| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2004/6/15-16 [Recreation/Food/Alcohol, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:30811 Activity:insanely high |
6/14 Even better than ketchup as vegetable, USDA declares that french fries
are a vegetable! Or is that Freedom Vegetables?
http://csua.org/u/7rs (yahoo news)
\_ it's like the Ents took a long time to decide something obvious
\_ Ketchup isn't a vegetable, it's a fruit.
\_ Look, a fruit bat!
\_ Eric the fruit bat?
\_ The USDA never said ketchup was a vegetable but it's up there with
Al Gore Invented The Internet jokes.
\_ They were considering classifying it as a vegetable for school
lunches. The fact that they even considered it is enough...
\_ 'They' consider all sorts of stupid things. I'll bet you
there are war plans on a dusty shelf in the pentagon somewhere
for what to do when Britain turns against us, invades Florida
and nukes the New York and Washington. Just because it was
considered doesn't mean anything. You take your government
way too seriously, IMO.
\_ Uh, the point was/is that governments suffer from
dilbertesque idiocy and lack common sense. I don't
see how you could grok that I "take government too
seriously" from that. Perhaps you are projecting...
I think it's rather sad that our tax money is being
wasted on studies such as "should ketchup be classified
as a vegetable." Apparently you don't. Perhaps you'd
like to pay for my share in all stupid studies, because
I'd certainly like a refund on my tax dollar.
\_ I think it's worse than sad. I think government is too
big and too stupid. I think our taxes should be 10% at
most and all the stupid programs, welfare, etc, should
go away. I also think it's a hopeless cause.
\_ read the cia's own account of the government conspiracy
to conceal the existence of extraterrestrials--even
in the absence of any such ETs existence:
http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html
\_ Ok...? But what has this to do with ketchup, the
USDA and Al Gore's inventions?
\_ It's an example of government idiocy which may
appear somewhat sinister, but is really just
plain old idiocy. hence it supports what the post
one level up was saying, which was why i posted it.
\_ Ah, ok. Thanks. I'll check out the link when
I get home.
\_ But he DID!!!! Remember the information super-highway???
\_ Remember the Alamo!
\_ Wrong. The Reagan administation did propose classifying ketchup
as a vegetable until public outcry forced them to back down:
http://mimi.essortment.com/historyketchup_rlju.htm
\_ Why do you hate America?
\_ Yes yes some idiot always has to bring up some bullshit.
Move along. I was there. You were in diapers.
\_ obBothWaysUpHillThroughTheSnow
\_ Off topic, eh? I said you were ignorant, not that
my life was harder.
\_ wimp. we had to fight sabertooth tigers
for our lunch and access to the modem
pool. This being before fire, clubs or
dsl.
\_ tigers? you had tigers?! jeez, what kind of
goddamn wet behind the ears punks are they letting
in these days, anyway?
\_ This is accepted fact. Stop with your blatant attempts
at mythologizing.
\_ Accepted fact among your "thank god he's dead, I'm
going to rent Taxi Driver to celebrate" friends. The
rest of us remember the truth.
\_ Wow. You are truly deranged.
http://www.fact-index.com/k/ke/ketchup.html
\_ http://fact-index.com? uh huh.
\_ Wrong. Of course, this is the "liberal
Washington Post" so I am sure you will
discount it:
http://csua.org/u/7s6
\_ Discount it? Yes, but that's better than simply
deleting it instantly which is what you do when
I post links to back my statements. |
| 5/24 |
|
| csua.org/u/7rs -> story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040615/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/french_fries_vegetables_1 By IRA DREYFUSS, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - Batter-coated french fries are a fresh vegetable, according to the Agriculture Department, which has a federal judge's ruling to back it up. But the department said Tuesday that the classification applies only to rules of commerce, not nutrition, and it doesn't consider an order of fries the same as an apple in school lunches. The ruling last week by federal District Judge Richard Schell in Beaumont, Texas, allowed batter-coated french fries to be considered fresh vegetables under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act. Most other frozen fries had been on the list since 1996. Regulations under the law help to assure buyers of commodities such as french fries that they are getting what they ordered, said George Chartier, a spokesman for the department's Agricultural Marketing Service. Frozen fries are fresh simply because they don't meet the standard necessary for them to be listed as processed, and adding batter to the fries does not change the classification, he said. The commodities act does not apply to nutrition, where batter-coated french fries are still considered processed food. The department does not plan to repeat its experience in trying to classify ketchup as a vegetable in school lunches, Chartier said. The ketchup-as-vegetable proposal was put forward in the Reagan administration, and the department dropped the idea after it found itself not only opposed but laughed at. The department's proposal to list batter-coated fries as fresh under the commodities act provisions was challenged by a Dallas-area food distributor, Fleming Companies. The company is in Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization, and the law requires creditors who sold fresh fruits and vegetables to be paid in full, while other creditors might get partial payment, said Fleming Companies' lawyer, Tim Elliott of Chicago. The law was intended to protect growers of fruits and vegetables, especially small farmers, and the ruling misconstrues the act's intent, he said. "It's unfathomable to me that, when Congress passed this law in 1930 and used the term fresh vegetable,' they ever could have conceived that large food-processing companies could have convinced USDA that a frozen battered french fry fell into that definition," Elliott said. Although Fleming Companies sold the fries to supermarkets, most are eaten in fast food restaurants, Elliott said. The coating makes the fry crunchy and adds flavor, he said. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. |
| www.cia.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html Gerald K Haines An extraordinary 95 percent of all Americans have at least heard or read something about Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), and 57 percent believe they are real. Former US Presidents Carter and Reagan claim to have seen a UFO. UFOlogists--a neologism for UFO buffs--and private UFO organizations are found throughout the United States. Many are convinced that the US Government, and particularly CIA, are engaged in a massive conspiracy and coverup of the issue. The idea that CIA has secretly concealed its research into UFOs has been a major theme of UFO buffs since the modern UFO phenomena emerged in the late 1940s. DCI R James Woolsey ordered another review of all Agency files on UFOs. Using CIA records compiled from that review, this study traces CIA interest and involvement in the UFO controversy from the late 1940s to 1990. It chronologically examines the Agency's efforts to solve the mystery of UFOs, its programs that had an impact on UFO sightings, and its attempts to conceal CIA involvement in the entire UFO issue. What emerges from this examination is that, while Agency concern over UFOs was substantial until the early 1950s, CIA has since paid only limited and peripheral attention to the phenomena. Background The emergence in 1947 of the Cold War confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union also saw the first wave of UFO sightings. The first report of a "flying saucer" over the United States came on 24 June 1947, when Kenneth Arnold, a private pilot and reputable businessman, while looking for a downed plane sighted nine disk-shaped objects near Mt Rainier, Washington, traveling at an estimated speed of over 1,000 mph. Arnold's report was followed by a flood of additional sightings, including reports from military and civilian pilots and air traffic controllers all over the United States. Nathan Twining, head of the Air Technical Service Command, established Project SIGN (initially named Project SAUCER) to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute within the government all information relating to such sightings, on the premise that UFOs might be real and of national security concern. The Technical Intelligence Division of the Air Material Command (AMC) at Wright Field (later Wright-Patterson Air Force Base) in Dayton, Ohio, assumed control of Project SIGN and began its work on 23 January 1948. Although at first fearful that the objects might be Soviet secret weapons, the Air Force soon concluded that UFOs were real but easily explained and not extraordinary. The Air Force report found that almost all sightings stemmed from one or more of three causes: mass hysteria and hallucination, hoax, or misinterpretation of known objects. Nevertheless, the report recommended continued military intelligence control over the investigation of all sightings and did not rule out the possibility of extraterrestrial phenomena. Amid mounting UFO sightings, the Air Force continued to collect and evaluate UFO data in the late 1940s under a new project, GRUDGE, which tried to alleviate public anxiety over UFOs via a public relations campaign designed to persuade the public that UFOs constituted nothing unusual or extraordinary. UFO sightings were explained as balloons, conventional aircraft, planets, meteors, optical illusions, solar reflections, or even "large hailstones." GRUDGE officials found no evidence in UFO sightings of advanced foreign weapons design or development, and they concluded that UFOs did not threaten US security. They recommended that the project be reduced in scope because the very existence of Air Force official interest encouraged people to believe in UFOs and contributed to a "war hysteria" atmosphere. On 27 December 1949, the Air Force announced the project's termination. With increased Cold War tensions, the Korean war, and continued UFO sightings, USAF Director of Intelligence Maj Gen. Project BLUE BOOK became the major Air Force effort to study the UFO phenomenon throughout the 1950s and 1960s. The task of identifying and explaining UFOs continued to fall on the Air Material Command at Wright-Patterson. With a small staff, the Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) tried to persuade the public that UFOs were not extraordinary. Projects SIGN, GRUDGE, and BLUE BOOK set the tone for the official US Government position regarding UFOs for the next 30 years. Early CIA Concerns, 1947-52 CIA closely monitored the Air Force effort, aware of the mounting number of sightings and increasingly concerned that UFOs might pose a potential security threat. On 19 and 20 July, radar scopes at Washington National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base tracked mysterious blips. The Air Force scrambled interceptor aircraft to investigate, but they found nothing. The incidents, however, caused headlines across the country. The White House wanted to know what was happening, and the Air Force quickly offered the explanation that the radar blips might be the result of "temperature inversions." Later, a Civil Aeronautics Administration investigation confirmed that such radar blips were quite common and were caused by temperature inversions. Nevertheless, he recommended that the Agency continue monitoring the problem, in coordination with ATIC. He also urged that CIA conceal its interest from the media and the public, "in view of their probable alarmist tendencies" to accept such interest as confirming the existence of UFOs. Smith believed "there was only one chance in 10,000 that the phenomenon posed a threat to the security of the country, but even that chance could not be taken." According to Smith, it was CIA's responsibility by statute to coordinate the intelligence effort required to solve the problem. Smith also wanted to know what use could be made of the UFO phenomenon in connection with US psychological warfare efforts. The Air Force claimed that 90 percent of the reported sightings were easily accounted for. The other 10 percent were characterized as "a number of incredible reports from credible observers." The Air Force rejected the theories that the sightings involved US or Soviet secret weapons development or that they involved "men from Mars"; The Air Force briefers sought to explain these UFO reports as the misinterpretation of known objects or little understood natural phenomena. Sheffield, England, 4 March 1962 & Minneapolis, Minnesota, 20 October 1960 The CIA Study Group also searched the Soviet press for UFO reports, but found none, causing the group to conclude that the absence of reports had to have been the result of deliberate Soviet Government policy. The group also envisioned the USSR's possible use of UFOs as a psychological warfare tool. In addition, they worried that, if the US air warning system should be deliberately overloaded by UFO sightings, the Soviets might gain a surprise advantage in any nuclear attack. The group believed that the Soviets could use UFO reports to touch off mass hysteria and panic in the United States. The group also believed that the Soviets might use UFO sightings to overload the US air warning system so that it could not distinguish real targets from phantom UFOs. H Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director of OSI, added that he considered the problem of such importance "that it should be brought to the attention of the National Security Council, in order that a communitywide coordinated effort towards it solution may be initiated." He urged action because he was convinced that "something was going on that must have immediate attention" and that "sightings of unexplained objects at great altitudes and traveling at high speeds in the vicinity of major US defense installations are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles." He drafted a memorandum from the DCI to the National Security Council (NSC) and a proposed NSC Directive establishing the investigation of UFOs as a priority project throughout the intelligence and the defense research and development community. Chadwell then briefly reviewed the situation and the active program of the ATIC relating to UFOs. The committee agreed that the DCI should "enlist... |
| mimi.essortment.com/historyketchup_rlju.htm A brief history of ketchup A look at the history of ketchup, America's favorite condiment. From its beginning as a fish sauce in China, to the sweet tomato version we love today. Nearly everyone likes ketchup, even if what they like to put it on seems odd-Nixon covered his cottage cheese with it, the Japanese eat it on rice, and one ice cream manufacturer allegedly once tried a ketchup ice cream. But how did this condiment, by some estimates owned by 97% of US households, become America's favorite accompaniment to the classic hamburger and fries? In the 1600s Dutch and British seamen brought back a salty pickled fish sauce called 'ketsiap' from China. In this version, it was more related to soy or oyster sauce than the sweet, vinegary substance we call ketchup today. Variations in both the name and the ingredients quickly developed. British alternatives included mushrooms (the favorite), anchovies, oysters, and walnuts. In 1690 the word 'catchup' appeared in print in reference to this sauce, and in 1711 'ketchup'. The first ketchup recipe was printed in 1727 in Elizabeth Smith's The Compleat Housewife, and called for anchovies, shallots, vinegar, white wine, sweet spices (cloves, ginger, mace, nutmeg), pepper, and lemon peel. Eighty-five years later the first tomato ketchup recipe was published in Nova Scotia by American ex-pat James Mease, which he often refers to as 'love apple' ketchup-he attempts to give it more cachet by stating that this variation is influenced by French cooking, although there is no proof of it. Recipes continued to appear periodically, featuring mushrooms in Britain and tomatoes in the United States. A New England Farmer offered it for sale in 1830 in bottles, and priced from 33 to 50 cents. In 1837, Americans selling ketchup in Britain were encouraged to rename it 'tomato chutney' in order to draw attention to the differences between their product and the mushroom ketchup popular in Britain. In addition to the difference in ingredients, the British version also differed in texture, being nearly transparent and very thin in consistency. Ketchup was sold nationwide in the US by 1837 thanks to the hard work of Jonas Yerkes, who sold the product in quart and pint bottles. He used the refuse of tomato canning-skins, cores, green tomatoes, and lots of sugar and vinegar. Lots of other small companies followed suit-by 1900 there were 100 manufacturers of ketchup. The big success came in 1872 when HJ Heinz added ketchup to his line of pickled products and introduced it at the Philadelphia fair. The Heinz formula has not changed since, and has become the standard by which other ketchups are rated. In 1848 some ketchup manufacturers came under fire for their unsanitary practices-coal tar was frequently used to heighten the red color. Others made the condiment from concentrated tomato pulp in the off-season, which they stored in questionable circumstances. This debate continued until the 1900s, when the Pure Food Act put strict limits on food manufacturers. Variations such as catsup, catchup, katsup, and others abounded alongside 'ketchup'. However, when the Reagan administration briefly decided to count ketchup as a vegetable in 1981, Del Monte Catsup found itself out of the loop due to their spelling-they permanently changed to 'ketchup', but by then public outcry had forced a reversal of administration policy. Ever since, though, you'll be hard-pressed to find a bottle from any manufacturer labeled anything other than 'ketchup'. Although it frequently graces such foods as fries and greasy burgers, ketchup itself has a moderate health benefit, as it contains lycopene, an antioxidant associated with decreased cancer risk. |
| www.fact-index.com/k/ke/ketchup.html Larger tomato and ketchup Ketchup has not always been made out of tomatoes. It started out as a general term for sauce, typically made of mushrooms or fish brine, herbs and spices. David Stockman, proposed classifying ketchup as a vegetable as part of Reagan's budget cuts for federally financed school lunch programs (it would make it cheaper to satisfy the requirements on vegetable content of lunches). The suggestion was widely ridiculed and the proposal was killed. |
| csua.org/u/7s6 -> homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/chris.holt/home.informal/bar/politics/ketchup From dks@MITEDU Sun Feb 26 13:02:48 1995 Trickle-Down Vegetables ----------------------- | | | Copyright 1981 The Washington Post | September 15, 1981: First Section; A10 | School Lunches Flunk GAO Nutrition Test | By Ward Sinclair, Washington Post Staff Writer | | | No surprises for Johnny on this one: public school lunches get | a C for quantity, but an F for nutritional content in a new | report card by the General Accounting Office. Some of the | lunches did not even provide one fourth of the RDA, the GAO | found, although most met the quantity requirements. The | task force said the proposals would "compromise" the | nutritional integrity of the $35 billion program and that | cost-saving measures, other than changing meal content, should | be adopted. The task force findings and comments were not | mentioned by USDA in its lengthy explanation of its proposals, | published earlier this month in the Federal Register. His wife sets the | table with china worth over $200,000. The attorney general parties much | of the time and the secretary of Health and Human Services poses for a | magazine cover in white tie, tails and moronic grin. He is shown | sitting down at a banquet table the same week the administration says | that the size of school lunches will be shrunk and condiments will now | be considered vegatables. Stories of budget | cutbacks are juxtaposed with stories about parties. Stories about | programs being ended are juxtaposed with pictures of a president on | horseback. Not since the Marx Brothers movies have the rich seemed so | foolish. Not since Herbert Hoover has a president played the role of | Margaret Dumont. Is the president's -- | indeed the administration's -- life style relevant? Does a man who | thinks he has a mandate to shred all but the basics of | Democratic-liberalism have to live modestly himself? Should a Richard | Schweiker, who is presiding over a dimunition of the welfare budget, | refuse -- simply for the sake of appearances -- to pose like a | robber-baron in a Thomas Nast cartoon? Would things be better for the | poor if Reagan and Schweiker and the rest of the administration lived | poorly themselves? Reagan, after all, is not the first | president to live well while in office. Recent history serves up the | example of Franklin Roosevelt, the squire of Hyde Park, who smoked | cigarettes through a holder, wore a cape and spoke with a | Groton-Harvard-Columbia accent. Harry Truman, the man who followed, | lived modestly, but that was not the case with Dwight Eisenhower, who | vacationed in Palm Springs and Palm Beach and stocked his Gettysburg | farm with gifts from his rich friends. Next came John Kennedy of whom | no more need be said and then Richard Nixon of both San Clemente and | Key Biscayne of whom lots could be said, but nothing that would | disprove the point that modest living is not necessarily a presidential | tradition. But most of the presidents who lived richly, talked a | different game. Roosevelt may have been an aristocrat, but he was the | champion of the common man. The same was true of Kennedy, and while | neither Nixon or Eisenhower were what you might call socialists, | neither were they attempting to gut the social programs of their | predecessors. He is the first modern president whose life | style matches his rhetoric. But Stockman's effort to stop one flap | instantly started another. Agriculture Secretary John R Block, | whose department issued the regulation, was sorely miffed. I think it would be a | mistake to say that ketchup per se was classified as a | vegetable . Ketchup in combination with other things | was classified as a vegetable." This is one of the most ridiculous | regulations I ever heard of, and I suppose I need not add that | I know something about ketchup and relish--or did at one time." Agriculture | Secretary John R Block, whose agency wrote the rules, offers a | different explanation. "Both President Reagan and I felt they | were in tune with the administration's philosophy. Unfortunately, they | were misunderstood and misinterpreted . The intent and thrust will | not be changed" when the rules are reissued. |
| fact-index.com -> www.fact-index.com/ Index Search Mathematical and Natural Sciences Astronomy - Biology - Chemistry - Computer science - Earth science - Ecology - Health science - Mathematics - Physics - Statistics Applied Arts and Sciences Agriculture - Architecture - Business - Communication - Education - Engineering - Family and consumer science - Government - Law - Library and information science - Medicine - Politics - Public affairs - Software engineering - Technology - Transport Social Sciences and Philosophy Anthropology - Archaeology - Economics - Geography - History - History of science and technology - Language - Linguistics - Mythology - Philosophy - Political science - Psychology - Sociology Culture and Fine Arts Classics - Cooking - Dance - Entertainment - Film - Games - Gardening - Handicraft - Hobbies - Holidays - Internet - Literature - Music - Opera - Painting - Poetry - Radio - Recreation - Religion - Sculpture - Sports - Television - Theater - Tourism - Visual arts and design Other Category Schemes About our category schemes - Alphabetical order by title - By academic discipline - Historical timeline - Themed timelines - Calendar - Reference tables - Biographies - How-tos This article is from Wikipedia. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. |