text:
Balkinization   |
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu David Luban david.luban at gmail.com Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts Judge Shelby and Justice Scalia
Friday, December 20, 2013
Judge Shelby and Justice Scalia Jason Mazzone
Whatever the merits of Judge Robert J. Shelby's ruling today that Utah's same-sex marriage ban violates the Fourteenth Amendment, his opinion would have appeared considerably more judicial had he resisted the urge to give Justice Scalia the finger. Some sample statements from today's decision:
Judge Shelby does not write that Scalia "recommended" that lower federal courts strike down state marriage laws. He writes that Scalia recommended how to interpret the majority's opinion in Windsor, which is exactly what Scalia did in dissent. In this way, Shelby and Scalia are in "agreement" on the logical conclusion of the Shelby majority, even though Scalia does not think Shelby was rightly decided.
I'd argue it's much more disqualifying for Justice Scalia (among many other members of the judiciary) to not be able to understand that discrimination on the basis of sex in the granting of marriage licenses is a type of discrimination on the basis of sex before reaching the question of whether it has a disparate impact on a different class. You could say that it means he has no business on any Federal bench, let alone as someone who purports to care about text over legislative intent.
I don't understand. When Scalia said in his Lawrence dissent 'this is what the court is saying and this is what it would apply to' should people not take him at his word? Shelby agrees with Scalia that is where the majority's reason in Lawrence leads. If Scalia was just being 'too cute by half' then we can hardly blame others for taking his dissent seriously.
Personally, I'm fine with it being recognized that marriage laws discriminate on the basis of sex, so long as it's also recognized that the ERA wasn't ratified.
I'm fine with the lack of an ERA while there's a clause in the Constitution which guarantees everyone equal protection of the laws, and which has been interpreted to require an "exceedingly persuasive justification" for discrimination on the basis of sex, with the discrimination being substantially related to the justification. I've yet to see any justification for prohibiting a marriage strictly based on the sex of the participants that can muster "persuasive," let alone "exceedingly persuasive."
Giving "justice Scalia the finger" will linger long in my mind. Perhaps if Scalia takes the point that Judge Shelby gave him the finger, Scalia may tone down in future dissents his views of the direction that the Court's decision may take in the future which seemed to guide Judge Shelby. This seems to be an unusual use of dissents by a lower courts. Have there been other instances of using dissents in this manner?
Well, of course you're fine with the ERA not being ratified, as long as the 14th amendment is interpreted as having the same effect as the ERA would have had. What I'm pointing out is that the very reason the ERA was proposed, written, passed out of Congress, and sent to the states, is that the 14th amendment was NOT so interpreted until very recently.
Indeed, rendering the non-ratification of the ERA moot was the point of interpreting the 14th amendment in this way. It's essentially judicial ratification of a failed amendment. Not really any different than if an amendment prohibiting progressive taxation were attempted by conservatives, rejected by the states, and then the judiciary were subsequently induced to declare progressive taxation a violation of the guarantee of equal protection of the law. I'm in favor of an interpretive norm for the courts: That the failure of an amendment to be ratified precludes changing the interpretation of an existing part of the Constitution to give the same effect. It's just too blatant that the ERA gets rejected, and shortly after the 14th amendment is "discovered" to mean the same thing.
Brett, for how long should the failure of an amendment to be ratified preclude changing the interpretation of an existing part of the Constitution to give the same effect? Presumably not forever, and your complaint is that it was "shortly" after failure of ratification that the 14th amendment was "discovered" to mean the same thing.
And, as for the scare quotes around "discovered," perhaps finding sex discrimination to violate equal protection was a natural reading that would and should have occurred even if no ERA had been introduced. So natural, in fact, that the burden should be on advocates of sex discrimination to introduce an anti-ERA.
Here's the headline at TPM:
"In Striking Down Utah's Gay Marriage Ban Judge Gives Scalia Big Bear Hug" I wonder if Justice Scalia is getting his "shotgun" ready to fire back (in words, of course). Query: Is the "Big Bear Hug" preferable to the "finger"? Scalia's pre-emptive "slippery slopes" with Lawrence and Windsor dissents are in a landslide. And is Same Sex Polygamy next?
"I'm in favor of an interpretive norm for the courts: That the failure of an amendment to be ratified precludes changing the interpretation of an existing part of the Constitution to give the same effect."
I wonder what you think the failure of the Corwin Amendment means then, for, say, much of the 'New Federalism' interpretations handed down since the Rehnquist Court?
I'd argue it's much more disqualifying for Justice Scalia (among many other members of the judiciary) to not be able to understand that discrimination on the basis of sex in the granting of marriage licenses is a type of discrimination on the basis of sex
I think your criticism covers just about everyone on the bench. The argument that there is sex discrimination in either Lawrence or any of the DOMAs has been a failure. I find it hard to believe that virtually all judges fail to see the obvious, so perhaps there are good arguments that it isn't obvious?
The Corwin Amendment said, "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."
That translates to, "if you wish to enact such an amendment, you have to first repeal this one."
"Call me old fashioned, but it seems to me that if you can't fairly represent the opinions of Supreme Court justices, you have little business being on a district court. "
IIRC, in the same week, Scalia issued a dissent to the DOMA case, castigating SCOTUS for daring to overturn a law. And then gutted a large chunk of the 14th Amendment on voting. Scalia has long since fallen below the standard for intellectual honesty which should be demanded of a judge at any level.
Personally, I'm fine with it being recognized that marriage laws discriminate on the basis of sex, so long as it's also recognized that the ERA wasn't ratified.
The opinion held that there is a fundamental right to marry and that it was here being denied to same sex couples, particularly those of a certain sexual orientation. Likewise, it held that it violated EP even on rational basis. The first prong is not a "sex equality" argument (in fact, state courts that recognized a right to SSM have consistently not relied on that), the second is not only based not on "sex" by on "same sex couples" but uses a lower level of review than the ERA. See also, New Mexico Supreme Court's recent ruling -- NM has a state ERA. It was not relied on. Instead, it was seen as sexual orientation discrimination warranting intermediate scrutiny. The ERA would in effect require strict scrutiny for sex discrimination. It would have done this c. 1980. It took years for the Supreme Court, which could change its mind w/o a clearer constitutional command, to apply the more general language of the Equal Protection Clause in respect to sex to an "exceedingly persuasive justification." The ERA allowed such years of development to develop. And, STILL the level of scrutiny is lower than the ERA. Even if the Equal Protection Clause was applied to hold that sex should be held to strict scrutiny, the time allowed for development of the law alone would mean something. A clear command also has special emotional force, which is one reason some wanted ERA to be ratified. The ERA was proposed before a lot of stuff happened that helped balance the playing field. Some even opposed it as unnecessary since we already have an Equal Protection Clause. I personally think that myself. If we are going to guess the motivation of the few states that didn't ratify, why not use that as a reason?
The concern troll nature of the OP is tiresome. THIS is what we are going to focus on? I also agree with those who provide a different framing even if we are going to worry about that. Sheesh.
"Shelby's ruling today that Utah's same-sex marriage ban violates the Fourteenth Amendment, his opinion would have appeared considerably more judicial had he resisted the urge to give Justice Scalia the finger."
That is an opinion, not a statement of fact. Judge Shelby read Scalia's statements on the subject and agreed with them. Far from giving the finger; it's a use of another judge's statements to buttress a judicial ruling.
Justice Scalia has been running his "parade of horribles" for a long time and deserves to have his rants thrown back at him every once and a while.
While Brett and his AWM faction of the GOP have difficulties accepting the changing demographics of color, they seem to resent the already existing gender change demographics. Brett and his AWM faction of the GOP can continue to reminisce in the Constitution of yore that favored white male property owners, although Brett and his ilk directly did not enjoy those good old bubba days. Brett with his comments demonstrates the anger of the AWM faction of the GOP, this time with women-can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.
Shag, I have little doubt that, should you live long enough, you, too, will regret the abandonment of the rule of law that I lament today. After it's too late for your regret to matter, of course...
What does Brett "lament today?" Does he lament the Civil War Amendments? What else as a member of the AWM faction of the GOP does he lament that he thinks I might lament if I should live so long? In my lifetime (much longer than his to date). I have seen progress, perhaps too slowly. But Brett seems to lament what he never directly had the opportunity to enjoy; that must anger him.
Scalia has been running a con for years, pretending that his opinions follow "original intent" whatever that bit of blather means. Because of that his opinions are an opinion shopper's dream, something for everyone in every direction. Good for Shelby for pointing this out in a way which will be painful for Scalia
Judge Shelby's favorable citation to Scalia's evisceration of the metaphysical Kennedy opinion is less giving the finger to Scalia than a very poor political decision to stick a finger into the eye of Kennedy.
OFF TOPIC: Over at Juan Cole's Informed Comment blog there is a video link to a C-Span interview of Prof. Andrew Bacevich on his recently published "Breach of Trust: How Americans Failed Their Soldiers and Their Country" that runs a fast 59+ minutes.
Those who choose to watch this interesting interview should keep in mind the objections of the founders/framers to a standing military after the American Revolution. The issues of public service and a citizens military might be anathema to all stripes of libertarians. But such may lead to a better citizenry.
D. Ghirlandaio: Fortunately for us, the founders were not libertarians.
Congress did not impose a military draft until the Civil War.
The link to the Juan Cole book review to which Shag referred is here:
http://www.juancole.com/2013/12/bacevich-americans-soldiers.html The review starts: Andrew Bacevich's "Breach of Trust: How Americans failed their Soldiers and their Country" is a post-mortem on the professional standing army that the US has sent to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bacevich argues that the citizens' standing army created by the draft in WW II and after had been highly successful militarily in Europe and Korea and had been a profound expression of individual buy-in and shared national sacrifice. Three errors right off the bat. 1) The WWII draft was imposed to create an temporary army to fight a world war, not a standing army. 2) By definition, a compelled military draft upon pain of execution or imprisonment is the diametric opposite of "a profound expression of individual buy-in." 3) There was no shared-sacrifice. The WWII draft was riddled with exceptions for those the government wanted to keep as civilians for various reasons. Cole concludes: In fact, like hidden cancer, a whole host of potential pathologies lurked in the standing professional army… Americans were actively discouraged from shared sacrifice and told by the president to go shopping and to go on vacation at Disney World. Actually, recruiting was substantially beefed up because Bush expanded the size of the military. What Cole is referring to was Bush's refusal to accept the Democrat proposals to use the war as an excuse to impose another tax increase on the wealthy, which is hardly shared sacrifice. At the same time, the grunts did the heavy lifting, sentenced to multiple long deployments in a set of guerrilla wars that politicians maintained they won in the face of a gritty litany of disasters that left the countries where they fought long-term basket cases. Cole's ignorance of military history is staggering. When you were drafted during WWII, you were in for the entire war. You had two ways out - getting killed or getting maimed to the extent that you were no longer combat effective Today, we have year long tours in a war zone followed by equal or longer breaks back home. You are not sentenced to anything. You initially volunteer to serve for three years, which could have one, maybe two, combat tours; then you have to reenlist for further stints. I depart from pure libertarians in that I understand a government will usually need to impose a military draft in a major war to prevail against an existential enemy. Beyond that extreme situation, there is no justification in a free country for government imposed involuntary servitude. Glorifying compelled military service in a war is heaping an obscenity on a necessary evil.
Note that our TYRANNYSAURUS REX is not focusing on Prof. Bacevich's interview but on Juan Cole's commentary. I realize that 59+ minutes is a long time for our TR to concentrate on the interview but it better expresses author Bacevich's views than does Juan Cole.
And Bacevich is not glorifying compelled military service. Rather, he thinks a military draft/public service requirement gives the citizenry skin in the game with respect to decisions to go to war, i.e. not being mere spectators cheering on wars in which 1% are involved, e.g. as was the case in the Bush/Cheney Administration, such that very few Americans had loved ones involved ir Iraq and Afghanistan.
Sorry. Cole has a singular talent for offering ignorant statements which set me off. Bacevich is a true classical American conservative of the type who historically was always suspicious of foreign entanglements and led our isolationist movements. One of the great political inversions of the Twentieth Century was conservatives becoming internationalist under FDR and then progressives becoming isolationist after Vietnam. Bacevich is a historical anomaly. Bacevich and I differ on how muscular foreign policy should be and our world views are colored by our military service - his by losing the Vietnam War and mine by easy victories in Grenada, the Cold War and the Persian Gulf War. Because Bacevich's POV is formed by his service rather than Cole's know nothing ideology, I can respect it. Bacevich and I both share a deep unease over the divide growing between the military, it is civilian masters and the citizenry. It IS easier for a ruling class which does not serve to order the military into battle to pursue its political objectives and then betray the military in the field and surrender when those objectives change. It IS easier for a citizenry without "skin in the fight" to support or at least acquiesce to these decisions of the ruling class. And it thus becomes easier for the military to question the competence and commitment of its civilian masters and the citizenry. Bacevich worries that this divide leads to the abuse of the military. I worry that this divide will eventually lead to a coup d'tat by a military caste that - with more than a little justification - believes itself better equipped than civilian politicians to rule.
Prof. Bacevich makes the point in this interview, and in the book I presume, a point he has made in earlier books and articles, that American is good at starting wars but bad at winning them. Calling Grenada a war is a bit much and what did it win? The Cold War is not a traditional war. And while Gulf I for its magnitude was a war, the extent to which it was a win is questionable as it failed to resolve important issues.
As to a military coup d'etat, I can't see that happening in America as the military-industrial-congressional complex can't afford it. [Query: Wouldn't the Second Amendment yahoos come to our rescue?] By the Bybee [expletives deleted], when asked what President Bacevich thought did a good job on military matters, he referenced Ike even though Ike had a couple of miscues. I highly recommend watching, listening carefully to the interview. Bacevich is concise and directly asnswers questions. One can disagree with some of his views, but clearly America is bad at winning wars. And before America goes into war, the citizenry is entitled to the facts, the truth, proper assessments of costs and outcomes. Consider the messes of two long wars in the first 13 years of this new century. And more to come if neocons get back in power. Realists have been silenced too long.
Speaking of libertarians, Joseph Stiglitz's "In No One We Trust" NYTimes Opinionator website column of 12/21/13, rejects self-interest and focuses on the need for trust for a society such as is America, that we need to bring back trust to make America work better. This column is an extension of Stiglitz's attacks on inequality. For me, Pres. Reagan's greatest accomplishment was "Trust, but verify." As Stiglitz points out, deregulation did not work so we have to go back to regulation to better assure trust.
And trust is part of Prof. Bacevich's concerns, trust that before going to war the citizenry will be involved in the debates, that the government will be truthful in its assessments of a decision to go to war. David Sanger of the NYTimes was recently interviewed (yesterday?) on C-Span on the recent book going paperback. Sanger and a cohort came up with a cost of over 3 trillion so far on the Afghan/Iraq wars (not including the costs of loss of life, limb, etc, on all sides or the continuing Greater Middle East issues). How well was the citizenry apprised of such costs in making decisions to go to war? As Prof. Bacevich points out, the citizenry was cheering on from the sidelines as most did not have skin in the game. But the wars went on and on. And then we had the 2007-8 Bush/Cheney Great Recession that dug such a deep hole we're still climbing out. So perhaps Pres. Reagan's phrase should be reversed: "Verify and then trust" as least until the playing fields are somewhat leveled. Stiglitz's column made me think about how my life has been with trust. I do trust, I have trusted and hope to continue to trust, as trust is necessary for survival. My trust is a form of self-interest but in a cooperative not a competitive way. Sometimes trust is misplaced. But that is the exception that we should learn from. (Just think of the trust we deal with on a daily basis from the time we awake until the next day.) And then there's Pope Francis whose trust extends to the poor, a worthwhile message to the secular (such as myself) as well as the religious of various faiths. Imagine, Peace on Earth. But then there are those wars. This is a time that families get together, with love and trust. Let's pass it on to the rest of this and next year. My tree comes down after January 6th, a religious tradition that I have continued on a secular basis. So Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays to all.
I was a bit surprised at claim Bacevich's claim that the US has difficulty winning wars when it has lost only one - Bacevich's own Vietnam War - a won the others, often decisively. Von Clausewitz was correct when he observed that war is "the continuation of state policy with other means." Most US wars are small affairs (like Genada) that advance limited policy goals (like regime change to stop the Soviet Empire from using the island to arm revolutionary groups in the region). You achieve the goals, you win the war, even if the collateral results are less than perfect.
You achieve the goals, you win the war, even if the collateral results are less than perfect.
# posted by Blogger Bart DePalma : 8:56 AM That is moronic. If the collateral results are worse than the threat that you imagined (see Iraq's WMD), you lost the war.
Was the Korean War (Police Power) a win? What did America win?
How was Gulf I a win? What did it really accomplish based upon what came after? And how have Afghan and Iraq been wins? Prof. Bacevich goes back in time to the Philippines early in the 20th century in reviewing America's wars in his claim that America is bad at winning wars. By the Bybee [expletives deleted], our TYRANNYSAURUS REX's: "You achieve the goals, you win the war, even if the collateral results are less than perfect." dated Von C's views on wars, do not apply today. Of course "less than perfect" is a tad absurd with respect to the Afghan/Iraq wars. As for "achieving the goals," the goalposts change along the way, which is a concern that Bacevich focuses on in the decision to go to war. Concepts of war change with time and technology. Von C is basically passe. As to Grenada, this link: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/25/invasion-grenadaronaldreagan.html looks at Grenada after 30 years. Yes, Pres. Reagan made his C-I-C with Grenada. But what about those many Marines killed elsewhere? Where was the national interest/security in invading Grenada (which earlier I had know of from a popular song)? Was it the ability of American dental students to drill?
