Chili Verde Beef (or Pork)
- 2 lbs Lean Ground Beef or Pork
- 2 Large Red Bell Peppers, chopped
- 2 Large Sweet Onions, chopped
- 10 cloves Garlic, chopped
- 2 T Chili Powder
- 4 t Ground Cumin
- 1/2 t Cayenne Pepper
- 1 15-oz Can Green Enchilada Sauce, Hatch brand
- 1 16-oz Bottle Think & Chunky Salsa Verde sauce, La Victoria brand
- 1/2 C water
- 2 15-oz Cans Kidney Bean, rinsed
Brown the meat along with the bell pepper and the onions over medium heat
Add the Garlic and dry spices. stir well to mix.
Stir in the Sauce, Salsa and water. Reduce heat to medium low and simmer covered for 15 minutes while stirring occasionally.
Stir in the beans and allow to heat through for about 2 minutes
Serve with a dollop of sour cream and a sprinkling of shredded cheese along with some corn chips
Clam Chowder
- 1/4 lb Bacon
- 1 large Onions, chopped
- 2 cans minced Clams, undrained
- 1/2 lb whole Clam meat
- 1/2 C Water
- 3 large Potatoes, peeled and cubed
- 3 Celery stalks, finely chopped
- 1 11-oz can Corn, drained
- 2 Tb Butter
- 1 C Milk
- 1 C Half-and-half
- 1/2 C Flour
- Salt & Pepper to taste
Fry Bacon until crispy, drain and crumble bacon when cooled.
Using the same skillet the bacon was cooked in add onion and cook until “clear”. Add the Onions and bacon to the slow cooker
Stir in the canned clams (with their juice), water, potatoes, celery and corn into the slow cooker
Cover and cook on LOW for 4-6 hours
In a sauce pan combine the butter, milk and half-and-half, and flour. Cook on low and whisk until the roux in thick and bubbly
Mix 1/2 C of the liquid from the slow-cooker into the roux. Add the roux to the slow-cooker and stir well to blend.
Salt & Pepper to taste, Cover and continue to cook on LOW for 30 additional minutes
Saute the whole clams in olive oil. When tender add to the Slow-cooker or serve on the side to add to individual bowls as desired
Serve with toasted slices of baguette
Sesame Beef
- 2 lbs Beef Chuck Roast, boneless, sliced against the grain in thin strips
- 1.5 C Beef Broth
- 1 c Oyster Sauce
- 1 lb Broccoli florets, fresh
- 5 oz Carrots, shredded
- 6 oz Snap Peas, whole
- 1/4 C Water
- 2 Tb Cornstarch
- Hot, Cooked rice
- Toasted Sesame Seeds
Add beef broth, Oyster sauce and Beef strips to slow cooker. Cover and cook over Low heat for 6-8 hours or on High for 3-4 (until beef is tender)
When beef is ready combine the cornstarch and 2 Tb of the cooking broth in a cup and mix well. Once combined pour back into the slow cooker and stir well.
Cook uncovered on High for 15 minutes to allow the Sauce to thicken
Place the Broccoli in a microwave safe dish with 1/4 C water. Microwave 4-5 minutes (until broccoli is tender)
While the Broccoli is cooking add the shredded carrots and whole snap peas to the slow cooker to allow them to heat through
When the Broccoli is done drain the water
Serve the beef, broth, carrots and snap peas over cooked rice and garnish with broccoli and sesame seeds.
Sprinkle with crushed Red Pepper flakes to add a little heat as desired.
AcidEasy
AcidEasy was a process for doing acid washes on swimming pools that eliminated the back breaking aspect of the job. Resulted in a smoother surface too
[media id=57 width=320 height=240]
This was a video we shot back in 1995 that shows us doing an acid wash on a diving pool in real time. We did one half of the pool to sharply demonstrate how green this pool was to start with by in effect doing a before/after
These were the instructions we had prepared to go with the sprayers
Instructions For the AcidEasy Sprayer
As with any way of acid washing some stains will not respond to the acid. The acid sprayer is only a tool to help you apply the acid to the walls and flour quick and easy We at acid easy accept no responsibility for any damage done with the acid. Their are many ways to do a pool the 14 steps bellow are suggestions to help you get started.
