Split (1)

train · 2.6M rows

text stringlengths 10 78.4k
Hidden away above a casino in Commercial Street, Clary’s in Northampton is a real gem that doesn’t appear to have been fully discovered just yet.
My girlfriend and I find it impossible to go somewhere without perusing the menu beforehand, and our sneak peek left us excited to sample their food.
Deciding to visit on a Saturday night we booked a table, fully expecting it to be full after hearing great things, but were surprised to find it half-empty.
That was no bad thing however, as it meant there was a relaxing atmosphere and we were given full attention by our very friendly Scottish waitress Aileen.
When the chips are down, Clary’s is a real payday treat and possesses a carefully-balanced mix of fine dining and home favourites to suit everyone.
Dishes range from traditional burgers and steaks to terrines and risottos, with a variety of sides and extras.
We both class ourselves as ‘foodies’ and ventured out by starting our dinner with some seafood.
I went for the scallops with pea puree and bacon, while Natalie chose the king prawns with chorizo.
The dishes were the perfect size for a starter and were devoured within a matter of minutes.
It was the first time I’d had scallops cooked by someone other than me, and it pains me to say that they were far better than my efforts.
Natalie’s prawns were beautifully complimented by the spicy chorizo, with bread served to mop up the oil.
There was a pleasant array of wines available, and after a long week we were both more than happy to oblige with a glass of Chenin Blanc which supplemented our food well.
The wine was reasonably priced too, with a medium glass costing £4.
What usually annoys me in restaurants is the wait between starters and mains, but this was not a problem at Clary’s.
Just ten minutes after our plates were cleared we received our mains, which despite being slightly pricy were great value for money considering the portion sizes.
I chose the sea bass, which came with prawn garlic butter and crushed potatoes, while Natalie picked the chicken with pesto and parma ham on a bed of wild mushrooms.
We were surprised when our waitress came out with a mound of sauteed potatoes and baby veg on the side, but far from complaining.
The fish was delicate and full of flavour, with the chicken moist and perfectly complemented by the earthy mushrooms.
Our only gripe was the insistence of decorating the plate with tasteless purple leaves, but the food itself more than made up for this slight annoyance.
Neither of us could quite finish our main but as always, there’s space for pudding with me.
There isn’t a huge selection of desserts, but those on offer are mouth-watering - I went for the chocolate souffle with cherry compote.
Natalie pulled the classic “I’m full so I won’t get one” line before eating half of mine, stealing a spoonful every time I glanced away.
The souffle itself was rich and creamy and oozing with melting chocolate, with the compote sweet and fruity.
It also came with a handful of strawberries and redcurrants on the side, which was an added bonus.
Our waitress informed us that it was the chef’s first attempt at making it, so hats off to him.
As we wiped the chocolate from our lips - you can’t take us anywhere - we concluded we’d made a pretty good choice in going to Clary’s.
All in all, the food was tasty, the portions were big and it was great value for money.
I became interested in the Jeffco School Board's goings-on after the new board members were elected in November 2013 and immediately proceeded to hire a new lawyer just for the board. I couldn't believe that their very first action would be so wasteful of taxpayer money, not to mention done in direct violation of their own Governance Policy GP-02. The rest, as they say, is history.
Unsafe levels of a paint thinner chemical have been found in gravy granules sold at Lidl, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) has revealed.
The contamination affected two batches of Kania Gravy Granules, which were found to contain xylene.
Customers have been advised not to eat the products, and return them to the supermarket for a full refund.
An alert from the FSA said exposure to xylene in food products posed a health risk.
“The contaminant levels in this [gravy granules] product exceed those set to minimise this risk and the product is therefore being recalled as a precaution,” the FSA said.
Xylene is a petrochemical used as a solvent in products such as paints and inks.
Exposure can cause irritation of the mouth, throat, nose and lungs and in severe cases lead to heart problems, liver and kidney damage and coma, according to Public Health England.
The products affected are 300g packets of Kania Gravy Granules for meat and for chicken with best before dates of October and November 2017.
Other Kania products are not affected by the recall.
Lidl has said it takes the issue “very seriously” and is working with its supplier to identify the cause.
Lidl will display notices in all stores that sold the products, and customers are being urged to return the granules for a full refund.
A spokeswoman for Lidl said: “We were very sorry to hear of this matter and can confirm that an investigation was launched as soon as we were made aware.
The following Game of Thrones theory is based purely on informed speculation and evidence that already exists in the show. No book spoilers or casting news were abused in the making of this post. But just the same and to be safe, here’s Ser Pounce with a spoiler warning anyway.
This week’s episode of Game of Thrones saw the welcome return of German actor Tom Wlaschiha as the mysterious Jaqen H’ghar. Some casting news and red-carpet appearances “spoiled” his surprise reveal for some, but since Jaqen H’ghar isn’t in the books at this point, there’s a chance Sunday night’s face-off moment came as a shock to show watchers and book readers alike.
It’s all part of a bigger plan. We still don’t know who Jaqen is and why he showed up in the story in the first place. It was never explained why he ended up in the black cells in King’s Landing and then went on that journey. It wasn’t a coincidence. It was all part of a bigger plan — that’s my theory.
The “that’s my theory” coda here is either Wlaschiha hastily covering his spoiler bases, or this is all truly speculation on his part. But it’s worth asking how a highly trained assassin like H’ghar—the Anton Chigurh of Westeros—ever found himself in captivity. There’s a long-cherished book-reader theory about that and while it may never pay off in the novels, it’s entirely possible it could fit in the show. What if Jaqen H’ghar and Arya’s vivacious fencing instructor from Season 1, Syrio Forel, are the same person?
There are some technical reasons why this can’t work in the books, but as far as the show is concerned, the timeline adds up. The last time we saw Forel was in Season 1, Episode 8. After besting a group of guards, he squared off against the villainous Ser Meryn Trant in order to protect Arya. At his insistence, Arya runs away before the confrontation between Trant and Forel is over. Could Forel still be alive? It’s entirely possible.
We didn’t meet Wlaschiha until Season 2, Episode 2, though the cage where his character is presumably restrained is introduced in Season 1, Episode 10. But two episodes is plenty of time for Forel to get himself down to the black cells, swap out his face (one again, this process is clearly more complicated in the books than it is on the show) and put himself in a position to be rounded up by Yoren and sent off the Wall with Arya.
As I’ve said several times now, this is a link that would only really work with what we know about the show versions of Syrio, Jaqen, and the Faceless Men, not what we know about the book versions. But there are also a couple more show-based indications that everyone’s favorite First Sword of Braavos could make a triumphant return. First, there’s the “God of Death” connection. “What do we say to the God of Death?” is Syrio’s most memorable line from Season 1. The House of Black and White is a temple dedicated to the God of Death.
But if that’s too shaky a connection for you then let’s look at Arya’s death list. Many viewers have noticed that Arya’s morbid little mantra has been cut down significantly between Season 4 and Season 5. Missing from the list? Joffrey, Tywin Lannister, the Red Woman, Beric Dondarrion, Thoros of Myr, Ilyn Payne, and the Hound. Many of those people are obviously off the list because they’ve died, but the Red Woman (a.k.a. Melisandre), Beric Dondarrion, Thoros of Myr, and Ilyn Payne have all been mysteriously demoted. But more significant than who is missing, is who isn’t. Among very familiar figures like Cersei, Walder Frey (orchestrator of the Red Wedding), and the Mountain (on the slab in Qyburn’s lab) we find Arya huddled outside the House of Black and White chanting the relatively obscure name Meryn Trant. You might remember some of Trant’s greatest hits, like beating Sansa Stark in public, testifying against Tyrion Lannister, and, oh yes, allegedly murdering Syrio Forel.
Though Trant has been doing evil deeds on behalf of the Lannisters for five seasons (and we’ve already seen him twice this season), he hardly seems more deserving of a place on the list than, say, Melisandre, who stuck leeches to Arya’s friend Gendry before trying to have him burned alive. Could Trant’s name be there to remind us of what he allegedly did to Syrio? The book-reader theory that Syrio is (a) not dead (b) a Faceless Man or (c) Jaqen H’ghar is largely based on wishful thinking. But as a show theory, we are on much firmer ground. The HBO series loves recycling old characters instead of trotting out new ones. (Case in point, the re-use of Jaqen H’ghar.) So will we see the triumphant return of Syrio (in some form) back to teach Arya even more valuable life lessons? A girl can hope.
ILLUMINATE: Akram Khan's iTMOI confidently took on some difficult themes.
It's only now, in that "morning after" mood of looking back at four days of a full-on dance showcase that the longer-term impact of British Dance Edition 2014 (BDE) starts taking shape.
The public saw some of the BDE's "heavy-hitters" on-stage at the Edinburgh King's as Akram Khan, Hofesh Shechter and our own Scottish Dance Theatre (SDT) delivered the kind of work that surely encourages young companies (and audiences) to push beyond comfort zones.
Khan's iTMOi (in the mind of igor), Shechter's Sun and SDT's Winter Again were thrillingly confident statements of how dance can tackle chewy themes and provocative issues with a degree of theatricality that illuminates as well as entertains.
If this is the stuff of foreign touring - and all three companies have carved out a strong following abroad as well as in the UK - then, beyond the public gaze, there were pieces of work seen only by the hundreds of visiting delegates. This was the "trade fair" aspect of BDE: producers and programmers from all over the world gathered in one place (or two really, as Edinburgh and Glasgow shared the hosting of this first BDE in Scotland) to network and perhaps book some of what they saw.
For some performers this can be a real career watershed moment, for others harshly exposing. The curating team had the responsibility of sourcing work from all of the UK, and some of the young companies - Mysteryskin, Deborah Light, Theo Clinkard - were caught at a formative stage of development, rather than in full possession of a persuasively fashioned piece. For them, the hope would be that British agencies would foster and mentor their initiatives and that they will shine in Cardiff in 2016.
If I had a venue to programme, or a budget to spend, I'd happily book Liz Aggiss, Colin Poole and Aakash Odedra for starters. Aggiss, flashing her thighs as she shimmies and struts and tells us she is now 60, is one of those glorious wild cards who grounds her eccentricities in a bedrock of serious cultural and social information - all astutely accrued over years of creating, performing and teaching.
Her show, Liz Aggiss is The English Channel, merrily deploys morsels of that history, but the humour twists into observations on ageing, mortality and the conventions of how we behave in childhood or in later life.
"Do I please you or do I please myself?" is the emerging connection, as relevant to everyday life as it is to performing. Aggiss has never dodged away from putting herself, under scrutiny and the gaze of others, and this solo performance gets its claws into you - you laugh at the time, but afterwards you realise how moving and honest it was.
Colin Poole's Joyride is a provocation that has complacent prejudices about race, class, status, beliefs and human rights in its sights. Poole performs naked throughout, using his lithe muscularity and fierce intellect to conjure up images that home in on savage truths. We see him, like a dog on all fours, worrying at his discarded clothing suggestive of the brutal humil-iations of slavery or torture and the imperial superiority of the "them and us" heirarchy.
Aakash Odedra's Murmur is a solo confrontation with the demons of his dyslexia.
Projections on a dividing scrim animate his confusion and frustration when engulfed by written text.
But when he breaks free, whirling into Kathak-inflected dance, he finds a language where he is not only articulate, but inspired - one of the most affecting and uplifting showings at BDE.
Other highlights by companies new to me included Southpaw's liquid delivery of break-dance moves in Man on a Mission, while Maiden Voyage's deftly peeling away time shifts at a school reunion in Fragile Ghosts, Mild Acquaintances was a stylishly nuanced pairing with the barnstorming glory of Noces from the National Dance Company Wales.
Robbie Synge, Colette Sadler, Marc Brew and the rest of the Scottish contingent did us proud in a programme that was a brave new beginning for dance-making in the UK and beyond.
If you don't know the difference between "copay" and "coinsurance," it could cost you.
Buried beneath the hoopla brought about by election season is an arguably far more important issue for our nation's seniors: the open enrollment period for Medicare.
Every year between Oct. 15 and Dec. 7, Medicare enrollees -- of which five in six are 65 or older -- are free to shop around and enroll in a Part D prescription drug plan under original Medicare or an alternative plan known as Medicare Advantage (which is also known as Part C). Since a majority of retirees are receiving Social Security benefits by the time they become eligible to enroll in Medicare, they're automatically enrolled in original Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) and Part B (outpatient services). However, for those who've chosen to delay taking their Social Security benefits, this period is also a time to enroll in Part A and Part B.
The importance of Medicare simply can't be understated. Though Medicare beneficiaries aren't receiving a tangible monthly check as they would from the Social Security Administration, the cumulative lifetime benefits received from Medicare compared to Social Security is narrowing. According to estimates from the Urban Institute of an average-earning male turning 65, by the year 2055 Medicare will be paying out more in lifetime benefits to retirees than Social Security. Thus, your annual Medicare coverage decision isn't something to take lightly.
As most seniors may have rightly guessed by now, the costs to be insured through Medicare are going up in 2017, though for some enrollees more than others. For enrollees receiving Social Security, the "hold harmless" rule will ensure that their Part B premiums rise by no more than their cost-of-living adjustment, which was just recently announced at 0.3%. However, new enrollees to Medicare, as well as those who aren't enrolled in Social Security, or prefer to be billed directly by Medicare, could be looking at a greater than 20% increase in Part B premiums in 2017.
Additionally, Part D premiums for prescription drug plans (PDPs) are on the rise. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, PDP premiums are expected to rise by 9% in 2017 to $42.17 a month, based on the weighted average of 2016 plan enrollment. Keep in mind that KFF's estimate may not be perfect as it makes the assumption that enrollees stick with their current plan, and it combines the premium costs for both basic and enhanced PDPs.
Much of the blame for rising prescription drug costs can probably be cast on brand-name and specialty therapeutics, as well as the inherent pricing power advantages most drug companies have while operating in the United States.
Prescription drug plans are especially in focus for enrollees in original Medicare (which comprises about seven in 10 enrollees) because there are no limits on annual out-of-pocket expenses. Choose a plan that isn't the best value, and you could wind up paying way more out of your own pocket than you'd anticipated.
However, there's much more to a PDP than simply its premium. Additional expenses, such as copays, coinsurance, and formulary tiers (most insurers have five tiers in 2017), can play a big role in determining how much you spend out of pocket. Think of formulary tiers as a pyramid of all approved drugs by an insurer, with the most expensive and specialized therapies on the highest tiers and the cheapest drugs on the lower tiers. Insurers appear to be betting that seniors won't pay close enough attention to the difference between copays and coinsurance as we head into 2017, and it may pay off in insurers' favor, and at the detriment of seniors who didn't take the time to shop around.
Copays are a fixed amount that a member pays across the board for drugs in a certain tier. On the other hand, coinsurance requires the member to pay a percentage of the cost of the drug rather than a flat fee. Thus, coinsurance can be considerably costlier to Medicare members if their prescription drugs wind up in one of the higher tiers.
Based on data from research firm Avalere announced in March 2016, the number of drugs subject to coinsurance under Medicare Part D has increased from 35% in 2014 to 58% in 2016. Furthermore, Avalere notes that 96% of beneficiaries are enrolled in a PDP that has more than one formulary tier that requires coinsurance. That's up from just 39% in 2014. If this trend continues, it could soon be impossible for seniors to find a PDP with copays rather than coinsurance.
The clear takeaway from this push toward coinsurance is that insurers are trying to pass along some of their rising expenses to the consumer. With very little stymying drugmakers' pricing power, it's unlikely that this trend will slow or reverse anytime soon. It essentially means that seniors really need to take their time when reviewing PDPs over the next month.
The most important thing seniors need to understand as they shop for a Part D plan for the upcoming year is the difference between copays and coinsurance. Pay exceptionally close attention to whether your regular prescription drugs are treated as copays or coinsurance with the plans you're researching since it could have a very large out-of-pocket difference.
Second, and this probably goes without saying, you need to shop around with the assumption that your PDP last year may not be the best value for you in the current year. Part A and Part B are a one-size-fits-all package for Medicare members, but the more than one dozen Part D plans are contracted by Medicare with private insurance companies. These insurers can change their formulary tiers, copays, coinsurance, and premiums every single year.
Third, as was alluded to above, pay attention to the tier your regular prescription drugs fall into. It's not uncommon for the tiers of specialized therapies to vary from one insurer to the next, so there could be substantive savings to be had by keeping a close eye on the drug tiers when comparing plans.
Last, it's probably worth your while to at least consider a Medicare Advantage plan. Medicare Advantage plans offer the same services as Medicare, plus a few others (e.g., dental, vision, and hearing coverage), all rolled up into one easy-to-enroll plan. There's no guarantee that your prescription drugs will necessarily be any cheaper with a Medicare Advantage plan, but it's worth your time to consider this potentially more competitive original Medicare alternative.
Mel Brooks, Christopher Lloyd and More to Sta..
Is The Elephant Man David Lynch’s Best Film?
Is Lynch’s 1980 drama his greatest cinematic achievement?
Blazing Samurai Casts Samuel L. Jackson, Michael Cera and More!
TV ratings for the Women’s World Cup Final were 3 times bigger than the Stanley Cup Final, so why did FIFA give it short shrift?
on how FIFA treats the Women’s World Cup differently than the men’s.
,” delves into the outsized costs of hosting major sporting events and asks the important question: Is it worth it?
We caught up with Zimbalist again after the incredible victory by the U.S. Women’s National Team over Japan to learn more about the game. How many people tuned in? Did Sepp Blatter attend? And why, despite continually strong TV ratings, do teams in the Women’s World Cup play on subpar fields and win less prize money than the men?
To learn more, read the full interview with Zimbalist below.
The Women’s World Cup seems to have been a big success. From what you have seen, how did it fare in terms of TV ratings, attendance, and payoff for host country Canada?
Zimbalist: The TV ratings have been impressive. The semi-final game between the U.S. and German teams earned a 6.1 rating with 8.4 million viewers in the U.S. In Germany, despite the fact that the match started at 1 am German time, it garnered a 42.6 percent share with an average of 2.63 million viewers.
Yesterday’s final game between the U.S. and Japan earned a 15.2 overnight rating. That handily beats even the previous U.S. record for the single highest-rated soccer game of all time, which was a 13.3 overnight for the Women’s World Cup USA-China final in 1999.
NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman can crow all he wants about the resurgence of hockey’s popularity, but its Stanley Cup final game this year drew only a 5.6 rating. The women’s final even came within a hair of matching the NBA championship game last month between the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Golden State Warriors which garnered a 15.9 overnight rating.
Attendance at the games has also been strong, the small size of some venues notwithstanding. Authorities are expecting close to 1.5 million tickets sold.
There were a lot of complaints at this World Cup about how the women were treated compared to how the men are treated. The women were forced to play on turf, opposing teams shared hotels, brackets didn’t seem well planned or thoughtful (top teams met in earlier stages of the tournament, which does not typically happen in a men’s tournament). Do you think that these kind of things will start to change in a post-Blatter regime? What else needs to change at FIFA?
Zimbalist: While FIFA president Sepp Blatter likes to take full credit for the growth of women’s soccer, by any objective measure FIFA continues to treat the women in a blatantly discriminatory manner. The men play their World Cup on grass. The women wanted to play on grass as well, but were denied. Turf is not only a different game in terms of ball movement, but it entails rubber pellets from the turf flying into the face, hair, and uniforms of the players. Despite the strong TV ratings and attendance of the Women’s World Cup, the prize money for the men’s Cup is 38.5 times higher than it is for the women’s Cup. And just to put an exclamation point on the prejudicial treatment of the women, neither Blatter nor his chief lieutenant, FIFA Secretary General Jerome Valcke, appeared at any of the Women’s World Cup games. They were both in Brazil for the entirety of the men’s World Cup in 2014.
Since announcing he would step down at a date in the future, Sepp Blatter has given murky comments about his future with FIFA. When do you expect Blatter to actually step down, and if so what do you think his role will be in the future of FIFA? What will it take for FIFA to turn itself around?
Zimbalist: Blatter is hanging around long enough to try to influence the selection of his successor. After the previously corrupt FIFA president, Joao Havelange, retired in 1998, Blatter arranged for Havelange to have a handsomely remunerated and perked position as the president emeritus. Blatter would like a similar deal, along with the possibility of playing an eminence gris role. Whether this comes to pass will be a function of how the U.S. and Swiss investigations of FIFA’s corruption play out.
FIFA is a monopoly of the world’s most popular sport. It is subject to no regulatory authority. We shouldn’t expect abuse from FIFA to disappear. The best we can hope for is that it be minimized. To accomplish this FIFA needs to change its voting system for selecting its president, to accept oversight by an independent board of directors, to make the votes of its executive committee on the host country transparent, and to incorporate women equally into its decision-making apparatus.
Mark Whitehouse and sociologist Olga Kryshtanovskaya debate Russia's future.

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.