Rambling Reporter

WME's Political Debate: Ari Emanuel's WME not only got his brother Rahm Emanuel and Karl Rove in the same place at its annual agency retreat Jan. 11 to 13 at La Costa Resort & Spa in Carlsbad, Calif. -- they got them to engage in a 75-minute debate. Moderated by PBS' Need to Know host Jeff Greenfield, "it was very heated," according to an insider. WME declined comment on the chat. THR also hears the getaway boasted a passel of other heavyweight panelists including Al Gore, former Google chief Eric Schmidt, former Morgan Stanley head John Mack, former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, Michael Milken and Napster co-founder Sean Parker.

David Cross Gets Cross

THR has learned that Karen Rosenfelt is the unnamed Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked exec producer who was the subject of actor-comedian David Cross' rant about "the most miserable experience that I've had in my professional life" on the Jan. 9 episode of Late Night With Conan O'Brien. Cross complained of being "forced -- at 'legal-point' -- to spend a week on a cruise ship" while dressed head-to-toe in a rubber pelican outfit. "You cannot see any of my flesh [in the film]," he told Conan O'Brien. "Nor do I have any dialogue." Cross, noting he should have been allowed a stand-in and that "everyone else had my back" on this issue, claimed he was overruled by Rosenfelt, whom Cross described as "the personification of what people think about when they think negatively about Jews." (Cross was raised Jewish but is now an atheist.) O'Brien quickly changed the subject. Neither Rosenfelt nor Cross could be reached for comment.

Even Young Adults Dig Downton Abbey

Patton Oswalt, the Young Adult star who played sci-fi geek Spence Olchin on The King of Queens, has outed himself as the most prominent fan of PBS' aristocrats-and-servants drama Downton Abbey. "It reminds me of The Wire," he tells THR. "You can easily have 15 favorite characters on the show." Oswalt has been riffing about Abbey to his half-million-plus Twitter followers ("It's Star Trek for tea drinkers!"; "If they remake Escape From New York, I elect Maggie Smith to play Snake Plissken") since its second-season debut Jan. 8, which he took in at a viewing party with Aimee Mann and Adult Swim mainstay Tim Heidecker. Oswalt notes that the series' class-consciousness feels current: "The Earl of Grantham's daughters are like trust-funders who don't have jobs and are looking for something to do with themselves."

The Artist: Lost in Translation

Hollywood has more than embraced the Franco-centric film The Artist, but its country of origin has not -- at least not to the extent its French producer would like. "For Hollywood, it's a 'French film,' " Thomas Langmann tells THR. "But to the French, it's a 'Hollywood film.' I think they feel it wasn't French enough." Artist has sold 1.5 million tickets in France, but Warner Bros., which released the film there Oct. 12, will rerelease it Jan. 25, expanding it from 80 theaters to 200. "We created a whole new poster, a new trailer, a new ad campaign," reveals Langmann. "It seems the French are more open to it now that America has embraced it so much."


Episode Info:

.On today's experiment of The North Lab Podcast, the boy's come together to talk about, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (4:45), Tory Lanez Quarantine Radio(11:30), Melz's Girl Problems (16:10), Bhad Bhabie Gets Called Out (26:23) & more.


YMCA (Columbus, Georgia)

YMCA in Columbus, Georgia, located at 124 11th St., was built in 1903.  It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980.

It is a building of YMCA of Metropolitan Columbus.  It is a three-story building, Classical Revival in style.

It was funded by donation from George Foster Peabody and was believed to be the only marble YMCA building in America.

References

Category:YMCA buildings in the United States
Category:National Register of Historic Places in Muscogee County, Georgia
Category:Neoclassical architecture in Georgia (U.S. state)
Category:Buildings and structures completed in 1903


While speaking at a Cabinet meeting on Monday, President Trump declared that Obamacare doesn’t exist anymore and that when premiums increase, it is the Democrats’ fault because they voted for Obamacare.

Trump said, “Republicans are meeting with Democrats because of what I did with the CSRs, because I cut off the gravy train. If I didn’t cut the CSRs, they wouldn’t be meeting. They’d be having lunch and enjoying themselves, alright? They’re right now having emergency meetings to get a short-term fix of health care, where premiums don’t have to double and triple every year like they’ve been doing under Obamacare. Because Obamacare is finished. It’s dead. It’s gone. It’s no longer — don’t — you shouldn’t even mention it. It’s gone. There is no such thing as Obamacare anymore.”

He later added, “I do believe we’ll have a short-term fix. Because, I think, the Democrats will be blamed for the mess. This is an Obamacare mess. When the premiums go up, that has nothing to do with anything other than the fact that we had poor health care, delivered poorly, written poorly, approved by the Democrats. It was called Obamacare. But I think we’ll have a short-term fix, and then we’ll have a long-term fix and that will take place probably in March or April. We will have a very solid vote. It’ll be probably 100% Republican, no Democrats. But most people know that that’s going to be a very good form of health insurance.”

Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett


Ziad Abu Amr tells reporters in Austria, 'I believe that at this time we don't have an Israeli partner anymore'

Associated Press Published: 04.04.07, 14:59 / Israel News

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is not ready for "serious negotiations" with the Palestinians and other Arab leaders on efforts to forge peace in the Middle East, the Palestinian foreign minister said Wednesday.

"I believe that Mr. Prime Minister Olmert is not ready to enter into real negotiations, serious negotiations with the Arabs, with the Palestinian side," Ziad Abu Amr told reporters after meeting with Austrian counterpart Ursula Plassnik.

"And I also believe, I can say here, that at this time we don't have an Israeli partner anymore."

On Sunday, Olmert said Israel would show up for a peace summit with Arab leaders if invited.

During a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the prime minister said, "I want to take this opportunity of being here with the European Union president in order to invite all Arab leaders, including the Saudi king.

"I am telling the heads of Arab countries that if the Saudi king initiates a meeting of the moderate states' leaders and invites both me and the Palestinian Authority president, I would gladly come there and speak our mind."

In Saudi Arabia's first comment to Olmert's call, an official sais Israel should withdraw from Arab territory and allow the creation of a Palestinian state before Arabs recognize it.

The Saudi official told The Associated Press that "before any meeting could be considered," Israel should accept the 2002 Arab peace initiative that would recognize Israel in exchange for withdrawal from captured territory and a just solution for the Palestinian refugees. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

At a summit in Saudi Arabia last week, the Arab League renewed its commitment to the peace initiative, which was initially proposed by Saudi Arabia. Olmert welcomed the decision but said Israel did not accept all parts of the plan.


Man United eye Icardi and Miranda, Real Madrid return for David De Gea

The winter window might have shut, but the rumour mill rolls on. As always, Transfer Talk has its finger on the pulse when it comes to the latest rumours and gossip. See the latest deals here.

Man United eye Inter duo

Manchester United may be relying on kids right now, but things will change in the summer. Harry Kane is a known target, but there is also a chance that whoever is in charge at Old Trafford next summer is keeping an eye on things at Inter Milan.

That's because, as the Daily Express claim, the Italian side don't see a future with Mauro Icardi and Miranda.

Icardi, 23, is Inter's skipper but has been linked with a move away from the club for some time and the striker would certainly fit the bill for United. While Miranda is on a two-year loan from Atletico Madrid and could cost just £8.6 million due to a clause in his contract.

If Jose Mourinho does land at Old Trafford this summer, then expect movement. Possibly even before then!

Madrid back in for De Gea

The news that every Manchester United fan doesn't want to hear: Yes, Real Madrid are still keen on goalkeeper David De Gea, reports the Daily Star.

The United star signed a new contract after almost moving to the Bernabeu in the summer, but Madrid don't give up easily. Despite the fact that Keylor Navas has become one of the best goalkeepers in Europe this season, Real Madrid are still after Spain's future No. 1.

Without Champions League football (and possibly not even Europa League either), United will struggle to ward off Madrid's advances a second time. One can only hope the saga is not as dramatic as the last one ...

Will Real Madrid be able to sign David De Gea from Manchester United this summer?

Juve plot Alexis swoop

With just two years remaining on Alexis Sanchez's contract, Arsenal are working tirelessly to tie down the Chilean to a new four-year deal. Should the North London club be unable to come to terms with the former Barcelona man, however, there are suitors waiting to strike a deal, according to the Mirror.

Juventus are reportedly keen to bring Alexis to Turin following their Champions League round-of-16 exit at the hands of Bayern Munich, and they are willing to offer the same £35m that the Gunners paid Barca two years ago for the attacker's services. And if that doesn't work out, Atletico Madrid are also reportedly interested in the electric Chilean.

Liverpool eye Sule move

Becoming a regular for your team in the centre of defence at just 20 years old is pretty impressive, and Liverpool have certainly taken note of the progress made by Niklas Sule at Hoffenheim. The centre-back has made 53 appearances for his side since making his debut in 2013, and he has caught the attention of Jurgen Klopp, according to Sport Bild.

The Germany under-21 international has a bright future ahead of him. With the Reds already having lined up Schalke's Joel Matip on a free transfer this summer, Sule could be part of a new-look Liverpool back line next season.

Tap-Ins

If Arsenal dip into the transfer market for another striker this summer, Olivier Giroud could head to Juventus.

- Juventus are keen on Arsenal striker Olivier Giroud if the Gunners decide to upgrade their striking services over the summer, according to Tuttosport.

- Manchester City are ready to go head-to-head with Barcelona and Bayern Munich for young Rennes winger Ousmane Dembele, according to the Mail. The 18-year-old has a host of suitors, and no doubt Tottenham will join the race to add another Dembele to their squad list, while also chasing Fulham striker Moussa.

- Twenty games after a 1-0 loss to Swansea prompted Aston Villa to sack manager Tim Sherwood. Another 1-0 defeat to the Swans will push the Midlands club to oust current boss Remi Garde, report the Star.


