debt: Mar 19, 2008

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Wordless Wednesday - My piggy bank after filling up with gas

Tags: wordless wednesday

Free Stuff at CVS

I am so glad that I looked at the CVS paper today. CVS is having some specials on things you can get for free.

For today only you can get Hershey’s Pot of Gold, plastic Easter eggs, and jelly beans for free. Limit 2 each. When I say free, I mean that you buy them and then CVS gives you back the same amount you spent in CVS bucks to spend on something else.

Here are some other things that are free right now:

Maybelline lipgloss (limit 1) - $8.99
Oral B Pro Health toothbrushes (limit 2) - $4.99
Listerine Smart Rinse for Kids (limit 2) - $2.99
Colgate Total Advance 4 oz (limit 5) - $2.99

If you get the Listerine, make sure you look for the rebate on the display. That means you can get it for free and get another $2.99 back from the manufacturer. You can also combine manufacturer’s coupons with these and save even more money.

I ended up with 2 Hershey’s Pot of Gold chocolates, 2 packages of Easter eggs, 2 bags of jelly beans, 2 Oral B toothbrushes, 1 Listerine, 1 lipgloss, and 3 Colgate toothpastes. I spent $13.94 before tax and I returned home with another $13.94 in Extra Care Bucks for later. CVS also emailed me a coupon for $4 off my next $20 purchase. In the next week or so, I’m going to purchase $20 in stuff, use my $4 coupon, and my $13.94 in CVS bucks, and only pay approximately $4 for the stuff. I also have a coupon for $2 off a CVS brand purchase, so I could combine that one too. Pretty cool, huh?

I love saving money! Please tell us if you’ve found any deals lately!

Tags: CVS, extra care bucks, free, sale

David Adam Friedman Article on Free Offers

David Adam Friedman's article, Free Offers: A New Look, to appear in the New Mexico Law Review, is available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1010238. Here's the abstract:

Free offers - the practice wherein firms market goods and services by claiming that they are free - have been overlooked for too long from a structural regulatory perspective. These offers have become so ingrained into our consumer culture that they often go unnoticed, viewed as part of the natural commercial landscape. The courts and the FTC have effectively left free offer regulation untouched since the 1950s. Even legal scholarship has largely ignored free offers. I argue that advances in the study of human behavior require a new look and a new approach to the half-century-old free offer regulatory regime.

A truly free offer would be a gift. In contrast, a free offer attached to another definite commercial commitment is not free under our common understanding of the word. Under the legal standard, however, the use of the word free is lawful, provided there is adequate disclosure of the attached commercial commitment.

Free offers can be perceived as merely harmless exaggerations or simple puffery. In fact, why wouldn't consumers want free goods and services? Rational consumers should want truly free goods and services. However, free offers subvert rationality. Cognitive psychology and reciprocity theory demonstrate that the power of a free offer induces consumers to behave differently, making them more likely to engage in certain transactions. The powerful expressive function of the word free tactically puts consumers at a disadvantage even in the situations where the conditions of our laws and regulations are satisfied.

I argue that current law and regulations require wholesale reevaluation, especially given the date of their original formation and the advances in our understanding of human behavior. This ubiquitous practice should be reexamined. Moreover, policymakers should go even as far as banning the practice of the free offer in certain contexts and seeking other appropriate means to even the playing field.

No Pasta Lasagna

My husband is not fond of pasta. I know, it’s weird. lol Sometimes it is hard to cook for him because there are so many dishes that have pasta in them.

Last week I decided to concoct a pasta free lasagna. Here’s a picture of it before I cooked it. Sorry, I don’t have an after picture. This pic will help you to see the layers.

My husband said this was the best lasagna he had ever eaten. When he had the leftovers the next day for lunch, he said again how much he enjoyed it. That made me feel pretty good. :) This lasagna would also work well for someone that wants a low carb dish.

Here’s what I did . . .

These are in order by layer, with the bottom layer listed first.

spaghetti sauce (I included a lot of meat b/c he really likes meat.)
fresh steamed spinach
cottage cheese mixed with 2 eggs and minced garlic
shredded cheddar cheese
parmesan cheese
crushed red pepper
steamed cabbage
spaghetti sauce
shredded mozarella cheese

I did not use a traditional marinara for this lasagna. My husband likes the vodka spaghetti sauce, so I bought the sauce. You can find it in most grocery stores.

I made a small lasagna for him and a regular lasagna for me and the kids. lol I always make enough lasagna to freeze a little for lunches.

I baked these on 350 until it was hot and bubbly (about 45 minutes). Let me know if you have any questions. Enjoy!

Tags: lasagna, low carb, pasta free, recipe

Report on Chavez ignores OAS rebuke of Columbia

Venezuelan President Hugo Cavez was again portrayed as a Bush-hating "provocateur' whose only goal is to antagonize the administration, this morning 3/6/08 on FOX and Friends First. Hosts Steve Doocy and Alisyn Camerota briefly discussed recent actions in South America but what they failed to include would have added balance and context to the story. As it was, it only served as another anti-Chavez propaganda piece.

Doocy glossed over the reason for Venezuela's massing of troops on its border with Columbia, Saturday's incursion into Ecuador by Columbian military in pursuit of Columbian FARC rebels. The Organization of American States has approved a resolution calling the raid a violation of national sovereignty and is working to repair relations between the two countries. Ecuador has also mobilized forces to its border with Columbia. (From the New York Times.)

The US as represented by the Bush administration is the only country in the hemisphere explicitly supporting Columbia. (Not surprising in light of their disregard for national sovereignty of other nations, who all not coincidentally have vast resources of oil.)

No, all we got from Doocy and Camerota was that Chavez is a provacateur, Ecuador was "really bothered" by Columbia's pursuit and killing within their borders, and Hugo Chavez will go to great lengths to get a headline. "This guy is a bug." said Doocy. "The only thing he's got we need is oil...and he's got a lot of that."

At least in this case the administration and their media arm are being upfront about why they demonize the leader, no WMD scare tactic BS. He's got Bush's cronies' oil, and some nerve not to cave to them.

How Many Distortions And Falsehoods Can Mary Matalin Tell In Three Minutes?

I stopped counting but the list includes Barack Obama's and Hillary Clinton's positions on NAFTA, McCain's flip-flops on torture, taxes and immigration, and public support for McCain on the issues. All this in one brief interview on Hannity & Colmes. With video.

From Alan Colmes' portion of an interview with Republican operative Mary Matalin on the 3/5/08 Hannity & Colmes:

* Matalin claimed that both Obama and Clinton "completely capitulated on NAFTA," that both candidates previously, before campaigning in Ohio that "(NAFTA) has been an enormous benefit to this country."

Fact check: In 2004, Clinton said: "I think on balance NAFTA has been good for New York and America," adding, "but I also think that there are a number of areas where we're not dealt with in an upfront way in dealing with our friend to the north, Canada, which seems to be able to come up with a number of rationales for keeping New York agricultural products out of Canada." In other words, she was not a whole-hearted supporter. In 2004, Obama was described by the Washington Times as "a critic of NAFTA." His criticisms were also published in the Chicago Sun-Times, Economist, and by Associated Press.

During the interview, Colmes noted that neither Democrat had changed their positions on NAFTA but that McCain had changed his position on immigration, torture, and the Bush tax cuts.

* Matalin replied, "No, no, no, no, Alan. We're not gonna have a campaign like this where you're gonna mischaracterize."

Fact check: From a March 3, 2008 article in The New York Times:

Mr. McCain, who derided his onetime Republican competitor Mitt Romney for his political mutability, has himself meandered over the years from position to position on some topics, particularly as he has tried to court the conservatives who have long distrusted him. His most striking turnaround has been on the Bush tax cuts, which he voted against twice but now wants to make permanent. Mr. McCain has also expressed varying positions on immigration, torture, abortion and Donald H. Rumsfeld, the former defense secretary.

* Matalin told Colmes, "Right now, John McCain is getting twice as many Democrats as Barack Obama's getting Republicans. They're all splitting the independents but John McCain is winning on every single issue except for health care, and he hasn't laid out his plan yet."