Parts:
When you get your AcidEasy sprayer it should include tank with attached pump hose and wand.
Acid wash suggestions:
1) Drain pool
2) Hose plaster down
3) Set AcidEasy sprayer on the deck in the middle of the pool
4) Fill tank with 3-5 gallons of water and a pint of AcidThick additive
5) Pour from 4-6 gallons of acid into tank
6) Fill the tank the rest of the way with water. Do not get motor wet
7) Some spa defoamer might be needed if the tank is full of suds
8) Plug in AcidEasy to a G.F.I outlet
9) wet plaster
10) Stand back 6 to 8 feet from the wall
11) Open valve and coat pool with acid solution starting with the walls
12) Spray can be adjusted from stream to fan depending on stains and pool size
13) Hose off plaster
14) Coat stains a second or maybe a third time depending on response
15) Bushing is usually not needed use spray psi and multiple coats instead
16) To clean, run a full tank of fresh water threw hose
Clothing:
Must have rubber boots and rubber gloves
Must wear protective eyewear
it is advisable to wear protective clothing and a respirator
Don’t :
go stronger than 1:1 acid to water solution
get motor wet
spray towards anybody remember acid is corrosive
Do:
always plug into an G.F.I. protected outlet
pump out solution as you go with a sumpump
always use an anti-fume anti-etch acid additive
Love it when someone that wants to believe they are Libertarian”, “Conservative”, or “Independent” lables me a Liberal
A couple people that fit that description show they don’t understand the concept of the 1st Amendment and that what is good for the Goose also needs to be accommodated for the Gander.
Had to point out to them that:
“I’m not defending Unions. I LOVE living in a Right to Work State and ALL states should provide their Workers that freedom. I will however defend anyone’s right to express their point of view. That is the purpose of the 1st Amendment. Not to guarantee speech you agree with but to guarantee the right of people to express speech that you disagree with”
Here is a screen grab of the discussion
Steps to add a Calender item
[media id=56 width=320 height=240]
Note that the icon on the bottom right of the viewer will maximize the video window
Protected: SU&D-O
Politicians say “I” if things go right, and “they” if things go wrong
With all the observations and criticism about Barack continuing to spike the ball over the anniversary of the OBL takedown and seeing this comment on a friends FB post
“leaders in the military are taught “I” if things go wrong, and “they” if things go right, only to have politicians say “I” if things go right, and “they” if things go wrong? That is TOO big of a fundamental difference between the two cultures!”
It reminded me of another old paper I had written back around 1984 that was entitled “Criminal Negligent – Kennedy and the Bay of Pigs”. The Professor teaching this History class was a HUGE JFK fan and was constantly allowing her political slip to show. To tweak her a bit (ok, more than a bit) I wrote this paper for the class. It had to have irridated her no end to read it and in the end grade the paper and A
Scanning some old papers from College back in the early to mid 80’s
This short paper was on Business Cycles. My analysis at the back of the paper seems pretty precient given what has happened over the past few years.
Depression – The Business Cycle
I love how I opened the paper with a quote from Keynesian economist Paul Samuelson since he unknowingly pointed out the reason we are in this current mess
“Nothing like the Depression should ever occur again. It it does, the fault will come from unwillingness to take action, from a fixed belief in the validity of certain theories, and from a hope that what worked in an earlier generation will also work well again.”
Yep, Keynesians believe that their theories dug us out of the Great Depression (while ignoring the fact the rest of the world was in shambles and therefore we had markets to sell to). So who exactly has a “fixed belief in the validity of certain theories”?
Self professed “Conservatives” ripping “Moderates”
For those “nominally” on my side of the Political Aisle who rip and castigate as “Moderates” and not listening to the “Founders” those that understand the requirement to attempt compromise while still seeking to advance a conservative philosophy.
Consider this about the “Founders”. Great Britain certainly did not view any of them as “moderates” even thought they certainly had issues and differences among each other. Just read the reports from the Continental Congress hashing out the Declaration of Independence. The Founders did NOT speak with one voice concerning the foundations that were laid down to establish this Nation.
Some were firebrands intent on rubbing King George’s nose in it and others did want a more moderate approach. In the end they worked to reach a compromise in the very language that birthed this Country. Including moderation in language that resulted in the bloodshed of thousands of Citizens just a few short decades later.
So consider that when you rip your fellow travelers on the “right” because those on the “left” don’t view any of us as “moderate”. They view us all as barely one on step away from wearing jackboots and brownshirts.
Taming the Shrews
The overwrought gnashing of teeth by those on the left over the possibility of SCOTUS striking down ObamaCare is beyond borderline psychotic.
When a shrew like Marueen Dowd writes something as inane as “accountable to no one once they give the last word” in referring to the Justices it just shows how dumb and desperate they are.
Hey, Maureen, you might want to take a look at the Constitution. The ENTIRE document. Then you might notice that neither SCOTUS, POTUS (or his teleprompter) have the final say. Who does? Well the answer can be found in the fact that if we don’t like something in the Constitution WE THE PEOPLE can amend it (unless of course you live in California where their Court can tell the population to pound sand – but I guess the lefts desire for DEMOCRATIC action only extends to action they agree with)
Try that and let’s see how many Americans really want to give complete control of our lives and choices to Politicians.
Non Believers want to drive Believers from the Public Square
Its is disturbing that those who claim “no belief” want to ridicule and drive those with “belief” from the public square in the name of a separation of church and state while failing to grasp what Jefferson was writing about and to ignore not only our shared 1st Amendment protections but also the plain “no religious test” clause in the Constitution proper.
“A choice between two unconstitutionally coercive regulatory techniques is no choice at all.”
Regarding the Commerce Clause argument for ObamaCare.
There is a distinct difference between regulation of commerce and coercion of commerce.
In the 1992 New York v. United States decision the Supreme Court held that Congress cannot compel a State to enter into a contract. If they cannot compel a State how can they compel a citizen of that same State?
Swing Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote that to do so was:
“Congress has crossed the line distinguishing encouragement from coercion.”
In the next paragraph she even cut to the matter of timeliness with this observation:
“We must initially reject respondents’ suggestion that, because the take-title provision will not take effect until January 1, 1996, petitioners’ challenge thereto is unripe. It takes many years to develop a new disposal site. All parties agree that New York must take action now in order to avoid the take-title provision’s consequences, and no party suggests that the State’s waste generators will have ceased producing waste by 1996. The issue is thus ripe for review.
How would an Unconstitutional forced subsidy of waste producers be any different that a forced subsidy to Insurance companies?
“Such a forced transfer, standing alone, would in principle be no different than a congressionally compelled subsidy from state governments to radioactive waste producers.”
Considering the Federally imposed penalty/tax (depending on the forum that the Administration is arguing in front of) for not entering into this coerced contract Justice O’Connor also held
“In this provision, Congress has not held out the threat of exercising its spending power or its commerce power; it has instead held out the threat, should the States not regulate according to one federal instruction, of simply forcing the States to submit to another federal instruction. A choice between two unconstitutionally coercive regulatory techniques is no choice at all.”
So for those caught up in the nonsense that the Supreme Court should follow precedence here ya go.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=505&page=144
Protected: Tyler 3-10-2012
Protected: Tyler 12-24-2011
Some good info on what is Doctrinie
I get irritated having to clear up for non-members false doctrines presented by other members.
This is a weakness of mine but it irritates me when people expound on “The Gospel According To Them”
Especially when they try to equate ALL the words spoken by another member – even if a Church leader as being doctrine.
