Tomatomania

My friend Bridget had to skip town for a family emergency, so she loaded me up with all the tomatoes and eggs I could carry. The tomatoes were really ripe, so our usual M.O. of adding sliced tomato to lunch and dinner was not going to use them fast enough. I synthesized all the marinara recipe information I could glean from Serious Eats into one recipe (which I share after the jump). Then I used the remaining tomatoes - mostly gorgeous yellow tomatoes - to make a salsa based on the recipe for salsa fresca in Mexican Light by Martha Rose Shulman.
The following marinara recipe (well, according to Mario Batali, it's not a true marinara, but its texture is closer to a marinara than a tomato sauce, which is thicker, less chunky, and cooked longer) is a hybrid of Mario Batali’s Basic Tomato Sauce, a marinara sauce recipe adapted from Lidia Bastianich's Lidia's Italian-American Kitchen, and comments about marinara sauce from the readers of Serious Eats.

Marinara Sauce

Ingredients

• 1/4 cup extra virgin olive oil
  
• 1/2 large or 1 small red onion, cut into 1/4-inch dice
  
• 8 garlic cloves, peeled and pressed
  
• 4 teaspoons fresh thyme leaves (or 1 teaspoon dried)
  
• 2 teaspoons crushed red pepper (this makes a fairly spicy sauce)
  
• 1/2 medium carrot, finely shredded
  
• 3 pounds ripe fresh plum tomatoes, or one 35 ounce can Italian plum tomatoes (preferably San Marzano), seeded and lightly crushed, with their liquid
  
• Salt
  
• 10 fresh basil leaves, torn into small pieces
  
• 1/4 teaspoon oregano
  

Procedure

1. Heat the oil in a 2- to 3-quart nonreactive saucepan over medium heat. Add the onion. When the onions are about halfway done (about 5 minutes) add the garlic.

2. Add the thyme, crushed red pepper, and carrot; cook 5 minutes more.

3. Add the tomatoes. Bring to a boil and then lower the heat to just bubbling, stirring occasionally for 20-30 minutes. Break up tomatoes with a whisk or spoon, until sauce is chunky and thick

4. Stir in the basil and oregano about 5 minutes before sauce is finished. Taste sauce, and season with salt and red pepper if necessary. Serve immediately or set aside for further use. The sauce may be refrigerated for up to 1 week or frozen for up to 6 months.

Click here to see the rest of this post...

Progress

We finally got rid of the horrible sponge paint in the spare bedroom. Bob and I spent the weekend cleaning, taping, priming and painting. But, it was worth it. I'm so glad to have a new room.

Update on the use of 20 pounds of peaches below.





I made individual hand pies for the neighborhood party. This was insane. They were tasty, but it was way too much work.



Most of the peaches were used for peach jam and for spiced peaches. I want to make more spiced peaches - they are very tasty with vanilla ice cream.

Click here to see the rest of this post...

Food, Inc

We went to see Food, Inc. yesterday. In fact, we went to a Whole Foods sponsored viewing of the movie (we did pay for the movie) which included a panel discussion following the movie, free samples from Whole Foods and a wine tasting plus food from Whole Foods. Overall, the movie was as I expected - it took a lot of information from The Omnivores Dilemma (and presumably Fast Food Nation but I haven't read that yet.) It was fairly graphic in its presentation of slaughter houses so if you weren't a vegetarian before, you might consider being one now. Poor animals. The biggest impact that it made on me is that I'm not sure I can eat at a restaurant any more.


I was a bit disappointed that they didn't get any of the major corporations to comment on the content. Nor did they talk to anyone with a different perspective than 'the corporations are evil and they are making us sick.' I do believe that like most other large corporations, the focus is on generating the biggest profit and that the choices made are to maximize profit with minimizing risk. But, that means that there is some risk and when you are talking about food, that risk can be deadly. I also wish that the movie had more information from government authorities on their take on the situation. Why is the FDA so impotent? What is being done to change this? Is there any move to have oversight of agriculture corporations? One thing that is misleading is that the movie doesn't discuss the fact that most of the soybeans grown in the country are used for animal feed, not for people food.

The panel discussion was interesting (if too short) and included many local people:
Particia Stansbury (Epic Gardens)
Mark "Coach" Smallwood (Local Forager for Whole Foods)
Lisa Taranto (Tricycle Gardens)
Sally Norton (Nutritionist from VCU)
Jonah Fogel (Virginia Cooperative Extension Service)
Lisa Dearden (Center for Rural Culture)
Ellen Frackleton (Agriberry)

Coach was a low impact farmer and was recruited by Whole Foods to source local, responsibly grown food and meat for stores in the mid Atlantic region. I would have liked to have heard more from him. He was definitely a great choice as a spokesperson representing Whole Foods. All of the panel was in favor of supporting local farmers. The basic take home message was if you don't talk to the person making your food, you don't know what went into creating it. Even when things are labeled organic, the animals may not be treated the way you would think. Any food that is mass produced is typically pooled from many suppliers which always raises the risk of food safety. Also, everyone on the panel felt like there needs to be more government involvement in stepping up safety regulations and policing these large corporations.

I left the moving feeling fortunate that I have the money and time and availability of good food, that I can choose to know the farmers where my food comes from. I can cook most of our meals from scratch and I can make informed decisions about what we eat. Most of the country does not have this choice or the means to make this choice. I feel like I should come up with a way to use some mathematical modeling to explore risk/cost/safety issues...

Click here to see the rest of this post...

Veggie Hunter

 

The hunter came home victorious; the whole village will feast tonight!

More of the bounty available at the link below.

Click here to see the rest of this post...

From cocktails

This is the product of the Mystery Photo Entertainment posted earlier. It's cucumber-infused vodka, which, it turns out, is ridiculously easy. (I followed the instructions here.) And it tastes awesome.

Bipartisanship should be an effect, not a cause

Matt Yglesias got me thinking about this fascination with "bipartisanship".

Apparently, Congress and pundits favor "bipartisan" legislation, that is, bills you can get members of both parties to sign on to. Rhetorically I ask, but why? Surely we can all dispense with the naïve notion that the best solution, or the one most desired by the people, lies at the mean between the party positions. There are at least three reasons off the top of my head proving the preposterousness of that notion, and you can probably come up with more than me.

Really, bipartisanship is supposed to be a reflection of the value of a bill. The bill's not good because it's bipartisan; rather, the bill's inherently good, so good that people want to publicly support it, even if it's not what their party came up with. A bill might be bipartisan because a priori it's good.

Lack of bipartisanship is generally framed as a negative for the bill's originator: "Obama has failed to deliver on the promise of bipartisanship for his agenda." But there's a perfectly good converse view. If a bill's good, or popular -- the health care public option, for example -- opponents of the bill would be right to fear the lack of bipartisanship. If they're too dumb or stubborn to back what's good, then they're useless to their constituents.

An agenda setter should put good legislation out there, with no compromises solely to garner support from across the aisle. If it's good enough, and popular enough, then all the Congresscritters in vulnerable seats are under pressure to back it. Bipartisanship is an indicator that the bill was good in the first place; but it is only a correlated side-effect, not a necessary (or sufficient) condition for good legislation.

Mystery photo entertainment

From Picasa

What's going on here?

Field Trip Friday

Katherine came for a visit and so I took Friday off from work and we went to see the butterfly exhibit at Lewis Ginter Botanical Gardens. It was awesome. So many cool butterflies. The day was stiflingly hot, but the gardens were still pretty.

TNC cannot stop talking about slavery

If you read only 200 things Ta-Nehisi Coates writes this year, this should be one of them. Also, you will only have read about a fifth of the great stuff he writes.

Insightful, as always, but I don't think TNC is quite right here. Or perhaps he is overall, but some nuance is in order.

Specifically, I think there's a historical line that goes like TNC says "We tend to think", namely that slavery was kind of this regrettable cruelty that the world in general was tolerant of, until we got civilized and disavowed it.

But there is at least an acknowledgment, in the historical line I was taught, that America (like always) was exceptional. That line says, what with the explosion of cotton (which Eli Whitney's invention contributed to), the economy of the South became completely dependent on slavery as an economic fuel, kind of like we talk about being dependent on oil today. And that dependence shifted the culture, both toward a vigorous defense of the economic interests in slavery and toward dehumanization of slaves on a scale and to a degree beyond whatever the barbaric practices of yesteryear had been.

But that's just my impression from my history classes. I'm not sure there's a shared "American" conventional point of view on this.

Where I feel TNC has it right is that "we have never grappled with this," `this' being that most of the culture of America is formed from the fractious and unresolved shards that remain from centuries of dehumanizing black people, and the struggles both violent and nonviolent to erode and destroy them.

Again, referring to my own education, the mythology of America is the "melting pot" notion of disparate cultures coming together and peacefully sharing the opportunities of a new land. But this, it seems to me, is a gloss, a "and they all lived happily ever after" resolution of the unresolved issue that defines America. We (which of course is not really "we", since we weren't there, but the imagined "we" of this country) invented a new kind of racism, and have never been able to put that dire genie back into the bottle.

Click here to see the rest of this post...

Opinion and Policy on Gay Rights

There's a great chart displayed over at fivethirtyeight.com with public opinion on various gay rights questions by state, including whether those policies are actually adopted as law in those states. The original PDF is available here.

I'm struck by how consistent the popularity ranking of the issues is across states. With a few quibbly exceptions, from most popular support to least the issues are:

1. housing antidiscrimination


2. hate crimes protection


3. job antidiscrimination


4. health benefits for same-sex partners


5. civil unions


6. 2nd parent adoption for same-sex couples


7. same-sex marriage

It's also interesting, but not surprising, to see that adoption of these policies is not nearly as widespread as their popularity. The most widespread policy by far is hate crimes protection, which is the unsurprising one. But there is no state that offers housing antidiscrimination (super-popular) that does not also offer jobs antidiscrimination (third most popular) AND the far less popular 2nd parent adoption -- 20 states have all three of those. Seven of those 20 states that provide those three do NOT provide health benefits for same-sex partners, even though it's much more popular than 2nd parent adoption.

I wonder if adoption policy has sort of gone "under the radar" and the decisions have been made based on what's best for adopted children, rather than traditional family stereotypes. I also wonder if partner health benefits might have a lot of "bang for the buck" in the sense of being politically achievable in the short term, and really improving the lives of many couples.

Provoke your thoughts -- about health care

This has been recommended by a bunch of bloggy people and eventually I broke down and read it:

Annals of Medicine: The Cost Conundrum: newyorker.com
(Shared via AddThis)

It is definitely worth reading and thinking about. And analogizing to, say, education.

The question it provoked most in me is, well, the question of capitalism. Go read it, and tell me if you think he's sort of saying "to get good, cheap health care, we need to reward doctors for acting in non-profit-seeking ways." How does that work, exactly? Do you reward them with money? Is he saying that we need doctors to not act in their own self-interest -- to be suckers? Or that the free market is not a good system for health care?

Secret Compartments

These are a couple of pictures of our most recent basement demolition. The wall at the front of the house was actually wood paneling over a rather nicer paneling, which had some built-in shelves. The open area at ground level is the access to the main water line. The open area next to the small shelf is -- I dunno. Maybe a window to the view of the brick wall?

Animation: Why Americans Need Health Reform

Short, cute, educational! Go watch this!

Animation: Why Americans Need Health Reform

Note: "health reform" isn't about changing health care practices; they mean changing how health care gets paid for.

Cucumber Festival

It was a muggy day, but the Farmers Market was packed. There was a cucumber festival today. We didn't hang around for the cucumber eating contest, but I will stage my own at home. I planning on making some bread and butter pickles today.

In other news, my tomato seedlings had survived and are finally starting to flower. I may get a tomato yet. Note to self: start seeds in January next year!



UPDATE: Amy's cucumber won the costume contest! Very exciting.

Click-throughs guaranteed!

How agency will protect consumers | Marketplace From American Public Media:

"HOBSON: Well, one administration official I spoke to today said there will still be fine print. But it'll be the kind of thing like on the Internet when you click the box that says, 'I agree to the terms and conditions,' and you click 'OK.' It will actually be OK, you won't have to worry that something in the fine print will trap you down the road."

I think (and hope) that Jeremy Hobson of Marketplace didn't intend this to mean what it sounds like. To me, it sounds like he's asserting that click-through agreements are nothing to worry about, that clicking the "OK" button will actually be OK. If there's a consumer protection agency vetting the click-through agreements, please let me know!

California Adventure

Bob and I just returned from visiting Sarah and David in Fullerton. We had a great time. Highlights include a scavenger hunt on Hollywood Boulevard, dinner at Lance and Gordon's (forgot to take pictures), trip to the Getty Center, and a trip to San Diego to visit the Wildlife Park and the zoo. I separated out the pictures from the zoo.

Back from the Great Virginia Race

Bob, Rebecca, and David (Chan, not Kelman) went on a Ravenchase across Virginia. Our first day time was, um, not so good. Our second day we did quite well, however, so we award ourselves the "Most Improved" trophy.

George Will: innumerate

I'm late to this, but Matt Yglesias called out George Will for throwing out ".01 percent" as a ridiculously high proportion of Americans to bike to work.

The actual fraction of Americans who bike to work is .4 percent. Which is a lot bigger.

You know, if someone just makes up words and/or applies random words to a situation without considering their meaning, that person is either illiterate or lying or both. And not even the socially acceptable lying or illiteracy. If you wrote a column for a newspaper and misdescribed a situation because you didn't know what the words you used meant, or because you picked words at random that you thought sounded vaguely like what you were reporting, you wouldn't keep a job writing columns for very long. Because literacy is a prerequisite for the job.

Shouldn't innumeracy preclude you from spouting numbers? George Will should perhaps leave the percentages to the staff of the local middle school newsletter, who are more qualified to handle them.

Ethics

I've been reading Pat Kane's The Play Ethic: a Manifesto for a Different Way of Living and he spends a chapter describing the work ethic, its role in the "new economy" (global corporations, erosion of pensions, rarity of lifelong careers in one company, etc.), and how people have tried to recast it or modify it for the post-industrial world. And he spends the book describing an alternative "play ethic", as the title suggests.

My question(s) for you is this: what is your work ethic? What is your play ethic? What is your learning ethic? How are these related, if at all? Would you say you have a "strong work ethic"? How about the others?

Don't plumb the depths here -- just answer what occurs to you. You can answer one, some, or all of the above. You can answer a question I haven't come up with. I just want to hear what you think about these terms and what they mean to you.

"before"

What have you been doing over your summer vacation, Bob?

Ripping up the basement.

Here's some pictures of the destruction, with some opportunities for forensic electricianship, if you're interested. Any comments about the state of the basement and our plans for future furnishing are welcome.

Those plans currently include: ripping out the furring strips that have been driven into the brick wall, as well as the strips on the ceiling; painting the brick walls with drylok, and putting a stud wall up to replace the strips; putting drywall up on the walls and ceiling, after putting canister lights or other recessed lighting up between the joists.

Our end goal is to have a nice-looking furnished basement room with >6'6" height just about everywhere (floor-to-joist height is 6'8"), and with soffits as small and high as possible (I can walk under the radiator pipes, but not under the soffit around them with ceiling tile and trim as it was.)

Thoughts? Suggestions? Dire warnings of homeowner doom?