Two Left-Coasters on College Bowl Pilgrimage to Heartland (Reprint)

Thanks to Terry Smith, Editor at The Athens News (Athens, Ohio), for publishing our little piece in his fine newspaper.  Now, everyone knows how I'm spending my Fall vacation (along with my old buddy, Mike--old because he's in his 40s and old because I've known him for 40 years):

And, because the internet is what it is, we've already heard from John Ellis.  He runs the Cat's Eye Saloon out in Athens and has invited us to his tailgate party before the Temple vs. Ohio game on Wednesday, November 2.

Damn straight we'll be there...

My little brother, Johnny, sporting his new UK tattoo at UK's upset of USC (east coast version), Lexington, 2010.

Vote NO on 2011 Washington Initiative 1183!

Why I'm voting against Washington I-1183  

All things being equal (whatever that means), here's what I would like to see in Washington State: More stores like the wonderful Liquor Barn in Kentucky.  Much more fun and interesting and informational and, yes, communal than the slimy, sleazy, dreary, fluorescent-lit, porn-store-out-on-the-interstate feel (not that I would know) that is our current set of state-controlled liquor stores.  These are not stores meant for browsing or speaking to other liquor-seekers, but places to duck into in order to take what you want before sheepishly walking out into the rain, paper bag tucked under your arm...

Yuck.

Tea Thyme (vodka infused with Earl Grey tea bag, honey water, muddled backyard thyme with thyme for garnish).

That said, I'm voting against 1183 which, in a nutshell, is stated thusly on the ballot:   

"Initiative Measure No. 1183 concerns liquor:  beer, wine, and spirits (hard liquor). 

This measure would close state liquor stores and sell their assets; license private parties to sell and distribute spirits; set license fees based on sales; regulate licensees; and change regulation of wine distribution.

Should this measure be enacted into law?

[  ]  Yes

[  ]  No

The Official Ballot Title was written by the Attorney General as required by law and revised by the court. The Explanatory Statement was written by the Attorney General as required by law. The Fiscal Impact Statement was written by the Office of Financial Management as required by law. The Secretary of State is not responsible for the content of arguments or statements (WAC 434-381-180)."

My brother-in-law's perfect manhattan.

Here are at least 3 of my reasons for voting against 1183:

* Costco (a store I frequent and enjoy and which is relatively good on the scale of good/bad businesses) has dumped many millions into this fight in support of this measure, not to mention the last 2 or 3 of the same topic. Such outlay is deeply suspicious for multiple reasons, at least one of which is because...

* This measure controls the size of stores that can sell liquor (which is either touted or ignored on the VOTE YES commercials and depending on what misleading information is in that particular commercial). If I read the Initiative correctly, liquor-selling stores must be over 9,000 square feet. Thus, whatever this bill is, it is not free market capitalism (which is, ironically, one of the main arguments for it).  Rather, it is more, if not monopolistic, then pre-determined to create winning and losing businesses. Obviously, Costco is over 9,000 square feet.

My point:  Costco and others are selling this change as being good for businesses, prices, consumers, yadda, yadda, yadda (yeah, it's actually in a dictionary or two, but I digress), but it is mostly just good for their businesses.  Thus, Costco is a bad actor here and is intentionally misleading Washingtonians.  What else are we not being told in their publicity campaign?

*Also, as the Voters' Pamphlet's (VP) "Argument Against" correctly argues, Washingtonians have recently voted against such a change multiple times. But clearly the goal here is for deep pocketed corporations (certainly not actual people) to keep bringing it up until the voters submit. Not my version of democracy even though, as Mitt Romney proudly reminds us, "Corporations are people, my friend." Well, not in my Constitution.

* Despite the size requirement, VP estimates that there will be over 1,400 licenses liquor retailers in the near future (up from 328 current state stores).  Thus...

*Those for 1183 argue that b/c selling-to-minor penalties will increase, little or no increase in alcohol problems (i.e. drunk driving, teens accessing alcohol) will exist. They also argue that increased revenue will go to fire/police, thus tacitly admitting, at least in part, that there will be increased problems.

OK, maybe that was more than 3 reasons, but that's enough for now...

I urge you to Vote No on I-1183, but to also keep drinking safely and interestingly.

My brother's jalapeño and cucumber margarita.

PS: Here are a few other good reasons to Vote No, taken from my facebook page discussion on the same topic (unedited):

Samantha K:  Another reason is that although Costco is generally "good" as far as corporations go - they pass on the 10% distributors fee to suppliers that currently state liquor stores. This is why many of our state's small distilleries are against this initiative. I think writing in what is essentially their own tax loophole is hurtful to these small businesses. They also have threatened to not carry those distilleries product should they openly oppose this initiative. I guess that's politics but I don't like this side of it. Our firefighters at large are against it - which matters to me. All of your other points are good too 

Danny O:  Additionally, stores like Costco (and other big-box contributors like Target and Wal Mart) are dumping cash into this while asking us to "trust them" that they won't collude or mark up the prices higher than they are now. I'm sure it wouldn't happen right away (they have a point to prove) but there wouldn't be anyway to stop it once it started. After all, its a hell of a lot easier to eliminate a liquor control organization than start a new one after its abolition. When was the last time we could trust these guys anyways?

Andrew M: "Teens are going to get alcohol anyway" is not convincing me. I'm against this issue too.

Eating the World: Australia

So, my brother and I like to travel, and have done a decent bit of it, but are always starving for more.

Which is where the eating comes in.  We also like to eat.  So, last year Brian had the brilliant idea to cook a dinner from each country in the world, in alphabetical order.  We could travel without leaving the kitchen. 

At least one problem we will have is that people rarely agree on just how many countries there are, but it's currently in the 190s, I think.  And anyway, who cares?  (I know who: people from that country!)

We won't sweat the small stuff and have given ourselves the liberty of not being entirely faithful to the food's origins, because, of course, that would be impossible anyway.

And, fortunately, we are in no hurry.  I say fortunately because we are in our second year and only just now approaching the end of the As.

I plan to post pictures from each country, but am only getting around to it now, with Australia. 

But what the hell is Australian food, you ask?  Well, there are the basics that every U.S.-type person knows, thanks to stereotyping, or marketing, or both, such as Foster's beer (I know, I know, not a popular beer in Australia, but re-read the first part of my sentence), vegemite, and shrimp on barbies (called prawns in Australia, I think; Paul Hogan's been lying to us for years, apparently).  Also, the dessert Pavlova, which I had never heard of and which, apparently, the Kiwis also claim as their own. 

But never mind, because I don't have a sweet tooth and don't make desserts.  I have an umami tooth and cook accordingly. 

So, what else is there?  Well, there's Kanga and Roo.  Brian's been Down Under many times and eaten the tasty looking marsupial, but I never have.  So, a query on facebook and Kayla C. provided the answer:  Stewart's Meats, a fine old-fashioned and very busy butcher shop.

Head toward Mt. Rainier on Yelm Hwy and you'll find Stewart's on the right.

Among other meat wonders, they have a freezer case with exotic meats, including, in Spanish, cangoro, $12.99 a pound.

But what to do with it?  A good red meat like that can certainly be spiced and eaten on its own, with some kind of mash on the side.  And, according to the Kangaroo Institute of Australia this is a perfectly Aussie thing to do.

But it seemed too boring.  And, as Australia is more or less in Asia (in school, they never tired of telling us that it was somehow its own continent, which, upon reflection, seems like a racial/colonial issue of some kind), I wanted something else.  So when I found a recipe on their website for Red Thai Coconut Curry I knew I had a winner.

(Note:  I also learned from the KIA (how appropriate) that kangaroo is not farmed but hunted under strict guidelines.  Or, so they say.)

Speaking of which, as recipes are but guidelines, I made my own version, which includes pre-made red curry paste from a local Asian grocery and whatever veggies I had in the fridge and the cabinet:

CSA carrot, onion, leek and lettuce with tomato, asparagus, canned baby corn.

First, I seared the kangaroo in a cast iron pan, then cut it up into bite-sized chunks.

Then, I stir-fried the chili paste on its own before adding half the can of coconut milk.  Next, the meat, cooked until almost done.  Lastly, throw in all veggies but the tomato (added at the last moment).

Added the rest of the coconut milk, a little water, and cooked until veggies just tender.  Served on jasmine rice (always buy at an Asian grocery, never at Safeway et al., a bloo'y rip-off).  Served with Foster's, because, remember, this is technically Aussie.  Canned rambutan for dessert.

Delicious, mate. (I couldn't resist, the "mate" or the dinner.)

Only 190+ posts to go, but surely this is a noble cause.  Surely.  Noble.  Or, if not noble, then hopefully quite tasty.

Next up:  Austria.

Note to self:  No more shooting with the yellow kitchen light.  Flash needed for real colors.

Neo-Historical Road Markers as Art

My friend Irina G. just tuned me into this amazing project:

Norm Magnusson's I-75 Project

Magnusson creates new historical markers that are overtly political.  Good stuff.

I've been working with (thinking and writing about, photographing) historical markers in Northern Kentucky (especially in Lexington) for awhile now, so this project is near and dear to my heart.  Besides good politics, these signs, of course, point out what a farce so many historical markers really are.

Here, a prime example of historical lying, from Lexington:

False history through the sins of omission.

For more, see my blog post on this and other historical markers here: "Revisionist History...Might Just Be a Good Thing"

In a piece of fine timing, it just so happens that I will soon be driving the entire state of Ohio (more on this soon) so I will be on the lookout for Magnusson's project and be reporting back.

WHATDOUTHINKABOUTJESUS.COM

If you know me, you might be surprised to see such a title and/or topic. 

But a longtime friend of my brother Brian, good ol' Tom Stafford, has started a website asking this very question.  I'm not sure what he's after, though based on his survey monkey survey, uh, monkey (department of redundancy department?), he just wants you to answer the damn question.

Anyway, Tom's a good earnest guy and he says he's trying to learn.  Good enough for me.

Entrance to an old mine in Death Valley.

And even though I have read the New Testament word for word (because I once took a Bible as Literature course at UCLA), I don't know much about Jesus.  I know (if that's the right word) and am certainly much more interested in how Jesus is used (utilized?) in the (American) public arena.  That is, in politics and culture. 

But this blog post is not about that gigantic topic and I'm not even going to mention, for instance, the latest smiling charlatan--Robert Jeffress--to burden us all with his myopic and hateful views on religions/sects that are, coincidentally, not his own, such as Mormonism or Catholicism.  No, why waste my argumentative time on this guy?  Won't even mention him.  Jeffress.  Or his website. 

Lotus flower, Chinese Garden, Portland.

Instead, I just wanted to post, for the helluva it, what I wrote on Tom Stafford's website:

   I think that what Jesus teaches in the Bible, or what others have written that he teaches, constitute an amazingly progressive body of ideas about human interaction.
   Especially ideas like who will be blessed (peace makers, the meek, etc., in Matthew 5.3-12).  Simply  amazing teachings, given his historical milieu.  Such messages resonate with us to this day and are ideas from which we can all learn.
   What I regret about Jesus, especially as an American, can be more or less summed up with one of my favorite bumper stickers:
   "Jesus, save me from your followers."
   This is certainly not Jesus' fault, but Jesus is usually more exploited than not in the American political arena.
   For example, this statement, attributed to Jesus:
   "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (Matthew 19:24).
   This is just one of many statements which directly contradict the American Dream ethos (or, what it's become) of more materialism, more money, and an ever-increasing wealth redistribution to the extremely wealthy in our society.
   I have no idea whether Jesus is the Son of God or whether God exists, but I do know that Jesus is heavily exploited by a large segment of the wealthy and powerful in the U.S.
   And for what? 
   If what Jesus is alleged to have said above is true, this exploitation is for earthly concerns only and not for getting into Heaven.

   What a waste.

Tom responded by thanking me for my post and throwing out this quote that has been attributed to Gandhi:

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. The materialism of affluent Christian countries appears to contradict the claims of Jesus Christ that says it's not possible to worship both Mammon and God at the same time.  

By the way, whether or not Gandhi actually said this or not, it's a genius piece of arguing, and for one word.  What is that one word: "appears."  Very difficult to argue with because of this one well-placed word. 

Gandhi keeps watch over San Francisco Bay

Now for the standard caveat: clearly, I am not discussing Christians in general.  No, I am interested in how Jesus' teachings are largely ignored and/or manipulated by many people for their own narrow political concerns.  Need examples?  Watch Fox News.  Don't see them there?  Watch Fox News with me.  Then you'll see them.

Also, Tom says he welcomes your own take on this, so please go to his website if you're so inclined and answer his question.