Ingredients
- 6 cups water
- 1 cube chicken bouillon
- 1 pound dried black-eyed peas, sorted and rinsed
- 1 onion, diced
- 2 cloves garlic, diced
- 1 red bell pepper, stemmed, seeded, and diced
- 1 jalapeno chile, seeded and minced
- 8 ounces diced ham
- 4 slices bacon, chopped
- 1/2 teaspoon cayenne pepper
- 1 1/2 teaspoons cumin
- salt, to taste
- 1 teaspoon ground black pepper
Directions
- Pour the water into a slow cooker, add the bouillon cube, and stir to dissolve. Combine the black-eyed peas, onion, garlic, bell pepper, jalapeno pepper, ham, bacon, cayenne pepper, cumin, salt, and pepper; stir to blend. Cover the slow cooker and cook on Low for 6 to 8 hours until the beans are tender.
Jill noted we hadn't included anything for InstaPots in some time. You can use a traditional slow cooker for this recipe or your InstaPot.
Another reason to note this recipe is the black eyed peas.
They are a good source of iron and a good source of fiber. Remember fiber helps our digestion in many ways including helping with our blood sugar levels. That's why there's a move in this country among some diabetics (some Type II diabetics) to address the condition of diabetes by significantly increasing their intake of fiber.
Black eyed peas can be purchased in the can, you can get them fresh, you can get them frozen and you can purchase them as dried beans. You should either soak dried black eyed peas overnight or else boil them for 3 to five minutes and then let stand for 2 hours. After those two hours, you can drain and rinse them and then cook. Instructions are on the plastic bag that the black eyed peas come in.
It's not winter yet but I did make a pot of black eyed peas this evening. Not the recipe above, just a pot of black eyed peas from dried beans. I do try to make sure that my family gets enough fiber.
And when money was tight -- as it usually was in the early days of our marriage -- we would eat a lot of dried beans not because of their nutritional value but because they were so cheap. They are still inexpensive.
My youngest daughter had a question for me and we discussed it. Afterwards, she said I should note it here. (This is my daughter that never wants to be mentioned online. But this time she does, so I'll note her.)
She's recently lost 15 pounds and is confused because it was hard work and she doesn't understand how she gained the weight in the first place?
Our metabolism -- unless we're physically active -- will slow down. But that wasn't really her issue.
She was putting on a few pounds each year since she'd moved into her own place. She wasn't eating a lot ("pigging out" as she put it). What was going on?
What was going on was sides. While she lived here, we would have a main dish and then we'd have sides.
Sides might be a salad, squash, some other vegetable, usually a bean or a pea, corn, you name it.
So I'd prepare a main dish and two or three sides. The sides were always plentiful in fiber.
When you live on your own, there is a temptation to eat and cook quickly. So you may -- as my daughter was doing -- just focus on the main dish if you're just cooking something for you. If you're eating the main dish without sides, you're not getting as much fiber as you previously were. A high fiber diet can help you maintain your weight. (As opposed to increasing it.)
This is from The Mayo Clinic:
Eat more fiber. You've probably heard it before. But do you know why fiber is so good for your health?
Dietary fiber — found mainly in fruits, vegetables, whole grains and legumes — is probably best known for its ability to prevent or relieve constipation. But foods containing fiber can provide other health benefits as well, such as helping to maintain a healthy weight and lowering your risk of diabetes, heart disease and some types of cancer.
Selecting tasty foods that provide fiber isn't difficult. Find out how much dietary fiber you need, the foods that contain it, and how to add them to meals and snacks.
What is dietary fiber?
Dietary fiber, also known as roughage or bulk, includes the parts of plant foods your body can't digest or absorb. Unlike other food components, such as fats, proteins or carbohydrates — which your body breaks down and absorbs — fiber isn't digested by your body. Instead, it passes relatively intact through your stomach, small intestine and colon and out of your body.
Fiber is commonly classified as soluble, which dissolves in water, or insoluble, which doesn't dissolve.
- Soluble fiber. This type of fiber dissolves in water to form a gel-like material. It can help lower blood cholesterol and glucose levels. Soluble fiber is found in oats, peas, beans, apples, citrus fruits, carrots, barley and psyllium.
