Podcasts about Sandford

Friends; this was a gushy one from the weatherbeaten civic on a post-Owen Sound/Uxbridge rip. Lots about my pal Krista and the Thornbury crew and lots about my pals in the Uxbridge region (Sandford specifically). If you're not up for some feels, maybe redirect your ear vehicles to an alternate sideroad because this sucker puts the pedal down on the love expressway. Have the best day and thanks for clocking in (PS - another carcast is coming soon) and being you.Catch me in a town near you in 2025 alongside Melissa Payne and many other rad artists by visiting my website to see where I'm playing. If people can hate for no reason, I can love for no reason - and I love you. Thanks for stopping by Graventown. Yer always welcome here. As a full time independent artist, you can support me by buying the Always Everthing vinyl or brand new "block heater" toque here or by joining my SUPER RAD subscription service at https://ko-fi.com/gravencanada

On this week's Mentioned in Dispatches podcast, Stephen Sandford explores the early history of the 18th Battalion London Regiment (London Irish) during the First World War. He examines the battalion's formation, recruitment, training and unique cultural identity, as well as its connections to Ireland and its first action at Loos. This talk was recorded at the London Pride Conference, held in June 2024.

You can now text us anonymously to leave feedback, suggest future content or simply hurl abuse at us. We'll read out any texts we receive on the show. Click here to try it out!Welcome back to Bad Dads Film Review, where this week we lock, stock, and double-tap our way into the gloriously over-the-top world of Hot Fuzz (2007), the second film in Edgar Wright's beloved Cornetto Trilogy. With an outrageous body count and a razor-sharp script, it's a love letter to action movies — by way of twee English village life.Directed by Edgar Wright and written by Wright and Simon Pegg, Hot Fuzz stars Simon Pegg as Nicholas Angel, a no-nonsense London supercop who's so good at his job that he's making everyone else look bad. As a result, he's reassigned to the sleepy village of Sandford, where crime seems suspiciously low — and the residents suspiciously Stepford.Teamed up with the bumbling but big-hearted PC Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), Angel initially struggles with Sandford's slower pace — until a series of grisly “accidents” reveals something darker lurking beneath the surface. Cue a rampage of pensioners, hidden agendas, and a spectacular finale with more gunfire than the M25 at rush hour.This is one we could all agree on: Hot Fuzz is a near-perfect comedy that rewards repeat viewings. It's cleverly constructed, endlessly quotable (“The greater good!”), and absolutely packed with details that make it a joy to dissect. Whether you're a fan of action movies, British humour, or seeing Timothy Dalton with a smug smile and a hedge trimmer, there's something here for you.Hot Fuzz takes the quiet menace of rural England and sets it ablaze with blockbuster spectacle and sharp comedy. It's both homage and original, firing on all cylinders from start to finish. If you like your action with a side of Bakewell tart and local shop for local people energy, this one's a must-watch.

We are dropping a special episode to talk about the only Midsomer Murders spin-off - HOT FUZZ! When London police officer Nicholas Angel is transfered to the quiet town of Sandford, he uncovers a series of murders that only he can solve. We are talking a very weird Midsomer story, the history of those guys who stand in city centers pretending they are statues, and if there is indeed a place in a man's head that explodes when you shoot it. Created, produced, and hosted by Eileen Becker and Eric BuscherSend us email! We love it and crave validation! Write to us at welcometomidsomer@gmail.comLinksWebsite - www.welcometomidsomer.comFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/welcometomidsomerInstagram - welcometomidsomerThreads - welcometomidsomerWe are now on YOUTUBE - https://www.youtube.com/@WelcomeToMidsomerLogo and Podcast art - Smeedrai Theme Music - The Infamous Space

This Day in Legal History: Dred Scott DecidedOn March 6, 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its infamous ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford, a decision that deepened national tensions over slavery. The Court held that Dred Scott, an enslaved man who had lived in free territories, was not a U.S. citizen and therefore had no legal standing to sue for his freedom. In a sweeping opinion by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the Court went further, declaring that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in federal territories. This effectively struck down the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had restricted the spread of slavery in certain parts of the country. The ruling was celebrated in the South but outraged abolitionists and many in the North, who saw it as an alarming expansion of pro-slavery power.The Dred Scott decision is widely regarded as one of the worst in Supreme Court history, as it denied citizenship and legal protections to Black Americans. It also emboldened pro-slavery forces while further alienating the growing anti-slavery movement. The backlash contributed to the intensifying sectional divide that would lead to the Civil War just four years later. During the war, President Abraham Lincoln and Congress took steps to undermine the decision, culminating in the passage of the 13th and 14th Amendments. These amendments abolished slavery and established birthright citizenship, directly overturning Dred Scott. Today, the case stands as a stark reminder of how the law has been used to uphold racial injustice—and how later legal reforms can correct such profound wrongs.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 against President Donald Trump's effort to withhold payments from foreign aid organizations for work already completed. The decision upheld an order by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, requiring the government to release nearly $2 billion in funds owed to contractors and grant recipients under USAID and the State Department. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the Court's liberal justices to form the majority, while four conservative justices dissented. The Trump administration had paused all foreign aid on January 20, citing an “America First” agenda, which disrupted humanitarian efforts worldwide. Aid organizations sued, arguing Trump exceeded his authority by defunding programs approved by Congress. The administration contended that enforcing payments without proper review amounted to judicial overreach. Despite Ali's repeated orders, the administration largely kept the funds frozen, prompting legal battles over compliance. Plaintiffs warned that continued delays would cause “extraordinary and irreversible harm” to millions relying on aid. The Supreme Court did not provide a rationale for its order but instructed Ali to clarify compliance obligations. A hearing is scheduled for March 7 to determine the next steps.US Supreme Court won't let Trump withhold payment to foreign aid groups | ReutersDozens of U.S. hospital systems and healthcare providers have filed lawsuits against Blue Cross Blue Shield, alleging the insurer underpaid them by billions. These providers chose to opt out of a $2.8 billion class-action settlement in Alabama, which is awaiting final approval. The new lawsuits, filed in federal courts in California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania, argue that Blue Cross and its affiliates conspired to divide the market, reducing competition and driving down reimbursement rates in violation of antitrust laws. Plaintiffs, including Bon Secours Mercy Health and Temple University Health, believe they could recover more through individual lawsuits than the settlement. Blue Cross has denied wrongdoing and declined to comment. The final approval hearing for the Alabama settlement is scheduled for July 29. This litigation follows a separate $2.7 billion antitrust settlement in 2020 for commercial and individual subscribers, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld last year. Some large companies also opted out of that settlement to pursue their own claims.Hospitals line up to sue Blue Cross, opting out of $2.8 bln settlement | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the authority to license temporary nuclear waste storage sites, a case brought by Texas and oil industry interests. The dispute centers on a facility in western Texas, licensed by the NRC in 2021, which opponents argue poses environmental and security risks. Some conservative justices questioned whether "temporary" storage could last indefinitely, undermining efforts to establish a permanent waste site. Liberal justices focused on whether the plaintiffs had legal standing, as they did not initially challenge the NRC's decision through the agency's process. The case follows past failures to establish a permanent nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, despite significant federal investment. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled the NRC lacked authority under the Atomic Energy Act, prompting the Biden administration to appeal—a move continued under Trump. A decision is expected by June.US Supreme Court hears Texas nuclear waste storage dispute | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode today We talk to a few men's shed supporters in Canberra What we're doing differently in On the Road this season In On the Tools, Guy Michela from the Sandford shed in Queensland tells us about his whale tail sculpture In On the Pulse, Stuart finds out about the new safety equipment required for welding Marty talks to Michael Maxworthy in Pambula for Shedder in the Spotlight In Rip's Tip, Rip Woodchip is going to give us some tips on looking after your noggin!

This is Michelle in her own words. I am the Developer Engagement Lead for Microsoft in Asia as well as a Tedx Speaker, developer community mentor, Microsoftie and international conference Speaker. I live at the heart of the coding community and help drive awareness and engagement as a developer advocate and technology evangelist. I advocate for STEM, the Games Industry and Developers You can find Michelle on the following sites: Bluesky LinkedIn GitHub YouTube Here are some links provided by Michelle: Tech Outsiders PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST Spotify Apple Podcasts YouTube Music Amazon Music RSS Feed You can check out more episodes of Coffee and Open Source on https://www.coffeeandopensource.com Coffee and Open Source is hosted by Isaac Levin

Seth on New Years' Resolutions. Peggy Noonan's Wall Street Journal opinion entitled "Signposts on the Wisdom Trail." Seth reads from Justice John McLean's dissent in the 1857 Supreme Court case Dred Scott v. Sandford.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Full Video Series at Mary Wollstonecraft goes off on Rousseau, hoisting him with his own Petard, as it were.* 00:00 Opening 00:57 I Have Notes 06:26 CHAPTER 3 06:44 Introduction to Bodily Strength and Gender 07:34 Misconceptions About Genius and Health 10:21 The Superiority Debate: Men vs. Women 11:43 ROUSSEAU Footnote: Why Women Can't ________ 17:38 Education and Female Virtue 19:01 EXTENSIVE   FOOTNOTE from Mr. Day's "Sandford and Merton", Vol III 22:30  Critique of Rousseau's Views on Women 27:11 ROUSSEAU Quote re Girls & Dolls & Coquettes 30:39 ROUSSEAU Footnote on Girl Writing the Letter "O" 36:30 The Consequences of Female Subjugation 38:05 The Call for Rational Education 40:51 The Corruption of Power and Female Dignity 41:24 Revolutionizing Female Manners 44:55 The Nature of Worship and Rational Conduct 47:20 The Role of Women in Society 51:53 The Consequences of Dependence 54:36 ROUSSEAU Footnote: Men Have All The Good Qualities (sorry ladies!) 01:02:06 ROUSSEAU Footnote - "How Lovely is Her Ignorance" 01:07:13 Summing Up: The Call for Rational Virtues 01:10:53 Outro • Xiran Jay Zhao, Author of "Iron Widow" has an amazing Channel chock full of things you never knew you needed to learn—but you do.    /   • If you've never read Anne Brontë, please take a listen to CraftLit's "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall" (starts with episode 516—). She's the most shocking, most modern, and arguably the best of the Brontë writers. You likely missed her b/c Charlotte didn't like this book's 'sensibilities' and did what she could to ghost it after Anne's death. Bad Charlotte! *The phrase's meaning is that a bomb-maker is blown ("hoist", the past tense of "hoise") off the ground by his own bomb ("petard"), and indicates an ironic reversal or poetic justice. []

Dr Gareth Sandford has a consulting business that helps Olympic, Pro & College coaches with individualized conditioning. Recent consulting clients include: Manchester City Football Club (EPL), England Football Association (International Football), Australian Institute of Sport (Olympic/Paralympic Sport), Melbourne Football Club (AFL), Kerry GAA (Gaelic Football). Prior to this, Gareth has worked for 14+ years across individual and team sports within three Olympic and Paralympic systems (UK, New Zealand and Canada) and three professional sports leagues (English Football, Cricket and Rugby), supporting over 450 athletes that achieved 23 Olympic, Paralympic and World Championship medals, and one world record. He was also scientific lead for the Canadian Olympic marathon and race-walk athletes at the Tokyo 2021 Olympic Games. He holds a PhD in sport physiology and running performance from the Sport Performance Research Institute at AUT University in New Zealand and a ‘mini' MBA from Simon Fraser University in science innovation and technology commercialisation. QUOTES “There are a number of things that we should be looking for. The first thing is the athlete profile. So that is where all your sub-disciplines come in, from a medical standpoint, what are we talking about? From a biomechanical, psychological standpoint, which type of personality are we dealing with? From a physiological standpoint, are we talking about a speed profile, hybrid or endurance profile?” “So a common question you hear often is should conditioning be more sport specific or should it be more targeting the physical capacities underpinning the sport? But the reality of the matter is that physiology exists, whichever sport you're playing.” “It is a very rare occasion in a team sport where you are short on the sport-specific exposure of chemistry” “Sprinting speed is scaffolding for team sports. We can't build it and then let it go, because if we let it go, then the percentage we're working at when running goes up” “The three metrics alongside team sport key training metrics I'm looking at are where's the sprinting speed? where's the MAS? where's the critical speed?” “Athletes need to be exposed to all the stimulus, from low intensity to sprinting speed, probably for 18 months, two years at the low end, for us to be confident, this is the type of profile an athlete is.” “The key metric for low and moderate intensity work is the effort, the internal effort, not the external speed and the answer is whatever speed elicits a five or six out of 10 feeling” SHOWNOTES 1) Gareth's exploration of the anaerobic speed reserve which has taken him from the UK to NZ to Canada 2) The framework for conditioning and importance of athlete profiling 3) The relevance of middle-distance track events and their training for field sports 4) Getting a clear characterization of what is happening in technical-tactical training sessions and unlearning “classical” physiology 5) Assessing the anaerobic speed reserve in athletes and the practical application of profiling 6) The interplay between critical speed and maximal aerobic speed or velocity VO2max and Gareth's preferences for measuring both 7) How to use the ASR ratio as a screen of “spread” and benchmarking sprint and endurance physiology 8) Principles versus models and the value of holding principles as loosely as possible until you understand exactly what type of athlete you are dealing with PEOPLE MENTIONED Peter Weyand Phil Bellinger Veronica Billat Phil Scott

In this episode of 'Shaping Your Pottery,' host Nic Torres interviews Jessica Sanford, a seasoned potter with 25 years of experience. Jessica shares her unique perspectives on commonly held beliefs in the pottery world, especially regarding beginners and the emphasis on production. She recounts her journey into pottery, from high school classes to becoming an inadvertent teacher, and discusses how teaching has elevated her own pottery skills. Jessica also delves into her current focus on functional pottery and graphic design influences, her approach to finding one's voice in pottery, and the importance of curiosity and continuous learning. Listeners will gain valuable insights into the common mistakes made by beginners and intermediates, and the significance of being generous in the pottery community. You can learn more about Jessica by checking out her Instagram https://www.instagram.com/claywithjess/Join The Shaping Your Pottery Newsletter By Clicking This Link shapingyourpottery.com/newsletterFor more episodes click here www.shapingyourpottery.com 00:00 Introduction and Newsletter Invitation 00:29 Challenging Common Pottery Beliefs 03:40 Jessica's Pottery Journey 04:40 The Unexpected Teaching Opportunity 07:33 Improving Pottery Skills Through Teaching 13:03 Common Mistakes in Wheel Throwing 18:11 Jessica's Pottery Style and Inspirations 25:16 Finding Your Voice in Pottery 33:39 Final Thoughts and Parting Advice 36:13 Outro and Newsletter Reminder

Lock up your swans and grab your Cornettos - this week, Jack and Ben rewatch Edgar Wright's Hot Fuzz! In this high-octane episode, we dive into the second instalment of the Cornetto Trilogy, exploring why Jack picked it and how it stacks up against Shaun of the Dead. Is this the best of the trilogy? We discuss its loving homage to American cop films, its clever skewering of Hollywood clichés, and its razor-sharp self-awareness.We unpack the writing process behind Hot Fuzz: from turning off the internet to meticulously crafting Sandford as their own rural Sim City, Wright and Pegg left no stone unturned. Plus, how does the idyllic setting of Wells, Somerset add to the film's charm? And what does Hot Fuzz say about rural communities and the socio-political undertones of them?Finally, we debate our MVPs—Simon Pegg, Timothy Dalton, or Nick Frost—and consider how the film has aged since 2007.Next week, Ben takes the wheel with his pick—what will it be? One last big one before we focus on Christmas. Tune in to find out! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Michael and Ian from Lord Of Adders Black: A Blackadder Podcast join Flixwatcher to review Michael's choice Hot Fuzz. Hot Fuzz (2007) is an action comedy directed by Edgar Wright starring Simon Pegg (who co-wrote the screenplay) and Nick Frost. It also stars the who's who of British TV and film, Jim Broadbent, Paddy Considine, Timothy Dalton, Bill Nighy, Edward Woodward, Bill Bailey, Adam Buxton, Olivia Colman and Rafe Spall. Ambitious Police Sargent Nicholas Angel (Pegg) is reassigned from London to the rural town Sandford in Gloucestershire due to his overachieving and making the rest of the force look bad. He has an eventful first evening in the Sandford and arrests a local man for drunk driving who is revealed to be PC Danny Butterman (Frost), his new police partner. Despite appearances a series of tragic accidents bestow a number of the Sandford residents with Angel suspecting foul play. Recommendability scores for Hot Fuzz were very high. Despite having watched Hot Fuzz multiple times before the engagement and repeat viewing scores were also high to give a very impressive 4.51 overall. [supsystic-tables id=376]     Episode #362 Crew Links Thanks to the Episode # 362 crew of Michael and Ian from Lord Of Adders Black: A Blackadder Podcast You can find their website here https://shows.acast.com/lord-of-adders-black    Please make sure you give them some love   More about Hot Fuzz For more info on Hot Fuzz can visit Hot Fuzz IMDB page here or Hot Fuzz Rotten Tomatoes page here. Final Plug! Subscribe, Share and Review us on iTunes If you enjoyed this episode of Flixwatcher Podcast you probably know other people who will like it too! Please share it with your friends and family, review us, and join us across ALL of the Social Media links below. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sports reporter Jamie Wall spoke to Lisa Owen about the Black Ferns looking to salvage something from their up and down season tomorrow and how Harper Sandford went viral for his performance at a Thames Valley Swamp Foxes game last weekend.

In this episode of The Future of Work® Podcast, we explore the fast-paced evolution of flexible workspaces and their impact on commercial real estate with Will Sandford, Director of Coworking at Yardi.     Will discusses the growing demand for coworking solutions, the rise of enterprise clients in flexible office spaces, and how data is reshaping real estate strategies.     We also unpack Yardi's long-term investment in the coworking sector and what it means for the future of office space. As coworking continues to expand, could flexible offices become the new standard for businesses of all sizes? Join us  to find out. 

The Groundsmen this week meet one of the most interesting and experienced operators in corporate finance. Sandford Loudon of Oakvale gives an exceptionally  articulate and erudite overview of the nexus between capital and sport. This is really really good. And we have a very high bar on all this stuff. Brought to you by Web 3 Sports Ventures.

How do you bring women's health innovation to life when the healthcare system is set up to resist change? In this episode, Nicole Sandford, CEO of Aspira Women's Health, shares the hurdles her company faces in pushing forward diagnostics for ovarian cancer. As a cancer survivor, she also reflects on how her personal health journey fuels her commitment to advancing care for women.Resources and Links:Learn more about Aspira Women's Health and their ‘Ovasuite' blood tests: https://aspirawh.com/Mentioned in the episode: World Ovarian Cancer Coalition: https://worldovariancancercoalition.org/Related Episodes:‘Diagnosis' from Overlooked Season 1: https://overlookedpod.com/episode/diagnosis SUBSCRIBE to the newsletter to get updates on the podcast: sign up at the banner on the website: www.overlookedpod.com. EMAIL US - get in touch with the show: hello@overlookedpod.comDISCLAIMER What you hear and read on ‘Overlooked' is for general information purposes only and represents the opinions of the host and guests. The content on the podcast and website should not be taken as medical advice. Every person's body is unique, so please consult your healthcare professional for any medical questions that may arise.

Patrick Sandford is a playwright, survivor and award-winning theatre maker. His film, Groomed, a first-person documentary about sexual abuse, is available to stream via Soho Theatre On Demand. https://sohotheatre.com/digitalevent/groomed/ Links: the myth of the vampire - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26615777/ The brave movement - https://www.bravemovement.org/ heat intiaitve - https://protectchildrennotabuse.org/ Lucy faithfull https://www.lucyfaithfull.org.uk/ Stop SO https://stopso.org.uk/ Elizabeth Letourneau https://tedmed.com/talks/show?id=620399 mankind charity https://mkcharity.org/ the survivors trust https://thesurvivorstrust.org/ 1 in 6 https://www.1in6.uk/ Survivors UK https://www.survivorsuk.org/

February 26 - March 3, 1972 RETURNING guests to the show comedians Irene Bremis (watch her special Sweetie) and TV's Frank Conniff join Ken this week. Ken, Irene and Frank discuss growing up in New York, the horrors of Staten Island, good pizza, racism, Mary Tyler Moore, Sherlock Holmes cigarettes, Doral Cigarettes, True Cigarettes, killing women, Rain Barrell, questionable protein stains, fabric softener, The Old Man Who Cried Wolf, movies vs tv series, where Irene and Frank met, Brian Denehy, the map of Ireland on Frank's face, Maureen O'Hara, psychic detectives, Saturday night death slots, MTM productions, strong women, Maude, how awful Bill Cosby is, dying on stage, Bob Hope, Dana Gould, Bing Crosby and Friends, women's lib, Ear Stoppies, wigs, Rowan & Martin, Gene Hackman, Jerry Stiller, Anne Meara, comic comradery, Sid & Marty Kroft, Hart to Hart, the show with the woman, James Garner, Left Behind, Kirk, Christians, losing your mind, cycle cell anemia, Greeks, Cannon, William Conrad, MeTV, It Takes a Thief, Carson, Serling, meeting Dick Cavet, Adam 12, Dick Clark, Hellzapoppin the TV series, Dom DeLuise, George Wallace, working on Sabrina, That Girl, Cannonball Run, Eddie Murphy, Red Foxx, Sandford and Son, Soap, Room 222, and watching MeTV at 2am. 

By granting former President Donald Trump absolute immunity from criminal prosecution "for official acts" as Trump fights charges stemming from his attempt to overthrow the 2020 election results, the Supreme Court "descended to a level of shame reserved until now for the Roger B. Taney Court that decided the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford in 1857," says Princeton historian Sean Wilentz in an essay for The New York Review. In this episode, Wilentz discusses the problems with the Court's 6-3 ruling that declared a president above the law -- a first in U.S. history.

Send us a Text Message.Aspira CEO and Director Nicole Sandford joins the Water Tower Hour Podcast to discuss recent updates on OvaSuite, including preliminary 2Q24 OvaWatch volume growth and the launch of mass monitoring. She walks us through what is driving OvaWatch growth and the messaging to physicians and patients around the value of proper malignancy risk assessment prior to surgical intervention. In addition, she reviews the recent private placement financing and potential opportunities for the company's biobank of patient samples, including academic collaborations.

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/latino-studies

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/latin-american-studies

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/caribbean-studies

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9).

