The 11 Best Cookbooks Of 2009 : NPR

The 11 Best Cookbooks Of 2009 : NPR

Posted using ShareThis

Baltimore tells crisis pregnancy centers to say they don't do abortions.

Baltimore tells crisis pregnancy centers to say they don't do abortions.: "The Baltimore City Council went where no local government has gone before, it seems, in telling crisis pregnancy centers in the city this week that they have to put up signs saying they don't provide abortion or birth control.

[more ...]












Abortion - Birth control - Reproductive health - Health - Clinics and Services"

Progressive hope

Progressive hope: "I don't want to get too gooshy as we go into the Thanksgiving holiday weekend by giving you all the stuff I'm thankful for, but it does seem like an appropriate moment to be a little more reflective than usual. The thing I want to focus on today is the hope for a better world.

It is very easy to be pessimistic and cynical about the chance for things to get better as we fight our issue and political battles. Wealthy powerful special interests are entrenched and seem able to run everything. Too many politicians are incompetent or corrupt. Well-intentioned organizations are sometimes pretty ineffectual. The establishment's conventional wisdom seems set in stone. And I think we have seen so many things in the last few decades that have made us cynical about our government and questioning about our leaders, it is easy to think that nothing will ever change. I know for me, reading the Church committee report about the CIA, The Pentagon Papers, and the Nixon White House tapes transcripts as a young man was enough to make me very skeptical about the nature of our government at the time.

I think a certain level of healthy skepticism about our government and the establishment is a very good thing, and should be cultivated. The problem arises when skepticism turns cynical and pessimistic, and infects how we view every single thing in life and politics. At the heart of progressivism is the hope that it is possible to make a better world, that progress is indeed within our reach. When Barack Obama ran a campaign with a slogan he borrowed from Cesar Chavez and the United Farmworkers, Yes We Can, and preached his gospel of hope, he was tapping into a long progressive tradition dating back to our very founding as a country. Heading into that terrible winter at Valley Forge, Tom Paine, wrote: 'Let it be told to the future world, that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive, that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet it and repulse it.' Lincoln at Gettysburg, at that terrible moment honoring those tens of thousands of fallen soldiers at their gravesites, spoke of the hope 'that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.' Martin Luther King, Jr., in a discouraging moment in his great work, said that 'the arc of the moral universe is long, but it curves toward justice', and the civil rights movement anthem's chorus sang out 'We Shall Overcome'.

We progressives should embrace the hope that our movement, the progressive movement, has always carried as its banner. It is conservatives who have always feared change and doused the flames of hope, conservatives who said government could not do anything right or make progress for the American people.

I write this because I see too often the deep cynicism of many friends in the progressive movement, the assumption that virtually every politician is corrupted by being an insider, that every compromise in the legislative process is a sleazy one, that every progressive group is a sell-out. I see it in the responses I sometimes get when I write about my hopes for passing legislation that could be improved on in the future, where people ask why I think any piece of legislation will be improved on given that corporations run America. I see it in articles by progressive thinkers like Jamie Galbraith, who wrote on Monday an entire blog post about how hopeless everything was in terms of making changes in economic policy. I see it in progressive talk show hosts and comedians and media figures: a sense of gloom about any prospects for a better future are everywhere I look.

While righteous anger and cynical humor are an important part of our work, progressivism that is at its core cynical and pessimistic doesn't work over the long run. For one thing, it will burn itself out. When I was a young organizer being trained, I was told that you can't organize people if you are too depressed to be hopeful, that if you were feeling burnt out, you should take a vacation or even get into a different line of work. I still believe that to be true. Righteous anger is a great thing, and can feed you for a while, but if it's not leavened with hope, it won't sustain you over the long good fight. But it also doesn't work because the internal contradiction is too great. Telling people that we can change things for the better while being cynical about any hope for change is a self-defeating philosophy.

Albert Camus wrote in The Plague that "once the faint stirring of hope became possible, the dominion of the plague ended." It is our job as progressives not just to attack the powers that be, not just to fight against the establishment, but to breathe life into those faint stirrings of hope, and to believe in them ourselves. It is easy to be a cynic with all the bad things that happen in the world. It takes more courage to believe that we can, someday soon, overcome. It is our hope and optimism that gives us the strength to keep fighting the odds against us, that keeps us going in the face of the money and power of the entrenched special interests. And history is very clear on this point: those with the faith and hope that they could indeed overcome the odds did quite often prevail. The abolitionists won their 40-year battle, the suffragists prevailed after 90 years of struggle, Jim Crow was finally beaten 90 years after African-American rights were abandoned by the North with the end of reconstruction. Through decades of violence, derision, arrests, intimidation, our progressive ancestors never gave into despair and defeatism. We should take their example to heart, and have hope for the future, hope that we can make progress, hope that we can build a more perfect union. Hope and virtue have survived: now let's make them flourish.

"

California pushes cap-and-trade plan

California pushes cap-and-trade plan: "

California today issued the nation’s first blueprint for a broad-based cap-and-trade program to control global warming emissions.

The pioneering effort would cap greenhouse gases emitted by more than 600 power plants, refineries, cement plants and other big factories at 15% below today’s levels by 2020. And it would allow companies to buy and sell emissions allowances among themselves as a way to meet the overall goal less expensively.

The preliminary rule is a “milestone ... to address our state’s contributions to climate change, as the eighth largest economy in the world,” said Air Resources Board Chairman Mary D. Nichols. She pointedly contrasted it with the upcoming meeting of 192 nations in Copenhagen next month “for another conference at which no international treaty will be signed.”

Cap-and-trade, a centerpiece of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s push for flexible market-based regulations, could yield $2 billion to $4 billion per year in revenue to the state from affected industries, depending on the market value of carbon, how many allowances for greenhouse gases are auctioned, how many are given away.

Schwarzenegger praised the board’s work as showing that “California has led the nation and the world in developing green policies,” adding that the program will drive innovation and generate jobs.

The state’s landmark 2006 law requires emissions of planet-heating pollutants to drop to 1990 levels by 2020. The cap-and-trade program will take effect beginning in 2012, complementing strict rules to cut emissions from automobiles and slash the carbon content of fuels.

The cap-and-trade rule, which would cover fuel deliverers such as oil and gas companies, could lead to a rise in the price of gasoline by 8 cents a gallon, if carbon permits are eventually traded at a likely $10 a ton. The air board says it is weighing whether to bring fuel deliverers under the cap in 2012 or in 2015.

California’s new push comes amid growing alarm over the likely impacts of global warming on the state, the nation and the planet as a whole. Sierra Nevada snowpacks are diminishing, raising the prospect of further drought and water shortages. Central Valley crops have begun to move north. And the habitats of local animals and birds are changing.

A report in April by California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, “Indicators of Climate Change in California,” said the state’s hotter temperatures, rising sea levels, and increasing wildfires are consistent with climate changes occurring globally.

California’s cap-and-trade proposal was designed in concert with national academic, industry and environmental experts and is likely to influence the shape of eventual federal regulations.The U.S. House in June passed a comprehensive climate bill, which is scheduled to be debated in the Senate next spring.

If a federal bill passes, then California’s program, along with a cap-and-trade program in the Northeast that only covers power plants, would probably merge with a federal program. But Nichols said the state could be free to require more emissions cuts in some cases.

European nations, operating under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, a climate treaty that the U.S. refused to ratify, have regulated greenhouse gases under a cap-and-trade system for several years.

--Margot Roosevelt

"

Pass the turkey, hold the arsenic

Pass the turkey, hold the arsenic: "

With Thanksgiving just around the corner, U.S. Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) would like to remind you that the turkey defrosting in your fridge might be poisonous.

You see, that turkey may contain roxarsone, a food additive that poultry producers use to fight off parasites and help young chicks grow. But it is a derivative of arsenic, which isn’t necessarily the healthiest thing to eat. As the CDC warns:

“Ingesting very high levels of arsenic can result in death. Exposure to lower levels can cause nausea and vomiting, decreased production of red and white blood cells, abnormal heart rhythm, damage to blood vessels, and a sensation of “pins and needles” in hands and feet.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has declared that consumption of arsenic is safe at levels up to 0.5 parts per million in poultry muscle, and that roxarsone is OK to use. But Israel is not convinced. And so he has introduced a bill – the Poison Free Poultry Act of 2009 (H.R.3624).

On Monday, he held a news conference in his Long Island district to emphasize the gravity of the situation. According to a report in Newsday, he pointed to a bird and declared, “There is no good reason to be injecting poison into this turkey.”

Israel noted that the FDA’s safety threshold was set more than 30 years ago, and is in dire need of updating in light of medical research linking arsenic to such health problems as cancer and diabetes.

He has the support of Keeve Nachman, science director of the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. In a statement published on the center’s blog, he writes that:

“Studies have shown that some of the arsenic fed to chickens remains in the edible portions of the birds. Arsenic has also been found in poultry waste, where it poses environmental and human health risks when the waste is managed, often by spreading on agricultural fields as fertilizer for food crops.”

The center has endorsed Israel’s bill, along with the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, the Humane Society of the United States, The Clean Water Network, Huntington Breast Cancer Action Coalition, Food & Water Watch, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Waterkeeper Alliance, Illinois Citizens for Clean Air & Water, the Organic Consumers Assn., Food Animal Concerns Trust (FACT), Ohio Environmental Council, Friends of the Earth, the Center for Food Safety, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of Family Farmers, according to Israel’s website.

So far, the bill has zero co-sponsors in Congress, and it’s stuck in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. It’s unclear when – or if – it could become law, so in the meantime Nachman advises consumers to consider organic turkeys, which are roxarsone-free.

Or, if you don’t mind salt, you can try a completely meat-free alternative.

-- Karen Kaplan

Photo: Could this bird be poisonous? Photo credit: Bill Hogan / Chicago Tribune

"

Princesses aside, many young girls worry they are fat

Princesses aside, many young girls worry they are fat: "

Parents who worry their young daughters may be overexposed to princess images on television and in movies and videos can take a small measure of satisfaction from a new study showing girls age 3 to 6 don't suffer body-image problems from observing these characters. However, the study still found that even little girls worry they are fat.

The role of media in shaping girls' perceptions of their appearances has been a concern for many years. Several studies suggest that grade-school-age girls and teens compare themselves with fashion models and television and movie stars and may become dissatisfied with their own appearance as a result. But the new study, which surveyed 121 U.S. girls, found they were not affected by watching "Cinderella" or Belle in "Beauty and the Beast." Half of the girls watched videos of pretty, thin heroines and half watched videos that did not contain appearance-related messages. After observing the girls' behavior during play, the researchers concluded that young girls were more likely to adopt the persona of the princess instead of focusing on her appearance.

Despite this positive finding, 31% of the girls said they always worried about being fat and another 18% said they sometimes worried about being fat, according to the study, conducted by the researchers from the University of Central Florida.

The new Disney movie "The Princess and the Frog" opens this week in Los Angeles, providing a good opportunity for parents to talk to their daughters about perceptions of beauty. For example, parents can point out how the princess' waist is unrealistically tiny and that no one has perfect skin.

"We need to help our children challenge the images of beauty, particularly thinness, that they see and idolize and encourage them to question how much appearance should be part of their self-worth," said the lead author of the study, psychology professor Stacey Tantleff-Dunn, in a news release. "We should help them build a positive self-image with an appreciation for many different types of body attributes."

The study is published online this week in the British Journal of Developmental Psychology.

-- Shari Roan

Photo credit: Actress Anika Noni Rose arrives at the premiere of Walt Disney Pictures' "The Princess and the Frog" at the Disney Studios in Burbank. Credit: Kevin Winter / Getty Images.

"

What do scientists think about religion? -- latimes.com

What do scientists think about religion? -- latimes.com

Posted using ShareThis

War Tax=Carbon Tax

War Tax=Carbon Tax: "

Oil fires in Kuwait during Operation Desert Storm

Congressman David Obey yesterday called for a war tax to pay for troops in Afghanistan. While the idea of a war tax makes all the sense in the world (if health care can’t add to the deficit, why should our wars?), Obey’s proposed tax on upper-income earners is aimed at the wrong source. Instead of an income tax, why not a carbon tax to pay for our wars in the Middle East? After all, much of the reason for our military involvement in that region comes from our desire to protect and exploit its rich oil and natural gas resources. A carbon tax to pay for our involvement there would only be fitting. And if the carbon tax is so politically unpalatable in its pure form, perhaps marrying it to a patriotic, heartland-type cause would boost support. We’ll need to pay for these wars somehow, and the tax would help wean us from the product that got us into this mess. And it would also provide substantial environmental benefits: less driving, less energy consumption, and more energy efficiency and clean tech innovation.

"

Global Warming Basics

Global Warming Basics: "A fresh, but ever-evolving, summary of the basics on global warming."

White House Pushes Science and Math Education

White House Pushes Science and Math Education: "The plan will enlist companies and nonprofits, including “Sesame Street,” to spend money and time to encourage students to pursue science, technology, engineering and math.


"

Children in home-based day care watch more TV

Children in home-based day care watch more TV: "

Several studies have been conducted to determine how much television young children are watching. The topic is important because research shows planting a kid in front of the TV for several hours a day does much more harm than good. A new study, published online today in the journal Pediatrics, has found that children in day care are watching twice the amount of television than previously thought.

Previous studies on kids' viewing habits did not include data from hours of television watched in child care settings, according to researchers. The new study examined both home-based and child-care settings and found that, with the exception of infants, children in home-based day care programs were exposed to much more TV per day than children in child-care centers: for toddlers, 1.6 hours compared with .1 hour and, for preschool-age children, 2.4 hours versus .4 hour.

The average time of daily TV use for preschool-age children in which television was used at all was 3.4 hours for home-based programs and 1.2 hours in center-based programs. Overall, children watched TV daily in 70% of home-based programs and 36% of center-based programs. The study was conducted among 168 day-care settings, of which 94 were home-based.

These figures reflect little change from surveys conducted in previous years, noted the authors, from the University of Washington. "This lack of change is disconcerting, given the intervening publication of the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines regarding television use for young children," the authors wrote in the paper. They note that infant and toddler TV viewing is linked to increased risks of obesity, language delay, inactivity, aggression and decreased attention spans. The AAP recommends no TV viewing in children ages 2 and younger and, for older children, no more than one to two hours a day of "quality programming."

"Our findings highlight just how pervasive screen time is for very young U.S. children," they wrote.

The AAP policy on children and television viewing can be found here.

— Shari Roan

Photo credit: Alan Marler / Associated Press

"

Report Warns of Rising Water Demand

Report Warns of Rising Water Demand: "A new McKinsey study suggests that governments need to pay more attention to exploding water demands."

Anti-gay, religious-motivated crimes up

Anti-gay, religious-motivated crimes up: "FBI data shows 11 percent increase in crimes based on sexual orientation"