Friday, May 13, 2016

The Bernie Sanders voters who would choose Trump over Clinton


In this most bizarre of presidential election cycles, every day seems to bring another jaw-dropping development. Donald Trump on the size of his genitals,Ben Carson and the Egyptian pyramids, Bernie Sanders’ socialist revolution,Hillary Clinton and the cloth she used to wipe her private email server clean.
But it’s not just the candidates who have raised eyebrows in 2016.


The latest startling phenomenon is the voter who is feeling the Bern, but also has eyes for the Donald.
This week the Guardian sought out Sanders fans who are contemplating switching their allegiance to Trump if Hillary Clinton secures the Democratic nomination.
Almost 700 people replied to the call-out, and some 500 of them said they were thinking the unthinkable: a Sanders-Trump switch.
They explained their unconventional position by expressing a variety of passionately held views on their shared commitment for protecting workers and against new wars, on their zeal for an alternative to the establishment, and on their desire to support anyone but Hillary Clinton.
As one respondent, a 34-year-old male IT technician, put it: “Bernie and Trump agree a lot on healthcare, Iraq war, campaign finance and trade. I really want to move on to something new, new ideas from outside the box. Maybe Donald Trump can provide that.”
The Guardian call-out was not a poll, but controlled surveys by polling companies have identified this small but not insignificant slice of the Sanders crowd who would consider backing Trump. 
In an NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey conducted by Hart Research Associates this month, 7% of Sanders voters said they could see themselves supporting Trump. Some 66% said the same for Clinton.



A similar proportion of Sanders folk – 8% – gave Trump a positive likeability rating, compared with 48% for Clinton. That figure is unlikely to be causing Clinton campaign aides much loss of sleep.
“The data does not indicate any meaningful concern for Clinton that if she wins the Democratic nomination large numbers of Sanders voters would head to Trump,” said Jeff Horwitt, a senior vice-president with Hart Research.
So we are not seeing the birth of a new cross-party force in American politics. But we are seeing an interesting political dynamic. Almost one in 10 Sanders supporters apparently think Trump is next best thing to their candidate, and certainly better than Clinton.
A woman, 55, who described herself as a homemaker, said: “Both Trump and Sanders are non-establishment candidates who are not bought by the special interests that have control over policy and legislation because of their ‘bribes’.”
One male Sanders fan wrote: “Trump is an obnoxious vulgar blowhard who says foolish things. However, unlike Clinton – but like Sanders – at least he is an outsider who understands that the government and the economy are broken.”

Venn Diagram
Pinterest
 Photograph: Mona Chalabi for the Guardian

Shared motivations

Responses to the Guardian call-out show that Trump and Sanders share a few themes in their messaging that resonate with the same groups. When asked which was the most important issue in determining candidate choice, respondents in a CNN/ORC poll overwhelmingly checked the box that said “the economy”.
Messaging from Sanders and Trump on this issue varies greatly – Trump focuses on jobs moving overseas while “socialist” Sanders uses the 1% as the framework for talking about economic inequality.
But both candidates appear to have been effective in convincing voters that they ‘“get it”. Another CNN/ORC poll released at the end of February found that 46% of Republicans said Trump, better than any other candidate, understands the problems facing them personally. And 48% of Democrats said the same about Sanders.
Many respondents to the Guardian’s call-out also expressed the sentiment that Sanders and Trump get voters’ economic pain. Several said they found an affinity between the two candidates’ take on the economy, particularly trade.
A male medical emergency technician, 36, from Chicago, said he had watched the devastation wrought on areas of the city by job losses that in his view had been caused by free trade. “Donald Trump is the only candidate besides Bernie Sanderswho cares about curtailing Free Trade. This is my only reason for supporting him if he makes if to November and Clinton is the Democratic nominee.”
The other primary motivation for Sanders fans thinking about backing Trump is widespread negative feelings towards Hillary Clinton.
Of the respondents who shared their views, 61% said they were motivated by an anti-Hillary feeling – the remainder were split down the middle between saying they were “pro-Trump” or felt equally pro-Trump and anti-Hillary.
Commonly expressed criticisms of Clinton were that she is a war-monger, that she is corrupt and “owned by Wall Street”, that her policies are Republican in all but name and that she is an establishment insider while Sanders and Trump are both outsiders. Views such as this are also driving some Sanders followers to vow that for them it is “Bernie or bust” – should he fail to win the nomination they will abstain entirely from the ballot.
A 29-year-old female data processor wrote: “As horrific as Donald Trump is, and he is a horrible, racist, misogynist idiot, I don’t think Hillary Clinton is any better. I feel like with Trump, he could at least inspire a revolution, even if it is against him. I prefer chaos to stagnation.”
Such deep suspicions of Clinton are also reflected in formal opinion polls such as a Hart Research survey for NBC/WSJ that found that a third of Sanders voters saw her in a negative light. “That’s a figure that needs to be addressed – the Clinton campaign is concerned about it and are focused on doing something about it,” Horwitt said.

