Dark Matter eLiquid

Enjoy the wonderful flavor of our latest VapeSafe eLiquid - Dark Matter.

Dark Matter tastes like German chocolate cake. For those of you who have not had the fortunate to try a piece German chocolate cake recently, this is a great way to experience the flavor without getting any of the calories. German chocolate cake is a layered cake filled and topped with a coconut-pecan frosting. Traditionally sweet baking chocolate is used for the chocolate flavor in the actual cake. The robust filling and topping is a caramel made with egg yolks and evaporated milk. Once the caramel is cooked, coconut and pecans are stirred into the mixture. Finally, rich chocolate frosting is spread around the sides of the cake to hold in the filling.

Dark Matter eLiquid by VapeSafe captures the essence of German chocolate cake. Dark Matter eLiquid delivers plumes of vapor and rich chocolatey flavor that you'll want to enjoy again and again. Try Dark Matter today!

Technology Information:

The 37th Amendment: A Novel

Description

Ted Braden is just trying to collect on a basketball bet when he telephones a fellow Lakers fan one night. That phone call makes him a witness in a sensational murder trial and launches him into a dangerous battle with the California criminal justice system—the year is 2056, forty years after the 37th Amendment has removed "due process of law" from the United States Constitution.

Join Ted as his calm world is rocked by an angry girlfriend, a beautiful prosecutor, and an eminent defense attorney who has had enough of a legal system tilted against defendants. Then meet someone who has a different view.

A wild ride through a surprising future, The 37th Amendment is a startling look at what our society has given up to crime, what we might do about it, and what the next generation might think of our choices.

This remarkable novel includes an appendix that tells the true story of "How the First Amendment Came to Protect Topless Dancing." You'll never look at the U.S. Supreme Court the same way again.

Reviews

Rating: 4 / 5
Date: 2007-09-04
Summary: "Thought Provoking"

It is the year 2056 and the 37th Amendment has been ratified ensuring that all individuals, regardless of race or gender, will be treated equally. This has effectively rid the county of anything that would give preference to a particular group including concepts such as affirmative action and quotas. It also left the individual States with the ability to govern themselves without federal oversight - especially without the Supreme Court.

California has taken this liberty and implemented extremely tough crime fighting laws that have significantly shortened the time one has to come to trial and prepare a defense. California has also become a frontrunner in the use and execution of the death penalty. As a result, crime rates have plummeted reacting to the swift and certain punishment associated with the harsher criminal justice system. But when one man is arrested for a brutal murder, those that come to his defense believe that he is innocent and it appears that the criminal laws, in place because of the 37th Amendment, will not provide them with an adequate opportunity to mount a defense and prepare for trial.

This novel presents an interesting philosophical question - is society willing to suffer a loss of due process rights in exchange for a safer, crime free community? The plot poses a circumstance where a loss of liberty has essential resulted in a safer community because law enforcement is free to walk up to gang members and search them for weapons without probable cause or even reasonable articulable suspicion. Most law abiding citizens would likely initially vote for the safer community. But how would they feel if they were the innocent accused? The book sets a sympathetic stage so that the reader will fight an internal battle throughout while enjoying the experience of the plot unfolding. The story suffers from some plot weakness, but ultimately succeeds in setting out an intriguing issue based in a fast paced storyline.

---

Rating: 1 / 5
Date: 2005-03-09
Summary: "liberal nonsense"

This book is just another exercise in fear and hatred by liberals. This time
directed at mainstream americans who want reform of the 14th amendment.
Contrary to the premise of the book, the 14th Amendment was never leagally
ratified to begin with and was never intended to apply the constrants of the
bill of rights to the states.

As to the rest of the premise, its the usual liberal nonsense. If you give
people freedom, it empowers them. Susan Shelley seems to think that people
can't be trusted with freedom. In particular, she thinks that people need
to be protected from their own state and local government while washington
is the source of all freedom and security. What nonsense. The founding
fathers feared and rejected an all-powerful federal government because they
knew that it, not the states, would become a tyranny to America.

What she wrote in the book is a good view of what liberalism would be like
if they still ruled the country. If the 14the Amendment were done away with,
we would see a return to true federalism, an end to big government stepping
on our rights, the supreme court returning to the original intent of our
founding fathers and an ownership society where freedom florished.

---

Rating: 5 / 5
Date: 2005-01-17
Summary: "Freedom in free fall"

Set in 2056, Ms. Shelley's novel examines what happens when the due process clause of the United States Constitution is eliminated and states are truly free to set their own laws, no matter how draconian, without any federal oversight. No matter where you fall on the political spectrum, this is a thought provoking examination of a United States legal system where the constitution has been amended to accomplish the states' rights agenda of many current politicans. The story presents both sides of the debate in a way that is simultaneously entertaining and intellectually challenging: a formidable accomplishment.

---

Rating: 2 / 5
Date: 2004-08-16
Summary: "Interesting concept, but the novel never develops"

I was drawn to this book by the concept and my enjoyment of "What if..." fiction. The idea is an interesting one, but I wish that Shelley had spent more time on developing her characters and plot and less on proselytizing her views on Federalism. Instead of telling a story with the concept as a background, Shelley uses most of her characters as straight men to lob up nice, slow softball-pitches to what becomes the book's main voice, the grandmother who fears a return to the "bad old days" of due process of law, who lectures the other characters and the reader with Shelley's opinions.

As to the depth of the characters, I was fascinated that the character who knew the least about the law and who acted with the least amount of common sense was the only female lawyer in the book. With the exception of the above-mentioned grandmother, the two main female characters are vapid, easily-manipulated sexpots. While both characters have careers that would seemingly require intelligence and character, neither seems to have any concept of what is going on, pout and cry when they don't get their way, and revert to a junior-high level of catty jealousy when their shared boyfriend, who is 20+ years older than both, mentions the other. I don't necessarily expect a female author to always write strong female characters, but these two were such shallow stereotypes that I just could not take this book seriously.

I personally disagree with many of Shelley's ideas about due process, but would have respected them more if she had worked harder on the delivery vehicle of the novel as a story, rather than a pulpit for her views. The addendum in the back, in the guise of a law review article, shows that Shelley did her legal homework. I just wish she had worked harder on the voices that delivered those facts.

---

Rating: 5 / 5
Date: 2003-08-06
Summary: "Riveting, Exciting, Thought-Provoking."

This book is advertised as a legal thriller and it is -- it certainly keeps you turning the pages -- but it's a lot more than just a story about the lives and loves of lawyers. What Susan Shelley has done in this novel is amend the U.S. Constitution to solve the crime problem, and then start the story forty years later, in 2056, to see how it turned out.

It's fascinating in kind of a back-to-the-future (but not quite) way. Picture the 1950s with modern women and without the bother of marriage.

While you're flying through the story (it moves!), thinking about how nice it would be to live in a nearly crime-free Los Angeles, the characters in the book are battling over a case of justice gone wrong and trying to change everything back to the way we do it now.

You'll find yourself identifying with the senior citizens in this book, the ones who remember how things were way back in the 1990s. These kids today....

This is a dazzling novel. It also includes an appendix, an amazing history of "How the First Amendment Came to Protect Topless Dancing." You'll definitely want to read it if you're interested in the Supreme Court, or if you're on the Supreme Court.

Five stars.