Those of you who read these posts know a couple of things about me. I like to cook. I looooove chocolate. When I go out and it is availabe, I always dessert on molten chocolate cake, like this one from Food and Wine Magazine. (from chef Jean-Georges Vongerichten). Molten Chocolate Cake 1 stick unsalted butter 6 oz. good quality bittersweet chocolate 2 eggs 2 egg yolks 1/4 cup sugar Pinch of salt 2 tbsp. all-purpose flour Preheat the oven to 450. Butter and lightly flour four 6-oz. ramekins. Tap out the excess flour and set the ramekins on a baking sheet. In a double boiler over simmering water, melt the butter with the chocolate. In a medium bowl, beat the eggs and egg yolks, sugar and salt at high speed until thickened and pale. Whisk the chocolate until smooth. Quickly fold it into the egg mixture along with the flour. Spoon the batter into the prepared ramekins and bake for 12 minutes, or until the sides of the cakes are firm but the centers are soft. Let the cakes cool for about one minute and then cover each with a dessert plate. Carefully turn each one over, let audiovox cell phone tand for 10 seconds, then unmold. Serve immediately. * * * * * I like to relieve the unrelenting chocolatiness of this dish with a dollop of whipped cream, a little vanilla ice cream or, more exotically, a small scoop of coconut, raspberry or mango sorbet. [Illustration from Wagner-Stephens ]

Satire, irony or just very bad taste? I'm not sure but it raises some important questions and is certain to spark debate. Take a look and let us know what baseball batting cage nets ou think...

Ah. Today Daniel Froomkin boosts the journalistic reputation of Washington Post-Newsweek Interactive--which, as everybody in the Post newsroom hastens to assure me, is a very separate operation from the print Washington Post : Dan Froomkin - Bush Rules - washingtonpost.com : Today's Senate vote on President Bush's detainee legislation, after House approval yesterday, marks a defining moment for this nation. How far from our historic and Constitutional values are we willing to stray? How mercilessly are we willing to treat those we suspect to be our enemies? How much raw, unchecked power are we willing to hand over to the executive? The legislation before the Senate today would ban torture, but let Bush define it; would allow the president to imprison indefinitely anyone he decides falls under a wide-ranging new definition of unlawful combatant; one click dvd ould suspend the Great Writ of habeas corpus; would immunize retroactively those who may have engaged in torture. And that's just for starters.... The people have lost confidence in their president.... Bush remains deeply unpopular... mistrusted... out of touch.... But he's still got Congress wrapped around his little finger. Today's vote will show more clearly than ever before that... the Republicans who control Congress are in lock step behind the president, and the Democrats -- who could block him, if they chose to do so -- are too afraid to put up a real fight.

Ah. Today Daniel Froomkin boosts the journalistic reputation of Washington Post-Newsweek Interactive--which, as everybody in the Post newsroom hastens to assure me, is a very separate operation from the print Washington Post : Dan Froomkin - Bush Rules - washingtonpost.com : Today's Senate vote on President Bush's detainee legislation, after House approval yesterday, marks a defining moment for this nation. How far equifax free credit report rom our historic and Constitutional values are we willing to stray? How mercilessly are we willing to treat those we suspect to be our enemies? How much raw, unchecked power are we willing to hand over to the executive? The legislation before the Senate today would ban torture, but let Bush define it; would allow the president to imprison indefinitely anyone he decides falls under a wide-ranging new definition of unlawful combatant; would suspend the Great Writ of habeas corpus; would immunize retroactively those who may have engaged in torture. And that's just for starters.... The people have lost confidence in their president.... Bush remains deeply unpopular... mistrusted... out of touch.... But he's still got Congress wrapped around his little finger. Today's vote will show more clearly than ever before that... the Republicans who control Congress are in lock step behind the president, and the Democrats -- who could block him, if they chose to do so -- are too afraid to put up a real fight.

Satire, irony or just very bad taste? I'm not sure but it raises some important questions and is certain to spark debate. Take a look and let us know what instant online credit report ou think...

