Last night was a 2 -2 tie for the Republicans. On the D side, The Bern took 2 of 3 so it looks like Hilz wins based on delegate count.
And since all’s right in the world I’m moving.on.dot.org to recipes today. So post away: new favorites, old favorites, ethnic recipes and recipes you’ve been been meaning to try. Why? Because I said so.
I think I told you I went to Chick-fil-A on my way home from the airport last week. I haven’t been there since they obtained a cease and desist order against their coleslaw and sent their “superfood” kale salad in as a replacement. Since I liked their coleslaw - even though it was a tad sweet to my taste - I wanted to report back on how awful the new super-salad was. Unfortunately it was quite good. Way to go: spoil a perfectly good fowl mood, Chick-fil-A!
Okay, that’s the Hollywood version; your serving will look more like this:
So don’t order it if you really, really don’t like twigs and stems; or greens. Still, it’s hard not to like it unless you’re just holding a grudge against management for chopping the coleslaw.
At least now we understand why Chick-fil-A took the little guy to court over what they claimed was copyright infringement:
Unfortunately for Chick-fil-A the judge decided chicken isn’t kale, so if they want to add the “eat more kale” tagline to their portfolio they’ll have to pay the t-shirt guy for the privilege.
I don’t want to get sued so this isn’t so much a recipe as it is a list of components: some assembly is required.
Chopped kale, stems removed
Chopped raw broccolini
Maple vinaigrette dressing
Dried sour cherries
Sugared nuts, mixture of walnuts, almonds and pecans (served, sealed in a bag, on the side to avoid allergy issues)
I’m sure copycat recipes will follow shortly.
Since it’s an election year, and I don’t want to be accused of being biased, here’s a “Brutally Honest Product Review” from an opposing viewpoint (which is pretty funny). I believe the post is simply a case of sour grapes from a sweet coleslaw junkie who sees her drug of choice being cut off:
“So basically, losing the slaw in favor of f***ing kale means that ISIS is pretty much in charge of the Chick-fil-a drive-thru now.”
If you live near a Chick-fil-A I encourage you to try it yourself. If, like many Republicans, you are Anti-Green just on principle, the chicken sandwiches and breakfast biscuits are still darn good all on their own. So vote your conscience.
It’s written by a life-long (conservative) Republican who has also served two tours of duty in the War on Terror.
This dude not only gets it, he’s lived it, risked it and rejected it. In his letter he explains why he is now done with the GOPe’s idea of “conservative”:
Let me say up front that I am a life-long Republican and conservative. I have never voted for a Democrat in my life and have voted in every presidential and midterm election since 1988. I have never in my life considered myself anything but a conservative. I am pained to admit that the conservative media and many conservatives’ reaction to Donald Trump has caused me to no longer consider myself part of the movement. I would suggest to you that if you have lost people like me, and I am not alone, you might want to reconsider your reaction to Donald Trump. Let me explain why.
And chastises their “conservative” efforts to date:
In 2012, we were told to vote for Mitt Romney, a Massachusetts liberal who proudly signed an individual insurance mandate into law and refused to repudiate the decision. Before that, there was George W. Bush, the man who decided it was America’s duty to bring democracy to the Middle East (more about him later). And before that, there was Bob Dole, the man who gave us the Americans with Disabilities Act. I, of course, voted for those candidates and do not regret doing so. I, however, am self-aware enough to realize I voted for them because I will vote for virtually anyone to keep the Left out of power and not because I thought them to be the best or even really a conservative choice. Given this history, the conservative media’s claims that the Republican party must reject Donald Trump because he is not a “conservative” are pathetic and ridiculous to those of us who are old enough to remember the last 25 years.
Before explaining why he’s voting for Trump:
Donald Trump is the only Republican candidate who seems to have any inclination to act strictly in America’s interest…the first people to condemn him and deny the obvious were conservatives. Somehow, being conservative now means denying the obvious and saying idiotic fantasies like “Islam is the religion of peace,” or “Our war is not with Islam.” Uh, sorry but no it is not, and yes it is. And if getting a president who at least understands that means voting for Trump, then I guess I am not a conservative.(snip)
Fourth, I really do not care that Donald Trump is vulgar, combative, and uncivil and I would encourage you not to care as well. I would love to have our political discourse be what it was even thirty years ago and something better than what it is today. But the fact is the Democratic Party is never going to return to that and there isn’t anything anyone can do about it. Over the last 15 years, I have watched the then-chairman of the DNC say the idea that President Bush knew about 9-11 and let it happen was a “serious position held by many people,” watched the vice president tell a black audience that Republicans would return them to slavery if they could, watched Harry Reid say Mitt Romney was a tax cheat without any reason to believe it was true, and seen an endless amount of appalling behavior on the part of the Democrats which is too long to list here and which I am sure you are aware. And now you tell me that I should reject Trump because he is uncivil and mean to his opponents? Is that some kind of a joke? This is not the time for civility or to worry about it in our candidates.
