Cooking for Two. Or Fewer.

I have a friend who is trying to work out cooking for fewer people than she has been accustomed to doing. I've been cooking for just me for nine or so years and have come up with some tricks and shortcuts that don't involve frozen entrees. But I can't think of them all at one sitting so I'm going to periodically post my thoughts and suggestions on this subject.

The most useful advice I can give, which was also shared by several of my single friends when I surveyed them, was to cook what you're used to cooking, and freeze the rest. That is a good idea but isn't always practical. Plus, some days you just want something freshly made.

I've found that, being single, I can afford to buy better cuts of meat since I'm buying less than I would for a couple or a family. Always have something special on hand. In my case, that can be either a hanger steak or skirt steak, or a rib eye (although even when feeding only one person that can be way pricey.) I also like to keep lamb around, either chops or shank. When you live alone, there are going to be times when you're feeling a little lonely. When that happens, spoil yourself.

A trick I use, and it's one I recommend for everyone, not just for people cooking for one, is to set aside a time each week to do some of your prep for cooking. I chop an onion, usually on Sunday. I store it in a plastic container, and use only the amount I need for each thing I'm making. That usually means I chop a very large onion, and that leaves me in tears. This is sometimes therapeutic. If I have celery and/or bell pepper handy I'll chop those, too. Don't try to do this for longer than a week; the onion will lose flavor and other vegetables will soften if you do it too far ahead.

I'm not too proud to buy stew meat already cubed but if you don't want to do that, you can cube chuck or round steak for stews when you are chopping your onions and other aromatics.

By the way, you shouldn't count on chopping garlic ahead of time. It will lost flavor lots faster than onion will, provided the onion is in a well sealed container and refrigerated. I don't know if that's a scientifically provable fact or just my experience, but that's what I'm suggesting.

I'm going to share more thoughts, suggestions, and recipes on this topic as I'm inspired to and as I think of things. I would appreciate being linked to anyone else's suggestions and/or recipes for one.

Skirt of leftovers

I have some time to spend crafting thanks to the economy (and the failing health of the owner of the company I was working for.) So I can finally do some of my less pressing but still good projects. This skirt is made of strips from two COMPLETELY different fabrics from my unused extras pile. The print was for an appliance cover (not used since I decided to store the food processor in the cabinet) and is an upholstery weight cotton and acrylic (not to be confused with polyester) blend of some sort. The solid is cotton flannel leftover from my successful handkerchiefs project. Neither is going to fight wrinkles at all and washing this will be A Pain. But I love how it looks, both on the hanger and on me. So I'll find a way to make it work. Now I have to go find the crochet hook I dropped behind the bed last night. You should see the stash busting I'm doing!

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.2

Name the recipe?

I found a recipe in an old (1984) British cookbook I've been idly paging through for a few weeks. The recipe was called Lentil Rice and it sounded pretty good. I started picking through my pantry and discovered I was short a few ingredients. My substitutions made it even better than I expected it to be. Now I need to name the recipe and I'm fresh out of creativity. Here's the recipe. I'm taking suggestions for names. (Once I have a name I might have to share this with Bob's Red Mill.)

water for soaking

1/4 cup Bob's Red Mill Vegi Soup Mix

1/4 cup brown rice

Oil for sauteeing

1/2 onion, chopped fine

2 cloves garlic, chopped fine

1/4 teaspoon fenugreek seed

1/4 teaspoon fennel seed

1/4 teaspoon ground cumin (I'd rather have used cumin seed but couldn't find any)

pinch or two of red pepper flakes

salt and pepper to taste

2 cups water

Soak soup mix and rice in water to cover for a half hour to an hour. No longer or it'll turn mushy. Heat oil in saucepan. When the oil is shimmering hot, add onions and garlic and saute until onion is translucent, about 3 minutes. Add spices and continue to saute up to 2 minutes until it's really fragrant. Drain soup mix and rice well, and add to the saucepan. Saute a minute or minute and a half but no longer. Add 2 cups water, stir well to loosen what's gotten stuck to the bottom of the saucepan, bring to a boil, cover, and reduce heat to medium. Let cook without removing the cover for 20 minutes, then check for doneness. Continue to simmer, covered, until it's done. If it is too watery for your tastes, simmer uncovered 5 minutes, stirring frequently.

Serves 2 (meaning I have enough leftovers for another lunch.)

So, anyone care to suggest a name? I'd hate to have to send this off to Bob's just titled Vegi Soup Mix and Rice.

My $3 Craft Challenge Project

I never uploaded the tutorial pictures but I have the final product to show you. I'm not sure the tutorial is necessary. It's fairly obvious what I did. But if someone wants details, I'll be happy to explain what I did. (BTW, I do not ever again want to work with tis kind of fabric again unless it's to piece together finished napkins. Fake satin IS the Satan of fabrics!)

It is, unfortunately, too small for my head. I cut it the right size, but used wider seams than I'd meant to. This is my interpretation of a pillbox hat. I used a strip of posterboard that I had in my paper collection to stiffen the brim, but other than that it's all stuff I got at the Dollar Tree. Well, and thread. I didn't have any thread to match the napkins so I used the closest color I had (brown.) It was really easy to make but I don't think I'll make another one. I'm not a pillbox hat kind of a girl. But if I were, I'd want one in that color.

Have any of you finished your projects yet? I'm thinking of trying another of these for the fall, but will wait until I hear back no how others fared in this challenge.

??? DOLLAR CRAFT CHALLENGE

I have decided to instigate a non-specifically periodic craft challenge. I'm calling it the ??? Dollar Craft Challenge. Every once in a while I will go down to my dollar store and pick up a certain number of things that I will challenge my readers (if there still are any) to do something creative with. There is no prize. There is no time frame. But if you want to participate (and I'll pimp the hell out of this, on the off chance complete strangers are interested) post your results in comments, with instructions if you feel they are necessary. Link to a photo (I'm not sure you can put one directly into comments) if you have one. And bask in the knowledge that you are showing off your creativity.

Here are the rules

1. You have to use all of the items.
2. You may substitute for something SIMILAR if your dollar store doesn't have the same exact components. (String or yarn for the hemp cord in this one, for example.)
3. You may use what you have on hand only if you are using things you have on hand for many or all projects. Paints are okay, for example, as is thread and small amounts of stabilizing fabric. But you cannot pull fabric from your stash and use the components as minor parts of a larger project.
4. You can pull the components apart (the fake flowers in this one, for instance) and even alter them, so long as we can tell that you used the components.

If there is a good enough response, in the future I might even do these for prizes.

Here are the components for this first challenge, a Three Dollar Craft Challenge:

A pair of polyester (or cotton if your dollar store has more class than mine) dinner napkins
A fake (they ain't silk at the dollar store) flower
Hemp cord

Here's a picture of the components I picked up over the weekend:

Good luck, and let's have a whole heap o'fun with this!

Grousing Because I Can

The law prohibiting texting while driving is one of those “duh” laws that ought not to require a law. Really, how stupid do you have to be to do something that requires you to use both hands while you are driving a car, which also requires BOTH HANDS? (No, not just if it’s a stick shift. You need a hand free for emergencies like if you start to drift, or if you need to signal a turn or a slowdown, or just if you need to use the steering wheel. A couple of seconds with one hand off the wheel to change the radio station is probably not a big deal but to text? Seriously? Wow, some folks really do have far too high an opinion of their own abilities than they ought.

That said, what is less self-evident is that you shouldn’t text while walking. Case in point: This morning a man who was absorbed in typing who-knows-what walked past me on Oak, jostling my arm and not noticing it. That didn’t bother me although it did make me stare at him in some amazement that he hadn’t noticed. I’m not microscopic. I’m not even svelte. But, anyway, I then saw him walk out into traffic because whatever he was typing was apparently more important than noticing if there was a Max train barreling down on him. It wasn’t barreling so close that I got to witness the gore of a Max-ident up close, but the train tooted at him from a half a block away. He didn’t look up. But the car that was closer and had to slam on its brakes to avoid him got his attention. He sort of handwaved an apology and returned to his texting. I lost sight of him after that but am keeping my ears open for news of Darwin at work in Portland.

And lest anyone think I am all curmudgeon all the time, let me sing the praises of my little air conditioner. While it is true that the mild climate we enjoy in Portland seems to make an air conditioner wasteful and completely unnecessary, I have to say it’s made me uncommonly happy on days when the temperature goes over 90. It might be cooling the smallest room in the house, but that room is really comfortable. There’s just one oddity. You know how a window air conditioner drips condensation? Usually that goes out the window and either evaporates before it hits the ground or it waters a little tiny patch of pavement. Well, there are bars on my window. That made it really easy to install the unit, because I have a piece of furniture JUST the right height to fit it into the window frame up to the screen. But guess where that condensation is now dripping? I finally figure out that I needed to put a pail under the unit. But that is a minor inconvenience next to the lovely cool afternoon I had Sunday!

Now if only my neighbors weren’t setting off fireworks every night I’d be happy. WTF, people? The Fourth of July was on the FOURTH! Today is the twenty-sixth. Did you really buy enough fireworks to last twenty two EXTRA days? (Probably thirty extra once all is said and done.) I just don’t understand it.

I'm Not Racist. I Just Have Allergies.

This evening as I rode the Max home, I was nursing the beginning of a sinus headache. I’m allergic to mold, so I’m not sure what caused the headache but there it was.
At Lloyd Center (which, coincidentally or maybe not so coincidentally) a man got on the train with a big bunch of incense sticks in his hand. He was selling them, he explained, on behalf of some anti-gang ministry. He was a very pleasant man. He was polite and friendly and chatted with all the people who turned him down.
His incense sticks smelled so strongly they turned the beginning of a sinus headache into a full blown migraine. I don’t get migraines. I just get sinus headaches that mimic them. So to block the scent from getting to me any further, I stuck my head deeply into the magazine I was reading. When that didn’t help I held my nose and breathed through my mouth. My eyes watered but it helped.

The guy was very nice about it. He saw that I was suffering and he moved away from me. He even said, “Oh, you can’t have any of this, can you? I’m sorry, Miss, I’ll move away. God bless you.” Which I thought was delightful and I smiled.

The woman sitting across the aisle from me bought a lot of his incense. Sigh!

After he had gone to the front of the train car (leaving the godsawful scent behind) the woman across the aisle turned to me and said, “Was it really necessary for you to be so rude to him?”

I said, “I’m sorry I couldn’t buy anything from him but I get the worst headaches from that kind of incense.”

“Because he's a man of color?” she asked, all pompous and self-righteous. “Would it have been a problem if he'd been white? And clean cut? And middle class? I think not!" (She may not have sounded so speechified but at the time it felt that way.)

I was lucky because there were other people sitting nearby who had my back. One guy, an old guy with one of those "you stinking kids get off my lawn" looks on his face, said, “Lady, that’s pretty damn strong incense. I gave the guy a buck but I’m not going to buy his incense. Some of us don’t like it and some actually are allergic to it.”
The self-righteous woman said, “Whatever!” and moved to another part of the train. The woman sitting behind me offered a couple of aspirins (I had nothing to take them with, sadly.)

I’m in a fragile enough mood because of this stinking headache. The headache that started before any of this took place. I really did not need someone accusing me of racism because I had a headache. I was on the verge of tears. But I maintained because a guy I misjudged turned out to be so nice.

There, I’ve bitched and now I feel better. Hope your day went better.

It explains a few things

Fox Snooze - er - News has an undeniable right-wing bias. There is, in particular, a vitriol in the network's treatment of Democrats, both candidates and elected officials. It makes them money, for sure, and even if overall owner Rupert Murdoch may not always agree with this bias, he won't mess with such a lucrative strategy.

I wondered where the idea had come from. For a long time, I blamed Murdoch. But I realized a long time ago that Murdoch, while a brilliant businessman, wasn't this creative. Then I read this article which appeared in the New York Times this past weekend.

The bit that caught my attention was this:

Mr. Ailes majored in radio and television at Ohio University and worked for “The Mike Douglas Show,” where at age 27 he met then-presidential candidate Richard M. Nixon in 1968.

“The camera doesn’t like you,” he told Mr. Nixon, according to “Crazy Like a Fox,” a book by Scott Collins about Fox News.

“It’s a shame a man has to use gimmicks like this to get elected,” Mr. Nixon said.

“Television is not a gimmick, and if you think it is, you’ll lose again,” Mr. Ailes said. The Nixon campaign hired him a few days later.

Once again, it all comes back to Nixon. I sometimes think the right wing of the Republican Party is still trying to get its revenge for 1960, when John F Kennedy defeated Nixon by 84 electoral votes but less than 1 percent of the popular vote. (As a point of interest, Nixon carried the entire west coast while Kennedy carried nearly all of the southern states. Things have changed a bit since those days.)

Once Nixon finally got into the White House in 1969, machinations by people like Ailes continued, with the apparent goal of making the Republican Party the most powerful and only important political party in the United States.

It took some seriously brilliant public relations to keep the party afloat after both Nixon and his Vice President Spiro Agnew were forced to resign due to allegations (in Nixon's case) and sustainable charges (in Agnew's case) of criminal misconduct of one sort or another.

Part of that credit has to be laid in Gerald Ford's lap. His preemptive pardoning Nixon for any criminal activities he may have participated in with regards to the Watergate incident may not have sat well with many people, but the inevitability of it could not be denied. And Ford was charming, so much so that more people noticed that than noticed how much of a Republican Party loyalist he was.

I cannot accept that no one in the Republican Party foresaw Ford's defeat in the next election. (Well, I know that the party saw it coming because there was an attempt to run someone other than Ford (e,.g,, Ronald Reagan) in that election. Yet I believe there are Republican party faithful who were angered by this defeat.

You'd think that, with Reagan's election, that anger and hatred would die back to a minor huff every once in a while. After all, not only was Reagan elected, but after eight years he was succeeded by his Vice President, the original George (HW) Bush.

I'm not going to comment on the damage done to the nation by Reagan. And I'm not going to dwell on the fact that I think HW Bush was a strong party loyalist and as corrupt a politician as they come but that he wasn't THAT bad of a President. But the story tells itself. The economic situation Reagan had left the country in left HW Bush with no option but to raise taxes. And that is one thing a Republican must never do. It was one thing HW Bush had, himself, sworn not to do.

And thus, Bill Clinton, an affable Democrat but no less a politician than any other (and much more so than most) became President after HW Bush's single term.

I think Ailes and others of his ilk saw this as a recurrence of the Nixon defeat in 1960. They determined that they needed to redouble their efforts to place the Republican party as the permanent ruling party in the United States. (I use the phrasing deliberately. If you think I'm making them sound Communist, remember that what the Soviets and Chinese call Communism is what most people call totalitarianism, a system in opposition to what pure communism really is.) One thing they decided they needed (possibly because CNN, newly powerful thanks to HW Bush's war in the Middle East, had shown a slight prejudice in favor of Democrats) their own news network.

There's obviously more to the story, but this was the birth of Fox News. It seems clear to me (and to others, some of whom are related to me, and he would be mortified if he knew about this citation, but I digress...) that it exists solely for revenge against upstart (my term for how I suspect they're viewed by this group) Democrats who would dare run against a Republican.

This is of no consequence, in the long run. I could tell fans of Faux News about this for days and they'd tell me I'm being unduly influenced by the left wing media. The trouble is, the left wing media is not as powerful as the right wing media (a) thinks it is and (b) is working towards becoming, itself. I don't deny the existence of some left wing media outlets. So I wish the right wing media would stop denying that it exists.

And I wish Roger Ailes could forgive people for being as good at their jobs as he is at his. But I'm a dreamer.

WTF?

I had thought that my unpleasant memories of the Campus Crusade for the nice Jewish Boy Frequently Mistaken for Deity were more or less just manifestations of my generally unhappy year trying to fit in at a new university. Turns out my memory is pretty much fine.

I've had two groups come to my house so far this afternoon. They're all from the Campus Crusade and I can see that there are at least two other groups of them out there. Each group of 3 to 4 teenagers is carrying some paperwork and a large package of some sort wrapped in plain brown paper and taped up well. They ring the doorbell or knock and say, "Hi, we're from the Campus Crusade. We're looking for families in need so we can give them this package of non-perishable food for their New Year dinner."

This is so very many degrees of fucking stupid I can't even count them. I want to grab these kids and shake them.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA, I will shout at them, HOW FUCKING INSULTING AND STUPID YOU ARE?

Who would ever accept the package (which, btw, is sealed up well enough that you can't quite tell what's in it and the shape suggests it's not cans) offered when it's phrased like that? You'd have to be homeless or nearly so not to take some degree of offense at it. Add to that the clear religiosity of it, and it adds up to bad proselytizing.

I'm certain these kids mean well. I'm certain they are doing this because just donating doesn't feel personal enough, even donating actual food. They wanted to see the people they were helping, to know that their work was having a direct effect, and possibly to spread their religious beliefs as well.

The trouble is, they're making fools of themselves and no one (including me) has the nerve to call them on it. I don't know about anyone else but if you're like me it's because you were raised to spare other people needless embarrassment.

And this, I'm afraid, may be at the root of the aggressive behavior many of the more pushy Christian groups demonstrate. No one ever told them how stupid they come across as. And, as time went by, the attitude became their idea of proper conduct.

If another pack of CCC's shows up at my door with their suspicious looking package, I'm going to try. I'm going to really, really try to point out their mistake. I'm going to give them a list of places that would happily take the packages off their hands and distribute the food to those who need it, without the inadvertent sneer. And if I can do it, maybe, just maybe, at least one person will come away knowing that his or her behavior can reflect the good their religion instills in them, without making it into something obnoxious and nasty. Maybe, just maybe, one of these teen-agers will figure out that tolerance doesn't mean being polite to anyone who doesn't disagree with them too much, but means accepting that there is good in everyone.

I suspect, though, that the kids have already pointed out my house and said that they've spoken to me and I don't want their brown paper wrapped packages of charity.

Did I not promise some knitting?

It was cold yesterday. Not Boston cold. Not even Colorado cold. Just cold. And I forgot my coat. Yeah, you read that right. I forgot my coat. It was that kind of a morning. Fortunately, I was knitting something for myself and I happened to finish it just in time.

Gypsy Cowl

1 skein super bulky yarn (I used Rowan’s Big Wool for the gauge, and then switched to an unknown yarn of the same dimensions for the actual piece. Thus I don’t know the exact gauge)
Size 17 circular needles, 16” or even smaller will do.
1 marker to fit needles

Cast on 60 stitches.
Place marker and join.
Row 1 Being careful not to twist the yarn, K around.
Rows 2-3 Repeat Row 1
Row 4 Purl around
Row 5 Knit around
Row 6 *K5, K 2 tog* K1 (53 stitches remain)
Rows 7-8 Knit around
Row 9 Purl around
Row 10 Knit around
Row 11 K, *K 2 tog* K3 (46 stitches remain)
Row 12 K around
Row 13 Purl around
Rows 14-20 Knit around
Bind off. Weave in loose ends.

Sprint PictureMail
Originally uploaded by ms.gyspy

This is how it looks, although the colors are brighter than they appear in the photograph. I wore it in the biting wind this morning. YES I remembered my coat today. This was wonderful. I could even bury my ears in it!

So I guess I have more food on my mind

I invented this the other night. To be honest, my friend Kim mentioned a recipe for maple glazed chicken and I just let my tastebuds run with the concept. Living alone, I often cook for one. This means my recipes are easily adaptable. All you have to do is take my recipe and multiply by the number of people you are feeding.

If you make this let me know how you liked it. And if you find typos feel free to make fun of me. I know my fingers have lives of their own.

Gypsy's Mustard-Maple Glazed Chicken
Serves 1

(Can be doubled. Or tripled. Or quintupled. Quantities need only be multiplied by number of diners.)

1 Tablespoon prepared Dijon mustard
1 teaspoon pure maple syrup
¼ teaspoon canola or other neutral flavored oil
1 teaspoon dehydrated onion (note: If substituting fresh, use 1 tablespoon finely chopped onion, see below for how to do this.)
1 skinless, boneless chicken breast, about ½ pound

1. Preheat oven to 350F.

2. Combine mustard, syrup, oil, and dehydrated onion. Mix well. Make sure chicken is dry, then rub glaze all over. Place in a small baking dish that has been sprayed with a nonstick spray or greased. (Use a dish to fit the quantity you are making, of course.) (If using fresh onion, put it under the chicken.)

3. Cover with aluminum foil and bake 20 minutes.

4. Remove aluminum foil and continue baking until chicken reaches an internal temperature of 170F. Allow to rest a few minutes before eating.

5. If the dish appears dry and too crusty when you remove the aluminum foil, add a teaspoon or so of chicken broth.

6. The chicken will be moist but this recipe does not create much, or anything, in the way of gravy. It would be reasonably tasty served over a piece of sourdough or rye toast, however. If desired, spread butter or mustard on the toast.

It's been ages since I've updated

And to be honest, talking about the health care debate just pisses me off more and discussing Afghanistan frustrates me.

So instead, here's the recipe for the gingerbread brownies that I made for Thanksgiving last week. They were SCRUMPTIOUS and must be tasted to be believed. I made two changes to the recipe. They are in italics. Otherwise, this is the recipe exactly as it appears at the referenced website.

Gingerbread Brownies
CDKitchen http://www.cdkitchen.com
Category: Brownies Serves/Makes: 24 Difficulty Level: 3 Ready In: 30-60 minutes

Ingredients:
1 1/2 cup all-purpose flour
1 cup sugar
1/4 cup unsweetened cocoa powder
1 teaspoon ground ginger
1 teaspoon ground cinnamon
1/2 teaspoon baking soda
1/2 teaspoon ground cloves
1/4 cup unsalted butter, melted
1/3 cup molasses
2 eggs
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
Powdered sugar (optional. I left it plain and it was excellent.)

Directions:Combine flour, sugar, cocoa powder, ginger, cinnamon, baking soda, and cloves in a large mixing bowl.
In a separate bowl, combine melted butter, molasses, and eggs and vanilla extract. Add to flour mixture, stirring until combined. Do not beat (the batter will be thick).
Spread batter in a greased 13x9x2-inch baking pan.
Bake in a 350 degree oven for 20 minutes. Do not overbake. Cool on a wire rack.
Dust with powdered sugar sprinkled through a paper doily if that's what you're doing. Cut into squares.
Recipe Location: http://www.cdkitchen.com/recipes/recs/28/Gingerbread-Brownies114270.shtmlRecipe ID: 85143

Read at your own risk.

I'm not being funny. The link below will take you to the transcript of a very unnerving interview with an eyewitness to some of the violence in Iran. I don't claim to know what should be done about it. I just know what's going on there is horrific.

http://liberal4lifeblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/eyewitness-account-of-massacre-at.html

Proof that you can use statistics to prove anything

This blog entry from the US News and World Report blog pretty much exemplifies the reaction of most of the media to the recent Gallup poll on the subject of abortion, in which people who describe themselves as pro-choice made up 42% of the respondents while those calling themselves pro-life were 51%. This led to a hoot and a holler about how the "tide has turned" and now is the right time for Roe v Wade to be challenged, and that Obama needs to go with the flow of the populace and so on ad nauseum.

The US News article pays some lip service to the fact that the majority of Americans feel that abortion should remain legal. They disagree on when, but on the fundamental concept the majority still agrees.

But more than even that, there is another question from the poll that isn't being flaunted. And for good reason, at least if you're a right-winger.

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?

