Dogfight

Yesterday was absolutely gorgeous -- blue skies, somewhere in the 70's. The day before had been quite rainy and cool. that's the way Spring is in Oregon -- it comes in fits and starts, with an unexpected mixture of dry and wet, warm and cool. Don't like the weather? Give it fifteen minutes, it'll change. TFR tells me that Minnesota Springs are not like that -- she says that in the Twin Cities, if you blink, you miss the transition from bitter winter to blazing summer.

Spring days like yesterday tend to draw Oregonians out even more than nice summer days -- the more recent the cold, the more appreciated the warmth. I couldn't get out too much yesterday afternoon because the Lad had had a fussy morning, and was finally sleeping, but I stepped into the back yard for a few minutes, passing Little Big Dog over the fence to play with the neighbor dogs (a hyper Papillon and a cowardly Golden Retriever, whom LBD has completely cowed).

All of this is just to introduce what happened next, which was one of the most interesting things I've ever witnessed. As I stood at the fence talking to our neighbor, I heard a faint, high-pitched soundcoming from what seemed to be above. I looked up to see a large bird soaring towards me. At first, I thouight it was a turkey vulture -- a very common carrion bird in these parts. But I noticed a couple of differences. This bird was much bigger, the wings didn't have the right shape, or the split finger-like feathers, and the head was white, not the hairless red of a buzzard.

It was a bald eagle.

Bald eagles aren't that rare in this part of the country, I've seen them numerous times around lakes and rivers up in the Cascades, and even on one occasion circling over the river by a county park just outside of town, but from the angle he was approaching, he had to have flown right over downtown Springfield.

And that wasn't even the oddest thing about the sight. As he flew, his course was not as straight and graceful as normal. As my eyes focused, I noticed that another bird was wheeling and circling the eagle, swooping in and trying to strike. It was obvious that the smaller bird was the aggressor, and the eagle was trying to get away as quickly as he could. And most interesting of all, the other bird was also a raptor. It was one of the Osprey that are so numerous here in the Northwest. Both the bald eagle and the osprey are fishing birds, and I live less than a mile from the Willamette River.

Now, I've seen smaller birds chase of bigger birds before. In fact, a few days ago, standing at the window at work, I watched another osprey (I work even closer to the Willamette than I live) being driven off by a pair of corvids. From a distance I couldn't tell if they were ravens or crows. I've seen crows chase ravens. I've seen sparrows chase both. Hummingbirds are absolutely vicious when it comes to this behavior. But I'd never seen a raptor-on-raptor fight like this before.

Given that they're competitors for fish, and I believe osprey are territorial, I shouldn't be surprised. But I couldn't help but be fascinated by what I saw.

Note to Pat Buchanan: Lay Off the Cough Syrup

Thanks for the Memory to my good buddy Vulture 6 over at Vulture's Row.

Apparently, Pat Buchanan questions the validity of defeating Nazi Germany in World War II:

On the radio and Internet, Buchanan framed his positions as amplification of remarks made over the weekend by President George W. Bush that the pact ending the war brought on a Stalinist domination that was "one of the greatest wrongs of history."

Yes, Stalinism WAS one of the greatest wrongs of history. Right up there with the equally heinous wrong that was the Holocaust. The fact that it took us until the 80's to defeat one doesn't mean we shouldn't have fought the other.

But Buchanan's comments on the Don Imus radio show and in an essay posted on the Web site of his organization, The American Cause, went much further. He suggested that because Germans voted Hitler in, they did not need to be liberated, and that Britain and France drew Germany into the wider conflict.

Um... Earth to Pat. Sprechen zie "Lebensraum"? Remember the Sudetenland? Poland? The camps?

He did not mention Jews or the Holocaust - the most outrageous omission for Yaffa Eliach, a Holocaust expert and survivor.

Not just for Yaffa, actually. Trivializing 6 million deaths tends to get under the skin of ANYONE with even a modicum of decency.

Former Mayor Ed Koch offered this blunt rebuttal: "I believe that no decent human being should ever sit down at the same table with Pat Buchanan and I am shocked that otherwise responsible, respectable citizens share platforms with him on Sunday shows."

Absolutely right, for once, Ed. I am amazed and ashamed that Buchanan was once considered a contender for the presidential candidacy of my party. What a maroon.

Update: I'm as hesitant as anyone to play the Race card, but in the case of Buchanan, I think that Ace is right.

Update II: Thanks for the Memory to The Maximum Leader. He links to an excellent essay by the esteemed Victor David Hansen which, while not directed specifically at Buchanan, provides ample ammunition for rebuttal of his view.

Anybody But Anybody But Bush

Thanks for the Memory to Vultures Row.

Interesting news today. Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Convention, has endorsed a candidate for U.S. Senate in Vermont. Interestingly enough, the candidate in question isn't a Democrat. He's an independent.

Not so big a deal, you might argue, since Vermont's exiting Indie Senator, Jim Jeffords, leaned to the Democratic side, and the endorsement is strategic, since anyone who can defeat a Republican is good news for the Dems. But here's the catch -- Bernard Sanders leans even farther leftwards than Jeffords. In fact, he leans even farther than most Democrats would like to admit they lean. Sanders is a Socialist.

My good friend Vulture six maintains that this support by Dean indicates either Socialist tendencies on the part of Dean, or a calculated willingness to overlook Sanders' socialism just to stick it to the Republicans.

I'd be willing to consider the possibility of both options being true. The most influential Democratic President of the Twentieth Century, F.D.R., was definitely a socialist, and most liberal domestic policies smack of at least small-s socialism. The difference between the Dems and Sanders is more a matter of degrees than of kind, and when compared to Dean, even the degree is hard to distinguish.

But I've also noticed a willingness among the left, especially among the more radical Democrats and the leadership (less so among rank-and-file Democrats who tend to be idealists), to get in bed with the most odious elements of the left if that's what it takes to defeat the Republicans. This is reflected in the "Anybody but Bush" tone during the elections, as well as in expressions by notable leftists like Michael Moore, expressing hope that insurgents in Iraq would succeed in inflicting more casualties just so Bush's election chances would be damaged.

Again, while I know many who lean farther to the left than I who truly believe they are fighting for good, and while politicians in general tend to Macchiavellianism, the level to which the DNC has taken it in recent years is truly frightening.

Recommended Reading

Blogfather Rusty has posted an excellent piece on comparisons between Communism and Naziism.

Actually, his piece is a review of an equally well-written article in the Washington Times, so he had a head start, but his additional comments are well worth the read.

Forewarned is Forearmed

Thanks for the Memory to Lars Larson.

Sex offenders may be forced to drive vehicles with pink license plates

According to the article, Ohio is considering a law that would require that registered sex offenders be issued special plates for their cars. The plates would be all pink (why that color I don't know, other than high visibility), and the rationale is that children would know which vehicles to stay away from.

I don't know what Ohio's paws regarding sex offenders already are, so this might be a "band-aid" law, but if it's being proposed in conjunction with other effective laws, I'm all for it. Anything to help protect our children from real monsters.

Slainte Mhath! (Indeed!)

The word Whisky comes from the Gaelic uisge beatha, which is translated "Water of Life". The traditional Gaelic toast is Slainte (in Ireland, Slainte Mhath in Scotland), which is translated "health".

Appropriate.

Defining Irony

An avowed atheist referring to "religious intolerance", and then declaring that "Religion is for chumps."

Believe whom?

Forcing My Hand

I was trying to avoid commenting on the whole brouhaha regarding First Lady Laura Bush and her jokes the other night, only because it seems like everyone is getting WAY too worked up over what should be a non-issue. Unfortunately, it's the level 0f worked-uppedness that has forced my hand. That and the fact that it ties in to several other issues that have worked their way under my skin under the guise of "Church-State Issues".

For the record, I think that the level of offense some have taken with the First Lady's comments is a bit Sullivanesque. Lighten up -- the event has ALWAYS been irreverent, and the Horse joke specifically has been misinterpreted.

On the other hand, I also think that those defending Mrs. Bush have also taken this one not just over the top, but through the wire and well into No Man's Land. I'm getting a bit tired of the chracterization of anyone with a modicum of morals as being a repressed Victorian prude. There's nothing wrong with a little proper decorum and respect for one anothers sensibilities.

Now, to be sure, there are some morally conservative people, most of whom are Christian,s who are overreacting. But to paint all Christians, or even all social conseervatives, with the same brush is a bit much. Today Ace posted an excellent bit on the current friction between religious and non-religious conservatives. I think he's dead on. In addition, there's a good and lively discussion going on in the comments. I especially appreciated this comment by Ace's reader Jason:

Well, this just depends on who you consider the "Religious Right" to be. If you're referring to any conservative who has the audacity to be religious, then it's simply not true. If you're referring to specific religious conservatives, it's true, but trivial. You can point to members of any political group that demand 100% compliance.

Also today I noted that the esteemed Smallholder addresses persecution. Twice. While I agree whole-heartedly that the characterization of ANY opposition to Christianity as persecution trivializes real persecution, I'd beg to make two points:
1. I have heard the argument before that Christians here keep whining about persecution. A good friend of mine made the same observation on his Blog. However, with the exception of a few loudmouths who get more attention than they deserve and whom one can almost dismiss out of hand any time they speak, I quite honestly don't hear the "P" word being used as much as Smallholder seems to indicate.

2. Having said that, let me address Smallholder's comment, It's not Christians who are persecuted. We are doing the persecution (though not all of us agree with it).

Again, any reasoned agreement or disagreement with this statement on my part would require that I extract from Smallholder a definition of Persecution. Included in that definition there would necessarily be either an acceptance or rejection of degrees of persecution. In one Blog Entry, he states that real persecution would be execution for ones faith. In another, limiting tax benefits is persecution. This leads me to believe that he must at least recognize varying degrees of persecution as still being persecution.

Furthermore, I must take exception with his comment, So when my coreligionists whine about the persecution of not having Principal-led prayer in the public schools, I become a bit indignant. I become indignant when Pat Roberston complains that extending civil rights to gays "persecutes" believers.

I do hope he really doesn't think that that is the extent of the objections many Christians have with our treatment in modern society. But I will reserve further reaction until he has clarified.

A few days ago, my good friend and reader Mary left a comment asking me if I feel any moral obligation to provide for public education. I shall address her here, because itis, as you will see, germain to the crux of my post. I do geel a moral obligation to help others -- to give to the poor, to help provide those in need with that which will help them. But as I've stated before, when it comes to translating my personal morals into political policy, there's a fine line to be walked. As Ace argues in his article, it is unfair to expect people of religious convictions to not apply those convictions to the way they vote. Because, as his reader hobgoblin points out, ALL law is morality. Anything we require or prohibit by law is because the majority have determined that that which is required is morally necessary and because that which is prohibited is morally wrong. The question is, whose morals? Which morals? Which morals supercede other morals -- freedom vs. Justice, for instance? In the long run, it seems to me that the best laws are those which enforce the moral concept of not doing wrong to others. Once we get into the realm of forcing people to do good to one another, the law becomes a bit too intrusive, and open to debate. And that is why I can see the point of those who think that taxes for public education is not as morally or legally necessary as, say, fire or police or defense or tort laws.

It Just Dawned on Me

Back in my high school days, when my father was pastoring a church in Southern Oregon, my mother used to sing trios in church along with a musically inclined couple who also led our youth group. One of the songs they sang quite often was called Bless the Lord. The theme running through the song was that the beauty surrounding the songwriter moved them to praise God. The opening line of the song was "Morning Sun, light of creation..."

Ever since TFR went back to work, I've been working an earlier shift, 6 AM - 3 PM. Today, as I was standing next to my desk, looking out the window, I was reminded of that song. There's something special about the quality of lighting at sunrise, especially somewhere as beautiful as here in Oregon. The sun is still low enough that it doesn't flood the entire landscape, so taller things like trees are lit more brightly, giving them greater contrast -- they almost glow. This time of year, the deciduous trees have new leaves which are a light, bright green, magnifying the contrast when compared to the darker green of the conifers. I remember a visitor who mentioned to me once that what struck them most about Oregon was not just how much green there was, but how many different hues and shades of green there were.

I could get used to being a morning person.

May's Days

Quite a busy week as far as the minor holiday calendar goes.

Growing up I used to love to celebrate May Day - not Soviet style, with parades and MiG flyovers, but by leaving flowers on the doorsteps of neighbors. As a child in Idaho, I had a neighbor in her 80's, Mrs. Brown, on whose doorstep I'd leave paper baskets full of dandelions. I'd ring her doorbell and then run, so that the flowers would be "anonymous".