Shag: Was the Korean War (Police Power) a win? What did America win?.
Defended an ally (ROK) from conquest by one of the most brutal regimes in history (NK) and secondarily kept a strategic enemy (USSR) from using Korea to project air and sea power against a second ally (Japan). How was Gulf I a win? What did it really accomplish based upon what came after? Defended allies (Kuwait and Saudi) and our oil supply from conquest by another of the most brutal regimes in history (Saddam's Iraq). You are correct that the US should have finished the job and removed Saddam from power, but that was not our objective at the time. And how have Afghan and Iraq been wins? We won a strategic victory in Iraq - both replacing Saddam (an ongoing threat to our oil supply and allies) with a democratic ally and decimating al Qaeda. Afghanistan is still in question. If we leave an allied or at least neutral government and the Taliban/al Qaeda remain out of power, the war was a victory. If the Taliban/al Qaeda return to power, it was lost. Prof. Bacevich goes back in time to the Philippines early in the 20th century in reviewing America's wars in his claim that America is bad at winning wars. Nasty guerilla war, but another strategic victory. The Philippines became a long term ally and projected power against Japan. dated Von C's views on wars, do not apply today. Really? What then is the purpose of war if not to achieve political objectives? Yes, Pres. Reagan made his C-I-C with Grenada. But what about those many Marines killed elsewhere? Grenada and Lebanon are unrelated and the latter was not a war. The Marines were in Labanon as observers. Where was the national interest/security in invading Grenada (which earlier I had know of from a popular song)? Was it the ability of American dental students to drill? The Soviet Empire was using Cuban engineers to build a SAC bomber base in Grenada (which we later completed and turned into the first Reagan International Airport) and was using the island as a transshipment point to funnel weapons into guerilla groups throughout the region. I was serving in the 82d Airborne at the time and was supporting the operation from Fort Bragg. Our troops on the ground found warehouses with enough weapons to arm a couple infantry divisions. The danger to the students was a pretext to eliminate this threat.
Grenada was "The Gnat That Roared," a virtual comic opera. It probably spurred on the brooding neocons (who avoided serving in Vietnam) who advised George W.
Regarding post-WW II wars (however defined) based upon: "What then is the purpose of war if not to achieve political objectives?" how real, how lasting are the political objectives that were achieved in looking at the international scene today, particularly in the Greater Middle East moving into Asia? By the Bybee [expletives deleted], our TYRANNYSAURUS REX has not mentioned Panama. And then there were other military adventures in the Western Hemisphere going way back in the Caribbean and South America that some have branded as part of the establishment American Empire.
Bart, one of the most brutal regimes in history, as you call it, came to full fruition after a war in which US policy was the carpet bombing of cities. Massive civilian casualties were thought to weaken the hold of the regime. 2 million men women and children, give or take. Every city, again and again.
Go fuck yourself.
BD: "What then is the purpose of war if not to achieve political objectives?"
Shag: "how real, how lasting are the political objectives that were achieved in looking at the international scene today, particularly in the Greater Middle East moving into Asia?" There is no such thing as a war to end all wars and all achievements are temporary. A great nation achieves what it can to create a favorable international environment, while it can, at the least cost in blood and treasure. Foreign policy is more akin to trash removal than a triumphant "end of history." The movie Patton did an excellent job correctly portraying the general as a military historian and synthesized a number of his real life statements into this pertinent film narration: "For over a thousand years Roman conquerors returning from the wars enjoyed the honor of triumph, a tumultuous parade. In the procession came trumpeteers, musicians and strange animals from conquered territories, together with carts laden with treasure and captured armaments. The conquerors rode in a triumphal chariot, the dazed prisoners walking in chains before him. Sometimes his children robed in white stood with him in the chariot or rode the trace horses. A slave stood behind the conqueror holding a golden crown and whispering in his ear a warning: that all glory is fleeting."
The Soviet Empire was using Cuban engineers to build a SAC bomber base in Grenada (which we later completed and turned into the first Reagan International Airport) and was using the island as a transshipment point to funnel weapons into guerilla groups throughout the region.
I was serving in the 82d Airborne at the time and was supporting the operation from Fort Bragg. Our troops on the ground found warehouses with enough weapons to arm a couple infantry divisions. The danger to the students was a pretext to eliminate this threat. # posted by Blogger Bart DePalma : 10:49 AM LOL The "threat" was "eliminated" because that was the only place in the region where it was possible for the Soviets to land aircraft. Oh, wait...
D. Ghirlandaio said...Bart, one of the most brutal regimes in history, as you call it, came to full fruition after a war in which US policy was the carpet bombing of cities. Massive civilian casualties were thought to weaken the hold of the regime. 2 million men women and children, give or take. Every city, again and again.
You most certainly are not describing either the air campaigns in the Korean or the Persian Gulf Wars. Go fuck yourself. And a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you.
The Soviets did not possess rights in the western hemisphere to a landing strip long enough for use by their strategic bombers. Cuba was off limits since the missile crisis.
A federal judge -- on page three this time -- had a "Scalia was right" comment when holding that Ohio had to recognize a same sex marriage from another state on a death certificate. Ohio recognizes out of state marriages, even those it does not authorize itself, but not SSM.
I found this a bit gratuitous, especially since it was more prominently place, but it still is not what I'd focus on.
From your review: The most eye-opening sections of "The Korean War" detail America's saturation bombing of Korea's north. "What hardly any Americans know or remember," Mr. Cumings writes, "is that we carpet-bombed the north for three years with next to no concern for civilian casualties." "Eye-opening" because "carpet bombing" (indiscriminate mass bombing) of civilians in North Korean cities never happened. The United States dropped more bombs in Korea (635,000 tons, as well as 32,557 tons of napalm) than in the entire Pacific theater during World War II. This is hardly proof of "carpet bombing" civilians. Here is a chronology of the Korean War air campaign: http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2000/October%202000/1000korea.aspx Cummings is probably referring to the strategic bombing campaign toward the end of the war targeting infrastructure, not civilians, to put pressure on the enemy to agree to a ceasefire. http://library.uoregon.edu/ec/e-asia/reada/1528.pdf Our logic seemed to be, he says, that "they are savages, so that gives us the right to shower napalm on innocents. Innocents? We used napalm to eliminate mass infantry formations. See the chronology provided above.
D. Ghirlandaio said.. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lormand/poli/soa/grenada.htm
"But: The site is open to the public (no need for spy photos) since the airfield is meant to foster tourism (the island's only growth industry)." Please. Cuban military engineers were building an airstrip longer than needed or used by any other Caribbean Island and fought to defend it from the Rangers and some of my buddies in the 307th Engineers (82d Abn) http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/155/25966.html In reality, there were only three warehouses that were only one-quarter full of antiquated small arms that had been confiscated a few days earlier by the coup leaders from the popular militias. LMAO! I saw the photos our men took. The weapons were standard Soviet small arms up through anti-aircraft weapons Where the hell would Grenadan "popular militias" have obtained these weapons. Furthermore, Grenada was a most unlikely place for the Cubans to have stockpiled arms: Grenada is three times further from the Central American isthmus than is Cuba itself and only marginally closer to Cuban bases then in Angola, more than 12,000 miles away. They were Soviet weapons. The Cubans were engineers working on the air strip. Despite administration claims to the contrary, less than 100 of the 750 Cubans on the island were military personnel. LMAO! Here is some inside ball you will not read in the histories. The 82d Airborne commander was incompetent and he plopped the division HQ in a field overlooking a town. In the back of the field, was a jungle with a company (100+) armed Cuban soldiers hiding there. No one bothered to set up perimeter security. The Cubans could have wiped out the HQ, but were terrified by all the shock and awe and wanted to surrender. However, the Cuban commissars told them that we tortured to death POWs so they were also afraid to surrender. The Cubans drew straws to see who would go out alone to the Americans and offer to surrender to see what would happen. This character walked up to the general's party with a white flag before anyone noticed him. The Cubans surrendered peacefully after the "volunteer" POW told them it was OK. Our general was relieved a few weeks after the operation was over. This group does not count the Cubans we engaged around the airfield and elsewhere around the island. Furthermore, despite initial press accounts that the U.S. assault was resisted almost exclusively be Cuban forces, it appears that the bulk of the resistance to the invasion was done by Grenadans. Straw man. No one claimed otherwise. Have you ever heard the terms "cover story" and "useful fools?"
Our TYRANNYSAURUS REX's:
"Foreign policy is more akin to trash removal than a triumphant 'end of history.'" ignores that one person's trash may be another person's treasure. As to the "end of history," that might coincide with the end of the world as we know it. The concept of "the end of history" is not a perfect political world in the manner of Fukuyama after the end of the old war. Our TR seems to belong to the garbageman school of foreign policy and may be its only adherent. Consider what that "trash" consists of and how it is "removed", say, in the sense of the Civil War or pre-WW II Germany. And consider our TR's: "A great nation achieves what it can to create a favorable international environment, while it can, at the least cost in blood and treasure." and apply it to the Afghan/Iraq wars. No, our TR's history displays the stench of the neocons' approach to foreign policy. It is an example of the industrial/military/congressional complex in action, justifying great expenditures for defense but because of its costs, justifies cutting back safety nets of the lower middle class and the poor. Our TR's history, especially military, compares with his economics. To our TR, American exceptionalism results in a foreign policy akin to trash removal. That's trashy history.
That is a willful misquotation of Lemay repeated without attribution among the usual suspects on the left. In reality, the full excerpt from the interview discusses how the Pentagon denied LeMay's request to firebomb North Korea, as we had done with Japan during WWII, expressly to avoid civilian casualties. The excerpt from LaMay you quoted was his complaint that the land war ended up devastating North Korea and parts of South Korea even though we did not firebomb the cities: Kohn: Did you believe our bombing campaign against North Korea was strategic air war as you knew it? LeMay: No, we never did hit a strategic target. Catton: It was interdiction. Kohn: It was interdiction with strategic bombers? Catton: Absolutely. The strategic targets-the resource-were located north of the Yalu, yet we were not permitted to go north of the Yal~. 'General LeMay kept very close contact with those three units-the 98th, the 92d, and the 22d. He kept very close tabs on those outfits; they did the jobs they were asked to do extremely well. He also sent Rosie O'Donnell to be the FEAF Bomber Command Commander. So, while General LeMay did not relinquish possession of those outfits, they were under the operational control of the theater commander. Right? LeMay: Right. Kohn: No lessons to be learned from the strategic standpoint, then? LeMay: How not to use the strategic air weapon. Kohn: Could you expand on that a little bit, General LeMay? LeMay: Right at the start of the war, unofficially I slipped a message in "under the carpet" in the Pentagon that we ought to turn SAC loose with incendiaries on some North Korean towns. The answer came back, under the carpet again, that there would be too many civilian casualties; we couldn't do anything like that. So we went over there and fought the war and eventually burned down every town in North Korea anyway, some way or another, and some in South Korea, too. We even burned down Pusan-an accident, but we burned it down anyway. The Marines started a battle down there with no enemy in sight. Over a period of three years or so, we killed off-what- twenty percent of the population of Korea as direct casualties of war, or from starvation and exposure? Over a period of three years, this seemed to be acceptable to everybody, but to kill a few people at the start right away, no, we can't seem to stomach that. http://www.afhso.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-100929-052.pdf Pages 87-88.
It's time for another viewing of "Dr. Strangelove" to better picture Gen. Curtis Lemay. To complete the double feature, let's add "The Mouse That Roared." to consider its many variations not only during the Cold War but since up to the present. Query: Is an alternative to our TYRANNYSAURUS REX'S garbageman school of foreign policy a Gen. Lemay recycling foreign policy?
"Over a period of three years or so, we killed off-what- twenty percent of the population of Korea as direct casualties of war, or from starvation and exposure? Over a period of three years, this seemed to be acceptable to everybody, but to kill a few people at the start right away, no, we can't seem to stomach that."
The Soviets did not possess rights in the western hemisphere to a landing strip long enough for use by their strategic bombers.
LOL Blankshot, how does it feel to be afraid of your own shadow?
As I read Roger Cohen's column today at the NYTimes website titled "When I'm Sixty-Four" about some prognostications on significant increases in longevity that some Hi-Techers are putting forth, I thought about my 83 years (so far) and wondered if this came about fairly soon, would I be looking forward to continuing to comment at this and other blogs. Would I need a health care provider well versed on computers and the Internet to keep me apprised of posts on my favorite blogs as well as the comments and who's making them so that I can dictate my own comments? Might my health care provider act somewhat to temper my comments in the interests of my health? Would Obamacare provide coverage for this if medically continuing to comment would be good for my health? To play on Gen. Douglas McArthur, "Old bloggers never die, and the commenters don't fade away."
These are my thoughts as I await the family gathering here in Brookline, as we usual suspects at this Blog maintain (hopefully) a Christmas Armistice in the manner of that WW I battleground event that I still get choked up about. " War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing." (With credit to the Seinfeld episode.)
One last time, LeMay was spouting off. He was a SAC general serving in Japan and has ZERO personal knowledge of what happened on the ground with the grunts. The war waged by North Korea and China against the South and us was bad enough as it was without adding slanders of your own country. Just admit you were wrong and enjoy the Christmas holiday.
"In the spring of 1952, with a stalemate on the ground and the failure of a negotiated truce, FEAF began a new policy of "selective destruction" using "air pressure" to force the communists to settle. The goal was to make the war in Korea too costly for the communists by destroying specific high-value economic targets. The air pressure campaign started on June 24, 1952, when USAF, U.S. Navy and Marine fighter-bombers attacked North Korean hydroelectric dams, devastating the enemy's power supply. The air pressure raids continued into 1953 with strikes against key North Korean communication, transportation, manufacturing, supply, and power centers. In May 1953 Air Force F-84 Thunderjets attacked irrigation dams for the first time, causing extensive flood damage. The air pressure campaign was a means of striking at the enemy when the situation on the ground was deadlocked, and it was a significant factor in bringing the fighting in Korea to a close." http://hnn.us/article/67717 "The first couple of times I went in on a napalm strike, I had kind of an empty feeling. I thought afterward, Well, maybe I shouldn't have done it. Maybe those people I set afire were innocent civilians. But you get conditioned, especially after you've hit what looks like a civilian and the A-frame on his back lights up like a Roman candle—a sure enough sign that he's been carrying ammunition. Normally speaking, I have no qualms about my job. Besides, we don't generally use napalm on people we can see. We use it on hill positions, or buildings. And one thing about napalm is that when you've hit a village and have seen it go up in flames, you know that you've accomplished something. Nothing makes a pilot feel worse than to work over an area and not see that he's accomplished anything." From this: http://www.amazon.com/Bombing-Civilians-A-Twentieth-Century-History/dp/1595585478 And I prefer to take the General at his word. He was speaking after the fact, and about the historical record. "By 1952, according to a UN estimate, one out of nine men, women, and children in North Korea had been killed. In the South, 5,000,000 people had been displaced and 100,000 children were described as unaccompanied. "The countless ruined villages are the most terrible and universal mark of the war on the Korean landscape. To wipe out cover for North Korean vehicles and personnel, hundreds of thatch-roofed houses were burned by air-dropped jellied gasoline or artillery fire," Walter Sullivan, former New York Times Korea correspondent, reported in The Nation. J. Donald Kingsley, head of the reconstruction agency, called Korea "the most devastated land and its people the most destitute in the history of modern warfare." And a belated happy Chanukah to you.
Going back on topic of this post, Joe brought to our attention another recent reference to a Justice Scalia dissent by a federal district court judge. In thinking about this, the "case or controversy" requirement of Article III comes to mind, that the Court is not in the business of providing advisory opinions. Consider the dicta in Justice Scalia's decision in Heller on the Second Amendment indicating some areas of possible government limitations. While dissents are not addressed with specificity in Article III, might they constitute an advisory opinion of sorts on some future case or controversy? Did the dissents of Justice Scalia with their slippery slope predictions fit this description? How common is this with dissents over the years? In particular, was Justice Harlan's dissent in Plessy comparable to Scalia's dissents? Might the uses by lower court judges of dissents such as Scalia's suggest that other Justices in dissents in the future may engage in slippery slope predictions? Or, are the recent references by federal judges to Scalia dissents a message from the lower courts that it is difficult for them to be guided by controversial decisions of the Court?
Let me return to the BU Law School Conference on Political Dysfunction once agains to Panel VII "What are we to do about dysfunction? Proposed cures and other constitutional connections." The Panel included Frank Michelman who suggested that perhaps there was a need for a "constitutional interpreter" to address such dysfunction. Prof. Michelman paused and then said "like the Supreme Court." Then after a second pause, he said he had expected a "gasp" in response to this suggestion but there was no audible "gasp." I did provide a silent "gasp" not only because of the divided Court but also the issue of the "case or controversy" requirement and the taboo on providing advisory opinions. I haven't read Prof. Michelman's paper and look forward to it for some elucidation on his suggestion. As I noted in an earlier comment on Panel VII, it did not result in a consensus on whether there is political dysfunction and if so on possible cures that would pass constitutional muster. So, has constitutional law become a blood sport?
