baccarat demo

ATLANTA (AP) — Ethan Vasko threw three touchdown passes and ran for a fourth as Coastal Carolina became bowl eligible by beating Georgia State 48-27 for its sixth win of the season in the regular season finale on Saturday. The Chanticleers evened their season record at 6-6 with the win and finished 3-5 in the Sun Belt East. The loss leaves Georgia State (3-9) with just one win in eight conference games. Vasko threw 10 yards to Senika McKie for the game's first score midway through the first quarter, but the Panthers got a Liam Rickman 28-yard field goal and a 19-yard touchdown run by Freddie Brock to take a 10-7 second-quarter lead. Vasko threw his second TD pass, this one a five-yard strike to Zach Courtney to take the lead and Kade Hensley booted a 43-yard field goal as time expired to put Coastal Carolina up 17-10 at halftime. Christian Washington ran 18-yards for a touchdown to open up a 24-10 lead four minutes into the third quarter. Vasko hit McKie for their second touchdown, this one from 31-yards out and Vasko ran 10 yards for a fourth-quarter touchdown to make it 38-10 with under 10 minutes to play. Vasko was 13 of 17 passing for 200 yards and carried 13 times for another 68. Washington carried 20 times for 124 yards. McKie caught five passes for 81 yards Georgia State amassed 428 yards of offense, but the Panthers turned the ball over six times. Christian Veilleux completed 15 of 26 passes for 205 yards but was picked off four times and fumbled. Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-footballNoneLegislation allowing terminally ill individuals to legally end their lives through medication is back on the table for next year’s legislative session but with one change – patients would be prohibited from taking the prescribed medication in public spaces. State Rep. Bob Lynn, a Windham Republican and the bill’s primary sponsor, explained that the revision addresses concerns about the possibility of those eligible for the end-of-life care taking the medications in public areas like beaches, alleys, parks or lakes. However, Lynn believes these fears are unfounded. “It really sounds to me, to be honest, respectfully to those who don’t like this bill generally, it’s almost a frivolous kind of argument,” said Lynn. “Somebody that’s terminally ill and within six months of death is probably not likely to be tooling around in public. But nonetheless, to address that issue, we put that in there.” To qualify for life-ending medications under this bill — similar to the previously debated House Bill 1283 — individuals must be at least 18 years old, have a terminal illness with a prognosis of six months or less to live, possess sound mental capacity and be able to self-administer the medication. The process also requires verification from two healthcare providers before any prescription is issued. The bill drew significant public attention, with over 1,780 people testifying both for and against it. Among them, 1,125 voiced opposition before the measure ultimately failed in the Senate. The opposition wasn’t focused on the medication or the methods, but rather the concern that the bill would effectively condone suicide. Steven Wade, executive director of the Brain Injury Association, views the bill as a potential risk for abuse within the disability community, warning that it sends a dangerous message that suicide is an acceptable solution. “Having a difficult life and being in pain, those are things that people with brain injury and people with disabilities live with every day,” said Wade. “It’s devaluing the lived experience of people living with severe disability in the community and it’s also putting folks like that at risk in the sense that all of a sudden it becomes, maybe becomes an obligation to end your life rather than necessarily a choice.” But, the bill does not allow individuals with a terminal illness and a severe disability to be eligible for the end-of-life option, as they must be capable of self-administering the medication. Article continues after... Cross|Word Flipart Typeshift SpellTower Really Bad Chess Opponents of the end-of-life care option believe the state should prioritize expanding palliative care to ensure greater comfort for individuals with terminal illnesses, rather than promoting medication to end suffering through death. The National Alliance on Mental Illness New Hampshire has chosen to remain neutral on the bill. Modeled after similar laws in 10 states and the District of Columbia, including neighboring Maine and Vermont, the bill gives those with terminal illnesses the power to control their own death. Once the medication is prescribed, patients retain full autonomy over its use, deciding when — or if — they wish to take it, whether at home or in a hospice setting. For supporters, it is a matter of personal liberty and bodily autonomy. “If I had some really terrible disease and was in pain and suffering and the doctor told me I only had six months to live, I think I would want to have the option of being able to die peacefully, rather than not peacefully,” said Lynn, a former chief justice of the state Supreme Court. Although the bill received bipartisan support this year, with more Democrats favoring it, the recent elections have shifted the political landscape, giving Republicans greater control in both the House and Senate. To get the bill passed, Lynn said he is focused on educating the public and addressing misconceptions about the bill. “I hope it’ll get bipartisan support this year because I think it really is the right thing to do if you believe in liberty and you believe that people who are suffering should be able to have a right to make the decision when they’re very close to death, but not continue their suffering,” said Lynn. Sruthi Gopalakrishnan can be rea ched at sgopalakrishnan@cmonitor.combaccarat demo 。

Japan's famous sake joins UNESCO's cultural heritage list, a boost to brewers and enthusiasts

