Halibut season is open, which means I have access to one of my favorite ingredients – halibut cheeks. If you’ve never eaten them before, you really should look for them; many chefs will use them in specials, and they can be requested from most decent fish mongers. Unlike a halibut filet, which has a firm but tender texture, cheeks are toned by their use in the body, which makes them chewy and interesting.
And it’s all about the texture: I like to make different sauces each time I enjoy them. For the first meal this season, I dredged the cheeks in flour seasoned with salt and pepper. Knock the excess flour off; you don’t want a thick roux-style sauce. Then I browned the cheeks in olive oil and removed them from the pan. For the sauce I deglazed the pan with a French Chardonnay (no oak) and added lemon juice and capers. Just return the cheeks at the last minute. Easy. Another favorite is a tomato-saffron broth. Delicious.
Along the cheek theme – remember, it’s about the texture – I’m going to experiment with pork cheeks in the next few days. I had my first experience with them a few weeks ago at Cochon Restaurant in New Orleans. My idea is to deconstruct the hot dog, and create a combination of pork, mustard, onion and pastry elements. When I’m finished, I’ll make sure I post a description and photos. I think you’ll be surprised.
So, step outside the box and try these interesting economy cuts. They may not be popular, but they will definitely deliver a great dining experience.
At the risk of being called curmudgeonly, I feel that this is a good week to nominate another super-huge douchebag. A lot has happened, and it’s only Wednesday morning.
Of course, Monday was Tea Party/Lionize Timothy McVeigh/Celebrate Sedition Day, and that provided enough material to fill this post. Straight to the juicy parts!
Let’s start with our perennial favorite, Rush Limbaugh (via Media Matters). Yesterday, on his radio show, he blamed Bill Clinton for the Oklahoma City bombing, claiming that McVeigh was motivated by the tyranny of Waco. That’s funny, because what I remember about The Branch Davidian incident was that a couple of U.S. Marshals were shot and killed when they showed up to investigate a suspected illegal weapons cache at the compound of the alleged child sex offender David Koresh.
Next is Representative Paul Broun of Georgia. So, just to reiterate, this guy is a fucking U.S. Congressman. At an armed gun rally in Virginia on Monday, he claimed there are enemies of the state planning to plunge the country into tyranny. But that’s not incitement to violence. The clip is from last night’s Rachel Maddow show, which I’ve included in its entirety because it is worth watching. Broun’s cheerleading begins at 1:50.
And lastly is our friend and moderate Republican, Orrin Hatch. This measured “analysis” on Fox News left my jaw dragging the floor, whether it was his claim that he wanted to work with Democrats on the healthcare bill (he actually fought against many of the provisions he had authored in the ’90′s), or that he strongly supports financial reform (as long as it doesn’t include any consumer protection or financial transparency.) But he gets nominated for his comment at 4:25, when he suggests that the Goldman-Sachs investigation by the SEC was launched in order to give the Democrats momentum for their financial reform bill. Thank you Orrin Hatch, the man who fought against re-importation of American pharmaceuticals from Canada while deregulating cheap, ineffective drugs from India and other countries.
Want to nominate someone? Drop me a note. I’m off to have a fun day.
What a fabulous town this is! I landed yesterday (Saturday) at cocktail hour and grabbed the first vodka-rocks I could find. After unpacking my materials for this week’s trade show, I dined at Cochon, a cajun restaurant in the Warehouse District. Everything on the menu is fresh, and all the meats are cured in-house. The vibe is upbeat and the interior design has a contemporary, urban feel.
It was a meat fest! I started off with the paneed pork cheeks, garnished with pickled anise and peanuts. The combination sounds bizarre but it was quite delicious; the peanuts were not overpowering. The pork was dreamy, but I would have liked a bit more vinegar flavor to the marinade/sauce. My salad was fresh mushrooms with fried beef jerky, and it had a touch of cilantro tossed with it. A great combination of flavors and texture. Finally, I had the smoked brisket and horseradish potato salad for my main course. That’s a hard dish to fuck up, and this was no exception. Delicious! Cochon definitely gets snaps for the overall dining experience.
The Southern Republican Leadership Council is meeting in New Orleans this week. Sadly (cue the sarcasm), I did not run into Newt Gingrich or Sarah Palin last night. But they got to do their speechy thing! And despite their rockstar celebrity, both of them finished way down in the straw poll, losing to Mitt Romney (who didn’t even show up) and Ron Paul. So the GOP hasn’t changed:
Obama is a socialist;
Stimulus spending wrecked our country;
We need to cut taxes, because that won’t add to the budget deficit;
We need to bomb Iran, because that will fix the Middle East;
Homosexuals will prevent God-fearing Christians from breeding;
Let’s forget about the War Of Northern Aggression and worship the 10th Amendment.
So, it looks like we’re going to have an elevated, intellectual debate about public policy as the midterm elections approach.
On a happier note, I just finished my poached eggs and corned beef hash at Pierre Maspero’s, a favorite breakfast joint. It’s a lovely morning and I’m going to wander the Quarter a bit before I have to setup the trade show. More to come…
There seem to be a bunch of recipes floating around which use this name, but I’m claiming the hard-core vodka space. It tastes like the real thing and will knock you on your ass.
3 parts Absolut vodka
1 part Cointreau
Splash of Navan cognac
Shake vodka and Cointreau vigorously with ice. In a very chilled martini glass, place Navan and swirl before discarding. Strain vodka into glass. Serve with orange twist.
I find the recent rise of populist rhetoric in our civil discourse a bit troubling. Add a strong sense of entitlement within the Tea Party movement and other right-wing extremist groups, and the question, “Is the right wing conservative?” demands examination. I have spoken previously of why populism does not have conservative roots, so there’s no point covering that ground again. Instead, I would like to illustrate parallels between recent statements and the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the 18th-century French liberal whose work – according to many conservatives of the day – paved the way for the Jacobins to unleash The Reign of Terror.
Let’s start with a video that became much more interesting this week, with the sentencing of Scott Roeder, the man convicted of murdering Dr. George Tiller in Wichita, Kansas. It is an interview by Dave Leach, an anti-abortion zealot, from 1996, and they very quickly discriminate between God’s law and societal law. It starts getting good at 2:10.
Now, the assertion of Providential law certainly seems conservative, and, in fact, Edmund Burke considered the belief that Providential law must inform the laws of mankind to be a cornerstone of conservative thought (see Russell Kirk’s “The Conservative Mind”.) Unfortunately, that is not what is being discussed in the interview. Instead, Leach and Roeder are dismissing societal law as invalid, in favor of something more fundamental: whereas conservative philosophy uses Providential law to inform statute and attempt to reflect God’s will, Roeder claims the existence of Providential law nullifies any attempts made by society to impose law. What he is actually claiming is the existence of a natural law that can only exist in the absence of government.
That is a pretty radical concept, but it isn’t new. Let’s step into the way-back machine and experience a bit of expository writing from Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who took the French intellectual world by storm with his 1755 essay, “A Discourse Upon The Origin And Basis Of Inequality Among Men”.
“…when I see free-born animals through a natural abhorrence of captivity dash their brains out against the bars of their prison; when I see multitudes of naked savages despise European pleasures, and brave hunger, fire and sword, and death itself to preserve their independency; I feel that it belongs not to slaves to argue concerning liberty.”
Rousseau argued that increasing societal organization infringes upon man’s natural liberty. At best, we placed ourselves in a state of voluntary slavery in order to achieve security, shelter and food, things that existed without shortage in our savage – or natural – state. While conservatives asserted that societal inequality was God’s design, Rousseau blamed the underlying structures for inequality, and illustrated, in his essay, its development as savage man began to coalesce into small groups, clans and later societies. By claiming that driving a car is a right that is not linked to the responsibility of licensing, Scott Roeder is channeling Rousseau and asserting that liberty can only be achieved in the natural state.
Not surprisingly, genuine conservatives are pretty horrified by this philosophy. Again, from Kirk:
“Infatuation with natural right in the practical concerns of government must end in anarchy, in a fiery and intolerant individualism. Even parliaments cannot endure if the doctrinaires of natural rights are triumphant, for any form of representative government is in some degree an invasion of absolute liberty.”
I hear you saying, “Michael, not everyone on the right is as whacked as Scott Roeder.” And I agree. So let’s turn our attention to my new favorite source of amusement, the Tea Party. Despite my mocking tone (it’s a character flaw), extreme ideological movements like the Tea Party deserve serious attention for the simple matter that they create political gravity wells which influence the overall debate. Consider the open courting by GOP leadership, and Sarah Palin’s recent comment that the Tea Party is “…a beautiful grassroots movement that is putting government back on the side of the people,” and you begin to understand the magnitude of that influence.
Of course, we know the official party line mission statement from their website. But being for fiscal responsibility, limited government and free markets doesn’t tell us much. After all, I believe in those things, and most people who support the Tea Party consider me a Marxist. Instead, I look to their actions to determine their political philosophy and, again, we find it occupying a surprising space in the political spectrum.
We’ve already discussed the idea that society is slavery, but it’s not necessary to go that far – the Tea Party has saved us the trouble. We can start with the notion that taxes are tyranny, or any other legislation with which they disagree. Next, consider that the possession of arms is not only a right, but there is a belief that these arms may be used for seditious purposes outside the scope of a state militia. You don’t have to dig very deeply into a group like the Oath Keepers before you discover that there is something extralegal being envisioned. Lastly is the belief that sometimes – despite the perfection and sanctity of our political process – it is okay to hit the reset button and throw everything away. Each of these points, while appearing conservative on the surface, shares an underlying belief in a natural state, an existence that supersedes societal structures, and is given priority even when it is done in the name of those societal structures. That is how an Oath Keeper or Tea Partyer can talk about upholding the Constitution by forcibly removing constitutionally-elected officials from office.
Well, I’ve kept you long enough; it is a blog, after all. I hope I have at least made a first effort at pointing out some of the absurdity of our far right politics in America, and demonstrating that their pedigree does not descend from the conservative movement that is their namesake. I am not a conservative, but I believe that it is important for liberals and progressives to deny the far right the use of that moniker, for it deceives many in this country with a false sense of credibility and tradition. Words matter.
As Russell Kirk noted, “The world is growing more enlightened, popular opinion asserts; and there is some truth in the belief that newspapers, magazines and circulating libraries have made mankind wiser; but with the pride that accompanies a little new learning comes the peril of popular vanity, the hazard that all old opinions may be discarded.”
In closing, I will leave you with the words of John Adams, one of America’s first conservatives. Sneering at Rousseau’s praise of natural savagery, Adams disagrees that,
“…knowledge is corruption; that arts, sciences and taste have deformed the beauty and destroyed the felicity of human nature, which appears only in perfection in the savage state – the children of nature.”