Myths about the powers held by the United States are often supported by the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which derives its logic from the interpretation of a document that the US itself developed. Therefore, when pressure is placed on a specific legal precedent, the shallowness of its validity is revealed. Dr. Mónica A. Jiménez accomplishes this kind of scholarly work in her recently published book Making Never-Never Land: Race and Law in the Creation of Puerto Rico (University of North Carolina Press, 2024). By tracing the legal logic of what continues to animate the colonial dynamics between the United States and Puerto Rico, Jiménez offers a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that both folds time and space to make clear how late-19th century Supreme Court logics and opinions continue to subjugate the land and people of Puerto Rico to colonial violence. Split into two sections, the first half of the book details the key case Downes v. Bidwell (1901), while the second half explores how the legal ramifications of Downes continued to haunt the archipelago. The first chapter focuses on the development of Downes and its outcome, which argued that territories of the United States were not allowed to access certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ambiguous legal foundation for this decision was established in 1900 after Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States when the US Supreme Court established the territorial incorporation doctrine, effectively creating the legal category of “unincorporated territory." Chapter two probes the white supremacist U.S. legal landscape to offer a “genealogy of racial exclusion in law” (36) that shows the reader how U.S. settler colonialism and empire-making are dependent on the reuse and recycling of legal precedents and tactics that disenfranchised and dispossessed racially marginalized communities. By excavating the legal opinions handed down during the Marshal Trilolgy and Dred Scott v. Sandford – a collection of Supreme Court cases that defined 19th-century legal policy for Native Americans and African Americans, respectively – Jiménez makes clear that “It is not a coincidence that the most shameful cases in the United States' legal history of race should serve as direct precedents to a decision that continues to serve as the basis for Puerto Rico's exclusion more than one hundred years after it was handed down” (9). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Singer/songwriter, producer and studio owner (amongst many other things) – Chas Sandford – speaks about his creative process, some of his most memorable projects from down the years, and the Augspurger monitoring setup at his Franklin, TN-based studio – Secret Sound.

James lures Alasdair to a bad mannered manor house in Dorset*. We're in Sandford Orcas - which is a village, not pod of Free Willies - and the place is simply brimming with ghosts! From Ghosts in the South West by James Turner, Shakey tells a tale of troublesome monks, lunar assassins and one very macabre way of not getting blamed for farts. And you'll be pleased to know that this spooky/farty manor is currently on sale for less than five million quid - so get your offers in now! Follow along here... https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/147382139#/?channel=RES_BUY * You wouldn't endorse it. This episode was edited by Joseph Burrows - Audio Editor. Come see us LIVE Again! https://www.angelcomedy.co.uk/event-detail/loremen-live-again-18th-aug-the-bill-murray-london-tickets-202408181730/ LoreBoys nether say die! Support the Loremen here (and get stuff): patreon.com/loremenpod ko-fi.com/loremen Check the sweet, sweet merch here... https://www.teepublic.com/stores/loremen-podcast?ref_id=24631 @loremenpod youtube.com/loremenpodcast www.instagram.com/loremenpod www.facebook.com/loremenpod

James takes Alasdair to the spooky manor house at Sandford Orcas (a village not some cetacea) and this place is simply brimming with ghosts! From Ghosts in the South West by James Turner, this is a tale of loads of ghosts and one very macabre way of not getting blamed for farts! Follow along here... https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/147382139#/?channel=RES_BUY This episode was edited by Joseph Burrows - Audio Editor. Come see us LIVE Again! https://www.angelcomedy.co.uk/event-detail/loremen-live-again-18th-aug-the-bill-murray-london-tickets-202408181730/ LoreBoys nether say die! Support the Loremen here (and get stuff): patreon.com/loremenpod ko-fi.com/loremen Check the sweet, sweet merch here... https://www.teepublic.com/stores/loremen-podcast?ref_id=24631 @loremenpod youtube.com/loremenpodcast www.instagram.com/loremenpod www.facebook.com/loremenpod Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us a Text Message.What happens when quilting becomes a lifeline for someone managing ADHD? Artist Kate Sandford joins us on Breaking the Blocks to share her transformative journey. She recounts her path from art college to embracing quilting, highlighting how this creative outlet helped her navigate the complexities of ADHD while raising young children. Listen as Kate reveals her early memories of making things and her passion for art, explaining how quilting offered a structured yet expressive way to channel her energy and creativity.Returning to art after intense self-doubt and a recent ADHD diagnosis at 48, Kate offers an emotional and candid look at her struggles with feelings of inadequacy. She discusses the significant role of hormones, how her children's experiences with autism and ADHD influenced her self-understanding, and the importance of seeking help and support. The episode touches on the challenges of growing up as a creative child under pressure to conform and how these experiences shaped her approach to parenting and personal identity.Kate also opens up about the therapeutic power of crafting in managing mental health, emphasizing the importance of authenticity and self-expression. From the excitement of attending a two-day masterclass to the mixed feelings of receiving an autism diagnosis later in life, she reflects on the continuous process of healing and self-discovery. Join us for an inspiring discussion on the transformative power of art, the necessity of understanding one's unique neurological wiring, and the value of finding supportive communities.Follow Kate on @katemustsew on InstagramSupport the Show.

Norwegian composer Kristine Tjøgersen in her fish-forward orchestral work, Pelagic Dreamscape; the first man to be arrested, wrongly, with the help of AI-enabled policing; an artist-led wiff-waff pow-wow at Cork Midsummer; and organist and scholar Geoffrey Webber on the restored 19th century organ at Sandford church as part of Pipeworks Festival.

Ben Criddle talks BYU sports every weekday from 3 to 7 pm.Today's Co-Hosts: Ben Criddle (@criddlebenjamin)Subscribe to the Cougar Sports with Ben Criddle podcast:Apple Podcastshttps://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/cougar-sports-with-ben-criddle/id99676

Janice Ellig is joined by Nicole Sandford, CEO of Aspira Women's Health, to discuss Aspira's dedication to the discovery, development, and utilization of novel high-value diagnostic and bio-analytical solutions that help physicians diagnose, treat, and improve women's gynecologic health outcomes.tags: lr, janice ellig, nicole sandford, ceo, leadership, aspira, women, health, healthcare, doctor, diagnosis, tests, research, science, biotech, hospital, diversity 

This week the James' review Hot Fuzz. James H is able to compare is background knowledge of the force to see how accurate this film is.  As a former London constable, Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) finds if difficult to adapt to his new assignment in the sleepy British village of Sandford. Not only does he miss the excitement of the big city, but he also has a well-meaning oaf (Nick Frost) for a partner. However, when a series of grisly accidents rocks Sandford, Nick smells something rotten in the idyllic village… and things will never be the same again!  Click subcribe, then play and enjoy the high speed chase of this week's episode.  Talking Codswallop can be found on ALL social media: @CodswallopPod and we are on YOUTUBE too!!! :)  

This week on The Learning Curve co-hosts U-Arkansas Prof. Albert Cheng and DFER’s Alisha Searcy interview POLITICO’s Peter Canellos, biographer of Justice John Marshall Harlan. Mr. Canellos delves into Harlan’s upbringing in a prominent slaveholding family, his Civil War service in the Union Army, and his rapid rise in Kentucky politics as a Republican. He highlights John Harlan's mixed-race half-brother Robert Harlan and key legal precedents like the notorious Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which influenced Harlan’s […]

This week on The Learning Curve co-hosts U-Arkansas Prof. Albert Cheng and DFER's Alisha Searcy interview POLITICO's Peter Canellos, biographer of Justice John Marshall Harlan. Mr. Canellos delves into Harlan's upbringing in a prominent slaveholding family, his Civil War service in the Union Army, and his rapid rise in Kentucky politics as a Republican. He highlights John Harlan's mixed-race half-brother Robert Harlan and key legal precedents like the notorious Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which influenced Harlan's views on race and equality. Canellos explores Harlan's famously farsighted dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), emphasizing its significance in laying the groundwork for future civil rights legal victories, notably Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In closing, Mr. Canellos reads a passage from his book, The Great Dissenter: The Story of John Marshall Harlan, America's Judicial Hero.

In this special episode, Nicole is joined by industry experts Tim Regan and Tim Gerdeman from Water Tower Research. Together, they embark on a dynamic conversation delving into the latest trends, challenges, and opportunities in women's health. They discuss continued progress on the markets adoption of the Company's OvaSuite products and other areas of growth for AWH. 

Today's episode features an interview with professional photographer Dave Sandford (@davesandford), known for his captivating NHL and wildlife photography. Today he opens up about his journey through mental health challenges starting at the beginning of COVID lockdowns until recently. Dave shares his personal struggles, highlighting the turning point that led him to actively address his well-being and break the silence surrounding mental health.  During the episode, Dave intertwines his narrative of resilience with the evolution of his photography and creativity, emphasizing the profound connection between personal well-being and artistic expression. His story serves as a powerful testament to the transformative impact of seeking help and finding the tools to build resilience through stressful situations.Disclaimer: While we deeply value and appreciate the personal stories shared on our podcast, it's important to acknowledge that we are not licensed professionals in the field of mental health. If you or someone you know is struggling with mental health issues, experiencing distressing thoughts, or in need of support, we strongly encourage seeking assistance from qualified mental health professionals or reaching out to local mental health hotlines or support organizations.Thanks to WhiteWall for being our lead sponsor this episode! They're the top choice for photographers who want high-quality prints, with a variety of material options, and who want their work delivered fast in 9 days or less! Use code MINDSET15 for 15% offhttps://www.whitewall.com/Our 2024 TPM Photography Retreat in Alaska has dropped in price from $4800 USD to $4000 USD. ONLY 1 SPOT LEFT! https://thephotographermindset.com/products/2024-tpm-annual-retreat-alaskaSubscribe to TPM's Youtube page and watch full length episodes: https://www.youtube.com/thephotographermindset/If you're listening on Spotify you can now interact with us directly by typing your thoughts, opinions, or questions in the Q & A section. We read them and publish them. It's a great way to make these episodes more of a two way conversation so be sure to add your two cents after each episode!Make a donation via PayPal for any amount you feel is equal to the value you receive from our podcast episodes! Donations help with the fees related to hosting the show:https://paypal.me/podcasttpm?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_USThanks for listening!Go get shooting, go get editing, and stay focused.@sethmacey@mantis_photography@thephotographermindsetSupport the show