Q:

VBA other Workbook Doesnt close Properly

Hi there My VBA code does not want to close my Raw data File properly.
I have a data capture form then , When I hit Submit, Opens another Excel File, Copies all the data into it and is supposed to save and close the workbook.
My code is as follows:
Private Sub submit_Click()

'Open Workbook
If MsgBox("You are about to Submit, Are you sure?" & vbCr & "Please make sure that the OUTCOME box is complete", vbYesNo) = vbNo Then Exit Sub

Dim wb As Workbook, sh As Worksheet
Set wkb = Workbooks.Open("\\ServerName\Reports Folder\Team Name\Manager Name\RAW\RAW QC data.xlsx")

'Make Daily_Tracking_Dataset active
'Determine emptyRow
'Transfer Information

Set wb = Workbooks("RAW QC data.xlsx")

Set sh = wb.Sheets(1)
cAry = Array(Me.QCBX, Me.CallBX, Me.INBX, Me.AgntBX, Me.VoxBX, Me.ClntBX, Me.PolBX, Me.DateBX1, Me.AuditBX1, Me.TextBox7, Me.TextBox8, Me.OUTBX1, Me.Cbx1_1, Me.Cbx1_2, Me.Cbx1_3, Me.Cbx1_4, Me.OUTBX2, Me.Cbx2_1, Me.Cbx2_2, Me.Cbx2_3, Me.OUTBX3, Me.Cbx3_1, Me.Cbx3_2, Me.OUTBX4, Me.Cbx4_1, Me.Cbx4_2, Me.Cbx4_3, Me.OUTBX5, Me.Cbx5_1, Me.Cbx5_2, Me.Cbx5_3, Me.Cbx5_4, Me.Cbx5_5, Me.Cbx5_6, Me.Cbx5_7, Me.Cbx5_8, Me.ACBX, Me.QTBX, Me.QFBX)
    With sh
        For i = 1 To 39
            .Cells(Rows.Count, i).End(xlUp)(2) = cAry(i - 1).Value
        Next
    End With

'Save the Raw data
wb.Close SaveChanges:=True

End Sub

What is happening is that it looks like it is working but when I try to submit the next one, It gives me the SAVE AS window

A:

You have both wkb and wb in your code. Probably this is not what you intend. Just try changing wkb to wb in your code. That's a good reason to start using Option Explicit - What do Option Strict and Option Explicit do?

In general, something as simple as this should be working:
Public Sub TestMe()

    'Dim wb      As Workbook
    Dim wkb     As Workbook
    Dim sh      As Worksheet

    Set wkb = Workbooks.Open(ThisWorkbook.Path & "\Testing.xlsx")
    'Set wb = Workbooks("Testing.xlsx")

    'Put your loop instead of the TEST later:
    wb.Worksheets(1).Cells(1, 1) = "TEST"

    Application.DisplayAlerts = False
    wkb.Save
    Application.DisplayAlerts = True
    wkb.Close

End Sub


Sev. Park coach to appeal his suspension

Purpura was suspended for using ineligible runner

Cross country

High Schools

October 05, 2003|By Edward Lee | Edward Lee,SUN STAFF

Severna Park cross country coach Ed Purpura is appealing a ruling by the Anne Arundel County board of arbitration that suspended the 15-year coach for the rest of the fall season for using an ineligible runner.

Purpura, The Sun's Anne Arundel County Boys Coach of the Year in cross country last season, said yesterday that he filed an appeal Thursday with the Maryland Public Secondary Schools Athletic Association, asking the state organization to reduce the terms of the suspension.

Purpura, who admitted allowing the ineligible runner to compete in two races last month and reported himself to school officials, said the county board's decision Monday to suspend him for the rest of the fall season was too harsh.

"I thought it was a miscarriage of justice," said Purpura, who will be replaced by assistant coach Mary Seidel. "I served a one-meet suspension the week before, and my principal thought that would be adequate, along with whatever censure was handed down. ... Everybody I have talked with has felt it was too severe."

Purpura said he turned himself in two weeks ago when he learned that the athlete in question had run in two JV races - at a county meet at Arundel High and at the Knights Invitational at Baybrook Park.

Purpura, whose boys team forfeited all of its points from the two meets, said the runner had been told he could not represent the school in meets until his grades had improved. Somehow, Purpura said, the athlete managed to run in the races until an assistant informed him of the error.

Purpura said the county board's ruling sets a bad precedent.

"I think this sends a bad message that if you make a mistake and you report yourself, you will get hammered for it," he said. "He was a JV runner who had never run before. It's not like I tried to pull something on anyone."

Marlene Kelly, the county's coordinator of athletics, was unavailable for comment.

Broadneck coach Dana Dobbs, one of Purpura's closest friends and toughest rivals, said that while the head coach is "ultimately responsible" for preventing ineligible runners from competing, he did not agree with the length of the suspension.

"I learned much of what I know about cross country from Ed," Dobbs said. "He produces nothing but winners. ... I don't know all the details, but it does seem heavy."


Franklin Labs caused a kerfuffle in Oct. 2017 when it quietly put its Reading grow permit up for sale — including property and other assets — with a price tag of $20 million. A senior executive explained at the time that the company wanted to pursue an even more lucrative research license that would allow it to produce marijuana in conjunction with a Pennsylvania university — and sell cannabis at five dispensaries.


Q:

How to assign linq anonymous type variable

I have a linq query that gives me an System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable(of <Anonymous Type>). Actually I wanted to create a class to get better access to what I want form that query but I fail aready with declaring a member variable that should hold the query outcome. The query I use in the Sub New() of my class is (explained and c# version here:)
Dim jan1 = New DateTime(DateTime.Today.Year, 1, 1)
Dim startOfFirstWeek = jan1.AddDays(1 - CInt(jan1.DayOfWeek))
Dim weeks = Enumerable.Range(0, 54).[Select](Function(i) New With { _
    Key .weekStart = startOfFirstWeek.AddDays(i * 7) _
}).TakeWhile(Function(x) x.weekStart.Year <= jan1.Year).[Select](Function(x) New With { _
    x.weekStart, _
    Key .weekFinish = x.weekStart.AddDays(4) _
}).SkipWhile(Function(x) x.weekFinish < jan1.AddDays(1)).[Select](Function(x, i) New With { _
    x.weekStart, _
    x.weekFinish, _
    Key .weekNum = i + 1 _
})

My Class should look like:
Public Class WeekInfo

Private _weeks as ?????

end Class

Could anyone tell me what is the usual procedure to accomplish that task and how to put the find a type for my member to access the weeks variable?

A:

VB.Net anonymous types are exposed as type Object so you're variable would be:
Dim weeks As IEnumerable(Of Object)

You will not get intellisense on the anonymous type's fields outside of the function you created them in but you can access them dynamically, i.e.
For Each week In weeks
    Console.WriteLine(week.weekStart + " " + week.weekFinish)
Next

If you need to expose the type externally you should define a concrete class or struct instead.


89 Wn.2d 321 (1977)
572 P.2d 1085
BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC., ET AL, Respondents,
v.
KEN JOHNSTON, ET AL, Appellants.
No. 44056.
The Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.
December 8, 1977.
*323 Christopher T. Bayley, Prosecuting Attorney, Norman K. Maleng, Chief Civil Deputy, and William C. Severson, Deputy, for appellant King County.
Donald Herron, Prosecuting Attorney, and Terrence F. McCarthy, Deputy, for appellant Pierce County.
Robert E. Schillberg, Prosecuting Attorney, and Elmer E. Johnston, Jr., for appellant Snohomish County.
John C. Merkel, Prosecuting Attorney, and W. Daniel Phillips, Deputy, for appellant Kitsap County.
Patrick McMullen, Prosecuting Attorney, and William H. Nielsen, Deputy, for appellant Skagit County.
Craig Ritchie, Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant Clallam County.
David Thiele, Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant Island County.
H.N. Woolson, Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant Columbia County.
Woodrow L. Taylor, for respondent Burlington Northern, Inc.
Cummings, Durkan & McCabe and James B. McCabe, for respondent Cascade Natural Gas Corporation.
Lane, Powell, Moss & Miller and G. Keith Grim, for respondent Burlington Northern, Inc., et al.
Slade Gorton, Attorney General, and Matthew J. Coyle, Assistant, for respondent State.
ROSELLINI, J.
Before the Board of Tax Appeals, eight county assessors challenged the Department of Revenue's 1972 equalization of real and personal properties of utilities and private car companies (hereinafter called the companies). They contended that the method used was unconstitutional and that it was not authorized by RCW 84.12.350 and RCW 84.16.110, which provide for equalization of such *324 properties. Under that method, instead of equalizing company real property at the same level as locally assessed real property and company personal property at the same level as locally assessed personal property, the department used what it termed an "indicated ratio." This percentage figure was computed by dividing the total assessed value of the two kinds of property by their total indicated market value.
It appears that in a period of inflation such as we have been experiencing in recent years, the 4-year cycle of revaluation of real property provided for in RCW 84.41.030 and approved by this court in Snohomish County Bd. of Equalization v. Department of Revenue, 80 Wn.2d 262, 493 P.2d 1012 (1972), results in a declining ratio of assessed to true value with respect to each property during the interim between valuations. Personal property, which is valued every year, maintains a consistent ratio of 50 percent of true and fair value; but the ratio of assessed value to true value, with respect to any one piece of real property, falls below that ratio after the valuation has been made. Consequently, the average ratio of assessed value of real property is less than 50 percent of true value. Because there is more taxable value in real property, generally, than in personal property, the declining real property ratio causes the composite ratio of real and personal property to fall below 50 percent and closer to the real property ratio than to the personal property ratio.
Company operating property is predominantly personal property. If all of the property which is classified as personal property under the statute is equalized as such, the equalization will be at a higher ratio than the composite ratio adopted by the department. Use of the indicated ratio means that the companies' tax liabilities are less than they would be if the real and personal properties were equalized separately. Consequently it results in a loss of revenues to the counties.
The board held that the method used violated Const. art. 7, §§ 1 and 2.[1] In its opinion, it found that the method was *325 not authorized by statute. However, it did not base its decision on that finding.
The board ordered that the department certify all of the operating property to the counties at 50 percent of its true and fair value, and that the property be assessed at that value. Realizing that the case would probably be appealed to the Superior Court and anticipating a possible reversal on this holding, the board adopted as its alternative decision the dissenting opinion of its chairman, who concluded that the department should equalize the values of real and personal property separately, according to the average ratio at which such property was valued locally.
The Department of Revenue and intervening utilities petitioned the Superior Court for Thurston County for review of this decision.[2] After reviewing the record, that court reversed the Board of Tax Appeals. It held that the use of the indicated ratio did not violate constitutional provisions and that it was authorized by statute, giving conclusive weight to the fact that the legislature had not seen fit to amend the provision relied upon as authority, *326 after the method of equalization was adopted in 1963. The county assessors have appealed from that decision.
[1] The first question before us is one of statutory interpretation. It is settled that an administrative agency has only those powers which are expressly granted to it by statute, or necessarily implied in the grant. Ortblad v. State, 85 Wn.2d 109, 530 P.2d 635 (1975). While such an agency has some discretion in interpreting ambiguous statutes, it may not alter or amend an act, and its interpretation must be within the framework and policy of the statute. Allen v. Employment Security Dep't, 83 Wn.2d 145, 516 P.2d 1032 (1973); see Smith v. Greene, 86 Wn.2d 363, 545 P.2d 550 (1976).
[2] In interpreting a statute, it is the duty of the court to ascertain and give effect to the intent and purpose of the legislature, as expressed in the act. The act must be construed as a whole, and effect should be given to all the language used. Also, all of the provisions of the act must be considered in their relation to each other and, if possible, harmonized to insure proper construction of each provision. Publishers Forest Prods. Co. v. State, 81 Wn.2d 814, 505 P.2d 453 (1973).
The equalizing of company property is one of a series of duties enjoined upon the Department of Revenue under RCW 84.12 and RCW 84.16, with respect to the valuation of such properties and the apportioning of the value of the operating property of any such company to the state and to the counties within which it operates. Those duties include: (1) determining the true cash value of the operating property of each company operating in Washington (RCW 84.12.270 and RCW 84.16.040); (2) apportioning to Washington that part of the value of each interstate company which represents the value of its property in Washington (RCW 84.12.300 and RCW 84.16.050); (3) apportioning the value of the operating property of each company equitably to the counties in which it operates (RCW 84.12.350 and .360, and RCW 84.16.110 and.120); (4) determining the equalized value of the property apportioned to each county *327 (RCW 84.12.350 and RCW 84.16.110); and (5) certifying the equalized value to the local assessors for placement on the tax rolls (RCW 84.12.370 and RCW 84.16.130). It is the fourth duty, that of equalization, with which we are concerned here.
For purposes of assessment of the operating properties of public utilities, and the apportionment and taxation thereof, the legislature has expressly classified such properties as either personal or real in RCW 84.12.280. For example, all railroad equipment which is stationary is classified as real property, while all movable property is classified as personal property. All of the operating property other than lands or buildings of electric light and power companies, telephone companies, gas companies, and heating companies is to be "assessed and taxed" as personal property. Under RCW 84.16.010 all of the operating property of a private car company is deemed to be personal property.
Factors which the department may take into consideration in valuing the operating property of a company are set forth in RCW 84.12.300 and RCW 84.16.040 and .050, and the department is authorized to take into consideration the value of the property as a unit.
The controversy before us focuses upon the term "general property", as used in RCW 84.12.350 and RCW 84.16.110.
Upon determination by the department of revenue of the true and correct actual cash value of the property appearing on such rolls it shall apportion such value to the respective counties entitled thereto, as hereinafter provided, and shall determine the equalized assessed valuation of such property in each such county and in the several taxing districts therein, by applying to such actual apportioned value the same ratio as the ratio of assessed to actual value of the general property in such county: Provided, That, whenever the amount of the true and correct value of the operating property of any company otherwise apportionable to any county or other taxing district shall be less than two hundred fifty dollars, such amount need not be apportioned to such county or *328 taxing district but may be added to the amount apportioned to an adjacent county or taxing district.
RCW 84.12.350.
Upon determination by the department of revenue of the true and correct actual cash value of the property appearing on such rolls the department shall apportion such value to the respective counties entitled thereto as hereinafter provided, and shall determine the equalized or assessed valuation of such property in such counties by applying to such actual apportioned value the same ratio as the ratio of assessed to actual value of the general property of the respective counties: Provided, That, whenever the amount of the true and correct value of the operating property of any company otherwise apportionable to any county shall be less than two hundred fifty dollars, such amount need not be apportioned to such county but may be added to the amount apportioned to an adjacent county.
RCW 84.16.110. It will be seen that these two provisions are substantially identical and that the general purpose and scheme of the two statutes are the same.
To summarize their pertinent provisions, RCW 84.12 and RCW 84.16 impose upon the state, rather than upon the counties, the duty of determining the value of the operating properties of companies covered by their provisions and apportioning that value among the counties. They declare that for purposes of assessment and apportionment, some operating properties of the companies shall be classified as personal and others as real property. While they authorize the department to consider the operating property as a unit in arriving at its value, they expressly require that the property be apportioned to the counties as real or personal property and that it be assessed as such.
After the apportionment, the statutes require the department to determine the equalized assessed valuation of such property in each such county and in the several taxing districts therein, using the ratio of assessed value to actual value of the "general property" in such county. In each of the two chapters, this is the first time that the term *329 "general property" is used. It is not defined in the "definitions" sections of the statutes. It does, however, with respect to public utilities, reappear in RCW 84.12.370, which provides:
When the state board of equalization shall have determined the equalized assessed value of the operating property of each company in each of the respective counties and in the taxing districts thereof, as hereinabove provided, the department of revenue shall certify such equalized assessed value to the county assessor of the proper county. The county assessor shall enter the company's real operating property upon the real property tax rolls and the company's personal operating property upon the personal property tax rolls of his county, together with the values so apportioned, and the same shall be and constitute the assessed valuation of the operating property of the company in such county and the taxing districts therein for that year, upon which taxes shall be levied and collected in the same manner as on the general property of such county.

(Italics ours.) Again we find it in RCW 84.12.380 which reads:
All property of any company not assessed as operating property under the provisions of this chapter shall be assessed by the assessor of the county wherein the same may be located or situate the same as the general property of the county.
RCW 84.16.130 and RCW 84.16.140 contain essentially the same provisions, with respect to private car companies. RCW 84.16.130 expressly directs the county assessor to enter the assessment upon the personal property tax rolls, there to be taxed the same as "general property" of the county.
It would seem evident that the legislature was much concerned with the classification of operating property as either real or personal in these statutes, although it recognized the practicality and desirability of determining the value of the property as a unit, before segregating it as real and personal property for tax purposes. The legislature's possible motivation in prescribing these classifications is *330 not explained in any of these briefs. We must assume that it had in mind the constitutional requirement of uniformity and that the classification was directed toward this end.
The constitutionality of these classifications is not challenged. Moreover, the respondents concede, and in fact rely upon the legislature's right to classify property for purposes of taxation. We have acknowledged the right in State ex rel. Atwood v. Wooster, 163 Wash. 659, 2 P.2d 653 (1931); Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. Seattle, 117 Wash. 351, 201 P. 449 (1921).
It is the respondent's theory that in this instance the legislature created a class of property which is neither real nor personal, for the purposes of valuation and equalization; although they are forced to admit that for purposes of taxation (the main object of the statute), property must be placed upon the tax rolls as either personal or real property. The intent to create such a class, it is suggested, can be found in the provision requiring that company property be equalized with the "general property" of the county. As they read the statute, it conveys a legislative intent that all of the property of the companies shall be treated as one class called "general," and equalized with all of the property of a given county, which is likewise treated as one class called "general."
It is obvious that such an intent is not expressly stated in the statute. If it can be found there at all, it must be derived by implication from the word "general" as it is used in describing the property with which company property is to be equalized.
The term "general property" is not one commonly used to describe a class of property. Black's Law Dictionary 1382 (4th ed. 1968) gives only this definition: "The right and property in a thing enjoyed by the general owner." Obviously, that definition has no relevance in this context.
[3] The parties have drawn our attention to no court decision in which the meaning of the term has been explored. The respondents do, however, point out that it has been used by the Washington Legislature in previous *331 statutes, and that in one of them, Laws of 1925, 1st Ex. Sess., ch. 130, § 36(7), p. 246, the following provision can be found:
7. The term "general property of the state" shall be deemed to include all real and personal property appearing upon the assessment rolls and tax rolls throughout the state, upon which the state, county and local taxes are levied and collected, with such changes and corrections made by the tax commission as hereinafter provided.
The quoted provision does not reveal a legislative intent to reclassify real and personal property, combining them into one homogeneous class. Rather it suggests that the legislature intended to employ a shorthand expression, to avoid the necessity of repeating the words "real and personal" and the modifying words which follow them in the quoted section.
All of the parties to this action are agreed that the term "general property," as used in this context, means "real and personal property." The dispute centers upon the question whether the legislature intended that real and personal property should be lumped together and their ratios of assessed to actual value averaged to compute the equalizing factor, or whether it intended that personal operating property should be equalized at the ratio of assessment to actual value in the counties, and real operating property should be equalized at the ratio of assessment to actual value in the counties.
[4] Reading the statute in its entirety, giving effect to all of the provisions and seeking to harmonize them, we cannot find expressed therein any intent that the classifications established in RCW 84.12.280 and RCW 84.16.010 should be abandoned for purposes of equalization. Such an interpretation would require us to disregard entirely the legislative declaration that in the case of utilities, the classification is made for the purposes of making the assessment, and apportioning the values and the taxation thereof. *332 (RCW 84.12.280.) Also, in the case of private car companies, it is declared that for the purposes of that chapter, all of the operating properties "shall be deemed personal property." RCW 84.16.010. The purposes of that chapter include equalization. Under RCW 84.12.350 and RCW 84.16.110, apportionment is done before equalization is undertaken. By the legislative directive, the property has already been classified as personal or real before the department turns to the question of equalization.
The department gives as its reason for treating the real and personal operating property of a company as a homogeneous whole for purposes of equalization its belief that the legislative classification of certain property as personal rather than real, results in a lack of uniformity of tax burden. Although this argument was made before the Board of Tax Appeals, that body did not find that it was established by the evidence. We are not shown that the record supports the respondents' contention. The chairman's partial dissent, adopted by the majority as its alternate decision, expressly states its author's belief that the separate equalization of real and personal property results in greater equity and uniformity than the other methods or procedures presented before the board. The Superior Court did not find that such an equalization procedure would be inequitable.
It would appear that the department disagrees with the legislative judgment upon this subject. It is nevertheless bound to carry out the legislative directive. As we have observed earlier, the validity of the legislative classification of company operating property is not challenged in this action.
Our understanding of the legislative intent with respect to the use of the term "general property" in the equalization provisions of the two statutes accords with the obvious meaning of the term as it is used in RCW 84.12.370 and .380, and RCW 84.16.130 and.140. In each of these contexts, the county assessor is told to enter the property on the tax rolls as real or personal. Each provides that taxes *333 shall be levied and collected the same as on the general property of the county. The respondents do not suggest that the term "general property," as used in these provisions, means anything but that real property shall be taxed as real property and personal property shall be taxed as personal property.
We are told that because the legislature has not, by statutory amendment, rejected the department's interpretation, it has impliedly approved that interpretation. The apportionment and equalization provisions of RCW 84.12.350 and RCW 84.16.110 appeared in the statutes as early as 1933, in chapter 146, section 11 in substantially the same language. The "indicated ratio" was first used in 1963. Thus it appears that for 30 years, the department understood the provisions the same as we now read them. If the length of time during which the legislature has remained inert is a determinative factor, there is more reason to assume that the legislature approved the original interpretation than to assume that it has approved the later one, a period of 30 years having elapsed under the prior interpretation and only 10 under the one now contended for, at the time this action was brought. In any event, an administrative agency cannot alter or amend a statute by interpretation, even with legislative acquiescence, and the court must give effect to the plain meaning of the language used.
The Board of Tax Appeals correctly found that the legislature, in enacting these two statutes, did not intend to create a new class of property for purposes of equalization,[3] but rather intended that company operating property should be classified for all purposes of taxation, other than valuation, as real or personal, as prescribed in the statutes. This determination was sufficient to support its holding that company operating property should be equalized according to its classification in the statutes.
*334 We do not agree, however, with the board's further conclusion that company operating properties should be assessed at 50 percent of their true and fair value, without regard to the value at which other county property is assessed. It was the clearly expressed legislative intent that the properties should be equalized at the local ratios, even though the department values them every year at their true and fair value.
[5] The legislative purpose was obviously to achieve as much uniformity as possible in the distribution of the tax burden. We have recently recognized that the constitutional requirement of uniformity, Const. art. 7, § 1 (amendment 14), is more insistent than the requirement that property be valued at 50 percent of its true and fair value, Const. art. 7, § 2 (amendment 17); and legislation directed toward the achievement of this end should be given effect. Snohomish County Bd. of Equalization v. Department of Revenue, 80 Wn.2d 262, 493 P.2d 1012 (1972). We approve, therefore, the minority opinion of the chairman of the board, which was the board's alternate decision.
Inasmuch as we have found that the statute does not authorize the method of equalization employed by the department, it becomes unnecessary to consider whether the method used is unconstitutional, as contended by the appellants.
The judgment of the Superior Court is reversed, and the alternate decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is reinstated. The Department of Revenue must equalize the assessed values of company operating property as real or personal property according to the classifications provided in the statutes.
WRIGHT, C.J., and HAMILTON, STAFFORD, BRACHTENBACH, HOROWITZ, and HICKS, JJ., concur. DOLLIVER, J. (dissenting)
The majority has based its decision solely upon an interpretation of RCW 84.12.350 and RCW 84.16.130. The Department of Revenue has *335 interpreted these provisions to allow the use of a combined indicated ratio. Contrary to the majority, I not only believe the interpretation of the department is accurate but I also believe the rules of construction previously adopted by this court lead to the conclusion that the position of the department is correct.
The history of RCW 84.12.350 demonstrates that the term "general property" was intended to include both real and personal property. RCW 84.12.350 was derived from the Laws of 1935, ch. 123, § 14, p. 367, which provided:
The assessment rolls of companies assessed under the provisions of this act shall be reviewed, examined and corrected by the state board of equalization at its annual meeting held in September for the purpose of equalizing the assessed valuation of the taxable property of the state and said state board of equalization may correct the valuation in such manner as may in its judgment make the valuation thereof just and relatively equal with the valuation of the general property of the state.
That section in turn was taken almost in whole from Laws of 1925, 1st Ex. Sess., ch. 130, § 46, p. 256, which provided in relevant part:
The assessment rolls of railroad and telegraph companies shall, by the commission, be submitted to the state board of equalization at its annual meeting held for the purpose of equalizing the assessed valuation of the taxable property of the state; and any railroad or telegraph company interested shall have the right to appear and be heard as to the assessment of the property of such company, and as to the value and assessment of the general property of the state, and the said board of equalization may, on application or of its own motion, correct the valuation or assessment of the property of such company, in such manner as may in its judgment make the valuation thereof just and relatively equal with the valuation of the general property of the state.
The phrase "general property" of the state was defined in section 36(7) of the 1925 statute at page 246, as:

*336 The term "general property of the state" shall be deemed to include all real and personal property appearing upon the assessment rolls and tax rolls throughout the state, upon which the state, county and local taxes are levied and collected, with such changes and corrections made by the tax commission as hereinafter provided.
The majority argues the purpose of defining "general property" was "to employ a shorthand expression" to avoid repeating certain words and phrases. While this notion understandably possesses a certain charm for the majority, I am not persuaded of its validity.
Although section 36 and many other sections of the 1925 act were repealed by the 1935 act, use of the original legislative definition is appropriate, particularly since the section of the original statute which contains the defined term was reenacted without significant change. See State v. Herr, 151 Wash. 623, 628, 276 P. 870 (1929).
In Great Northern Ry. v. Cohn, 3 Wn.2d 672, 687, 101 P.2d 985 (1940), we stated:
In the construction of statutes which reenact with certain changes, or repeal, former statutes, or which contain revisions or codifications of earlier laws, resort may be had to repealed and superseded statutes in pari materia.

See also 2A C. Sands, Statutes and Statutory Construction § 51.04 (4th ed. 1973).
In any event, the property tax laws have been subject to continuing interpretation by this court during the past 10 years. See Sator v. State, 89 Wn.2d 338, 572 P.2d 1094 (1977). During that same period, the same statutes have gone through a substantial reformation by the legislature. The majority points out the Department of Revenue has used the combined ratio only since 1963 while the statute has been in effect since 1933. Thus, by a ratio of 3-to-1, the former interpretation must have been correct. Although this is acceptable arithmetic, I do not believe it is good law. The record does not disclose the reasons for adopting the combined ratio in 1963. It just as reasonably could be argued the pre-1963 interpretation of the statute was in *337 error and that only in 1963 did the department finally interpret the statute to accord with legislative intent.
At no time since 1963, however, has the legislature seen fit to alter the language in question in RCW 84.16.110 or RCW 84.12.350. The Department of Revenue has used the combined indicated ratio for approximately 14 years. In interpreting these statutes, the decisions of the administrative agency should be afforded considerable weight. Smith v. Northern Pac. Ry., 7 Wn.2d 652, 110 P.2d 851 (1941). Indeed, it may be said the legislature has acquiesced in the department's interpretation of these statutes. As we stated in State ex rel. Pirak v. Schoettler, 45 Wn.2d 367, 372, 274 P.2d 852 (1954):
This [acquiescence by the legislature] is particularly true when, as here, the section is subsequently (1) considered by the legislature, (2) amended in some other particular, and (3) the administrative construction of the section is not repudiated.
This is precisely what occurred here. Compare Laws of 1961, ch. 15, § 84.12.350, p. 1118, with Laws of 1967, 1st Ex. Sess., ch. 26, § 17, p. 1525, and Laws of 1961, ch. 15, § 84.16.110, p. 1125, with Laws of 1967, 1st Ex. Sess., ch. 26, § 18, p. 1525.
While the statutes may require interpretation, the rules of construction and the circumstances to which they should be applied are clear. The judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.
UTTER, J., concurs with DOLLIVER, J.
NOTES
[1]  Const. art. 7, § 1 (amendment 14), requires that all taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the levying authority. At the time of the equalization and the assessment of these properties, Const. art. 7, § 2 (amendment 17), required that property be assessed at 50 percent of its true and fair value. Const. art. 7, § 2 has been amended three times since 1972. 1971, S.J.R. 1, approved 11/7/72 (amendment 55); 1971, H.J.R. 47, approved 11/7/72 (amendment 59); and 1975-76 (2d Ex. Sess.), S.J.R. 137, approved 11/2/76 (amendment 64).
[2]  It is agreed that the use of the department's indicated ratio resulted in a loss of tax revenues to the counties. The board's holding portended no loss of revenue to the state. It would appear debatable, therefore, whether the Department of Revenue is a "person aggrieved" within the meaning of RCW 34.04.130(1), the statute under which the right to petition for review was claimed, or that its substantial rights could be shown to have been prejudiced. Proof of such prejudice is required under RCW 34.04.130(6) before a reversal can be ordered. See Bitney v. Morgan, 84 Wn.2d 9, 523 P.2d 929 (1974). RCW 82.03.180, providing for judicial review of decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals, allows the Director of Revenue to appeal only from decisions made pursuant to RCW 82.03.130(1). We need not decide whether the department had standing to seek judicial relief in this action, however, since utilities and car companies, whose tax liability is involved, have intervened.
[3]  We note that the department has been given the authority to classify property for equalization purposes in RCW 84.48.080. The concisely expressed intent found in this statute stands in sharp contrast to the vague term upon which the department supports its authority in this action.


Family reunions just got more interesting for Larry David and Bernie Sanders

See the 'Unbelievable' Moment Bernie Sanders and Larry David Learn They're Related: 'You're Kidding!'

Family reunions just got more interesting for Larry David and Bernie Sanders.

On a preview for the season 4 premiere of the PBS show Finding Your Roots, — a series that helps notable people track their lineage — the Vermont senator and the actor who flawlessly portrayed him on Saturday Night Live learn that they’re distant cousins.

Get push notifications with news, features and more.

