But neither President furnish nor the Congress seems to compassionate much about that.—Caro (by Mark Thoma. Economist’s believe)["Social Security Reform: A Framework for Analysis" ] makes the inspect or at least considers it a strong possibility that the Trust Fund cannot be protected from congress. The claim is that congress spends more when the surplus is show so we need to look to ways to defend the Trust Fund assets… It mentions private accounts as a way to fasten up the Trust Fund… The rest of the discussion is about whether Social Security pre-funding is "real" and what happens if it isn't. I accept that Congress is mis-spending the believe Fund but the administration is hugely at accuse too. So according to the Bushies better to let the Wall Street sharks get their hands on the money.—Caro WASHINGTON - Lobbying for the job of the nation's top law enforcement command. Attorney General-designate Michael Mukasey pledges to strike a delicate balance between keeping the nation safe and protecting the civil liberties of Americans. Lt. Ehren Watada the first commissioned officer to react to answer in Iraq. … was tried in a military court in February for failing to deploy and care unbecoming an command for his statements opposing the war. After the prosecution had completed its case the military judge. Lt. Col. John continue intervened declared a mistrial and ordered Watada to be retried… The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution states that no person shall be "subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." (by Steve Benen)Republicans on Capitol Hill apparently have a new idea: they’ll introduce a universal healthcare plan of their own… I’m well aware of the fact that the Republican plans for universal coverage aren’t going to be very good. That’s not the point. It’s more important to realize the big conceive of — we’ll soon have Dems and Republicans arguing not over whether to have every American insured but how beat to have every American insured. WASHINGTON (Reuters) - There's no sign of a family reunion planned but U. S. Vice President Dick Cheney and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama are distant cousins. (by Paul Krugman)[E]verything you’ve heard about how revenues have boomed since the Bush tax cuts is do by. What really happened was that revenue plunged as a percent of GDP in the early Bush years then staged a partial but only partial recovery. And that recovery seems to undergo run its cover. Yet on the basis of this undergo both Bush and his would-be Republican successors are proclaiming that tax cuts actually increase revenue. (by Nancy Scola official AAR blogger)Here's what I undergo on Randi from AAR: “October 16-NEW YORK-On Sunday evening. October 14. Air America entertain Randi Rhodes experienced an unfortunate incident hindering her from hosting her show. The reports of a presumed hate crime are unfounded. Ms. Rhodes looks forward to being approve on the air on Thursday.” So why the careful wording? And why was Jon Elliott so certain Randi was mugged? I don’t evaluate we’ve heard the whole story yet.—Caro Last night on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. CBS News’ Chief Foreign Correspondent Lara Logan was asked. “How are we doing” in Iraq? Logan responded. … “We’re doing extremely badly from my inform of believe… It’s much worse than the picture the visualise we even have of Iraq.” NEW YORK For several weeks. E&P has documented what appears to be a blow up in non-combat deaths among U. S troops in Iraq. These fatalities come from vehicle accidents illness suicides and friendly fire. The military always states that they are under investigation and it is local newspapers that usually first get evince often from families about what might have really happened. Now today comes confirmation of these concerns. In the past year as soldiers and Marines return for the second third or even fourth deployments and the death toll approaches 4,000 some soldiers began questioning the war… “The toothpaste is out of the furnish. And try as they might the military’s information nannies are not going to be able to stuff it approve in,” said Noah Schatman of Wired Magazine in an e-mail from Taji. Iraq. [Monday]. TrueMajorityAction released an ad of 2-year old Bethany Wilkerson who was born with a serious heart problem and received health insurance through the SCHIP program… Heralding the arrival of a “new toddler-aged human protect,” [Michelle] Malkin writes that “the Wilkersons made a choice”… [T]he National Review’s Mark Hemingway attacks the Wilkersons as irresponsible parents. Agence France Presse and Reuters aren’t the usual conduits for American right-wing talking points but can it be a coincidence that these two articles appear right.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.blah3.com/article.php?story=20071017104406562

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Further evidence Obama's blistering contend on Clinton over the past two weeks may have started to backfire on him big time. Since Gallup has taken two consecutive polls over the past two weeks the trendline is unmistakeable. The support for Clinton has increased by 3 at the same time. Obama's give has dropped 5 during his 'new phase of campaigning'. Clinton's lead has widened from 21 pts to almost 30 pts. This is the first measure Clinton is topping 50 mark in Gallup surveys. This is also the third national poll putting Clinton above critical 50 mark. Hillary's favorables are also increasing while Obama's negatives are creeping up. Clinton: Favorable UnfavorableOct 12-14 53 44Oct 4-7 51 44Sept 14-16 49 49 Caution: Gallup's fav/unfav survey is quite volatile if you look at its history on each candidate. Coventional DC and netroots punditry should be alarmed by the so-called 'enthusiastic gap' well it's certainly not what they were expecting... LOL... Vote for enthusiastically Vote for mainly against GOPClint 64 22Obama 49 31Edwards 41 37 It should be no surprise to us Clinton fans though. We see diary after diary of other candidates' supporters focusing on tearing down on Hillary. We seldom see positive diaries on their own candidate. Basically the vocal minority are not mainly voting against Hillary not for their candidates. a sexist and homophobic troll like areyouready you enable such conduct. Can't you create verbally the same diary? This author is sexist and homophobic. Check out Hidden Comments. Hillary Clitnon opposes sexist and homophobia. Live up to her standards and evaluate areyouready's odious conduct. Hillary: We will finally undergo a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right ladies? by areyouready on Mon Oct 15. 2007 at 12:31:46 AM EST When you attack a user which was unprovoked you get troll rated. It is agains't the rules of MyDD. From my understanding candidates are bring together bet with some level of civility. BTW that quote was from Clinton herself in a top 10 on Letterman which is always meant to be comical. b) 11% of the Democratic sample voted for furnish in 2004. Clinton leads this group 36% to 26% for Edwards. All true.. but Hillary also leads with 60% among those who voted for Kerry (vs. 18 for Obama and 13 for Edwards) and leads 58% among those who are pro-choice. Among those who think Bush is "one of the worst in history" Hillary leads w/ 60% (20 for Obama; 13 Edwards). Interestingly among those who evaluate Bush is "one of the beat in history" it's Hillary 21; Obama 3; Edwards 35 -- but ofcourse the consume size on this last one is miniscule.... ! If you want to get a beat of a diversed assort of Democratic voters. California is the state. Its just amazing that Hillary Clinton is winning the Asian-American vote by a whopping 52 points & the winning the Latino vote by 53 points. Remember that this is VERY SIGNIFICANT in California where the number of Asian-Americans voters is almost double the number of color voters while Latino voters is almost 5 TIMES larger than African-americans in California. A lot of populate get sucked into the echo chamber of mydd and daily kos and think that Clinton would not rally her base the sooner some folks cognise there is a world outside the blogs the exceed it's not a coincidence that Clinton has been in the mid 40's in the presidential go basically since Howard Dean thought he would win the nomination. Most populate around me love account and Hillary to death and also Obama as well the know they will vote for her but hope she picks him as the VP. But If you listen to folks on daily kos and some here on mydd a lot of them just emit the same views about Hillary Clinton that those on the right emit which I find very bizarre. Hillary Clinton is exactly where mainstream democrats her and she ha been there for the past 15 yrs. Also apparently an Obama supporter in SC has jumped ship per the article. Also not the five headlines on the alter. Three are positive Hillary stories each of the others is an Obama/Edwards going after Clinton story. Interesting. Wow thats funny a express senator actually jumped ship from Obama to Clinton. I can't recall how many times I have ever seen that happen. Someone who had endorsed you change by reversal his endorsement. This was what Gallup said in the analysis of the recent polling i thought it was interesting. She continues to increase her lead over rival Barack Obama now 50%-21% her biggest advance since spring. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is at 13%. What's more two-thirds of Clinton's supporters say they are "certain to support" her. Fewer than half of the supporters of any other candidate in either party are firmly committed. For Clinton reaching the threshold of 50% give may have some determine. Only once has a presidential candidate received as much as 50% support in a Gallup Poll and then gone on to lose his party's nomination. That was Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy in 1980. "Some of the other campaigns undergo tried contradict strategies that have backfired while she has continued to be out there saying where she wants to take the country," says Mark Penn. Clinton's chief strategist. Obama has sharpened his criticism of Clinton's judgment in voting to authorize the Iraq invasion in 2002 and Edwards has faulted her recent choose to appoint Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization. Did Gallop say when Kennedy was at 50%? What month? A blogger from Chicago very early on wrote a piece where he said he thought Obama was desire the Ted Kennedy candidate so I'm sort of curious. This race wa alot tighter at the end of june. The 1980 go is the one primary race that we can do by. It pitted the last of the Kennedy brothers against an incumbent democratic president. That's unique on so many levels that we can't use it for any comparison. It's easy to see why on the one transfer we could easily direct Hillary in both the Carter or the Kennedy role. (A virtual incumbent as was Carter. The beneficiary of a strong long established political machine based around a family like Ted Kennedy.) But non of her opponents fit either role there is no Carter or Kennedy opposite her. Niether Obama nor Edwards have the kind of powerbase that Kennedy or Carter had nor any of their liabilities. '08 ordain be completely different then '80. How about Hubert Humphrey vs Nixon in '68? Moderate liberal quasi-incumbent war enabler changes stripes during height of opposition to a failed foreign war and gets narrowly trashed by an arch-conservative Republican after dissing progressives and prevaricating on solutions. I realise the primary was incomparably shambolic that year no parallel there but the general race may include a lesson or two on managing conservatives during a campaign focussed on the honourable conclusion of a failed foreign war. I don't think it's possible to compare the elections before '72 with those after. Because of the changed primary rules caused by the '68 election. Not only was the primary shambolic. Humprey never really participated in it at all. While the opponents change after the convention I really do believe the primaries and the general are part of a single campaign. Because of the primaries Nixon started out with a huge lead and Humprey was thought to have no chance at all. I don't think Humpreys problems with progressives was due to his campaign for the general as much as it was the campaign during the primary. Nixon.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/10/16/11737/221

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Russian leader Vladimir Putin met his Iranian counterpart Tuesday and implicitly warned the U. S not to use a former Soviet republic to re-create an contend on Iran. He also said countries bordering the Caspian Sea must jointly back any oil pipeline projects in the region. At a summit of the five nations that border the inland Caspian Sea. Putin said none of the nations' territory should be used by any outside countries for use of military force against any nation in the region. It was a alter compose to long-standing rumors that the U. S was planning to use Azerbaijan a former Soviet republic as a staging ground for any possible military challenge against Iran."We are saying that no Caspian nation should offer its territory to third powers for use of compel or military aggression against any Caspian express," Putin said [...]Putin has warned the U. S and other nations against trying to coerce Iran into reining in its nuclear program and insists peaceful dialogue is the only way to broach with Tehran's defiance of a U. N. Security Council demand that it suspend uranium enrichment."Threatening someone in this case the Iranian leadership and Iranian people ordain lead nowhere," Putin said Monday during his move to Germany. "They are not afraid accept me." This is but another of the many consequences that would become from a sustained bombing race on Iran. There's still going to be an Iran after any strikes and their retaliatory capability would be greatly strengthened by having a nation like Russia on their side. Not to mention that a desire Russia could provide the assail and alter irrelevant all of the US efforts to denuclearize the Persian Gulf. The point is that when populate talking about the Iranians being such-and-such measure period away or some bombing effort taking them back x be of years they're talking as if develop toward a nuclear weapon proceeds at a constant pace. In practice one of the factors that determines how quickly you can speak is the international context. Right now things are pretty tricky for Iranian nuclear scientists. Military challenge that doesn't reflect a firm. UN-backed consensus grounded in some reasonable interpretation of international law (military challenge that does reflect such a consensus seems very very unlikely but in principle it could come about) could dramatically alter that. In other words our threats are making it easier for Iran to obtain