Eric Lanlard is launching a festive-themed pop-up cake shop in the GILT Cocktail Lounge in London next month.The new Cake Boy boutique, based on his bakery business in Battersea, south London, will open on 14 and 15 December from 11am to 4pm in the drinking venue, located in the five-star hotel Jumeirah Carlton Tower in Knightsbridge.The temporary bakery shop will be selling a selection of Christmas cupcakes, boxes of mini mince pies and Lanlard’s twist on the traditional Christmas cake.Lanlard, who will running the pop-up shop, said: “I’m excited to take Cake Boy on the road. Jumeirah Carlton Tower offers the perfect temporary home, located in the heart of Knightsbridge, and just off one of London’s most exclusive shopping streets.”The patissier and host of the Channel 4 television series Baking Mad designed his own afternoon tea for the same hotel back in March, and is currently offering an ‘I Love Paris’ afternoon tea menu in the Jumeirah Carlton Tower’s Chinoiserie tea room.
The Harry Elkins Widener Memorial Room houses about 3,300 volumes from the book collection of its namesake, a 1907 Harvard graduate who died in the sinking of the RMS Titanic a century ago.His books include first editions by Charles Dickens, Robert Lewis Stevenson, and Charlotte Bronte. There are also original illustrations from novels he loved and costume books that inspired some of his era’s Hasty Pudding Club theatricals. Creating the Memorial Room was a condition of building the library, along with the requirements that Harry’s collection not be moved or mixed into the general collection.In 1916, Eleanor Elkins Widener — by then Eleanor Elkins Rice — wrote to Harvard President A. Lawrence Lowell, requesting that fresh-cut flowers be kept near the portrait of “my dear son Harry” in the Memorial Room.Despite a complete written record relating to the Widener gift, two mythical Widener requirements are still in general circulation: that ice cream (Harry’s favorite dessert) be served in every dining hall, and that all incoming students pass a swim test. Neither is true.— Corydon Ireland
Roger Bannister, celebrated for breaking the four-minute mile in 1954, died last month at 88. For many, the news brought to mind a simpler — albeit slower — era on the track, and highlighted a distance often overshadowed by races both shorter and longer.Today’s mile record – 3:43.13, set in 1999 — is quite a bit faster than Bannister’s 3:59.4. Perhaps more significant, Moroccan Hicham El Guerrouj’s 19-year reign is the longest stretch since American Norman Taber — running 4:12.6 on the Harvard track in Allston — broke a nearly 30-year-old record in 1915.Daniel Lieberman, chair of Harvard’s Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, has through his writing and research deepened our understanding of the role of running in human survival. He’s also known for having helped set in motion the barefoot-running boom by emphasizing how forefoot strikers like Bannister more closely mirror our ancestors than the heavily shod heel-strikers of today.Ahead of lining up for his eighth Boston Marathon, Lieberman shared some thoughts on the past, present, and future of speed, including the history-making performance of Roger Bannister, whom he once met.Q&ADaniel LiebermanGAZETTE: When did you meet Roger Bannister?LIEBERMAN: Every year there’s a conference at the Royal Society of Medicine right before the London Marathon. The first time I spoke there — I think it would have been 2006 or 2007 — I couldn’t take my eyes off an elderly fellow with a tweed suit sitting in the front row, looking very engaged. I remember wondering if it was Roger Bannister. They had a lunch for the speakers at a fancy restaurant right near the Royal Society, and they seated him next to me.We ended up having lunch together and chatted for hours. We talked about everything under the sun, but a lot about feet and running. I remember at one point he took off his shoes to show me his arch — this is at a fancy London restaurant. It was a treat to talk to him because he was so intellectually engaged in the science and physiology of running.GAZETTE: Do his arches look any different? Any hint of what might have set him apart?LIEBERMAN: (laughing) I think he had pretty typical feet for a septuagenarian.He did talk about the kinds of shoes that he wore back in the day, and was fascinated by — and not particularly approving of — how running shoes had gotten so built up. He, like any fast miler, was a forefoot striker. We published a few years later the paper in which we made the argument that, essentially, prior to shoes pretty much everybody ran the way Bannister ran. He felt that was clearly the best way to run.I remember him describing how he had his shoes made by a cobbler in London. You couldn’t go to a shoe store back then and buy a pair of running shoes. He basically had to have his shoes custom made. I remember he discussed how hard it was to get the right kind of material — light but durable enough not to fall apart.One thing that was amazing about his achievement was that he did this before the modern era. Everything was completely amateur. When he broke the four-minute mile, he was a young doctor and took the train up from London that morning. He wasn’t a professional runner. He just did this on the side, while still devoting the majority of his energy to being a doctor and to his research.,GAZETTE: The current mile record is around 3:43, set in 1999.LIEBERMAN: It was a Moroccan named El Guerrouj …GAZETTE: … so it’s been almost 20 years now …LIEBERMAN: Three minutes and 43 seconds is considerably faster than four minutes. But there are still not