Thursday is, of course, Cinco de Mayo, which commemorates a Mexican victory over French troops at the Battle of Puebla. And as a run-up to it, Saturday was Camerone Day, the day the French Foreign Legion commemorates a tactical defeat that established their reputstion as brave, fierce fighters.

And next Sunday is Mother's Day. NOt so minor for me this year. The Lad (*ahem*) has already purchased his Mommy a present -- a set of earrings and a pendant in his birthstone.

Not much esle to say right now, maybe more on these topics after I wake up.

Sense and Censorship

I just received an email from a good friend, and the email included a link to the following article, along with the suggestion that I Blog on it:

Alabama Bill Targets Gay Authors

At first blush, I was rather disturbed by the idea. Especially when the article starts out like this:


(CBS) A college production tells the story of Matthew Sheppard, a student beaten to death because he was gay.

And soon, it could be banned in Alabama.



As soon as I read that, I got fired up, all ready to launch into a "What part of no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; didn't you understand?" rant.

Please understand. As a thelogically conservative Christian, I believe that the practice of homosexuality is immoral. But I aslo believe strongly that when we start playing favorites with regards to the Consititution, we're treading on a mighty thin lava crust over a mighty deep pool of magma. The same Constitution that protects your right to tell me that Homosexuality is OK is the same Constitution that protects my right to tell you you're wrong. If I kick that right out from under you, I find mself at risk as well.

But as I read the article further, I started to question my initial impression. It seems possible that the CBS News reporter who filed this report may have sensationalized things a bit (As shocking as it may be to some to think that CBS might be... ahem... creative in their presentation...). The article goes on to say:


As CBS News Correspondent Mark Strassmann reports, under [Alabama lawmaker Gerald Allen's] bill, public school libraries could no longer buy new copies of plays or books by gay authors, or about gay characters.



While that's still an iffy proposition, that's a bit different than "banned in Alabama". So before I address the issue of the bill itself, I'd like to finish the article, and point out one other bit of overreacting, this time on the part of an interviewee:

"I think it's an absolutely absurd bill," says Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

First Amendment advocates say the ban clearly does amount to censorship.

"It's a Nazi book burning," says Potok. "You know, it's a remarkable piece of work."



Try to take a deep breath, Mark. I understand your opposition to the law, but Godwinesque hyperbole isn't helping. It may (or may not) be a bad law, but it's by NO stretch a "Nazi Book burning". If it were, there'd be, ya know, Nazis and bonfires and such.

Now, as for the law itself:

I have a real dilemma on my hands with regards to this law. The problem is that it specifically targets public school libraries. In the article, Strassman reports


Librarian Donna Schremser fears the "thought police," would be patrolling her shelves.

"And so the idea that we would have a pristine collection that represents one political view, one religioius view, that's not a library,'' says Schremser.



Again, Schremser's overstating the point, so I'll return the favor. I have NO problem whatsoever with the judicious screening of material made available to underage children. Ms. Schremser seems to disagree, and thinks all viewpoints should be represented. Should I conclude then that she advocate the placement of Playboy or Hustler or The Anarchist's Cookbook in an elementary school library? I think not. so if we eliminate the extremes, both "This is thought police" and "This is pornography", we find that there's a middle ground -- the agreement that Children DO need a certain level of protection from images or words that could damage them. The question becomes, which images? Which ideas? The Devil is in the details.

Now, I would argue that banning an author JUST because he or she was/is gay is a stretch. And I furthermore have no objection to the sympathetic portrayal of a gay character. I'd draw the line at the graphic portrayal of sex, gay OR straight. But in the middle we have the issue of literature that advocates the gay lifestyle.

Which leads me to a conclusion I reached only as I wrote this entry. I believe firmly that it is the right and duty of parents to teach their children morality and ethics. First and forempst my job is to love my son, provide for him, and teach him right from wrong. That's not a school's job. And so I would argue that it would be fair to regulate books that directly address moral issues -- either allow all viewpoints (which means requiring that P.S. Libraries stock books that both advocate and oppose a given moral viewpoint), or remain silent on all viewpoints (which means requiring that P.S. Libraries avoid stock books that either advocate and oppose a given moral viewpoint).

In addition, I also believe that if parents were more actively involved with their childrens' educations, this would be an issue. That's why I'll be keeping a close eye on the TV programs, movies, music, and books The Lad has access to growing up. It's also one more reason I'm seriously looking long and hard at home schooling.

Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes....

Amazing how fatherhood changes your perspective. This week has been the first week of a new schedule, in which I care for The Lad in the afternoons while TFR works. Yesterday was an absolutely GORGEOUS spring day, somewhere in the high 60's, scattered clouds, the kind of day that Nor'Westers keep reminding themselves will come as they wait all winter. So I loaded The Lad into his stroller, leashed up Little Big Dog, and headed out for a walk through the park. On the way there, we were passed by a man walking a very large dog. The dog was straining at its leash, but we managed to pass each other without incident. But it got me thinking: What if it had attacked us? How would I defend both The Lad and LBD? And I knew in an instant that if I couldn't, I'd lose my dog, because my child's life was the most important of the three in question. And I also knew in an instant that if I had to, I'd kill that dog, or anyone or anything trying to harm my son.

I constantly find myself doing this now, and I suppose it's a parent thing. Everywhere I go, every setting in which I find myself, my first instinct is to size up my surroundings and evaluate any possible threats to my little family, and assess what I will do to respond if any of those potential threats become actual threats.

I suppose I'm no different than any other parent, but it's disconcerting when you realize it's happened to you.

Right Again!

Thanks for the Memory to Patty-Jo.

American Cities That Best Fit You:

65% Portland

60% Denver

60% Philadelphia

55% San Francisco

50% Chicago

Which American Cities Best Fit You?

For all its liberal politics, Portland has some features I love. I love its hilliness (Eugene and Springfield are too danged FLAT!), I love all the stuff to do there and the great restaurant and Pub scenes, and the diversity of types of neighborhoods. TFR and I very much want to move there.

Erin Go Bragh!

Thanks for the Memory to The Llama Butchers.

Hey, sometimes these things are accurate:

Your Inner European is Irish!

Sprited and boisterous! You drink everyone under the table.

Who's Your Inner European?

Home Front

Thanks to everyone who prayed for TFR over the weekend. Here's the scoop:

The spa was nice, and they liked TFR, but it's a Lease position. This is pretty common in TFR's business. Instead of paying her a salary or commission, she would pay them a monthly rent, and be responsible for the purchase of her products, but she wuld keep all profits from every service she performs. While this may seem like nothing more than Chic Sharecropping, it can actually prove a very profitable format -- provided you have the capital outlay to get started. We do not.

In other news, we've decided to stop trying to breastfeed The LAd. Because he's a preemie, his airway is underdeveloped, and he has difficulty breathing while feeding -- he engages in a respiratory behavior called "crowing". TFR has been really down on herself, because she thinks his difficulties prove she's a bad mother, despite all my efforts to encourage her to the contrary. Finally, the hospital's lactation consultant told her the same thing I've been telling her, and she feels better. We'll still be feeding him breast milk via bottle.

I'm on a new schedule. As of today, I work 6 AM to 3 PM so that TFR can work 4-8 without us having to pay for daycare. So if my Blogging becomes even MORE sporadic, you'll know why.

One More Reason...

... To Enjoy Reading Naked Villainy

Maximum Leader is a Baseball Fan, and what's more, a National League fan, for the right reasons.

That's right, I'm one of THOSE Baseball fans. Capital B. The ones who believe that Baseball should be played on grass, with wooden bats, as God intended, who believe that the Designated Hitter is an affront to all that is pure and right and good, who believe that The Hall of Fame in Cooperstown is the closest America comes to a Pantheon on Olympus, that Baseball fields are our national temples and arenas and hippodromes and circuses, that a man wielding a Louisville slugger on a summers afternoon should be filmed from below, as if he were taller than mortal men, that all men of good will hold their breaths for just a split second as the pill fires from the pitcher's hand, who loves terms like "High heat", who believes the greatest epic poem ever was "Casey at the Bat", whose liturgy includes "Tinker to Evers to Chance" and "Take Me out to the Ball Game" and "Hey batter batter". Baseball, in short, is my second religion.

One bit of advice for ML: Do not let a team's lack of on field success prevent you from supporting them. I am a lifelong fan of the San Diego Padres, aka the Cubs of the West. A true baseball fan bleeds his team's colors. Just ask yourBrother-in-Law the Bosox fan where that can eventually get you. That one moment of glory is worth the price of a lifetime of heartache.

Prayer Request III

Things have been pretty hand-to-mouth ever since The Feared Redhead had The Lad back in January. My paycheck has paid the bills, but we've had to rely on credit cards to buy food. But the line of credit is running low, so TFR is returning to work a week earlier than planned, this coming Monday. Unfortunately, her old work doesn't have as many hours available as before (she was always part time). But anything helps.

Since The In-Laws were in town, she decided to have them babysit while she distributed her resume, hoping for a better job. She already has an interview this Saturday.

Please pray for us -- we need the income badly.

Northwest Humor

How many of you out there remember Almost Live? It was a Seattle area sketch comedy show that enjoyed national success for a while back in the 80's, and spawned the career of Bill Nye. The humor was quintessentially Northwest, a bit odd, a bit quirky, and very self-deprecating -- with characters like Speed Walker, Seattle's own superhero, and Uncle Fran, the bitter, disgruntled divorcee with a public access kids show. Very similar to the goofy, sincere humor of the Science Guy show, but with an adult edge.

Well, I still get to enjoy the humor of at least one cast member, f not in a sketch format. Pat Cashman is doing voiceovers for Jerry's, Home Improvement Center, a local two-store chain that outperforms AND outclasses national chains like Lowe's and Home Depot. And the humor, while it's only in thirty-second snippets, has Almost Live's fingerprints all over it. The commercials take some of the most bizzarre home video and old home movie footage, and gives it these odd voiceovers. In one commercial, a baby being bathed in the kitchen sink questions whether the sink was actually cleared of dishes first, informs his mother that the sink needs a new washer, and warns her, "Here come some more bubbles!" In my favorite, a couple is discussing how to paint a room. When she suggests, "How about a fresco?" his response is, "Nah, I'm not that thirsty."

Like I said, Quirky, goofy stuff. My favorite.

Semper Fidelis / Semper Memoralis

A quick note to whomever was visiting my blog from the United States Marine Corps' net:

Thank you for reading. And thank you for serving. This is one civilian who is "Semper Memoralis" -- eternally grateful.

More Fine Whine

A couple more thoughts about wine from this weekend. My in-laws are in town from Minnesota to attend the Lad's Baby Dedication (We attend a church that does not practie infant baptism), so we took them to King Estate Winery. Remember, the one whose Chardonnay and Cab I criticized so harshly? Well, they've stopped selling their 2000 vintage and we had a taste of the 2001. Apparently, it goes well with crow. It was smooth, complex, and buttery. Nice stuff, and only $10 a bottle.

That night, the In-Laws volunteered to babysit The Lad, so TFR and I had a chance to get out for the evening. We went and saw the movie Sideways. I found it at turns depressing and hilarious, and in the end it had me once again reflecting on my own willingness to quit all too easily. All in all, it was a good movie.

Sunday, after the dedication, we had a big family dinner (Me, TFR, the Inlaw's, TFR's sister and her husband, The Lad, and our two nephews). We had a big shank ham, and I came up with a pretty good glaze for it:

1 Bone-in Shank ham
1 can (12 oz.) Orange Juice Concentrate, thawed
1 can pineapple rings (OK, so I used a fresher pineapple from the produce department, one of the ones that's already been cored, but the cut core is still in the middle)
1 cup brown sugar
1/4 cup tequila
1/4 cup Triple Sec
1/2 tsp ginger powder
2 bay leaves
1/4 tsp hot mustard
Whole cloves
2 larege sprigs rosemary

set aside about 1/2 of the pineapple rings. Combine the rest of the pineapple, including the juice, with the OJ concentrate in a blender or food processor. Puree. Pour the liquid into a saucepan. Combine with the brown sugar, tequila, triple sec, ginger, bay leaves, and mustard. Bring to a boil over medium heat. reduce heat, simmering until liquid is reduced by 1/3. Remove from heat, cool, and refrigerate overnight.

Score the ham on one side in a crisscross pattern, inserting a clove at each scoring intersection. Place the ham face down in about 1/8 inch water in a baking pan, cover with foil, bake at 325 for 20 minutes per pound. About 30 minutes before the end of the baking time, uncover the hame and lay it on its side, scored side up. place the pineapple rings, rosemary sprigs, and bay leaves (recovered from the glaze) on top, apply glaze. Re-apply glaze every 5-10 minutes until the end of the baking cycle. Remove from oven and let stand for 10-15 minutes.