Tag Archive 夜上海论坛

Home Alone! Yen’s Cast & Creative Team Are Ready for Off-Broadway

admin no comments

first_imgThe cast & creative team of ‘Yen'(Photo: Emilio Madrid-Kuser) Show Closed This production ended its run on March 4, 2017 Lucas Hedges Star Files Yencenter_img Manchester by the Sea standout Lucas Hedges as well as stage and screen stars Ari Graynor, Stefania LaVie Owen, Justice Smith and Jack DiFalco are poised for the American premiere of Anna Jordan’s Yen. Directed by Trip Cullman, Yen tells the story of Bobbie (Smith) and Hench (Hedges) whose days home alone are spent streaming porn, playing video games and watching the world go by; it’s chaos when they’re absent mother visits (which is rarely). However, when animal-loving neighbor Jenny (Owen) takes an interest in their dog Taliban, the boys discover a world far beyond what they know. Yen is scheduled to begin performances at MCC’s Lucille Lortel Theatre on January 12, 2017 and officially open on January 30. The limited engagement will run through February 19. Take a look at Broadway.com’s hot shot of the cast, scribe and director, and be sure to see the show! Related Shows View Commentslast_img read more

Court considers kids’right to representation

admin no comments

first_imgCourt considers kids’right to representation Court considers kids’ right to representation Jan Pudlow Associate Editor Children in juvenile court should not be allowed to waive their right to counsel and enter a plea without first talking to an attorney and understanding fully what rights they are giving up.That was the top priority of The Florida Bar Commission on the Legal Needs of Children, after three years of research and study. It was also recommended by both the Supreme Court’s Steering Committee on Family and Children in the Courts and the Juvenile Court Rules Committee, approved by the Bar Board of Governors, and endorsed by the Florida Public Defender Association.But in oral arguments June 10 on proposed amendment to Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.165, justices peppered lawyers with practical questions, including Justice Charles Wells’ attempt to get a handle on the fiscal impact it may have on public defenders who say they are willing to take on these added duties in juvenile court.“My concern is, I want to understand how this will work in real life,” Wells said.Gerard Glynn, executive director of Florida’s Children First! and a member of the Juvenile Rules Committee, described what he envisioned should happen at arraignment: The judge would ask the child whether he or she had talked to an attorney. If the child answers, “Yes,” the judge would inquire: “Whom did you speak with?” and probably go into a colloquy about what the child understood. If the child answers, “No,” the judge would ask the child to speak to the public defender already on duty in the courtroom.Justice Peggy Quince asked about determining whether the child is indigent to qualify for the public defender. And Justice Raoul Cantero asked whether a child’s family who is not indigent would be directed by the judge to hire an attorney.To the first question, Glynn answered that the public defender would simply be assigned to talk to the child for that limited purpose, not appointed for the whole case, so it should not be a problem. To the second question, Glynn answered that §985.203 deals with that issue.“It is common that a parent may refuse to want to hire an attorney. And the reason the child is entering this plea is because generally children don’t have money,” Glynn said. The statute gives the judge the authority to appoint a paid attorney to a non-indigent client and order the parents to pay for that attorney, he said.Justice Barbara Pariente asked why the Bar’s Commission on the Legal Needs of Children saw the need for this new rule.Glynn quoted the commission’s 2002 final report: “Alarming to many commissioners was that children entitled to representation in delinquency cases often waive that right.”But Glynn was not able to answer Justice Kenneth Bell’s question on how many children plead guilty or no contest to crimes they did not commit.There was a difference of opinion of whether this proposed rule would create a substantive right that should be addressed in changes to the statute by the legislature, rather than a procedural matter that could be addressed in a rule change by the court.Glynn argued that the right to counsel is created in the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and the rule would create a procedure so there are guarantees before that substantive right is waived.“The issue of why these procedures are necessary is because. . . we recognize there needs to be extra caution when we are dealing with children waiving their rights,” Glynn said.Ward Metzger, of Jacksonville, speaking on behalf of the Florida Public Defender Association, said: “Let me assure the court that, in fact, the public defenders do wholeheartedly support this rule and the concept behind the rule. We believe that it is crucial that children in the courtrooms of the state of Florida understand before they enter a plea, before they waive counsel, what it is in fact that they are giving up.”Wells asked whether the association had “done an analysis of how many more lawyers the public defender would need in order to provide this service? In other words, the fiscal impact?”Because public defenders are already present in juvenile courts, and many judges already make sure no child goes unrepresented, Metzger answered: “We believe at this point in time that there will not be a direct fiscal impact.”Jennifer Parker, general counsel for the Department of Juvenile Justice, spoke in her capacity as chair of the Juvenile Rules Committee, and presented the minority opinion that to mandate a child be represented by counsel confers a substantive right.Chief Justice Harry Lee Anstead asked whether DJJ objects when judges, such as those in Jacksonville, already follow the practice of appointing a lawyer for the child.“Absolutely not,” Parker answered. “Again, I am not really here for the department. But it would be the department’s position that every child be represented before they proceed. It is just our opinion that the statute needs to indicate that, not the rule.”Sixth Circuit Judge Lynn Tepper, a member of the Bar’s Commission on the Legal Needs of Children, spoke on behalf of the Supreme Court’s Steering Committee on Family and Children in the Courts, which voted 12 to 3 in favor of the proposed rule change.“Children have a right to counsel. Courts take waivers all the time,” Tepper said. “How we take that waiver is procedural. It is not conferring a right on a child. The right exists. It is to assure that the judges, and I believe it is frankly probably the majority of judges in this state who may not do what we do in Dade City or do what they do in Duval County, and have a child confer.”Tepper pointed out that there is already a fiscal impact with the status quo, noting that 35 cases have gone up on appeal regarding a child’s waiver of counsel. Thirty-three of those were reversed with the finding it was not a valid waiver of counsel, so those cases will have to be retried, she said.Chief Justice Harry Lee Anstead: “I take it that you see this as a very valuable quality control device?”“Absolutely,” Tepper said. “I’m concerned that I have children whose parents have the wrong motivation at heart. It is the children’s rights that are at issue. These children and these families are in crisis.”Justice Quince wondered what happens in “some jurisdiction where the public defender is not available or will not talk to children who are not indigent?” And even though Metzger assured the public defenders of the state are willing to take on the requirements of the new rule, Justice Wells reminded “but they don’t have a statutory obligation.”“With this rule, it will make it clear that they would need to be there,” Tepper answered. “Again, children can waive their right to counsel. This doesn’t mean that the public defender will be with the child through every stage of the proceedings. And it doesn’t mean that children whose families can afford an attorney will necessarily end up with a public defender at an adjudicatory hearing.”But it would mean that the judge must inquire whether the child had an opportunity to talk to a lawyer before entering a plea, she said.“It may be I have a child who is being prosecuted for domestic violence,” Tepper said. “The very parent being asked to pay for the attorney is the named victim. It is my policy, frankly, to appoint the public defender.”Justice Cantero asked: “Why don’t we just establish a rule that a certain colloquy needs to be undertaken, when the right to counsel is waived?”“I would refer you to the research and testimony of the Commission on the Legal Needs of Children that did consider these alternatives,” Tepper said.“Yes, we can educate judges. Yes, we can improve that. But I have found that children may have defenses they do not recognize or they’re simply stating to the court, ‘I don’t want an attorney. I didn’t do it. I want to get it over with.’ Their motivation may not fully comprehend the consequences, although I say, ‘This is going to come back and haunt you.’ I have found the public defender’s office is very effective in persuading their clients just exactly what the impact may be in a few years.” July 1, 2004 Associate Editor Regular Newslast_img read more

3-second account access wins IdentityX NACUSO Big Idea Award

admin no comments

first_img ShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr How would you like to dropkick your password and access your account in 3 seconds? Well, you can. IdentityX President Conor White joined us to explain how his speedy, yet secure, biometric technology works and why it won NACUSO’s recent Big Idea Award along with CUNA Technology Council’s Award at the 2015 GAC. continue reading »last_img

Three reasons your employees should also be your members

admin no comments

first_imgA few weeks ago, I escorted our senior staff writer, Colleen Cormier, to the Apple Store – also known as my happy place. Yes…I am married to Apple. Each member of my family owns some kind of MacBook. We also own iPhones, iPads and iPods. If there is a little “i” in front of a device, I probably own it. I also provide an Apple computer for each of my staff members. This was Colleen’s transition to the “other side.”My experience there is always a positive one, but something one of the employees said took us both by surprise. He said “I don’t use a Mac.”A similar scenario happened not too long ago during a marketing audit we were conducting for a client. One of the employees told us he didn’t use his credit union’s products and services – not one. Why would a customer or member use your products if your own employees don’t?“Internal branding and vocal brand advocacy from employees will be minimally successful at best if your employees don’t actually use your brand,” writes Susan Gunelius, president and
CEO at KeySplash Creative, Inc., in a blog at corporateeye.com. “How can they truly talk about your brand, advocate your brand, develop appropriate new products, and sell your product if they’ve never or rarely used it?” continue reading » 6SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblrlast_img read more

The future of HSAs

admin no comments

first_imgIf there is one constant in American politics, it is that with every new administration comes change. One of the first questions that I received after the election was if I think that health savings accounts (HSAs) are at risk of being negatively affected or eliminated. My answer—absolutely not. Of all the issues discussed, it was one of the few issues both sides agreed on. Let’s take a look at why.MomentumHSAs became available in January 2004, at a time employers were actively seeking to lower health care expenses for their employees. Hence, the growth of high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) emerged. By the end of 2007, approximately 10 percent of employers offered an HDHP. The key driver clearly was economics. For early adopters, acceptance of these high deductible plans required education and support of HSAs. Learn more from an in-depth conversation with Steve in Using HSAs To Attract New Members-Part 1 podcast.HSA Growth ContinuedHSAs and the dollars invested continued to grow at an accelerate rate. At the end of 2007, there were an estimated 3 million HSAs holding approximately $3.4 billion in assets. By year-end 2012, HSAs grew to 8.2 million with $15.5 billion in assets, and year-end 2015, 16.7 million with $30.2 billion in assets. And at year-end 2015, $4.2 billion of that $30.2 billion was held in investment accounts. continue reading » 12SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblrlast_img read more

Jakarta Police apprehend seven alleged provocateurs in rally protesting jobs bill

admin no comments

first_imgThe Jakarta Police have apprehended seven alleged provocateurs at a rally protesting the controversial omnibus bill on job creation in front of the House of Representatives complex in Central Jakarta on Friday.The police initially netted more than 100 people who allegedly infiltrated the rally to incite riots, Jakarta Police spokesman Sr. Comr. Yusri Yunus said. Of those detained, seven faced questioning while the rest were released.The seven people were apprehended for carrying items deemed suspicious, such as flags bearing the sigil of a so-called anarcho-syndicalist group, rocks and bottles that the police claimed resembled Molotov cocktails.”[We suspect that] five of them are members of the anarcho-syndicalist group and one is a former member,” Yusri told The Jakarta Post on Saturday. Topics : “We are still questioning and investigating them.”Read also: Komnas HAM calls for stop to job creation omnibus bill deliberationsIn April, the police claimed that the group had committed acts of vandalism and provocation to trigger social unrest across the island of Java amid public anxiety over the COVID-19 pandemic.Thousands of protesters comprising students and laborers gathered at the legislative complex in Senayan on Friday to demand the House and the government end deliberation of the omnibus bill on job creation. They condemned contentious articles stipulating manpower affairs, fearing the bill, if passed, would take away workers’ rights.They protested outside the House during the annual People’s Consultative Assembly meeting attended by the country’s executive, legislative and judicial branches. President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo delivered his state of the union address at the meeting, held ahead of Indonesia’s 75th anniversary on Monday.last_img read more

McCutchen, Jones homer, McDonald wins 5th

admin no comments

first_imgIn a tight spot in the sixth inning, he kept a cool head, striking out Rickie Weeks and Cody Ransom before departing. The Pirates hung on to win 6-5.“It was a big moment for my team in the sixth and I was able to bump my chest and slow myself down and get out of that inning because I wasn’t very sharp today,” McDonald said.McDonald gave up a run for the first time after 13 scoreless innings, ending the longest scoreless run by a Pirates pitcher this season.He finished with eight strikeouts won for the third time in four starts. McDonald (5-2) held the Brewers to four hits and a walk, and only one of the three runs he allowed was earned.“He didn’t have his best stuff today but he did have, and he has for much of the season, an extremely good downhill angle on his fastball.” Hurdle “It was good for him to finish.”Joel Hanrahan pitched a shaky ninth for his 14th save of the season.Clint Barmes hit a solo shot off John Axford in the ninth that extended the Pirates’ lead to 6-4.The Pirates took two out of three in the series for their first winning series in Milwaukee since April 2010.“It’s good to get a series win but to make it anything more than that, I’m not going to be jumping around, dancing in the streets,” Hurdle said. “We expect to win series when we go on the road, just like we do at home. We know the history and it is nice to do it, I get that.”The Brewers are 59-21 against the Pirates since 2007.McDonald led off the fifth inning with a single, and scored on McCutchen’s homer. Jones later made it 4-2 Pirates by homering for the second day in a row.Rod Barajas added a solo homer in the top of the sixth.Brewers starter Michael Fiers (1-1) gave up four runs and eight hits with eight strikeouts and a walk in five innings in his second big league start. MILWAUKEE (AP)—Andrew McCutchen and Garrett Jones helped James McDonald win when he didn’t have his best stuff.McDonald may have helped himself even more. TWO-RUN SHOT—Pirates’ Andrew McCutchen hits a two-run home run during the fifth inning June 3, 2012, in Milwaukee. (AP Photo/Morry Gash) last_img read more

Language Is Not a Simple Genetic Matter

admin no comments

first_imgIt sounds so simple.  The title on an article in PhysOrg announced, in Kipling Just-So Story Format, “How gorilla gestures point to evolution of human language.”  Because gorillas have an extensive repertoire of over 100 gestures, human conversation was only a matter of evolutionary time.  Is this mere storytelling, or do such explanations have scientific validity?  Can the changes necessary for human language be found in the genes?    The FOXP2 gene is often singled out as crucial to the evolution of human language, because mutations in that gene lead to speech defects in humans.  The recently published Neanderthal genome (see National Geographic News) showed that Neanderthals had the same FOXP2 gene we have.  “This gene is involved in linguistic development, suggesting that Neanderthals could talk,” the article said.  No one has shown, however, that FOXP2 is a necessary or sufficient cause for the origin of language – such an inference is hopelessly simplistic (see 05/26/2004, 02/21/2008).  For example, a defective power supply in a radio that renders it inoperable does not explain the communication heard when it works.  Is there more than genetics involved in the origin of our language capacity?  How could we know?Cultural selection and synergy    In an essay in Nature,1 E�rs Szathm�ry and Szabolcs Sz�mad� argued that “Language evolved as part of a uniquely human group of traits, the interdependence of which calls for an integrated approach to the study of brain function.”  It’s more than the ability to recognize words.  Your dog can do that.  They said, “more than any other attribute, language was probably key to the development of the set of traits that makes humans unique.”  These two authors proposed that social factors were much more important than genes in the development of language.  “Cultural evolution has shown us that one word can be worth a thousand genes,” they said.  But how can that explain language in a Darwinian paradigm?  It almost sounds Lamarckian – the discredited hypothesis of inheritance of acquired characteristics.  Here’s how they tied it in to Darwinism:That the genes involved in a cognitive trait affect other traits, and have effects that interact with each other, is business as usual for complex behaviour.  But the result is likely to be a network of interacting effects, in which evolution in one trait builds on an attribute already modified as a by-product of selection acting on another.  The nature of the gene networks underpinning complex behaviour suggests that several genes will have been selected for because they enhanced proficiency in a range of tasks – whether in social, linguistic or tool-use domains.Language emerged, they said, at the same time humans were learning to fish and hunt big game and make stone tools.  It was a by-product of the co-option of existing genes for vocalization being selected for new uses, they suggested.  This all happened at a time when major evolutionary changes were occurring simultaneously:The probable emergence of modern language in the context of these other capacities points to the evolution of a uniquely human set of traits.  We’ve barely begun to probe the architecture of this ‘suite’, but there is little to suggest that each capacity evolved one by one, or that they could be lost independently without harming at least some other traits in the set.But is this explanation helpful for elucidating what actually happened, or does it shield itself from falsification in the noise of complexity?  Creationists would say God designed all these traits to work together.  These evolutionists did appeal to evidence, but then only for the interdependence of the traits, not their origin: “Evidence supporting the close-knit evolution of traits comes, for example, from experiments showing that people who struggle with grammar also have difficulties drawing hierarchical structures, such as a layered arrangement of matches.”  They also said that tool-making and language appear related.  But such linkages do not necessarily point to evolution as the only explanation.    Szathm�ry and Sz�mad� used their hypothesis to weave a seamless story of the transition from genetic evolution to cultural evolution:The evidence strongly suggests that language evolved into its modern form embedded in a group of synergistic traits.  However, language almost certainly holds special status over the other traits in the set.  More than any other attribute, language is likely to have played a key role in driving genetic and cultural human evolution.    Language enables us to pass on cultural information more efficiently than can any other species.  It’s taken about 40 million years, for example, for five agricultural systems to appear in fungus-growing ants.  Human agriculture diversified on a massive scale in just a few thousand years.  Language makes it easier for people to live in large groups and helps drive cumulative cultural evolution – the build-up of complex belief systems, and the establishment of laws and theories over several generations.  It has allowed us to construct a highly altered social and physical world, which has in turn shaped our evolution.  Cultural evolution has shown us that one word can be worth a thousand genes.  Language was the key evolutionary innovation because it built on important cognitive prerequisites and opened the door to so much else.It appears they just said that their own reasoning evolved from cultural evolution which evolved from genetic evolution.  Can those gaps be bridged so easily?  Can one shift the hot potato of explanation between genes and culture as required to keep the story going?Exaptation: Dissing Darwin    Robert Berwick raised questions about this in a commentary in PNAS,2 “What genes can’t learn about language.”  He opened with this very issue: “Human language has long been viewed as a product of both genes and individual external experience or culture, but the key puzzle has always been to assess the relative contribution of each.”  He asked whimsically if language evolution is more like hemline fashions (culture) or the fingers on one’s hand (genetics).  There must be an interplay of both, because we know every child is born ready to learn a language, but those who learn Hindi cannot understand those who speak Mandarin.    Berwick’s solution leaned toward cultural evolution.  The reason is that genetic evolution is too slow to keep up with the rapid changes known to occur in human language.  One finding he cited “runs counter to one popular view that these properties of human language were explicitly selected for,… instead pointing to human language as largely adventitious, an exaptation, with many, perhaps most, details driven by culture.”  (An exaptation means a trait not acquired by natural selection – presumably through a trait that predisposed a creature toward an adaptation).  The upside is that it means the set of genes devoted to language can be greatly reduced.  “There is no need, and more critically no informational space, for the genome to blueprint some intricate set of highly-modular, interrelated components for language, just as the genome does not spell out the precise neuron-to-neuron wiring of the developing brain.”  The downside is that classical Darwinian natural selection had little to do with it.    Berwick recognized the controversy this position is likely to raise: “such a result may prove surprising to Darwinian enthusiasts who see the hand of natural selection everywhere,” he admitted, but he had an even “more startling” ramification to unleash: a convergence between the views of two groups often at variance with one another: cultural evolutionists and theoretical linguists.  Recent models by subsets of these camps can make do with a “minimal human genome for language.”  Is this an evolutionary coup?String Theory and Semantics    One thing remains: explaining the “hallmark of human language,” recursive concatenation.  This is our unique ability to combine words into new entities that can be treated as a single object, then combined again over and over.  This ability, which provides us “an infinity of possible meaningful signs integrated with the human conceptual system,” is lacking in animals.  With it, though, we have “the algebraic closure of a recursive operator over our dictionary.”  We have “infinite use of finite means.”  How could genes or culture explain this capability?  Berwick merely states that it does: “the claim that human language is an exaptation rather than a selected-for adaptation becomes not only much more likely but very nearly inescapable.”  Believe it or not.    Actually, the coup is not over yet.  Berwick ended with two caveats about “What models can’t tell us about language evolution.”  The cultural-evolution model would expect all aspects of human language to rise and fall like hemlines, but “Indeed, as far back as we can discern, human languages have always been just as complicated and fixed along certain dimensions.”  There’s a difference, for example, between a sound and its value.  There is no necessary connection between what our genes allow us to pronounce and what we mean by the sound.  Exaptation merely assumes what it needs to prove: the “promiscuous recursion harnessed to our conceptual dictionary” that makes language so endlessly expressive.Why Confirm What We Already Know?    The second caveat is even more alarming.  Berwick said we can never know how language evolved:Second, there remain inherent restrictions on our ability to ferret out biological adaptation generally and see into the past, more so than is sometimes generally acknowledged, simply because of limits on what we can measure given the signal-to-noise ratio of evolution by natural selection, and similarly constraining what computer simulations like the one in this issue of PNAS can ever tell us.  Since the pioneering study in ref. 11 we know that cultural evolution can sweep through populations as quickly as viral infections.  By comparison, evolution by natural selection is orders of magnitude slower and weaker, its effects on gene frequencies easily swamped by the migration of even a few individuals per generation.  Practically, this means that although we know without a doubt that adaptive selection has been involved in the shaping of certain traits, language being one of them, the data to establish this fact conclusively remains methodologically out of reach simply because it is infeasible to collect the requisite experimental evidence.  To take a far more secure case than language, although we have long known that human blood group differences confer certain reproductive evolutionary advantages, geneticists have estimated we would require the complete age-specific birth and death rate tables for on the order of 50,000 individuals to confirm what must certainly be true.  Given the great costs coupled with the relatively small benefits of confirming what we already know, the pragmatic nature of science wins out and there is simply little enthusiasm in carrying forward the exercise.By portraying language evolution as something “we already know,” Berwick has insulated it from the need for empirical evidence.  Indeed, he generalized this to all cases of evolutionary adaptation, not just language.  If the signal-to-noise ratio of natural selection is so low as to be undetectable, is evolution a science, or a belief?  Notice the phrase “story line” in his ending paragraph:Consequently, it is probably safe to say that neither this nor any other confirmation of adaptive advantage for one or another particular evolutionary story line about human language, no matter how compelling or how internally consistent its computer simulation logic, will be immediately forthcoming.  To be sure, computer simulations can still establish boundary conditions on evolvability via the Balwin�Simpson effect or set directions for further inquiry, and Chater et al. succeed admirably.  Nonetheless, we should remain ever alert that there are always restrictions on restrictions, that neither this study nor others like it can tell us how human language actually evolved.1.  E�rs Szathm�ry and Szabolcs Sz�mad�, “Being Human: Language: a social history of words,” Nature 456, 40-41 (6 November 2008) | doi:10.1038/456040a.2.  Robert C. Berwick, “What genes can’t learn about language,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, February 10, 2009, 106:6, pp 1685-1686, doi:10.1073/pnas.0812871106.Those last two block quotes are worth reading carefully.  For Darwin skeptics, the evidence could hardly be more clear: evolution is a belief imposed on the evidence, not a belief derived from the evidence.  Since there is no way they could possibly test their belief, evolutionists begin with the assumption of evolution and work everything into their chosen paradigm: fragmentary evidence, elusive hints of signal in a noise (like the FOXP2 gene, inferences from which are as likely to deceive as enlighten), and copious amounts of imagination and storytelling.  Since “we already know” by collective agreement that Darwin reigns and creationism is out, what need have we of proof?, they think.  They have tossed verification out the window.  Like communist dictators behind a wall, they have awarded themselves offices for life and comfy quarters for speculating endlessly without fear of contradiction.  Evidence, like the peasantry, becomes subservient to the State.  Damaging evidence has been filtered out by the State-run press.  The regime is self-promoting, self-serving, and self-perpetuating.Time for a revolution.(Visited 17 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

23 days agoFlamengo veteran Dani Alves: Guardiola a football gift

admin no comments

first_imgAbout the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Flamengo veteran Dani Alves: Guardiola a football giftby Paul Vegas23 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveFlamengo veteran Dani Alves heaped praise on Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola.Alves arrived at Barcelona just a day after Guardiola took charge of the club and together they went on to win three La Ligas, two Copa Del Reys, two Club World Cups, two UEFA Supercups, three Spanish Supercups and two Champions Leagues.”I think Pep is a genius,” the right-back told CNN.”A genius that football gave us as a gift, as a coach, as a person. How he got the best out of every player — those that played a lot, those that didn’t play as much — creating a synergy with a lot of respect between those inside the team.”That puts him in a very special position in my life and a very particular position. I think he’s a nonconformist genius, a methodical genius, a perfectionist genius and I think that makes him unique.”Wherever he goes, he can win more or he can win less, but I think a player that works with him will never be the same. Every day is a learning [curve], it’s a class like you were going to college. It’s a discipline because you learn something more.” last_img read more

Kelly Clarkson To Rock For Musicians On Call

admin no comments

first_imgMusicians on Call (MOC) Nashville is celebrating six years in Music City with an anniversary benefit concert featuring GRAMMY Award-winning superstar Kelly Clarkson.Kelly Clarkson Musicians On Call ConcertThe Nov. 14 event presented by Citi Private Pass will showcase Clarkson in the intimate setting of downtown Nashville’s Hard Rock Cafe, located at 100 Broadway. Tickets will be available for purchase exclusively by Citi Private Pass members for a limited time beginning at 10 a.m. CT Wednesday, Oct. 9 with general on sale opening at noon Friday, Oct. 11. Tickets start at $160 and include a VIP Cocktail Reception provided by Hard Rock Cafe and valet parking provided by Eagle Parking.The night will also include a silent auction featuring items from local vendors and autographed memorabilia from today’s hottest stars. All proceeds from the event will go directly to MOC Nashville and its efforts to bring live and recorded music to the bedsides of patients in healthcare facilities. Since MOC’s expansion into Nashville in April 2007, it has brought the healing power of music to over 70,000 patients, families and staff in Middle Tennessee through 12 weekly programs in seven area healthcare facilities including the latest program, which recently launched at Alive Hospice. Through the generous support of artists like Clarkson, as well as sponsors Citi Private Pass, Hard Rock Cafe Nashville, and City National Bank, MOC Nashville will continue to thrive and grow.Clarkson has long been a champion for MOC – last year surprising patients and lifting spirits at Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt with an impromptu performance for the holidays. The vibrant singer is nominated for Female Vocalist of the Year at this year’s CMA Awards as well as nominated for Musical Event of the Year for her collaboration with Vince Gill on “Don’t Rush.” Clarkson brings her soulful vocals to her latest Oct. 29 holiday release, Wrapped In Red.For more information on the MOC Nashville Sixth Anniversary Concert, visit www.musiciansoncall.org/kellyclarkson. For sponsorship inquiries, contact Dana Sones at [email protected]last_img read more

Recent Comments