that many people who’ve broken a four-minute mile. I think fewer than 1,500 people on the planet have ever run that far in less than four minutes. And it’s not for lack of trying.GAZETTE: Is there a physiological limit that humans can’t go beyond?LIEBERMAN: There must be. If you look at the curve of mile time against year, that curve is definitely slowing down, but it hasn’t flattened out. It will at some point; the question is where.A good example of this principle is horse racing. Horses have evidently hit their speed limit and are not getting any faster. Since 1940, Kentucky Derby times have essentially remained unchanged for a number of reasons.So, yes, there must be a limit for humans at some point. It is true, every once in a while there is a big leap, but those leaps are going to get smaller and more incremental. Nobody’s beaten El Guerrouj’s record in almost 20 years, so that’s saying a lot.Keep in mind also that the mile is an especially challenging distance. We tend to think about extremes in running. At one end are the explosive, all-out, pure power events, like the 100 meters, and at the other the endurance events like the marathon and longer. But between 800 meters up to five kilometers, runners have to precisely tune their bodies and their strategies to be good at both speed and endurance. That balance is really hard to get just right. “At one point he took off his shoes to show me his arch — this is at a fancy London restaurant. It was a treat to talk to him because he was so intellectually engaged in the science and physiology of running.” — about meeting Roger Bannister GAZETTE: Are humans, as a species, better runners now than we were back in the evolutionary past?LIEBERMAN: That is such a hard question to answer because until recently everybody’s job was to be an athlete.We were hunter-gatherers, and that involved primarily walking a lot, but also climbing, digging, and running. And that running would have involved not just long-distance running but also occasionally sprinting. If you look at the data on hunter-gatherers running when they are hunting, they don’t go particularly fast. They average a 10-minute mile, usually for about half-marathon distances. No doubt when chased by wild animals, they’ll sprint very fast, but I doubt that few if any hunter-gatherers ever ran as fast as Roger Bannister over a mile. For any fit human to run that fast takes extraordinary effort and training, and it was probably never necessary.That said, as a whole, I would say that humans have always been good athletes. Compared to other animals, we’re not particularly fast, but we have terrific endurance. What’s odd today, however, is that so few of us develop these skills. Most of us are sedentary, and we have largely professionalized athletics. It’s become a form of entertainment. GAZETTE: I imagine race strategy is important, but these top runners probably have that aspect of the race down.LIEBERMAN: There’s still some debate. I’m not an expert on this, but runners endlessly debate whether to run what’s called “even splits” — run each quarter-mile the same speed — or conserve energy initially to leave a little gas in the tank so you can end with a serious kick.Bannister was famous for his incredible surge. And if you look at El Guerrouj’s world record, his last lap was his fastest. Consider also that normally people race not to beat a particular time, but to beat other human beings, so the race is partly about your own physiology, but also partly about psychology. Putting on that burst at the end of a run when everybody else is flagging can really demoralize other runners.GAZETTE: You’ve written about persistence hunting and the ability of humans to run down faster animals, and even, over a long distance, animals that we think of as being distance runners, like horses and dogs. Are we faster over a mile than animals?LIEBERMAN: Very few. There are very few animals that humans can beat over a mile, although keep in mind that these pronouncements don’t come from actual races. Instead, researchers have clocked the maximum speeds of various animals by chasing them in cars or affixing sensors to their bodies when they are hunting or being hunted. Most animals sprint for only short distances, and it’s hard to know just how long and how far they can keep those speeds up.GAZETTE: You’re not going to outrun a cheetah for a mile?LIEBERMAN: There are examples of people who do run down a cheetah, but only over long distances. A few years ago some Kenyan farmers got really irritated by two cheetahs that were eating their goats, so they ran them down by chasing them for six kilometers. The cheetahs obviously could run many times faster than these guys, but we can outrun the cheetah easily over a few kilometers. That’s true for a lot of other animals too. I myself even recently participated in a man-against-horse marathon.GAZETTE: How did that go?LIEBERMAN: Every year they have a race in Arizona called Man Against Horse, which, as you can imagine, started in a bar.So two years ago, I decided I had to put my money where my mouth is and run it. It’s a marathon over a mountain. I’m not a great runner by any stretch of the imagination and I’ll never win anything. But it was an amazing experience, although very dispiriting at first as the horses, which were being ridden, quickly outpaced all of the humans in the first few miles.Then as the sun rose and it got hotter and hotter, we started passing the horses near the top of the mountain around mile 18. Passing those horses was one of the biggest thrills of my running life. I’ve also never felt so competitive. As I was racing those horses toward the end, I had an indescribably primal urge to beat them.I didn’t run a particularly fast time by human standards, but it was good enough for those hot, tired horses. I think there were 53 horses and I beat all but 13 of them. For me, it was also thrilling to experience physically what I’ve studied and written about, which is that over long distances, humans really can outrun the premier running animal on the planet, the horse. And I’m just an average runner, even if I do like to run marathons. I have no chance to come even close to winning any race ever. “Passing those horses was one of the biggest thrills of my running life. I’ve also never felt so competitive. As I was racing those horses toward the end, I had an indescribably primal urge to beat them.” Researchers making breakthroughs in learning how and why we run Chasing down a better way to run One result of our modern attitude toward running is that we forget how good just average people can be. If you consider the distribution of running times from any major marathon, there are a few insanely fast people who can run just a little bit slower than two hours, a slightly larger number of ridiculously fast people who can run it less than two hours and 30 minutes, or under three hours, but the vast majority of people can finish in four to six hours. It’s a very, very non-normal distribution, but even average finishers have accomplished something special that few animals can achieve.We tend to focus on the elites because they’re exciting and impressive, but where would our ancestors have been had they been so silly as to run 26.2 miles for no reason at all? They would have been mostly four- to five-hour finishers.GAZETTE: Are we evolving as a species to be worse runners? What forces may be at play?LIEBERMAN: Natural selection only works when there’s heritable variation that affects reproductive success. Since I suspect the ability to run fast has little effect on anyone’s ability to reproduce, I’d expect an absence of selection, hence a gradual increase in variation. An added complication is that running performance is a result of both environment and genes, and it’s the environmental component that is mostly changing. Thus, more of us are not living up to our potential. But that said, there is still a small group of people who really care passionately about running fast, who keep breaking records.Interview was edited for clarity and length. Related
A question I’m often asked by IT Leaders appears to be less of a technology question and more of an operational one; “how will the deployment of VblockTM Systems in my data center affect my IT staff?” I’d suggest they’re both dependent upon the other; the right technology leads to a smoother operational transition.Before looking at the technology I think it’s important to take a look back at where we’ve come from as historically as we’ve been making changes to keep up with the fast pace of the IT industry for years.Sixteen years ago I was a UNIX Engineer working with DEC Alpha systems and direct attached storage (still my favorite and most missed flavor of UNIX!); we had rack upon rack of storage dedicated to a single system running a large database. That’s the way we did it until somebody talked to us about shared storage. Of course there were objections from the application owners; how can you guarantee performance? How can you guarantee security and availability? But shared storage was here to stay and to say it’s prevalent within the data center today would be an understatement.About ten years ago we went through a similar transition with the advent of server virtualization. In the early days there was no vMotion and VM resources were limited; server virtualization was the exception rather than the rule. But as the technology matured we saw server consolidation becoming more of a reality. Once again we were asked; “how will you secure and guarantee the performance of my applications?” We could of course, the industry adjusted and today server virtualization is the rule with customers in all markets pushing for higher and higher consolidation ratios.So why, you may well ask, am I rambling on nostalgically about the various technologies witnessed during my time in IT? Simple, my career followed a very similar path. A career that began with UNIX progressed to storage, followed by server virtualization and then converged infrastructure. Had I insisted on remaining a UNIX engineer working with direct attached storage my career options today would probably be limited.We’re seeing something very similar today. The market has shifted and I’d argue converged infrastructure is here to stay; it’s the natural transition within the data center. With this transition skill sets are once again going to have to change or people will find their options becoming limited. Like the technology they’re going to have to adjust; it’s a natural transition for them too.So nothing new – it’s a pattern we’ve seen happen time and time again and will continue to see throughout our careers. With the change, however, comes good news – now instead of asking; “how will the Vblock deployment affect my IT Staff” the IT Director can ask “how can we best refocus our time to meet the business needs of the company?” Far too many in the data center must do more with fewer resources; they have accelerated timelines in which to deploy for a new project or initiative and don’t have the right skill sets in house. Vblock Systems allow them to take a look at their staff, analyze where there maybe shortfalls and reallocate them. It allows them to focus on their critical business applications rather than the underlying infrastructure that supports them.It’s always good to hear this confirmed when speaking with our customers who’ve deployed Vblock in their data centers; with more resources dedicated to their critical business applications innovation has increased. As a result they’ve become more competitive and are in many cases a step ahead of the competition.I mentioned earlier that the right technology leads to a smoother operational transition. Let’s take that a little further.In today’s data centers companies have personnel with strong skill sets around compute, storage and networking as individual components. What they don’t necessarily have is the ability to pull those components together rapidly, per best practice, for optimal application performance and availability. Vblock of course provides this value from a physical perspective; when integrated with the proper management strategy it performs it from both a physical and a logical one.It sounds easy doesn’t it? Of course it’s not; if it’s not done right you’ll have staff who aren’t trained in the new solution, don’t have access or can’t manage the environment through the tools they do know, and unplanned downtime will be the result.With that in mind, it’s the approach rather than the specific tool that becomes important. The ability to transition to a new operational model as the skill sets of your IT staff evolve too. The ability to use existing tool sets and transition to the new within your data center as requirements dictate rather than allowing the solution to force your hand. Now of course if you want to “flip the switch” it can be done, but if your concern is in how you integrate new technology within your data center, Vblock can accommodate that approach too.There’s a lot more to be said about our approach but for the sake of brevity I’ll leave it there; suffice it to say more will follow in future posts and through VCE announcements. For now I’d like to say thanks for your time, thanks for reading, and please come back and visit this site again soon.
A Notre Dame political science professor had the unique opportunity last month to teach students about “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in a place where such terms are foreign and difficult to grasp.Professor Vincent Muñoz traveled to the American University of Iraq-Sulaimani (AUI-S) to teach students about the principles behind the United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence.“The ideas were new and not familiar. They really wanted to know what it means to have the right to life, the right to liberty,” Muñoz said. AUI-S, a private university, opened in 2007 and offers an American-style liberal arts education. All classes are taught in English.Muñoz met AUI-S Provost John Agresto last November after the Notre Dame professor gave a lecture about the Constitution in Philadelphia. Agresto later invited Muñoz to teach students about American democracy in a workshop setting at AUI-S.Muñoz left for Iraq on March 25 and returned on April 5, traveling 30 hours each way. Notre Dame’s Institute for Scholarship in the Liberal Arts (ISLA) funded the trip.“I definitely want to thank Agustin Fuentes, director of the ISLA,” Muñoz said.On a typical day, Muñoz did some of his own work in the morning, ate lunch with faculty in the afternoon, met with his class and held informal conversations with students after class.“I taught for five days, but the total trip was 10 days,” Muñoz said. “I taught a 75 minute class which tended to go to 90 minutes. Anyone could come, and more students came every day.”Muñoz said the students arrived at each seminar class well prepared and with many questions.“The first day we did the Declaration of Independence and [discussed] what the purpose of government is. The second day we did the Federalist Number 10. [We then] spent two days on religious freedom and one day on constitutional design,” Muñoz said. “Students were so engaged because Iraq just wrote a constitution.”Muñoz said most students looked to America as the ideal democratic society.“[We discussed that] liberal democracy has its advantages and disadvantages,” he said. “They are so enamored with the idea of democracy, to have someone talk about the disadvantages of democracy was new to them.”Muñoz said some female students worried about the abuses of freedom. These students were concerned too much freedom could lead to an increased prevalence of abortions and pornography.Toward the end of his stay in Iraq, Muñoz gave a lecture open to the entire university titled “Constitutional Democracy and Religious Freedom.”“In the lecture I did a comparison between the Iraqi and American constitutions,” Muñoz said. “Islam is the established religion in the Iraqi constitution. I compared that to how we don’t have an official religion in America. Students thought it would be impossible not to have an established religion [In Iraq].”Muñoz said students were surprised a separation of church and state is not considered anti-religious. They also struggled to comprehend the idea of a limited government.“They had not seen the arguments for these ideas before,” Muñoz said.Muñoz said his class felt “in many ways, just like a seminar at Notre Dame.”But he said teaching students who are so unfamiliar with concepts like freedom of speech and freedom of religion — concepts most Americans do not think twice about — was refreshing.“[The trip] reminded me why I love to teach these things, because the students were so hungry to learn and the ideas were so new to them,” Muñoz said. “The eagerness of the students was infectious — they desire so much to live as a stable democracy like America.”