Consider the following. Our country is going broke, half its working-age population isn’t even looking for work, faces the real threat of massive Islamic terrorist attack, and has a government incapable of doing even basic functions. Meanwhile, conservatives act like cutting Planned Parenthood off the government or stopping gays from getting marriage licenses are the great issues of the day and then have the gumption to call Donald Trump a clown.
In short:
I would however encourage you to at least think about what I have said and understand that the people backing Trump are not nihilists or uneducated hillbillies looking for a job. Some of us are pretty serious people and once considered ourselves conservatives. Even if you still hate Trump, you owe it to conservatism to ask yourself how exactly conservatism managed to alienate so many of its supporters such that they are now willing to vote for someone you loath as much as Trump.
There’s more, read-the-whole-thing, as they say. It will be thought provoking and it might even be…liberating.
I remind you once again: “Suicide is Painless” – except for the survivors.
Wow, that was hard to watch, butt then, aren’t they all? These highly orchestrated political circuses need to be over like yesterday.
This was the 11lth, yes, 11th Republican debate. Do not try to tell me that the networks are running them as a public service; if that were the case they would be commercial free. And I don’t care which dog you had in the fight they didn’t do anything last night to make you a proud owner. Unless, that is, Kasich is your b**ch; at least he was the only dog that didn’t spend the whole night marking his territory. That may be due to his OCD that keeps him repeating his accomplishments as Governor of OHIO over and over again.
When you’re busy chasing your own tail, the other dogs don’t try to bite your face off.
Rubio kept yipping at Trump’s heels.
Trump kept redefined his flip-flopping as “flexibility,”
Which might be okay on some issues, butt trust me Big Dog, it isn’t going to fly on immigration.
“H1B visas? Ya, know that I’ve thought about it, we need some.”
Cruz tried to stay on message while still attempting to eat the Trumpster’s lunch.
Can we all agree we’ve seen enough of these dog fights and just get on to the serious business of choosing a pack leader?
If not, we’ll just go ahead without you, and you’ll have to catch up.
I hear that Mitt Romney will be delivering a Dump Trump speech today. I trust the tone will be significantly different from that time he thanked him for his support:
“Donald Trump has shown an extraordinary ability to understand how the economy works and to create jobs…”
I guess the GOPe clearly views The Donald as a danger.
“The bright colours of this granular poison frogsignal a warning to predators of its toxicity.”
They apparently think Marco Rubio’s analysis is correct: “He’s not going to make America great, he’s going to make it orange!”
Did I already explain that the frog’s unusual orange coloring is a sign of his toxicity? You can attack it if you wish, butt there will be consequences because that’s the way he rolls:
The frog is an aposematic animal, and it uses poison only for self-defense from predators. Its bright colors are used as a warning signal to all possible predators…the male granular poison frog spends the majority of its time and energy defending its calling site. These warning signals are more vocal (acoustic) than visual. If an encroaching male granular poison frog were to dare approach too closely, these frogs have no qualms about engaging physically. The lengths they will go to defend their territory epitomize their unique aggressive behavior
I would suggest the Dump Trumpsters from within the GOPe read this article by Don Surber by way ofAmerican Digest:
The threat to democracy is not the people we elect, but the people we don't elect who assume the power. From the Supreme Court to the regulatory agencies, America's biggest threat is a federal government that answers to nobody.
Pushing to label Trump a Nazi is the last mad gasp of the newspaper of record in the most corrupt town in the world. The revolving doors from politics to journalism is particularly revolting. Clinton's spokesman heads ABC News for crying out loud.
Trump is a threat to these institutions. And so they call him Hitler. Like little boys they pencil the mustache on his picture under his nose.
One way or another it looks like we’re getting an orange; my only advice is to choose your target carefully.
