This last week, with no looming deadlines to worry me, I was able to reflect some on my first semester now that it is officially over. First of all, the adage that what you put into your education you'll get out of it is completely true. I put a lot of effort into this class, and that is reflected by my final grade. An online program is hard to accomplish unless you stay on top of your work. A couple of times this semester, I did fall a little behind; each time, it was difficult (but not impossible) to catch up. I would recommend for anyone starting or considering an online program to 1) schedule out your school work time and 2) start readings and assignments as soon as possible. Secondly, there is a LOT of material and a lot of topics that were covered over the course of the semester. My instructor ran the class like a seminar, and we were provided with so many articles and other readings outside the class textbook. I really appreciated this because I was exposed to so many viewpoints and so much information through just the readings that I don't think would have been possible in a traditional classroom setting. My classmates and I engaged in some very valuable discussions, and our diverse backgrounds (many of us came from very different fields) lent even more to the class forums. In this alone, the online program has been a very valuable experience.
My instructor has also been an incredible resource of ideas, topics, and discussion. She is very knowledgeable and active in several areas of librarianship including open access and intellectual freedom, secrecy, government documents, and social responsibility. I think it was my instructor even more than the material that was such an inspiration for me. She brought up a lot of topics that don't seem to get enough discussion in the field, and she asked thought-provoking questions that really made me examine certain aspects of the profession and librarianship as a whole. I got so much out of this class, and I saved everything that was on the reading list in a binder to refer back to in the future.
On a side note, I got my ALA membership card in the mail this last week too. The dues are reasonable and there are a LOT of workshops offered for professional development. There's a webinar next month offered to ALA members that I plan to take; the topic is one that I think the students here on campus would really benefit from. I'll post more general info of the workshop and my impressions after the middle of next month.
Yesterday was the much-anticipated birthday party for my mom's birthday party. I won't disclose her age (it's a number she doesn't like mentioning yet), but it's one of the major years so of course we had to do something special. My older brother came up with the idea of us hosting an open house for her at her place. He also came up with a gift idea: guests could bring Christmas ornaments to put on a jubilee tree, a nod to her penchant for putting up Christmas trees--big and small--all over her house (I have to say that her house always looks so lovely during the holiday season). She got a lot of beautiful and unique ornaments, and the bare tree that had been set up with lights for this day will not need any more ornaments since guests were so generous and several brought more than one ornament. There were so many people in the house--it was standing room only! But Mom had a wonderful time and my dad tells me that she was reading through the guestbook when he left for work this morning. She even got to see friends and relatives that she hasn't seen or talked to in years. I have a feeling that she will remember the party for years to come.
We did have part of the food catered, but we also bought and made some of the food ourselves. My contribution was a large batch of mini red velvet cupcakes with cream cheese frosting. I have to smile as I post this because red velvet is a trademark of my best friend, and she passed on her recipe to me. Sadly, I couldn't find her recipe, so I turned again to southern cuisine queen Paula Deen for her red velvet cupcake recipe. The original recipe can be found here. I did make a few changes, so the recipe as I made it is below.
What you'll need:
For the cupcakes:
2 1/2 c. all-purpose flour
1 1/2 c. sugar
1 tsp. baking soda
1 tsp. salt
2 tsp. cocoa powder
1 1/2 c. vegetable oil
1 c. buttermilk, at room temp
2 eggs, at room temp
1 oz. bottle of red food coloring
1 tsp. white distilled vinegar
1 tsp. vanilla
For the frosting:
1 lb. cream cheese (softened)
2 sticks butter (softened)
1 tsp. vanilla
4 c. powdered sugar
What you'll need to do:
1. Sift together flour, sugar, baking soda, salt, and cocoa powder into a medium bowl.
2. In a large bowl, add the oil buttermilk, eggs, food coloring, vinegar, and vanilla and gently beat everything together. You can do this by hand or with an electric mixer on a low setting.
3. Slowly add the dry ingredients, mixing them into the wet ingredients until you get a smooth batter.
4. Grease mini or regular cupcake tins or line with cupcake paper cups. Distribute the batter among the tins until cups are slightly more than 2/3 full.
5. Bake in the oven at 350 degrees. For mini-cupcakes bake for 12-15 minutes then check them; for regular cupcakes, bake for 20-22 minutes. Use a toothpick to check the cupcakes; toothpick should come out clean when inserted into the center of the cupcakes.
6. Remove the cupcake tins from oven and let the cupcakes cool for 5 min, then remove the cupcakes from the tins and finish cooling them completely on a cooling rack.
7. Using an electric beater, combine the cream cheese, butter and vanilla together in a large bowl until you get a smooth mixture.
8. With the mixer on a low setting, slowly add the powdered sugar and beat until completely mixed. Increase the speed and mix the frosting on high until it's light and fluffy.
9. Frost the completely cool cupcakes and decorate with sprinkles if desired.
If I don't have the chance to post again before next week, Happy Holidays to you. Enjoy!
Monday, December 20, 2010
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
More Holiday Traditions
A little over a month ago, I wrote about my family's ravioli making and the tradition that it comes from. Another tradition that my grandmother started (and one that died when she passed away) was her candy-making.
I have to admit that Gramma was an artiste in the kitchen. She could make the most ordinary of ingredients turn into something fantastic. I would like to think that I got some of her almost magical ability, but I know that I still have a long way to go before I am as good as she is. Every year, for Easter and Christmas, she would make hand-dipped chocolates and other candies to serve with dessert. Her candy grew quite famous among family and friends, and it became a much-anticipated part of our large family gatherings. My mother tells me that she began making her own hand-dipped chocolates in 1980 (when she was 61). I'm not sure where she got the idea, but she perfected it over the next 27 years before she died. She was also very picky when it came to the ingredients she bought. Her chocolate had to come from Ghirardelli. Her other ingredients came from a little shop not too far from where she lived (surprisingly, the shop is still there). She made the candy fondant herself.
At the peak of her candy making, she was rolling out and hand-dipping upwards of 50 pounds of candy. It was given out to family, and friends, and friends of friends. She gave it to her dentist (funny enough, the office loved it and looked forward to their box every year). My sister would take it to work and share it with her boss and her department. Neighbors got some, old neighbors got some. The candy was spread far and wide. Flavors included raspberry, mint, orange, strawberry, coffee, vanilla, chocolate, and more that she would add in as whimsy and taste dictated. Her most famous candy by far, however, were the brandy cherries. Sadly, I have never been able to find any candy anywhere that comes close to these most revered of her candies. This particular candy was not a child-friendly one (lots of alcohol!), and it was almost a rite of passage when you were allowed to finally have one of Gramma's brandy cherries.
After Gramma died, the candy-making tradition seemed to die with her. We never pursued it, although we mentioned often enough how we wished we could make her candy and bring it back. Finally, this Christmas, more than three years since she passed away, we've reignited the tradition. My sister, my mom, and I tried out a couple of her classics using recipes we made up or found online. We put out a batch of English toffee and 24 peanut clusters.
So for you, I will be posting the English toffee recipe we used. The original recipe we used was Paula Deen's English toffee recipe, which can be found here. However, we did change a couple of things.
What you'll need:
14 Tbs. butter
1 c. sugar
2 Tbs. cold water
1 tsp. vanilla
1 dash of salt
6 oz. semisweet chocolate chips or baking chips (Ghirardelli chocolate preferred, of course)
1/2 c. chopped pecans or walnuts
a candy thermometer
What you'll need to do:
1. Generously butter a cookie sheet. This will keep the toffee from sticking to it.
2. In a medium-sized heavy saucepan, add the butter, sugar, and water and heat it over medium-high heat. Bring to a bubbling boil while constantly stirring.
3. Remove the spoon, lower to medium-low heat, and slowly cook the mixture to a very brittle stage. On the candy thermometer the temperature would read 300 to 310 degrees. If you don't have a candy thermometer, a cold water test will work (when dropped into cold water, the candy will separate into hard and brittle threads).
4. Remove from heat and add the vanilla and salt. Stir together and pour the mixture onto the prepared cookie sheet. Spread it around quickly, as it will start to form. Cool slightly, then top with the chocolate and spread it around as it begins to melt. After the chocolate is melted completely, sprinkle the chopped nuts onto the top.
5. Cool the toffee completely. Use a spatula to pry the toffee off of the cookie sheet. Break it into pieces and store in an airtight container.
We may try another batch before Christmas, and we may be doing hand-dipped chocolates next week as well. Unfortunately, since the hand-dipped chocolates are a "family trademark" as my mom calls it, I will not be posting a recipe for those.
Enjoy the toffee!
I have to admit that Gramma was an artiste in the kitchen. She could make the most ordinary of ingredients turn into something fantastic. I would like to think that I got some of her almost magical ability, but I know that I still have a long way to go before I am as good as she is. Every year, for Easter and Christmas, she would make hand-dipped chocolates and other candies to serve with dessert. Her candy grew quite famous among family and friends, and it became a much-anticipated part of our large family gatherings. My mother tells me that she began making her own hand-dipped chocolates in 1980 (when she was 61). I'm not sure where she got the idea, but she perfected it over the next 27 years before she died. She was also very picky when it came to the ingredients she bought. Her chocolate had to come from Ghirardelli. Her other ingredients came from a little shop not too far from where she lived (surprisingly, the shop is still there). She made the candy fondant herself.
At the peak of her candy making, she was rolling out and hand-dipping upwards of 50 pounds of candy. It was given out to family, and friends, and friends of friends. She gave it to her dentist (funny enough, the office loved it and looked forward to their box every year). My sister would take it to work and share it with her boss and her department. Neighbors got some, old neighbors got some. The candy was spread far and wide. Flavors included raspberry, mint, orange, strawberry, coffee, vanilla, chocolate, and more that she would add in as whimsy and taste dictated. Her most famous candy by far, however, were the brandy cherries. Sadly, I have never been able to find any candy anywhere that comes close to these most revered of her candies. This particular candy was not a child-friendly one (lots of alcohol!), and it was almost a rite of passage when you were allowed to finally have one of Gramma's brandy cherries.
After Gramma died, the candy-making tradition seemed to die with her. We never pursued it, although we mentioned often enough how we wished we could make her candy and bring it back. Finally, this Christmas, more than three years since she passed away, we've reignited the tradition. My sister, my mom, and I tried out a couple of her classics using recipes we made up or found online. We put out a batch of English toffee and 24 peanut clusters.
So for you, I will be posting the English toffee recipe we used. The original recipe we used was Paula Deen's English toffee recipe, which can be found here. However, we did change a couple of things.
What you'll need:
14 Tbs. butter
1 c. sugar
2 Tbs. cold water
1 tsp. vanilla
1 dash of salt
6 oz. semisweet chocolate chips or baking chips (Ghirardelli chocolate preferred, of course)
1/2 c. chopped pecans or walnuts
a candy thermometer
What you'll need to do:
1. Generously butter a cookie sheet. This will keep the toffee from sticking to it.
2. In a medium-sized heavy saucepan, add the butter, sugar, and water and heat it over medium-high heat. Bring to a bubbling boil while constantly stirring.
3. Remove the spoon, lower to medium-low heat, and slowly cook the mixture to a very brittle stage. On the candy thermometer the temperature would read 300 to 310 degrees. If you don't have a candy thermometer, a cold water test will work (when dropped into cold water, the candy will separate into hard and brittle threads).
4. Remove from heat and add the vanilla and salt. Stir together and pour the mixture onto the prepared cookie sheet. Spread it around quickly, as it will start to form. Cool slightly, then top with the chocolate and spread it around as it begins to melt. After the chocolate is melted completely, sprinkle the chopped nuts onto the top.
5. Cool the toffee completely. Use a spatula to pry the toffee off of the cookie sheet. Break it into pieces and store in an airtight container.
We may try another batch before Christmas, and we may be doing hand-dipped chocolates next week as well. Unfortunately, since the hand-dipped chocolates are a "family trademark" as my mom calls it, I will not be posting a recipe for those.
Enjoy the toffee!
Monday, December 13, 2010
St. Lucia Day
To give a little history of the holiday, St. Lucia (or St. Lucy) was an Italian saint who died as a Christian martyr. How she came to be celebrated in Sweden is explained in various ways, but Swedish tradition tells of a woman appearing to starving people in Sweden in the Lake Vänern region and bringing them food. She was dressed in white and wearing a crown of burning candles on her head. The woman was believed to be St. Lucy, and this initiated the celebration of her feast day in that region. Eventually, the tradition spread to the rest of Sweden.
As part of the tradition now celebrated, the eldest girl in the family will wake up very, very early before the coming day begins to lighten the sky and dress in a white gown tied with a red sash. On her head she'll put a crown--commonly made of evergreen or lingonberry leaves--with lighted candles in it (the daring will use real lit candles). She'll go around to her family, singing as she goes, to wake them. Often, she will carry food with her, traditionally Lucia buns (called "Lussekattor" in Swedish) and coffee. In Sweden, this tradition takes place everywhere, and even businesses and public buildings like schools and hospitals will participate in their own rendition of the Lucia Day tradition, including having a girl as their own St. Lucia with a train of girls also in white who are her handmaidens; boys join the train too as the "star boys." Do an image search for "St. Lucia Day celebration" and you'll see how big the trains get.
St. Lucia Day celebrations are not held in Sweden alone, although the manner of celebrations differ in other areas. The other Scandinavian countries celebrate this day, as well as Italy and an island in the Caribbean that shares St. Lucia's name. Parts of the US where the population is heavily Scandinavian also have communal celebrations of this day.
In my family, this day is always remembered and the Swedish tradition always kept for two reasons. 1) My father was born and raised in Sweden, and we celebrate this as part of the family's culture. 2) Both of my parents share this day as their birthday, so this has also become a part of their birthday celebration.
When I was a little girl in pre-school, my mother would come to my school as St. Lucia and share this tradition and ceremony with my class. She would wear the white gown and red sash, and on her head would be a crown of greenery with battery-powered candles. Mom would come in, singing Lucia's song, and carrying a tray of goodies for me and my classmates. You can imagine how interesting this was for my classmates whose Christmas figures included Jesus, Santa Claus, Rudolph, and Frosty but no crowned woman in white. At home, she would dress me up in my own Lucia outfit (I was the oldest girl in the household), carefully help me light a candle that I would hold away from my long hair, and jump back into bed with my father to watch me walk in as Lucia's song played on the stereo (since I couldn't memorize the words yet). And of course she would gasp right along with my dad and say how beautiful I looked. This would promptly be followed by coffee (for my parents) and muffins in bed.
As the oldest of my dad's children, I still continue this tradition for them even though I no longer live with them. Years ago, I learned the song so that I could sing it without the help of the stereo. I have a white gown that I pull out of my closet once a year for this holiday, and I wear the sash and crown that my mom wore for me and my classmates so long ago. Since I don't live with them anymore, I sneak into their house very early in the morning, make a pot of coffee, gather a tray of food, and carry it into their bedroom, singing to announce Lucia's arrival (you can see the first verse of the song at the bottom of this post).
I think my mom especially loves having this birthday present every year. Someday, if I have a daughter, this tradition will be passed on to her.
Sankta Lucia:
Natten går tunga fjät
rund gård och stuva;
kring jord, som sol förlät,
skuggorna ruva.
Då i vårt mörka hus,
stiger med tända ljus,
Sankta Lucia, Sankta Lucia.
Translation:
Night walks with a heavy step
Round yard and hearth,
As the sun departs from earth,
Shadows are brooding.
There in our dark house,
Walking with lit candles,
Santa Lucia, Santa Lucia!
I'll be posting my weekly recipe tomorrow.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Wikileaks and me
I know that many people have weighed in on Wikileaks's release of classified US government documents. My purpose in bringing it up and adding my voice to the chorus is not to chastize them, although I have very mixed feelings about their decision to post the cables as expressed in one of my posts on my class's discussion board:
"I don't know what the answer is in regards to information relating to national security. On one side is this feeling I have that the citizens of a country have the right to know what their government is doing, so [government] transparency--something that has been promised in the past but never truly attained--would be necessary for this to happen. Yet, I can understand why such information should be kept from the public eye--leaks can happen like the one Wikileaks was just involved in, and information that's dangerous for other ("enemy") countries to know could be released that harms us in the end."
So on the topic of the ethics of the leak, I'm still on the fence. I honestly don't know whether it's right or wrong. Maybe it'll depend on how many lives are negatively effected by this (and I mean ordinary citizens, not political leaders).
My real concern lies with the fact that the Library of Congress has decided to block all access to Wikileaks from all of their computers, public and staff computers alike. The Library of Congress issued a statement, which is also posted on their own blog as to why they did this. In their statement, they say that as federal agency they are "obligated to protect classified information." This would make sense if the whole world also didn't have access to these cables. However, I fail to see the logic behind this reason for blocking documents posted on a website that is publically accessible from 1) public libraries, 2) public wireless access points, and 3) home computers (I would also bet the leaks can be uploaded on mobile devices too). I hate to tell the US government, but the documents are no longer classified if everyone can access them and read them. They get credit for trying to prevent people from reading them, including addressing federal government workers[1] (and even students looking to get future jobs in the federal government are being told to question the wisdom in looking at the documents[2]); but they won't be able to put "the genie back in the bottle"[3], a term the Progressive Librarians Guild uses in their statement admonishing the LoC for its move to block Wikileaks.
On a related matter, the Library of Congress also houses the Congressional Research Service. For those who don't know what the CRS is, it is a group of researchers in the LoC that provides reports that are "high-level professional analysis"[4] on various topics to the Congressional committees (more information about the CRS if you're interested can be found on their website here). Because the CRS does all of its research out of the Library of Congress, it too cannot view the cables and, according to this article, will be unable to refer directly to any of the cables; they would have to rely on secondary sources, like newspapers that have cited the leaked documents. Finding the secondary sources to cite may prove difficult, especially after an article I read this morning that discusses the list of secret locations that was released early this week. The article states, "the Associated Press has decided against publishing their names because of the sensitive nature of the information."[5] Well, that's very considerate of the Associated Press, but unfortunately the information is still out there. If Congress requires a report on these topics--for example, in order to determine legislature for future protection of sensitive digital US documents--the CRS would not be able to use anything from the leaked cables themselves. I would bet my year's salary that every country the US has its eye on has these documents and is going over them very carefully, including the location list. So these countries can look through that information all it wants, but the CRS can't? How does this make sense?
I remember seeing a couple of articles saying that LoC claimed they were told to block the site. Unfortunately, I can't find which articles mentioned that (I've read of lot of literature on this topic over the last week), so I can't state whether or not I actually saw those articles or even if the LoC did in fact make those claims. I can say, according to a number of articles including this one on Library Journal, that a memo from the White House's Office of Management and Budget did go out directing federal workers that classified information cannot be accessed on non-classified systems. (The original memo can be found on the TPM Muckraker website.) However, at no point was any office, department, or agency told to block the website. So why did the LoC do it?
That is the million-dollar question. Why did the LoC do it? While they may be the federal archives, they are still a library and should follow those tenets that libraries hold so dear, including advocating against censorship. If our national library (which the LoC really is) will not stand up against censorship, then why do the rest of the nation's public libraries fight so darn hard against it? I feel very saddened by the LoC's choice to take the initiative to censor Wikileaks, first because the block wasn't being required of them and second because libraries are supposed to fight censorship, not promote it.
The staff of the LoC are being very quiet about all this, but I wonder what they would say? Do they agree with the move? Do they feel conflicted about it? Sadly, they are probably being directed to say nothing about it, regardless of what they hear. I would like to know their opinion and perspective on this situation; it may help me to understand why a library, an institution that historically has stood for open access and freedom of information, would choose to close its doors the way the LoC did.
For the record, to date I have not looked at the leaked documents.
[1] Lipton, E. (2010, December 4). Don’t Look, Don’t Read: Government Warns Its Workers Away From WikiLeaks Documents. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/world/05restrict.html
[2] Grinberg, E. (2010, December 8). Will reading WikiLeaks cost students jobs with the federal government? CNN.com. Retrieved from http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-08/justice/wikileaks.students_1_wikileaks-security-clearance-students?_s=PM:CRIME
[3] Progressive Librarians Guild. (2010, December 4). On Wikileaks and the Library of Congress: A Statement by the Progressive Librarians Guild. Retrieved from http://libr.org/plg/lcwikileaks.php
[4] Aftergood, S. (2010, December 6). Blocking Access to Wikileaks May Harm CRS, Analysts Say. Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2010/12/crs_block.html
[5] List reveals secret locations. (2010, December 6). Retrieved from http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_16794319?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com&nclick_check=1
"I don't know what the answer is in regards to information relating to national security. On one side is this feeling I have that the citizens of a country have the right to know what their government is doing, so [government] transparency--something that has been promised in the past but never truly attained--would be necessary for this to happen. Yet, I can understand why such information should be kept from the public eye--leaks can happen like the one Wikileaks was just involved in, and information that's dangerous for other ("enemy") countries to know could be released that harms us in the end."
So on the topic of the ethics of the leak, I'm still on the fence. I honestly don't know whether it's right or wrong. Maybe it'll depend on how many lives are negatively effected by this (and I mean ordinary citizens, not political leaders).
My real concern lies with the fact that the Library of Congress has decided to block all access to Wikileaks from all of their computers, public and staff computers alike. The Library of Congress issued a statement, which is also posted on their own blog as to why they did this. In their statement, they say that as federal agency they are "obligated to protect classified information." This would make sense if the whole world also didn't have access to these cables. However, I fail to see the logic behind this reason for blocking documents posted on a website that is publically accessible from 1) public libraries, 2) public wireless access points, and 3) home computers (I would also bet the leaks can be uploaded on mobile devices too). I hate to tell the US government, but the documents are no longer classified if everyone can access them and read them. They get credit for trying to prevent people from reading them, including addressing federal government workers[1] (and even students looking to get future jobs in the federal government are being told to question the wisdom in looking at the documents[2]); but they won't be able to put "the genie back in the bottle"[3], a term the Progressive Librarians Guild uses in their statement admonishing the LoC for its move to block Wikileaks.
On a related matter, the Library of Congress also houses the Congressional Research Service. For those who don't know what the CRS is, it is a group of researchers in the LoC that provides reports that are "high-level professional analysis"[4] on various topics to the Congressional committees (more information about the CRS if you're interested can be found on their website here). Because the CRS does all of its research out of the Library of Congress, it too cannot view the cables and, according to this article, will be unable to refer directly to any of the cables; they would have to rely on secondary sources, like newspapers that have cited the leaked documents. Finding the secondary sources to cite may prove difficult, especially after an article I read this morning that discusses the list of secret locations that was released early this week. The article states, "the Associated Press has decided against publishing their names because of the sensitive nature of the information."[5] Well, that's very considerate of the Associated Press, but unfortunately the information is still out there. If Congress requires a report on these topics--for example, in order to determine legislature for future protection of sensitive digital US documents--the CRS would not be able to use anything from the leaked cables themselves. I would bet my year's salary that every country the US has its eye on has these documents and is going over them very carefully, including the location list. So these countries can look through that information all it wants, but the CRS can't? How does this make sense?
I remember seeing a couple of articles saying that LoC claimed they were told to block the site. Unfortunately, I can't find which articles mentioned that (I've read of lot of literature on this topic over the last week), so I can't state whether or not I actually saw those articles or even if the LoC did in fact make those claims. I can say, according to a number of articles including this one on Library Journal, that a memo from the White House's Office of Management and Budget did go out directing federal workers that classified information cannot be accessed on non-classified systems. (The original memo can be found on the TPM Muckraker website.) However, at no point was any office, department, or agency told to block the website. So why did the LoC do it?
