7 December, 2018 14:42

Not Daisy’s footprints in front of house. early winter hard on wild animals!

Advertisements

CRIS’s CHRISTMAS COOKIES

CRIS’s CHRISTMAS COOKIES

1 cup sugar,
1 stick of butter, let it sit out to soften,
1 egg,
1 teaspoon vanilla extract,
2 cups white flour,
1/4 teaspoon salt,
1 teaspoon baking powder,
mix all ingredients together in
large mixing bowl,
put in refrigerator 2 hours to chill.

Put flour on clean counter
and use roller to roll out the dough.

Use cookie cutters to make the
shapes, or if you don’t have any,
then use a very dull knife to
cut shapes, and use a spatula
to pick the shapes up and put them
on a cookie sheet,
after you butter
the cookie sheet first.

Bake at 350 degrees almost
10 minutes,
but check before then
to see if there is a very slight
brownish crispt,
and they are done.

Now, make the frosting
in a separate mixing bowl,
put 1 softened stick of butter
and 1 cup of confectioners sugar,
and 1/8 cup whole milk.
Mix them completely.

Then divide the frosting into
5 containers, and add a different
color of food coloring to each one,
just a couple of drips of red,
green, yellow, blue.
Also, try mixing colors.

After the cookies are out of the
oven, set them aside to cool off.

When they are completely cool,
you can add the colors of frosting.

Be creative.
Use the smallest spoon
you have to spread the frosting
on in shapes.
Add walnuts, chopped cranberry,
pecans.

CRIS’s BROWNIES

CRIS’s BROWNIES
Preheat oven to 350 degrees.
Mix together in a very large
mixing bowl:
1 stick of butter left out
to warm until soft,
3/4 cup cocoa,
4 eggs,
1/4 teaspoon salt,
2 cups sugar,
1 teaspoon vanilla,
1 cup flour,
Mix together in large bowl.
Butter the bottoms and sides
of an oven cooking
pan at least 3 inches thick,
then pour in the mixed
ingredients, then decorate the
top with walnuts or pecans.
Look in the oven after about
20 minutes when you start to
smell the scent.
Turn the oven off to save
energy, the oven will hold
heat until it finishes cooking.
When the brownies look ever
so crispy on top, test with fork
for cake like consistency.
Do not over cook.
Set them on a thick towel to cool off.

CRIS’s CROISSANTS: cook while pondering laws which should be repealed and stricken from the books!

CRIS’s CROISSANTS:
cook while pondering laws
which should be repealed
and stricken from the books!

Once we get past some of this slippery and dangerous
rain/snow rain/snow rain/snow weather
in the hills of southeastern Vermont,
I am hoping to find Vermonters
willing to go on local community access telelvision
to discuss politics with me!
http://www.politics2020.org
Let’s talk!

Meanwhile,
here is a recipe with no guarantee.

Cris’s CROISSANTS

Warm a cup milk with
1 tablespoon butter and
1 tablespoons maple syrup and
1/2 teaspoon salt.

Add a heaping tablespoon of yeast
dissolved in 1/3 cup very warm water
with 1 tablespoon maple syrup.

Stir the ingredients all together
and knead in
2 1/2 cups sifted all purpose flour.

Cover with a damp cloth.
Set aside to rise for 2 hours.

Chill in refrigerator for 20 minutes.
Roll it out 1/4 inch thick.

Heat 1 cup butter only until
slightly soft.
Dot the surface of the dough
with the butter.

You can also add to the
buttered surface
other ingredients:
small amounts of
chocolate chips,
chopped dried cranberry,
pecans or walnuts.

Fold the dough in various
ways, roll, fold, be creative.
Chill the dough for 2 hours.
Cut into shapes.

Bake for 10 minutes at
350 degrees
then keep checking to see
if they are crispy.

You can turn the oven off
before they are completely
done to save electricity
because the oven will still
hold the heat.

http://www.politics2020.org

TAXPAYERS DEMAND RETURN ON INVESTMENT OF THEIR TAXPAYER DOLLARS $$$

Years ago someone wrote what I’ve been trying to say, only he wrote it much better, got his book published in 2006, and I never heard about it until I bought his book at a library book sale. I didn’t even get to the main point on page 536-7 until yesterday.
Author: Michael Crichton, Title: NEXT
Page 536-7
“Rescind the Bayh-Doyle Act. In 1980, Congress decided that the discoveries made within universities were not being made widely available, to benefit the public. To move things along, it passed a law permitting university researchers to sell their discoveries for their own profit, even when that research had been funded by taxpayer money.
As a result of this legislation, most science professors now have corporate ties, either to companies they have started or to other biotech companies.
Thirty years ago, there was a distint difference in approach between university research and that of private industry. Today the
distinction is blurred, or absent. Thirty years ago, disinterested scientists were available to discuss any subject affecting the public. Now, scientists have personal interests that influence their judgment. Academic institutions have changed in unexpected ways: The original Bayh-Dole legislation recognized that universities were not commercial entities, and encouraged them to make their research available to organizations that were. But today, universities attempt to maximize profits by conducting more and more commercial work themselves, thus making their products more valuable to them when they are finally licensed. For example, if universities think they have a new drug, they will do the FDA testing themselves, and so on. Thus Bayh-Dole has, paradoxically, increased the commerical focus of the university. Many observers judge the effect of this legislation to be corrupting and destructive to universities as institutions of learning. Bayh-Dole was always of uncertain benefit to the American taxpayers, who became, through their government, uniquely generous investors. Taxpayers finance research, but when it bears fruit, the researchers sell it for their own institutional and personal gain, after which the drug is sold back to the taxpayers. Consumers thus pay top dollar for a drug they helped finance. Ordinarily, when a venture capitalist invests in research, he or she expects a significant return on investment. The American taxpayer gets no return at all. …the drawbacks far outweigh the benefits…repeal Bayh-Dole legislation.”

The author of this book, Michael Crichton, died after it was published. Copyright 2006 by Michael Crichton

NOVEMBER 18, 2018 HOUSE FREEDOM CAUCUS HAS 2 MONTHS TO FIX NATIONAL DEBT CRISIS

NOVEMBER 18, 2018

To: THE HOUSE FREEDOM CAUCUS
and U.S. Congressman Mark Meadows
of North Carolina (Republican) —-
YOU HAVE 2 MONTHS LEFT TO
REDUCE THE NATIONAL DEBT!

PART 1)
We must demand taxpayers own a share of the profits
for all prescription drugs and medical devices
for which taxpayers paid for the research, design and development under U.S. Copyright work made for hire laws which give ownership of all drawings, diagrams and blueprints to the party who paid for the research, and in our case, this is the U.S. Taxpayer.

The U.S. Taxpayer should be the owner of the U.S. Copyrights which are then used to apply for the U.S. Patents.
In our case of taxpayers paying for research,
design and development of new prescription drugs and medical devices, the taxpayers should own a share of the profits which
pharmaceutical corporations make because we, the
taxpayers, paid for the underlying patents and copyrights,
and therefore we deserve “R.O.I.” return on investment.

The government shouldn’t be handing out taxpayer dollars
for research, design and development of new prescription
drugs and medical devices which are used by
profit-making pharmaceutical corporations
to manufacture products and sell the drugs and devices
worldwide for Trillions of dollars in profit,
without a return on our investment! “R.O.I.”

The pharmaceutical companies claim the ownership of the
Patents for all of the drugs and medical devices invented
for their benefit
using our tax dollars to pay for the research, but, under
U.S. Patent Laws, the taxpayers should rightfully
own a share of the profits of all sales of all of the
prescription drugs and medical devices sold
which were invented using taxpayer dollars
because it all starts with drawings and diagrams and
illustrations and blueprints which fall squarely under
U.S. Copyright “work made for hire” laws which
give the party paying for the research the ownership
in the U.S. Copyrights which are then used to
make the Patents; and it is the taxpayers paying
for all of this, so the taxpayers deserve
“R.O.I.” return on investment.

PART 2) REDUCING THE NATIONAL DEBT

Our biggest expense is what is should be, national defense.
But, this valid expenditure for our U.S. Military has made some defense contractors mega-multi-millionaire, and even billionaires. That’s the part that makes no common sense,
particularly since our war Veterans are lacking a lot of
medical and dental treatment, and many are homeless.

WHAT ARE THE CURRENT FACTS ON HOMELESS
U.S. MILITARY VETERANS?

http://nchv.org/index.php/news/media/background_and_statistics/ ” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimates that 40,056 Veterans are homeless on any given night.”…
…” more than 40,000 homeless Veterans receive compensation or pension benefits each month.”

WHERE WILL THE MONEY COME FROM TO BUILD VETERANS VILLAGES FOR HOMELESS US MILITARY VETERANS FROM ALL OVER THE USA, ALL 50,000 OF THEM?

The US Congress votes to give our tax dollars to the Pentagon and then the Pentagon hands our tax dollars out to various defense contractors like Lockheed and Boeing and then they use our tax dollars for research – design & development and then they invent new defense products using our tax dollars for research and then they sell the new defense products worldwide to our allies and then they pocket the trillions of dollars of profit.

What’s wrong with this?

We – the taxpayers – should receive “R.O.I.”
RETURN ON INVESTMENT
of part of the profits of all sales of
defense products to our allies world
wide because under US COPYRIGHT LAWS,
WORK MADE FOR HIRE LAWS, ALL PRODUCTS START WITH
DIAGRAMS, DRAWINGS AND BLUEPRINTS WHICH FALL
SQUARELY UNDER U.S. COPYRIGHT WORK MADE FOR HIRE LAWS,
AND THE U.S. TAXPAYERS PAID FOR THE WORK, SO THEY
DESERVE “R.O.I.” RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

Under US Patent law, where we paid for the UNDERLYING
U.S. COPYRIGHTS, DRAWINGS, BLUEPRINTS, DIAGRAMS
USED TO APPLY FOR THE U.S. PATENTS,
WE, THE TAXPAYERS should OWN a share of the
the profits on products we paid for the research,
design and development of.

“R.O.I.”
We, the people, demand return on investment!
WHERE’S OUR SHARE OF THE PROFIT?
IT SHOULD BE USED TO REDUCE THE NATIONAL DEBT.
IT COULD ALSO BE USED FOR HEALTHCARE,
EDUCATION, LOW COST HOUSING AND
INFRASTRUCTURE.

Cris Ericson
NOVEMBER 18, 2018

COMING SOON!!!
COMMUNITY ACCESS
TELEVISION SHOWS
WITH CRIS ERICSON
AND GUESTS
DISCUSSING POLITICS
http://www.politics2020.org
cell phone only receives text
messages:
1-802-289-1000

HOUSE FREEDOM CAUCUS HAS 2 MONTHS TO SOLVE NATIONAL DEBT CRISIS BEFORE DEMOCRATS TAKE CONTROL OF HOUSE

To: THE HOUSE FREEDOM CAUCUS
and U.S. Congressman Mark Meadows
of North Carolina (Republican) —-

YOU HAVE 2 MONTHS LEFT TO
REDUCE THE NATIONAL DEBT!

PART 1)
We must demand taxpayers own a share of the profits
for all prescription drugs and medical devices
for which taxpayers paid for the research, design and development under U.S. Copyright work made for hire laws which give ownership of all drawings, diagrams and blueprints to the party who paid for the research, and in our case, this is the U.S. Taxpayer.

The U.S. Taxpayer should be the owner of the U.S. Copyrights which are then used to apply for the U.S. Patents.
In our case of taxpayers paying for research,
design and development of new prescription drugs and medical devices, the taxpayers should own a share of the profits which
pharmaceutical corporations make because we, the
taxpayers, paid for the underlying patents and copyrights,
and therefore we deserve “R.O.I.” return on investment.

The government shouldn’t be handing out taxpayer dollars
for research, design and development of new prescription
drugs and medical devices which are used by
profit-making pharmaceutical corporations
to manufacture products and sell the drugs and devices
worldwide for Trillions of dollars in profit,
without a return on our investment! “R.O.I.”

The pharmaceutical companies claim the ownership of the
Patents for all of the drugs and medical devices invented
for their benefit
using our tax dollars to pay for the research, but, under
U.S. Patent Laws, the taxpayers should rightfully
own a share of the profits of all sales of all of the
prescription drugs and medical devices sold
which were invented using taxpayer dollars
because it all starts with drawings and diagrams and
illustrations and blueprints which fall squarely under
U.S. Copyright “work made for hire” laws which
give the party paying for the research the ownership
in the U.S. Copyrights which are then used to
make the Patents; and it is the taxpayers paying
for all of this, so the taxpayers deserve
“R.O.I.” return on investment.

PART 2) REDUCING THE NATIONAL DEBT

Our biggest expense is what is should be, national defense.
But, this valid expenditure for our U.S. Military has made some defense contractors mega-multi-millionaire, and even billionaires. That’s the part that makes no common sense,
particularly since our war Veterans are lacking a lot of
medical and dental treatment, and many are homeless.

WHAT ARE THE CURRENT FACTS ON HOMELESS
U.S. MILITARY VETERANS?

http://nchv.org/index.php/news/media/background_and_statistics/ ” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimates that 40,056 Veterans are homeless on any given night.”…
…” more than 40,000 homeless Veterans receive compensation or pension benefits each month.”

WHERE WILL THE MONEY COME FROM TO BUILD VETERANS VILLAGES FOR HOMELESS US MILITARY VETERANS FROM ALL OVER THE USA, ALL 50,000 OF THEM?

The US Congress votes to give our tax dollars to the Pentagon and then the Pentagon hands our tax dollars out to various defense contractors like Lockheed and Boeing and then they use our tax dollars for research – design & development and then they invent new defense products using our tax dollars for research and then they sell the new defense products worldwide to our allies and then they pocket the trillions of dollars of profit.

What’s wrong with this?

We – the taxpayers – should receive “R.O.I.”
RETURN ON INVESTMENT
of part of the profits of all sales of
defense products to our allies world
wide because under US COPYRIGHT LAWS,
WORK MADE FOR HIRE LAWS, ALL PRODUCTS START WITH
DIAGRAMS, DRAWINGS AND BLUEPRINTS WHICH FALL
SQUARELY UNDER U.S. COPYRIGHT WORK MADE FOR HIRE LAWS,
AND THE U.S. TAXPAYERS PAID FOR THE WORK, SO THEY
DESERVE “R.O.I.” RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

Under US Patent law, where we paid for the UNDERLYING
U.S. COPYRIGHTS, DRAWINGS, BLUEPRINTS, DIAGRAMS
USED TO APPLY FOR THE U.S. PATENTS,
WE, THE TAXPAYERS should OWN a share of the
the profits on products we paid for the research,
design and development of.

“R.O.I.”
We, the people, demand return on investment!
WHERE’S OUR SHARE OF THE PROFIT?
IT SHOULD BE USED TO REDUCE THE NATIONAL DEBT.
IT COULD ALSO BE USED FOR HEALTHCARE,
EDUCATION, LOW COST HOUSING AND
INFRASTRUCTURE.

Cris Ericson
http://www.politics2020.org
cell phone only receives text
messages:
1-802-289-1000

RED, WHITE & BLUE to: BLACK & BLUE & RED excluding candidates from debates is Un-American!

From: Cris Ericson
crisericson7@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018
Subject:
RED, WHITE & BLUE to: BLACK & BLUE & RED:
excluding candidates from debates is Un-American!

There were many “guilty” parties
excluding political candidates
from debates in the 2018 election
in the State of Vermont.

They should be stripped of their
taxpayer funding as “non-profits”
which actually act as political
action committees determined to
fraudulently affect the outcome
of the election by trying to make
voters think only certain candidates
are on the ballot, while in reality,
there are other candidates on
the ballot who are being denied
an equal opportunity to express
their freedom of speech and
freedom of association with
Vermont registered voters.

Cris Ericson was denied access
to some debates but still received
over 9,000 votes and over 3% of the
total vote for Representative to
the United States Congress
in the 2018 election.

She would have received
more votes if she had
not been denied
participation in some debates.

Denying all candidates participation
in all debates is a form of
“political racism” whereby only
the “Red” Republicans and “Blue”
Democrats are invited to the most
debates, and the “White” Independent
and minor party
candidates, like Cris Ericson,
are excluded from some debates.
This is “political racism” and discrimination
by color representing their political
affiliation.

In the 2018 political race in Vermont,
Vermont PBS and Vermont Public Radio
and others claiming to be “non-profits”
received taxpayer funding through
Public Broadcasting and the State of
Vermont, and then proceeded to
violate the rights of freedom of speech
and freedom of association to the
candidates they determined were
the wrong color political party affiliation.

Our American Flag was
Red, White and Blue,
and now is it Black & Blue & Red,
beaten by abuse and by the
“color of authority” because
incumbent Governor Phil Scott
and incumbent U.S. Congressman
Peter Welch co-conspired,
under their “color of authority”
to deny 2018 candidate Cris Ericson
the right to participate in some
political debates which were at
least in part funded with state and
federal taxpayer dollars.

crisericson7@gmail.com

RED, WHITE & BLUE to: BLACK & BLUE & RED excluding candidates from debates is Un-American!

There were many “guilty” parties
excluding political candidates
from debates in the 2018 election
in the State of Vermont.
They should be stripped of their
taxpayer funding as “non-profits”
which actually act as political
action committees determined to
fraudulently affect the outcome
of the election by trying to make
voters think only certain candidates
are on the ballot, while in reality,
there are other candidates on
the ballot who are being denied
an equal opportunity to express
their freedom of speech and
freedom of association with
Vermont registered voters.

Cris Ericson was denied access
to debates but still received over
9,000 votes and over 3% of the
total vote for Representative to
the United States Congress
in the 2018 election. She would
have received more votes if
she had not been denied
participation in debates.

Denying all candidates participation
in all debates is a form of
“political racism” whereby only
the Red Republicans and Blue
Democrats are invited to the most
debates, and the White Independent
candidates, like Cris Ericson,
and other minor party candidates,
are excluded. This is
“political racism” and discrimination
by color.

In the 2018 political race in Vermont,
Vermont PBS and Vermont Public Radio
and others claiming to be “non-profits”
received taxpayer funding through
Public Broadcasting and the State of
Vermont, and then proceeded to
violate the rights of freedom of speech
and freedom of association to the
candidates they determined were
the wrong color.

Our American Flag was
Red, White and Blue,
and now is it Black & Blue & Red,
beaten by abuse and by the
“color of authority” because
incumbent Governor Phil Scott
and incumbent U.S. Congressman
Peter Welch co-conspired,
under their “color of authority”
to deny 2018 candidate Cris Ericson
the right to participate in
political debates which were at
least in part funded with state and
federal taxpayer dollars.

crisericson7@gmail.com