Welcome to your life There’s no turning back Even while we sleep We will find you
Acting on your best behavior Turn your back on mother nature Everybody wants to rule the world
Its my own design Its my own remorse Help me to decide Help me make the most Of freedom and of pleasure Nothing ever lasts forever Everybody wants to rule the world
There’s a room where the light wont find you Holding hands while the walls come tumbling down When they do I’ll be right behind you
So glad we’ve almost made it So sad they had to fade it Everybody wants to rule the world
I can’t stand this indecision Married with a lack of vision Everybody wants to rule the world Say that you’ll never never never never need it One headline why believe it? Everybody wants to rule the world
All for freedom and for pleasure Nothing ever lasts forever Everybody wants to rule the world
What would you do if you ruled the world? If I ruled the world – and seeing how others have failed miserably I see no reason why I shouldn’t - here’s how I would align the stars:
1. Republican Presidential Ticket: Trump–Rubio, in that order. Trump brings the disaffected, who are legion and Rubio brings Florida and maybe some Hispanics and millennials. Texas will most likely go Republican anyway. And pragmatically, I think that ticket can win.
2. Supreme Court: Trump guarantees that if he wins he will immediately appoint Ted Cruz to the Supreme Court – a position that at this point in time is actually more important than who wins the presidency.
Quite simply, if the Democrats win, our Republic is dead; they pack the Supreme Court and there is no way out of the rabbit hole. And if the Republicans win – regardless of who it is – the Republic may still be dead but the wake postponed.
Unless the Republicans take a page from the Lib’s book and manage to pack the Supreme Court with ideological conservatives the country will continue it’s slow dance with progressive socialism. The fate of the nation no longer lies in the hands of the Executive Branch, nor the Legislative Branch. The shadow government is so entrenched, due in no small part to rulings by the Supreme Court, that only the Supreme Court has the wherewithal to reverse the damage. That’s where Cruz comes in: a young, idealistic constitutional conservative like Ted Cruz would have far more leverage to right the ship of state from the vantage of the bench than from the Oval Office.
Because let’s face it, no matter how many times we win the House, the Senate, even the presidency, the entrenched cronyism, bureaucracies, and special interests will continue to drive a progressive, collectivist, agenda that works against liberty. All the R-team can do is play defense and prevent the D-team from running up the score in a fixed game.
In order to change the game, in order for us to “take it back” and ensure the survival of our Republic as conceived by the founders we need to control the Supreme Court. Just as the Left introduced the concept of the Constitution as a “living document” open to their interpretation rather than the founders intent, the Right has to run an ‘activist” Court hell-bent on reestablishing the doctrine of original intent. Despite the Left’s insistence to the contrary, the concept is still quite workable in the modern world.
And if I ruled the world Ted Cruz would serve as Chief Justice surrounded by conservative replacements (or conservatives masquerading as liberals) for Brennan, Ginsberg and Kennedy. And as demonstrated by the Left, once appointed, presidents can come and go but the ideology ensconced in the Supreme Court lives on.
In my world, the Court wouldn’t be afraid to to take up cases that might upset the apple cart; cases such as those challenging the constitutionality of federal departments and agencies. We would enjoy a Court that determines the outcome of cases along constitutional lines rather than political correctness and administrative ease; a Court that won’t be afraid to dismantle entire unconstitutional bureaucracies (Education, Commerce, Energy for starters) that have taken the power out of the hands of Congress (or rather, that Congress has willingly relinquished to them). And we would have a Court willing to overturn precedents that are diametrically opposed to the Constitution such as Affirmative Action, Obamacare, and the entire Administrative Law Process that delegates rule making to bureaucratic agencies rather than the duly elected Congress. We the people do not wish to be ruled by nameless, faceless bureaucrats elected by nobody and accountable to no one.
So as much as I admire Ted Cruz’s conservative chops (who I already voted for in my primary), I find them to be more important in the Judicial Branch than the Executive Office. And that is why, if I ruled the world, he would serve as Supreme Court Justice for another 40 years or so rather than president for 4 or 8. Let Trump take that job and do his best to make America Great Again™ and if we don’t like what he does, we’ll sue and send the case to the Supreme Court.
And that’s what I’d do, if only I could rule the world.
Everybody wants to rule the world Everybody wants to rule the world Everybody wants to rule the world
Hard to believe it’s Soop-er Tuesday already. My, how time flies when you’re having fun!
Or at least Belgian-style politics.
Prepare yourself for a day of ignoring phone calls from pollsters and get-out-the voters who will be annoying you right up to the minute the polls close. Since I sent my absentee ballot in last week (Ted Cruz!) I think I’ll prepare a traditional Belgique dinner instead of watching the pundits and pundettes pretend to, first, predict and, second, analyze the primary results.