Bridget Everett, Cole Escola, Celisse Henderson and Chelsea Packard begin performances in Rock Bottom on September 9 at Joe’s Pub. Created by Everett, Marc Shaiman, Scott Wittman, Adam “Ad-Rock” Horovitz and Matt Ray, the production will run through October 11. Opening night is set for September 17. Rock Bottom View Comments Related Shows The show features familiar songs heard in Everett’s monthly showcase with her band The Tender Moments at Joe’s Pub and new original songs written with Shaiman, Wittman, Ray and Horovitz. Directed by Wittman, Rock Bottom is the story of what happens when you’re too passionate to give up, and too big to fail. In it, Everett barrels through life tip-toeing toward disaster, wine bottle by wine bottle and man by man. However, instead of succumbing to a chardonnay-induced stupor, Everett embraces a series of revelations that lead her to redemption. Show Closed This production ended its run on Feb. 20, 2015
Related Shows She’s trading in scrubs for serving trays! Charity Angél Dawson, who originated the role of Nurse Norma during Waitress’ premiere at the American Repertory Theater in Cambridge, Massachusetts and has been part of the cast ever since, assumed the role of Becky beginning on October 20. Keala Settle played her last performance in the Diane Paulus-helmed hit on October 19.A graduate of the American Musical and Dramatic Academy, Dawson has also been seen on the Great White Way in the 2014 revival of Side Show; she played Lavora in the off-Broadway production of Disaster!. Her other stage credits include Dreamgirls, The Color Purple, Ain’t Misbehavin’, Kiss Me Kate, The Wiz and West Side Story.The cast of Waitress also features Jessie Mueller, Drew Gehling, Dakin Matthews, William Popp, Christopher Fitzgerald and Eric Anderson.Waitress marks five-time Grammy nominee Sara Bareilles’ stage-writing debut. Based on the 2007 film by the late Adrienne Shelly and book by Jessie Nelson, the tuner follows Jenna (Mueller), a small town waitress stuck in a loveless marriage. As a nearby baking contest approaches (and a new doctor comes to town), she’s torn between her commitments and—thanks to her pie-making expertise—a chance at freedom. View Comments Waitress Charity Angél Dawson(Photo: Caitlin McNaney) Show Closed This production ended its run on Jan. 5, 2020
continue reading » 2SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr In response to the continuing challenges related to COVID-19, many financial institutions are relying on digital tools, including document management systems, to keep some semblance of normality.Document management systems are among the digital solutions that help your institution streamline operations and external communication. As financial institutions navigate this unprecedented situation while providing essential services to customers, maintaining productivity remains a priority. Follow these best practices to ensure your institution is operating efficiently while continuing to serve your customers during this time.1. Electronic Document DeliveryTo connect with customers, many financial institutions are using digital statements. With digital eStatements and eNotices, your customers can securely view a dynamic, interactive statement or bank notice online. Using these digital tools, your institution can reduce your paper and postage costs while offering convenience and physical safety during the COVID-19 pandemic.
