Political Junkie column: Betty Ford, Geraldine Ferraro -- A list of those in the political world who passed in 2011. Source: http://twitter.com/kenrudin/statuses/151644634181926912
ali fedotowsky ali fedotowsky krill oil krill oil black friday 2011 rhodium uppity
Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv
Ultra-Orthodox leader calls for boycott of IDF, college programs
Rabbi Elyashiv's letter published on the front page of Yated Neeman, at the height of the tensions and conflicts going on in Bet Shemesh.
By Yair Ettinger ? Ha?aretzThe most senior of Haredi rabbis has called on his followers to boycott all programs set up for them in education, national and military service.
In a letter published on Tuesday and described as "historic, of incredible significance for now and future generations" by his followers, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv - who is considered the leader of the Lithuanian non-Hasidic faction of Ashkenazi ultra-Orthodox Jews - called for a total boycott of frameworks, such as the programs that enable Haredim to serve in separate army units or learn a profession in the IDF, and the colleges where thousands of ultra-Orthodox study. He said such programs are subjugated to the control and culture of those who have "thrown off the burden [of the commandments]."
Rabbi Elyashiv's letter was published on the front page of his newspaper, Yated Neeman. The letter was published at the height of the tensions and conflicts going on in Bet Shemesh. On Monday, the main headline in the paper referred to a "Campaign of planned incitement against the Haredi community," and on Tuesday the dramatic letter was intended to raise the barriers between the Haredi camp and the outside world.
"We must protest and warn of all sorts of trends from outside to harm the pure cruse of oil, who found 'special frameworks for Haredim,' which will be under their full control and spirit," he wrote.
Writing about the Haredi colleges founded in recent years, Elyashiv warned they will "bring in foreign ambitions absorbed from the outside, and their goal is to bring a change in the spirit and essence of the Haredi public, and act to introduce all sorts of other aspirations, national and enlightenment which our forefathers did not know; and to integrate and connect them with the nonreligious life and the culture of evil people." He called on his followers to perform the "will of our heavenly father" and walk only in the path of tradition.
Here's more of the letter:
?The secret and foundation to the survival of Torah and of those who fear G-d and live a life of Torah is absolute separation from the world of the secular, who have thrown off the yoke of Torah. As such we must protest and warn against all sorts of trends from the outside that seek to harm the pure oil of the hareidi institutions. These institutions must be under the control of the rabbis and must be guided by them, and must exclude all paths that lead to national service, secular studies, or the army, even if they assure a special framework for hareidi Jews. Such a framework will subject hareidi Jews to the control and culture of secular Jews who have thrown off the yoke of Torah. Thus they encourage all sorts of programs, academies, colleges, and the like which promise degrees, licenses, academic credentials, etc., intended to introduce goals and aspirations foreign to our way of life. This is in direct contradiction to the instructions of the the great rabbis of previous generations, who battled against all institutions that had these purposes, and removed them from the 'camp of Torah.' This is especially the case now, where the institutions make clear that their purpose is to change our ways of life, and to instill foreign aspirations ? nationalistic and academic ? that our forefathers never accepted, bringing us to make inappropriate connections with secular people, those of the 'culture of sinners.'?
Related Post: Haredi Leader Bans All Secular Studies, College, Apecial Haredi Army Programs.
national defense authorization act national defense authorization act clemson seven days in utopia seven days in utopia big 10 championship game big 10 championship game
CAIRO (Reuters) ? Egyptian activists have called a mass rally in Cairo on Friday against the army's handling of protests that killed 17 people and drew international criticism of the ruling generals.
Protesters who fought soldiers and police in the capital for five days until calm was restored this week want the ruling military council to cede power more swiftly than planned.
Some Egyptians, skeptical of the military's avowed commitment to democratic change, want a presidential vote as early as January 25, the first anniversary of the start of the uprising that ousted Hosni Mubarak, or at least much earlier than the mid-2012 handover now scheduled.
Students have called for Egyptians to join Friday's protest with a march from Cairo's Ain Shams university, two of whose students were among the 17 killed.
Those two deaths prompted sit-ins on Ain Shams campus, in front of the Defense Ministry and at other universities.
"The current predicament we have reached is a result of the army council's reluctance to play its role, its intentional foot-dragging, breaking its obligations and failing over the economy and security, putting the whole country on the edge of a huge crisis," said a statement signed by two dozen parties, youth movements and others calling for Friday's protest.
The April 6 movement, which played a lead role in galvanizing Egyptians to rise up against Mubarak, said the army's handling of the latest street protests showed it was seeking to "protect the previous regime."
BROTHERHOOD PARTY STAYS OFF STREETS
The Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), leading in Egypt's staggered parliamentary election and wary of derailing the vote that will secure its place in mainstream politics, said it would not join in.
The ultraconservative Salafist al-Nour Party said on its Facebook page however that it would take part.
Many activists accuse the Brotherhood and other Islamists of betraying the protest movement in order to secure their own positions in the emerging new power structure.
The FJP said on its Facebook page it would not participate although it said it was "the right of the Egyptian people to protest and demonstrate peacefully."
"The party emphasizes the need for the handover of power to civilians according to the will of the Egyptian people through free and fair elections ... in a stable environment," said Mohamed al-Katatni, a senior member of the FJP.
The comments indicated the Brotherhood was sticking to the army's timetable to hold a presidential vote in June. The Brotherhood has said bringing the vote forward could "create chaos."
The Brotherhood may want to shape the new constitution before a presidential poll, seeking greater powers for parliament and avoiding giving the president too many powers, analysts say.
They add that an earlier presidential election would not necessarily eliminate the military's dominance in a new civilian-governed state.
The military has survived Egypt's political upheaval intact and has vast economic and other interests, so any new president would need its support to maintain order.
"This is a transitional period where one party hands power to another. A deal must be struck. This is politics," a source close to the military said.
(Editing by Andrew Roche)
Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/africa/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20111222/wl_nm/us_egypt
day of the dead rocksmith blackbeard widespread panic widespread panic richard stallman richard stallman
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich jumps into a slight 30 - 25 percent lead over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney among Virginia Republicans in the race for the GOP presidential nomination, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. No other candidate tops 9 percent.
REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS............................ WhtBrnAgnEv TEA PARTY Tot Men Wom Con Mod Yes No Yes NoPerry 6% 6% 5% 7% 1% 8% 3% 5% 6% Gingrich 30 35 26 33 27 34 30 41 27 Romney 25 21 30 21 37 22 34 14 29 Bachmann 6 5 6 7 2 7 2 13 2 Santorum 3 2 3 4 1 5 1 4 3 Paul 9 11 8 7 14 6 10 9 9 Huntsman 4 3 4 3 6 2 6 - 5 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 1 2 1 - 1 - 1 - 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 1 1 1 1 2 1 - - 1 DK/NA 15 14 17 17 9 15 14 12 16
COLLEGE DEG AGE IN YEARS..... ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Yes No 18-49 50-64 65+ 100K
Perry 5% 6% 7% 3% 5% 7% 8% 2% Gingrich 25 34 27 34 36 36 27 29 Romney 29 23 21 24 34 24 25 27 Bachmann 7 5 5 9 3 2 8 7 Santorum 5 2 2 4 2 2 2 5 Paul 10 9 15 7 2 10 12 8 Huntsman 8 1 4 3 3 1 4 8 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 1 1 2 - 1 4 - - WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 1 1 - 1 1 - 1 1 DK/NA 8 19 16 14 13 16 12 12
REPUBLICANS........... Dec 21 Oct 11 Sep 15 2011 2011 2011 Perry 6 11 25 Gingrich 30 7 4 Romney 25 21 19 Bachmann 6 7 5 Santorum 3 2 2 Paul 9 9 8 Huntsman 4 1 1 Cain na 21 6 McCotter na na - Palin na na 7 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 1 - 1 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 1 1 2 DK/NA 15 20 20
REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS............................ WhtBrnAgnEv TEA PARTY Tot Men Wom Con Mod Yes No Yes NoGingrich 47% 53% 42% 51% 41% 51% 45% 65% 41% Romney 39 35 42 37 45 34 46 23 46 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 - 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 3 2 3 2 7 2 3 3 3 DK/NA 9 7 12 9 7 11 4 8 8
COLLEGE DEG AGE IN YEARS..... ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Yes No 18-49 50-64 65+ 100K
Gingrich 39% 52% 46% 54% 46% 50% 46% 47% Romney 49 33 38 33 44 38 35 43 SMONE ELSE(VOL) - 3 2 2 - 3 1 - WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 5 2 4 3 2 3 4 2 DK/NA 6 10 9 9 8 5 14 8
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkObama 42% 4% 87% 41% 42% 43% 32% 88% Romney 44 90 5 41 43 45 56 2 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 3 2 2 4 5 2 3 - WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 3 1 1 4 5 2 3 4 DK/NA 7 2 5 11 6 8 6 6
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Obama 43% 24% 24% 30% 18% 32% 43% 46% 39% Romney 47 62 64 55 70 54 39 42 49 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 3 4 2 3 3 3 4 4 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 3 3 4 4 5 3 5 2 3 DK/NA 4 7 5 9 5 7 9 6 7
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Obama 49% 39% 50% 43% 38% 44% Romney 41 45 34 41 51 45 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 3 4 3 3 3 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 3 4 3 3 3 4 DK/NA 5 9 10 9 4 5
Dec 21 Oct 11 Sep 15 2011 2011 2011 Obama 42 44 42 Romney 44 45 44 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 3 1 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 3 3 2 DK/NA 7 7 9
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkObama 46% 7% 90% 47% 45% 47% 36% 88% Gingrich 41 88 4 36 41 40 52 2 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 3 1 1 5 4 2 3 - WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 4 2 1 3 4 4 4 4 DK/NA 6 2 4 9 6 7 6 6
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Obama 47% 29% 27% 37% 21% 37% 47% 50% 43% Gingrich 43 57 60 51 66 50 36 40 46 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 3 4 5 2 5 4 6 4 3 DK/NA 4 7 6 7 5 7 10 4 6
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Obama 52% 43% 52% 46% 42% 51% Gingrich 38 43 33 42 45 41 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 3 3 4 2 3 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 3 4 4 3 4 3 DK/NA 4 8 8 7 6 3
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkFavorable 29% 62% 5% 25% 32% 27% 35% 8% Unfavorable 45 14 72 51 48 42 42 62 Hvn't hrd enough 23 21 22 22 17 28 21 27 REFUSED 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 3
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Favorable 31% 37% 43% 36% 48% 33% 20% 29% 34% Unfavorable 58 31 33 44 28 43 41 48 45 Hvn't hrd enough 10 29 21 18 22 21 35 21 18 REFUSED 1 3 2 1 2 3 4 1 3
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Favorable 28% 30% 18% 36% 32% 33% Unfavorable 59 37 43 40 46 55 Hvn't hrd enough 11 30 36 20 20 11 REFUSED 2 3 3 4 1 1
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkFavorable 37% 59% 19% 41% 39% 35% 46% 12% Unfavorable 27 15 37 28 33 22 25 36 Hvn't hrd enough 33 24 42 30 25 40 27 50 REFUSED 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 2
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Favorable 49% 43% 50% 49% 44% 51% 29% 34% 43% Unfavorable 34 19 20 30 22 24 30 31 22 Hvn't hrd enough 16 34 28 20 31 23 40 32 31 REFUSED 1 3 3 1 3 2 1 3 4
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Favorable 43% 33% 25% 35% 39% 49% Unfavorable 35 23 22 29 27 35 Hvn't hrd enough 19 41 53 33 32 15 REFUSED 3 3 1 3 2 2
Dec 21 Oct 11 2011 2011 Favorable 37 38 Unfavorable 27 29 Hvn't hrd enough 33 31 REFUSED 3 2
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkFavorable 45% 7% 84% 46% 43% 47% 35% 88% Unfavorable 47 88 10 46 51 44 59 2 Hvn't hrd enough 3 2 2 3 3 4 2 6 REFUSED 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 3
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Favorable 46% 27% 28% 37% 20% 38% 47% 47% 41% Unfavorable 50 65 65 60 75 55 43 46 52 Hvn't hrd enough 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 3 REFUSED 2 6 5 1 3 5 5 5 4
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Favorable 52% 41% 52% 44% 42% 49% Unfavorable 43 50 39 48 53 47 Hvn't hrd enough 2 4 5 4 1 2 REFUSED 3 5 4 4 4 2
Dec 21 Oct 11 2011 2011 Favorable 45 45 Unfavorable 47 49 Hvn't hrd enough 3 2 REFUSED 4 3
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkMore 30% 42% 29% 24% 36% 25% 28% 33% Less 23 15 21 29 22 25 24 17 About the same 46 42 50 47 41 50 47 50 DK/NA 1 1 - - 1 1 1 -
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
More 26% 30% 30% 24% 33% 24% 22% 32% 34% Less 25 23 22 27 21 27 28 24 19 About the same 48 46 47 50 46 48 49 43 46 DK/NA 1 - 1 - - 1 1 1 -
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
More 27% 32% 27% 28% 34% 30% Less 27 21 21 19 25 29 About the same 45 46 52 53 41 39 DK/NA 1 - - - - 1
Dec 21 Oct 11 2011 2011 More 30 35 Less 23 20 About the same 46 44 DK/NA 1 1
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkAllen 44% 88% 8% 40% 48% 41% 52% 12% Kaine 42 5 78 44 39 44 35 66 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 1 - 1 1 2 - 1 1 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 2 - 2 2 2 1 1 6 DK/NA(VOL) 12 7 12 12 9 14 11 15
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Allen 45% 58% 64% 50% 74% 47% 35% 42% 51% Kaine 43 30 26 34 18 38 49 40 37 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 2 - 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 DK/NA(VOL) 10 11 8 14 7 13 13 14 9
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Allen 40% 47% 36% 47% 47% 48% Kaine 48 38 47 40 38 45 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 1 1 1 2 1 - WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 1 2 1 2 2 1 DK/NA(VOL) 10 12 14 9 12 6
Dec 21 Oct 11 Sep 15 Jun 30 2011 2011 2011 2011 Allen 44 44 45 42 Kaine 42 45 44 43 SMONE ELSE(VOL) 1 1 1 2 WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) 2 1 1 2 DK/NA(VOL) 12 9 9 11