Ah. Today Daniel Froomkin boosts the journalistic reputation of Washington Post-Newsweek Interactive--which, as everybody in the Post newsroom hastens to assure me, is a very separate operation from the print Washington Post : Dan Froomkin - Bush Rules - washingtonpost.com : Today's Senate vote on President Bush's detainee legislation, after House approval yesterday, email marketing toronto arks a defining moment for this nation. How far from our historic and Constitutional values are we willing to stray? How mercilessly are we willing to treat those we suspect to be our enemies? How much raw, unchecked power are we willing to hand over to the executive? The legislation before the Senate today would ban torture, but let Bush define it; would allow the president to imprison indefinitely anyone he decides falls under a wide-ranging new definition of unlawful combatant; would suspend the Great Writ of habeas corpus; would immunize retroactively those who may have engaged in torture. And that's just for starters.... The people have lost confidence in their president.... Bush remains deeply unpopular... mistrusted... out of touch.... But he's still got Congress wrapped around his little finger. Today's vote will show more clearly than ever before that... the Republicans who control Congress are in lock step behind the president, and the Democrats -- who could block him, if they chose to do so -- are too afraid to put up a real fight.

Satire, irony or just very bad taste? I'm not sure but it raises some important questions and is certain to spark debate. Take Cell phones emergency look and let us know what you think...

American Idol is at an end for another year--the 4 months sure do seem to have flown by now that they're over. There's been a lot of grumbling about this season, and the decline in ratings have led many to wonder if the bloom is off the rose permanently (never mind that ratings for almost all veteran shows have fallen in 2007). I think the off season had a few causes, some of which were the result of poor choices made by the producers. The one thing that I do not think the show can be blamed for is the number of singers who seemed very promising early on who simply didn't deliver in the Top 24 phase. Most of the weakness of the male field this season can be attributed to the failure of 3 performers who came out of the audition looking like the primary male contenders: Sundance Head, Chris Sligh, and Brandon Rogers. All were gone before April Fools' Day. Plus, a lot of time was spent with Antonella Barba, who online fundraising as never a real contender. One of the problems as the season went on was that we pretty much knew ahead of time what would happen: Melinda Doolittle would outperform everyone else (except on those nights when Jordin got a hold of "I (Who Have Nothing)"), Sanjaya would be terrible, and everyone else would struggle to varying degrees. Other problems were avoidable, though, and my sense is that some decisions were made in reaction to the last couple of years that ended up backfiring.

By Mimikatz By now the Senate may have passed the detainee bill. Most of the focus of the bill has been on interrogation techniques, but the really insidious thing is that Congress is poised to give the President to power to "disappear" people, the hallmark of the most heinous regimes of the recent past. We have now come solar power generator ull circle, because the first post I ever wrote for The Next Hurrah, a little over a year ago, was on bearing witness and the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo in Argentina. How is this so? As both the NY Times and Glenn Greenwald point out, the ability of the President to define anyone, including US citizens who have not left US soil, as "enemy combatants" on the basis that they had somehow supported terrorists, even if they had not in any way participated in hostilities against the US, coupled with the abolition of habeas corpus for those so detained, creates this result. Throwing someone in a dungeon with no opportunity for judicial review and no way for anyone to find out what has happened is precisely what is meant by "disappearing" people. Greenwald explains: As Ackerman put it: "The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights.

Satire, irony or just business card printing ery bad taste? I'm not sure but it raises some important questions and is certain to spark debate. Take a look and let us know what you think...