I have to wonder just how credible a college professor who has never been a federal judge can place himself in a position as a "nay sayer" and potty mouth of shelby. I live in Utah and was impressed with this ruling. What wrong Prof? Jealous?
Perhaps had Scalia refrained from "giving the finger" to the SCOTUS majority, the LGBT community, and pretty much everyone else, it would have been easier for Shelby to resist. However, even if Scalia was sneering, his analysis was probably correct so I guess he just has to live with the fruits of his dark sarcasm.
Tony's bed-wetting at the prospect of what equality might lead to, does indeed offer tempting quotes.
Of course that wasn't how Tony meant it. He was, the polite version would have it, "sending an alarm about the constitutional dangers he foresaw" (h/t to Bob Egelko). It simply happens that the prospects that alarm Tony, others find right and just. Yet I suppose Shelby should have resisted the urge. However Black too was unable to resist. And others may follow. Perhaps this weakness is not uncommon.
Funny that Prof. Mazzone doesn't seem very concerned by how judicial (or not) Scalia appears in his dissent.
Scalia basically drew a road map for arguments to use in lawsuits against states prohibitions of same sex marriage. Judge Shelby merely pointed that out in his opinion. If you don't get that, and the beautiful irony of it, maybe you shouldn't be teaching constitutional law, or any law for that matter.
. . . but it seems to me that if you can't fairly represent the opinions of U.S. District Judge Robert J. Shelby, you have little business being a law professor.
I think it is fairly common for dissents to predict the future and do so at times in ways that arguably exaggerate the necessary extent of the majority opinion. Brennan, e.g., was known for more than a few angry dissents predicting the possible lengths of the in his view oh so wrong majority opinions.
Sometimes, dissents are seen in hindsight as prophetic. For a discussion with some examples, see, "I Dissent: Great Opposing Opinions in Landmark Supreme Court Cases" by Mark Tushnet.
Well Mazzone got quoted in the New York Times - that's how I got here - but to me it just makes Mazzone look like an overly earnest academic lacking basic social skills, particularly a sense of humor. Or maybe this post is meant to be ironic since Scalia is imfamous for his snarky opinions. If he can dish it out, I'm sure he can take it...
Oh! The snark!
Now, let's be clear: dishing it out is not the same as taking it. Unfair, perhaps, but that's how the world works. Tony is hardly the first person to have said too much. Perhaps we should be charitable. Oh wait I just can't be in this case. Perhaps when my gay friends aren't being BEATEN TO DEATH well then perhaps I will have more charity for Tony.
The ERA was proposed before a lot of stuff happened that helped balance the playing field. Some even opposed it as unnecessary since we already have an Equal Protection Clause. I personally think that myself. If we are going to guess the motivation of the few states that didn't ratify, why not use that as a reason?Cheap FUT 14 Coins
LOL elo boost
we have year long tours in a war zone followed by equal or longer breaks back home. You are not sentenced to anything. You initially volunteer to serve for three years, which could have one, maybe two, combat tours; then you have to reenlist for further stints.lol欧服代练
buy fifa coins fifa 15 coins Buy LOL Elo Boost thanks so much i like very so much your post حلي الاوريو الفطر الهندي صور تورتة حلى قهوه طريقة عمل السينابون طريقة عمل بلح الشام بيتزا هت كيكة الزبادي حلا سهل صور كيك عجينة العشر دقائق طريقة عمل الدونات طريقة عمل البان كيك طريقة عمل الكنافة طريقة عمل البسبوسة طريقة عمل الكيك طريقة عمل عجينة البيتزا فوائد القرفه Very awesome post , i am really impressed with it a lot When I first visited your blog, I liked the concept of your blog posts. It is very well portrayed as well as depicted Arts de la table recette tiramisu gateau aux pommes creme patissiere creme anglaise recette chantilly recette gaufre recette galette des rois mélatonine pate a crepe recette crepe
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions?
Post a Comment
Agen Judi Online Terpercaya |
Books by Balkinization Bloggers Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin's Press, 2022) Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |


text:
Our The Actor Owen Warner Diamond Painting is a craft that has impacted the art and craft world and made waves among DIY artists and crafters, Diamond Painting is a form of mosaic art in which the artist applies shiny resins onto a pre-sticky canvas to complete the painting, and the best part is that you don't need any prior experience, simply pick your canvas up and let your mind wander and feel the worries of the day fade away with every diamond you place on your sticky canvas, and without realizing it you will create your own artwork.
How Diamond Paint Work?
Step 1: Unpack Canvas, tools, and diamond
Each Diamond Painting kit comes with everything you need to get started
Step 2: Unroll the canvas on a flat, smooth surface
Flatten your canvas on a dry, clean table or workplace
Step 3: Poor diamond into the grooved tray
Choose a color diamond and get started, pour a small number of diamonds into the tray, and if you hold it at a slight angle and shake it gently the diamonds will settle right side up so they are facing the correct way to pick them up with the applicator.
Step 4: Peel back a small section of the plastic film to work on at one time
It's easiest to work on a small section at a time. It is important to keep the canvas covered when you aren't working on it.
Step 5: Apply Wax to diamond pen
Dip the tip of the applicator to fill it with wax.
Step 6: Match the diamond to the corresponding symbol on the canvas
After matching the diamond to its corresponding symbol on the canvas, you can then pick up the diamonds as they will easily stick to the tip of the applicator. Once picked up, carefully press the diamond onto its corresponding symbol on the canvas.
Ultimately, remember to add a little bit more wax if the pen seems like it doesn't pick up the diamonds anymore.
Why you should try The Actor Owen Warner Diamond Painting:
1- Reduces Stress and Anxiety
Experts agree with the fact that arts and crafts are a great outlet for stress and anxiety. Just like meditation, Diamond By Numbers also allows you to switch off your brain from the daily stress and submerge in a peaceful yet creative environment, It can be particularly effective for people who aren't comfortable with more creatively expressive forms of art, People who are more guarded find a lot of tranquility in Painting with Diamond. It feels safer and it creates containment around their process.
2- Trains Your Brain To Focus:
The brain needs exercise and concentrating on detail work is a great way to exercise your brain and the process of Diamond By Numbers involves both logic and creativity. We use logic when reading the pattern by picking a symbol and finding the color associated with it from the chart. This activates the analytical part of the brain.
Engaging your brain in this way keeps it active so that you will be better able to concentrate at work or in class.
3- 5D Diamond Painting helps your motor Skills
Motor skills is a scientific term that correlates to the movement and synchronization of the body's muscles. By focusing on a task for a long period of time, you can improve concentration levels and hand-to-eye coordination. In fact, engaging in activities that require hand-eye coordination can significantly enhance this skill. For instance, the diamond painting will provide an outlet for you to improve your motor skills and enhance your hand-eye coordination.
4- Diamond Art Diamond Art Kits Are Thoughtful Gifts
The diamond painting process can be extremely soothing and relaxing. As a result, you can create a wonderful piece of artwork that will impress your cherished ones. Furthermore, you can tell them how much creativity you put into your artwork to make it a truly special gift. In fact, by expressing your emotions, you can create a heartfelt gift that will be treasured for years to come.
5- You Can Frame And Hang A Finished Diamond Painting
One of the best features of diamond painting is that you can hang your own piece of art on your wall.
6- Unplugs You from Technology
Diamond painting is a DIY activity that offers a welcome escape from the constant glare of our gadget screens. Instead of staring at a digital device, diamond painting provides a way to get in touch with our creative side without drying out our eyes. Additionally, engaging in diamond painting can have a positive impact on our well-being. Not only is it an enjoyable artistic hobby, but it also keeps our brain, fingers, and eyes stimulated and healthy. Ultimately, diamond painting is a great way to improve our mental and physical health while creating beautiful works of art.
What does the The Actor Owen Warner Diamond Painting package includes
Our Diamond Paintings Include everything you need to get started!
- 1x Numbered high-quality canvas Rolled around a foam.
- A pack of diamonds
- 1x premium diamond drill pen tool
- 1x wax pad used to pick up diamonds with the diamond pen
- 1x grooved organizing tray (shake lightly to sort your diamonds)
- Instruction Paper

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Take a second look at the title of this post. That's right: Cooking School: Hot Cross Buns. The last time I looked, Hot Cross Buns fell under the category of Breads. Now take a look if you are on the right blog!
Yup! You are on What's For Lunch, Honey? and yes you are seeing this correctly. I am indeed presenting you with self baked bread outside of a Daring Baker's challenge, that is. If you have no idea what I am talking about then I presume you are new around these parts and would like to direct you to this post. That was my last challenge and as you can see I fear bread baking.
After reading the many comments and emails I got from that post I was rather amazed. Amazed, because you all seem to think that I was fearless. Well I guess Mighty Meeta's Kryptonite is bread baking.