Fact check: A March 6, 2008 article in the Washington Post, called, "Both Obama and Clinton Hold Edge Over McCain," states:

Both Democrats are buoyed by moderates and independents when going head to head with McCain and benefit from sustained negative public assessments of President Bush and the war in Iraq.
About two-thirds of Americans disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job and think the war was not worth fighting, and most hold those positions "strongly." A slim majority also doubt that the United States is making progress toward restoring civil order in Iraq, even as McCain and others extol recent successes there.

… Obama also leads McCain on four of the six top issues in the poll: health care, immigration, ethics in government and voters' No. 1 concern, the economy.

Alan Colmes Cut Off During Tough Questioning Of Republican George Allen

George "Macaca" Allen appeared on last night's (3/5/08) Hannity & Colmes as a John McCain supporter. As the video after the jump shows, Sean Hannity got about 3 minutes to interview Allen. But Alan Colmes had not completed a full minute of his turn with Allen before the music began, a direct signal that the segment was about to end. It just so happened that Colmes was asking Allen some tough questions. With video.

Hannity welcomed the bigoted Allen by calling him "Our good friend" and a "Great American." Hannity also added that he's always been "a fan, a supporter, a friend of yours." Sure he has. There's nobody Hannity likes better than a white guy accused of being a racist.

Then, predictably, "Truth Is For Other People" Hannity used his time to misrepresent and smear Democrats. "They want to raise taxes, nationalize health care, hand Iraq over to Ahmadinejad and Al Qaeda." You can check out Barack Obama's and Hillary Clinton's websites for the truth on their positions.

In the video below, Colmes starts to break in at 3:21 and actually begins at 3:38 (Hannity took about 30 seconds for an intro).

Colmes confronted Allen about conservative support for McCain, given his flip-flops, and the enmity of some Republicans toward some of his positions. Noting that when liberals change their position, conservatives accuse them of flip-flopping, Colmes said, "It's amazing to me that as long as a candidate like John McCain changes position and the final position ends up where conservatives want him, that's OK… and it seems like some of you are just twisting yourselves into pretzels to try and accept this guy."

"You look at all the issues," Allen said. "And if you agree with someone 85% of the time, that's a whole heck of a lot better than someone you agree with 8% of the time."

"Then why give him such a hard time to begin with?" Colmes asked.

"Because conservatives care about principles and ideas," Allen claimed. The music began as he was speaking (his actual answer was longer), at about 4:36.

Bill O'Reilly Predicts Violence At Democratic Convention

After O'Reilly's small contribution last night as a political analyst with Brit Hume, The Factor tonight, 3/5/08, was all politics and he came off as the great authority. After a predictable segment with Dick Morris talking in his usual confusing circles about Hillary, Lanny Davis and Patricia Murphy, blogger, joined him to discuss the outcome on Texas and Ohio last night.

O'Reilly cautioned Davis that if super delegates come into play the Democratic Convention there would be a "blow up" adding that Al Sharpton would be staking it out. Davis explained that " the rules are indisputable" and there's really no question about changing the process in place. O'Reilly warned Davis he could be caught in the violence, " I can use the video of five guys beating you up."

O'Reilly moved to Murphy, an Obama supporter ,saying, " Old people kicked your butt." Then he wanted to know why older women like Hillary but wouldn't let Murphy really answer thoroughly. Her answer that older women relate to Clinton because they've experienced the same things could have been an opening for an interesting dialogue but BOR discounted it and wanted just the " political message" Clinton sent them. Murphy continued to try to explain while O'Reilly asked "Why?" over and over. Finally Murphy blurted " They just like her."

Lanny Davis said that " young people want to take back the white house." O'Reilly issued another warning. " You're not listening to me!", claiming that the Obama voters don't want " a back room deal". He insisted there would be a "brawl" adding " in a physical way."

He let Davis know that he was concerned about the Democrats but added ."Howard Dean, I don't like. I don't care what happens to him."

comment: Two more political analysts plus Dennis Miller appeared to talk about Clinton/Obama tonight. At least there were no culture warrior segments about sex shows at ivy league schools or trans gendered 8 year olds. Maybe Bill O'Reilly is redefining himself. Brit Hume better watch his back.

debt