Friday, August 31, 2012

Cheesy nutty delight--grilled in heaven

I love weekends. They are a time when you can try something special and easy for a snack type lunch. Try this cheesy nutty delight.
Toast some bread---any sort---brown, white, in between, you choose.
Turn the grill on. I use one of those bench-top ovens--- they use less energy.
Now, place some peanuts and cheese in a food processor.  Now, this is where you can use your imagination. For those who have none--- keep it simple.
You can use the roasted peanut variety of you want a salty addition. I prefer to use raw peanuts and then add the salt later to taste. If you want ‘heat,’ add chilli flakes. Oh, go one--- try herbs and any other spices if you want but for the plain Janes—stick to the programme.
Spread the mixture from the food processor over the lightly toasted bread and grill. I hope I don’t have to tell you how to do that!
When the toasted cheesy/nutty delights turn brown and bubbly, take them out. This is when you add the salt of you want.
PS. Try aging finely sliced onion to the mixture after it has been ‘processed.’
ENJOY! I was going to take a picture, but I ate them too quickly. (Perdy, my Jack Russell and star of my latest book—‘Talk To Me’, just licked the mixture off the toast).  
 www.authorneilcoleman.com

Once upon a time in in a land very near to where you live----

The sky was grey, threatening a rain that the farmers loved but the townsfolk found annoying. Wives rushed to gather their washing before the deluge made mischief with fluttering clothing, displayed colourfully on the lines. Of course the quality of the clothing was quite different in the yards of the rich compared to that of the poor in the southern parts of the town.
Two wives from the two parts of the city wondered how their husbands were fairing in the tasks they were pursuing. Both husbands had left quite early in the morning, the rich one in a carriage and the poor one on a donkey. The latter had loaded his beast up with produce he had been working on for the past two months, while the better endowed citizen sat contemplatively in his carriage, ruminating on how he was going to deal with his business partner and satisfy his wife’s request for a larger share in the profit of his venture.
The poor husband was well respected in his street and had only come to the notice of the authorities once, for the late payment of his taxes. His counterpart in the central part of town was friendly with the same authorities and had dealt with them in the business world on many occasions. He had profited much through these endeavours. Another difference between the two men was that of their origin. The rich man claimed that his forefathers had been instrumental in the early settlement of the town whilst the poor man was the son of an immigrant.
The rain finally unleashed its bullets from God, pelting those unprepared or lacking suitable clothing, causing them to head for whatever shelter they could find. The rich husband observed the scurrying citizens, smugly reflecting on his good fortune. His driver pulled his woollen coat tighter about his body in an attempt to ward off the worst of the probing rain. He also increased the speed of the carriage by whipping the four horses cruelly. Two would have been sufficient, but the rich husband liked to display his wealth as he believed any citizen of good standing should do.
The poor husband struggled to keep his donkey from panicking and at the same time kept a watch on his produce as it tilted towards one side. Just when he thought he had seen an alleyway that offered some protection from the rain, a shop keeper barred his way as he unloaded a cart on front of his premises. The donkey had sped up as he too sensed that his master strove for the tiny oasis in the middle of the storm. The husband became annoyed at the antics of the shop keeper and made his thoughts clear by swearing, something that he usually reserved for those moments he was alone. His wife did not countenance such utterings.
On hearing the husband’s words, the shop keeper responded in kind and the husband pulled his donkey to a stop. The loaded produce on the donkey had a mind of its own and did not stop; instead, if flew off the donkey’s back and landed heavily on the shop keeper. Screams of pain filled the air and fellow shop keepers came to his aid, while someone called for a doctor. In the meantime the husband was detained roughly by the neighbours and was taken struggling to the nearby cells in the guardhouse by the walls of the town. He was cast inside the dingy cell which was already occupied by two drunkards, arrested the night before. At least they had a dry place. The screaming of the shop keeper was audible through the barred window in the cell. He was carried to the home of a doctor who had just opened his rooms for the day.
In the meantime, the rich husband was nearing his destination. He yelled at his driver and exhorted him to increase his speed. He was impatient and wanted his business over and done with. The driver resisted but the rich husband would not listen. He threatened his driver with dire consequences if he did not comply. The coach was soon careering along the cobbled street.
A bend in the road appeared and unfortunately, a young woman with a baby was trying to cross the road. The driver saw her but too late. The rich husband was still shouting at him to increase the pace of the carriage. The horses saw the young woman but it was too late to stop, even though the driver pulled violently on the reins. The young woman and her baby were lost under the flailing hooves. A small miracle occurred. The baby was flung into the air where a passing guard reached high and caught the baby. Those watching the scene from under the shelter of the shop eaves called out in approval.
The young woman did not stir as she lay in on the rain swept road. After a few seconds the pitiful sound of her pained voice stirred the bystanders into action. The coach remained still as the driver held the horses by their halters. The rich husband angrily left the shelter of his coach and began to yell at his driver to continue. Under the orders of his master, the driver finally continued the journey while the onlookers muttered that someone should report the actions of the rich husband to the authorities.
The rich husband must have had a change of mind because he reappeared and enquired after the health of the young woman. By now she had being cared for and taken on the back of a cart to a nearby monastery where the nuns would take care of her. A shop keeper had seen the incident and someone had told him how the rich husband had more or less forced the driver into the dangerous actions that led to the incident. He told the guard of this.
Two weeks later in two courts, there were two very different results. The poor husband, accompanied by his wife and neighbours heard the judge announce that he would forfeit his donkey, go to prison for a year and be fined the equivalent of a year’s toil; the said amount being awarded to the injured shopkeeper. The poor husband was beside himself with worry. Who would look after his family? They were destined to a life of poverty, dependant on the charity of others.
In the court near the centre of town, the rich husband, represented by the best lawyer that money could buy heard that he had to pay the young woman an amount similar to that paid by the poorer husband. He did not receive a prison term because the judge announced that being a citizen of ‘high standing’ in the community such an outcome was not warranted. Despite the statements from the witnesses, no other action was taken. The rich husband left the court while the young woman continued to be helped by the nuns. Her future was in question, the money she had received quickly gone as the nuns had to use it to purchase medicines and treatments that they could not otherwise provide. The baby was looked after by a sister.
Those who had heard about both cases shook their heads in wonder.
In another land many years later, an upstanding citizen also received lenient treatment because he too was smiled upon by the legal system. Those nearer the South in his city would not have been so lucky, especially if they were the sons of immigrants.
www.authorneilcoleman.com
 Go to the New Zealand Herald for 1st September, 2012 and you will the meaning of my story.