Like any fearless super hero I decided to grab the proverbial bull by its proverbial horns and take this fear factor head on. I have been collecting a few bread recipes in the past few days and hope to present you with a few more bread varieties on this blog - outside of the DB challenges!
Do you see the Categories section on the sidebar? Well you all know how it works - click on the label and you get a list of all the recipes/articles filed under that particular category. The ones that have a larger font simply means that there are more recipes/articles under that category. Now look at the size of my breads category. It's minute! My aim this year is to make that label grow in font size!
As Easter is just around the corner I decided to start with Hot Cross Buns.
What are Hot Cross Buns?
Hot Cross buns have been a symbol of Good Friday for decades. They are specifically sold in bakeries and supermarkets throughout the Easter season. Each bun has cross piped, either with icing, pastry or glaze, on top to signify the crucifixion.
In England, they were once sold by street vendors who advertised their buns with cries of "Hot Cross Buns! "Hot Cross Buns!"
These street cries became the famous nursery rhyme. Do you remember?
- Hot cross buns,
- Hot cross buns,
- one ha' penny,
- two ha' penny,
- hot cross buns.
- If you have no daughters,
- give them to your sons,
- one ha' penny,
- two ha' penny,
- Hot Cross Buns
As I went to a British School, I certainly remember singing the rhyme. I would not say the Hot Cross Buns I have had in my life were of the gourmet kind but they were certainly delicious. I loved the smell of the spices and the sweet aroma of the raisins when the buns were cut open and toasted on the toaster.
In Christian history, the buns were traditionally eaten on Good Friday, with the cross depicting the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Although they have been a Lenten and Good Friday tradition for centuries, Hot Cross Buns were not always associated with Christianity. The origins of the crumb lie in pagan traditions of ancient cultures, with the cross representing the four quarters of the moon. During early missionary efforts, the Christian church adopted the buns and re-interpreted the cross. In 1361, a monk named Father Thomas Rockcliffe began a tradition of giving Hot Cross Buns to the poor of St Albans on Good Friday.
In years that followed, many customs, traditions, superstitions, and claims of healing and protection from evil and were associated with the buns. In the 16th century, Roman Catholicism was banned in England, but the popularity of Hot Cross buns continued. Queen Elizabeth I passed a law banning the consumption of Hot Cross Buns except during festivals such as Easter, Christmas and funerals.
The recipe I used must have been as old as Queen Elizabeth I herself, because it was taped in my recipe notebook and looked rather faded and tattered. The handwriting was not mine and I cannot remember for the life of me who gave me the recipe. I normally write the names down of the people who gave me the recipes but I only started doing this for the past 8-9 years! So the recipe is certainly older than that. What attracted me to the recipe was the use of all-spice.
The recipes I found during my comparison research did not have all-spice listed in them. It's a spice I really like, but do not use very often in my kitchen outside of the Christmas baking. I also liked that the buns were piped with a mixture of flour and water and not icing. As far as I remember the British either cut the crosses in the buns or use the flour/water pastry mixture to pipe the crosses - never with icing. The reason behind this is because the buns are made a few days ahead and should be enjoyed toasted with only butter spread thickly on the warm bread. Using icing sugar will only cause it to burn when toasted.
Extra Read: My latest article is out on FoodieView. This week I am Re-thinking Casseroles!
The Monthly Mingle gets fruity this month! My guest host Abby has chosen a spectacular theme for this month - Spring Fruit Sensations. So get out your colorful fruit creations and send them over to Abby.
Deadline: April 7th, 2008
Printable version of recipe here.
14g dry active yeast or 30g fresh yeast
500g white flour for bread, plus more for dusting
3 tablespoons sugar
2 teaspoons ground mixed spices - I used cinnamon, all-spice, nutmeg, cloves and ginger
40g butter
200g raisins
Pastry for the crosses:
30g flour
1/4 teaspoon sugar
For the glaze
1 1/2 tablespoon sugar
1 teaspoon gelatine powder
Prepare a baking sheet by lightly greasing it.
In a small bowl incorporate the yeast, 2 teaspoons flour, 1 teaspoon sugar and 125 ml luke warm water well. Cover with a with a damp cloth and place in warm place for about 10 minutes to activate the yeast. After the 10 minutes your yeast mixture should be frothy and bubbly. If this is not the case this means that your yeast is too old and you will have to proof it again with fresh yeast.
In a larger bowl sift the flour and the spices, then mix in the sugar. Add the butter and knead with your fingertips until it resembles breadcrumbs. Throw in the raisins. Make a well in the middle of the flour and pour in the yeast mixture and 185ml water. Using your hands gently mix in the flour into the yeast mixture. Knead into a smooth dough.
Dust the countertop lightly with some flour then tip out the dough and knead for 5 minutes until the dough is soft and smooth. Dust a large bowl with flour. Shape a ball out of the dough and place into the bowl and cover with a damp cloth. Place in a warm place for 30-40 minutes until the dough has doubled in volume.
Preheat the oven to 200 degrees C.
Tip the dough onto the counter and give it another good kneading. Divide into 12 equal parts, then roll each portion into a ball and place on the greased baking tray. Place each ball of dough so that they are touching each other. Cover the tray with a damp cloth and allow to rest in a warm place for another 20 minutes. They balls of dough will double in volume again.
Pastry for the crosses:
Mix the flour, sugar and 2 1/2 tablespoons water into a thick, smooth paste-like mixture. Fill into a piping bag or a small sandwich bag with a slight cut at one of the corners. Now pipe crosses onto the buns.
Slide the baking tray into the oven and bake for 20 minutes until golden brown.
For the glaze
In the meantime prepare the glaze by mixing the sugar, 1 tablespoon water and the gelatine powder in a small saucepan. Mix until dissolved. On low heat heat the mixture until the mixture is smooth.
When the buns come out of the oven brush the buns while still hot with the glaze.
Allow to cool. The best way to enjoy the buns are cut, toasted and with lots of good butter. Hmmmn! You can serve these for a Easter breakfast or brunch.
This is incredible. I think I am getting used to this rising and kneading thing as it is proving to be rather therapeutic. While the dough was doing its first rise I was able to complete a relaxing session of yoga. The kneading helps to take away and frustrations and on the second rise I was able to do my nails. LOL! The buns were simply delicious. They rose perfectly, took on a wonderful golden color and the whole house smelled of spices. We enjoyed these for breakfast on the weekend, lightly toasted on the toaster. Soeren spread honey on his, Tom red current jam and I just had it with butter. I think I will make these every now and then for sure and it does not always have to be Easter! ;-)
As I am quite proud of these little babies, I am sending these to - wait for it - Bread Baking Day! This month's hostess is Susan of Wild Yeast and her theme is focusing on the upcoming Spring seasonal holidays - Easter St. Patrick's Day and so on! I've watched from the sidelines and almost took part in last month's Flatbreads theme but chickened out instead. I hope I can often take part in this event from now on LOL!
To celebrate Easter I have thoughtfully and carefully put together a few menu ideas for you. Hope you enjoy them. I'll be in Dubai with my parents, Tom and Soeren, enjoying the sun and looking for Easter eggs in the sand.
Easter menu "Flavors":
Starter: | Creamy Ginger Carrot Soup wit Lemon Cream | |
Entrée: | Honey Teriyaki Salmon with Mange-Tout | |
Dessert: | Lemon Meringue Pie |
Easter Menu "Non-Vegetarian":
Starter: | Spinach Soup with Coconut milk and Chicken | |
Entrée: | Creamy Veal and Mushroom Pie with Potato Crust | |
Dessert: | Raspberry Chocolate Tiramisu |
Easter Menu "Vegetarian":
Starter: | Spinach Salad with Goat Cheese and Avocado | |
Entrée: | Mustard Eggs with Rice Duo | |
Dessert: | Raspberry Dream Cream |
When I made these last week, Nandita of Saffron Trail and I were chatting and I showed her the pictures I took of these buns. She instantly wanted one. I told her she'd have to make them herself. Well she did and we decided to post on the same day. Do check out Nandita's version of Eggless Hot Cross Buns.
All photographs and written content on What's For Lunch, Honey? © 2006-2008 Meeta Khurana unless otherwise indicated. | All rights reserved | Please Ask First


text:
System Requirements & Preparation
Before you install MoinMoin, you must have the necessary infrastructure in place. This procedure explains the steps necessary to install the infrastructure and provides detailed instructions for the installation of MoinMoin.
Windows 2000, XP, or greater (including server variants, such as Windows 2000 Server).
Earlier versions of Windows (such as Win98 or WinME) are not recommended due to their obsolete and poor-performing multiple-process handling. WinNT is obsolete and Microsoft has officially dropped support for it and should not be considered a safe server platform for the Internet.
- Run Windows Update to ensure that you are running the latest service packs and security patches.