A majority of Americans said they were concerned about how the coronavirus is spreading, according to the poll, as the number of COVID-19 cases surpassed 1 million people in the United States this week, killing more than 56,000.Trump publicly mused about the benefits of “cleaning” COVID-19 patients on the insides with disinfectants or ultraviolet light during a news conference last week, directing health officials in the room to look into it.Medical experts immediately condemned the president’s suggestion, and the makers of disinfectant products warned the public against ingesting them. Trump later tried to portray his remarks as sarcasm, but given his popularity with some Americans, health officials expressed concern his remarks would persuade some people to poison themselves.Overall, Trump’s overall popularity has not changed much over the past week. Forty-three percent of Americans said they approve of his overall job performance, and the same number also approve of his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Topics : Among registered voters, 44% said they would vote for Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, while 40% said they would back Trump if the election were held today.The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online, in English, throughout the United States. It gathered responses from 1,001 adults, including 416 Democrats and 419 Republicans. Americans appear to be losing faith in what President Donald Trump says about the coronavirus pandemic, with almost everyone rejecting Trump’s remark that COVID-19 may be treated by injecting infected people with bleach or other disinfectants, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Tuesday.The April 27-28 public opinion poll found that fewer than half of all adults in the US – 47% – said they were “very” or “somewhat” likely to follow recommendations Trump makes about the virus. That is 15 percentage points lower than the number who said they would follow Trump’s advice in a survey that ran at the end of March.And 98% of Americans said they would not try to inject themselves with bleach or other disinfectants if they got the coronavirus, including 98% of Democrats and 98% of Republicans. That is a near-unanimous rejection of an idea that Trump floated at a time of widespread anxiety about the virus.
February 17, 2017 Governor and First Lady Wolf Join Health Professionals, Advocates, & Legislators to Denounce Senate Bill 3 SHARE Email Facebook Twitter Press Release, Public Health, Women’s Rights Abington, PA – Governor Tom Wolf and First Lady Frances Wolf today joined women’s health advocates and medical professionals, along with Representative Madeleine Dean, Senator Art Haywood, Representative Steve McCarter, and Representative Mary Jo Daley to denounce the fast-tracking of Senate Bill 3 which would eliminate a woman’s right to make choices about her own health care in consultation with her doctor.“I want to thank the members of the General Assembly who have stood against this bill. Let me be clear: Should Senate Bill 3 reach my desk, I will veto it,” Governor Wolf said. “I am not threatening a veto out of partisanship, or due to some political back and forth. I am promising this veto to demonstrate that Pennsylvania will not play games with women’s healthcare in our Commonwealth. Simply put, this legislation severely limits women’s ability to make informed and timely decisions about their own health care options. That is not the place of government.”“Senate Bill 3 is an unwise, unscientific, unvetted, and unconstitutional bill,” said Representative Madeleine Dean. “It is dangerous and is anti-woman, seeks to take both the choice and the decision making away from a woman, her doctor and her family—and bizarrely puts critical medical decisions in the hands of the Pennsylvania legislature. All of this without so much as a hearing or consultation with experts and doctors.”Senate Bill 3 proposes the most extreme restrictions on abortion in the country. It would ban abortions after twenty weeks except in the rarest of circumstances, leaving no exceptions for rape, incest, health or tragic fetal anomalies. The bill would also ban one of the safest methods of second trimester abortions, putting women at risk and taking crucial decisions about their medical care out of the hands of their trusted medical providers.“This vote was based upon a bunch of quacks,” said Senator Art Haywood. “There’s no medical basis for the decisions a group of non-doctors have made. And they made this decision on behalf of Pennsylvania’s women without the input of those women or the doctors who serve them.”The Pennsylvania Senate recently passed the bill, despite bi-partisan opposition, through committee and the floor in just three days with limited debate and no expert witnesses or public hearings. The bill now awaits action by the House of Representatives, where a similar version passed last session.Governor and First Lady Wolf were joined today by women who have had to make devastating decisions about their pregnancies. If SB 3 were to be passed, women facing the same circumstances would be stripped of their right to make these personal, family decisions.“I am grateful for the one element of control I had in an otherwise powerless situation: the decision to end our pregnancy and with it our son’s pain and suffering,” said Erica Goldblatt Hyatt. “This is the paradox, I learned, of being a mother: in my case, loving my son so deeply that it meant choosing to say goodbye. Though that choice rests on my heart every day, I know it was the right one for our family, and I am grateful to live in a State where our Governor supports the rights of women like me to make it, autonomously, with those who know and love her best.”Like Governor Tom Wolf on Facebook: Facebook.com/GovernorWolf