March 6, 1857. In the landmark case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, the US Supreme Court rules that African Americans are not entitled to citizenship. This episode originally aired in 2023.Support the show! Join Into History for ad-free listening and more.History Daily is a co-production of Airship and Noiser.Go to HistoryDaily.com for more history, daily.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If there was a major event in the last-half of the 19th century in Canada, chances are Sir Sandford Fleming was involved somehow. The first Canadian stamp, the telegraph line to New Zealand, the Last Spike, Standard Time, he had something to do with all of them. Artwork/logo design by Janet Cordahi Support: patreon.com/canadaehx Merch: www.canadaehx.com/shop Donate: www.buymeacoffee.com/craigu Donate: canadaehx.com (Click Donate) E-mail: craig@canadaehx.com Twitter: twitter.com/craigbaird Threads: https://www.threads.net/@cdnhistoryehx Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@cdnhistoryehx YouTube: youtube.com/c/canadianhistoryehx Want to send me something? Craig Baird PO Box 2384 Stony Plain PO Main, Alberta T7Z1X8 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Exceptional policeman officer Nicholas Angel is given a promotion to Sergeant, but has to move to the sleepy village of Sandford, Gloucestershire. Despite its idyllic exterior, Sandford holds many secrets, and only Nicholas, and his monkey, can save the day.   The second in Edgar Wright's Three Flavours Cornetto trilogy, Hot Fuzz is a love letter to the glory days of action cinema. It affirmed the Wright/Pegg/Frost dream team by combining sizzling actions sequences, elements of horror and laugh out loud humour.   All The Right Movies are ready to cook some fools.   Episode sponsors: BetterHelp: For a 10% discount off your first month with BetterHelp, click here Connect with ATRM: To support what we do, access our archive and listen to exclusive episodes, become an ATRM patron. Twitter: @ATRightMovies YouTube: Subscribe to our channel Instagram and Threads: @allthe_rightmovies  Facebook: Join our movie group TikTok: @alltherightmovies Website: alltherightmovies.com

A wondrous, buried treasure from the 20-year On Being archive, with renowned yoga teacher Matthew Sanford. Be prepared, as you listen to what follows, to take in subtleties and gracefulness you've never before pondered — or tried to feel in yourself — in the interplay between your mind and your body.Matthew has an immensely energetic physical presence. He has been paralyzed from the chest down since a car accident in 1978. But he likes to say that his experience is only more extreme, not so different, from that of everyone else. He's written, "We are all leaving our bodies — this is the inevitable arc of living. Death cannot be avoided; neither can the inward silence that comes with the aging process." Matthew's intricate knowledge of that "inward silence," which he was forced to befriend after the noisy connections which most of us take for granted were severed — it's revelatory. So is his insistence that it's not possible to live more deeply in your body — in all its grace and all its flaws — without becoming more compassionate towards all of life. And: if you do yoga, you will never think about what it is affecting inside you in the same way again.Krista sat with Matthew Sanford in 2006, just after he'd published his beautiful book Waking: A Memoir of Trauma and Transcendence.Matthew Sanford is the founder and president of Mind Body Solutions. He teaches yoga for all kinds of bodies, including adaptive yoga classes weekly, and holds regular virtual gatherings with people around the world. A video library of his teaching methods for yoga teachers is freely available. His book is Waking: A Memoir of Trauma and Transcendence.Find the transcript for this show at onbeing.org.______Sign up for The Pause — a Saturday morning companion to the podcast season.

Dred Scott v. Sandford is one of the most infamous cases in Supreme Court history: in 1857, an enslaved person named Dred Scott filed a suit for his freedom and lost. In his decision, Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney wrote that Black men “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” One Civil War and more than a century later, the Taneys and the Scotts reunite at a Hilton in Missouri to figure out what reconciliation looks like in the 21st century. Voices in the episode include: • Lynne Jackson — great-great-granddaughter of Dred and Harriet Scott, and president and founder of the Dred Scott Heritage Foundation • Dred Scott Madison — great-great-grandson of Dred Scott • Barbara McGregory — great-great-granddaughter of Dred Scott • Charlie Taney — great-great-grandnephew of Roger Brooke Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who wrote the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision • Richard Josey — Manager of Programs at the Minnesota Historical Society Learn more: • 1857: Dred Scott v. Sandford • The Dred Scott Heritage Foundation   Special thanks to Kate Taney Billingsley, whose play, "A Man of His Time," inspired the episode; and to Soren Shade for production help. Additional music for this episode by Gyan Riley. Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.