- Apache doesn't require Windows Server (unlike IIS), so it's a great way to use an older desktop without using a Server license! Apache doesn't artificially limit the number of connections, unlike personal IIS for example.
Many users prefer to install software products in a folder other than the installation default. Python typically changes the default installation folder name with each point release, and Apache has changed the default installation folder name with the release of version 2. Instead of enumerating all the possibilities at each step, this procedure will use the Reference name in the table below as the installed location for each product. Substitute your real installation location when editing configuration files and entering commands.
Reference |
Product |
Installation Default or Typical Name |
C:\Apache |
Apache |
C:\Program Files\Apache Group\Apache2 |
C:\Python |
Python |
C:\Python25 |
C:\Moin |
wiki instances |
C:\My Documents\Moin |
Downloading and installing all of the required components below will require almost 100 MB of disk space - shouldn't be a problem nowadays, right?
Installing Apache
Download & Install Apache 2.0.xx or greater
Note about versions: Apache2 was re-written with better support for non-unix systems (such as Windows), therefore the 2.xx series is strongly recommended for Windows users over Apache 1.3.xx.
Go to http://httpd.apache.org
download the Win32 Binary (MSI Installer) for the latest version of Apache 2.
- Read the Apache documentation to determine the correct installation procedure for your situation.
- Test your Apache installation to make sure it runs correctly before proceeding (questions and problems with the Apache installation should be resolved through the resources provided by the Apache organization).
Installing Python
There are currently two different distributions of Python available for Windows.
Download & Install Python for Windows.
Go to http://www.python.org.
Note about versions: Moin is well tested on Python version 2.5.x, and therefore recommended. Python 2.6.x should work fine, however is less tested. Moin currently does not work with Python 3.0.
Installing MoinMoin
Download MoinMoin
The most current version is here: MoinMoinDownload
Expand the archive
Note: users of older versions of WinZip report problem expanding .tar.gz files. Either upgrade or switch to the free 7-Zip utility.
Expand the archive into C:\TEMP or an alternative location.
You should then have a folder such as C:\TEMP\moin-x.x where "x.x" is the current release number. This folder will contain a setup.py file in addition to several other files and subfolders.
Run Setup.py from the commandline
Open an DOS window (start > Run... > type cmd) and enter the commands:
C: cd \TEMP\moin-x.x C:\Python\python setup.py install --record=install.log
The above commands will add MoinMoin to your C:\Python installation and create an install.log file in C:\temp\moin-x.x listing all the copied files. You can use Windows Explorer to examine the newly created folders within C:\Python. You should find a C:\Python\share\moin folder and a C:\Python\Lib\site-packages\MoinMoin folder. The MoinMoin folder contains many Python scripts and several subfolders.
You are now ready to create a wiki instance.
It is a good practice to try to keep all of your personal or site specific data under a few root folders. This way you can easily backup your important data on a regular basis without having to waste time either backing up static files or picking out dozens of important folders scattered throughout your folder structure. You should avoid placing your wiki data under the C:\Python folder so that you can later upgrade Python or MoinMoin without accidentally overwriting or deleting your wiki data. For the same reason, you probably don't want to place your wiki data within the C:\Apache folder.
Choose a location appropriate for you; the following instructions assume you will be creating one or more wiki instances in C:\Moin\ and the first wiki instance will be named mywiki.
You may replace the name mywiki with almost any name you wish, but do not use wiki because that is used by MoinMoin for loading standard images and style sheets. Although this can be changed later, the name you choose for mywiki will become part of the url used to access your site, e.g. http://server.myorganization.org/mywiki/FrontPage.
Creating a Wiki Instance
Start an DOS window and enter the commands below. This will create a clone of the MoinMoin wiki in the mywiki folder.
cd C:\ md Moin md Moin\mywiki md Moin\mywiki\data md Moin\mywiki\underlay cd \Python\share\moin xcopy data C:\Moin\mywiki\data /E xcopy underlay C:\Moin\mywiki\underlay /E copy config\*.* C:\Moin\mywiki\*.* copy server\*.* C:\Moin\mywiki\*.*
If your server is going to run multiple wikis, you need to create additional clones. Do the same commands again, but use mywiki2 instead of mywiki.
Configuring wikiconfig.py
Edit C:\Moin\mywiki\wikiconfig.py and at least change sitename to the name of your wiki:
sitename = 'My Wiki'
Additionally, set data_dir and data_underlay_dir to the absolute paths of the particular directories. Like here:
data_dir = r'C:\Moin\mywiki\data' data_underlay_dir = r'C:\Moin\mywiki\underlay'
For a public installation, you'll normally want to forbid some of the more dangerous actions. Add a line like this to wikiconfig.py:
actions_excluded = ['AttachFile', 'DeletePage', 'RenamePage', ]
If you will not be running a Wiki farm (if you're not sure what this means, then you probably won't be), make sure to delete the farmconfig.py file from the C:\Moin\mywiki directory, or else moin.cgi will most likely give off various errors (including one about not being able to find a configuration file) and will ultimately fail to start up properly.
Additional configuration details can be found in HelpOnConfiguration.
Configuring moin.cgi
Use your editor to edit the file C:\Moin\mywiki\moin.cgi. Change the first line (the shebang statement) to point to your local Python executable program. Note the forward slashes -- Apache uses the Unix convention for folder separators. This tells Apache the moin.cgi file is an executable script that will be interpreted by a program to be loaded from C:/Python/python.
#! C:/Python25/python
Configuring Apache httpd.conf
The next step is to tell Apache that is has more work to do. Use your editor to append the following lines to C:\Apache\conf\httpd.conf. Note the presence and absence of trailing slashes, it is important to enter the lines exactly as shown below.
Alias /moin_static160/ "C:/Python/share/moin/htdocs/" ScriptAlias /mywiki "C:/Moin/mywiki/moin.cgi"
The Alias line above instructs Apache to serve images, style sheets, etc. from the specified folders and subfolders. The ScriptAlias line is needed once for each wiki instance, so if you have multiple wikis, repeat the statement using mywiki2, mywiki3, etc. The ScriptAlias statement instructs Apache to execute scripts from the specified folder. See the Apache docs for a complete explanation.
Test your changes by restarting your Apache server and try to access your newborn wiki with the URL http://127.0.0.1/mywiki. You should see the FrontPage, try to edit and save it, and if that works, verify your edit is reflected on the RecentChanges page.
And now, it is up to you and your user community to transform your wiki into an informative and useful tool. You will probably want to retain most of the HelpOn~ pages dealing with editing, delete those pages with irrelevant information (like this page, don't let your users or boss know how easy it was to install MoinMoin ), and rewrite the FrontPage to introduce your wiki topic.
The first place to look for clues when the unexpected happens is to try changing your url to: http://127.0.0.1/mywiki?action=test. If Apache can find and execute the module C:/Moin/mywiki/moin.cgi, a page of diagnostics titled MoinMoin CGI Diagnosis will be displayed. Check the output for error messages.
The second place to look for is C:\Apache\logs\error.log. The following are common errors grouped by the message displayed by your browser:
Internal Server Error
If the Apache log shows a message "The system cannot find the file specified." then a possibility is the shebang statement in moin.cgi is incorrect.
If the Apache log shows a different error message, then the MoinMoin Python scripts may be abending. To determine the cause, you could try temporarily renaming moin.cgi to moin.py, loading moin.py with the Python idle IDE and executing it to determine if there are any error messages.
Not Found
If the Apache error log shows the message "File does not exist: C:/Apache/htdocs/mywiki", the ScriptAlias statement in httpd.conf may be incorrect.
The Page Cannot be found
If the Apache error log shows the message "File does not exist: C:/Apache/htdocs/????", you may have mistyped the url "http://127.0.0.1/mywiki" into your browser.
FrontPage Loads Without Icons
If the Apache Error log shows many error messages "File does not exist: C:/Apache/htdocs/wiki", then the Alias statement in httpd.conf may be incorrect.
If you did not install MoinMoin in the Python site-packages folder (i.e. only if you deviated from the above instructions), you will have to activate the lines which add a folder to the sys.path and enter your path to MoinMoin there:
import sys sys.path.insert(0, r'C:\Moin\...')