The meal is a commemorative gesture to Belgium as it used to be, prior to succumbing to the European Union’s (and the Democrats’) vision of how the world should work.
I’m thinking moules frites:
With a nice Belgium beer:
“Devil” – how appropriate.
And perhaps a few Belgium chocolates for dessert.
You’re welcome to join me for dinner, or you can gird you loins for yet another night of primary coverage. Whichever you prefer.
“So 2 Cubans and a WASP walk into a bar…”
Sorry, I’m not sure how that joke ends, as it was interrupted by a barroom brawl.
Meanwhile, things are looking pretty bad over in Kasichistan:
Come on guys, what part of “rally” do you not understand?
So carry on. Since we’ve already disproved one of Warren Buffett’s most famous adages - “Negotiating with one's self seldom produces a barroom brawl” - let’s at least try to keep the barroom brawls to a minimum.
I didn’t watch the Oscars last night. We have guests and they (wisely) chose to binge-watch Lillehammerinstead.
So I can’t give you my usual fashion review, butt the WaPo covered the Red Carpet pretty well if you’re interested. And don’t even start on me about the lack of D-I-V-E-R-S-I-T-Y.
I think this is plenty diverse, if you know what I mean. And I think you do.
Nobody really cares who won any of the awards anyhow since nobody goes to the movies anymore. And why should you when you can watch anything you want on Netflix and eat popcorn with real butter on it in the comfort of your own home for less than the $30+/head.
Still, it is an interesting fact that the largest block of Black Lives Matter cheerleaders this side of Washington D.C. somehow failed to nominate even one Black Life for a major award this year. Just a tad hypocritical.
Among the “A-listers” - depending on how you alphabetize – sporting the bracelets were Patricia Arquette, Steve Carell, and Bryan Cranston. I’d suggest that their movies had already done a pretty good job of bringing awareness to the scourge of gun violence in America.
Patricia Arquette:
Steve Carell, proving that even in a comedy you can get off a few good shots:
Bryan Cranston: doesn’t have Total Recall of all of his contributions to glorifying gun violence:
Not that you’d expect the well-protected Hollywood elite to be any less hypocritical than the well- protected Washington elite.
I know this test is an oldie butt goodie, butt I’ve added a new category so our Hollywood elites can now participate as well. I think it still works.
Are You a Democrat, Republican, Southern Republican or Hypocritical Hollywood Elite?
This test that will help you decide.
Question: You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you. You are carrying a Glock cal .40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Democrat's Answer: Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it? Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to my children? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? Should I call 9-1-1? Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.
This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for few days and try to come to a consensus. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Boy, the lines between the bi-coastals really are beginning to blur aren’t they? Pols think they’re celebrities and celebrities think they’re Pols. Not that there’s really that much difference anymore.
So, I guess Hillary won South Carolina resoundingly:
With all the grace and felicity of a falling piano, Hillary Clinton flattened Bernie Sanders in South Carolina.
It wasn't even close. Clinton demolished Sanders, obliterating him by nearly 50 points, 73.5 percent to 26 percent. This was far and away the most dominating primary or caucus victory for any candidate of either party in this 2016 race. – The Week
So the Democratic machine seems to be operating at peak efficiency again, capable of ramming their designated hitter down the throats of the loyal electorate.
The establishment in the other camp continues to experience problems promoting their favorite pony-of-the-day,
and they blame you:
Star-struck, low-information celebrity cultists will vote for Trump under any circumstances because they do not know any better and do not care. For them, Trump is whatever they want him to be, and they will never change their minds. – The Federalist
The rest of us, however, have a much more difficult choice to make. Will we really oppose Trump to the point of accepting any alternative, including Hillary Clinton?…
Hillary Clinton Is Despicable, But Trump Is Worse.
My hands almost could not type those words, because I think Hillary Clinton is one of the worst human beings in American politics. She has few principles that I can discern, other than her firm conviction that she deserves the Oval Office for enabling and then defending her sexually neurotic husband. She lies as easily as the rest of us breathe. She has compromised national security through sheer laziness at best, and corrupt intent at worst. If elected, she will enrich Wall Street and raid the public coffers while preaching hateful doctrines of identity politics to distract America’s poor and working classes. - The Federalist
Oh well, sure. That should fix everything.
We’ve been condemned to live in interesting times, probably forevermore. I blame Obama. And Apple.
Posts