Ah. Today Daniel Froomkin boosts the journalistic reputation of Washington Post-Newsweek Interactive--which, as everybody in the Post newsroom hastens american psychological association style manual o assure me, is a very separate operation from the print Washington Post : Dan Froomkin - Bush Rules - washingtonpost.com : Today's Senate vote on President Bush's detainee legislation, after House approval yesterday, marks a defining moment for this nation. How far from our historic and Constitutional values are we willing to stray? How mercilessly are we willing to treat those we suspect to be our enemies? How much raw, unchecked power are we willing to hand over to the executive? The legislation before the Senate today would ban torture, but let Bush define it; would allow the president to imprison indefinitely anyone he decides falls under a wide-ranging new definition of unlawful combatant; would suspend the Great Writ of habeas corpus; would immunize retroactively those who may have engaged in torture. And that's just for starters.... The people have lost confidence in their president.... Bush remains deeply unpopular... mistrusted... out of touch.... But he's still got Congress wrapped around his little finger. Today's vote will show more clearly than ever before that... the Republicans who control Congress are in lock step behind the president, and the Democrats -- who could block him, if they chose to do so -- are too afraid to put up a real fight.

American Idol is at an end for another year--the 4 months sure do seem to have flown by now that they're over. There's been a lot of grumbling about this season, and the decline in ratings have led many to wonder if the bloom is off the rose permanently (never mind that ratings for almost all veteran shows have fallen in 2007). I think the off season had a few causes, some of which were the result of poor choices made by the producers. The one thing that I do not think the show can be blamed for is the number of singers who seemed very promising early on who simply didn't deliver in nasdaq small caps he Top 24 phase. Most of the weakness of the male field this season can be attributed to the failure of 3 performers who came out of the audition looking like the primary male contenders: Sundance Head, Chris Sligh, and Brandon Rogers. All were gone before April Fools' Day. Plus, a lot of time was spent with Antonella Barba, who was never a real contender. One of the problems as the season went on was that we pretty much knew ahead of time what would happen: Melinda Doolittle would outperform everyone else (except on those nights when Jordin got a hold of "I (Who Have Nothing)"), Sanjaya would be terrible, and everyone else would struggle to varying degrees. Other problems were avoidable, though, and my sense is that some decisions were made in reaction to the last couple of years that ended up backfiring.

Ah. Today Daniel Froomkin boosts the journalistic reputation of Washington Post-Newsweek Interactive--which, as everybody in the Post newsroom hastens to assure me, is a very separate operation from the print Washington Post : Dan Froomkin - Bush Rules - washingtonpost.com : Today's Senate vote on President Bush's detainee legislation, kids robot fter House approval yesterday, marks a defining moment for this nation. How far from our historic and Constitutional values are we willing to stray? How mercilessly are we willing to treat those we suspect to be our enemies? How much raw, unchecked power are we willing to hand over to the executive? The legislation before the Senate today would ban torture, but let Bush define it; would allow the president to imprison indefinitely anyone he decides falls under a wide-ranging new definition of unlawful combatant; would suspend the Great Writ of habeas corpus; would immunize retroactively those who may have engaged in torture. And that's just for starters.... The people have lost confidence in their president.... Bush remains deeply unpopular... mistrusted... out of touch.... But he's still got Congress wrapped around his little finger. Today's vote will show more clearly than ever before that... the Republicans who control Congress are in lock step behind the president, and the Democrats -- who could block him, if they chose to do so -- are too afraid to put up a real fight.

By Mimikatz By now the Senate may have passed the detainee bill. Most of the focus of the bill has been on interrogation techniques, but the really insidious thing is that Congress is poised to give the President to power to "disappear" people, the hallmark of the most heinous regimes of the recent past. We have now come full circle, because the first post I ever wrote for The Next Hurrah, a little over a year ago, was on bearing witness and the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo in Argentina. How is this so? As both the NY Times and Glenn Greenwald point out, the ability of the President to define anyone, including US citizens who have not left US soil, as "enemy combatants" on the basis that they had somehow web spam upported terrorists, even if they had not in any way participated in hostilities against the US, coupled with the abolition of habeas corpus for those so detained, creates this result. Throwing someone in a dungeon with no opportunity for judicial review and no way for anyone to find out what has happened is precisely what is meant by "disappearing" people. Greenwald explains: As Ackerman put it: "The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights.

Satire, irony or just very bad taste? I'm not sure but it raises some important questions and is certain to spark debate. Take baby shower thank you notes look and let us know what you think...