Next Steps
Authenticating MoinMoin Users Against a Domain Controller
- Many organizations are setting up wiki's for documentation on their internal network. As a result, many organizations require the security of authentication, which protects their content, as well as allowing people to work remotely on the wiki without anonymous eye's peeking at their site. Domain authentication is convenient for both the administrator and the user, because it uses the same password the user would use for other network logins. If this describes you, proceed to:
Simple Windows MoinMoin Backup
- Simple strategy for backing up your wiki:
FastCGI with Windows
- Dramatically increase performance of your wiki with the FastCGI Apache module:


text:
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Orange Glazed Fiesta Chicken
We don't eat a lot of Mexican food and I tend not to make the high caloric favorites that graced the table when our children were at home. However, since today is Cinco de Mayo, I thought today's recipe should be Mexican or Mexican inspired. I didn't want to add another version of enchiladas to your already burgeoning collection and I thought you might enjoy the flavors of this quick and easy fiesta chicken. The recipe is straight forward. The chicken is braised stove top, but is finished under the broiler. While this is not necessary, time under the broiler gives the chicken a lovely orange glow. I use bone-in thighs for this preparation, but I remove the skin. The skin becomes flaccid as the chicken braises and, in my book, becomes inedible. I've tried cooking with the skin on and then removing it just before serving, but chicken prepared this way lacks the depth of the flavor I look for in a braise. I've found the best solution is to remove the skin, lightly dust the thighs with flour and then brown them using medium heat before adding liquid to the pan. The chicken is table ready in about 35 minutes. While there is a poblano in the sauce, this is not an overly spicy recipe. Let's get this done. It's time for a fiesta.
Orange Glazed Fiesta Chicken
1 tablespoon freshly zested orange peel
1/2 cup fresh orange juice
2 to 3 tablespoons honey
2 tablespoons orange liqueur
1 chipotle chile (canned and packed in adobo sauce), mashed
1 teaspoon adobo sauce from canned chipotle chile
4 cloves minced garlic
1 chicken bouillon cube
1/2 teaspoon pimenton (sweet smoked Spanish paprika)
1 tablespoon olive oil
1 tablespoon butter
1/4 cup all-purpose flour
8 bone-in, skinless chicken thighs
1 teaspoon kosher salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly cracked pepper
Optional garnish:
1 tablespoon chopped cilantro
1 tablespoon orange peel strips
1) Combine orange zest, orange juice, honey, orange liqueur, mashed chile, adobo sauce, garlic, bouillon cube and paprika in a small bowl. Mix well. Set aside.
2) Season chicken with salt and pepper. Lightly coat with flour.
3) Heat oil and butter in a large ovenproof skillet over medium heat. Add chicken thighs and saute, turning once, until both sides are brown, about 6 to 8 minutes. Pour sauce over chicken and bring to a boil. Reduce heat and simmer, covered, for 20 minutes turning and basting halfway through.
4) Meanwhile, preheat oven broiler. Transfer chicken to a broiler pan. Broil 5 inches from heating element until bubbly and lightly brown. Transfer chicken to a serving plate.
5) Rapidly boil sauce to reduce by half. Adjust seasoning. Spoon over chicken. Garnish with cilantro and orange strips, if using. Yield: 4 servings.
38 comments :
- Selba said...
Oh Mary.. this is the most beautiful orange glazed on chicken that I've ever seen! Beautiful!
- May 5, 2009 at 12:24 AM
- Martha said...
This looks like a good dish for Cinco De Mayo -- and so much different that the cheese sauced dishes that one often finds in Mexican restaurants.
- May 5, 2009 at 12:29 AM
- noble pig said...
I have chicken thighs in the freezer that have been staring at me. Now I know what I'm going to make. Beautiful!
- May 5, 2009 at 12:49 AM
- theUngourmet said...
This looks and sounds wonderful! I bet the chipotle chili and the adobe sauce added fabulous flavor to the chicken!
- May 5, 2009 at 12:50 AM
- Ning said...
I usually remove the chicken skin - for health reasons - because it is high in fats and cholesterol. So most of my chicken dishes do not look good. I have never thought of finishing the cooking under the broiler to make it look good. Thanks for the wonderful idea. :)
- May 5, 2009 at 2:39 AM
- Katy ~ said...
Fabulous! Looks beautiful and so delicious that I wanted to bite the screen! I'm saving this for sure. Looks like it has a nice spice without being overwhelming.
- May 5, 2009 at 5:04 AM
- Donna-FFW said...
What gorgeous coloring on the chicken, and so nice and healthy. Perfect dish for cinco de mayo. Just pass me some with a margarita.
- May 5, 2009 at 6:23 AM
- Heather S-G said...
This looks great Mary! (and it would be perfect for entering in my May chile round-up...hint hint)!
- May 5, 2009 at 6:41 AM
- Penny said...
Love the looks of this chicken and bet it would be great paired with the orange couscous.
- May 5, 2009 at 6:45 AM
- Joy Tilton said...
Mary, can't wait to try this! We love Mexican food but it's so high in fat and calories. This one is actually healthy and would be fabulous with traditonal latin sides like plantains and rice. Thanks for a great recipe!
joy c. at grannymountain - May 5, 2009 at 8:30 AM
- Ginger said...
Mary what else can I say but spectacular!!! Wonderful photos.
- May 5, 2009 at 9:07 AM
- Jamie said...
Mary, Mary this looks way too amazing! I think I just decided what I am using my single can of chipotle chili in adobo sauce that someone sent me for! Too too beautiful! And the flavors! I am speechless!
- May 5, 2009 at 10:05 AM
- Culinary Wannabe said...
What a beautiful color! I was just trying to decide how to spend our cinco de mayo, and this sounds lovely. Especially when paired with a big margarita!
- May 5, 2009 at 10:43 AM
- Netts Nook said...
Wow what flavors. Great pictures. Happy Cinco De Mayo.
- May 5, 2009 at 10:45 AM
- Pam said...
Mmmm. This looks and sounds so good Mary. I will be trying this recipe soon.
- May 5, 2009 at 12:01 PM
- La Bella Cooks said...
Oh wow, just look at that color! I would definitely love this orange glaze. This is a beautiful dish.
- May 5, 2009 at 12:04 PM
these are my kind of flavors. Your presentation and photo is brilliant! Love everything about this post!!!
- May 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM
- The Blonde Duck said...
I love this! Perfect for Cinco de Mayo!
- May 5, 2009 at 2:39 PM
- Esi said...
That looks great with tons of flavor!
- May 5, 2009 at 2:47 PM
- Lori said...
Another great recipe. Geez Mary- you sure are one amazing chef and baker!
- May 5, 2009 at 3:10 PM
- Katherine Roberts Aucoin said...
Mary I have to make this! What an eye chatcher. Perfect for a celebration.
- May 5, 2009 at 3:32 PM
- Liesl said...
Your pictures make me drool!! That chicken looks so delicious!
- May 5, 2009 at 4:13 PM
- Mary Bergfeld said...
Esi, welcome to One Perfect Bite. I hope you'll become a frequent visitor.
- May 5, 2009 at 5:03 PM
- Mary Bergfeld said...
Heather (onestepbeyond), thanks so much for stopping by. I hope you stop by often.
- May 5, 2009 at 5:04 PM
- Karen said...
This looks really good, Mary. Lots of 'orange-ness' going on in that chicken. Yum!
- May 5, 2009 at 5:48 PM
- pam said...
Those are amazing! The color is gorgeous!
- May 5, 2009 at 7:43 PM
- Jersey Girl Cooks said...
Great glaze and looks so pretty!
- May 5, 2009 at 10:27 PM
- My Little Space said...
I think my kids going to love this dish! I will definitely try it.
- May 6, 2009 at 4:19 AM
- Creative Classroom Core said...
What a tasty and flavorful sounding dish! Great pics!
- May 6, 2009 at 4:30 PM
- Prue Barrett said...
This looks fantastic. I've only just found your blog - it's brilliant. I'm bookmarking this recipe for sure.
- May 9, 2009 at 5:31 PM
- Jackie said...
I was wondering if I could try this with bone-in, skin on chicken. - February 15, 2010 at 7:29 PM
- Mary Bergfeld said...
Jackie, my answer is "yes, but" The chicken skin will become limp and flacid when braised in this amount of liquid. You get the flavor but almost everyone will pull off the skin and leave it on their plates.
- February 15, 2010 at 7:39 PM
Thank you so much for your kind comment on my blog. I am honored you came to visit me :)
The flavors in this are amazing! - May 14, 2010 at 5:28 PM
- Create. Snap. Eat. said...
What a recipe! It sounds like it worth the work. And the image is making me hungry! Delicious.
- April 30, 2011 at 1:01 AM
- martu said...
This is my favorite. It looks delicious! I was living in Mexico when I was a student and I love mexican food. You did it great! Have a nice weekend and happy first of May
- April 30, 2011 at 8:42 AM
- Mother Rimmy said...
I love the color on this chicken! I've not seen a Mexican version of orange glazed chicken. I'm anxious to try this out. I love the flavors of Mexican cuisine!
- April 30, 2011 at 11:08 PM
- Susan at www.ugogrrl.com said...
This looks so yummy - I love Mexican food! All of your choices look amazing!
Susan - May 1, 2011 at 1:21 AM
- Ana Powell said...
Bookmarked, what a delightful dish ♥
- May 5, 2011 at 4:51 AM