text:
Microsoft Office Publisher 2007 is the business publishing program that helps you create, design, and publish professional-looking marketing and communication materials. You can create materials for print, e-mail, and the Web with an intuitive, task-based environment that guides you from initial concept to final delivery in-house without professional design and production expertise.
Office Publisher 2007 is designed to help businesses create professional-looking publications in-house quickly and easily. Even a beginner can create a publication for print, e-mail, or the Web.
Office Publisher 2007 has been redesigned to make it even easier to quickly start or open publications. You can create your own publications with the professionally designed Publisher templates, customize the templates as needed, and then change from one type of publication to another by clicking a single button.
For example, you can start with a business card and then click Change Template to create a return mailing label with the Business Information set — your name, mailing address, business logo, and design colors — already applied.
If you worked on a publication recently, you can open it again by clicking its icon in the Recent Publications list.
The most popular publication types, such as Newsletters, have large icons in the center of the workspace when you start Publisher. Just double-click the icon, and you can begin customizing your new publication.
Select your page size from the wide variety of page sizes (the paper dimensions are listed) in the Page Setup dialog box.
In Office Publisher 2007, you can see page, envelope, and label sizes. All of the sizes are listed with their common printing names, such as A4 and Size 10, and their dimensions.
If you can't find what you want, you can create the page size that you need. Unusual page sizes for admission tickets, big banners, business cards, or flyers are no problem.
You can also preview an example of how your publication type and template design will fit on the paper — so you can quickly see how your publication will look before it is printed. If you don't see the page size that you need, you can quickly create a custom page size.
If you are connected to the Internet, you can search Microsoft Office Online for Publisher templates that fit your needs. You can use the Publisher templates to design your own templates, and you can organize your templates in the My Templates catalog.
Top of Page
Office Publisher 2007 includes helpful tips and tools for marketing your business with print, mail, e-mail, and Web publications.
Get tips such as how to prepare a publication for your mailing list or e-mailing list, track the effect of marketing campaigns, perform e-mail marketing, and write effective marketing publications. For example, create your marketing campaign with the ideas and tips in Publisher Tasks. After you create your marketing campaign, the compression tools in Publisher can optimize the publications that you plan to send as e-mail messages. Finally, the Catalog Merge Wizard can manage your multiple mailing lists to simplify the e-mail process.
Publisher Tasks are task-based articles, such as "Adding text and images to publications" and "Preparing for mailing," that provide step-by-step assistance and help you use Publisher to market your business. These articles are designed to assist you in communicating with your clients and managing your outreach efforts more effectively.
Integration between Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office Outlook 2007, and Microsoft Office Outlook 2007 with Business Contact Manager includes new tracking tools that help you determine the effectiveness of marketing mailings. Create flyers and a newsletter to mail and send as an e-mail message for your sporting goods store in Publisher. Merge multiple customer lists from Microsoft Office Access 2007, Microsoft Office Excel 2007, Office Outlook 2007, and Office Publisher 2007 by using the Publisher merge tools. Use Business Contact Manager to keep track of the marketing materials that you send, the responses that you receive, and the costs associated with each outreach campaign.
Office Publisher 2007 makes it really easy to create content one time and then reuse it in many different publications. Start with one of the professionally designed templates, and then add your business's colors, logo, personnel names, and contact information.
You can also customize a template's font scheme and other options before you apply the template to your publication.
Create and store content such as logos, lists of services, success stories, maps to a business location, testimonials, and pictures that can be inserted into publications later and reused for faster, professional-looking publications.
Create Business Information sets that can be easily inserted into publications or transferred from one publication to another. When you finish creating a business card and then create a mailing label, the business information is automatically added in the appropriate places.
As you convert one type of publication to another, Publisher moves any content from the previous publication type that doesn't easily fit into the new publication type to the Extra Content task pane. When you try to close a publication with content in the Extra Content task pane, Publisher notifies you, so that you won't lose your work.
You can save your publications as Portable Document Format (PDF) files and XML Paper Specification (XPS) files and share them as read-only publications. This makes it easy to share your publications with customers, colleagues, or family members who do not have Publisher installed on their computers.
Important You can save as a PDF or XPS file from a 2007 Microsoft Office system program only after you install an add-in. For more information, see Enable support for other file formats, such as PDF and XPS.
When you save publications as high-quality PDF files or XPS files, you can print them on your own high-quality printer, post them in a viewable, fixed format for visitors to your Web site, or use the Pack and Go Wizard to take the files to a commercial printer in a format that the printer is sure to be able to professionally print.
Office Publisher 2007 minimizes printing surprises. Not only does it support the PDF file format that commercial printers use for their preflight (pre-press) tasks, but Office Publisher 2007 also notifies you of possible design errors that might cause problems during the printing process. Office Publisher 2007 suggests how to fix the problem before you send the file to the printer.
Print preview has been improved, so that what you see when you preview your publication is what you get when you print it. You can also select an option to show you how to insert paper when you are printing a two-sided (duplex) publication.
When you are using the Pack and Go Wizard and you select the Take to a commercial printer option, a task pane shows any errors that may cause problems during the printing process.
You can also select whether you want high-quality printing (for desktop printing) or commercial press quality printing for the file that you are packing.
Send a single compressed file instead of four files (.pub, .exe, .txt, and .puz files) to a commercial printer. The improved Pack and Go Wizard, which is now in a task pane, makes the process even simpler and the file smaller.
You can save the publication as a .pdf file in addition to creating a compressed file that is even smaller than the .puz file. You can also create a .pub file at the same time.
The Colors dialog box now has a PANTONE® tab, so it is easy to get exactly the right color. Plus, when your publication is printed by a commercial printer, the colors will be the same colors that you selected.
If your printer can accommodate banner-sized paper, you can print an entire banner without tiling individual pages.
Office Publisher 2007 helps you create marketing publications that are targeted to individuals selected from your client list.
Tailor your mail or e-mail publications so that they don't look as if they are part of a mass mailing. Your clients will appreciate the individualized attention, and you can track how your clients respond to the e-mail campaign.
Send personalized e-mail messages to select individuals from a list of clients, and add hyperlinks that are of interest to each individual.
For example, if your sporting goods store is sending a message to customers who are interested in soccer, you might want to target those customers who are interested in a particular team. In Office Publisher 2007, you can include a hyperlink to the team Web site in your messages.
If you have multiple e-mail accounts, you can also choose which account you use to send the e-mail messages.
Mail merge has been simplified with step-by-step assistance. In three steps, you can successfully create mail merges.
Publisher notifies you when there are trade-offs that need to be made between the size of an e-mail message and the quality of the message's content. For example, if your message has many high-quality photos or it has bitmapped text, Publisher notifies you that the file size may be too large for some recipients' mailboxes.
Manage and use client lists more powerfully and simply. Combine and edit customer lists from a variety of sources such as Microsoft Office Outlook 2007, Microsoft Office Excel 2007, Microsoft Office Access 2007, Office Publisher 2007, the Microsoft List Builder service, and Microsoft Office Outlook 2007 with Business Contact Manager. For example, if some of your sporting goods store's clients don't have e-mail addresses, you can filter your client list for clients who are interested in soccer, the specific soccer team, and have no e-mail addresses, and then you can mail a flyer to these clients.
You can add lists, filter and sort on criteria, revise the lists, create a special message for specific recipients, and create a new recipient list by merging the lists that you are using — all with one program.
After you create your combined list, you can keep a shortcut to the list and use the shortcut to update the data source lists that you used to create the recipient list.
Microsoft Office Diagnostics is a series of diagnostic tests that can help you to discover why your computer is crashing. The diagnostic tests can solve some problems directly and may identify ways that you can solve other problems. Microsoft Office Diagnostics replaces the following Microsoft Office 2003 features: Detect and Repair and Microsoft Office Application Recovery.
For more information, see Diagnose and repair crashing Office programs by using Office Diagnostics.


text:
Narrow By Clear All
- 2-3 persons (1)
- 4 person (4)
- 5 person (1)
- 6 person (4)
- $100 - $125 (2)
- $125 - $300 (2)
- $300 - $450 (1)
- $450 - $600 (2)
- $600 - $700 (2)
- $700 & above (1)
- Grand Resort (3)
- Garden Oasis (2)
- La-Z-Boy (2)
- Agio International (1)
- Country Living (1)
- Mason Green (1)
- Hexagonal (1)
- Rectangular (3)
- Round (4)
- Square (2)
Dining Sets
All Products(10)
Sears Only(10)
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
+Earn Points
Serve meals in style on outdoor dining sets
Serve guests at your next patio party meals in style on one of our outdoor dining sets. We have an outstanding collection of outdoor dining sets, including intimate bistro sets as well as long tables with chairs to seat large groups of guests. These affordable sets feature many types of patio chairs, including spring swivel rockers with arms. Many outdoor dining tables have a center umbrella and stand to provide shade and cover from rainy weather. Fill the patio with different types of outdoor tables, such as a bar table, coffee table or side table. We also have lighted tables to help set that soft evening mood so right for entertaining guests. Our selection is very broad, with enough styles that you can match any decorative theme you are trying to create. As always, our patio furniture is priced to be affordable for all budgets.
A perfect accompaniment to your outdoor living patio furniture is a nice grill, barbecue or smoker to use for outdoor cooking. Take a look at all the different style grills and cookers we have for your outdoor cooking adventures. We have gas grills, charcoal grills, electric grills, smokers and specialty cookers. You can really cook up a feast outside with these beauties. We have deluxe full-size covered grills, kettle style grills and table top Hibachi grills. Portable grills are ideal for tailgate partying or picnics. Many larger grills have adjustable heat controls and multiple burners, so you can fix an entire meal at once. Your guests will be nearby, drawn in by the wonderful aromas of grilled food. Brand names like Kenmore, Masterbuilt, Cuisinart and others are famous and popular because these products are reliable and high quality. We have them all at Sears, ready for you to pick up or have delivered.
Plan to visit Sears in advance of your next patio party. We have all you might need for stylish and affordable outdoor entertaining. Our outdoor dining sets, tables and outdoor cooking equipment and accessories are second to none. We feature top brands and high quality products that you can enjoy using for years. Get all you need for excellent patio partying at your nearest Sears store or have your purchases delivered to your location.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
By Richard Grogan, Interim CEO, and Teresa Reynolds, CNO
Read Full Article
HRMC is the area's sole provider of procedure that can aid in early detection of lung cancer
Shine a Light on Lung Cancer at Haywood Regional Medical Center to be Held on November 12, 2014
Haywood Regional Medical Center will host a free vein educational session Tuesday, September 23 at their Outpatient Care Center. There will be three sessions; 4pm, 5pm and 6pm. Call 828-452-VEIN to register.
Free and open to the public
May installment will focus on the neck and throat
Free health risk assessments and light refreshments will be offered
Those with leg pain and other vein problems are encouraged to attend
American Red Cross certified classes open to ages 3-10
Events planned for the entire month of February
The following practices phones have now been retored: Mountain Medical Associates, Haywood Women's Medical Center,
Haywood Medical Associates, Western Carolina Cardiology
MedWest Health System today announced the resignation of Mike Poore, President and Chief Executive Officer of MedWest-Haywood.
CLYDE, N.C. – Sylvia Lonnee, President of the Waynesville Garden Club, presented a gift of $1,000
MedWest Health System and the American Organization of Nurse Executives have honored three MedWest registered nurses
CLYDE, N.C. – MedWest Health System celebrated the opening of its new $3.4 million inpatient hospice unit
MedWest Health System will hold an open house for The Homestead inpatient hospice unit
Do you suffer with pain, tingling or numbness in your hands or wrists?
MedWest-Haywood recently completed a survey by The Joint Commission
a women's health exposition featuring speakers and health screenings designed to renew the mind, body and spirit,
© 2014 Haywood Regional Medical Center
(828) 456-7311
Healthcare Websitepowered by In10sity


text:
Skip brand navigation
skip form
Where are you going?
City, airport, address, attraction, or hotel
Use flexible dates
Use HHonors Points
Promotion/Offer code:
Group code:
Corporate account:
Travel agent
AAA rate *
AARP rate *
Senior rate *
Government / Military rates *
* ID required at check-in
close tab panel
Skip secondary navigation
Find where we are located
Talk to a Hotel Expert:1-855 786-4702
Discover a unique environment at the breathtaking Hilton Hawaiian Village Waikiki Beach Resort. Set amid lush tropical gardens, waterfalls and exotic wildlife, the hotel is a true Waikiki haven. Conveniently located only 3 miles from downtown Honolulu and many popular Oahu attractions, guests at the hotel will enjoy plenty to see and do. Enjoy a host of resort activities during your stay including snorkeling, kayaking, surfing, submarine tours, Hawaiian culture and arts, Precor by Hilton fitness center, Mandara Spa and world-class shops all on your doorstep. Choose from over 18 different restaurants, cafes and lounge-bars within the hotel, including the award-winning Bali Steak & Seafood restaurant.
Retire to a spacious guest room or suite at the Hilton Hawaiian Village Waikiki Beach Resort. All rooms feature stunning views of the resort or ocean and offer high-speed internet access. Upgrade to a suite for extra space and special amenities including bathrobes and a wet bar.
Ideal for meetings and functions, the hotel is a premier banqueting and convention resort in the Pacific. Host a meeting or conference in one of the hotels meeting rooms or a romantic wedding in one of the ballrooms or stunning outdoor venues. Keep in touch with business during your stay and make use of the 24-hour business center with a host of useful amenities to meet all your business needs.
With an abundance of resort activities and local attractions, there are always countless things to see and do at the Hilton Hawaiian Village Waikiki Beach Resort. Many great local attractions are just minutes from the hotel. Enjoy a round of golf at one of the nearby golf courses or explore Pearl Harbor, U.S.S Arizona or U.S.S Missouri. Shop till you drop at The Shops at Hilton or visit the Hawaii Convention Center, only a seven minute walk from the hotel. For a more relaxing activity, remain within the resort and soak up the sun on the white-sand beach, lounge by one of five swimming pools or unwind at the salt water lagoon.
This content will open in a overlay
Our Hilton Mom Voyage team shares experiences to help you plan a vacation the whole family will love!
Tips on Family Vacations to Hawaii
Create your vacation package and save with hotel+air and optional rental car all in one transaction!
View Package Details


text:
Come along to The Creature Teachers animal encounters and get up close and hands on with lots of different animals! Have you ever been tickled by a millipede? Have you ever touched scaly reptiles and felt how different their skin is? Have you been inches from a barn owl in flight?
Meet these, and many more animals during our fun, interactive, action packed encounters this summer at Sandy Balls.
Associated Venue
The Woodside Inn
Additional Information
Children's activities
UK holidays, weekend breaks and short breaks at Sandy Balls Holiday Centre set in the New Forest National Park. We provide high quality holiday accommodation in luxury lodges and caravans and we also cater for tourers and campers. We have a range of facilities including a restaurant, pub, beauty suite,cycle centre and two swimming pools. There is also fantastic activties for all from archery and laser clay pigeon shooting to team games, arts and crafts and much more!


text: Keyboard not Work! I cannot use the keyboard, her go once and for it reacting to grope no longer in Parallels, only if I pull the original keyboard of Apple from the USB port and again put goes it in again only briefly. The keyboard does not go only then if one the Numlocktaste operated. This goes only if one VM again starts, but without Numlock. Thanks end best regards from Frankfurt Germany My System 10.5.3 Paralleles Build 3.0.2150.92060 Mac Pro Early 2008 2x2,8 Quad 4x500 GB 16 GB Ram Standard Apple Hardware


text:
G-III Celtics Brewster T-Shirt
Sale Price: $14.97
List Price: $27.95
You Save: $12.98 46% off
- Additional Details
- Brand: GIII
- Color: Charcoal
- Fit: Standard
- Gender: Mens
- Includes: Distressed Crackle Ink
- Made In: Imported
- Made Of: 50% Polyester/38% Cotton/12% Rayon
Reviewed by 1 customer
Best Uses
Comments about this product:
This was supposed to be a gift for my husband. He's not a big guy - purchased a medium and it is HUGE! When I tried to return it and complained I was told that I must pay to return it and that is the policy. There is absolutely no way this shirt is a medium - I could fit 2 of him in it. It is at least an XL - and I feel it has to be a defect. Buyer beware - Celtics.com is of no help to the customer and I would not shop here again.
- Fit:
- Feels too big
- Length:
- Feels too long
- Was this a gift?:
- Yes
Unconditional satisfaction guaranteed.Safe Shopping:
Confidentiality and privacy secured.FAQ:
Quick answers, easy solutions.


text:
The social network icon(s) and/or link(s) and the website(s) they link to is/are not owned by Hanesbrands Inc. or its affiliates (collectively "HBI") and HBI does not control said website(s) and their information, policies or practices. By proceeding, you do so at your own risk. Please understand that you are about to exit the HBI site and HBI is not responsible for the website(s) you are about to access.
© 2014 Hanesbrands Inc.


text:
Design Your Own Unknown
1. Choose Your Unknown
2. Choose Center Gemstone
3. View Your Completed Unknown
Freeform Pink Sapphire, Round Lavender Sapphire, and Diamond Pendant (18")
This sweet and colorful pendant boasts one freeform pink sapphire, at 1.96 carats TW. Accenting the gorgeous gem are six round lavender sapphires, at .82 carat TW, and nine round diamonds, at .50 carat TW. These vibrant gems are crafted in quality 14 karat yellow gold, and the exclusive One-Of-A-Kind design hangs from a matching 18-inch curb chain with a two inch extender. The total gem weight is 3.28 carats.
Item Details
Item Number
Adjustable Chain
Metal Type
14K Yellow Gold
One of a Kind
Sapphire Color
Stone Shape
Stone Type
Total Carat Weight
3 1/4 ct. t.g.w.
Help Content
Click any item detail link to view more information.
Add to Shopping Bag
View All Details
Item Not Available
Add to Wish List
Close [X]
Call our jewelry experts at
to order it now!
Custom sizes typically deliver in 6-8 weeks, but may be available sooner.
Remember, you will also receive:
Free Lifetime Warranty
Certified Appraisal
Free FedEx 2nd Day shipping
The lowest price and best value every day with no sales gimmicks or sales commissions.
Our downloadable ring sizer gives you two convenient ways to determine your ring size.
When you print the ring sizer, you must set the Page Scaling to "None" in your printer's dialog box. Otherwise, the ring sizer will not print to the correct scale.
Open Ring Sizer (PDF)
To add this item to your wish list.
I'm adding this to a...
Please select.
Add a removable clasp to this charm ($25)?
Ring size:
Add to Wish List
Your item has been successfully added to the Wish List.
View Wish List
To add this item to your wish list, please log in or create an account.
Registered Users
Email Address
Log In
Please Wait...
Lookup my password...
New Users
Register today and enjoy all these features and more:
Check the status of orders and view the details of past orders.
Keep track of important dates so you don't forget any birthday's, anniversaries or other special dates.
Create a Wish List that you can share with others.
Create An Account


text: April-b By Jeff Holbrook December 1, 2011 10:20 AM Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Category: Share on Facebook Share on Twitter More Leave a comment Send to a friend! Print this page Pin it! Reddit This! Share on Tumblr! More from US 103 Lapeer Native Dead after Being Stabbed by Roommate in Florida Man in Serious Condition after Motorcycle Crash in Lapeer County Pumpkins,Treats and Magic For The Kids In Downtown Lapeer IKEA Might Scare Your Furniture Silly With This Ad Best of the Web


text:
Main Content
You couldn't be prouder about Jimmie Johnson's victory in the 2013 Daytona 500! Show off your die-hard NASCAR spirit when you wear this Daytona 500 Champion pin on your lapel. It's got vibrant Champ graphics for a lively display of NASCAR pride. All images are not final and are subject to change.
- High-quality graphics
- Officially licensed NASCAR product
Special event items are produced by manufacturers only after the outcome of a game or event. These are advanced sale items and will ship immediately after they are received in our warehouse.
Manufacturer direct items are shipped directly from the manufacturer. These items are not available for international or expedited shipping.
Customized items can be personalized with options such as your name, your favorite number, and/or designs. Some options may be limited by league rules.


text:
There are no items currently in your bag.
Our gardenia guipure cocktail dress captivates with style and meticulous hand embroidery. The intricate guipure lace bodice is covered with black sequins and the voluminous tulle and organza skirt is created using an origami technique.
o Belt sold separately
o Made in USA
There are no items currently in your bag.


text:
An extraordinary day at the Volta a Catalunya Wednesday ended with an unusual outcome when race officials decided to nullify the rain and snow-laden race that was abruptly shortened from 210 to 155 kilometers.
Top 10 Either Way
With a 12-man breakaway – which included BMC Racing Team's Johann Tschopp – leading by nearly 10 minutes, officials decided to eliminate the last two of four major climbs on the race's queen stage. Tschopp was listed as placing eighth behind apparent stage winner Janez Brajokovic (Astana Pro Team) in abbreviated results that were later negated. Assistant Director Rik Verbrugghe said the decision didn't significantly affect the BMC Racing Team. "If they had taken the time of the stage with the time gap, we would have had Tschopp moving into the top 10," he said. "But as it is, Steve Morabito stays in the top 10 with his fourth place overall."
Van Garderen Withdraws
Tschopp said he was simply following orders when he initially made a break with two others in the first hour of the race. Their group grew larger and led by more than 12 minutes as the temperature dropped and rain turned to snow. "Rik told us to try and get in the breakaway and I was feeling good," Tschopp said. "But the weather made it a really hard day with the rain and the snow and the wind." Conditions were bad enough that BMC Racing Team's Tejay van Garderen was one of many riders to abandon the race. "I already wasn't feeling 100 percent when the race started and when there'e extreme conditions like this, I wasn't going to get any better," van Garderen said. When racing resumes Thursday, Stage 1 and 2 winner Michael Albasini (GreenEDGE Cycling Team) will still be in the overall lead, 92 seconds ahead of Morabito.
Click here to view photos from the race.


text:
Every month ResellerRatings picks a reviewer and sends them an iPad Mini to thank them for participating in our site. The rules are simple, and you can check out everything you need to know on our iPad Mini giveaway page, and see the fine print here.
From Google, Bing & Yahoo your review is heard across the web. We make sure your voice travels far and wide. The ResellerRatings community of shoppers (like you) make the world a better place by leaving reviews of your online experience.


text:
Or rather, the "Bob Wenzel Loves Hearing Himself Talk Podcast." Wenzel starts off with a series of false pleasentries - and then he begins by trying to strawman Kinsella by citing old insults (which I don't know the full story on) but this notwithstanding, it had nothing to do with IP, and it was just a feeble attempt on Wenzel's part at getting something on Kinsella to help cover up his poor argument. And this is only the start of it - as Kinsella states his position, Wenzel, instead of clearly stating his stance on the issue, begins by just throwing out a barrage of quotes from Rothbard and Hoppe, and a meaningless reciting of passages from their books, most of which went entirely nowhere. To make things even better, he repeatedly said throughout the theoretical "debate" that "I'm going to destroy you, Stef-awn!" and "I've got ya by the balls, man!" It took divine intervention for Kinsella to actually finish a full sentence without a "But STEF-AWN!" and the replies to his points were usually "you don't know what the fuck you're talking about."
Who knows. Perhaps Wenzel teamed up with Kinsella to create a really high-end April Fools joke...I was sort of expecting them to shout it at the end, but no, it ended on a really depressing note which you'd have to hear to get what I mean by that.
You didn't exactly expect that pompous bozo to say "Kinsella Defeats me on IP", did you?
What's wrong with the url for the post where you actually got that "ugly" link?
or the link that says "direct link"?
Skip to 18:50. Before that it's Wenzel sniveling like a bitch.
Actually, it sounds like that keeps going. "Steff-awn" like 400 times in 22 minutes. Can't take much more. 30 minutes, he can't define IP. "We'll get there". OK, jackass, how about let's start there. Too busy dee-stwoying Steff-awn.
That's what it comes off as to me as well. Another thing he shouts a lot is "I'M TRYING TO DESTROY YOU STEF-AWN!" How obnoxious. He's sounding like the Comic Book Guy of libertarianism.
"I am going to hang up if you don't shut the hell up. Now I don't know if you are a genuinely retarded person or what..."
Holy mackeral. I'm surprised it's taken this long for Kinsella to start to lose his cool - kudos to him for keeping it for so long, or most of it.
So once Kinsella actually gets to where baby Wenzel answers something, those answers are all "...Uh."
SK: Once you release something to the public, anyone can recreate it.
RW: But not everyone will know about it!
Steff-awn: "Bob, you're gonna have to let me answer a question."
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
This is the most ridiculous nonsense I've ever listened to. How is this moron prominent?
What I don't understand is how they went on for sooooo long.
@ Stephan Adkins
Wenzel has made decent comments on his blog, however in his interviews he tends to show a strong love of displaying an over-read demeanor - which, in the case of this "debate," made the man an obnoxious baboon. As of late however, his blog has shown a lot of dogmatic tendancies, most of which regarding Ron Paul and an inability to call out strange Ron Paulian acts - of course there are other flaws as well.
@ Daniel Muffinburg
I got the feeling that that aspect of the whole thing originated as a Wenzellian idea - Kinsella threatened to hang up multiple times, and each time it seemed like Wenzel, like a YT comments troll, would say something even more absurd to the point where it lured Kinsella back into the "debate."
Wenzel: Do you understand multi-variable calculus?
Kinsella: I used to.
Kinsella's new debate blog post
Compare that post with Wenzel's regarding the debate.
Stephan's Post Title: Debate with Robert Wenzel on Intellectual Property
Wenzel's Post Title: KINSELLA CRUSHED!!!
Best bit of Kinsella's blog post:
"Ultimately the "debate" was pointless because Wenzel does not know how to engage in subtle discussion, he engages in question-begging repeatedly, he engages in bizarre ad hominem and tangential arguments, he refuses to define terms and seems unable to engage in clear, analytical reasoning. Honestly, he seems to have no clear position at all on IP, so it's kind of a mystery why he is so invested in it at all, so passionate about it, so hostile to my views. Other than his thinking he has some magical formula for getting Drudge Report links that he wants to be able to sell in his Drudge-Report dominated libertarian paradise. Apparently he is for some reason upset that anyone would dare, DARE, to ever challenge or disagree with Rothard (though there is no way Wenzel could agree with Rothbard's own contract theory or views on defamation law, and maintain his pro-IP stance), or that the anti-IP position is becoming the default position among modern libertarians (The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism; The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism)."
"Listen if you dare; I cannot promise it will be enjoyable; and I apologize in advance for at times being unable to take Wenzel's unfounded bluster and bravado and sputtering attempt at arguments seriously, and sometimes myself resorting to sarcasm, mockery, condescension, and coarse language (all accurate and well-deserved)."
"In short: Wenzel embarrassed himself but as expected is saying he "crushed" me—all the while seemingly oblivious to the fact that he did not even attempt to argue for IP must less define it or establish that it is justified or compatible with libertarian property principles."
Wenzel: If you're driving down the price.
Kinsella: What are you; a neoclassical?
Kinsella: Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake.
Not knowing anything else about him, I have a hard time believing he's a libertarian at all. His thinking is muddled and he doesn't seem to know how to debate. He's highly emotional and more interested in seeking revenge for getting his feelings hurt than arriving at the truth. He talks like Walter Block but thinks like Nancy Pelosi.
What really baffled me was why Wenzel felt that he had to shout and whine into the microphone the entire time when Kinsella was doing absolutely nothing to provoke him - it could have easily been an easy-mannered, friendly discussion, but ol' Bob was determined to be the most unethical and obnoxious debater this side of 4Chan.
Wenzel is nearly always like this, from what I have heard. Even when I agree completely with his positions I find him totally insufferable. I tried to listen to his Mises Media talk about the Soviet Union and had to turn it off after a few minutes with the same level of frustration that I have when I am forced (whether in airports or someone else's house) to watch CNN/MSNBC. The guy's delivery and attitude are the absolute pits. His blog is pretty solid and useful but damn I wish he would never speak in public. Shrill would be a complimentary way of describing it...
Guys, Kinsella just linked to this very thread from his Facebook:
hello-- my own take on the debate is here. Glad some enjoyed it.
Stephan Kinsella
Oh this was so much fun.
Maybe it was my anticipation of it, but I don't know how you guys could stop listening. It was as entertaining as a good movie. I even had my popcorn. (Well, it was tortillas, but still.)
I'm going to address specific points from the debate, so if you want to listen first, go ahead and do that before reading further :)
My pre-debate guess was correct...despite all his "getting into Kinsella's head" posts on his blog, it was Wenzel who was getting people in his own head. He all but admits it when early on he proclaims several times how Kinsella "pissed him off". And he was clearly emotionally affected for the vast majority of the podcast.
What's also telling is how Kinsella laid it out quite clearly (in his intro, no less) that the burden on Wenzel (and any pro-IP advocate) is to actually provide a positive case for IP...that simply picking at Kinsella's argument or anyone else's is not sufficient. But notice that's exactly what Wenzel starts off doing. And it's not even a good pick...he picks on Kinsella's opening statements in Against Intellectual Property, where he lists Rothbard as an example of people showing anti-IP sentiments?
I guess it should have been expected, given Wenzel's obsession with Rothbard (that goes even beyond his fixation with Jeff Tucker). Wenzel is probably more "If Rothbard said it, it's Gospel" than even Lew Rockwell. So I suppose it's fitting that his first instinct is to make sure to try and make the point that Rothbard was in favor of IP...because of course that's the side he himself has taken, so of course the most important thing is that that's the side Rothbard was on...and if that means he can show Kinsella was wrong in a statement about Rothbard, so much the better.
The trouble Kinsella has right from the start in getting Wenzel to even give a definition of "intellectual property" illustrates quite plainly what has been said in the comments of Wenzel's blog for some time now: Wenzel has basically avoided stating any real concrete explanations of anything he's had to say on IP...so no one has really had any way of actually dismantling his pro-IP position...because he essentially won't give one.
Every time he's ever been challenged on it he just claimed it would be dealt with in his "upcoming book". For FOUR F-ING YEARS he's been saying that. No joke. Here's the earliest mention (earliest I happened to know of, anyway) of this mysterious book ...in 2009. (To put that in perspective, George W. Bush was still President, just 5 days prior.) There may be others even earlier, but I'm not sure.
I think this comment from a few months ago was quite apt:
I am creating a new fallacy called "Argumentum ad Pseudo Librum", it's the "Argument by referring to an unpublished book" fallacy. Bob always drags it out when you start questioning his pro-"libertarian IP" views. He says "Just wait for my book" instead of responding to your argument. Then he never publishes the book.
Where is it? HBR? Wiley? Oxford? MIT Press? Who optioned the IP on this one?
I think this debate all but proves we'll never see an IP book from Wenzel. At least, not one that provides any sort of positive case for it, anyway. I fully accept he may put out all sorts of crap attacking Kinsella's work and that of any others...but I can pretty much guarantee we'll never see anything of his explicating any of his own actual positions...something that everyone else can pick apart the way he insists on doing with Kinsella.
In fact someone even brought it up back in 2010 on his own blog...
"It will be nice when you finally publish your IP book so we can all start taking swings at your IP views because right now it's unclear what they are and why and everytime people try to critique them you insist we wait to read your book!"
...Again that was almost 3 years ago.
Wenzel has no positive position because he can't. Kinsella is simply right, there is no way to justify IP within a true libertarian framework. It's simply unlibertarian. This is why Wenzel insists on trying to find fallacies in Kinsella's writing, and simply quoting other people, instead of even defining what "intellectual property" is. He won't even define his terms....probably because he's got at least a few brain cells left in his senility to know that the minute he actually states a concrete position on IP, he'll be taken to the woodshed, not just by Kinsella, but by the entire libertarian population that understands the unlibertarian reality of IP...which is quickly becoming not only the vast majority of the libertarian population, but large numbers of the population even outside libertarian spheres... (Falkvinge.net; Torrentfreak.com; Legal Scholars: Thumbs Down on Patent and Copyright; The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism; The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism)
You'll notice this tactic of nitpicking is basically his whole "argument" for at least the first third of the podcast. When he moves on to his Drudge Report formula, he simply fixates on the the fact that he's (allegedly) the only person who knows the formula (even though there's no possible way he could be sure that he's the only one who has come to know it. He fully concedes the concept of "independent discovery," yet he apparently knows for sure he's the only person to figure out this formula). He claims that the fact that no one else knows it, means it's scarce. When Kinsella says it's not scarce, Wenzel insists Kinsella recite the formula back to him. As if a single person not knowing something means it's scarce.
Even on Wenzel's own terms...hypothetically saying ideas can be owned, I fail to see how one single man not knowing the formula demonstrates its "scarcity." I'm sure Kinsella could have easily asked Wenzel what the 100th digit in π is...does Wenzel's ignorance of that prove it's a "scarce" bit of knowledge? And just how many people have to know something before it's not scarce, anyway? 25? 250? 1 million? Where do we arbitrarily draw this arbitrary line?
When Kinsella tries to point out that scarcity in the economic/property rights context implies rivalrousness, Wenzel equates "rivalry" with competition, using an example of himself being pissed off at party C who came to know his secret through breach of contract by party B...that means that him and C now have a "rivalry". The moron doesn't even know the economic definition of the word...but then again I suppose that's not surprising, considering he won't define ANY of his terms.
This is further illustrated with his fixation with Hoppe's words "super abundant". He basically takes those words as the litmus test for whether something is "scarce" or not. (As if that were any less ambiguous than his "does a particular man know it" test from earlier.) His problem is that he is evidently not familiar with the economic definition of "rivalrous", so Kinsella has no way to explain what truly determines if something is scarce.
Wenzel thinks that if he can make a case that something isn't "super abundant" — apparently because Hoppe is the ultimate authority on this, and his words are gospel, (where Hoppe ranks relative to Rothbard on this scale of supreme edicts from on high, I'm not quite sure) — then that specific something is not scarce. Kinsella tries to explain multiple times that "abundance" has nothing to do with scarcity in this context. When talking about scarcity in these terms, as Kinsella points out, the issue is whether they are rivalrous or not...that is, whether one person making use of the thing in question prevents or otherwise hinders someone else from using it.
Of course Wenzel never seems to get this point. What's funny is that a couple of commenters on his blog in his defense say things like "Yea....keep trying to convince everyone that "scarce" is something other than scarce," but Wenzel's opponents clearly state that 'scarcity' does not have to refer to 'rarity'.
You'll notice Wenzel's entire argument — if you can even call it that — almost entirely centers around the fallacies of begging the question and a combination of argument by name (i.e. argument by definition, without stating a definition), equivocation, and appeal to authority... (And that's of course if you ignore what seems to be his overall argument, the ad hominem that Kinsella is "sloppy" and "doesn't know Rothbard".)
Throughout the whole podcast his overarching theme is that Kinsella's writing is sloppy and Kinsella doesn't know Rothbard very well. What this does to prove or even support a pro case for IP, I have no idea.
When he's not spouting ad hominem, he constantly seems to essentially make variations of the argument that ideas are property because they can be "stolen", or that because it's "theft of someone's property" if you rent a car from Hertz and sell it to a third party, that means it's also "theft of someone's property" when you pay someone to share some information with you and then you reveal it to someone else...because "it applies to all sorts of property...intellectual property!" (1:51:40)
And when he's not doing that, he's either equivocating on the terms "scarce" and "rivalrous" or quoting Rothbard as saying "copyright is a logical device of property right on the free market", and essentially implying that because Rothbard said that, that makes copyright valid...even though (a) Rothbard is not God, and (b) he wasn't even talking about the same concept we are referring to by the term "copyright".
Wenzel is so focused on Rothbard simply stating that "copyright" is valid, that he doesn't even recognize Kinsella's point that Rothbard may have said the word "copyright" but was in fact talking about something else. Obviously if I take a bite of cereal and say "I sure do love eating cake"...that is not proof (or even strong evidence) that I actually like the dessert.
I think the part at which Wenzel gets closest to making any sort of coherent point is the part about the Mises sign, where he's referring to a blog post he made in which he embedded a picture of a "private property" sign on the parking lot of the LvMI. It sounds like he's making the point that everyone chooses to what extent they are willing to protect their property...meaning that the LvMI just put up a sign, but they could instead have a moat and sharpshooters. Applying that to his "Rothbardian" world of IP, it seems like he's trying to say that you get to choose to what lengths you'll go to to enforce your "intellectual property rights"...meaning if you are using information that someone else owns the copyright in, they can choose to simply send you a cease and desist letter, or they can actually go tie you to a chair. I think. I can't really be sure. He never really makes it clear, but either way it's irrelevant because he's still begging the question. He hasn't established that anything that is currently protected by IP laws is actually property. So it makes no difference how such things would get "protected" in a "free society"...he hasn't proven that they should be allowed to be "protected" (i.e. that you should be able to use force to prevent others from using them.)
I also understand what he's saying when he tries to say that Kinsella's theory doesn't begin until a contract is broken, but he only says that because in that moment he's limiting his view of what constitutes "intellectual property", or at least, what is currently protected by IP law (again, we never got a definition of IP from Wenzel).
He thinks that the only way things can become super abundant (when the "secret-knower" doesn't want his secret out) is if someone breaks a trade secret-type contract with someone else. But he's neglecting virtually all forms of copyright. If my house is near a pavilion, and an outdoor concert is being held there, and a band plays a song and I happen to hear it, under current copyright law I can't just go play that music on my own piano, record the sounds my piano makes, and sell copies of the recordings. (Not without paying someone a royalty, anyway.)
But there was no contract between me and the person playing the song. So how can he justifiably prevent me from selling my recordings of my piano playing? Kinsella addresses this very clearly in his monograph when he discusses how Rothbard was wrong: sure you can set it up so that everyone who buys a book agrees to a contract to not share the information contained within it...but suppose a third party comes across the book left on a park bench? Or sees words on the page over your shoulder as you're reading it. Can they now not go write a new story about those same characters? According to current copyright law they can't. But what contract have they broken? What contract has anyone broken?
Kinsella actually starts to get to this point when he actually poses that same book scenario, but he elects to take it in a different direction and point out how no one would even agree to such a contract. Personally I would have just hypothetically agreed with Wenzel's suggestion of such a contract and gone straight to the third party learning the information without B breaching the contract, because as we saw, Wenzel just used the wiggle room, leading to spit-on-the-keyboard moment starting at 2:16:17. [described below]
One of my favorite parts comes at 0:24:33 when Wenzel claims Rothbard supports copyright, and Kinsella says that's false. Then Wenzel quotes Rothbard saying "copyright is a logical device of property right on the free market"...right after Kinsella initially brought up that very section of Rothbard's work himself to show that Rothbard was confusing the term "copyright", as his example was a mousetrap...an invention...which is not covered by copyright, but patent. So when Wenzel introduces this quote, Kinsella responds "Bob, he's talking about a mousetrap. Do you understand the definition of..."
Then Wenzel cuts him off with: "THE MOUSETRAP...DON'T YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COPYRIGHT AND PATENT? THE MOUSTRAP IS PATENT, IT'S NOT A COPYRIGHT!"
I swear this guy was senile over 2 years ago when I initially said it. He's so far gone now it's comical.
1:18:28 was another one of the multiple parts I almost laughed my way into needing a new keyboard. Kinsella references Rothbard's "half-hearted" argument for contractual copyright. The minute he said that I was like: "Uh oh. NOW he's gone and done it." And Wenzel so totally delivered: "HALF HEARTED?! ROTHBARD?!??" Watch out Kinsella. I'm sure there's now a nice little spot for a doll of you in Wenzel's Rothbard closet shrine.
2:16:17: Kinsella asks "well how is [the contract] going to be designed then?" And Wenzel doesn't have an answer: "Who knows? Let the free market decide." And then Kinsella sums up Wenzel's argument:
"So in other words, you think maybe you could have a contract that could act something like IP, but what would the contract look like? 'Who knows?!' What would IP look like? 'Who knows?!' But I'm still in favor of it!" (Another nearly new-keyboard moment.)
1:42:19 is probably the best Cliff's Notes boil-down to the basis of Wenzel's amateur position. I love how he's so forceful with it, but yet still doesn't seem to be able to state it smoothly...all the meanwhile Kinsella is mockingly playing along with "uh huh"s as if he hasn't heard this crap a thousand and one times.
1:50:58 Wenzel gives his own summary of his major points: Kinsella doesn't know Rothbard, Kinsella quoted a paper in a blog post but didn't read the paper, and Kinsella thinks Wenzel's formula to get on Drudge is super abundant.
..I assume, "therefore, IP is valid"?
1:10:01 I was literally at the edge of my seat when I heard Wenzel begin "my alternative theory is..." And then it finally comes out: "...ideas are scarce."
There it is folks. That's Wenzel's basis for IP.
Of course now that Wenzel actually stated a position pertaining to IP, Kinsella just as a reflex jumped right into his refutation of that particular flawed justification for IP (the same one he and so many others have fleshed out so many times he could do it in his sleep). I just wish he would have slowed down to make Wenzel agree with him in a step by step Socratic way, so Wenzel couldn't worm his way around later.
1:41:28 The second admission we finally get from Wenzel of something concrete is that Rothbard would be in favor of copyright into perpetuity (which I think it goes without saying that that means that's what Wenzel is for too.) Can I just say, "holy shit?" Of course Kinsella laughs and Wenzel starts looking for a quote, and when he immediately discovers he can't search and talk at the same time, he tells Kinsella to "talk about some...uh...some other thing" (obviously so he can ignore whatever point Kinsella makes and use the time to track down his next Rothbard quote.)
Basically this interview exposes that Wenzel has absolutely no new theory of IP or even property rights. I recall in one blog post a while back when he was defending his delayed book release, he claimed that his research into IP led to him going even deeper, into analyzing the concept of property and property rights. Exactly a year ago he mentioned his "soon-to-be-released" booklet Why I Am A Libertarian Even Though There Are No Natural Rights. And more recently in his post on the Ron Paul vs. RonPaul.com fiasco, he states that all rights are "designed."
I forget exactly which post, but I seem to recall him implying his work was at least to some degree a development of a theory of rights or something to that effect...that essentially his defense of IP was going to be some kind of new understanding of even more basic concepts.
But of course this podcast unequivocally shows Wenzel's position is nothing even remotely new (surprise, surprise).
With all the dancing around and ad hominem, I'm actually a little surprised Kinsella didn't just eventually say "Okay Bob, I'm a total idiot. I'm the sloppiest writer in the world. Can we hear your case for IP now?"
Overall I find this to be a huge plus for the anti-IP side. Despite Wenzel's self-promotion and false blog post title, Kinsella clearly destroys him in every relevant way. (And yes, I realize it usually happens that people say that for the side they support, no matter what happens, because obviously the whole thing is subjective)...but in this case I think it gets as close to empirical as you can...
Kinsella offers clear arguments and expositions of his points, and actually offers such arguments on the topic of IP (the subject of the debate). Wenzel does no such thing, he simply picks specific quotes from various authors and reads them out loud, and then fixates on tangential irrelevant details, asking the same question over and over, even after Kinsella gives the answer. He must have asked the "is the formula scarce" question close to a dozen times, with Kinsella answering directly at least three times, and offering a full explanation twice. And of course when Kinsella ventures to ask him a simple question, or even to simply define his terms, Wenzel is all "well we're gonna get there."
I will grant that Kinsella initially was on the losing in terms of vulgarity, electing to use swear words on multiple occasions, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he got more angry than Wenzel...as Wenzel made it quite clear he was "pissed". It was evident to me Kinsella was just getting fed up, and being of a younger ilk, curse words seemed to be a much more colloquial, conversational part of his lexicon. (Notice his use of words like "dude" as well.)
But of course, later the tables turned and Wenzel let his tongue fly as well (1:25:14, 1:46:38, 2:04:39) LOL (Speaking of which, is Wenzel really a Scientologist?)
But as I said, in the areas that matter, I think anyone listening will find Kinsella to have had the superior showing. I'd like to say he had the superior argument, but Wenzel never really presented one...which I think is the most damning part of all for him.
I've determined that Wenzel really is well on his senility journey. I had my suspicions a couple years ago...but this was just scary. He honestly just doesn't seem to have the capacity to actually understand the anti-IP position. He makes it quite clear especially starting at 2:07:10 that he honestly doesn't understand not only the basis of the concept of property, but he doesn't even understand Kinsella's point about the nature of information. He literally says that Kinsella's argument is that if A tells B something, and C finds out, that makes the information "super abundant", and therefore not scarce, and therefore not property.
It's insane.
My favorite comment so far:
I thought the debate was funny. Stephan begins with his opening comment regarding IP. Wenzel's opening statement was used to explore the question, "Am I a worm?"
Stephan defined his terms and explained his position on IP. Wenzel stated his position on IP was based on destroying Stephan, but refused to give up a positive theory.
By the end of the "debate," Wenzel's theory of IP had been boiled down to one word: "Rothbard." I can't wait for his long-promised book.
"The General Theory of IP"
by Bob Wenzel
copyright 2017 Bob Wenzel
Chapter 1. General Theory
Rothbard, Murray 1
Second favorite:
I know the Drudge formula, and I will share it now.
But first, I must point out that by sharing the Drudge formula, that Wenzel will be crushed and will have to admit the formula is no longer scarce, since I know it. Sharing this knowledge will crush Wenzel.
Now, on to the formula, but first, allow me to gloat in advance over the imminent crushing Wenzel is soon to face! Oh, how sweet it will be to crush Wenzel!
Prepare yourself, as you are about to witness a crushing, the likes of which you've never seen, the likes of which you will never see again, so thorough will be this crushing!
I shall crush Wenzel like a bug! Like a whining, sniveling bug, I will crush him. I shall crush him now!
Now, I crush him, but only after I mention one last time how total this crushing will be! And now, on to the crushing.
The formula is simple: you add "HOT" to a blog title full of otherwise generally known information, throw in a few ad hominum attacks to your libertarian-themed tabloid, and delete comments you find disagreeable.
BOOM! Thus ends the most complete crushing of a man in the short but glorious history of the internet. And thus ends the notion that ideas are scarce.
Jagger out.
Good to see you come out of retirement JJ.
My humble blog
It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer
The discussion starts off well with intellectual points briefly eluded to by Kinsella... provision of context, defining terms, and indicating assumptions being made...great. Solid intro. Things look promising. Then it's Bob's turn... and the debate gets derailed before it's even begun - with an attempt to address the red herring of how the debate came about... sorry, but who cares? Answer: no-one but Wenzel. Thus commences the side-show.
I had hoped it wasn't going to end up this way. I must say props to Tucker for being way too classy to respond & get dragged in. Props to Kinsella for 'going there', and coming out on top despite all attempts at being dragged down in the face of such incivility. I must say, talk about shooting yourself in the foot. It'd actually have been more beneficial for Wenzel to have remained silent (and be thought a coward / buffoon) than to have spoken up and removed all doubt.
I've actually enjoyed Wenzel's blog for quite some time - until lately where the commentary has become more and more rancorous. I also wonder why there appears to be some kind of emotional attachment to the issue? On a bit of a personal note though, I appreciated when Bob started posting all the Rothbard video snippets I had edited down from the full lectures (an idea to make them more accessible). He then began copying them and hosting them on his own channel.
Obviously I could careless (it's nothing special), and in fact support their proliferation ... but what I am interested in though is how he would justify these actions with his IP "stance"? It seems rather contradictory. Again though this is hard to validate given his actual 'stance' is so obscure.
As a quip I'd suggest Wenzel has fallen for one of Rothbard's sociological laws: "Everybody specializes at what they are worst at (e.g. Friedman, and money)."
Except that Wenzel doesn't even reach that level - there isn't any indication of specialization at all.
Furthermore it's a shame that in all his zealotry Bob inadvertently drags down the names of the people he appeals to. Hoppe is clear as day regarding intellectual property:
Daily Bell: Where do you stand on copyright? Do you believe that intellectual property doesn't exist as Kinsella has proposed?
Dr. Hans-Hermann Hoppe: I agree with my friend Kinsella, that the idea of intellectual property rights is not just wrong and confused but dangerous. And I have already touched upon why this is so. Ideas - recipes, formulas, statements, arguments, algorithms, theorems, melodies, patterns, rhythms, images, etc. - are certainly goods (insofar as they are good, not bad, recipes, etc.), but they are not scarce goods. Once thought and expressed, they are free, inexhaustible goods. I whistle a melody or write down a poem, you hear the melody or read the poem and reproduce or copy it. In doing so you have not taken anything away from me. I can whistle and write as before. In fact, the entire world can copy me and yet nothing is taken from me. (If I didn't want anyone to copy my ideas I only have to keep them to myself and never express them.)
Now imagine I had been granted a property right in my melody or poem such that I could prohibit you from copying it or demanding a royalty from you if you do. First: Doesn't that imply, absurdly, that I, in turn, must pay royalties to the person (or his heirs) who invented whistling and writing, and further on to those, who invented sound-making and language, and so on? Second: In preventing you from or making you pay for whistling my melody or reciting my poem, I am actually made a (partial) owner of you: of your physical body, your vocal chords, your paper, your pencil, etc. because you did not use anything but your own property when you copied me. If you can no longer copy me, then, this means that I, the intellectual property owner, have expropriated you and your "real" property. Which shows: intellectual property rights and real property rights are incompatible, and the promotion of intellectual property must be seen as a most dangerous attack on the idea of "real" property (in scarce goods).
As for Rothbard - we can look back with hindsight regarding his position and adequately criticize... but it pays to remember the times. Given the below I have no doubt Rothbard would have been taken by Kinsella's & Tucker's cleaning up of the whole issue... just like when he admitted he was wrong after Hoppe advanced his 'a priori of argumentation':
"...Over 30 years I have been preaching to the economics profession that this cannot be done: that economists cannot arrive at any policy conclusions (e.g., that government should do X or should not do Y) strictly from value-free economics. [...]
And yet, remarkably and extraordinarily, Hans Hoppe has proven me wrong. He has done it: he has deduced an anarcho-Lockean rights ethic from self-evident axioms. Not only that: he has demonstrated that, just like the action axiom itself, it is impossible to deny or disagree with the anarcho-Lockean rights ethic without falling immediately into self-contradiction and self-refutation...."
As usual Rothbard was ahead of the game back then. The article starts off a tad rough but ends well...
"...Finally, there is the almost incredible harassment of VCR owners. If I buy a VCR and a blank tape, I should be able to tape a movie or other program off my own TV set. If the TV or movie people don't like it, they should jolly well have to lump it. It is grotesque that movie producers might get the Supreme Court to agree to outlaw use of the VCR. Worse yet is that the movie producers are harassing poor SONY, who only manufactures and doesn't use VCRs. Obviously, SONY has the deep pockets to enjoin and sue, which most home owners do not. Obviously, too, the government would have a great deal of difficulty mobilizing an enormous Gestapo, armed to the teeth, to break in on and confiscate or destroy the VCRs in many million American homes. Defend your VCRs to the death, fellow Americans! In practice, then, the movie people are not going to outlaw VCRs. They will just force SONY and the other manufacturers to pay a tax to the movie people, a tax which will be passed on to every VCR buyer. But the unfortunate principle—and the higher cost—might well be enshrined in the books.
The problem in all these cases is not whether "property rights" should or should not be upheld. The problem in each of these cases is: Who should have the property right? The computer hacker to do what he wants with his own computer and his access to the telephone lines, or the other computer owner? The signal sender or the signal receiver in the latter's own equipment? The VCR owner or movie producers? In all of these cases I believe that the concept of copyright has been illegitimately extended to become invasive, and that the fact that the common law cannot combat these "crimes" is already an indication that they are not crimes at all.
But I am in an odd position here. Of all the people in the libertarian movement, I probably know the least about computer technology. There are few movement people lower tech than myself. And yet among all the computer mavens in the movement, I have seen no discussion of these thorny issues. But it is important to apply libertarian property rights theory, i.e. judgments in various areas on who is a criminal and who is a victim, to advancing technology. So on these matters I still have a relatively open mind. Before the Iron Door closes, I cheerfully invite libertarian theorists and high-tech mavens to submit papers, on any or all sides of this problem, for possible publication in the Libertarian Forum. Is there computer crime? Are VCR and satellite dish owners criminals? Please send in your discussions, and help advance libertarian theory."
— Murray N. Rothbard, High Tech 'Crime': A Call for Papers, The Libertarian Forum, Vol. 17, No. 7-8, July-August, 1983.
Kinsella and Tucker have done just that. Advance libertarian theory. I don't think it takes any kind of stretch to come to the conclusion that Rothbard would have been persuaded by the new arguments and clarifications of old ones. Especially given sentiment against the Draconian measures suggested / adopted by statist policy makers in trying to clamp down on "intellectual property". The VCR example is also rather analogous to the music industry and mp3 files re: ripping from radio, online streaming and torrents. "I should be able to tape a movie or other program off my own TV set [computer]. If the TV or movie people [music industry] don't like it, they should jolly well have to lump it."
Wenzel's appeals to authority aren't even good. I do wonder though how he would respond to the above. Maybe that is the only way he'll change his tune? In any case: where's the intellectual honesty at Bob? Hopefully you will bounce back from this with some new found humility and a different take on the issue.
Maybe Wenzel won't give his definition of "intellectual property" because it's actually the same as Kinsella's. In other words, Wenzel's whole point may be that he wants (or believes he has) the right to force anyone and everyone else from using their own property in ways that duplicate what he's done with his own property - unless they give him whatever he wants from them.
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
Beautiful response, Conza. I wish there was a way to guarantee that baboon sees it.
Conza88:I've actually enjoyed Wenzel's blog for quite some time - until lately where the commentary has become more and more rancorous.
Diddo. Obviously some people deserve to be picked on, like bankers and the political elites...but it gets really pathetic when he decides he has an agend against a particular person, and the proceeds to seek out any possible information he can the could possibly be spun negative. Some recent examples would be the RonPaul.com guys, and of course, Jeff Tucker (which has actually been going on for quite some time.)
I also wonder why there appears to be some kind of emotional attachment to the issue?
Do you even have to ask?
I have one word: Rothbard.
On a bit of a personal note though, I appreciated when Bob started posting all the Rothbard video snippets I had edited down from the full lectures (an idea to make them more accessible). He then began copying them and hosting them on his own channel.
...You don't say
Obviously I could careless (it's nothing special), and in fact support their proliferation ... but what I am interested in though is how he would justify these actions with his IP "stance"? It seems rather contradictory. Again though this is hard to validate given his actual 'stance' is so obscure.
I think you should publicly ask him. Then again, I guarantee he'd come up with some sort of justification as to how his "stealing" of other people's videos isn't a violation of their "IP rights".
Furthermore it's a shame that in all his zealotry Bob inadvertently drags down the names of the people he appeals to. Hoppe is clear as day regarding intellectual property:
Daily Bell: Where do you stand on copyright? Do you believe that intellectual property doesn't exist as Kinsella has proposed?
Dr. Hans-Hermann Hoppe: I agree with my friend Kinsella, that the idea of intellectual property rights is not just wrong and confused but dangerous. And I have already touched upon why this is so. Ideas - recipes, formulas, statements, arguments, algorithms, theorems, melodies, patterns, rhythms, images, etc. - are certainly goods (insofar as they are good, not bad, recipes, etc.), but they are not scarce goods. Once thought and expressed, they are free, inexhaustible goods. I whistle a melody or write down a poem, you hear the melody or read the poem and reproduce or copy it. In doing so you have not taken anything away from me. I can whistle and write as before. In fact, the entire world can copy me and yet nothing is taken from me. (If I didn't want anyone to copy my ideas I only have to keep them to myself and never express them.)
Now imagine I had been granted a property right in my melody or poem such that I could prohibit you from copying it or demanding a royalty from you if you do. First: Doesn't that imply, absurdly, that I, in turn, must pay royalties to the person (or his heirs) who invented whistling and writing, and further on to those, who invented sound-making and language, and so on? Second: In preventing you from or making you pay for whistling my melody or reciting my poem, I am actually made a (partial) owner of you: of your physical body, your vocal chords, your paper, your pencil, etc. because you did not use anything but your own property when you copied me. If you can no longer copy me, then, this means that I, the intellectual property owner, have expropriated you and your "real" property. Which shows: intellectual property rights and real property rights are incompatible, and the promotion of intellectual property must be seen as a most dangerous attack on the idea of "real" property (in scarce goods).
Exactly what I was wondering. Why doesn't Wenzel have on some guys he respects (Hoppe, Block) and have them explain their position on IP. Will he pull out "But Rothbard..." on those two guys?
Going through the blog/youtube/facebook comments is even more fun than the debate.
Check em out:
Kinsella facebook
EPJ facebook
YouTube video
EPJ blog 1, 2
Kinsella blog
One comment in particular struck me:
I had flashbacks to the Wenzel\Peter Schiff debate. Mr Wenzel had similar tactics and Schiff explains them in the first couple of minutes of the youtube video titled: Peter Schiff Responds to Friday's Guest Robert Wenzel 10-24-11
That's actually what I was thinking (and actually alluded to in my original post). If you recall Wenzel's appearance on Schiff's show back then, Wenzel was as confused as ever. I actually provided an extensive coverage of that whole fiasco and the aftermath, starting here.
But get a load of the video the commenter is talking about. I actually posted it in that thread...
It's almost like he's describing the Kinsella debate. When Wenzel's wrong, he's so wrong, and handles it so poorly, it makes you wonder if he actually has some kind of mental defficiency. Kinsella suggested he might be functionally retarded. Some YouTube commentors wondered if he was autistic. As I did back then, I'm going with good old senility. You get a similar sounding craziness when you listen to Warren Buffett. That's another poor bastard that I think has gone off the deep end.
Exactly a year ago he mentioned his "soon-to-be-released" booklet Why I Am A Libertarian Even Though There Are No Natural Rights.
Wenzel has gone full retard.
This is the most ridiculous nonsense I've ever listened to. How is this moron prominent?
This is the most ridiculous nonsense I've ever listened to. How is this moron prominent?
Exactly--what the hell did I just listen to? Freakin Piers Morgan or Barack Obama could probably have made a stronger case.
"Wenzel" is over-sensitive, irrational, and incapable of even deducing a simple logical consequence. I truly feel like this guy needs to see a mental health professional, and he is genuinely, incredibly stupid. His communication skills just never advanced past age 12. He mixes up and uses words interchangably which are obviously different. Why have the "extra" words if they mean the same exact thing? Can't understand the economic definition of rivalry vs a lay person's usage interchangably with competition.
The guy is so delusional he actually thinks he won.
This is embarrasing, all it does is convince me that Kinsella really knows his stuff... and is fantastic in the art of (deserved) comedic insult.
Has Kinsella ever debated someone that can form a coherent argument? This was like a mentally challenged ping pong game.
Listening to this will drop your IQ ten points.
Oh this was so much fun.
Maybe it was my anticipation of it, but I don't know how you guys could stop listening. It was as entertaining as a good movie.
Oh this was so much fun.
Maybe it was my anticipation of it, but I don't know how you guys could stop listening. It was as entertaining as a good movie.
Is it bad that I want a part 2? I stayed up almost all night listening and I'm still laughing...
How is Kinsella saying that Rothbard didn't defend copyright?
David Gordon says the same thing here: "These writers modify and extend the work of Murray Rothbard, who allowed copyrights but not patents."
Admitedly I haven't read much into the IP debate but a quick google search reveals many websites saying a similar thing as Gordon.
Edit: heres' rothbard's original essay.
Sukrit:How is Kinsella saying that Rothbard didn't defend copyright?
If you'd actually listen to the podcast, you'd have the answer to that question.
Yes, it's worth listening to (well... only if you like comedy). I might listen through the whole thing a 2nd time, it was so flipping hiliarious.
Basically, he explained Rothbard had made a mistake and was confused (at least with the particular quote Bob was parroting). Since Murray was applying copyright to a mouse trap (rather than patent), it sounds like he had either made a mistake (*gasp*) or was perhaps accidentally equivocating.
But your link looks "interesting", I'll have to check that out later. However even if Kinsella IS wrong on Rothbard's view, it does absolutely no damage to his position (unless you're someone who reads Rothbard as gospel, or enjoy appeals to authority). He was willing to concede just to move on during the "debate".
If you'd actually listen to the podcast, you'd have the answer to that question.
If you'd actually listen to the podcast, you'd have the answer to that question.
Yep I understand now. Rothbard's version of copyright isn't the same as the government's legislated copyright, it's contractually based.
I really don't understand why this debate went for two and half hours. I got so sick of listening and had to turn it off, they're repeating themselves endlessly.
The repeating occurs IMO because Bob is so clueless, and maybe senile or something. Perhaps it's just my immature side, but I found that the insults and frustrations thrown back and forth made it MUCH easier to listen to. Probably much easier than just having Kinsella (or anyone) speak alone... which probably speaks volumes about my own ADD or whatever.
Kinsella was saying that Rothbard believed you could have a type of contract-based copyright (still haven't read the link above, but skimming it seems consistent with Kinsella's statement), which Bob was essentially defending. SK explained it wouldn't work, and also that it was even inconsistent with some of MR's other views regarding contract theory, defamation law and anti-patent stance.
If you can't take the audio, try this: http://www.stephankinsella.com/paf-podcast/kol-038-debate-with-robert-wenzel-on-intellectual-property/
I've been following the whole clash for sometime now, and I think Bob Wenzel is right. In fact, I find Rothbard's idea of IP (based on voluntary, private contracts) to be more in line with Bob's view than with Kinsella's. Quite surprised to see people here in this forum think otherwise.
Sukrit, I think you're mistaken (or have been misinformed by the polarized crowd I see here). Bob's view on IP is exactly the same as that of Rothbard's. He thinks copyrights are part of the market process arising out of private contracts (thus very much libertarian) while patents are state-conferred production privileges (thus very much statist)--just what Rothbard said.
the debate was terrible no doubt about it but it would be nice to see more debates in general, perhaps with individuals advocating the austrian point of view vs other points of view
... just as the State
has no money of its own, so it has no power of its own - Albert Jay Nock
schiff vs kinsella on limited government vs private property anarchism would be nice, for example


text:
Weather on CellularOne
Gilbertville, MA 01031
WeatherBug Mobile
WeatherBug Mobile Weather on CellularOne
WeatherBug provides subscription mobile weather solutions for a variety of wireless carriers. To learn more, contact your wireless carrier or visit their website for current pricing and a list of compatible phone models.
WeatherBug for Mobile
Get WeatherBug on your smartphone and tablet!
Be prepared. Know before. With WeatherBug's exclusive neighborhood-level network of stations, getting the most relevant and personalized weather has never been easier.
- Access to the largest weather network in the world
- Faster Severe Weather Alerts
- Better forecasts through our exclusive real-time weather network
Download the app used by millions, voted "Best Weather App Ever" and trusted as a "Best App for Moms" - WeatherBug.GET IT NOW
WeatherBug for Mobile Smartphones
Now, mobile smartphone users can take the power of the WeatherBug weather network wherever they go
Smartphone users simply need to enter m.weatherbug.com into their mobile browser in order to get easy access to live, local current weather conditions, extended forecast, severe weather alerts, interactive radar and maps… and much more!
- Current conditions from more than 8,000 WeatherBug Tracking Stations
- Detailed forecasts for all US ZIP Codes and International locations
- Severe weather alerts
- Local and regional radar
- Live weather cameras
WeatherBug Featured Products
Weather News
Other Top Weather Headlines
Tropical Depression Meanders Over Bay of Campeche
Tropical Depression Nine is slowly meandering towards Mexico's Yucatan…More >
Partial Solar Eclipse On Tap Today
Most of the U.S. will be treated to a partial solar eclipse today! Here are the…More >
Newborn Puget Sound Killer Whale Presumed Dead
A killer whale born to much hope in early September in the Puget Sound apparently died while its pod was in the open ocean…More >
WeatherBug Featured Content
Green Living
You too can help save our planet and put money back in your wallet. Learn how you can take the first steps to reduce your environmental impact, including driving green, easy ways you can conserve water, and energy saving tips. To learn more and discover the benefits of going green, visit WeatherBug's green living section. More >
Be Prepared, Know Before
Get faster alerts and better forecasts from the exclusive neighborhood-level WeatherBug network.Learn More


text:
Compliance Case Study: ABA Frontline Compliance
The only compliance cost that isn't going up
- |
- Written by Super User
- |
- Comments: DISQUS_COMMENTS
Jim Rakes' National Bank of Blacksburg, Va., serves 14 counties in southwest Virginia, and keeping the bank's 216 employees up to date with consumer banking regulations has been a logistical challenge. Most employees have had to drive a good hour to attend compliance training, according to Rakes, president and CEO of the $978.5 million-assets bank.
And that's just logistics. For years, the bigger challenge has been delivering up-to-date training, according to Shelby Evans, corporate auditor and compliance officer. Typically, the bank sent one employee to a compliance school, workshop, or other program, and that person would in turn present to fellow employees.
Rakes says the bank has been working into a new approach that will save costs and time. "And it will keep our employees in the bank during the day," he explains. The bank is implementing the next step in its usage of ABA Frontline Compliance, an e-learning service available free to ABA member institutions.
Hooking up to Frontline
ABA delivers Frontline's online courses over the internet, using its state-of-the-art learning management system. The system handles employee-student recordkeeping and similar chores. More than 70 compliance courses, including interactive text, video, audio, and printable documents, comprise the Frontline catalog. Rakes and his staff have been impressed with the quality of the content.
"I went through every course myself, to see what they were like," says compliance officer Evans.
Initially, the bank used the Frontline training as a template for its corporate trainer's efforts—the materials alone more than covered the bank's dues, according to Rakes. Frontline includes both overview courses—by regulation and bank position—as well as additional offerings that focus on how a regulation or law applies to a specific bank position. As its next step, National Bank is using Frontline to push training to every employee's computer desktop.
"Even though you are sitting at your computer, the courses' case studies and online conversations feel very interactive," says Lara Ramsey, vice-president for human resources and training. "You don't just feel like you're reading."
ABA provides a detailed "compliance training roadmap" for managers. This tool helps them determine which courses should be required for which positions in the bank. This avoids coming up with a "one size fits all" curriculum, instead tailoring the elearning to specific job descriptions.
"Not every bank's customer service representatives do the same thing," points out Evans. "You can mix and match courses."
To make sure the training sticks, Frontline includes tests, and tracks performance. The system grades the tests, and employees see their marks right away.
Balancing savings and exposure
ABA estimates that a member bank of $1 billion in assets saves about $10,000 annually by using Frontline. National Bank is not only reducing employee time out of the office, but also travel costs and the cost of the computer-based training it formerly used.
"We'll still do some schools occasionally," says Rakes. "The personal interaction bankers get there is important. But our spending on that—including enrollments, travel, and housing—will be substantially reduced. We'll be more selective about how we use outside compliance training now."
Another benefit will be freeing up the bank's trainer, who can now devote more time to live training in other functions. After all, there's more to banking than compliance.
Tagged under Compliance, ABA News,


text:
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Cooking Grass-Fed Beef: Episode 4 – Beef Shanks Braised in Three-Onion Broth
These beautiful beef shanks came from Steve Normanton, and were everything you want a braised shank to be -- moist, tender, sticky, and comforting.
As I looked around for ideas on how to do these grass-fed beef shanks, I knew I was going to slowly braise them (really the only way to go), but I couldn't decide what exactly to braise them in. So many options, so little time.
I saw a few recipes that called for the shanks to be cooked in a broth made from instant onion soup packets. As much as the thought of taking these wonderfully wholesome, all-natural, grass-fed shanks and sticking them in a sodium-packed, MSG-laced, artificially flavored and colored, dry soup mix repulsed me, the idea of cooking them in a French onion soup sounded pretty good.
It was better than pretty good -- it was fantastic! The collagen-rich shanks broke down beautifully and the combination of those succulent chucks of meat, sweet melted onions, buttery marrow, and rich aromatic sauce over the soft polenta, made for a very impressive bowl of food.
As I mention in the video, beef shanks are like a two-for-one deal. Not only do you get the marvelous meat, but you also get one marrowbone per shank! If you've never had beef marrow before, do yourself a favor and get some beef shanks and make this recipe.
Thanks to Steve Normanton as usual for providing such great beef to work with. By the way, those of you who want to cook with grass-fed beef, but don't like it medium-rare, should give this beef shank recipe a try -- it's basically impossible for the dish not to be delicious. Enjoy!
2 tbsp vegetable oil
4 beef shanks (about 1 1/2-inch thick)
3 large onions
1 bay leave
6 springs thyme
3 cloves garlic, chopped
2 sprigs rosemary
1/2 cup diced carrot
1/2 cup diced celery
salt and fresh ground black pepper to taste
2 cups beef broth
chives to garnish
41 comments:
I had a fried egg sandwich for dinner tonight. Do you have any idea how good those beef shanks look?
- September 16, 2009 at 11:34 PM
you are killing me. killing me.
(im a vegetarian).
- September 17, 2009 at 2:15 AM
- popsu said...
Nice one John! This is what I'll definately do on my next free weekend.
- September 17, 2009 at 2:38 AM
- Flo said...
Steve Normanton sells oxtail... so when are we going to see some oxtail stew, Chef John?
- September 17, 2009 at 10:46 AM
- Flo said...
Steve Normanton sells oxtail... so when are we going to see some oxtail stew, Chef John??
- September 17, 2009 at 10:46 AM
Could you brown the shanks in the stockpot, remove them, saute the onions in the pot and add the shanks back in- thus saving having to wash that saute pan?
- September 17, 2009 at 12:06 PM
- Chef John said...
- September 17, 2009 at 12:07 PM
that recipe looks amazing and i had steak for dinner! though my judgment could be skewed from the alcoholic beverages i have also consumed!
- September 17, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Chef John, mirepoix can be a pain in the butt for weekend cooks since they wont sell celery by the stalk. Im thinking of preparing and freezing small bags of the stuff. Given limited freezer space I have, Im even half-thinking reducing it into a soffritto before bagging and freezing it. Please Suze Orman approve/deny my plan.
- September 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM
- Chef John said...
I definitely approve!
- September 17, 2009 at 11:45 PM
So amazing looking! I am a huge marrow fan (lord help my arteries I had marrow on toast AND rib eye with marrow for dinner this week)
I can't wait for it to get a little cooler so I can make this!
p.s. I am making your fried green tomatoes tonight with my own green tomatoes. Cheers!
- September 18, 2009 at 4:14 PM
- Elijah said...
I made this dish for my parents last night and it was a big hit. I don't know why you would ever serve this over anything but home made mashed potatoes.
- October 30, 2009 at 1:40 PM
- Markus said...
Nice work John
Can you do this in the oven?
I don't trust my electirc stove that much (Please don't tell that to her =))
- January 14, 2010 at 7:05 AM
- Chef John said...
- January 14, 2010 at 1:07 PM
I found this video on 5 min Life videopedia. There was no written recipe and it didn't dawn on me to follow the link until after I made it! Duh. I guessed on the amounts except what was mentioned in the video. The only problem was it needed more salt. Other than that it was fantastic. My wife and I cooked it together and had a great time. I have now bookmarked your page.
- April 3, 2010 at 6:41 PM
Could you use German thyme
- June 16, 2010 at 4:19 PM
could you use German thyme instead of regular thyme
- June 23, 2010 at 1:05 AM
- Chef John said...
i've never heard of German thyme, but any herb would work
- June 23, 2010 at 1:21 AM
Have been cooking for 20 years but have never cooked beef shanks. If it were not for foodwishes I seriously doubt I ever would have. I was at a market yesterday and happened upon certified organic locally raised beef shanks. I remembered seeing a couple of recipes dealing with these on your site. I am excited to say there is a beef shank in a pot on the stove right now! Thank you.
- October 23, 2010 at 8:20 PM
- Clara said...
Just made this tonight and it turned out wonderfully! Served it with truffled mashed potatoes - I was going to make your truffled gratin again but decided against it due to lack of oven space (was baking your no-knead ciabatta) and also fear it would be too rich against the shanks. Even did those cherry pepper poppers again too, so it was a true Chef John feast. Thanks again for all the recipes!
My only regret is that I was so busy cooking and serving food I didn't have time to take any photos. =)
- October 24, 2010 at 4:22 AM
- Qin said...
I tried this recipe with osso bucco and it came out wonderful! The liquid turned out to taste almost the same as French onion soup with amazing flavor! I just want everyone to know osso bucco works fine if you cannot get beef shank. Thank you Chef John for this great recipe!
- November 15, 2010 at 12:13 PM
I just started this and it smells....*really bad*. I have never cooked a beef shank before and dont know what it is suposed o smell like. It looked very healthy, nice and pink. It smelled bad fresh out of the package and having cooked it is making my home smell really bad. Did I happen to get a bad one or do they just have an "off" smell?
- July 9, 2011 at 4:36 AM
- Chef John said...
It has a strong beefy smell, but shouldn't smell "bad" at any point.
- July 9, 2011 at 4:41 AM
Cooked this tonight and served it on mashed potato; and it was fabulous. It was worth the 4 hrs wait. :0) I used your mash potato recipe and it's really the best I have ever eaten. Thank you!!!
- November 26, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Chef, can I use dried herbs? And if so, how much thyme and rosemary?
- February 1, 2012 at 1:03 PM
- Chef John said...
yes, but just guessing at amounts... try a tsp of each and see what happens.
- February 1, 2012 at 1:06 PM
Thanks for the fast response. Another question, can this be baked? I've been up all night and want to take a nap, but I don't trust the stove. I want dinner my family to have dinner w/o the firefighters here.
- February 1, 2012 at 1:54 PM
- Chef John said...
Sure! Just roast until tender.
- February 1, 2012 at 3:04 PM
This recipe sounds great-- I'm thinking of trying it out tomorrow.
Do you think I can use a slow cooker for the braising portion of this recipe (after browning meat & sauteing the veggies on the stove)? If yes, how long do should it go on the low setting?
- April 19, 2012 at 12:47 PM
- Chef John said...
Yes! not sure time, but just go until tender! Enjoy!
- April 19, 2012 at 1:30 PM
- miriamchumbi said...
Commenting straight from Nairobi, Kenya. I loved this meal greatly and so did my guests, thank you. I utilised the ingredients as best as I could n cooked it for about 3hrs, the guests were hungry, and it turned out great, thanks. Check out my food blog (still in construction)
- August 22, 2012 at 4:19 AM
- Judy Davis said...
Two questions & a comment Chef:
I am thinking--and PLEASE correct me if I am wrong!--that anything that is being braised can be done in a slow cooker instead of on the stove in a low-heat stock pot. And everything else about the recipe would stay the same. Is this a correct thought??
2nd question
WHY do you always skim the fat off the top of cooking liquids. It is an "Americans eat too much fat" thing, a looks thing, or does it do something to the flavor of the food? In my experience, fat=flavor--so I am really curious on this one.
And a comment--OMG!! I have not had beef marrow in a round bone slice like that since I was a kid--and man, I LOVED that stuff!! I dunno what meal it was my Mom was cooking when I got one of those bones--but I remember them sooooo fondly ;) I HAVE to try this out just to re-acquaint myself with the yummyness that is beef marrow!!
Thanks Chef John!! <3 <3 <3
- September 16, 2012 at 1:14 AM
- Chef John said...
Yes, slow cooker works! Fat skimmed for appearance and to cut fat content. Enjoy!
- September 16, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Hello. Istead of Beef Shank, can I make this recipe with Beef Osso Bucco? Thanks in advance. Steve
- September 24, 2012 at 5:32 PM
- Chef John said...
Same thing!
- September 24, 2012 at 7:08 PM
- Playful said...
Marrow weirds me out... Never had it, but just the thought of it makes me shudder... No offense to you John!
- November 11, 2012 at 4:37 AM
- Playful said...
Marrow weirds me out... Never had it, but just the thought of it makes me shudder... No offense to you John!
- November 11, 2012 at 4:39 AM
- Jeff Kee said...
I'm trying mine but with a twist. I'm slowly sauteeing the onions, about 1 hour at low heat, to fully emulate the french-onion sweetness. Not sure if this will make a difference or not since the whole dish simmers at low for a while, but considering the differences of early caramelization, I'm going to make a bet that the sweetness will be increased!
- December 10, 2012 at 5:19 PM
- JDQ said...
Could you do this in the oven instead of the stove top? If so, what temp and how long? I love love love the pomegranate lamb recipe, would it be the same? Thanks!
- July 28, 2013 at 10:43 PM
- Chef John said...
yes! until fork tender.
- July 29, 2013 at 12:32 AM
- Francisco del Rincon said...
Hi Chef John, these look amazing! Question: are the shanks from the front or the back legs? Which ones will work better?
- January 7, 2014 at 1:03 PM


text:
You currently have (0) items in your shopping cart.
- "website and order process very easy but the order (which was paid to be delivered by courier) took longer than 7days to arrive. I would advise you to possibly try using a different courier service if parcels take this long to arrive!"Britt Caling
- "Received my Chariot Bike Trailer in a few days. Thanks for all your advise - my baby boy loves it."Rachael Batkovic
- "Sent me the wrong item. Follow up from Bike Trailers: Sorry we all make mistakes - problem was rectified for customer."Kirsten Keightley
- "Absolutely awesome service!!! Ordered, processed and delivered all within 3 days (not even!!!) Extremely quick responses to emails with very professional follow ups. And great prices, what more could you ask for?!?"Bachir Srour
- "After trying a friends WeeHoo Igo I phoned Bike Trailers and had very fast and efficient service, with delivery as promised. I would certainly use your services again."Felicity Ennis
- "Thank you Bike-Trailers.com.au for your amazing service. From my initial phone enquiry you were patient and thorough in your answers, through to my purchase and prompt delivery, you have been efficient and wonderful to deal with. We are very happy with our bike trailer and use it EVERY day :) PS: you were also the best value for money!! "Nicole Szalek
- "Our Croozer was ordered one night and posted the next day! It is fantastic. Easy to assemble, looks great and so easy to run with. We are looking forward to putting it on the bike next. My 10 month old son just loved it from the start! Thank you for a wonderful product that I am sure will bring many hours of fun. "Caroline Montefiore
- "Very nice trailer. I have been riding for 10 years and now have a 11 months old baby and we all can still go riding thanks to the croozer. I only lost a small amount of time of my average due to the croozer being easy to tow. Thanks Mick"Mick Darlow
- "Thank you. Staff were very helpful, I phoned and added an extra accessory to my order and this was no problem. Communication was very good, my item was out of stock and I was kept informed of the delay throughout. I am incredibly happy with the quality of my Chariot Cougar and am looking forward to many years of happy riding!"Linda
- "Recived our croozer today an im so happy with it. The service was fantastic can't wait to start our new biking adventures with our little family. Thank you so much guys will be happy to order more stuff through you guys in the near future."Tara Lehmann
- "I purchased an accessory and was impressed with how well you run your business - great price, excellent communication, and very quick delivery. "Ella
- "I found excellent service, with my order being quickly acknowledged. When the item I wanted was out of stock, I was offered a similar, more expensive item at the price of the original item. I am very happy with my purchase, which was delivered quickly and efficiently."Sean Knight
- "We purchased a Croozer bike trailer from Bike-Trailers.com and it was just the best experience; My initial & subsequent email enquiries were answered almost immediately and the staff were extremely helpful & friendly. We live up in Qld but I had barely ordered the Croozer when it arrived on our doorstep. Once the Croozer was unpacked and assembled my husband and I just sat there staring at it in awe, it's even more impressive up close! The Croozer is a fantastic contraption and suits our needs perfectly, being made of such sturdy stuff means that we will be able to pass it on to family or friends once we no longer need it - so it was money well spent in our opinion. In today's world of automated ordering processes and sterile, impersonal purchasing our experience with Bike-Trailers.com has been a breath of fresh air. E Brier "E Brier
- "I just wanted to say the service that I received has been first rate. From the time I ordered to the moment I received the item was a total of three days ( and that's with me ordering it at midnight). Will be ordering from this store in the future and will be letting others know about the service I received. Regards Lloyd "Lloyd Woodward
- "Everything received thank you very much and we are very happy with the trailer."Alistair Gray
Our Price: $1,349.00
You save: $100.00 (7%)
Product Review
(1 Reviews)
|5 Stars
|When people hire products they tend not to care for it like they care for their own things. With this in mind we chose the Pacific Trailer to put into our bike hire fleet. We don't like hiring out a bike seat, but rather hire the bike trailers, we wanted a sturdy trailer for our hire fleet as it comes in for a heap of punishment. We are happy to say we have been using the Pacific trailer in our hire fleet for 18 months and other than flat tyres the trailer has stood up to the pounding it cops from the hire market. The only thing we have noticed is the fading of the purple material in our sunny climate, it has been sun faded quite noticeably, however, component wise it has so far stood the test of time. So for a sturdy trailer at a great price that also meets the Australian saftey standards the Pacific trailer is a fantastic entry level trailer. If you find you use your trailer then you could look at stepping up to one of the up market brands we carry in the Croozer or Chariot, but if you are wanting to test the water and see what type of use you can get out of a bike trailer then the Pacific is the trailer for you. Julie & Shayne – Owners Action Bike & Ski – Yarrawonga
|Julie & Shayne Preer
Click Here to contact Action Bike & Ski