The demographics

A look at the demography of Trump and Sanders supporters also provides some insights. If you were to get Sanders’ supporters in a room with Trump’s supporters, the two groups would be pretty hard to tell apart.


Repeated polling (including exit polls of individuals who have actually voted in primary elections so far) shows that Sanders’ supporters are overwhelmingly white, and that black voters are unlikely to vote for Sanders.
Both of those facts are also applicable to Donald Trump. A February CNN and ORCpoll found that 44% of all white respondents said they had a favorable opinion of Trump, while 52% of white respondents said the same about Sanders. Non-white respondents were less likely to choose either candidate over others from their party.
Income is another shared characteristic. Exit polls from New Hampshire where Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton showed that the biggest fissure between voters was income. Among voters with a family income of less than $30,000, Sanders defeated Hillary by 48 percentage points but when the income was above $200,000, Sanders lost by seven percentage points. The Republican primary exit polls in New Hampshire revealed the same trend for Trump; his support was seven percentage points higher among low-income families than those earning $200,000 or more.

Voter income
Pinterest
 Voter income in the New Hampshire primary. Photograph: Mona Chalabi for the Guardian

The responses to our callout also came from lower income groups – 25% of respondents said that they earned less than $35,000 per year.


But the demographics of Trump and Sanders supporters also differ in several significant ways. Respondents in the CNN/ORC poll were more likely to have a favorable opinion of Trump if they were older (44% of those age 65 and over supported the candidate compared to 25% of those age 18-34) but younger respondents were more likely to support Sanders (51% of those age 65 and over compared to 69% of those age 18-34). While Sanders supporters were likely to say that they lived in urban areas, Trump’s supporters were more likely to say that they lived in rural parts of the country.
There was also another impassioned category of Sanders fans in the Guardian’s call-out: 214 people – 32% of all respondents – replied to express that they would never vote for Trump. Some expressed anger at the Guardian for even asking the question, which they saw as an insult to the Sanders movement and an example of “mainstream media” bias.
Amber Jamieson contributed reporting

Tell us Which election issue matters most to you?

As the race to the White House heats up, we’d like to know which issue – big or small – you want the candidates to discuss more. Your contribution will help shape our election coverage.

 *I had to post  the entire article.
Shape our coverage

at

The Rise Of The Inferior Function


Each Myers-Briggs personality type reacts to prolonged stress in a slightly different form. While there may be a simple answer forhelping each type through a bad day, the solution to helping each type snap out of a rut is slightly more complicated.
We tend to fall into ruts when our first three cognitive functionshave failed to aid us in a particular situation and we are forced to rely on our inferior function to get by.* Because we are not used to relying primarily on our inferior function, doing so often facilitates the development of an unhealthy mindset (or a ‘rut’) that we have trouble snapping out of. Each type’s rut manifests a bit differently – and each type requires something different to help turn their unhealthy mindset around.
For a closer look at what your ‘rut’ looks like, find and click on your type below:
*Note: Relying on one’s inferior function is only one of several unhealthy type manifestations. Prolonged stress can also bring about a dominant-tertiary loop, or cause an individual to develop an over-reliance on any one of their four individual functions. 


at

Incidents of rape in military much higher than previously reported


The estimated number of sexual assaults in the U.S. military dropped in 2014 but the number of rapes and violent sexual assaults is significantly higher than previously thought, according to new data released by the Defense Department and the Rand Corp.
Preliminary findings of an extensive survey of 170,000 troops released Thursday revealed that 20,000 service members said they had experienced at least one incident of unwanted sexual contact in the past year, representing nearly 5 percent of all active-duty women and 1 percent of active-duty men.
The figures are down from the estimated 26,000 in fiscal 2012, the last year a complete survey was conducted, a drop of more than 23 percent.
But new survey methodology used by the Rand Corp. found that many of the 20,000 assaults in 2014 were not "unwanted sexual contact" — a phrase the Pentagon uses to describe any incident of unsolicited and unwanted sexual behavior — they were violent, probing acts.
Nearly half the assaults reported by women and 35 percent reported by men were "penetrative sexual assaults" — crimes that include rape and penetration with an object.
Using the methodology DoD previously used for surveys, just 29 percent of assaults against women and 11 percent against men in 2014 would have been classified as penetrative sexual assaults.
The Rand survey generated some controversy earlier this year when some service members complained to the Associated Press about its explicit language and graphic questions on sexual activity.
But the Pentagon said the survey, which previously had been conducted by DoD but was contracted to Rand this year to improve reporting and ensure objectivity, was more detailed in order to get more accurate results.
Rand analysts said the higher number of penetrative assaults found in their data may be attributable to troops reporting incidents of assault that the DoD's methods would have omitted or not counted as sexual, such as hazing.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Thursday released results of a report on sexual assault prepared for President Obama that showed sexual assault reports from active-duty service members rose to 5,983, up 8 percent from 2013. But the number still represents fewer than a third of the total estimated assaults.
The number of unrestricted reports — on incidents that allow prosecution and courts-martial to proceed — increased as well but by a smaller margin, 6.5 percent.
Pentagon officials said the increased reports and decrease in number of assaults estimated by the Rand survey show progress is being made in efforts to combat the problem in the ranks.
"The [reporting] rate has continued to go up. That's actually good news. Two years ago, we reported that one in eight sexual assaults was reported, today that's one in four," Hagel said during a press conference on the report on Thursday.
At the same time, he said there is "much work to do," and he outlined steps the department will take to further reduce incidents.
The Pentagon continues to face pressure from Congress on the issue, with new measures included in the forthcoming fiscal 2015 defense bill that protect victims of sexual assault, allowing them to provide input on how their case should be tried and challenge any discharge or separation from service that may follow an incident of sexual assault, among other protections.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and a bipartisan group of senators on Monday renewed their call to overhaul the military justice system by removing the authority given to a small number of commanding officers to decide whether cases should proceed to courts-martial.
Gillibrand pressed for her legislation to be included in the defense bill as an amendment but said she would propose it for a stand-alone vote and continue pushing Obama for an executive action on the matter.
A breakdown of the newly released data for 2014:
  • DoD received 5,983 reports of sexual assault, with 4,501 being unrestricted. Less than a third, or 1,482, were "restricted" reports, meaning the victim sought only medical attention and did not want to participate in any investigation and prosecution (although a review of the military services' reports found 5,982 total reports).
  • Of the 2,419 cases in which military commanders had a suspect, legal jurisdiction and a victim willing to assist in an investigation, commanders found sufficient evidence to take disciplinary action in about 1,764 cases, including 1,380 for sexual assault and 384 for misconduct other than sexual assault.
  • Of the 1,380 cases that resulted in disciplinary action for sexual assault-related misconduct, 910 went to court-martial, 283 received nonjudicial punishment and 187 were discharged for other reasons.
The Pentagon altered its method of accounting for the assaults this year, a move some lawmakers have criticized for obscuring whether real change is occurring.
But the Rand report noted estimates using the standard DoD methods as well as the new format and found that under the traditional method, the fiscal 2014 estimates for assault would have been 19,000.
The new method indicated 20,000 troops experienced sexual assault, although the numbers still are not concrete because sexual assault is an under-reported crime.
According to Hagel's memo to service chiefs, changes will be made in training, education and at installations to improve sexual assault reporting and protect victims including:
  • A long-term effort at each installation to customize sexual assault programs to their circumstances and implement them.
  • New programs to increase unit leaders' knowledge and understanding of sexual assault programs to improve their ability to communicate the importance of prevention and response and mitigate retaliation against victims.
  • Further enforcement procedures to ensure that victims, witnesses or those who respond to an incident do no feel any consequences, reprisals or retaliation for reporting a sexual assault.
The new initiatives on curbing retaliation are aimed at addressing a long-standing problem in the Defense Department — that victims often are blamed for reporting crimes, shunned by colleagues, challenged professionally or depicted as having a mental health disorder and discharged.
The Rand survey found that 62 percent of women who experienced a sexual assault and reported it endured some type of retribution or retaliation — roughly the same number as was reported in 2013.
Social retaliation accounted for the largest form of perceived retribution, but 32 percent said they faced professional retaliation and 35 percent experienced an adverse administrative event after reporting an incident.
"We must tackle this difficult problem head on, because, like sexual assault itself, reprisal directly contradicts one of the highest values our military that we protect our brothers and our sisters in uniform," Hagel said.
Anu Bhagwati, a Marine Corps veteran and executive director of the Service Women's Action Network, said the retaliation issue must be addressed to improve reporting and ensure that victims feel supported and secure.
"We've seen number of assaults increase and decrease over time — a little bump here, a little drop there — but the retaliation is a clear indication that the climate still isn't safe for victims," Bhagwati said. "Retaliation is a crime under the UCMJ. What's being done with these people? Are they being punished?"
According to the Rand survey, the Air Force and Coast Guard had the lowest percentages of reported sexual assaults in 2014 and the Navy and Marine Corps had the highest.
The Marine Corps reported the highest percentage of sexual assaults against women, with 7.9 percent reporting having endured an assault, while the Navy had the highest for men, 1.5 percent.
The percent of troops reporting a sexual assault in the other services among women were 4.7 percent of Army soldiers, 6.5 percent of Navy sailors, 2.9 percent of Air Force airmen and 3.0 percent of Coast Guardsmen.
The percentage of male troops reporting a sexual assault were 1 percent of soldiers, 0.3 percent of airmen, 1.1 percent of Marines and 0.3 percent of Coast Guardsmen.
The Rand survey further estimated that 26 percent of active-duty women and 7 percent of active-duty men experienced sexual harassment or gender discrimination.
A complete report on the Rand survey, including information on sexual assault in the National Guard, is expected next year.
About 800 fewer airmen experienced some form of unwanted sexual contact in 2014 as compared to 2012, said Maj. Gen. Gina Grosso, who heads the Air Force's sexual assault prevention and response office at the Pentagon. For women, the prevalence of the crime dropped about 25 percent over that time period; for men, it dropped 14 percent.
Meanwhile, there was an overall 61 percent increase in reporting by airmen, Grosso said. About one out of every four men in the Air Force who experienced a sexual offense came forward; about three out of every five women reported the crime, according to the 2014 data.
"As encouraged as we are by these facts — that we are reaching a greater percentage of victims — we know each sexual assault is a critical event in the life of our airmen. We still have much work to do," Grosso said.
REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT INCREASE
All services showed a rise in sexual assault reports among active duty personnel, which officials say reflects victims growing confidence in the military system and increased emphasis on fixing the issue in the Defense and Homeland Security departments.
Service20132014
Army2,3352,525
Navy1,0571,274
Air Force1,1491,328
Marine Corps808855
Coast Guard190254
Totals5,5396,236
Source: Defense Department

at

I'll never ask God for anything


Here's why:

If I ask Him for strength, He says, "I gave you that".

If I ask Him for someone to get well, He says, "I may consider that".

If I ask Him for prosperity, He says, "I gave you talent, produce it".

If I ask Him to spare a life, He says, "Nature shall steer it's course".

If I ask Him for a woman, He says, "You will get what you need if it's within my plan".

If I ask Him for forgiveness, He says, "Have you forgiven yourself".

If I ask Him for blessings, He says, "You are blessed".

If I ask Him about heaven, He says, "Aren't you in it".

If I ask Him for stronger relationships, He says, "Make them".

If I ask Him do I need a fellowship, He says, "I didn't create you among fellows".

If I ask Him about my path, He says, "It's yours to cut".

If I ask Him was I appropriate, He says, "You are your cause and you'll live your effect".



 No matter what I can imagine to ask Him for, He says, "I have instilled all that you will ever need in this earthly life. Anything that you think you may need, I gave you the talents, experience and the diligence to get it". 

 "I created all my children perfect and I find no fault in any of you. You find faults and shortcomings within each other".

 "Call me when you have a legitimate concern" and he disconnects.

 So....

at

Thursday, May 12, 2016

Questioning human sanity


*My God, my Allah, my Yahweh, my Lord, my Christ, how could you possibly be within my perception? How could I possibly think that you lay within the parameters of my belief? How could you be limited by the words in a book?

