Before it does though, I wanted to tell you about a great organization that brings a little something extra to the lives of people who are down on their luck. While it might not fill a clear-cut need, I think something that brings a smile to faces fills an absolute need of delivering a little happiness … a little feeling of being special … to people who really need it.

Last year, I had the pleasure of meeting Lydia Walshin of The Perfect Pantry at the BlogHer Boston conference. She is a food writer and founder of Drop In & Decorate, a Rhode Island-based, tax-exempt nonprofit organization. This organization provides support for cooking decorating events held around the country and abroad, with the cookies produced being donated. This year, the nonprofit has support from some major companies who are making it easier than ever to just drop in.

What’s it all about? Here’s the basics, direct from Lydia:

The idea behind Drop In & Decorate is simple: bake some cookies; gather a group of family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, your worship group or book group to decorate the cookies together; donate the cookies to a nonprofit agency serving basic human needs in your own community. It’s a simple idea in a complicated world, and  something anyone can do.

If you’d like to host your own Drop In & Decorate® event, Pillsbury and Wilton would like to help. Pillsbury has donated 50 VIP coupons, worth $3.00 each, off any Pillsbury product — including sugar cookie mix, icing and flour — to be distributed, first come, first served, while supply lasts, to anyone who plans to host a Drop In & Decorate event (max. 5 coupons per person). And we’ll include a Comfort Grip cookie cutter, donated by Wilton, while our supply lasts.

Write to lydia AT ninecooks DOT com for more info on how to get your free coupons and cookie cutters.

It’s such a simple thing: to bake and decorate cookies. But it can mean so much. If you are looking for something charitable to do as a family, group or school this holiday season, check into Drop In & Decorate.

The other morning, my dear friend Angel directed me to a story on Yahoo! News about a town in Italy that is banning any foreign flavors from emerging in their walled Tuscan center. The new rule doesn’t impact the restaurants that are already there, but it prevents new, foreign restaurants from opening in their city limits …

Lucca, the aforementioned town, is a Tuscan town that is obviously becoming (or maybe just is?) as walled in their perceptions as they are with the actual walls around their town.

Preserving classical dishes, preparations and cuisines is a noble cause to pursue. It’s important that we hang on to these things since it’s through them that chefs learn distinction in flavors, techniques, preparations and, most importantly, traditions. But time presents an opportunity for food to grow, develop and change — for the better, and closing off from such change is madness.

In fact, to shut out foreign flavors is, at best, a misguided publicity stunt and, at worst, evidence of an arrogant food elitism that should shame Italian officials. I tend to believe it’s really the latter of the two. In 2006, the New York Times featured Lucca in its Dining section and explained how it’s food is probably the best in the Tuscan region, but the townspeople are so set in their ways that a waiter tsk’d a man from even putting lemon on his salt cod because it wasn’t the traditional way. As is common in  the Tuscany region, the bread remains unsalted. That’s unfortunate. Unsalted bread is tasteless (something I learned firsthand from a mistake I made once while making bread … I am careful not to repeat such an aggrievous error).

The arrogance of this rule is astonishing. Lucca is a city that has such memorable food because of foreign influences. Once an important stop on a trade route, it became rich in money and culture because of foreigners coming through … and no doubt, the food was influenced by that as well.

Foreign influences have created some of the greatest tastes we know today, with spices being traded around the globe and techniques being shared and adapted. Indian food, a terrific cuisine, has influences from many other Mediterranean countries. Chinese food has influenced cuisines around the world. And Italian food, oh, Italian food … Do we not remember that the pursuit of spices from foreign places is the very reason that North America became known and inhabited by Europeans in the first place?

A reader recently commented on a stir fry here on Sarah’s Cucina Bella, saying that it’s not very Asian, but still looks tasty (I took the liberty of paraphrasing). She is absolutely right. I don’t strive to cook within classical barriers nor did I promise an Asian stir fry that day. Much like the modern world, my cooking knows no boundaries beyond good taste and I like it that way.  I am very free spirited in that way.

But this isn’t about me. This is about the closing off of Lucca to foreign tastes. I think it’s a fool’s pursuit to not embrace the natural change and adaptation of anything, but particularly food. Forget boundaries … open minds create fabulous new tastes, new dishes, new regional specialties.

Of course, they have a right to protect their classical dishes, but it needn’t be in such a close-minded, we-are-better-than-you sort of way … There are better routes to take to ensure that history and food purism (ha! there is no such thing as truly pure food!) are preserved for study in the future.

Alright readers, what do you think?

Let’s get something established off the bat: I consider myself a fairly liberal person – few things offend me. Few things make me blush. And I rarely see something and wonder how that ended up in a magazine or on television or wherever. I believe in an open and honest relationship with kids and don’t shy away from difficult topics. But I also don’t invite uber-sexuality into my home either. I don’t subscribe to magazines that are inappropriate for my children to flip through and I don’t frequent late night pay per view (in fact, I never order pay per view anything – waste of money IMHO).

One of the magazines that arrives weekly in my little black mailbox is New York Magazine. My husband and I both read it. I typically check out the restaurant reviews and “In Season” column first, and then flip through the interesting articles. I have clippings of “In Season,” in a file in my office. I’ve learned about so many interesting foods from there that I wouldn’t have known about otherwise.

So, after several years of subscribing, I have a reasonable expectation that the magazine won’t run anything that my young children shouldn’t see. I expect to be able to read a reasonably interesting food section.

Enter the now infamous Lindsey Lohan cover shoot that was modeled after Marilyn Monroe’s last cover shoot.

The magazine arrived not covered in plastic. Aside from a notation that she was nude, there was no warning that this might not be appropriate for all readers . . . It was just there. I assumed the shoot would be tasteful — nude, but not naked. To me, nude is the Demi Moore Vanity Fair cover – everything exposed, but covered. Naked is what you find in Playboy. And while the Playboy photos are tasteful, they are not appropriate for, say, a two year old.  That’s why I subscribe to New York Magazine and not Playboy.

It would be an understatement to say I was shocked when I saw the Lindsey Lohan photos – her breasts are bared and little else is left to the imagination. And it goes on for pages. This isn’t an instructional on breast self-exams. Nor is it a spread in an adult magazine. These are gratuitous naked shots in an otherwise general interest magazine.

Before I get railed on with cries of this being artistic – that may have worked for Hugh Hefner for decades, but it doesn’t work here. My kids should be able to see me flip through this magazine without hiding pages . . . And before I hear about being comfortable with the female body, I agree that the body is a beautiful thing, not something shameful. But I am hardpressed to find an excuse that makes this anything more than soft porn.

You want artistic license? Artistic license is Sean Combs being about to speak the actual words on television from the play-turned-TV movie, A Raisin in the Sun. Those words include the N-word – you all know the one – but that is part of the play. It is an insight into a time gone. This LL shoot isn’t.

So, while people go ballistic about Jane Fonda actually saying the so-called C-word on the Today Show, which is part of the name of a segment of The Vagina Monologues that she’s appearing in and while the cast of A Raisin in the Sun had to fight tooth and nail to keep one of the N-word instances to remain at a critic point in the play,  people should take a step back and think a little about this.

Artistic integrity and artistic license is something reserved for true art works – the original Marilyn Monroe shoot, plays, proper names – not an imitation of the original.

Bringing this back around, I am not offended by the offensive words on shows and in plays as mentioned above – they are in context and should my kids be watching with me, they are something that can be a conversation starter for what’s appropriate and what’s not. But risque photos from a less-than-admirable starlet are nothing more than an attention-grabbing, mouth gaping editorial risk. New York Magazine pushed the envelope with this one . . . and they pushed it too far.

What do you think about Lindsey, Jane and Sean? What’s offensive and what isn’t?

Photos from NYMag.com

In any case, the whole tainted spinach scandal topped the news almost exactly one year ago. That being so, you can imagine my surprise when I read that there are concerns over salmonella tainted spinach again. Talk about deju vu. Apparently a different California farm had some spinach test positive for the bacteria . . . fortunately, thanks to increased safety measures, it was caught almost immediately and that day’s batch has been pulled from shelves and stockrooms.

But really. Really. It’s time for the farming industry to look beyond safety control and instead work on rectifying the situations lead to tainting. And maybe, just maybe, it’s time to start focusing more on small time farming and less on corporation farming. I buy almost all of my veggies at local farms . . . in fact, most of our produce comes from my cousin’s farm. I know our growers. And I trust them.

When you are getting your produce from unnamed farms in far off states, how can you garner that same level of comfort and trust? Simply put: you can’t.

Except, I wasn’t born yesterday and claims by the company that they won’t be having any input on the journal entries, that the women are getting full access, that the food is actually okay for you . . . well, that just sounds like McDonald’s is trying to pull a thick curtain of wool over our eyes.

Seriously folks, why wouldn’t comments be allowed? That is one of the things that has allowed the blogosphere to flourish – the public dialogue. And who are these women exactly? What about when should instill confidence? Check out this bit about one of the panelists from the USA Today article cited above:

Joanna Canizares, a Miami postal worker, is one of the panelists. She takes her boys to McDonald’s about twice a week, but she worries about trans fats, she says, because her 8-year-old son is “addicted” to Chicken McNuggets.

Canizares says she knows nuggets may not be the ideal food, but “it’s the lesser of two evils” because her son sometimes refuses to eat anything else.

“It’s better than eating nothing — and at least it has some protein.”

Let’s boil this down a bit: if you fed the kids real food at home, they wouldn’t have a taste for the processed and pressed chicken-like substance that has been deep fried to oblivion. According to McDonald’s website, the four chicken nuggets have 10 grams of protein (assuming the child is eating the regular Happy Meal and not getting a more gargantuan proportion). Meanwhile it’s also got 10 grams of fat and 250 milligrams of sodium. So that “protein” she’s touting as the saving grace to the meal really shies in comparison to all the heart-stopping bad things that are in those nuggets. And that doesn’t even consider the side dish and drink he’s eating too.

Now, if Canizares was eating at home and served a grilled chicken breast (or roasted or whatever) – 4 oz, about half of a breast – to her child, he would consume 27.2 grams of protein – nearly three times the amount found in the nuggets – as well as only 1.5 grams of fat and 76.7 milligrams of sodium. That chicken could be dressed up with delicious and exciting flavors too without impacting the nutritional value.

Obviously, it’s Canizares’ choice what her children eat and don’t eat. And if McDonald’s is okay with her, that’s her prerogative. But McDonald’s chose only women who eat there at least on occasion to participate in this program. What is occasionally though? That’s such a subjective phrase. And if the other women have similar habits to Canizares, won’t they be just a bit more forgiving because they want to feel okay about what their kids are eating?

(Just as a side note, the company says that the women aren’t being paid but their travel is covered by McD’s and they receive a laptop to keep.)

Let’s talk about full access for a minute. Who’s choosing where these women go? The women or the company? Are they going to the source – the slaughterhouses where the animals are killed for their meat? Are they seeing a variety of processing plants, test kitchens and restaurants? To me, all access would mean that these women could choose their destinations. I doubt that will be the case. Chances are McDonald’s will show the women the best of the best to put their best big red shoe forward. And chances are that they will avoid anywhere that would bring negative commentary. And really, you don’t think McDonald’s isn’t going to, um, edit what these women say at all?

If this program is one thing, it’s a brilliant marketing scheme. After all, it’s got people talking. And these women will likely say lovely things about the company and leave feeling much better about their McDonald’s habits. But let’s be real. McDonald’s food is not healthy – it contains insulting amounts of fats (including trans fat) and sodium and lacks the good nutrients that real food has. Do I eat there? Sure, once in a blue moon. But I eat there out of convenience once every few months knowing that it isn’t good for me.

Me thinks the company doth protest too much. If McDonald’s was really serious about appealing to the health conscious consumer, they would clean up their act: eliminate the trans fats now; get their meat from humane slaughterhouses; quit over processing food; offer truly healthy alternatives instead of salads wrought with partially hydrogenated oils and high fructose corn syrups; and just be honest. And don’t tell me that publishing their nutritional content (required by law) and ingredients makes them honest. McDonald’s works overtime to fool consumers into believing their food isn’t that bad. Check out their recent ads in magazines like Parents!

Frankly, these women aren’t going to be telling it like it is. Let some real journalists in there to investigate the company’s processes and maybe I will consider believing the outcome. Anything else is just an insult to my intelligence.

It was 5 years ago today that the world came to a screeching halt around us.

Where were you when it happened? Where were you when you heard?

Me?

I was on a train, running very late for work. It was my last week working for a New York directory publisher and I had intended on heading down to the World Trade Center that morning to grab breakfast and eat on the plaza. But I had missed my alarm, then my train and was desperately late. I called my boss, but had the worst time getting through. Finally I reached her and told her I would be late. She said not to come. At the time, I thought she was angry at my lateness.

The MTA conductor told us there had been an accident, a plane had hit the World Trade Center. They didn’t know many details. It was only later through spurts of cell conversations that the other passengers and I discovered that it wasn’t one but two planes and we, as a country were under attack. It wasn’t a single engine Cessna. They were full sized airline planes, filled with innocent people and they smashed into buildings filled with innocent people. Do you see a theme here?

I made it into the city that morning, albeit for just a few moments. I left the train for seconds before deciding to head home and reentering. Shortly after, I stood with the conductor and other passengers in the last car of the train as it pulled out of the tunnel into daylight. We watched the plume of smoke rise up into the air, clouding the skyline we all loved yet took for granted. It grew smaller and smaller till it disappeared from the horizon.

Tears still spring to my eyes when I see the images and hear the sad stories of child who will never know their moms and dads. Five years later, I am still crying for all the souls lost that day.

But I made a decision that Sept. 11 will not be a stigma for me or for my family. We will not let the world stand still every year because of this. I think I said it best in a letter to the editor that was published in the New York Times in August 2004:

My fiancé and I chose to be married on Sept. 11, 2004, because we cannot live in
fear of what was. As a country, we must move ahead while never forgetting what
happened three years ago.

Some people are surprised by our choice.

I can say only this: my loved ones and I were personally touched by the terrorist
attacks, and we decided that it’s time. Sept. 11 is a day just like Feb. 26,
April 19, June 6 or Nov. 22.

Forgiving the date isn’t neglecting what happened or forgetting those who died; it’s letting the stigma pass and normalcy return.

It’s not letting terrorists sway our lives.

I stand by those words.

Square watermelons?!?

It won’t roll around the fridge, it has a square rind that is easy to cut off….hmm, but a square watermelon?!?

I caught onto this one from reading the Sunday News at Growers & Grocers this week.

Taxes levied on the illegal, and it’s illegal not to pay them. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, Connecticut lawmakers are proud of their taxes that are levied on illegal substances like marijuana, heroin and cocaine. I am failing to comprehend their logic here. What drug dealer is going to high tail it in to pay his taxes on a business he isn’t supposed to be doing?

The New York Post lived up to its reputation yesterday with a jaw dropping headline (“Before they put Cheato Lay’s coffin in the grave, CHECK HE’S IN IT”) on the death of former Enron leader Kenneth Lay. Read more here. And also here. I won’t deign to comment on whether I agree or disagree, since we are all about food here.

Finally, one that comes from me. At least in part. A webcam in Madison Square Park tracking the line at a burger joint. Apparantly it’s THE burger joint in NYC and people are willing to wait hours for eats from this place.

So what was my first job? Well, promise not to laugh too hard, but from when I was 15 until I turned 18, I was a janitor at a local publishing company in my home town. I worked five days a week from 3-7 p.m. cleaning toilets, vacuuming, dusting, and other menial but necessary work. It was honest labor and great experience for me.

While I did learn some important lessons on cleaning (which my husband wishes I would employ more often), the most important lesson I learned was about budgeting my time. Since I worked everyday on top of school work and extracurriculars, I had to be very organized about when I did what. That lesson has stayed with me and to this day I thrive under pressure.

It has particularly come in handy with my cooking and writing – I can set a basic time frame and get things done during that time and then get to my other responsibilities. I know to budget time not just for the actually processes but for development, preparatory work and implementation.