- Insoluble fiber. This type of fiber promotes the movement of material through your digestive system and increases stool bulk, so it can be of benefit to those who struggle with constipation or irregular stools. Whole-wheat flour, wheat bran, nuts, beans and vegetables, such as cauliflower, green beans and potatoes, are good sources of insoluble fiber.
The amount of soluble and insoluble fiber varies in different plant foods. To receive the greatest health benefit, eat a wide variety of high-fiber foods.
Benefits of a high-fiber diet
A high-fiber diet:
- Normalizes bowel movements. Dietary fiber increases the weight and size of your stool and softens it. A bulky stool is easier to pass, decreasing your chance of constipation. If you have loose, watery stools, fiber may help to solidify the stool because it absorbs water and adds bulk to stool.
- Helps maintain bowel health. A high-fiber diet may lower your risk of developing hemorrhoids and small pouches in your colon (diverticular disease). Studies have also found that a high-fiber diet likely lowers the risk of colorectal cancer. Some fiber is fermented in the colon. Researchers are looking at how this may play a role in preventing diseases of the colon.
- Lowers cholesterol levels. Soluble fiber found in beans, oats, flaxseed and oat bran may help lower total blood cholesterol levels by lowering low-density lipoprotein, or "bad," cholesterol levels. Studies also have shown that high-fiber foods may have other heart-health benefits, such as reducing blood pressure and inflammation.
- Helps control blood sugar levels. In people with diabetes, fiber — particularly soluble fiber — can slow the absorption of sugar and help improve blood sugar levels. A healthy diet that includes insoluble fiber may also reduce the risk of developing type 2 diabetes.
- Aids in achieving healthy weight. High-fiber foods tend to be more filling than low-fiber foods, so you're likely to eat less and stay satisfied longer. And high-fiber foods tend to take longer to eat and to be less "energy dense," which means they have fewer calories for the same volume of food.
- Helps you live longer. Studies suggest that increasing your dietary fiber intake — especially cereal fiber — is associated with a reduced risk of dying from cardiovascular disease and all cancers.
How much fiber do you need?
The Institute of Medicine, which provides science-based advice on matters of medicine and health, gives the following daily fiber recommendations for adults:
Fiber: Daily recommendations for adults
| Age 50 or younger | Age 51 or older | |
|---|---|---|
| Institute of Medicine | ||
| Men | 38 grams | 30 grams |
| Women | 25 grams | 21 grams |
Your best fiber choices
If you aren't getting enough fiber each day, you may need to boost your intake. Good choices include:
- Whole-grain products
- Fruits
- Vegetables
- Beans, peas and other legumes
- Nuts and seeds
Refined or processed foods — such as canned fruits and vegetables, pulp-free juices, white breads and pastas, and non-whole-grain cereals — are lower in fiber. The grain-refining process removes the outer coat (bran) from the grain, which lowers its fiber content. Enriched foods have some of the B vitamins and iron added back after processing, but not the fiber.
Fiber supplements and fortified foods
Whole foods rather than fiber supplements are generally better. Fiber supplements — such as Metamucil, Citrucel and FiberCon — don't provide the variety of fibers, vitamins, minerals and other beneficial nutrients that foods do.
Another way to get more fiber is to eat foods, such as cereal, granola bars, yogurt and ice cream, with fiber added. The added fiber usually is labeled as "inulin" or "chicory root." Some people complain of gassiness after eating foods with added fiber.
However, some people may still need a fiber supplement if dietary changes aren't sufficient or if they have certain medical conditions, such as constipation, diarrhea or irritable bowel syndrome. Check with your doctor before taking fiber supplements.
Tips for fitting in more fiber
Need ideas for adding more fiber to your meals and snacks? Try these suggestions:
- Jump-start your day. For breakfast choose a high-fiber breakfast cereal — 5 or more grams of fiber a serving. Opt for cereals with "whole grain," "bran" or "fiber" in the name. Or add a few tablespoons of unprocessed wheat bran to your favorite cereal.
- Switch to whole grains. Consume at least half of all grains as whole grains. Look for breads that list whole wheat, whole-wheat flour or another whole grain as the first ingredient on the label and have at least 2 grams of dietary fiber a serving. Experiment with brown rice, wild rice, barley, whole-wheat pasta and bulgur wheat.
- Bulk up baked goods. Substitute whole-grain flour for half or all of the white flour when baking. Try adding crushed bran cereal, unprocessed wheat bran or uncooked oatmeal to muffins, cakes and cookies.
- Lean on legumes. Beans, peas and lentils are excellent sources of fiber. Add kidney beans to canned soup or a green salad. Or make nachos with refried black beans, lots of fresh veggies, whole-wheat tortilla chips and salsa.
- Eat more fruit and vegetables. Fruits and vegetables are rich in fiber, as well as vitamins and minerals. Try to eat five or more servings daily.
- Make snacks count. Fresh fruits, raw vegetables, low-fat popcorn and whole-grain crackers are all good choices. A handful of nuts or dried fruits also is a healthy, high-fiber snack — although be aware that nuts and dried fruits are high in calories.
High-fiber foods are good for your health. But adding too much fiber too quickly can promote intestinal gas, abdominal bloating and cramping. Increase fiber in your diet gradually over a few weeks. This allows the natural bacteria in your digestive system to adjust to the change.
Also, drink plenty of water. Fiber works best when it absorbs water, making your stool soft and bulky.
New topic, WSWS continues to cover the strike by the autoworkers. Here are some links:
GM restores health care to strikers in maneuver to smooth path for UAW sellout
By
Tom Hall,
27 September 2019
Media commentators feared the cutoff of healthcare would backfire, with the Detroit Free Press likening it to “pouring gas on the fire,” and only harden workers’ resolve against both GM and the UAW.
UAW keeping workers in the dark as it works to shut down strike against GM
In photo op at GM picket line, Sanders promotes nationalism, covers for Democrats and UAW
As walkout leads to layoffs across North America
Counting on UAW to sabotage strike, GM not budging on concession demands
“It would be wonderful if the strike expanded to the other auto plants”
Michigan auto parts worker speaks in support of GM strike
By
our reporter,
27 September 2019
General Motors is seeking to replicate the
highly exploitative conditions existing in the auto parts industry into
its assembly plants, counting on the collaboration of the UAW.
More layoffs at parts plants as GM, UAW strategize how to defeat strike
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Friday:
Friday, September 27, 2019.. Ethics.
In the United States, the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination continues. Jim Newall (SLATE) notes:
While most of the news focus this week pertained to certain goings-on in the House of Representatives—goings-on that of course Elizabeth Warren was the first candidate to call for, in April—Warren has started to take Joe Biden’s lead. She led Biden narrowly, for the first time, in two national polls released this week, and she has taken the lead in the Iowa polling average as well. She took the lead in a New Hampshire poll. She is nearing the lead in Nevada. She is drawing healthy shares from supporters of both Clinton and Sanders in the 2016 primary contest. She is starting to see some movement among black voters. Democrats are the most enthusiastic about her candidacy. There is … nothing going wrong right now? Nothing! This newsletter likes to make jokes about how politicians are failing at politics, and she’s just not giving us anything.
So while Elizabeth is up, Joe is down, dragged down by his own actions. Over at US NEWS AND WORLD REPORTS, Susan Milligan speaks with University of New Hampshire's Dante Scala:
There is absolutely the evidence of wrong doing.
This lowering of our standards is how we end up with presidents unfit to serve.
Joe Biden's son Hunter gets employed by a firm and that's the wrong doing. Yes, Hunter needed a job. Three months prior the US military had kicked him out of the reserves because of his use of cocaine. They should have referred it over to a court, he should have been arrested. Instead, they just kicked him out. Three months later, with no experience to speak of, he's brought on and paid $50,000 a month.
That is unethical. And his father at the time was vice president. Joe then has interactions with the government of Ukraine. That is unethical.
Hunter never should have taken the job to begin with. Once he did, Joe should have been removed from any and all dealings with Ukraine.
It is unethical. And as vice president, Joe insisting, "I didn't do anything wrong," isn't enough. Joe has to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. He was the Vice President. He has to be held to a higher standard while in that office.
Mike Allen, Margaret Talev, Alexi McCammond (AXIOS) note:
No, wrong doing? Corruption in office is wrong doing. There is ample public knowledge that suggest wrong doing without any investigation.
Joe did not do his job as vice president because that job included avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Joe did not do his job.
His actions look smarmy, his actions appear unethical. And that's without any probe taking place.
The usual idiots of the faux left are refusing to look seriously at what is right before their eyes. In some cases, they're afraid of 'helping' Donald Trump. Try helping yourselves, you idiots. This is about democracy, this is about fairness, this is about basic expectations of those in public office.
I can understand the press being leery to go into too much detail after the verbal attacks on THE NEW YORK TIMES. I don't like THE TIMES. I'm not a fan. That was long ago established. But they published an article -- this one -- that I've read over and over trying to understand the need to attack the paper for it.
Didn't REUTERS already report that the whistle-blower or 'whistle-blower' was CIA?
I don't understand the anger at NYT. The person is of public interest. The news report -- fairly bland to begin with -- serves the public interest.
But you have all these idiots claiming on Twitter that NYT did something wrong. Then claiming that they've cancelled their subscriptions -- most never subscribed. Some even bigger idiots insisting that they're going to subscribe to the physical paper of THE WASHINGTON POST -- who's going to deliver that to most of your homes? Lots of luck with that.
How could NYT do this!!!! They insist the paper was wrong and you protect a source and -- The person who filed the complaint is not a source to the paper. People don't even understand journalism. It's not -- REPORT WHAT I LIKE!!!!!
The immaturity is just astounding.
On impeachment . . .
One person wrote a lengthy e-mail to the public account stating that the snapshot was brief because I was avoiding the topic of impeachment?
No, that’s not why it was brief. I’ve explained why it was brief. I will probably note a hearing in Monday’s snapshot. I went back and forth over including it today but wanted to just focus on ethics.
The e-mail informs me that I was wrong (wouldn’t be the first time) when I stated that I didn’t believe Donald Trump broke a law as it was being described in press reports. I still don’t. Based on the latest details. If you want to say it was unethical, I’ll hop on board that. But the Justice Dept was correct not to prosecute. If Congress wants to pass a law, they can do so. Whether or not the Court would uphold it is a big if, but they can pass a law on this. Currently, there is no law.
The e-mailer, like Nancy Pelosi yesterday, wants to insist that Donald was attempting to ensure that he won the 2020 election.
You’re ascribing motive.
On someone you don’t even know.
As noted here many times over the years, and at THIRD, I do not like Donald Trump and that’s based upon my knowing him.
As someone who has known him over the years, I don’t think he was trying to get re-elected.
I think he’s on a kamikaze mission. I’m ascribing motive but I’m basing it on my personal interaction with him in the past. (And that’s limited, I’ve noted before that I would walk away if I saw him approaching.)
Bob Somerby and others have done crazy lunatic talk. Donald’s not going to leave!!!! He’s going to lose the election and he’s not going to leave!!!!
First, there’s a good chance he will win the election.
Second, if he loses, he’ll leave and he’ll leave playing the victim and spend the rest of his life saying how the US screwed up and how every president after him screwed up. That’s Donald.
You know what else is Donald? Thinking the world is against him. “He didn’t even want to win!” That’s what some said as the 2016 election approached and after. Yes, he did. But he didn’t think he would and he didn't want to be seen as wanting it as much as he did because he felt the world would then laugh if he lost. That’s his low self-esteem. That same low self-esteem tells him he probably won’t be re-elected. As such, he’s out to destroy now. This was about punishing others. It was not, “Joe could beat me!” It was, “Democrats have been corrupt and I’ll take out any I can on my way out the door.” That’s Donald.
To be clear, I have not stated he will lose in 2020. There’s a good chance he’ll win. Especially if impeachment is pursued. Especially if No-Enthusiasm Joe is the nominee.
But he has low self-esteem and that’s what he operates from.
“He has a huge ego!!!!” He has bravado that covers (for some) his low self-esteem.
So I think he’s on a kamikaze mission to take out as many as he can before January 2021 when he fears/suspects/believes he will be leaving the White House.
That’s me ascribing motive. I don’t deny it. But I’d argue my insight is a little greater than some speaking on his possible motives.
Donald has low self-esteem. If he lost the election, he would see it as part of the world victimizing him and would leave the White House. I do not get the crazy that Bob Somerby has repeatedly preached on Donald locking himself in the White House after losing the election and refusing to go.
But I also don’t get the nonsense Bob preaches about Donald being crazy. His actions do not surprise me, they do not mystify me. I do not believe he’s insane. I do believe he is the wounded child who never recovered.
--------------
Note, the snapshot this morning included Stan's "PRODIGAL SON" -- I don't know how that happened but it was in here twice. To be clear, Stan wrote that. It also included the impeachment section 3 times. That's been reduced to one. Stan did a strong review of "PRODIGAL SON" and I want to be sure he gets credited for that. Ava and I do our TV pieces at THIRD. -- C.I., 9/27/19 12:37 pm EST.
------------------
The following sites updated:
In the United States, the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination continues. Jim Newall (SLATE) notes:
While most of the news focus this week pertained to certain goings-on in the House of Representatives—goings-on that of course Elizabeth Warren was the first candidate to call for, in April—Warren has started to take Joe Biden’s lead. She led Biden narrowly, for the first time, in two national polls released this week, and she has taken the lead in the Iowa polling average as well. She took the lead in a New Hampshire poll. She is nearing the lead in Nevada. She is drawing healthy shares from supporters of both Clinton and Sanders in the 2016 primary contest. She is starting to see some movement among black voters. Democrats are the most enthusiastic about her candidacy. There is … nothing going wrong right now? Nothing! This newsletter likes to make jokes about how politicians are failing at politics, and she’s just not giving us anything.
So while Elizabeth is up, Joe is down, dragged down by his own actions. Over at US NEWS AND WORLD REPORTS, Susan Milligan speaks with University of New Hampshire's Dante Scala:
Biden, in
fact, might have some vulnerability on the Ukraine matter with voters,
Scala says, because voters might wonder how and why the younger Biden
went to work for a Ukrainian firm while his father was in the White
House.
"It's not a great look, even though there's not any evidence of wrongdoing," Scala says.
There is absolutely the evidence of wrong doing.
This lowering of our standards is how we end up with presidents unfit to serve.
Joe Biden's son Hunter gets employed by a firm and that's the wrong doing. Yes, Hunter needed a job. Three months prior the US military had kicked him out of the reserves because of his use of cocaine. They should have referred it over to a court, he should have been arrested. Instead, they just kicked him out. Three months later, with no experience to speak of, he's brought on and paid $50,000 a month.
That is unethical. And his father at the time was vice president. Joe then has interactions with the government of Ukraine. That is unethical.
Hunter never should have taken the job to begin with. Once he did, Joe should have been removed from any and all dealings with Ukraine.
It is unethical. And as vice president, Joe insisting, "I didn't do anything wrong," isn't enough. Joe has to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. He was the Vice President. He has to be held to a higher standard while in that office.
Mike Allen, Margaret Talev, Alexi McCammond (AXIOS) note:
It was Joe Biden’s family that almost kept him from running. Now, it could help drag him down.
Why it matters: The former vice president has to answer questions about family controversies just as Elizabeth Warren is catching him in the polls.
No, wrong doing? Corruption in office is wrong doing. There is ample public knowledge that suggest wrong doing without any investigation.
Joe did not do his job as vice president because that job included avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Joe did not do his job.
His actions look smarmy, his actions appear unethical. And that's without any probe taking place.
The usual idiots of the faux left are refusing to look seriously at what is right before their eyes. In some cases, they're afraid of 'helping' Donald Trump. Try helping yourselves, you idiots. This is about democracy, this is about fairness, this is about basic expectations of those in public office.
I can understand the press being leery to go into too much detail after the verbal attacks on THE NEW YORK TIMES. I don't like THE TIMES. I'm not a fan. That was long ago established. But they published an article -- this one -- that I've read over and over trying to understand the need to attack the paper for it.
Didn't REUTERS already report that the whistle-blower or 'whistle-blower' was CIA?
I don't understand the anger at NYT. The person is of public interest. The news report -- fairly bland to begin with -- serves the public interest.
But you have all these idiots claiming on Twitter that NYT did something wrong. Then claiming that they've cancelled their subscriptions -- most never subscribed. Some even bigger idiots insisting that they're going to subscribe to the physical paper of THE WASHINGTON POST -- who's going to deliver that to most of your homes? Lots of luck with that.
How could NYT do this!!!! They insist the paper was wrong and you protect a source and -- The person who filed the complaint is not a source to the paper. People don't even understand journalism. It's not -- REPORT WHAT I LIKE!!!!!
The immaturity is just astounding.
On impeachment . . .
One person wrote a lengthy e-mail to the public account stating that the snapshot was brief because I was avoiding the topic of impeachment?
No, that’s not why it was brief. I’ve explained why it was brief. I will probably note a hearing in Monday’s snapshot. I went back and forth over including it today but wanted to just focus on ethics.
The e-mail informs me that I was wrong (wouldn’t be the first time) when I stated that I didn’t believe Donald Trump broke a law as it was being described in press reports. I still don’t. Based on the latest details. If you want to say it was unethical, I’ll hop on board that. But the Justice Dept was correct not to prosecute. If Congress wants to pass a law, they can do so. Whether or not the Court would uphold it is a big if, but they can pass a law on this. Currently, there is no law.
The e-mailer, like Nancy Pelosi yesterday, wants to insist that Donald was attempting to ensure that he won the 2020 election.
You’re ascribing motive.
On someone you don’t even know.
As noted here many times over the years, and at THIRD, I do not like Donald Trump and that’s based upon my knowing him.
As someone who has known him over the years, I don’t think he was trying to get re-elected.
I think he’s on a kamikaze mission. I’m ascribing motive but I’m basing it on my personal interaction with him in the past. (And that’s limited, I’ve noted before that I would walk away if I saw him approaching.)
Bob Somerby and others have done crazy lunatic talk. Donald’s not going to leave!!!! He’s going to lose the election and he’s not going to leave!!!!
First, there’s a good chance he will win the election.
Second, if he loses, he’ll leave and he’ll leave playing the victim and spend the rest of his life saying how the US screwed up and how every president after him screwed up. That’s Donald.
You know what else is Donald? Thinking the world is against him. “He didn’t even want to win!” That’s what some said as the 2016 election approached and after. Yes, he did. But he didn’t think he would and he didn't want to be seen as wanting it as much as he did because he felt the world would then laugh if he lost. That’s his low self-esteem. That same low self-esteem tells him he probably won’t be re-elected. As such, he’s out to destroy now. This was about punishing others. It was not, “Joe could beat me!” It was, “Democrats have been corrupt and I’ll take out any I can on my way out the door.” That’s Donald.
To be clear, I have not stated he will lose in 2020. There’s a good chance he’ll win. Especially if impeachment is pursued. Especially if No-Enthusiasm Joe is the nominee.
But he has low self-esteem and that’s what he operates from.
“He has a huge ego!!!!” He has bravado that covers (for some) his low self-esteem.
So I think he’s on a kamikaze mission to take out as many as he can before January 2021 when he fears/suspects/believes he will be leaving the White House.
That’s me ascribing motive. I don’t deny it. But I’d argue my insight is a little greater than some speaking on his possible motives.
Donald has low self-esteem. If he lost the election, he would see it as part of the world victimizing him and would leave the White House. I do not get the crazy that Bob Somerby has repeatedly preached on Donald locking himself in the White House after losing the election and refusing to go.
But I also don’t get the nonsense Bob preaches about Donald being crazy. His actions do not surprise me, they do not mystify me. I do not believe he’s insane. I do believe he is the wounded child who never recovered.
--------------
Note, the snapshot this morning included Stan's "PRODIGAL SON" -- I don't know how that happened but it was in here twice. To be clear, Stan wrote that. It also included the impeachment section 3 times. That's been reduced to one. Stan did a strong review of "PRODIGAL SON" and I want to be sure he gets credited for that. Ava and I do our TV pieces at THIRD. -- C.I., 9/27/19 12:37 pm EST.
------------------
The following sites updated:
