Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditThanks to the Serious Eats site for alerting me to a new July 4 campaign. Kitchen Gardeners International (the same people who successfully led the charge for a White House Kitchen Garden) are encouraging patriotic citizens to celebrate America's independence by feasting on locally grown and raised food on the fourth.
The related "Food Independence Day" petition asks the nation's 50 governors to participate and share their recipes and the names of the local farmers, fisherman, and food producers whose ingredients they'll be using.
So far, more than 5,000 people have pledged to eat a meal made with local food on July 4. Check out the map of where things are planned. If there's nothing near you, join the campaign and add yourself. If you don't think you can create a mostly local meal, pick one dish and try to include one local thing--maybe some mint from a community garden in a drink, broccoli from a CSA, watermelon from a roadside stand in a salad, or a roasted pastured chicken from a nearby farmer's market.
Need help finding a source of local food? Local Harvest is a good resource for finding farmers, CSAs, and other local producers by zip code.
And just so this doesn't all sound too utopian or elitist, heed organizer Roger Dorian, who wisely cautions that "moving towards food independence doesn't mean having to do everything and grow everything on our own. It's about learning what we, our soils, climate, and local farmers can produce, effortlessly or with some coaxing, and committing to eat more of these things when nature offers them up to us. In doing so, we discover that we have more choices and freedom than we realized."
Help spread the word about Food Independence Day by adding the map, petition, press release and widgets to your website, blog, or social network page.
PS: If you have extra time on your hands and want to follow me on Twitter -- a micro-blog -- click here. You'll find (slightly) more personal posts, basketball and breaking news and lots of links.
Share this article
Peter Rothberg
Your guide to expressing informed dissent to war, racism, sexism, environmental degradation and market-based solutions to social problems.
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
"The related "Food Independence Day" petition asks the nation's 50 governors to participate and share their recipes and the names of the local farmers, fisherman, and food producers whose ingredients they'll be using."
Peter...my gov is mark sanford. i think his favorite dish is argentinian cougar...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 6:58pm
Ccjicken On the 4th? Just couldn't bring yourself to suggest loacal-raised beef, eh? :)
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 8:30pm
PETER: "And just so this doesn't all sound too utopian or elitist,..."
Peter, I'm rolling all over my keyboard.....having a good laugh! (PS: I needed it.....a tenant gave me his end-of-July vacate notice today! A great young tenant who always paid a day or two early....an engineer who got laid off. He doesn't think he will find something fast and is moving back home, a suburb of Houston. I even offered to cut him some slack on rent for a few months while he looks for work!)
No, Peter, you don't sound "too utopian or elitist".....you `sound' like you're running out of more worthy causes to beat the drums for....:))
Posted by Happy at 06/30/2009 @ 8:39pm
No, Peter, you don't sound "too utopian or elitist".....you `sound' like you're running out of more worthy causes to beat the drums for....:))
Posted by Happy at 06/30/2009 @ 8:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person
whats not worthy about this cause, hap?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 8:41pm
whats not worthy about this cause, hap?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 8:41pm
Happy only thinks causes that put more money in his pocket are worthy.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 9:06pm
maybe some mint from a community garden in a drink, broccoli from a CSA, watermelon from a roadside stand in a salad, or a roasted pastured chicken from a nearby farmer's market.
or raspberries from an unsuspecting neighbour's backyard....
Posted by frosty zoom at 06/30/2009 @ 9:18pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 9:06pm | ignore this person | warn this person
i think he's tom tancredo...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 9:20pm
whats not worthy about this cause, hap?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 8:41pm
I didn't say it's "not worthy"...but there maybe more worthy causes to take up Peter's talent and our fart time....:)
Posted by Happy at 06/30/2009 @ 10:01pm
Home grown food and global warming are always troted out by leftist in the warm and growing seasons, them in the cold dead of winter they rush to the supermarket and curse the cold because there isn't enough cheap carbon fuel available to keep them warm and they must eat!
Its a funny ritual to observe!!!!
Posted by BigPasture at 06/30/2009 @ 10:09pm
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck /what_percentage_of_sonia_sotomayors_opinions_have.html
This is a little side not to whoever posted that sotomayor had been overturned 80% of the time. Should fact check before listening to Rush.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 10:45pm
i think he's tom tancredo...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 9:20pm
Hehe.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 10:45pm
and you say <i>i'm</i> random.
Posted by frosty zoom at 06/30/2009 @ 10:46pm
and you say <i>i'm</i> random.
Posted by frosty zoom at 06/30/2009 @ 10:46pm
Just came to mind.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 11:26pm
This is a little side not to whoever posted that sotomayor had been overturned 80% of the time. Should fact check before listening to Rush.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 10:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Don't know what Rush has said. However, if you are looking for "facts";
Already three of her five appellate opinions which were reviewed by the court have been overturned by the Supreme Court of the U.S.A. which made 60% of her cases that were reviewed. Now that the Ricci case has been overturned she is up to 67% of her 6 appellate cases reviewed that were overturned!
Yea, almost 70% of her cases being overturned is better than 80% since she is on the underqualified affirmative action idiot grade curve!
Posted by BigPasture at 06/30/2009 @ 11:55pm
"Home grown food and global warming are always troted out by leftist in the warm and growing seasons, them in the cold dead of winter they rush to the supermarket and curse the cold because there isn't enough cheap carbon fuel available to keep them warm and they must eat!"
it's always so painfully difficult to decipher bigpasture's posts.
and what of this?
"Already three of her five appellate opinions which were reviewed by the court have been overturned by the Supreme Court of the U.S.A. "
it's painfully obvious that bigpasture has no idea how the law works, and what this particular statistic means. you see, bigpasture would like you to believe that ms. sotomayor is somehow on the judicial fringe with respect to her rulings, when in fact, she is well within the mainstream.
and "overturned" only means that the ruling she gave was embraced by less judges than the opposite ruling.
for example, with the firefighters' case, only 4 of the 9 justices gave the same ruling as sotomayor.
that means nearly 50% of the justices sided with sotomayor.
hardly a "fringe" candidate is she.
but i really cannot expect bigpasture to realize this.
Posted by darladoon at 07/01/2009 @ 01:01am
Actually the other thing is she is not out of the norm. 60% is the average overturn rate on the supreme court. Which is how many of her cases were overturned. She is actually a little below average technically and she has had 232 cases. Which means only 1.5% of them were overturned in the end.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/01/2009 @ 02:35am
"Actually the other thing is she is not out of the norm"
i already said that, ccc
Posted by darladoon at 07/01/2009 @ 10:06am
and she has had 232 cases.Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/01/2009 @ 02:35am | ignore this person | warn this person
Lucky for her the other 225 were not reviewed by the supreme court;since 67% of the 6 reviewed were overturned demonstrating she is on the underqualified affirmative action idiot grade curve!
Posted by BigPasture at 07/01/2009 @ 10:08am
This is a non issue. Food is transported for a reason - it makes food cheaper and gives the people more choices. About the only thing the left wants to give people more choice of is abortion - everything else - government control. FYI it is hard to grow oranges and pineapples in Minnesota and other parts north.
Posted by pyeatte at 07/01/2009 @ 10:37am
transporting food does not make it cheaper.
locally grown food is an issue.
example: farmers in Long Island, 50 to 100 miles from NYC, grow terrific potatoes. I can't get them at my supermarket. Idaho, california etc potatoes yes.
Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 12:16pm
BigPasture?
big cow pie is more like it.
Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 12:17pm
Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 12:17pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Why bother to prove your ignorance of Great Plains Western History is one of your only sourses of bliss?
Posted by BigPasture at 07/01/2009 @ 1:33pm
Posted by BigPasture at 07/01/2009 @ 10:08am
Oh? As if that is an issue? How many decisions of John Roberts were reviewed by the SC? Answer: none. He did not serve as a appeals court justice long enough. So just by the fact that she actually had her rulings reviewed by the SC you would argue that she is not qualified. Horse shit.
Furthermore it has been pointed out that just because she has had her rulings overturned if like the recent firefighter case it was a 5-4 decision then by your logic the 4 current SCJs are not qualified, by that logic only conservative judges are acutally qualified, that may be your desire, but that is not reality. C'mon, you have a right to not liking her for whatever reason you choose, but don't be an idiot about it.
Posted by Extraneous at 07/01/2009 @ 2:00pm
Emile, your comment "transporting food does not make it cheaper" despite your Long Island example, is incorrect.
Local farming is inherently inefficient. per acre yeilds on potatos in Long Island are substantially lower than Idaho and California. Why do you think that Long Island Isn't the potato capital of the US?
Because the LI potatos are inefficient, the amount of acrage needed to produce them could never displace CA and ID potatos as a cheaper alternative.
Also, as noted in the thread, you can't grow all of the things you like to eat in Manhattan, therefore mass corporate farming is the only sustainable efficcient way to feed 300m people. 1 corporate farm providing produce to 500 retail stores in Manhattan is cheaper and more efficient than 1000 farms trying to supply the same 500 retailers (think of the traffic and carbon footprint of that)
Note: If you think that farms should be limited to say 100 acres per farmer, and a tractor can plow 300 acres/day, you have excess capacity in farming and therefore innefficciency (as most farmers are not going to share tractors.)
Posted by WallStreet at 07/01/2009 @ 2:19pm
Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 12:16pm: Transporting by itself makes nothing cheaper - it is just a way to get goods to market. It is the cost of growing that determines the price. The transportation costs are a factor but it allows us to have a bigger diversity of food year around. Potatoes? Quite frankly one potato is about as good as another and while I am not familar with Long Island potatoes I suspect the quantity grown there is rather small in comparison to the total consumption in NY. Further, I suspect potatoes grown in Long Island are consumed nearby unless there is a specialty (fetish) market in San Francisco for Long Island potatoes. Good grief!
Posted by pyeatte at 07/01/2009 @ 2:28pm
Edit, John Roberts did have one of his decisions over turned by the SC. 5-3 with him abstaining. On the legality of military tribunals. Sorry for the error above, I guess John Roberts would not be qualified according to lotsa Cowpie.
Posted by Extraneous at 07/01/2009 @ 2:34pm
It's friggin' HARD to eat locally if you're not making big bucks. Fact is, industrial food IS cheaper because it's farmed industrially, and is subsidized.
But it is possible to eat locally, three meals a day. This starving journalist did it, and made a video of the wacky experience.
http://www.hcn.org/articles/the-hungry-intern-breakfast
Posted by jonnypeace at 07/01/2009 @ 3:20pm
Further, I suspect potatoes grown in Long Island are consumed nearby unless there is a specialty (fetish) market in San Francisco for Long Island potatoes. Good grief! Posted by pyeatte at 07/01/2009 @ 2:28pm | ignore this person | warn this person
read my post again, more carefully. I live in NYC.
Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 3:20pm
Potatoes? Quite frankly one potato is about as good as another .... Posted by pyeatte at 07/01/2009 @ 2:28pm
Oh, no. Not at all. It's a matter of quality, as well as quantity.
Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/01/2009 @ 6:56pm
of course it is, speedy. I don't mind Idaho or Maine spuds, I just prefer the local variety.
and don't try to tell me that the travel time and travel costs of said taters are not an issue.
Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 7:16pm
Posted by pyeatte at 07/01/2009 @ 2:28pm
You need to work on your math. If you transport a ton of food 3000 miles for $1000, then that ton of food just got $1000 more expensive. The only way that transportation costs go down to negligible is if you cut other costs, government subsidies off-set these costs or you increasing your yields (which has a upper threshold beyond which you start destroying your soil).
So, the only way the costs comes to zero is if you exploit agricultural labor and push yields above a sustainable threshold and for U.S. products, government subsidies. So, you may not be paying at the supermarket - but you're paying.
Also, you should try community supported agriculture, because for a couple of hundred bucks, you can get more food than you can eat for a household of 4 for half the year. The supermarket can't beat that with a communist style hammer and anvil.
Posted by srjenkins at 07/01/2009 @ 9:11pm
i already said that, ccc
Posted by darladoon at 07/01/2009 @ 10:06am
Sorry didn't see that.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/01/2009 @ 9:26pm
Find me some decent oranges from Md and I'll gladly eat them instead. In the meantime, I'll take my Sunkist even if it comes from the Moon.
Sorry, I already spend enough time looking at labels, guys. Enough's enough.
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 07/02/2009 @ 08:09am
Mr. WallStreet has probably never worked in a wholesale produce distribution center. Those big trucks loaded for long distance transport are often supplied by little trucks that sometimes travel considerable mileage to discharge smaller quantities. Farms tend to be considerably outside urban boundaries.
And btw, not all produce is delivered to large supermarkets in big trucks. When's the last time you saw an eighteen wheeler delivering produce to a restaurant or grocery store?
Think about your carbon footprint.
Posted by Sorelish at 07/02/2009 @ 11:40am
"Local farming is inherently inefficient"
most ridiculous statement of the day. and i just love how he adds "inherently" to it.
Posted by darladoon at 07/02/2009 @ 11:41am
Posted by srjenkins at 07/01/2009 @ 9:11pm: If it wasn't cost effective to transport food it would not happen. Also, nobody transports one ton, they transport 10 or 100 tons or more - truck, train...
Posted by pyeatte at 07/02/2009 @ 11:46am
Posted by pyeatte at 07/02/2009 @ 11:46am
What, exactly, is the relevance of how many tons are transported if we are calculating cost based on $1000 per ton (as a hypothetical example just to show you the badness of your logic)?
Posted by srjenkins at 07/02/2009 @ 11:59am
"If it wasn't cost effective to transport food it would not happen."
Are you for real?
Posted by BlackFrancis at 07/02/2009 @ 2:19pm
Peter, I'm grilling a cow, and I don't care where it comes from!
Posted by SHUNK at 07/03/2009 @ 03:31am
I'm grilling a cow,...
Posted by SHUNK at 07/03/2009 @ 03:31am
Last night, after eating out, my wife and I got curious and visited a nearby supermarket catering to Mediterranean, Mid-East, N. Africa and Easter Europe cultures....a good eye-opener! More types of baklava and international wines than I've ever seen!
The most memorable, however, were spotted by my better half.......packages of raw, soft, oval Lamb Testicles roughly the size of small mangoes....and Lamb heads w/out skin. I look for cow testicles, came up empty.......:)
Posted by Happy at 07/03/2009 @ 3:25pm