UConn James

Hell welcomes another soul. I believe this is the third death-in-cell at the U.N. jail in the past year for members of the ethnic cleansing brigade.

I've got one called the "Lancaster Co. Amish Cookbook." There's a lot of great American staple recipes in there (esp. the pies section)... but I think they're all on the Crisco payroll. "The Bread Book" by Anthony Blake and Her Name Escapes Me Now.... Really well written, step-by-step instructions and photos. For anyone serious about bread, this is recommended. Their Ole Bollen recipe is the best I've seen. One I picked up last year, the "Hartford Veterans' Center Recipe Book." Nicely put together by mostly 'Nam vets who get together on Monday nights. It's got a picture of a P-38 on the cover(!) so how can you pass that up? Excellent stuffed pepper recipe and three for catfish.

I wear shower-shoes/sandals around the house lots and often to the store and whatnot. They're comfortable, and I could really give a sh-- if people don't like them. But no, I don't wear socks with them b/c that's gay. The kicker at Yale wears them year-round. Might be the only D-I kicker left who kicks barefoot. Sandals toughen up the feet to the weather. Cool article here.

People honestly think that this issue is casual enough to risk having it change willy-nilly, back-and-forth depending on which party is in power in a state house in any given session? THIS CRAP WAS DECIDED IN 1973, SUCH THAT IF YOU DON'T WANT AN ABORTION, DON'T HAVE ONE!!!!!! CAN WE PLEASE GET ON WITH THE REAL BUSINESS OF THE NATION? Furthermore, I'll tell you exactly what this and the Kansas legislation is: 1) A desire to kick the tires of the new Supreme Court, if this stuff even gets that far, which I highly doubt. 2) A bid to wrap up the vote of a certain, however small, percentage of the electorate that will base their vote purely on self-righteous moral/religious grounds. For politicians, this is the easiest vote they ever got because they don't need to earn it and they don't need to buy it.

Does this negate their amateur status? They are receiving money/reward for their performance in an athletic competition. Then again, the IOC lets NHL players strap on the skates.

I knew someone was going to be all gutter-minded with that, and I figured, "It'll probably be duey...."

Really? Well, I wouldn't be particularly saddened if someone targeted that church with a Molotov cocktail. Disgusting.

Not disputing that it played off of the story leading up to it. And in fact, Jack was ready to sign off on his father's version of the surgery until he heard from the panel that the woman was pregnant. I think it all melded. The resurrection for Charlie, redemption for Jack... and that Jack was finally able to save the child. In a certain way, you could see the noose as an umbilical cord. Look at the positioning of the actors. Kate with her legs in a V, Charlie gasping and grasping like a newborn and Jack being the delivery doctor/father figure.

*Ahem* What? I'm just clearing my throat.

Lana, there's no new ep until 22 March, I believe. Bummer that they do this, but you just have to get used to it. I'm guessing this ep will be shown again before that. Right. And I think the "him" Zeke and Ethan were talking about was the issue of what to do with Charlie. He was strung up by someone. And, to continue with the baby theme of this whole show, apparently, the scene where Jack (and Kate) revives him is shot and acted such that it resembles a birth. Anyone think Sun's possible child would be "special" too?

Nice to see Kellen Winslow Jr. back on his bike.

Yep. I was also wondering if the patterning on the plane was the Oceanic colors, but I couldn't see it ultra-clearly. Was hoping someone else could shed light, but I forgot to pose the question.... To me, I think that this element was there shows that the Others had a direct involvement in the crash and bringing these specific people. But, if it were a Matrix-like experiment, I don't see why 'Zeke'/Mr. Friendly would have confronted Ethan in the hallway, which gave Claire pause with what he said/how he said it. Also, they would know about (who we're lead to be is) Alex letting Claire go. Another question I have is, what caused Claire to be willing to give the Others her baby? Was it the drugs? Was it that she did not want the responsibility? I ask this mostly b/c, even after she knew they were bad people, she was calling out to Ethan. And, having just rewatched S1 during the repeats/layoff, keep in mind her flashback ep last season, interstingly titled "Raised By Another" --> Raised by An Other? She was ready to give Aaron away before the psychic told her that Bad Things would happen if she didn't raise him. He 'found a couple in LA' (but really, he knew the plane would crash), but I don't know if it was more b/c she believed in the psychic than she wanted to get rid of the baby. Anyone understand the course of thought I'm on here? And EZC, I also was expecting more and better commentary from this ep, but I can't complain b/c I didn't put much into it myself. Tho, with only over-the-air antenna, I have no chance to go back and watch things again, which was a must for this ep even moreso than others.

Some professional. She learned to pick locks in "Entrapment." And she can dis-arm laser security systems with her ass.

Even you have to sleep sometime. Leo Roth reports that you could doze off over a list of the GITMO detainees' names. And it could happen before next year.

UConn James reports that Anne Hathaway, Jenna Jameson, and Catherine Zeta-Jones could be interested in having a four-way with him. Way to work those weasel words.

Except to write, _______ > Teague. If nothing happens in FA, then a trade down to the late-1st might net someone, and barring that, who knows about Preston. He had serious liabilities on both sides when he was at RG.

I think the past three eps have had that same S1 feeling. Don't know what to think about the costumes, but like someone else said, they were left behind for a reason. The whole place was cleaned out, and it makes you wonder how many of these hatches are around the entire island, and how the Others move around b/w them (tunnels?).... I guess we are to take that the brunette girl was Alex, and that even tho she's been raised by them pretty much since birth, she knows that what they're doing isn't right. Another special child? Odd that Ethan called the Others a "family." And, from the doorway conversation I don't think it was he that strung up Charlie. Also, is there anything to how Sawyer says this is an all-girl mission? Is it solely a woman-as-caregiver/baby-stuff theme? 2) That's entirely possible. 3) Seemed like a spiritual thing. 4) Not sure that we should think Henry's quip proves he is an Other. It's a pretty common thing to play psychologist by using a "Who has more power" issue to create a rift b/w two people who are in leadership positions. And, like he said, he could hear through the door at the whole Jack/Locke contention. Looks like the next new ep will have Sayid going to find Henry's balloon to find out if he's telling the truth. 5) I think Desmond took it all. Or most of it. And what is Jack supposed to do with it anyway? You're going to start injecting people with a drug that you have no clue as to what it is? That they haven't gotten 'sick' might suggest a resistance had been found or acquired in the real world since the time of Rousseau's crash, yet the Others and the people on the island think it is still active. 6) Doubt it. She was on the plane.

Was Tom Brokaw capitalizing on the soldiers of WWII? What about using the Zapruder film to promote yet another story of JFK's assassination? At this point, more than 25 years later, Lennon's death is a historical event. And yet, if they're using them as a promo for a sports program, it's a little distasteful / crass that it's the first clip they might use. It would be wise for them to highlight the sport. B/c in this day and age, ESPN doesn't deliver news like that to a majority of the U.S. But it is part of MNF's legacy, putting together a good program, and 35 years of goodwill, which ESPN thinks they can assimilate; which is a lot like saying if Matt Lauer puts on a white jumpsuit, he can be Elvis.

You mean the 1997 season where it was Collins one week, Van Pelt the next?

Maybe he said "Coach Brown" at UTexas....

Big difference in letting people do what they want on their residential property and someone using said in a commercial or other capacity. That's what zoning is there for, and it's fairly straightforward. Fire and safety hazards need to be rectified for any structure; not saying those should be thrown to the wind. It's the "You can't park your car in your driveway!" "You have to move your evergreens over there!" and "You can't cohabitate in sin with your girlfriend!" types that draw ire. Those damn Founding Fathers and their "Pursuit of Happiness" garbage in the DoI! Guess they should have added a parenthetical "unless a group of your neighbors forbids such pursuits."

Because I have a "Different Strokes For Different Strokes" mentality about what people should be free to do on their own property, that makes me Fred Sanford with 20 rust-colored Cadillac lawn ornaments? I don't live in sloth; house has been appraised at $300K, and probably more since I built a 100' dry stone wall on it. There are people on my street that don't have the nicest of yards, yet my name isn't on the deed and what place is it of mine or anyone's to act like it is?."People like you" ... Wonderful, that. You should've stayed in journalism, Mock. You fit it to a T. If everyone here closes their eyes for a second, we can all visualize a high-pitched "NO-OOO-OOO! You need to do it MY way!!!"

And here, I thought you were going to ask 'Why do dogs lick their b---s?'....

I think the 'You can do this, and you can't do this' is more ingrained in the social agendas of Dems/Repubs rather than in liberal/conservative. And they both have their own pick-and-choose points on certain of issues. ----- LA and VA, I guess things just go a little differently here in (rural) New England. For us, if our name is not on the deed, we don't so much think it's our place to be telling people they can't have a fixer-upper in the driveway or whether they cut their grass every three days, or every two weeks. May be an issue of people not wanting to throw stones, as most houses here are works in progress. But I guess when you live in an area where everyone is expected to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, hire out for pesticidal TruGreen landscaping, and Endless Pools, you have nothing to worry about except how the Jones' aren't living up to your standards b/c they pick a shade of blue that you don't find appealing. Not to say there aren't limits to this. There's a guy in town raised in the uber-Depression mindset who saves EVERYthing from rusty old motors to dry-rotted tires to used 30-year old shingles. He raises 20 goats on a 1/2-acre lot. He would dig through the Dumpsters at the transfer station until they put up a 'No Picking Through Dumpsters' (aka the John W.... Law) sign. The town actually removed some things from his property because it was so full of sh--; whereupon he put up a big sign that read "Bullies, Butchers, Theives!" in 18-inch green hand-spraypainted letters and went on from there in smaller black and white. There is a time for intervention for people who are hoarders (pet hoarders especially, which is so sad), but these are truly some Sorry-ass Little First-World Problems. ----- But back to the original topic, we have a couple who like/love each other enough to live together, yet they're not quite ready for the (relatively recent, when you think about it) legal concept of marriage. And yet, in many courts, they'd beconsidered common-law husband-and-wife. And yet, even tho two of the kids are fathered by the homeowner, the woman and kids are basically being told by the city to Get Out or Get Married And Adopt. I choose to call bullsh-- by its proper term.

I'm NOT "the liberal." Far from it. And yet you insist on deeming me as such. I didn't imply doing anything illegal. Just be every bit an officious bastard as the beauracrats are being. Go over every bit of their decision-making, note their mistakes be they small or grievous and publicly air them loudly and often. Attend every town/city council meeting and raise your voice, call the newspaper, etc. Be the squeaky wheel. Sh--ty ordinances like these only get rectified when enough people say, 'Hey, that's BS!!' This and stories like it are a true example of where the media does its best work. From one standpoint, I could understand a town/city not wanting Joe Blow to send his kids to live with his friend Guy Bastard b/c that town has better schools. But it's in the making of the law that doesn't account for 5 million unmarried couples who live with each other that is the stink of it.