 Wouldn't that be synonymous with the egg dictating the terms of it's parent?

at

Radial vs The World - Fastest Drag Radial Cars Video Coverage




at

Difference Between Grey and White Matter

Grey Matter vs White Matter
The nervous system is divided into two parts; the central nervous system and the peripheral nervous system. The central nervous system is composed of the brain and the spinal cord. The brain, which has multi-level organized neurons, and connections of indefinite neurons, is divided wholly into grey and white matter. Grey matter, also known as substantia grisea, is the part of the brain that is controlled by the nerve cell bodies and the majority of the true dendrites (numerous, short, branching filaments that carry impulses towards the cell body). The cell body is the area of the neuron that is highlighted by the existence of a nucleus. Grey matter has no myelin blanket.
The real processing is concluded in the grey matter. It was given the name gray because of its appearance. It has a grey color because of the grey nuclei that comprises the cells. It fills about 40 percent of the whole brain in humans, and consumes 94 percent of oxygen. The neurons of the grey matter do not have extending axons, or long, thin projections of neurons, that send electrical signals away from the soma (another name for the cell body of neurons). Neurons create networks, in which nerve signals travel. From the dendrites to the end of its axons, the signals reproduce in the neural membrane by way of electrical modes. Neurons do not make body contact with each other when conveying messages. The neurotransmitters serve as the medium to connect one neuron to another neuron. The senses of the body (speech, hearing, feelings, seeing and memory) and control of the muscles, are part of the grey matter’s function.
The white matter, also known as substantia alba, is a neuron that is made up of extending, myelinated nerve fibers, or axons. It composes the structures at the center of the brain, like the thalamus and the hypothalamus. It is found between the brainstem and the cerebellum. It is the white matter that allows communication to and from grey matter areas, and between grey matter and the other parts of the body. It functions by transmitting the information from the different parts of the body towards the cerebral cortex. It also controls the functions that the body is unaware of, like temperature, blood pressure and the heart rate. Dispensing of hormones and the control of food, as well as the intake of water and the exposition of emotions, are additional functions of the white matter.
Axons are protected by the myelin sheath, which provides insulation from the electrical processes, allowing them to perform nerve signals more quickly. It is also the myelin that is responsible for the white appearance of the white matter. 60 percent of the brain is comprised of white matter.
Summary:
1. Grey matter is made up of nerve cell bodies, and white matter is made up of fibers.
2. Unlike the white matter, the neurons of grey matter do not have extended axons.
3. Grey matter occupies 40 percent of the brain, while white matter fills 60 percent of the brain.
4. Grey matter has a grey color because of the grey nuclei that comprises the cells. Myelin is responsible for the white appearance of the white matter.
5. Processing is concluded in the grey matter, while white matter allows communication to and from grey matter areas, and between the grey matter and the other parts of the body.
6. Grey matter has no myelin sheath, while white matter is myelinated.



Read more: Difference Between Grey and White Matter | Difference Between | Grey vs White Matter http://www.differencebetween.net/science/health/difference-between-grey-and-white-matter/#ixzz48R07ITxa
at

The truth is out: money is just an IOU, and the banks are rolling in it

The Bank of England's dose of honesty throws the theoretical basis for austerity out the window

ack in the 1930s, Henry Ford is supposed to have remarked that it was a good thing that most Americans didn't know how banking really works, because if they did, "there'd be a revolution before tomorrow morning".
Last week, something remarkable happened. The Bank of England let the cat out of the bag. In a paper called "Money Creation in the Modern Economy", co-authored by three economists from the Bank's Monetary Analysis Directorate, they stated outright that most common assumptions of how banking works are simply wrong, and that the kind of populist, heterodox positions more ordinarily associated with groups such as Occupy Wall Street are correct. In doing so, they have effectively thrown the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window.
To get a sense of how radical the Bank's new position is, consider the conventional view, which continues to be the basis of all respectable debate on public policy. People put their money in banks. Banks then lend that money out at interest – either to consumers, or to entrepreneurs willing to invest it in some profitable enterprise. True, the fractional reserve system does allow banks to lend out considerably more than they hold in reserve, and true, if savings don't suffice, private banks can seek to borrow more from the central bank.
The central bank can print as much money as it wishes. But it is also careful not to print too much. In fact, we are often told this is why independent central banks exist in the first place. If governments could print money themselves, they would surely put out too much of it, and the resulting inflation would throw the economy into chaos. Institutions such as the Bank of England or US Federal Reserve were created to carefully regulate the money supply to prevent inflation. This is why they are forbidden to directly fund the government, say, by buying treasury bonds, but instead fund private economic activity that the government merely taxes.
It's this understanding that allows us to continue to talk about money as if it were a limited resource like bauxite or petroleum, to say "there's just not enough money" to fund social programmes, to speak of the immorality of government debt or of public spending "crowding out" the private sector. What the Bank of England admitted this week is that none of this is really true. To quote from its own initial summary: "Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits" … "In normal times, the central bank does not fix the amount of money in circulation, nor is central bank money 'multiplied up' into more loans and deposits."
In other words, everything we know is not just wrong – it's backwards. When banks make loans, they create money. This is because money is really just an IOU. The role of the central bank is to preside over a legal order that effectively grants banks the exclusive right to create IOUs of a certain kind, ones that the government will recognise as legal tender by its willingness to accept them in payment of taxes. There's really no limit on how much banks could create, provided they can find someone willing to borrow it. They will never get caught short, for the simple reason that borrowers do not, generally speaking, take the cash and put it under their mattresses; ultimately, any money a bank loans out will just end up back in some bank again. So for the banking system as a whole, every loan just becomes another deposit. What's more, insofar as banks do need to acquire funds from the central bank, they can borrow as much as they like; all the latter really does is set the rate of interest, the cost of money, not its quantity. Since the beginning of the recession, the US and British central banks have reduced that cost to almost nothing. In fact, with "quantitative easing" they've been effectively pumping as much money as they can into the banks, without producing any inflationary effects.
What this means is that the real limit on the amount of money in circulation is not how much the central bank is willing to lend, but how much government, firms, and ordinary citizens, are willing to borrow. Government spending is the main driver in all this (and the paper does admit, if you read it carefully, that the central bank does fund the government after all). So there's no question of public spending "crowding out" private investment. It's exactly the opposite.
Why did the Bank of England suddenly admit all this? Well, one reason is because it's obviously true. The Bank's job is to actually run the system, and of late, the system has not been running especially well. It's possible that it decided that maintaining the fantasy-land version of economics that has proved so convenient to the rich is simply a luxury it can no longer afford.
But politically, this is taking an enormous risk. Just consider what might happen if mortgage holders realised the money the bank lent them is not, really, the life savings of some thrifty pensioner, but something the bank just whisked into existence through its possession of a magic wand which we, the public, handed over to it.
Historically, the Bank of England has tended to be a bellwether, staking out seeming radical positions that ultimately become new orthodoxies. If that's what's happening here, we might soon be in a position to learn if Henry Ford was right.

at

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

What's the Deal With Black Chickens?


Have you ever seen a black chicken? We don't mean a black-feathered chicken; we mean a Silkie chicken, which is black-pigmented right down to its bones. They aren't commonly found in the grocery store, but you might see them in Asian groceries. What's the deal with these black chickens, and do they taste different than the paler breed?

Silkie chickens are a highly-prized breed of chicken that has beautiful silky white plumage, and startlingly black skin. They are frequently found in China, India, and Southeast Asia. They have a mild-mannered nature and make excellent pets, and you'll often see them at poultry shows.
The chicken flesh itself is a dark bluish-grey or even black, and the bones are black as well. But the meat really doesn't taste different by nature; it's just chicken. The one difference, however, comes from the way the birds are raised. These obviously aren't factory-farmed birds, raised on the enormous scale of US poultry farms, so they're almost invariably free-range and slightly gamier in flavor. In fact, if you're looking for free-range and well-raised birds, choosing a black chicken is a good way to go.
Do you ever eat black chicken? How do you cook it? It seems that a roasted black bird would be slightly startling to guests; perhaps you're better off with soup? Here's an article from The New York Times on black chicken and soup:
→ Slow cooked silkie chicken

at

Semi Autonomous Defense Systems, "Sys Nica"

*Sys Nica hired a graduate software engineer today, welcome aboard.
Model "SADS" Home


*Attempting to trespass or enter a home, business or structure equipped with a "SAD" system and that's exactly what you'll be, "Sad".
*All gadgets not displayed. 


at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Featured Posts

Beautiful American Bully Pups for Sale

 

Popular Posts