Note the carefully worded qualifier. "WITH RESPECT TO THE ABORTION ISSUE." And here are the results from that question:

May 7-10, 2009
Pro-choice 51%
Pro-life 42%
Unsure/No answer 7%

May 12-13,2009
Pro-choice 50%
Pro-life 43%
Unsure/No answer 7%

The one percent change between the weeks could be accounted for many ways. It might have been a different geographical sample. It might have been that the question was asked right after a widely publicized event dealing in the subject. There are a lot of ifs here. The bottom line is, while the majority of Americans call themselves pro-life, they are not referring to it as an abortion-centered pro-life stance.

I'm pro-life in that I object to taking human life without really damn good cause. Like self-defense. Things like that. And I'm very pro-baby. Just ask some of the babies I'm friends with and make toys and hats for all the time. But I'm totally pro-choice. I don't see the contradiction.

And apparently, neither does a good percentage of the US population.

If you have a lot of time to spend watching a video

Did anyone doubt there are people in the military who think their mission as an American is to wipe out Islam and convert all of the Middle East to Christianity? (Sorry it's not embedded; I can't figure out how.)

I used to think it was just a few bad apples. (Sorry. That's only supposed to refer to the poor saps who followed orders at Abu Ghraib, isn't it...) Now it sounds like it's a pretty organized and sizeable group of idjits. Granted, they are not the largest sub-group in the military, but they are one of the groups that is at greatest odds with the Constitution they are supposed to be defending.

Are you ready to be cheered up?

Does Sean Hannity ever even guess that he's being played by a pro?

JESSE VENTURA!!!!!!!!



And it couldn't hurt to read the article that accompanies the video at Alter-Net.

When PC goes too far

Courtesy of Failblog.org.

Republicans object for the sake of objecting?

While the entire article is of interest I'm including a few excerpts that I found particularly interesting. The words I find most interesting are in red.

Conservatives Map Strategies on Court
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
Published: May 16, 2009

*******************
1. While conservatives say they know they have little chance of defeating Mr. Obama’s choice because Democrats control the Senate, they say they hope to mount a fight that could help refill depleted coffers and galvanize a movement demoralized by Republican electoral defeats.
*******************
2. The movement is much diminished from four years ago under President George W. Bush, when Supreme Court vacancies last arose and conservatives marshaled their forces to champion his nominees. (Judge Richard Posner, a prominent Reagan appointee, wrote recently that the conservative movement suffers from “intellectual deterioration.”) Republicans have lost control of the White House and Congress, have no clear party leader and have received low approval ratings.
*******************
3. “The risk for the Republican Party is they will be tempted to be more gentlemanly than Democrats are when a conservative is nominated,” Mr. Bauer said. “By doing that, they will not only lose an educational moment with the public, but they will risk driving the base of the Republican Party to once again be frustrated.”
*******************

1. I'm cynical, I know, but I think the conservative (bowel) movement really needs to reexamine their fundraising efforts. They cannot continue to do things "the way my grandaddy did." I have seen their efforts to fundraise on the internet and they give the phrase Johnny-come-lately a whole new meaning. Starting a fight over a judicial nominee is not going to help them as much as they seem to be hoping.

2. That phrase "intellectual deterioration" just seems so apt. It's exactly what's happened. This is no longer Barry Goldwater's party. I blame Nixon. Well, and Reagan. And the Bush Crime Family. And Darth Cheney. And....oh, you know what I mean.

3. There are just so many things wrong with this point of view. The Democrats weren't gentlemanly. They were puppy-dog like. Roberts: nominated September 5 and confirmed the 29th (a little over 3 weeks. Wow, what a nail biter that one was!) Alito was nominated on October 31 and while the confirmation on January 31 seems like a long time, remember Thanksgiving and Christmas breaks interfered. Don't tell me the fight over Harriet Miers is the proof. Among other things, it was Bush's own party who fought hardest to remove her. And, besides, she was nominated on October 3 and withdrew on the 27th. Comparable to Roberts, but against opposition from the Republicans. So...who wasn't gentlemanly?

Pah!

Jonah Goldberg's Recto-Cranial Inversion is more serious than previously thought

And he needs to see someone about it, soon. Because it'll only get worse if he keeps spouting off this kind of bullshit.

The EPA is choking democracy

by Jonah Goldberg, syndicated columnist
Wednesday April 22, 2009, 5:30
AM

One of the most important events of our lifetimes may have just transpired. A federal agency has decided that it has the power to regulate everything, including the air you breathe.

Nominally, the Environmental Protection Agency's announcement last Friday only applies to new-car emissions. But pretty much everyone agrees that the ruling opens the door to regulating, well, everything.

According to the EPA, greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide -- the gas you exhale -- as well as methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. It is literally impossible to imagine a significant economic or human activity that does not involve the production of one of these gases. Don't think just of the gas and electricity bills. Cow flatulence is a serious concern of the EPA's already. What next? Perhaps an EPA mandarin will pick up a copy of "The Greenpeace Guide to Environmentally Friendly Sex" and go after the root causes of global warming.

Now, don't think this it the end of ol' Jonah's hyperbole and mouth breathing. But it is a good representative sample. Other things he's bloviated upon in this article include his odd belief that the Supreme Court is anti-democratic ("Two years ago, the Supreme Court -- the least democratic branch of our formal government -- "), that the EPA is exercising new powers not previously granted to the President ("So the government bureaucracy is on its way to strong-arming the economy in ways Congress never imagined when it passed the Clean Air Act in 1970. Or the president has suddenly gained sweeping new powers over American life, in ways never imagined by Congress or the founders, and despite the fact that these new powers were never put before the voters. ") and that, by doing what the law permits, the EPA is being used as a threat ('California's Barbara Boxer, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has said as much: "EPA, through its scientists, has given us a warning that global warming pollution is a clear, present and future danger to America's families. If Congress does not act to pass legislation, then I will call on the EPA to take all steps authorized by law to protect our families."
Translation: Either you vote our way or we'll render voting meaningless. ') And then he concludes that all this provides evidence that no one in DC, at least no Democrats in DC, take their oaths of office seriously. (Almost but not quite a direct quote.)

Jonah Goldberg's influence isn't nearly as profound as he'd like to think but it's still real. And something is very, very wrong with the man. He may not need a strait-jacket and padded cell a la Glen Beck, but he needs something. Pills, maybe. A few sessions of heavy therapy. Something.

And he really doesn't belong in the Oregonian. Not that anything like common sense has ever stopped the Big O before...

And imagine my surprise that it's Spike, and not Fox, doing this...

(No reference to bad boy vampires or FBI agents named Mulder intended.)

Spike seals deal for show on Navy pirate hunters
By DAVID BAUDER
April 14, 2009

NEW YORK (AP) — Barely a day after the daring rescue of an American sea captain, cable TV's Spike announced a deal Monday to produce a show about U.S. Navy pirate hunters.

Two crews for 44 Blue Productions hope to be on board Navy vessels patrolling in the pirate-infested waters off the coast of Africa within two weeks. The company is aiming to have a series ready to put on the air by September, said Rasha Drachkovitch, 44 Blue's president and founder.

He'd been talking to the Navy about the idea for three months, but it was finished late last week while the standoff with pirates who had taken Capt. Richard Phillips hostage was going on.

"We had no idea if last week's events would actually kill the deal or seal the deal," said Sharon Levy, Spike's senior vice president for original series.

Drachkovitch said he thought the Navy would put the project on hold, yet instead the Phillips incident seemed to accelerate things. Commander Robert K. Anderson, Navy spokesman on the deal, said the agreement had essentially been made before the U.S. ship was attacked.

and continued at link above.

Honestly, if they hadn't been convincing about having thought up the show months ago, I'd have hooted "exploitation." But as it is, all I can think is that there really are too damn many networks and yet there's STILL nothing good on 99 percent of them!

I've been looking for this clip for a month

Michelle Bachmann=COOL? OMG! This would be embarrassing except I'm hardly a Republican nor conservative so I just find it high-larious!