BTW The editors at the Instructables site just e-mailed me that this one is also being featured. Been up less than 24 hours. If I wasn't so humble I'd be impressed with myself.

I returned an armload of Cherokee pants and polo shirts to Target this week! It used to be a good brand with several standard styles always made of 100% cotton. It's the reason I started buying clothes at Target. Designers are not supposed to alter "classic" lines like khakis and polo shirts. THis season, Target CHANGED THE MATERIALS AND DIMENSIONS IN THE CHEROKEE LINE. Can you believe it? I used to be able to grab a few pairs of khakis and just go home. Not any more. I took a tape measure and compared my old pants to the new ones: the rise is shorter, the leg width is wider with an additional 3 inches of material so it's more like a flared bell bottom or elephant leg, and the leg length is longer! They no longer make Cherokee khakis with a button closure, only with a side clasp. Worst of all the material is cheap - a lightweight blend of cotton and spandex (gross). They also altered the sleeves on the polo shirts and are making them out of that cheap blend of cotton and spandex. I looked at the Cherokee turtlenecks. Guess what? They are now made from this spandex-cotton garbage. Don't waste your money on them. If they look faded and have nubs when brand NEW, what will they look like after a few washes? Don't waste your money. I was so disgusted, I left the store without bothering to look at anything else. The Target customer service calls this "trending" the line. I call it a sure-fire way to lose an entire group of customers.

Posted by jasdip: "These obvious (and needless IMHO) warnings showed up ever since the broad sued MacDonald's when she spilled coffee on herself.....The judge who awarded her should be to blame for all this. That "broad" that you refer to was an 81y/o woman. And BTW she was not driving when this occurred like so many think. The car was parked. She received third degree burns requiring numerous skin grafts and over a week's stay in a hospital. There had been 700 previous reported incidents of people getting burned that badly due to McDonald "unique" way of "brewing" coffee. All she wanted was her medical bills paid. It was not the judge that awarded her millions - it was the JURY that awarded it. The judge REDUCED the award to $480,000 considering the jury's amount to be excessive. The woman then settled for even less than that, out of court, before McDonalds filed their appeal. All she wanted was her medical bills paid. The woman originally wanted $20,000 to cover her medical costs. It was her lawyer who upped the amount requested. Blame the lawyers if you must point blame. They are working for their percentage 'cut' of the award. --------------- On new camera: "This camera only works when there is film inside." That is not really a "warning". It is information. Many people buy cameras assuming they are digital cameras and fail to bother reading the instruction manual that comes with it. Then they are upset that they don't have their vacation or wedding pictures and try to return it in a rage because it is "broke". Sooooo, manufacturers had to start putting labels on cameras telling people to put film in them and alerting people to the fact that it was not a digital camera. ---------------- On can of self-defense pepper spray: "Warning do not spray at people." Legalese. For a long time in my state and many others, pepper spray as an assault weapon, was illegal carrying a ten year prison sentence and a $10,000 fine. Sooooo, cayenne pepper spray was marketed for "kitchen use". LOL. This way a person buying pepper spray to own, to defend themselves in case of attack, could avoid prison. On a household iron: "Never iron clothes while they are on your body." Ahhhh, sometimes warning are there for dumb people who do something one the spur of the moment. I found out the "Ouch" way that doing a touch up ironing while wearing clothes is not a good idea. Or at least don't use the *Burst of Steam* setting. Ouch.

Beth, I have been so delighted and educated with all these posts. I love the evolution of your wonderfully charming home! You are an amazing woman! I share several of the decorating dilemmas you've mentioned. My "living room" is about 2' more narrow and 2' shorter than your area. I'm learning a lot from your post. The repurposed gun cabinet idea is absolute genius. Please share a photo when you've installed the shelves and contents. Regarding the non-glare glass for your larger artwork. The price of non-glare glass has become simply ridiculous. I have an entire hallway lined with (Gasp!) a family gallery wall. It includes photos from more than 100 years ago to this year's school pics of the great-nephew. Color, colorized, sepia toned, black and white, all mixed together and mostly in their original mismatched frames. That just about breaks all the rules, but I love my wall. Several of the older photos - Mom's 1954 graduation photo; MIL's 1952 wedding photo, etc. - had plain glass. I can't tolerate the glare either. I made a note in my iPod of all the frame sizes that needed replacement non-glare glass. Every time I'm at a thrift shop or yard sale I check out the "frames" area. You can often find large pictures that may be in horrid frames, but they will have non-glare glass! I buy the frame, take out the glass, and toss the rest. I found one very large print of ballet slippers framed with non-glare that was big enough to cut down into several pieces. It made one 8x10 and three 5x7 pieces of non-glare glass for my wall, all for $1. With their permission, I took the glass out at the shop, tossed the faded print, and re-donated the empty frame back to them.