The clip shows both Sanders and David flipping a page to find a picture of their newly uncovered relative: each other.

“I hope it’s a good athlete,” the Curb Your Enthusiasm star joked before seeing Sanders’ photo.

“What the hell?” David, 70, said with a smile upon seeing that it was the politician, amazed to find out about “Cousin Bernie.”

Sanders, 76, reacted with the same joyful surprise.

“You’re kidding!” he exclaimed, putting his hand to his forehead. “That is unbelievable!”

Sanders added, “People say to me, they talk about Larry David, and I say, ‘He does a better Bernie Sanders than I do.’ ”

David told the audience at the Television Critics Association panel for Curb Your Enthusiasm in July that he was “very happy” to learn of the genealogical connection, saying that Sanders is “like a third cousin or something.”

“I thought there must be some connection,” he said, according to CNN. “I love Bernie.”

The star, of course, channeled the senator and Democratic candidate in several episodes of Saturday Night Live leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Sanders even made a surprise appearance alongside David in a history-themed 2016 skit.


                  FOR PUBLICATION
              JUDICIAL COUNCIL
            OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN RE COMPLAINT                            Nos. 09-90276,
OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT                           09-90277
                                                   and
                                                 09-90278

                                              ORDER

                   Filed January 12, 2011

                          ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

   Complainant, a pro se prisoner, filed a judicial misconduct
complaint against two district judges and a magistrate judge.
Instead of a brief statement of facts, he attached what appears
to be a complaint for a civil rights “tort action suit” he had
earlier tried to file with the Ninth Circuit’s clerk of court.
Complainants may not initiate a civil rights suit via the mis-
conduct procedure. The Judicial Council is not a court and has
no jurisdiction over civil actions. Compare 28 U.S.C.
§ 332(d), with id. §§ 1331, 1343(a). And, because the brief
statement of facts required to file a misconduct complaint
“must be prepared specifically for the misconduct proceed-
ing,” a complainant may not submit a document drawn up for
another purpose in lieu of such a statement. In re Complaint
of Judicial Misconduct, No. 09-90239, 2010 WL 5300813, at
*1 (9th Cir. Dec. 28, 2010).

   Because complainant submitted no statement of facts set-
ting forth his allegations of misconduct, he has made no alle-
gations of misconduct and the complaint must be dismissed.

                             667
668        IN RE COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT
See 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(1)(A)(i); In re Complaint of Judicial
Misconduct, 2010 WL 5300813, at *2.

   The sole purpose of the misconduct complaint procedure is
to identify and investigate allegations of misconduct against
federal judges. The only possible outcome of the proceedings,
should misconduct be shown, is corrective or disciplinary
action against the judge. Complainant may not obtain any
kind of personal relief such as a change to the judge’s ruling,
even if misconduct is ultimately shown. His request for
appointment of a “Philadelphia lawyer” therefore is dismissed
as beyond the purview of these proceedings. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 354(a)(2); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(a). The charges against
a state judge are likewise dismissed. See Judicial-Conduct
Rule 4.

  DISMISSED.


'Burt' Readies For Election Debut

CANBERRA -- The name “Burt” conjures, for some, a certain hirsute 1970’s movie heartthrob, but it is making a comeback in 2015 for political nerds.

The Australian Electoral Commission has been working through a population redistribution in Western Australia and has proposed, in time for the next election, a new federal electorate in the south east corner of Perth.

Provisionally called “Burt”, it would be WA’s 16th electorate, cover 172 sq/km and be a tribute to the late legal leaders of the state's Burt family, which included Sir Archibald Burt, Septimus Burt and Sir Francis Burt.

Strong rivals for Burt included the political suggestions, "Beazley" and "Court", but they were rejected as there was “some potential for confusion with other living family members who are prominent public figures.”


Eruptive keratoacanthoma with an internal malignant neoplasm.
A 65-year-old woman had hundreds of tumors on the sun-exposed portions of her body and similar lesions in her mouth. All biopsy specimens showed changes consistent with the diagnosis of keratoacanthoma. Further examination of this patient disclosed an asymptomatic ovarian carcinoma. To the best of our knowledge, this is the second case of the rare disorder of eruptive keratoacanthoma to occur in a patient with an internal malignant neoplasm.


On Saturday we kicked the "Kris Versteeg to the Flyers" rumors to the curb, questioning their source while still mentioning the plausibility of the deal. After all, while the source on the record was less than reputable, the speculation in that report made sense.

Versteeg's a nice two-way forward who won a Stanley Cup just a year ago against our boys. He has a relatively decent cap hit and he'd be a nice fit on the wing with these Flyers. Most of all, he's young and still has a ton of upside, and you could say that he was in less-than-ideal situations in both Toronto and Chicago to start his career.

Well, it's happened. The Philadelphia Flyers have traded for forward Kris Versteeg today, sending a first round pick and a third round pick to the Toronto Maple Leafs in exchange for the 24-year-old winger. If you're thinking that's a bit of an overpayment, you'd be correct.

This is a weak draft coming up this summer, but this will now be the third straight year in which the team lacks a first round pick. That is, unless they acquire one via another route before June. For now, we're still going with the assumption that the Flyers hate draft picks.

Here's the thing, though. Tim Panaccio reported that the Leafs were after James van Riemsdyk in this deal and that they settled on the two draft picks. It might be an overpayment, but if you consider the weak draft thing, can you be sure that the Flyers' first round pick this year would be a 20-goal scorer (or better) in the NHL? Up for debate.

Versteeg is under contract through the end of the 2011-2012 season at a cap hit of $3.083 million. With the trade on the books, the Flyers are again over the yearly salary cap -- albeit by just $19,383 according to CapGeek.com.

The biggest question in this move, as it pertains to the future, is what the Flyers do with Ville Leino. He's still an unrestricted free agent at the end of the current season, and as the Flyers add over $3 million to their pay roll for next year, you have to wonder where they're going to get the money to fit No. 22. Leino's expected to earn about $3 million per season on his next deal, as well. A lot depends on how much the salary cap goes up for next season.

We'll have plenty of time to analyze what this means for the future, but what does it mean for the current team? If you thought there were an excess of forwards before, the Flyers now have 15 on the NHL roster. FIFTEEN!

It bumps somebody else out of the roster immediately -- looking at you, Dan Carcillo or Jody Shelley -- and it makes you wonder if another move is coming. It's clear that Nikolay Zherdev, already a healthy scratch, is not liked by Peter Laviolette and the coaching staff. If they're not going to put him in the lineup, the best thing to do is trade him, and perhaps the acquisition of Versteeg is a precursor to that move.

Full team press release with quotes from Paul Holmgren ("he's an exciting young forward") and Kris Versteeg ("excited") after the jump.

FLYERS ACQUIRE RW KRIS VERSTEEG FROM TORONTO The Philadelphia Flyers announced today that they have acquired 5-10, 182-pound right wing Kris Versteeg from the Toronto Maple Leafs in exchange for a first-round and a third-round pick in the 2011 NHL Entry Draft, according to general manager Paul Holmgren. "Kris is an exciting young forward," Holmgren said. He's 24 years old and he'll fit in with our group of players here. He's a quality forward that can play in a lot of different roles for our hockey team. He can move up and down our lineup. He can kill penalties. He can play on the power play. We think he's a guy that over the last few years, particularly in Chicago, has really blossomed into a good forward and we think he's going to be a really good addition to our team." "Right away I was extremely excited to join this team," Versteeg said. "They've had a lot of success this season. They had a great playoff push last year and I'm excited to try and have a good one this year. I like to make plays and score goals at the same time, maybe go out there and be an agitator at times too. I'm going to try and do it all and have fun doing it." Versteeg, 24 (5-13-86), was a fifth-round selection of the Boston Bruins (134th overall) in the 2004 NHL Entry Draft. In 53 games for Toronto this season, Versteeg has posted 14 goals and 21 assists for 35 points. He was acquired by Toronto on June 30, 2010 in a five-player trade with the Chicago Blackhawks. Versteeg was part of Chicago's Stanley Cup championship team last season, contributing 20 goals and 24 assists for 44 points in 79 regular season games and adding six goals and eight assists for 14 points in 22 Stanley Cup Playoff games. In 223 NHL games with Chicago and Toronto over parts of four seasons, Versteeg has career totals of 58 goals and 78 assists for 136 points. The Flyers return to action on Tuesday night when they visit the Tampa Bay Lightning in the start of a four-game road trip. The game will be broadcast in high definition on Comcast SportsNet and also will air on 610 WIP. Puck drop is 7:30 PM. Individual game tickets for the 2010-11 season are still available exclusively through ComcastTIX at philadelphiaflyers.com, by phone at 1-800-298-4200 or in person at the Wells Fargo Center box office. Fan-favorite All You Can Eat packages including hot dogs, popcorn, chips with salsa and/or cheese, ice cream, and soda (or water) are also available exclusively through ComcastTIX, at philadelphiaflyers.com, by phone at 1-800-298-4200 or in person at the Wells Fargo Center box office. - FLYERS -


Synthesis and chemosensing properties of indole based donor- Π-acceptor dye material.
In this work, we have designed and synthesized a new chemosensor for the detection of various metal ions. The chemosensor named 2-[2-(1 H-indole-2-ylmethylene)-3-oxo-indan-1-yliden]- malononitrile was synthesized using 3-formyl indole and 2-(3-oxo-indan-1-yliden)-malononitrile. This chemosensor has been investigated the properties which are able to detect and recognize the detection function of heavy metal ions. D-π-A system of dye chemosensor between electron withdrawing malononitrile and electron donating indole moieties provides the functions to interact with target metal ions. These recognizing sensing effects were studied using the absorption behaviors. Furthermore, cyclic voltammogram was used to determine HOMO/LUMO energy levels from their redox onset points. Measured energy levels of HOMO/LUMO were compared with computational calculation and discussed in details. Finally, the interaction type of metal ions binding was determined by Job's plot measurements.


The Department of Veterans Affairs may be in total violation of Office of Special Counsel (OSC) policy not to use monitoring technologies to retaliate against whistleblowers.

The Washington Examiner reported last week that the department has maintained a secret list of whistleblowers, whose emails are all being covertly forwarded to the office of Robert McDonald, the Secretary of the VA, for observation.

The Office of Special Counsel, an agency which investigates federal government whistleblower complaints, anticipated this practice of spying all the way back in 2012 and instated a policy to nip it in the bud.

“We strongly urge executive departments and agencies (agencies) to evaluate their monitoring policies and practices, and take measures to ensure that these policies and practices do not interfere with or chill employees from using appropriate channels to disclose wrongdoing,” Carolyn Lerner, head of the OSC, wrote in the memo.

Lerner also reiterated the policy in an interview with The Washington Post a week after the OSC issued the memo, saying, “We are also doing our best to get the word out to all government agencies that whistleblower retaliation in any form is unacceptable and against the law. For example, I recently sent a memo to all federal agencies explaining that it is retaliatory and unlawful to monitor the communications of an employee because that employee has engaged in whistleblowing.”

The reason targeting with monitoring technologies is dangerous is because it undermines the ability of whistleblowers to disclose serious problems in the federal government.

Further, Lerner also added that monitoring communication of VA employees with the OSC or the inspector general was highly suspect. But according to one whistleblower, after he reached out to Congress and met with congressional staff, he was immediately placed on leave without pay.

In other words, that memo does not appear to have dissuaded the VA. The list of monitored whistleblowers was labeled “Sec Divert Internal.” Officials at the department immediately scrambled for a response, stating that the reason the office was reading all whistleblower emails was so that the department could more readily address their concerns.

“As part of the Secretary’s commitment to changing the culture of VA to provide better customer service to Veterans and to empower employees, because it is their work that makes VA better for our veterans, certain emails received by the secretary and deputy are immediately forwarded to VA’s client relations team for priority review and quick action,” a VA spokesperson told The Washington Examiner.

Whistleblowers didn’t buy the department’s explanation for a second.

Follow Jonah Bennett on Twitter

Send tips to jonah@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


Q:

Return a JSON result after deleting an item

I'm developing a web application with MVC 3 and want to return a message to the user after he has deleted an item successfully.
MyWallController method looks like this:
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult DeleteAlbum(Guid albumId)
{
    try
    {
        this.albumService.DeleteAlbum(albumId);
        return Json(new { success = true, msg = "Album successfully deleted" }, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
    }
    catch (FPSException e)
    {
        return Json(new { success = false, msg = e.Message });
    }
    catch (Exception)
    {
        throw new HttpException(500, "Error while deleting album");
    }
}

The link:
Delete

The JavaScript:
$(function () {
    $(document).on('click', '.open-DeleteAlbumDialog', function () {
    var answer = confirm('Are you sure you want to delete this album?')
    if (answer) {
        $.post(this.href, function (data) {
            if (data.success) {
                // do something
            } else {
                // do something else
            }
        });
    }
    else return false;
});

However the function defined inside post is never called and what I get is a "the resource cannot be found". But the item has been deleted successfully.
All kinds of help is appreciated.

A:

Your link is still working. You need to preventDefault:
$(function () {
    $(document).on('click', '.open-DeleteAlbumDialog', function (e) {
    e.preventDefault();
    var answer = confirm('Are you sure you want to delete this album?')
    if (answer) {
        $.post(this.href, function (data) {
            if (data.success) {
                // do something
            } else {
                // do something else
            }
        });
    }
});


All God's children need traveling shoes
Drive your problems from here
All good people read good books
Now your conscience is clear
I hear you talk girl
Now your conscience is clear

In the morning I wipe my brow
Wipe the miles away
I like to think I can be so willed
And never do what you say
I'll never hear you
And never do what you say

Look my eyes are just holograms
Look your love has drawn red from my hands
From my hands you know you'll never be
More than twist in my sobriety
More than twist in my sobriety
More than twist in my sobriety

We just poked a little empty pie
For the fun people had at night
Late at night don't need hostility
Timid smile and pause to free

I don't care about their different thoughts
Different thoughts are good for me
Up in arms and chaste and whole
All God's children took their toll

Look my eyes are just holograms
Look your love has drawn red from my hands
From my hands you know you'll never be
More than twist in my sobriety
More than twist in my sobriety
More than twist in my sobriety

Cup of tea, take time to think, yea
Time to risk a life, a life, a life
Sweet and handsome
Soft and porky
You pig out 'til you've seen the light
Pig out 'til you've seen the light

Half the people read the papers
Read them good and well
Pretty people, nervous people
People have got to sell
News you have to sell

Look my eyes are just holograms
Look your love has drawn red from my hands
From my hands you know you'll never be
More than twist in my sobriety
More than twist in my sobriety

Look my eyes are just holograms
Look your love has drawn red from my hands
From my hands you know you'll never be
More than twist in my sobriety
More than twist in my sobriety
More than twist in my sobriety


Spatial scale of autocorrelation of assemblages of benthic invertebrates in two upland rivers in South-Eastern Australia and its implications for biomonitoring and impact assessment in streams.
Spatial autocorrelation in ecological systems is a critical issue for monitoring (and a general understanding of ecological dynamics) yet there are very few data available, especially for riverine systems. Here, we report here on assemblage-level autocorrelation in the benthic-invertebrate assemblages of riffles in two adjacent, relatively pristine rivers in south-eastern Victoria, Australia (40-km reaches of the Wellington [surveys in summers of 1996 and 1997] and Wonnangatta Rivers [survey in summer of 1996 only], with 16 sites in each river). We found that analyses were similar if the data were resolved to family or to species level. Spatial autocorrelation was assessed by using Mantel-tests for the data partitioned into different sets of spatial separations of survey sites (e.g. 0-6 km, 6-12 km, etc.). We found strong small-scale (< or =6 km) autocorrelation in the Wellington River, which is consistent with known dispersal abilities of many aquatic invertebrates. Surprisingly, there were strong negative correlations at longer distance classes for the Wellington River in one of the two summers (20-40 km) and the Wonnangatta River (12-20 km). That two largely unimpacted, adjacent rivers should have such different autocorrelation patterns suggests that impact assessment cannot assume dependence or independence of sites a priori. We discuss the implications of these results for use of "reference" sites to assess impacts at nominally affected sites.


Last week, the American Humanist Association released the results of a poll they conducted about the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge. The poll showed that when people are told about the history of the phrase — how it was added to the Pledge in 1954 during the Cold War — more than a third of respondents supported removing the phrase.

The AHA is following up those results today with what’s sure to be a controversial national campaign. They’re urging students to remain seated during daily recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance to show solidarity with the non-religious people who are being discriminated against — and that means educating everyone about the history of “Under God.” The campaign includes bus ads in Washington, D.C. and New York City as well as 15-second ads on YouTube:

In addition to teaching people about when “Under God” was added to the Pledge, the AHA also wants to remind students that the Supreme Court, in the 1943 case West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, made clear that no one can be punished for staying seated during the Pledge.

“Through the daily Pledge exercise, our public schools are defining patriotism by promoting god-belief while stigmatizing atheist and humanist children,” said David Niose, legal director of the American Humanist Association’s Appignani Humanist Legal Center. “This violates the principles of equal rights and nondiscrimination, which is why we are currently challenging ‘under God’ in the Pledge with a lawsuit in New Jersey.”

You may recall that Niose lost a recent case in Massachusetts in which he was trying to get the state Supreme Court to declare the Pledge unconstitutional for reasons of discrimination. They’re trying it once again, as he said, in New Jersey.

The big question regarding their campaign is whether any students will refuse to stand as a result of it. You can be fully educated about the history of the Pledge and know your rights, and that still may not be enough for students to take on the role of class lightning rod. Hell, if I were in their shoes, I’m not sure if I’d want to do it. But it would be an amazing thing to see groups of students — including religious ones — remain seated in solidarity with atheists so that one of their classmates isn’t singled out.

The AHA is also offering legal resources to students who are punished in any way for remaining seated.

In case you think that never happens, I would point you to a student in New York who was punished for not standing for the Pledge earlier this year. It happened in 2012 in New Jersey, too.

On the flip side, when a couple of elementary school students remain seated last year, one of them convinced most of her classmates to join her.

Let’s see more brave students lead a similar charge.


Great fit. Stays put. Moves with me through out the day. Also great for jogging. Does not keep moisture next to my body. Great day time control of tummy and thighs. Almost forget I am wearing it because it feels so good.

I wear tights every day in the winter and these are a total game-changer for me!
Great stretch -- the fibers are very resilient and I don't feel like I am going to rip or put a hole in the fabric. The waistband construction is the best I've ever encountered: the very wide, soft waistband does not cut or dig in, but also does an impeccable job keeping the tights in place. Unlike every other pair of tights I've ever owned, with this pair I do not need to adjust or pull them back up throughout the day.

I have had numerous surgeries on my midsection and these are the first pantyhose that does not hurt the scars and does not roll down to make a huge muffin top! Also very comfortable in the legs all day long.

These are lovely... thankfully, I ordered two sizes.. the measurement chart said I was an "easy" medium, but thank God, I ordered a medium AND a TALL as I live in Ireland. I first tried the large (Tall) on and was very disappointed as to how small they were. I will never get into the mediums (sadly). I am an American size 8-10 and the tall is STILL super tight on me. Not sure I'll be able to tolerate them all day, but will let you know.

I'm new to Berkshire and experimenting with different styles. While I'm happy with all of them, I'm not sure of the point of 'no waistband'. This isn't meant as a criticism, the hose are terrific, but for me the no waistband style is neither better nor worse than the other Firm All the Way styles.
The best benefit to me of all the Firm styles is their comfortable firming without too much constriction - and they are easy to put on.

I ordered the black - they are a high quality denim that you can wear as "leggings" or just skinny jeans - great fit and very comfortable. Absolutely love the side zipper. I am going to order another pair in a different color.

This tank does exactly what it says it does; it shapes and smoothes your abdomen really nicely. It doesn't cut you off anywhere and it also doesn't smash 'the girls'. Quality is nice and not too heavy. I wish the length was just a tad longer than hip length (i'm 5"6 and 135 lbs), but other than that it's a nice piece and a great (all purpose) slimming and layering tank.

I would wear this everyday if I could. This is the perfect length for layering. I love it and it doesn't feel constricting or too tight. I even wear it to bed. I subtracted 1 star because the pricing is ridiculously expensive. As others have mentioned, it is very lightweight and I'm sure there will be limited mileage on it with frequent use but I still love it.
I am 5'6, curvy, purchased a medium.

I am a size 2x and no shape product in this world will flatten my stomach, But I do love this product. It firms and shapes my torso and I do feel much more confident in light weight clothing. I have 2 Yummy Tummy tanks in nude and have no regret about ordering them. I like the way they come down long and stay tucked in.

This fits great and is comfortable to wear. My old one had softer and less elastic fabric around bust and around the bottom. At first I was concerned about this. I thought it would constrict across the bust, but it doesn't. It stays in place and does not ride up. Overall pleased with it

I am a size 2x and no shape product in this world will flatten my stomach, But I do love this product. It firms and shapes my torso and I do feel much more confident in light weight clothing. I have 2 Yummy Tummy tanks in nude and have no regret about ordering them. I like the way they come down long and stay tucked in.

Our apologies...We are experiencing a technical issue with this page. Please call us at 1.877.728.9272, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and we'll gladly help you complete your order.

If you prefer, you may also email us at info@barenecessities.com. Please include: Your name, where on our site you received the error, any questions you may have, and how and when you'd like us to contact you. Our business hours are Monday-Sunday 8am-6pm EST.

Our apologies...We are experiencing a technical issue with this page. Please call us at 1.877.728.9272, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and we'll gladly help you complete your order.

If you prefer, you may also email us at info@barenecessities.com. Please include: Your name, where on our site you received the error, any questions you may have, and how and when you'd like us to contact you. Our business hours are Monday-Sunday 8am-6pm EST.


Long Tapes

LONG TAPES

MEASURING TAPES THAT ARE MEANT TO LAST

Since our inception, Keson long tapes have met the highest standards of accuracy and durability. They resist breakage and damage under the toughest field conditions. We understand that these tapes are critical to your profession. That’s something we take very seriously, which is why we supply the best possible tapes we can.

We have a variety of housing types; stainless steel, durable polycarbonate, 3X high speed rewind, or standard 1x rewind. Double riveted or screwed cases, metal reinforced handles and shovel-style rubber grips are standard on all of our offerings.

Keson offers the widest selection of blades. Units, attachments, and zero points vary because of the precise needs of our many customers.


Periodic table of the elements

From Conservapedia

The periodic table of the elements is a diagrammatic tool to illustrate the scientific theory of periodicity in chemistry, in which the elements have similar properties based on their position on the table. For example, the elements on the far left of the table (Group one) all demonstrate similar properties, such as softness and high reactivity. The table has a lot of predictive power, although there are many exceptions to the periodic properties.

The modern periodic table was first developed by RussianchemistDimitri Mendeleev. Its layout accurately arranges elements by their electron configuration, atomic number, and chemical properties. Using the structure he created, Mendeleev predicted the existence and properties of several yet-undiscovered elements; when those elements were discovered, his estimates proved to be quite accurate, vindicating his theory which had previously been criticized. Other chemists, such as Antione Lavoisier, and Johann Wolfgang Döbereiner had attempted to create periodic tables by grouping similar elements, but Mendeleev was successful because he left empty spaces for undiscovered, but predicted elements.

Organization

Elements in the periodic table are ordered by number of protons, and rows are arranged by number of electrons in their outermost electron shell. Since farther out shells have more orbitals, this means that there will be more elements in the lower rows of the periodic table than in the higher rows. For example, for principal quantum numbern=1, there is only one s-orbital available, which will fit only two electrons (due to the Pauli exclusion principle, which states that no two electrons can have the same quantum numbers). Therefore, only two elements can be in the top row of the periodic table. As the principal quantum number increases, the number of electrons per shell rises, so the farther-down rows hold more elements.

The group number tells how many electrons an element has in its outermost electron shell. For example, every element in group 8A, the noble gases, has its outermost electron shell completely full.

External Links

Interactive Periodic Table You've seen it before, but what do all those symbols and numbers really mean? You're about to find out.


3 - 63 + 1 + 3*c - 1 + (-4 + 2 + 1)*(0*c + 4*c - 2*c) - c + 4*c - 2*c - 3 + 3 - 2*c - c + 3 - 3 + c + 0*c - 3*c.
-5*c - 16
Expand (2 - 36*h - 2 + (-5 - 4 + 4)*(-1 + 2*h + 1))*(0 + 0 - 2*h**2).
92*h**3
Expand (-478 - 438 + 260 - 116)*(n**4 - n**5 - n**4).
772*n**5
Expand (-n - n + 7*n)*(-9 - 7*n + 9) + 6*n**2 + 4*n**2 - 5*n**2.
-30*n**2
Expand (25 + 17*r - 25)*(0 - 4 + 2) - 33 - 33 - 41*r + 66.
-75*r
Expand (5*s + 0*s - s)*(-1 - 2*s + 1) - 7*s**2 - 6*s**2 - 1 - s**2.
-22*s**2 - 1
Expand (0 + 2 + 0)*(14*a**5 - 7*a**5 - a**5).
12*a**5
Expand (-3 - t**3 + 3)*((2*t + 4 - 4)*(-4 + 2 + 0) - t + t + 2*t + (-5 + 2 + 5)*(18 - 18 - 27*t) + 3*t - 4*t - t).
58*t**4
Expand (-21 + 21 + 35*a**2)*(-4*a**3 - 4*a**3 + 6*a**3).
-70*a**5
Expand 14*v**2 - v**2 - 2066*v + 2070*v + 4*v**2 - 7*v**2 + 4*v**2 + (2*v + 4*v - 5*v)*(-2*v + 4*v - 3*v) + 2*v**2 + 2 - 2.
15*v**2 + 4*v
Expand (2 - 2 + 5)*(0*z + 0*z + 2*z + (3*z + 2*z + 0*z)*(23 + 27 - 21)).
735*z
Expand y**3 + 0*y + 0*y - 3*y**2 + 3*y**2 - 4*y**3 + (0*y**2 + 0*y**2 - y**2)*(-3*y + 5*y - y) + 6*y**3 - 12*y**3 - 14*y**3.
-24*y**3
Expand -11*g - 5*g + 9*g + (3 - 2 + 1)*(-3*g + 2*g + 3*g) + g - 1 + 1 + 43 - 43 + 10*g.
8*g
Expand (-3 - 1 + 3)*(-1 - b + 1) + 299*b + 601*b - 1634*b.
-733*b
Expand (-4*y + 5*y - 4*y)*(21 - 99 + 241).
-489*y
Expand ((4*f - 3*f + f)*(2 + 1 - 1) + 0 - f + 0)*(-f**2 + 3*f**2 + 0*f**2) - 782*f + 782*f - 950*f**3.
-944*f**3
Expand -4*b**3 + 4*b**3 - b**3 + (52*b**2 - 14*b**2 + 68*b**2)*(b + 0 + 0).
105*b**3
Expand 7*l + 2*l**2 - 4*l + l + (-3 - 2 + 2)*(-6*l**2 - 2*l**2 + l**2).
23*l**2 + 4*l
Expand (1 + 4 - 3)*(-2*f + 1 - 1) + 3 - 11*f - 3 + (2*f + f - 2*f)*(3 + 1 - 6) + (-3 + 1 + 1)*(0*f - 2*f + 0*f).
-15*f
Expand (3 - 2*l - 3)*(5 - 3 - 4)*(7 + 5 - 1)*(-2 - 2*l**2 + 2).
-88*l**3
Expand (-2*b + 3*b + b)*(2*b - 2 + 0*b - 2)*(-2*b - 13 + 13).
-8*b**3 + 16*b**2
Expand (-2*l + 4*l - l)*(-l + 0 + 0) + 10*l**2 - 12*l**2 + 3*l**2 + 31*l**2.
31*l**2
Expand (40*s**2 + 34*s**2 - 29*s**2)*(-3*s**2 + s**2 + s**2) + (-3*s - 2*s**2 + 3*s)*(0 + 5 - 2*s**2 - 10).
-41*s**4 + 10*s**2
Expand -44*f**2 + 8*f**2 + f**2 + (-2*f + 0*f + 0*f)*(-2*f + f + 0*f) - 1 + 1 - f**2 + 3 + 3*f**2 - 3.
-31*f**2
Expand (-60*k - 71*k + 36*k)*((4 - 4 - 2*k)*(5 - 2*k - 5) + (3 - 4 - 1)*(-5*k + 4*k + 0*k)*(-2*k + 0*k + 3*k)).
-570*k**3
Expand (-20*f**4 + 37*f - 36*f - 33*f**4)*(-4*f + 3*f + 3*f).
-106*f**5 + 2*f**2
Expand (5*h**3 + 9*h**3 - 3*h**3)*(14521*h**2 + 1 + 0 - 14474*h**2).
517*h**5 + 11*h**3
Expand (1 + 5 - 4)*(58*d + 53*d - 731 - 110*d).
2*d - 1462
Expand (3*n**3 - n**3 - n**3 + (n**2 - 4*n**2 + 2*n**2)*(0 + n + 0) + n**2 - n**2 + 2*n**3 + 0*n**3 + 0*n**3 + 2*n**3 - 98*n**3 + 2417*n - 2417*n)*(-4 + 2 - 1).
282*n**3
Expand (-2*a**4 - a**2 + a**2)*(4*a + 0*a + 0*a) - a**2 + a**5 + a**2 + (-3*a**2 + a**3 + 3*a**2)*(-3*a**2 + 2*a**2 - 2*a**2).
-10*a**5
Expand (-6*x**2 + 13*x**2 + 81*x**2 + (-x + 2*x + x)*(2 - 2 + 2*x) - 5*x**2 - x**2 + 4*x**2)*(9*x - 3*x - 2*x).
360*x**3
Expand -2*r - 4 + 4 + (1 - 3 + 3)*(-2*r - r + 4*r) + 1 - 1 + 2*r - 42*r - 59*r + 169*r.
69*r
Expand -5*m**3 + 4*m**3 - 2*m**3 + (-4*m**2 + 2*m**2 - 7*m**2)*(-16*m + 3*m + 2*m).
96*m**3
Expand (-13 + 15*b**3 + 13)*(3*b + 5*b - 2*b).
90*b**4
Expand j**3 + 0*j**3 + 4*j**3 + (3*j**2 + 0 - 2 + 0)*((4 + 0 - 2)*(1 - 3 + 1) - 4 + 3 - 1 - 2 - 3 + 3)*(-2*j + j + 0*j).
23*j**3 - 12*j
Expand (-8 - 98 + 38 - 45)*(t**4 + t**4 - t**4).
-113*t**4
Expand (-8 - 2*m**2 + 8)*(3*m - 2*m**3 - 3*m)*(126 - 164 + 90).
208*m**5
Expand (-5*u + 0*u + 4*u)*(0 + 3 - 2 - 3 + 3 - 1 + (-4 + 5 - 3)*(-5 - 1 + 4)) - 2 + 2 - 2*u.
-6*u
Expand 2*k - 7 + 7 + (-4 + 5 - 3)*(-2*k + 4 - 4) + (-3 - 2 - 2)*(-3*k + 5*k + 6*k).
-50*k
Expand (1 - 1 - x)*(-2*x**2 + 2 - 2) - 1 - x**3 + 1 - x**2 - 100 - 4*x**3 + 100.
-3*x**3 - x**2
Expand ((2 - 4 + 3)*(1 - 2 + 0) - 1 + 7 - 1)*(-1 + 0 - 4)*(6*j + 5*j - 2*j).
-180*j
Expand (2*v + 2 - 2)*(1 + v - 1)*(-71 + 18 - 90).
-286*v**2
Expand (0*p + 0*p + p)*(5 - 2*p - 5 + 0*p - 4*p + 3*p + 0*p + 3*p - p + (2 + 2 - 2)*(1 - 1 + 2*p) + 17*p - 22 + 22).
20*p**2
Expand (-s - 5*s - s)*(-4*s**4 + 4*s**4 - 2*s**4) + 2*s**5 - 2*s**5 - s**5.
13*s**5
Expand (2 - 2 - l)*(l**3 - 2*l**3 - 2*l**3) + (1 + 79*l - 74*l + 0)*(3*l**3 - 2*l**3 - 3*l**3).
-7*l**4 - 2*l**3
Expand -q**5 - q + q + (-10*q - 6 + 6 + (2 - 1 - 2)*(0 + 0 + q))*((15*q - 3*q**2 - 15*q)*(q**2 + q**2 - 4*q**2) + q**4 + 3*q**4 - 2*q**4).
-89*q**5
Expand 430*n**5 + 19053*n**4 - 19053*n**4 + 2*n**5 + n**5 - n**5 - n**5 + 0*n**5 + 0*n**5 + (-6*n**4 + 4*n**4 + 0*n**4)*(-4*n + 5*n - 3*n).
435*n**5
Expand -h - 4*h + 4*h - 2 - 2*h + 2 - 3 + 3 + h + (-1 - 3 + 2)*(h + 4*h - 3*h) + 0*h - 2*h - 4*h + 4*h + 2*h + 7*h.
h
Expand (1 - 4 + 6)*(5*u**2 - 7536 + 7536 - 26*u).
15*u**2 - 78*u
Expand (-17*i + 2*i - 13*i)*(-3*i - 4 + 4 + (-2 + 5 - 4)*(-i + 2*i - 3*i))*(-i**3 - i**3 + i**3).
-28*i**5
Expand (19*h**4 - 39*h**4 - 38*h**4)*(-8 + 0 + 0).
464*h**4
Expand -p**4 - 4*p**4 + 0*p**4 + (10*p**4 + 9*p**4 - 10*p**4)*(4 + 4 - 4).
31*p**4
Expand (1 - 1 + 6*a)*(4*a**2 - 4*a**2 + 9*a**3)*(-3*a + a - 1 + 0).
-108*a**5 - 54*a**4
Expand -484*b**3 + 40*b**3 + 6*b - 6*b + (3*b - b - 3*b)*(3*b**2 - 3*b**2 - b**2) - b**2 + b**2 + b**3.
-442*b**3
Expand (-12*d + 46*d - 13*d)*(-4 - 4*d**2 + 4).
-84*d**3
Expand -143*n + 55282 - 55282 + (-1 + 0 + 0)*(3*n - 4*n - n).
-141*n
Expand 206*b**4 - 414 + 414 + 2 - 2 - 2*b**4 + 2*b**4 + 0*b**2 + 0*b**2 - 2*b**4 + 3*b**3 - 3*b**3 + (0 + 0 - b**2)*(6*b**2 - 3*b**2 - b**2).
202*b**4
Expand (2*d**2 + d**2 - 1 + d**2)*(1 - d - 1)*(54 - 14*d - 54).
56*d**4 - 14*d**2
Expand (-2 - 1 + 1)*((8*w**3 + 6 - 6)*(-4 + 4 + 8*w) - 3*w**4 + 4*w**4 - 2*w**4 + (-w + 4*w - 5*w)*(2*w**3 - 3*w**3 - w**3)).
-134*w**4
Expand -5*i + 4*i + 0*i + 0*i + 0*i - 4*i + (3*i - 3*i + 2*i)*(3 + 1 - 3) + i + 0*i - 3*i - 3 - 5*i + 8 - 13.
-10*i - 8
Expand 3*j**2 + 25 - 25 - 2*j**2 + j**2 - j**2 + (4*j - 3*j - 2*j)*(-3*j + 3*j - 2*j) + 2*j**2 + 2*j - 2*j + 15*j - 15*j - 3*j**2.
2*j**2
Expand (3*n + 3*n - 4*n)*(3 + 1 - 3 + (-3 + 6 - 1)*(0 - 5 + 3) + 19 - 1 - 4 - 1 - 1 + 4 + (-1 - 2 + 4)*(-6 + 2 + 2) + 1 - 4 + 2).
20*n
Expand 3*b**3 - b**3 + 0*b**3 + (-2*b**2 + 7*b**2 - 3*b**2)*(-2*b + b + 3*b) - 59 + 59 - 12*b**3.
-6*b**3
Expand (-3041*t**2 - 2758*t**2 + 6275*t**2 + t - t - 3*t**2 + (0*t + 4*t - 6*t)*(t + 0*t + 0*t))*(t**2 - 3*t**2 + 4*t**2).
942*t**4
Expand (4*a**2 - 3*a**2 - 3*a**2 + (a - 2*a + 0*a)*(-a - 1 + 1))*(192*a - 525*a + 217*a)*(-2 + 3 + 0).
116*a**3
Expand (-283*v**3 - 696*v**3 + 114*v**3 - 34*v**3 + 2)*(2*v - v - 3*v).
1798*v**4 - 4*v
Expand (0 + 0 + 3*a)*(20*a - a - 15*a - 112 - 5*a).
-3*a**2 - 336*a
Expand (-13 + 8 + 7)*(-4 + 0 + 5)*(-j**2 + 4*j**2 + 0*j**2).
6*j**2
Expand (-1 + 0 + 0)*(c**3 + 0*c**3 + 0*c**3)*(-7 - c**2 + 10 + 9).
c**5 - 12*c**3
Expand (3 - 3 - 2*b)*(-1314 + 165 - 422 - 765 - 2015).
8702*b
Expand (2 - 2 + i)*(-4 + 4 - 8*i)*(2 - 2 + 13)*(2*i**3 + i**3 - i**3).
-208*i**5
Expand -n + 0 + 0 + (-4 + 0 + 2)*(-22*n - 69 + 69 + (-1 + 4 - 4)*(-3*n + 0 + 0)).
37*n
Expand -24*l**2 - 9*l**3 + 24*l**2 + (6*l - 3*l - 2*l)*(-43*l + 43*l - 9*l**2).
-18*l**3
Expand ((-3 + 1 + 0)*(3*b - 3*b + 2*b) + 4*b - 4*b + b)*(26*b - 13 - 17*b - 15*b).
18*b**2 + 39*b
Expand t - 3*t + 3*t + (-48 + 48 + 26*t)*(1 - 3 + 0) + (-6*t + t + 3*t)*(-3 - 2 + 3).
-47*t
Expand -1 + n + 1 + 27 - 15*n - 27 + (2*n - 3*n - n)*(-1 - 2 + 2) + 1 - 1 + n.
-11*n
Expand (-h + 4 - 4)*(531 - 531 + 219*h).
-219*h**2
Expand (17*c**2 - 213 + 432 + 12*c - 217)*(1 - 1 + 3*c**2).
51*c**4 + 36*c**3 + 6*c**2
Expand (l - l + 2*l)*(12*l**2 - 15*l**2 + 10*l**2) + (2*l + 14 - 14)*(-4*l**2 + 0*l**2 + 3*l**2).
12*l**3
Expand (-90 + 26 - 28)*(12*a - 93 + 93).
-1104*a
Expand (2 - 2 - 3)*(1 + 2 - 5)*(4 - 4 - 2*p) + (-2*p - 4 + 4)*(-1 + 0 + 2) - 41*p + 23*p - 27*p.
-59*p
Expand (5*q + 13*q - 6*q)*(-4 + 3 + 0)*(6 - 4 - 5)*(0*q - q + 0*q).
-36*q**2
Expand (-238*r + 12*r**3 + 238*r)*(-2 + r + 2)*(0 - 2 + 3)*(-2 + 9 - 2) - 2*r**4 + r**4 + 9*r**4.
68*r**4
Expand (0*p**5 - 2*p**5 - p**5 + (-4*p**3 + p**3 + 2*p**3)*(3*p**2 + 3*p**2 - 5*p**2))*(1 - 2 + 3)*(2 - 3 - 2)*(0 + 4 - 5).
-24*p**5
Expand (i - 7*i + i)*(-1 - 107*i + 374*i - 176*i).
-455*i**2 + 5*i
Expand (17*z + 11*z - 7*z)*(-z + 3*z + 0*z)*(0 - 2 + 1).
-42*z**2
Expand (2*l + 0 + 0)*(-6*l + 4*l + 0*l) - 2*l**2 + 733523*l + 30*l**2 - 733516