Meghan McCain , who pledged not to support either Vice President Kamala Harris or President-elect Donald Trump in the 2024 election, said this week that she instead cast a vote for her father, the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), for president. The Republican commentator and former “View” co-host made the revelation during an appearance on Katie Couric’s “Next Question” podcast this week. “I wrote in my dad. Is that cliché?” she explained. “People are so mad at me, Katie ― mad that I didn’t vote either way. And I was like, I have such Christian guilt at night, and I don’t want anything on my conscience with any of it. And I just can never vote for Trump. I can’t do it. I could never explain it to my children.” As for her decision not to vote for Harris, McCain said it came down to matters of “policy.” “I really wanted her to give me a reason to vote for her, and I just felt like it never happened, and there were some questions that she just couldn’t answer,” she told Couric. “And look, I’m a pro-life, pretty hardcore conservative woman, and Governor [Tim] Walz was way too extreme for me. He actually scared me a lot more than she did. He’s very radical on abortion and his record during 2020, George Floyd protests in Minneapolis. And I felt like he was cosplaying as a Republican to try and get my vote.” Members of the McCain family have repeatedly spoken out against Trump, who in 2015 made incendiary remarks about John McCain’s military career and his time as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. After Trump was elected president in 2016, he and John McCain sparred numerous times, most notably in 2017 when the senator sank the GOP’s efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act. When McCain died of brain cancer in 2018, Trump was not invited to the funeral. Meghan McCain’s decision to support neither Trump nor Harris isn’t surprising. In September, she said she wasn’t planning to vote for either one, even after her brother, Jimmy McCain, said he’d changed his voter registration from independent to Democrat with the intention of voting for Harris. “I greatly respect the wide variety of political opinions of all of my family members and love them all very much,” Meghan McCain wrote on X , formerly Twitter. “I however, remain a proud member of the Republican Party and hope for brighter days ahead. (Not voting for Harris or Trump, hope that clears things up).” Other news outlets have retreated behind paywalls. At HuffPost, we believe journalism should be free for everyone. Would you help us provide essential information to our readers during this critical time? We can't do it without you. Can't afford to contribute? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read. You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again . We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you. Whether you give once or many more times, we appreciate your contribution to keeping our journalism free for all. You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again . We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you. Whether you give just one more time or sign up again to contribute regularly, we appreciate you playing a part in keeping our journalism free for all. Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages. Still, in her “Next Question” interview, she had some mild praise for Harris for offering Democrats a fighting chance at the White House after President Joe Biden dropped out of the race in July. “She had 100 days to do this, and I think she should be applauded for getting in the cockpit of a crashing plane and leveling it out the way she did,” McCain said. “I don’t know how many other politicians could have done that. And I actually think that there are a lot of genuine criticisms of her that I can give. But I don’t think she’s this cataclysmic disaster that she’s being portrayed as now. I think it’s actually pretty unfair.” Listen to Meghan McCain’s “Next Question” interview below. Her comments about voting for her father begin at about the 30:25 mark. Related From Our Partner11-year-old Boston boy's weekly newspaper brings neighborhood togetherGNBS signs MoU with China Standards Administration to strengthen cooperation

New Hampshire courts hear two cases on transgender girls playing girls sports

REDWOOD SHORES, Calif. , Dec. 5, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP (RJLF) has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a coalition of manufacturers, businesses, affordable housing interests, and workers seeking to prevent enforcement of South Coast Air Quality Management District regulations that effectively ban certain gas appliances. The plaintiffs, representing thousands of California residents, businesses, and workers, include Rinnai America Corporation , Noritz America Corporation , National Association of Homebuilders , California Manufacturers & Technology Association , California Restaurant Association , California Hotel & Lodging Association , and California Apartment Association , all represented by RJLF and Sean Kneafsey of the Kneafsey Law Firm . Californians for Homeownership is represented by Matt Gelfand , Restaurant Law Center is represented by Angelo Amador , and the California State Pipe Trades Council by McCracken, Stemerman & Holsberry . The coalition's suit asserts that the District's zero-NOx emissions rule for certain appliances, which effectively bans those gas appliances, is preempted by the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) and should be blocked. The District's rule not only effectively mandates the use of electric appliances in new buildings but also forces costly retrofits to electric in existing buildings when appliances are replaced. This rule threatens the reliability and affordability of energy for millions of Californians, will impose enormous costs and disruption on businesses and workers, and will reduce the availability of affordable housing. Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that Berkeley, California's ban on gas piping in new buildings was preempted by EPCA ( California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley , 89 F.4th 1094 (9th Cir. 2024)) . The District's rule is legally indistinguishable, and the same result applies. "This case is pivotal to reinforcing the federal and state roles in setting national energy policy," said Sarah Jorgensen , lead counsel for the plaintiffs at RJLF. "The District's mandate for electric appliances in both new construction and forced retrofits not only jeopardizes our clients' work, business, and interests but also disregards established federal law. California must comply with the law." The case is Rinnai America Corp. et al. v. South Coast Air Quality Management District , No. 2:24-cv-10482 , in the United States District Court for the Central District of California . About Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP (RJLF) is a national trial firm that handles high-stakes energy, commercial, intellectual property, and white collar disputes. The firm is majority women-owned, reinventing the practice of law without the billable hour in favor of fee arrangements that align client interests. RJLF's attorneys are diverse, exceptionally credentialed, and passionate about trial advocacy. From offices in Silicon Valley, New York , Washington, D.C. , Austin , and Atlanta , the firm tries cases and argues appeals throughout the country. For more information, visit www.reichmanjorgensen.com . Contact Sarah Jorgensen sjorgensen@reichmanjorgensen.com (650) 623-1403 View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/reichman-jorgensen-lehman--feldberg-leads-suit-against-south-coast-air-quality-management-districts-effective-ban-on-certain-gas-appliances-302324441.html SOURCE Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP

Japan's famous sake joins UNESCO's cultural heritage list, a boost to brewers and enthusiastsAehr Test Systems, Inc. Stockholder Notice: Shareholder Rights Law Firm Robbins LLP Reminds Investors of the Class Action Against AEHR