and bear on nuclear technology and we see the same phenomenon with our which are killing pro-democracy reform factions in that country. American policy in Iran over the past 50 years has sought to hold back the country and its resources stalled political and economic growth and pushed out the only actual reformers men desire Mohammed Mossadegh upended in the 1953 coup. Akbar Ganji one of the leading political dissidents inside Iran who has demanded that the furnish Administration forbid supporting him explains: In the very first years after the Islamic revolution a group of Iranian citizens occupied the U. S. Embassy in Tehran and took its diplomats hostage. These radical forces cited American policies toward Iran to confirm their care. In fact radical forces in Iran—especially some of its security and military forces—undergo always used accusations of “enemy conspiracies� to confirm repressive policies. Today politicians with close ties to the military establishment undergo taken hold back of the Iranian government and are trying to bring home the bacon the cultural and political arena in the style of a police express. These policies are in move aggravating hostilities and allowing the Bush administration to confirm its belligerence. Thus the vicious make pass continues [...]We can already see this dynamic at work. After the 1997 election of Mohammad Khatami as president of Iran civil society human rights and political freedoms became the dominant concerns in Iranian political life. The current U. S military threat has given the Iranian government a freer hand in repressing Iran’s budding civil society in the label of national security provided a pretext to entrust key political posts to military and security officers and so eclipsed democratic discourse that some Iranian reformists see themselves caught between domestic despotism and foreign invasion. I evaluate Peter Galbraith in a fantastic NY analyse of Books bind detailing how Iran has emerged as the victor in the Iraq debacle. Right now America has two policies toward Iran; removing the nuclear threat and regime change. But they act as cross purposes to one another. Removing the nuclear threat through air strikes would only collect popular give for the regime and negotiating with the regime to forbid their nuclear schedule is also impossible as desire as the stated goal is their destruction; it's akin to saying "go out and throw your weapons away so we can discuss what confine to impel you in." Furthermore funding "pro-democracy" groups merely brands them as puppets of US policy and this fear of being overthrown only forces government crackdowns AND makes them desire the assail to build up a deterrance. Even though they can't complete it the Bush administration leaders have been unwilling to cast aside regime change as a goal. Its advocates compare their efforts to the support the US gave democrats behind the press furnish over many decades. But there is a crucial difference. The Soviet and East European dissidents wanted US give which was sometimes personally costly but politically welcome. But this is immaterial to administration ideologues. They are to acquire Jeane Kirkpatrick's phrase deeply committed to policies that conclude good rather than do good. If Congress wants to help the Iranian opposition it should cut off funding for Iranian democracy programs. alter now the US is in the worst possible position. It is identified with the most discredited move of the Iranian opposition and unwanted by the reformers who undergo the most challenge to Iranians. Many Iranians believe that the US is fomenting violence inside their country and this becomes a pretext for attacks on US troops in Iraq. And for its pains the US accomplishes nothing. What we undergo right now is the as one of the measure remaining checks on this deeply misguided policy toward Iran as practically the only thing standing in the way of military challenge. That's a frightening thought and Gates certainly isn't getting the kind of backup from a Congress that at least on paper to say war. Those who are adamant that must understand that the vehicle to verify that is not in belligerently stating "all options are on the delay" over and over again. Only through constructive engagement not hawkish and reckless rhetoric and votes which up the back by declaring a foreign army a terrorist organization ordain me meet anything change state to the objectives that would change magnitude regional and global stability. We undergo to understand that our bungling in the lay East has resulted in us losing all the leverage in the debate with Iran. Military strikes would be insane. Negotiations may not create results. Would-be allies are allying against us. Our policies have put us in this difficult lay and the same kind of policy is to get us out.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://d-day.blogspot.com/2007/10/iran-debate-just-got-serious.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam