On 7/23/2015 5:13 AM, Janet B wrote:
let’s just look at a few comments from some key Founding Fathers about
the United States, separation of church and state and how this nation
wasn’t founded on Christianity: The Treaty of Tripoli, signed by
President John Adams: “The Government of the United States of America is
not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” Thomas Jefferson:
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American
people which declared that their legislature should make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise
thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
James Madison: “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed,
as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & government will
both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.” Thomas
Jefferson: “Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common
law.” Thomas Jefferson: “History, I believe, furnishes no example of a
priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the
lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious
leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.” And that’s
not all of them – there are several more – but I figured those were
pretty clear cut. Now why, if our nation was founded on Christianity,
would some of our key Founding Fathers speak so strongly against mixing
religion and government? Why would our Constitution never once mention
God, Christian, Jesus or Christianity? Why does our very First Amendment
specifically say that Congress cannot make laws based on religion?

Read more at:
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/e...-christianity/
--
Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.

On 7/23/2015 8:55 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
> On 7/22/2015 1:54 PM, Dr. Edward Morbius wrote:
>> Conservatives seem to
>
>
> Folks hereabouts know so many of the troll "names" associated with Marty:
Barbara Llorente FRAUD!

On 7/23/2015 8:55 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
> On 7/22/2015 1:50 PM, Dr. Edward Morbius wrote:
>> The reason I do this
>
>
> Folks hereabouts know so many of the troll "names" associated with Marty:
Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:

> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
> 1965!). Here are some:
>
> - ring baloney

OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)

All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 - and I
never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed cabbage leaves';
he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground beef, onions, garlic and
carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom used to make and was one of his
father's favourites.

Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't make
them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On 8/1/2015 8:00 AM, ChattyCathy wrote:

> All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 - and I
> never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed cabbage leaves';
> he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground beef, onions, garlic and
> carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom used to make and was one of his
> father's favourites.
>
All the old babushkas I knew added rice to their stuffed cabbage.

> Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't make
> them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
>

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 09:09:44 -0400, S Viemeister wrote:

> On 8/1/2015 8:00 AM, ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 - and
>> I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed cabbage
>> leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground beef, onions,
>> garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom used to make and was
>> one of his father's favourites.
>>
> All the old babushkas I knew added rice to their stuffed cabbage.

He referred to them as 'galumkis' (no idea how it's really spelled - but
that's what it sounded like to me when I was a kid). And yes, rice also
rings a bell... also think there might have been some bread crumbs
involved in the stuffing too.


--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 7:00:12 AM UTC-5, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
> > So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
> > kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
> > town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
> > now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
> > 1965!). Here are some:
> >
> > - ring baloney
>
> OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
> which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
>
> All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 - and I
> never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed cabbage leaves';
> he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground beef, onions, garlic and
> carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom used to make and was one of his
> father's favourites.
>
> Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't make
> them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
>
I am a cabbage hater too, and one of the things that I detested as a
child was stuffed green peppers, but I eventually got to really like
green peppers. My mother stuffed them with rice, ground beef and
whatever else.
>
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

--Bryan

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:24:00 -0600, Janet B wrote:


> as I recall, the really tasty way to do it is to lay the piece of bread
> in the pan right after you've fried some kind of meat. You push the
> bread around in the drippings. that way you get all the seasonings as
> well. great stuff!
> Janet US

Great stuff indeed. Works the same way after roasting some sort of meat in
the oven. Still do that to this day.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:25:53 +0100, Ophelia wrote:


>
> What a lovely thread this has been, thank you for posting it)


I'll second that, Miz O.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:00:08 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
>> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
>> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
>> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
>> 1965!). Here are some:
>>
>> - ring baloney
>
>OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
>which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
snip
Ring bologna is approx. 1.5 inches across and the length of it,
instead of being a straight stick, has both ends tied together.
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&key...l_7rjjuw3oif_e
or
http://tinyurl.com/pubn4u6
Janet us

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:00:08 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>>
>>> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
>>> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
>>> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
>>> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
>>> 1965!). Here are some:
>>>
>>> - ring baloney
>>
>>OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
>>which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
> snip
> Ring bologna is approx. 1.5 inches across and the length of it,
> instead of being a straight stick, has both ends tied together.
> http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&key...l_7rjjuw3oif_e
> or
> http://tinyurl.com/pubn4u6

*I* knew that ) *strut*

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 8/1/2015 11:27 AM, Janet B wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:00:08 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>>
>>> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
>>> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
>>> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
>>> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
>>> 1965!). Here are some:
>>>
>>> - ring baloney
>>
>> OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
>> which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
> snip
> Ring bologna is approx. 1.5 inches across and the length of it,
> instead of being a straight stick, has both ends tied together.
> http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&key...l_7rjjuw3oif_e
> or
> http://tinyurl.com/pubn4u6
> Janet us
>

Ring baloney, in my experience, is just like a large hot dog in texture
and flavor, with the ends tied together, as mentioned above. It can be
hard to find; I've seen it in SoCal mainly, back in the 60s and 70s, and
in central PA recently. I like it a lot.

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 8:00:12 AM UTC-4, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
> > So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
> > kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
> > town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
> > now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
> > 1965!). Here are some:
> >
> > - ring baloney
>
> OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
> which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)

Ring bologna is stuffed into a narrower casing than regular bologna. Maybe
1.25 inches in diameter.

It's twisted into sections about yay long (sorry, I don't know exactly how
long--maybe 18-20 inches?) and the ends of the sections are brought together
before it is cooked; it stays in a curved shape afterward. Here's a picture
of ring bologna in a package:

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Eckrich-Ri...14-oz/20934730


Cindy Hamilton

On 8/1/2015 10:44 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 8:00:12 AM UTC-4, Chatty Cathy wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>>
>>> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
>>> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
>>> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
>>> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
>>> 1965!). Here are some:
>>>
>>> - ring baloney
>>
>> OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
>> which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
>
> Ring bologna is stuffed into a narrower casing than regular bologna. Maybe
> 1.25 inches in diameter.
>
> It's twisted into sections about yay long (sorry, I don't know exactly how
> long--maybe 18-20 inches?) and the ends of the sections are brought together
> before it is cooked; it stays in a curved shape afterward. Here's a picture
> of ring bologna in a package:
>
> http://www.walmart.com/ip/Eckrich-Ri...14-oz/20934730
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>

Looks like a nice fat keilbasa, is the taste similar?

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 12:48:06 PM UTC-4, Sal Paradise wrote:
> On 8/1/2015 10:44 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 8:00:12 AM UTC-4, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> >> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
> >>
> >>> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
> >>> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
> >>> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
> >>> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
> >>> 1965!). Here are some:
> >>>
> >>> - ring baloney
> >>
> >> OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
> >> which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
> >
> > Ring bologna is stuffed into a narrower casing than regular bologna. Maybe
> > 1.25 inches in diameter.
> >
> > It's twisted into sections about yay long (sorry, I don't know exactly how
> > long--maybe 18-20 inches?) and the ends of the sections are brought together
> > before it is cooked; it stays in a curved shape afterward. Here's a picture
> > of ring bologna in a package:
> >
> > http://www.walmart.com/ip/Eckrich-Ri...14-oz/20934730
> >
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
> >
>
> Looks like a nice fat keilbasa, is the taste similar?

Nope. Tastes like bologna.

My mother used to score it, dump catsup on it, and bake it.

Cindy Hamilton

On 8/2/2015 2:44 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
There are several ways in which the Bush family plays into the Savings
and Loan scandal, which involves not only many members of the Bush
family but also many other politicians that are still in office and
still part of the Bush Jr. administration today. Jeb Bush, George Bush
Sr., and his son Neil Bush have all been implicated in the Savings and
Loan Scandal, which cost American tax payers over $1.4 TRILLION dollars
(note that this is about one quarter of our national debt).

Between 1981 and 1989, when George Bush finally announced that there was
a Savings and Loan Crisis to the world, the Reagan/Bush administration
worked to cover up Savings and Loan problems by reducing the number and
depth of examinations required of S&Ls as well as attacking political
opponents who were sounding early alarms about the S&L industry.
Industry insiders were aware of significant S&L problems as early 1986
that they felt would require a bailout. This information was kept from
the media until after Bush had won the 1988 elections.

Jeb Bush defaulted on a $4.56 million loan from Broward Federal Savings
in Sunrise, Florida. After federal regulators closed the S&L, the office
building that Jeb used the $4.56 million to finance was reappraised by
the regulators at $500,000, which Bush and his partners paid. The
taxpayers had to pay back the remaining 4 million plus dollars.

Neil Bush was the most widely targeted member of the Bush family by the
press in the S&L scandal. Neil became director of Silverado Savings and
Loan at the age of 30 in 1985. Three years later the institution was
belly up at a cost of $1.6 billion to tax payers to bail out.