That is the million-dollar question. Why did the LoC do it? While they may be the federal archives, they are still a library and should follow those tenets that libraries hold so dear, including advocating against censorship. If our national library (which the LoC really is) will not stand up against censorship, then why do the rest of the nation's public libraries fight so darn hard against it? I feel very saddened by the LoC's choice to take the initiative to censor Wikileaks, first because the block wasn't being required of them and second because libraries are supposed to fight censorship, not promote it.
The staff of the LoC are being very quiet about all this, but I wonder what they would say? Do they agree with the move? Do they feel conflicted about it? Sadly, they are probably being directed to say nothing about it, regardless of what they hear. I would like to know their opinion and perspective on this situation; it may help me to understand why a library, an institution that historically has stood for open access and freedom of information, would choose to close its doors the way the LoC did.
For the record, to date I have not looked at the leaked documents.
[1] Lipton, E. (2010, December 4). Don’t Look, Don’t Read: Government Warns Its Workers Away From WikiLeaks Documents. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/world/05restrict.html
[2] Grinberg, E. (2010, December 8). Will reading WikiLeaks cost students jobs with the federal government? CNN.com. Retrieved from http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-08/justice/wikileaks.students_1_wikileaks-security-clearance-students?_s=PM:CRIME
[3] Progressive Librarians Guild. (2010, December 4). On Wikileaks and the Library of Congress: A Statement by the Progressive Librarians Guild. Retrieved from http://libr.org/plg/lcwikileaks.php
[4] Aftergood, S. (2010, December 6). Blocking Access to Wikileaks May Harm CRS, Analysts Say. Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2010/12/crs_block.html
[5] List reveals secret locations. (2010, December 6). Retrieved from http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_16794319?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com&nclick_check=1
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Christmas Time Is Here
Of course I still have my paper to finish, and I'm starting to feel the pressure from it with the deadline a mere six days away. I'm hoping to get enough time to work on it during the week that I'll be able to finish it up on Saturday, read back over it to edit any mistakes, and submit it with a sigh of relief. We'll see what my time at work and in the evenings looks like.
Of course with Christmas comes a lot of Christmas cooking. We have the raviolis which are already done. Next week, my mom, sister, cousin, and I will attempt to try and make the English toffee and hand-dipped chocolates that Gramma also used to make every year. Originally, tomorrow night was the planned date to try our hand at candy-making, but the weather outlook is not so good with a chance of rain. Gramma never made candy when it rained because the chocolate wouldn't set right; there's too much moisture in the air. So hopefully next week we get to try it out and I'll have much to tell about what we try (maybe I'll have pictures too!).
Another thing I'll be making this year (and something that I made last year) is lemon curd. Last year, I included jars of it in tea-themed gift baskets that also included special teas and fresh scones, a nod to the high teas my best friend and I put together every year for the ladies in my family for Mother's Day. These baskets were given out to my extended family, and I've gotten requests to do lemon curd again this year. The recipe I use is from my Better Homes and Gardens cookbook. Lemon curd is actually a lot easier to make than I thought before trying this recipe.
What you'll need:
1 c. sugar
2 Tbs. cornstarch
3 tsp. lemon peel, finely shredded
6 Tbs. lemon juice
6 Tbs. water
6 egg yolks, beaten
1/2 c. butter or margarine, cut up
What you'll need to do:
1. In a medium saucepan, add the sugar and cornstarch. Mix together, then add the lemon peel, lemon juice, and water. Cook it over medium heat until the mixture has become thickened and bubbly.
2. Remove half of the mixture from the saucepan and add it to the egg yolks. Stir until it is mixed together. Slowly return the egg mixture to the saucepan to keep the egg from solidifying.
3. Cook over medium heat while stirring constantly until the curd comes to a gentle boil. Cook and stir for another two minutes.
4. Remove saucepan from heat. Add the butter and stir until it has completely melted. Cover the saucepan with plastic wrap and chill in the fridge for about an hour.
If your curd has a few pieces of solidified egg in it from when you added the egg yolks into the saucepan, you can strain them out before putting up the lemon curd. It's not necessary, but I know some people (like me) are perfectionists. This recipe will give you about two cups.
With so many of us struggling to make ends meet, there is nothing wrong with giving others homemade things as Christmas gifts. Feel free to use this recipe for your own gift baskets. Enjoy!
Friday, December 3, 2010
The Easiest Chocolate Cake Ever!
I know I'm a little late (ok a lot late) with this week's post, but it's crunch time in school land and I have my last--and biggest--paper due a week from Monday. For the most part, all the research has been done already. However, there is a lot to write, and a lot of concepts from my sources that I want to include. In other words, a lot of work to be done.
My instructor wanted an 18-20 page (including the references) paper. My paper is currently holding at 17 pages, and I still have a lot of ground to cover. Granted, those 17 pages do include 3 pages of appendices, but I still feel like I'm going to end up with a much longer paper than my instructor wanted. I'll keep my fingers crossed that she won't mind too terribly.
And now for this week's recipe. This recipe goes out to all the men and women who love chocolate. I am passing on to you a recipe for a 5-minute chocolate cake that you make in a mug and microwave. It may sound questionable, and possibly "hooky," but I have tried this recipe and it is gooooooood. My mother emailed it to me, and it was emailed to her, and to the person who sent it to her, and so on, so I have no idea where this recipe originated. If anyone knows, leave a comment to that effect so I can update the post and give credit to the maker.
What you'll need:
4 Tbs. flour
4 Tbs. sugar*
2 Tbs. cocoa
1 egg
3 Tbs. milk
3 Tbs. oil
3 Tbs. chocolate chips (optional)
small splash of vanilla
1 large microwavable mug
What you'll need to do:
1. Add the flour, sugar, and cocoa to the mug. Stir so they're mixed well. Add the egg and completely mix it and the dry ingredients together.
2. Add the milk and oil and mix everything well. Add the chocolate chips (if you want them) and the vanilla and mix completely.
3. Put the mug in the microwave and cook for 3 minutes on high. Make sure your microwave runs at least 1000 watts.
4. The cake may rise over the top of the mug, so don't be alarmed if this happens. Allow cake to cool a little. You can tip it out onto a plate if you want.
This is perfect with a scoop of vanilla ice cream. Enjoy! I'm off to continue working on my paper. I will make every effort to get back on schedule next week with another recipe posted on Monday.
*A note in the recipe says that Splenda can be used in lieu of sugar.
My instructor wanted an 18-20 page (including the references) paper. My paper is currently holding at 17 pages, and I still have a lot of ground to cover. Granted, those 17 pages do include 3 pages of appendices, but I still feel like I'm going to end up with a much longer paper than my instructor wanted. I'll keep my fingers crossed that she won't mind too terribly.
And now for this week's recipe. This recipe goes out to all the men and women who love chocolate. I am passing on to you a recipe for a 5-minute chocolate cake that you make in a mug and microwave. It may sound questionable, and possibly "hooky," but I have tried this recipe and it is gooooooood. My mother emailed it to me, and it was emailed to her, and to the person who sent it to her, and so on, so I have no idea where this recipe originated. If anyone knows, leave a comment to that effect so I can update the post and give credit to the maker.
What you'll need:
4 Tbs. flour
4 Tbs. sugar*
2 Tbs. cocoa
1 egg
3 Tbs. milk
3 Tbs. oil
3 Tbs. chocolate chips (optional)
small splash of vanilla
1 large microwavable mug
What you'll need to do:
1. Add the flour, sugar, and cocoa to the mug. Stir so they're mixed well. Add the egg and completely mix it and the dry ingredients together.
2. Add the milk and oil and mix everything well. Add the chocolate chips (if you want them) and the vanilla and mix completely.
3. Put the mug in the microwave and cook for 3 minutes on high. Make sure your microwave runs at least 1000 watts.
4. The cake may rise over the top of the mug, so don't be alarmed if this happens. Allow cake to cool a little. You can tip it out onto a plate if you want.
This is perfect with a scoop of vanilla ice cream. Enjoy! I'm off to continue working on my paper. I will make every effort to get back on schedule next week with another recipe posted on Monday.
*A note in the recipe says that Splenda can be used in lieu of sugar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)