Skip to main content

eat the cup, part 8


well, i don't really have an option but to pull a repeat today. i've already cooked food from both italy and the ukraine and, as things progress, i'm going to run into this problem more and more.

at first, i was going to go ukrainian, because i felt like i owed them one. while i was in kensington on the weekend, one of the guys there was quizzing me on my predictions for the upcoming games and i had picked switzerland of the ukraine. my logic was that switzerland hadn't allowed a goal yet and no one could beat them if they couldn't score. in point of fact, this is wrong, because goals scored in a shoot out do not count, so you can lose a game without allowing the opposing team a goal. so, sorry about that, ukraine.

on the other hand, i couldn't face the idea of a really heavy meal today, so i went with the easier choice and made a meal of sumer vegetables with balsmic and basil. (this was my attempt at approximating the mind-blowing grilled vegetables at seven numbers.) one of the many things i like about italian cuisine is that it is so flexible. in the middle of winter, i could just as easily find a dish that was as temperature-appropriate.

indeed, there seem to be very few things that italy doesn't excel at, at least in the realm of the senses- art, cinema, various types of music, food, wine... they have a certain dramatic flare. (a few people i know would say that their soccer team uses that dramatic flare just a little too often. when these guys take a hit, you'd think they were acting a hambone macbeth.)

ah well. as orson welles once said: “in italy for thirty years under the borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they produced michelangelo, leonardo da vinci and the renaissance. in switzerland, they had brotherly love; they had five hundred years of democracy and peace and what did that produce? the cuckoo clock.” and, as it turns out, the world cup seems to be in agreement.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

fun-raising

no, i am not dead, nor have i been lying incapacitated in a ditch somewhere. i've mostly been preparing for our imminent, epic move, which is actually not so terribly epic, because we found a place quite close to where we are now. in addition, i've been the beneficiary of an inordinately large amount of paying work, which does, sadly, take precedence over blogging, even though you know i'd always rather be with you.

indeed, with moving expenses and medical expenses looming on the horizon, more than can be accounted for even with the deepest cuts in the lipstick budget, dom and i recently did something that we've not done before: we asked for help. last week, we launched a fundraising campaign on go fund me. it can be difficult to admit that you need a helping hand, but what's been overwhelming for both of us is how quick to respond so many people we know have been once we asked. it's also shocking to see how quickly things added up.

most of all, though, the ex…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …