Response to "Moral Crusade Against Foodies"

It’s hard for me to even approach B.R. Meyers’ article “Moral Crusade Against Foodies” in a serious manner.  His argument seems deeply hidden by his own arrogance.  The underlying hatred in this article seems to be rooted in his vegan lifestyle, which I’m sure he believes gives him a more effective moral compass.  However, Meyers comes off as an over-zealous nitpicker and his argument seems as under-developed as veal.

Meyers tries desperately to support his deduction that over-indulging in such delicious oral pleasures is disturbing and potentially sinful. The fact that “foodies” are gluttonous food-worshippers is undeniable, but can you really fault someone for pursuing their passion?  People like Anthony Bourdain have managed to support themselves financially and pseudo-spiritually with food.  Yes, it could be considered sacrilegious or blasphemous to refer to a pork dinner as, “like a ceremony…a secular Seder,” like Pollan has. Yet, it is not uncommon for young athletes or politicians to be revered as potential “saviors” or philanthropists to be referred to as “angels.”  Few people complain when these metaphors are used to describe people, yet Meyers insists that it is a gross injustice for these foodies to be so passionate about food.  The reason that these metaphors are used is because of the power that they have.  These foodies find great joy from the ingestion of scrumptious meals, yet Meyers doesn’t care for the descriptions of their highest pleasures.  

After a seemingly-endless search through seven pages of sermon from an egotistical vegan, Meyers’ argument appears to be for refusing to allow these people to be so obsessed with food.  He believes that the media power that these foodie writers have gained makes them believe that their lifestyle is “a model for the world,” and that we can’t let them push their garbage onto us.  I, however, applaud these foodies for insatiable passion and stomach in the pursuit of personal happiness. 

Love for Meat Loaf

Most children hide in the pantry when they hear that tonight’s main course is going to be meatloaf.  The idea of creating a loaf of meat just seems wrong to begin with.  The average meatloaf is as bland and disgusting as the name sounds.  The average meatloaf is tough and ugly, not unlike the musician with the same name.  The average meatloaf seems to lack any redeeming qualities.

The average meatloaf is just a loaf of beef with ketchup crust.  If it was supposed to be this way it would be called beef loaf.  Ground beef on its own has virtually no flavor without additional seasoning.  This is no secret, yet people still insist on baking enormous beef turds void of flavor.  These nasty beef loafs need to be put “Out of the Frying Pan (And into the Fire).”

My mother’s meatloaf, however, utilizes the meat that oftentimes is overlooked, ground pork.  This addition is no secret, but it is the redeeming quality that is missing in the average meatloaf.  The 2-1 ratio of ground beef to ground pork is my mother’s secret to making the flavor burst like a “Bat Out of Hell.” 

Her sauce is a combination of ketchup, mustard, Worcestershire sauce and brown sugar.  The brown sugar is her secret to creating the right consistency in her condiment crust.  It caramelizes just enough to thicken it up to a jelly-like, sweet and tangy sauce.   The end result is “Paradise by the Dashboard Light.”  

My mom’s meatloaf is famous in our family for its delicious take on an otherwise disgusting dish.  The mysterious meat ratio and the “secret sauce” is what sets her meatloaf apart from the rest.  When the family savors a slice of this delicious loaf, my brother always says, “MMM…meatloaf.”  Well Brian, “You Took the Words Right Out of my Mouth.”

Monsanto the Monster

Food Inc. really made me think about the power that big business has in this country.  Monsanto's desire for control has taken over any social empathy they pretended to have.  The company's insistence on ruining the lives of farmers that pose a minor threat shows that they don't care about this country.  The problem is, however, the fact that these sleezy bastards have taken office in the places that should be their opposition.  The movie showed that high-level employees from Monsanto have gone on to executive positions in the FDA and even to the Supreme Court.

Monsanto in 1998, when they first genetically modified soy beans, had control of only 2% of all of America's soy beans.  Now, the same company responsible for Agent Orange, has 90% of the nation's soy beans in patent-protected custody.  They have found a way to monopolize a crop in a country that produces close to 1/3 of the world's soy beans.  The shady business that Monsanto has been involved in is only possible with the fact that their transgressions have yet to be punished.  This disgusting company has infiltrated the American government and uses their political prowess to mold the legislative climate to their liking.

Agent Orange, a pesticide used as agricultural warfare during Vietnam, is a Monsanto product.  This pesticide was used in Operation Ranch Hand as a way to destroy the guerillas' crops.  The pesticide not only destroyed the crops, it sabatoged an entire generation.  The Cleveland Plain Dealer recently did a seven page analysis of the horrible effects that this poison has had on all those who had contact with it.  Generations of Americans and Vietnamese have Monsanto to blame for the horrible side effects of contact with Agent Orange.

Monsanto has admitted to cooking their books with false entries (same thing that went wrong with Enron), yet they hardly got a slap on the wrist.  They have been sued by foreign companies that claim they are monopolizing the marketplace.  Even with all of this negativity directed towards them, these punks still have the audacity to sue over 150 farmers just for using the seeds that grew from last year's crops instead of buying a new batch from Monsanto.

It's severely depressing to me that this company can destroy the lives of innocent people, foreign and domestic, and not face the consequences.

Super Bowl of Guacamole

The Super Bowl appetizer spread is more important to the game than the point spread.  Packers were up against that black and yellow team, guacamole faced salsa, the best of the best were on the biggest stage.  The football season has sadly come to a close, but at least I ate enough to hibernate until August.  With the rest of the entertainment providers of Super Bowl XLV (besides the game) providing lackluster performances, the food got my game ball.

Christina Aguilera butchered Francis Scott Keyes's lyrics, Slash was the only performer not lip-syncing the halftime show and the commercials would be forgotten by next week if we didn't have to watch them after every twelve minutes of programming.  But, the food at the Super Bowl party I attended should be put on ESPN Classic (thanks, Crissy).  The half dozen assorted bags of tortilla chips were dug into homemade guacamole and salsa like cleats into fresh grass.  These classic sports-watching-snacks are, as previously stated, a favorite of mine.  This year, the fresh guacamole had a smooth texture with a flavor as bright as the avocadoes green center.  Its heat was minimal, yet substantial.  The salsa was exactly the opposite.  The freshly diced tomatoes, onions, and jalapenos provided a chunky and spicy contrast to its smooth green cohort.  The other appetizers were an innovative twist on classic dishes.  Pulled pork potatoe skins and buffalo ranch bites were as bold and beautiful as Jerry Jones's multi-gazillion dollar stadium.  After diving face first into this party-food paydirt, my stomach was as big as the 600-ton flat screen Jumbotron hanging over the field.

I was happily full, until the Cheeseheads poured into the snowy Dallas streets in celebration.  Then, I was hungry for more football.

Fast Food

America does thrive on our time-management.  Other than fasting, there is no way to schedule less time for eating than relying on fast-food.  America is fast cars, fast money and fast food.  The difference between the people who associate with the first two examples and the final one are blatant.  People who have the luxury of a Mississippi River-like cash flow do not have to rely on Wendy, the Burger King and Ronald McDonald to provide their meals.  

Each of these quick meal caterers carries a multitude of meals, with different tastes for different taste buds.  If you wanted (or were forced by necessity) to eat a different fast-food every day for a year, you could.  The scary thing is, however, many people are forced to assume this diet due to time-constraints.  It takes a lot of time to go to the grocery store, plan meals and cook for a family.  When people don't have this time, they are forced to rely on other means of feeding their family.  Many homes that are on the lower end of the social hierarchy relish in the convenience of fast-food restaurants.  It is so much easier for a single parent or two working parents to pick up dinner on the way home instead of making it themselves.  Plus, the value menu allows for penny-pinching parents to pick items that will fill their stomachs and not starve their wallets.  Even the inclusion of toys in kids' meals allows a parent to feed and entertain children at the same time.  I still remember the devastation I felt when I lost the secret agent binoculars I got from McDonalds.

Almost every city in America has at least one fast food place, many have dozens.  Fast-food is so engrained in our culture that we have a hard time imagining a village so destitute that it doesn't have at least the three big burger joints.  Thankfully, Ronald,Wendy and the King are not permanent guests at my table.  I do enjoy, however, the ease of inviting them when I want to.

Sandwich of Liberty

Pure American food is as difficult to find as a pure American.  Our entire population has an abundance of international flavor, but we are all united under the Statue of Liberty.  I want this same liberty to be the theme of my restaurant.  

My restaurant will be a small sandwich joint where each patron has the opportunity to create their own sandwich from our abundance of toppings.  There will be a number of proven combinations like Philly Cheese Steaks or Italian sausage with green peppers and marinara.  However, my restaurant will be a sandwich democracy, allowing each patron to choose their own combination of meats, cheese, veggies and sauces.  I want my patrons to be like an American entrepreneur, unafraid of the risk of creativity.  

I feel like giving foreign patrons a little taste of our freedom would give them a better feel for what our country is about than force-feeding them “American classics.”  The menu will be in the same mold as Subway, the world’s most prominent fast-food joint.  I will have a wide selection of breads, ranging from plain wheat to cheese and herb topped loafs.  After they make this selection, they will have the opportunity to choose between classic lunch meats like turkey and salami, corned beef, steak, taco meat, bacon or Italian sausage.  If our selection does not meet the meat-craving of a particular patron, we will look into adding their idea to our arsenal.  After they select a meat they can choose from American cheese, pepper jack, cheddar, provolone, or Swiss.  The last part is the most fun in my opinion.  Patrons can choose from the usual veggies or they can add things like deep-fried cheese sticks and onion rings.  Sauces will be plentiful because there is nothing more American than dousing sandwiches with condiments.  

There is not a consistent theme in American cuisine, because our population has the liberty to bring their own flavor to the table.  That is why I don’t want to try to pick out a particular style to represent such a broad population.  Liberty is the only thing that all Americans share, and I want to let the world taste our freedom.

The Oscar for Best Supporting Salad

My mother’s cooking is comparable to Anthony Hopkins’ acting; everything is good.  Whether it is her meatballs or her meatloaf, her veal parmesan or her grilled cheese, everything has a bold flavor that stands on its own two feet.  The gem in my mother’s cooking crown is the dish that is most often times only playing a supporting role, her self-dressed salad.  The salad changes an entrée into a meal, much like the way a great supporting actor/actress changes a quality lead performance to a fulfilling feature film.

There are no strict measurements to follow in her recipe, but it is a balanced combination of first-press olive oil and red wine vinegar poured onto a few flicks of garlic, a couple pinches of parsley, some salt and pepper and a developed palette determining the correct balance.  When I was a kid, my mother would ask me if the salad dressing needed anything and even if I could tell the difference between tonight’s dressing and last night’s, I wouldn’t be able to determine what the missing part was.  But, after years of snatching cucumber slices when my mom was attending to other dishes, I can tell when the combination is just right. 

 

Comparatively, there are no set guidelines to how to become a successful supporting actor.  The balance between the lead role and the supporting character determines the quality of the supports contribution.  If the lead role is supposed to dominate the plotline, maybe the supporting salad needs less garlic.  If the supporting salad is a bold contrast to the main culinary character, maybe it needs more vinegar.

My mother’s salad gets a callback on all of its auditions.  It is better than Joaquin Phoenix as Caesar Salad in Gladiator and is better than Kathy Bates’ Hobbling Cobb Salad in Misery.  My mother’s salad gets two thumbs way up for all of its appearances.