Brigham Young let’s see what he had to say on the issue…
“I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inqure for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. (Brigham Young, 9:150)”
The First Presidency have of right a great influence over this people; and if we should get out of the way and lead this people to destruction, what a pity it would be! How can you know whether we lead you correctly or not? Can you know by any other power than that of the Holy Ghost? I have uniformly exhorted the people to obtain this living witness, each for themselves; then no man on earth can lead them astray. (Brigham Young, 6:100)”
In trying all matters of doctrine, to make a decision valid, it is necessary to obtain a unanumous voice, faith and decision. In the capacity of a Quorum, the three First Presidents must be one in their voice; the Twelve Apostles must be unanimous in their voice, to obtain a righteous decision upon any matter that may come before them, as you may read in the Doctrine and Covenants. Whenever you see thse Quorums unanimous in their declaration, you may set it down as true. (Brigham Young, 9:91-92)”
And this from President Lee
“It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they write. I don’t care what his position is, if he writes something or speaks something that goes beyond anything that you can find in the standard church works, unless that one be the prophet, seer, and revelator – please note that one exception – you may immediately say, “Well, that is his own idea.” And if he says something that contradicts what is found in the standard church works, you may know by that some token that it is false, regardless of the position of the man who says it. We can know or have the assurance that they are speaking under inspiration if we so live that we can have a witness that what they are speaking is the word of the Lord. There is only one safety, and that is that we shall live to have the witness to know. President Brigham Young said something to the effect that “the greatest fear I have is that the people of this Church will accept what we say as the will of the Lord without first praying about it and getting the witness within their own hearts that what we say is the word of the Lord.” (Harold B. Lee, Stand Ye In Holy Places, pp. 162-3, “The Prophet, Seer, and Revelator,” Address delivered to seminary and institute teachers, BYU, July 8, 1964)”
From the Church’s own website
“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works†of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine.
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine
A few years ago I was in the Elders Quorun in my Ward and we were going to have a little cookout and play horseshoes on a Saturday afternoon. I had volunteered to cook the Brats and Beans. My recipe for Brats calls for steeping them over low heat in beer overnight (along with veggies and spices). Of course cooking them on the hot grill over coals is going to disapate what little alcohol is in the Beer too. The event was a success and everyone loved my Brats. Flash forward a few years and the Elders decide to do this again. I’m asked if I will cook again. Sure, no problem. The night before I’m planning on going to the store to get my ingredients I get a call from one of the guys in the Elders Quorum Presidency and he starts off the conversation (with what I took to be a tone of condesention) “Brother Riddle…” He said it had come to his attention that I cooked the brats in beer and wanted me to not do that. I said thats how I cook them and he was of course free to get someone else to cook. I then pointed out that the Church has no position on cooking with alcohol and asked if his wife made sugar cookies or if he ate vanilla ice cream as both contain vanilla which, by law, is +35% alcohol by volume whereas beer is often 5% or less.
I really liked some of the references and observations on this page. Yes I do see the irony pointing to someone else’s observation on the “Gospel According To Them” but then the guy that wrote that page does have a disclaimer
From the Church’s site:
Tinga Poblana
- 2 lbs boneless Pork shoulder
- 8 oz Chorizo sausage
- 2 med Red Potatoes, cut into 1/2″ cubes
- 1 C chopped Onion
- 14.5 oz can diced fire-roasted tomatoes, undrained
- 3 can Chipotle peppers i adobo sauce, chopped
- 1 T Adobo sauce
- 4 cloves Garlic, minced
- 1 t dried Thyme leaves, crushed
- 2 bay leaves
- 1 t dried Mexican oregano, crushed
- 1/2 t Salt
- 1/4 t Sugar
Trim Fat from the pork and cut into 1″ cubes
Cook Chorizo over med-high heat until well browned. Transfer Chorizo to paper towels to drain
Combine Pork, chorizo, potatoes, onion, tomatoes, chipolte peppers, adobo sauce, garlic, thyme, bay leaves, oregano, salt and sugar in the corckpot.
Cover and cook on low for 8 hours
Discard the bay leaves, skim the fat form the liquid. Remove the pork from the liquid. Shred the meat and return to the cooker.
Serve with tortilla chips and garnish with avocado and queso fresco
Recent Comments