The basic actions of Neil Bush in the S&L scandal are as follows:

Neil received a $100,000 "loan" from Ken Good, of Good International,
with no obligation to pay any of the money back.

Good was a large shareholder in JNB Explorations, Neil Bush's
oil-exploration company.

Neil failed to disclose this conflict-of-interest when loans were given
to Good from Silverado, because the money was to be used in joint
venture with his own JNB. This was in essence giving himself a loan
from Silverado through a third party.

Neil then helped Silverado S&L approve Good International for a $900,000
line of credit.

Good defaulted on a total $32 million in loans from Silverado.

During this time Neil Bush did not disclose that $3 million of the $32
million that Good was defaulting on was actually for investment in JNB,
his own company.

Good subsequently raised Bush's JNB salary from $75,000 to $125,000 and
granted him a $22,500 bonus.

Neil Bush maintained that he did not see how this constituted a conflict
of interest.

Neil approved $106 million in Silverado loans to another JNB investor,
Bill Walters.

Neil also never formally disclosed his relationship with Walters and
Walters also defaulted on his loans, all $106 million of them.

On 8/2/2015 2:47 AM, Sal Paradise wrote:

Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.
Age 65 (Born 1950) (415) 239-7248. Background Check - Available. Record
ID: 47846596.

Your ass has more mass than Jupiter!

No one cares about you.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
Barbara Llorente | | | | |
| The | |____| | |
|Troll Enabler | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

On 8/1/2015 11:09 PM, S Viemeister wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

On 8/1/2015 11:09 PM, S Viemeister wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 09:54:00 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 12:48:06 PM UTC-4, Sal Paradise wrote:
>> On 8/1/2015 10:44 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> > On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 8:00:12 AM UTC-4, Chatty Cathy wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
>> >>> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
>> >>> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
>> >>> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
>> >>> 1965!). Here are some:
>> >>>
>> >>> - ring baloney
>> >>
>> >> OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
>> >> which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
>> >
>> > Ring bologna is stuffed into a narrower casing than regular bologna. Maybe
>> > 1.25 inches in diameter.
>> >
>> > It's twisted into sections about yay long (sorry, I don't know exactly how
>> > long--maybe 18-20 inches?) and the ends of the sections are brought together
>> > before it is cooked; it stays in a curved shape afterward. Here's a picture
>> > of ring bologna in a package:
>> >
>> > http://www.walmart.com/ip/Eckrich-Ri...14-oz/20934730
>> >
>> >
>> > Cindy Hamilton
>> >
>>
>> Looks like a nice fat keilbasa, is the taste similar?
>
>Nope. Tastes like bologna.
>
>My mother used to score it, dump catsup on it, and bake it.
>
>Cindy Hamilton

Only better It's something you can do in the smoker or on the grill
or in oven on a dish of sauerkraut, or. . . .
Janet US

On 8/2/2015 4:05 AM, Janet B wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of
Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the
Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the
1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his
January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist
Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."
Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation
between religion and government in the Constitution of the United
States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from
our Founding Fathers.

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church &
State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects
their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of
religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have
more churches than Seven-Elevens.

Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the
wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully
eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no
secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other
religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows
atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems,
regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:00:08 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I was a
>> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my Midwestern small
>> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's and into the 60's, some
>> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me (but grandpa lived 1876 ->
>> 1965!). Here are some:
>>
>> - ring baloney
>
>OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal' baloney -
>which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)


Ring bologna is the same recipe as other bologna, only its
configuration is different, and it's ends are tied together to form a
ring. Naturally every sausage maker makes bologna by different
recipes... here's Rytek Kutas' version:
http://www.alliedkenco.com/pdf/bolog..._long_ring.pdf
I like ring bologna prepared thusly (with hard boiled eggs too), makes
a great meal with beer as your vegetable:
http://www.coalregion.com/recipes/bologna.php, eaten on the nights you
will sleep alone.

>All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 - and I
>never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed cabbage leaves';
>he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground beef, onions, garlic and
>carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom used to make and was one of his
>father's favourites.
>
>Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't make
>them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.

I like both. I've discovered that those who abhor stuffed cabbage
have tried very poor versions... most people don't know how to make
stuffed cabbage because they think it's a way to cook cheaply... good
stuffed cabbage contains good ground beef (home ground) and NO rice,
NONE! Cabbage with rice is an ultimate TIADer... gotta be some
chemical reaction what makes the combo DisGusting.

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 16:37:58 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:24:00 -0600, Janet B wrote:
>
>
>> as I recall, the really tasty way to do it is to lay the piece of bread
>> in the pan right after you've fried some kind of meat. You push the
>> bread around in the drippings. that way you get all the seasonings as
>> well. great stuff!
>> Janet US
>
>Great stuff indeed. Works the same way after roasting some sort of meat in
>the oven. Still do that to this day.

I've been known to sneak behind my husband's back to do that.

Doris

ChattyCathy wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 09:09:44 -0400, S Viemeister wrote:
>
> > On 8/1/2015 8:00 AM, ChattyCathy wrote:
> >
> >> All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
> and >> I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
> cabbage >> leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
> beef, onions, >> garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
> used to make and was >> one of his father's favourites.
> > >
> > All the old babushkas I knew added rice to their stuffed cabbage.
>
> He referred to them as 'galumkis' (no idea how it's really spelled -
> but that's what it sounded like to me when I was a kid). And yes,
> rice also rings a bell... also think there might have been some bread
> crumbs involved in the stuffing too.

Clumkies, glumpkies, several spellings. Eastern european dish
(polish?). Often simmered in a crockpot with tomato juice. Pretty
good eats actually.

Carol

--

On 8/2/2015 5:01 AM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of
Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the
Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the
1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his
January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist
Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."
Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation
between religion and government in the Constitution of the United
States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from
our Founding Fathers.

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church &
State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects
their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of
religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have
more churches than Seven-Elevens.

Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the
wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully
eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no
secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other
religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows
atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems,
regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

On 8/2/2015 5:05 AM, Doris Night wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of
Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the
Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the
1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his
January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist
Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."
Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation
between religion and government in the Constitution of the United
States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from
our Founding Fathers.

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church &
State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects
their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of
religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have
more churches than Seven-Elevens.

Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the
wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully
eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no
secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other
religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows
atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems,
regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 7:00:12 AM UTC-5, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
> >
> > > So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I
> > > was a kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my
> > > Midwestern small town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's
> > > and into the 60's, some now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me
> > > (but grandpa lived 1876 -> 1965!). Here are some:
> > >
> > > - ring baloney
> >
> > OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal'
> > baloney - which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
> >
> > All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
> > and I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
> > cabbage leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
> > beef, onions, garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
> > used to make and was one of his father's favourites.
> >
> > Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't
> > make them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
> >
> I am a cabbage hater too, and one of the things that I detested as a
> child was stuffed green peppers, but I eventually got to really like
> green peppers. My mother stuffed them with rice, ground beef and
> whatever else.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Chatty Cathy
>
> --Bryan

I prefer them to be red bell peppers but green is ok.

Carol

--

On 8/2/2015 5:07 AM, cshenk wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of
Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the
Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the
1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his
January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist
Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."
Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation
between religion and government in the Constitution of the United
States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from
our Founding Fathers.

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church &
State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects
their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of
religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have
more churches than Seven-Elevens.

Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the
wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully
eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no
secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other
religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows
atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems,
regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

On 8/2/2015 5:08 AM, cshenk wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of
Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the
Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the
1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his
January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist
Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."
Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation
between religion and government in the Constitution of the United
States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from
our Founding Fathers.

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church &
State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects
their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of
religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have
more churches than Seven-Elevens.

Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the
wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully
eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no
secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other
religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows
atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems,
regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

On 8/2/2015 5:05 AM, Doris Night wrote:
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of
Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the
Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the
1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his
January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist
Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."
Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation
between religion and government in the Constitution of the United
States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from
our Founding Fathers.

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church &
State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects
their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of
religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have
more churches than Seven-Elevens.

Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the
wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully
eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no
secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other
religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows
atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems,
regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

"Doris Night" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 16:37:58 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:24:00 -0600, Janet B wrote:
>>
>>
>>> as I recall, the really tasty way to do it is to lay the piece of bread
>>> in the pan right after you've fried some kind of meat. You push the
>>> bread around in the drippings. that way you get all the seasonings as
>>> well. great stuff!
>>> Janet US
>>
>>Great stuff indeed. Works the same way after roasting some sort of meat in
>>the oven. Still do that to this day.
>
> I've been known to sneak behind my husband's back to do that.
>

But it is the cook's treat!!




--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 8/2/2015 5:12 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense
founded on the Christian religion

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America
and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms
a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity,
Jesus, or any supreme being. (For those who think the date of the
Constitution contradicts the last sentence, see note 1 at the end.) The
U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in
the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not
come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers
purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of
Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the
Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the
1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[bold caps, mine]

Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his
January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist
Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State."
Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation
between religion and government in the Constitution of the United
States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from
our Founding Fathers.

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church &
State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects
their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of
religion and non-religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have
more churches than Seven-Elevens.

Although many secular and atheist groups today support and fight for the
wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully
eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no
secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other
religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows
atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems,
regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:08:32 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

> MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
> > On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 7:00:12 AM UTC-5, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> > >
> > > All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
> > > and I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
> > > cabbage leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
> > > beef, onions, garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
> > > used to make and was one of his father's favourites.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't
> > > make them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
> > >
> > I am a cabbage hater too, and one of the things that I detested as a
> > child was stuffed green peppers, but I eventually got to really like
> > green peppers. My mother stuffed them with rice, ground beef and
> > whatever else.
> > >
>
> I prefer them to be red bell peppers but green is ok.
>

Zucchini are good to stuff too.


--

sf

Brooklyn1 wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:00:08 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
> >
> >> So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I
> was a >> kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my
> Midwestern small >> town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's
> and into the 60's, some >> now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me
> (but grandpa lived 1876 -> >> 1965!). Here are some:
> >>
> >> - ring baloney
> >
> > OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal'
> > baloney - which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
>
>
> Ring bologna is the same recipe as other bologna, only its
> configuration is different, and it's ends are tied together to form a
> ring. Naturally every sausage maker makes bologna by different
> recipes... here's Rytek Kutas' version:
> http://www.alliedkenco.com/pdf/bolog..._long_ring.pdf
> I like ring bologna prepared thusly (with hard boiled eggs too), makes
> a great meal with beer as your vegetable:
> http://www.coalregion.com/recipes/bologna.php, eaten on the nights you
> will sleep alone.
>
> > All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
> > and I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
> > cabbage leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
> > beef, onions, garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
> > used to make and was one of his father's favourites.
> >
> > Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't
> > make them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
>
> I like both. I've discovered that those who abhor stuffed cabbage
> have tried very poor versions... most people don't know how to make
> stuffed cabbage because they think it's a way to cook cheaply... good
> stuffed cabbage contains good ground beef (home ground) and NO rice,
> NONE! Cabbage with rice is an ultimate TIADer... gotta be some
> chemical reaction what makes the combo DisGusting.

Wrong Sheldon, it requires however the right spicing to make Klumpkies
(clumpkies, galumpies etc. spelling).

Rice is required and must be made right for the dish. This isnt a time
for sticky rice for example.

Carol

--

On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 15:58:04 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:08:32 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
>> MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>> > On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 7:00:12 AM UTC-5, Chatty Cathy wrote:
>> > >
>> > > All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
>> > > and I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
>> > > cabbage leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
>> > > beef, onions, garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
>> > > used to make and was one of his father's favourites.
>> > >
>> > > Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't
>> > > make them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
>> > >
>> > I am a cabbage hater too, and one of the things that I detested as a
>> > child was stuffed green peppers, but I eventually got to really like
>> > green peppers. My mother stuffed them with rice, ground beef and
>> > whatever else.
>> > >
>>
>> I prefer them to be red bell peppers but green is ok.
>>
>
>Zucchini are good to stuff too.

We all know where you stuff yours. LOL-LOL

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 2:08:41 PM UTC-5, cshenk wrote:
> MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
> > On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 7:00:12 AM UTC-5, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> > > On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:09:07 -0700, Gregory Morrow wrote:
> > >
> > > > So seeing Sheldon's garden pix got me all nostalgic about when I
> > > > was a kid. A childhood memory was some of the food that my
> > > > Midwestern small town grandparents routinely ate in the late 50's
> > > > and into the 60's, some now seem a bit "old - fashioned" to me
> > > > (but grandpa lived 1876 -> 1965!). Here are some:
> > > >
> > > > - ring baloney
> > >
> > > OK, I hafta ask, what's 'ring' baloney? (as opposed to 'normal'
> > > baloney - which is known as 'polony' in my neck of the woods...)
> > >
> > > All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
> > > and I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
> > > cabbage leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
> > > beef, onions, garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
> > > used to make and was one of his father's favourites.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't
> > > make them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
> > >
> > I am a cabbage hater too, and one of the things that I detested as a
> > child was stuffed green peppers, but I eventually got to really like
> > green peppers. My mother stuffed them with rice, ground beef and
> > whatever else.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers
> > > Chatty Cathy
> >
> > --Bryan
>
> I prefer them to be red bell peppers but green is ok.
>
I have a nephew who gets physically ill from green (unripe) bell peppers,
but is fine with ripe sweet peppers and all chilies.
>
> Carol
>
--Bryan

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 3:58:14 PM UTC-7, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:08:32 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
> > MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> >
> > > On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 7:00:12 AM UTC-5, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
> > > > and I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
> > > > cabbage leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
> > > > beef, onions, garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
> > > > used to make and was one of his father's favourites.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't
> > > > make them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
> > > >
> > > I am a cabbage hater too, and one of the things that I detested as a
> > > child was stuffed green peppers, but I eventually got to really like
> > > green peppers. My mother stuffed them with rice, ground beef and
> > > whatever else.
> > > >
> >
> > I prefer them to be red bell peppers but green is ok.
> >
>
> Zucchini are good to stuff too.

Remember that great Annette Funicello-Frankie Avalon movie, "How to Stuff
a Wild Zucchini"?

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 6:24:15 AM UTC-7, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 09:09:44 -0400, S Viemeister wrote:
>
> > On 8/1/2015 8:00 AM, ChattyCathy wrote:
> >
> >> All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 - and
> >> I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed cabbage
> >> leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground beef, onions,
> >> garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom used to make and was
> >> one of his father's favourites.
> >>
> > All the old babushkas I knew added rice to their stuffed cabbage.
>
> He referred to them as 'galumkis' (no idea how it's really spelled - but
> that's what it sounded like to me when I was a kid). And yes, rice also
> rings a bell... also think there might have been some bread crumbs
> involved in the stuffing too.
>

Spelled golabki, with a slash through the L to give it more of a w
sound. (The city of Lodz is pronounced Woodj in Polish.)

Golabki means "doves." And what strikes me is how similar the
pronunciation of the Polish word Golabki is to the Italian word
colombe.

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 20:50:59 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

> On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 3:58:14 PM UTC-7, sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:08:32 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
> >
> > > MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> > >
> > > > On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 7:00:12 AM UTC-5, Chatty Cathy wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > All my grandparents had passed on by the time I was about 6 or 7 -
> > > > > and I never met any of them - but my Dad used to love 'stuffed
> > > > > cabbage leaves'; he used to stuff them with a mixture of ground
> > > > > beef, onions, garlic and carrots (IIRC) - which he said his Mom
> > > > > used to make and was one of his father's favourites.
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately, being a cabbage hater, I didn't like them and don't
> > > > > make them myself. Stuffed bell peppers, OTOH - are really good.
> > > > >
> > > > I am a cabbage hater too, and one of the things that I detested as a
> > > > child was stuffed green peppers, but I eventually got to really like
> > > > green peppers. My mother stuffed them with rice, ground beef and
> > > > whatever else.
> > > > >
> > >
> > > I prefer them to be red bell peppers but green is ok.
> > >
> >
> > Zucchini are good to stuff too.
>
> Remember that great Annette Funicello-Frankie Avalon movie, "How to Stuff
> a Wild Zucchini"?

No.

--

sf

On 8/2/2015 8:58 AM, sf wrote:
As Jeb Bush prepares for his imminent presidential campaign, the
American people must keep in mind just who this man is and the crimes he
committed rigging the 2000 presidential election, which put his brother
George W. in the Oval Office, set us on the road to the Iraq War, the
Great Recession, destroyed America’s standing in the world, altered
American history forever.

Jeb Bush just so happened to be the Governor of Florida during that
election, and as you may recall, the Florida vote was so close that
recounts were requested and eventually declared his brother the winner.
Katherine Harris, Jeb’s secretary of state and the co-chair of the
George W. campaign, organized the election system that somehow ended up
losing or spoiling the ballots of hundreds of thousands of
African-American voters, who just so coincidentally tend to vote
Democratic. During the recount period, it is documented that the
Governor’s office made 95 calls to the Bush campaign- calls which Jeb
somehow “cannot remember” the reason for. That answer is unacceptable
for allegations of such importance. Why can’t you remember, Jeb?