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkFavorable 41% 73% 15% 39% 47% 35% 47% 18% Unfavorable 27 5 46 34 30 25 25 35 Hvn't hrd enough 30 21 38 25 22 38 27 46 REFUSED 2 1 - 1 1 2 1 2
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Favorable 41% 52% 57% 48% 64% 43% 31% 43% 45% Unfavorable 34 18 20 28 15 27 16 30 31 Hvn't hrd enough 23 29 21 24 21 29 53 26 22 REFUSED 1 1 1 - - 1 - 1 2
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Favorable 39% 43% 31% 44% 44% 47% Unfavorable 35 22 23 29 25 33 Hvn't hrd enough 25 34 44 26 31 20 REFUSED 2 1 2 - 1 1
Dec 21 Oct 11 2011 2011 Favorable 41 45 Unfavorable 27 28 Hvn't hrd enough 30 26 REFUSED 2 1
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkFavorable 42% 21% 66% 44% 44% 41% 40% 56% Unfavorable 27 51 7 27 32 23 33 8 Hvn't hrd enough 28 26 27 27 21 34 26 34 REFUSED 2 1 - 2 2 2 1 2
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Favorable 47% 35% 33% 42% 25% 45% 45% 43% 40% Unfavorable 32 34 40 32 46 29 13 31 33 Hvn't hrd enough 20 30 26 25 27 25 42 26 24 REFUSED 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Favorable 50% 38% 35% 44% 42% 54% Unfavorable 28 27 22 28 28 30 Hvn't hrd enough 21 32 41 27 29 14 REFUSED 1 2 2 1 - 2
Dec 21 Oct 11 2011 2011 Favorable 42 47 Unfavorable 27 29 Hvn't hrd enough 28 23 REFUSED 2 1
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkApprove 42% 5% 82% 39% 38% 46% 31% 88% Disapprove 51 90 13 52 56 46 63 3 DK/NA 7 5 6 9 6 8 6 10
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Approve 40% 24% 24% 31% 16% 32% 41% 45% 40% Disapprove 56 68 70 65 79 60 46 51 54 DK/NA 4 8 6 5 5 7 13 5 6
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Approve 46% 40% 52% 42% 39% 42% Disapprove 49 52 38 50 56 54 DK/NA 5 8 10 8 5 4
Dec 21 Oct 11 Sep 15 Jun 30 2011 2011 2011 2011 Approve 42 45 40 48 Disapprove 51 52 54 48 DK/NA 7 3 6 4
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkYes/Deserves 41% 3% 85% 39% 37% 45% 30% 90% No/Does not 53 94 10 53 56 49 65 4 DK/NA 6 3 5 8 7 6 6 6
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Yes/Deserves 39% 23% 22% 28% 15% 31% 40% 45% 39% No/Does not 56 70 71 68 79 64 51 51 54 DK/NA 5 7 6 4 6 5 9 4 7
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Yes/Deserves 44% 39% 52% 44% 35% 41% No/Does not 50 54 41 51 58 55 DK/NA 6 6 7 5 7 4
Dec 21 Oct 11 Sep 15 Jun 30 2011 2011 2011 2011 Yes/Deserves 41 44 41 47 No/Does not 53 51 51 47 DK/NA 6 5 8 6
REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS............................ WhtBrnAgnEv TEA PARTY Tot Men Wom Con Mod Yes No Yes NoPerry 6% 8% 5% 8% 2% 10% 3% 5% 7% Gingrich 26 24 29 27 27 31 21 35 23 Romney 35 31 38 33 43 26 49 25 40 Bachmann 5 6 5 6 4 6 3 14 2 Santorum 2 4 1 3 1 3 2 5 1 Paul 12 17 6 12 12 11 13 7 13 Huntsman 3 4 2 2 4 2 3 1 3 DK/NA 11 7 14 9 8 11 7 8 11
COLLEGE DEG AGE IN YEARS..... ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Yes No 18-49 50-64 65+ 100K
Perry 3% 8% 8% 6% 5% 9% 6% 3% Gingrich 20 30 21 34 31 32 26 22 Romney 44 30 29 34 44 28 33 43 Bachmann 6 5 7 4 4 2 7 6 Santorum 2 2 4 1 2 3 2 3 Paul 12 12 20 6 2 12 13 12 Huntsman 6 1 3 2 3 1 1 7 DK/NA 7 12 10 12 8 12 11 4
REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS............................ WhtBrnAgnEv TEA PARTY Tot Men Wom Con Mod Yes No Yes NoPerry 4% 3% 4% 5% - 6% 1% 4% 4% Gingrich 49 52 47 52 48 49 50 60 46 Romney 18 15 21 15 25 16 24 13 21 Bachmann 3 3 3 4 1 5 1 7 1 Santorum 4 5 2 5 1 4 3 7 2 Paul 6 7 4 5 7 5 6 - 7 Huntsman 5 6 5 4 8 2 8 1 7 DK/NA 12 9 15 10 9 12 8 7 12
COLLEGE DEG AGE IN YEARS..... ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Yes No 18-49 50-64 65+ 100K
Perry 4% 4% 6% 2% 2% 6% 3% 2% Gingrich 46 51 43 57 55 50 48 53 Romney 22 16 16 16 22 17 16 22 Bachmann 2 3 5 1 1 2 6 1 Santorum 3 4 5 2 2 4 4 3 Paul 6 5 10 1 2 7 6 6 Huntsman 11 2 4 5 7 5 4 8 DK/NA 7 15 11 16 9 11 13 5
REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS............................ WhtBrnAgnEv TEA PARTY Tot Men Wom Con Mod Yes No Yes NoPerry 15% 16% 13% 18% 9% 17% 12% 15% 15% Gingrich 27 31 23 25 30 26 26 28 26 Romney 18 13 23 16 25 15 26 12 21 Bachmann 10 11 8 11 6 9 8 18 6 Santorum 4 6 2 5 - 5 4 9 2 Paul 7 10 5 8 6 9 8 5 8 Huntsman 3 3 3 2 5 1 4 - 4 DK/NA 18 11 24 15 19 18 12 13 17
COLLEGE DEG AGE IN YEARS..... ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Yes No 18-49 50-64 65+ 100K
Perry 16% 14% 20% 12% 10% 18% 12% 15% Gingrich 25 28 22 32 33 32 25 24 Romney 20 17 19 12 21 18 22 16 Bachmann 9 10 7 14 10 4 10 14 Santorum 5 3 4 4 3 5 1 6 Paul 8 7 11 4 3 9 7 7 Huntsman 6 1 2 3 3 1 3 4 DK/NA 11 21 15 19 17 14 20 15
REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS............................ WhtBrnAgnEv TEA PARTY Tot Men Wom Con Mod Yes No Yes NoPerry 5% 4% 5% 6% 1% 7% 2% 7% 4% Gingrich 48 53 42 51 43 51 47 59 44 Romney 25 22 29 22 39 21 32 14 31 Bachmann 3 2 3 4 - 3 - 9 1 Santorum 1 2 1 2 - 2 1 1 1 Paul 5 7 3 5 5 4 7 2 7 Huntsman 2 2 3 2 3 - 4 - 3 DK/NA 10 7 13 8 9 11 8 8 9
COLLEGE DEG AGE IN YEARS..... ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Yes No 18-49 50-64 65+ 100K
Perry 2% 6% 6% 3% 4% 7% 4% 2% Gingrich 44 50 43 54 53 52 47 47 Romney 32 22 23 23 30 23 27 27 Bachmann 3 3 4 3 - 2 4 3 Santorum 2 1 2 - 1 - - 4 Paul 8 4 9 3 - 8 3 7 Huntsman 6 1 2 2 3 1 3 4 DK/NA 5 13 11 10 8 8 12 7
REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS............................ WhtBrnAgnEv TEA PARTY Tot Men Wom Con Mod Yes No Yes NoPerry 9% 11% 7% 10% 8% 11% 8% 11% 9% Gingrich 38 38 38 40 38 44 36 46 35 Romney 29 26 33 29 34 23 38 19 35 Bachmann 4 4 3 5 1 4 1 11 1 Santorum 1 1 1 1 1 2 - 2 1 Paul 6 9 4 6 7 7 6 2 7 Huntsman 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 - 3 DK/NA 10 8 11 7 9 7 8 9 9
COLLEGE DEG AGE IN YEARS..... ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Yes No 18-49 50-64 65+ 100K
Perry 9% 10% 12% 6% 7% 11% 9% 8% Gingrich 36 40 34 46 41 41 37 36 Romney 35 27 25 27 37 28 30 30 Bachmann 3 4 4 5 1 3 6 3 Santorum 2 1 2 - 1 1 1 3 Paul 8 6 11 5 - 6 7 8 Huntsman 3 1 3 1 3 1 2 3 DK/NA 5 12 9 11 9 9 9 8
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkObama 41% 5% 80% 36% 39% 42% 27% 90% Romney 46 87 10 50 48 45 59 3 DK/NA 13 8 10 14 12 14 13 6
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Obama 37% 21% 20% 29% 14% 29% 44% 43% 37% Romney 54 63 65 64 71 58 40 45 51 DK/NA 10 15 15 7 15 12 17 12 12
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Obama 44% 38% 49% 41% 35% 41% Romney 47 46 36 43 52 52 DK/NA 9 15 14 16 14 7
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht BlkObama 43% 4% 85% 40% 43% 43% 31% 87% Gingrich 45 90 5 44 47 43 57 3 DK/NA 12 6 10 15 10 14 12 10
WHITE.................................. COLLEGE DEG BornAgnEvan AGE IN YRS....... Yes No Prot Cath Yes No 18-34 35-54 55+
Obama 42% 24% 23% 30% 16% 32% 43% 46% 41% Gingrich 49 62 64 59 72 55 39 44 49 DK/NA 9 14 12 11 12 13 19 10 11
COLLEGE DEG ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME... Yes No 100K
Obama 47% 40% 51% 43% 35% 47% Gingrich 43 46 35 45 49 47 DK/NA 9 14 14 12 15 6
Source: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x5822.xml?ReleaseID=1684
straight no chaser bcs standings bcs standings douglas fir jim boeheim jim boeheim bill of rights
Lenovo ThinkPad X130e delayed until February, early-adopting school districts to blame originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:20:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink | | Email this | CommentsSource: http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/20/lenovo-thinkpad-x130e-delayed-until-february-early-adopting-sch/
black friday ads 2011 pacquiao vs marquez pacquiao vs marquez junior dos santos junior dos santos evelyn lauder nfl standings
JERUSALEM?? Israel was wrapping up preparations to release 550 Palestinian prisoners late Sunday, in the second and final phase of a swap with Hamas militants that brought home an Israeli soldier after five years in captivity.
Under the Egyptian-brokered deal, Israel has agreed to exchange a total of 1,027 prisoners for Sgt. Gilad Schalit, who was captured by Gaza militants in June 2006. Schalit returned home in October when Israel freed the first batch of 477 prisoners. Sunday's release will complete the swap.
Sunday's release, expected to take place late Sunday, was not infused with the same drama as the first phase since the most significant players in the trade have already been released.
The Oct. 18 return of Schalit, who appeared pale and thin but otherwise healthy, was the first public sighting of him since his capture, and the plight of the young man had captured Israel's attention for years.
The prisoners freed in the first round included dozens of militants serving life sentences for involvement in deadly attacks. Their releases set off ecstatic celebration in the Palestinian territories, particularly Hamas' Gaza stronghold.
Under the terms of the deal, Israel chose the prisoners to be freed Sunday. Prison officials said most were serving light sentences or near the end of their terms, and only 41 were returning to Gaza.
More than 500 were being sent to the West Bank, which is ruled by Hamas' rival, President Mahmoud Abbas, and most of them were believed to be linked to Abbas' Fatah movement. Israel is interested in bolstering Abbas at a time when Islamic groups like Hamas are gaining in power throughout the Middle East. Hamas enjoyed a huge boost of popularity following the October release.
The Palestinians have been divided between two rival governments since Hamas expelled Abbas' forces and seized control of Gaza in 2007. Abbas, who favors a negotiated peace settlement with Israel, has governed only in the West Bank since then.
In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said the movement welcomed the release of all prisoners, regardless of their political affiliation. "We are proud of this great achievement," he said.
Israeli-Palestinian peace talks have been frozen for three years, in part because of continued Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. The Palestinians claim both territories, captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war, as parts of a future state.
On Sunday, Israel's Housing Ministry published advertisements seeking contractors to build some 1,000 apartments in both areas.
The apartments were approved long ago. Last month, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered construction to be sped up after the U.N. cultural agency UNESCO granted the Palestinians membership. Israel opposes Palestinian efforts to join the U.N. in the absence of a negotiated peace deal.
___
Ian Deitch contributed to this report.
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45714778/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/
loft old navy cyber monday best deals cyber monday best deals brownback brownback salvia