Thursday, August 30, 2012

18 or 20---will it make any difference to our drinking culture?

I say NO! Whether the age to be able to drink alcohol is 18 or 20 will not make one bit of difference, because by the time many young people reach 18 they may well have been drinking for many years. It is not uncommon for kids as young as 14 to be seen drunk on a regular basis. Young people can arrive at school intoxicated and then the teacher shave to cope and keep them safe until a responsible adult is able to take over.
Therein lays the problem. Why would young people act in a responsible manner when they have seen their parents or caregivers abusing alcohol from a very early age? It is not just the messages they see in the media, but in their everyday life.  By the time many young people reach their teenage years, they have been exposed to negative role models around alcohol for a good deal of their lives. They may even have been a victim of their parents’ alcohol-fuelled behaviours, so why are we surprised when the same young people seek escape through excessive drinking?
Most of us would accept the premise that partaking in excessive (and some say, any) alcohol consumption is going to damage young people, both physically and psychologically. We know that young brains are not fully functional until into the early 20’s so the damage done from heavy drinking is indisputable.
In any weekend thousands of teenagers drink to the point where they are barley functional. The resulting damage is cumulative and contributes to health issues on later life. The social consequences are equally serious and learning is seriously hampered. Compounding affects almost guarantees that the young people will never reach their full potential.
How have we arrived at this sorry state? NZ has had a chequered relationship with alcohol, right from the early settlement by Europeans. Was not Russell in the North known as the ‘Hell hole of the Pacific?’ Alcohol has been a mainstream in NZ life for many years. It was even used to swindle Maori out of their land by some. We have an unfortunate history around alcohol and even the brief period of ‘prohibition’ (which I am not advocating) saw abuses and serious problems.
What can we do then about our alcohol problem?  No Government is ever going to try to ban it but we must find a way to be safer so that less young people start on the road to being ‘like their parents.’
Education is the answer some say. No-----not alone. Good modelling is just as important. Alongside that we must consider the role that images through advertising and media play in trapping young people into drinking at an early age. However the first issue we must face collectively is that we acknowledge the fact that we have a problem. It will mean changing much about the ‘culture’ we all live in. The discussion will go on and once we agree on a road ahead, then we may get somewhere.  The road is indeed bumpy!
18 or 20----its makes no difference.


OMG--- it has happenned--- Mr Dunne has grown some---

You know what I meant to say. I won’t be rude because that’s not at all like me. Are we seeing the beginning of the election campaign, two years before it is due or we going to see National stymied quite a lot from now on. Mr Dunne has laid down the gauntlet.
He has actually come out from where ever it is that he has been hiding (apart from the good work he has been doing on the synthetic drugs issue) and decided to make a stand. He is not going along with the Government re placing a spending lid on Government expenditure. That places the Government in a difficult position. I wonder if Mr Dunne will stand up to the pressure he will now come under.
Go for it Mr Dunne and the cynicism in me may stay put and I shall stop being mean to you. You have nothing to lose but a great deal to gain by standing up against the party you got into bed with. They will not dump you yet, because the simple fact is that they can no longer be sure that The Maori Party will support them and crazy John Banks is like a loose cannon at the moment.
Is this a Marylyn Warring moment? It’s certainly not a pissed Mr Muldoon coming on TV to announce an early election--- but let’s hope that you will now line up behind the other opposition in Parliament to stop the Asset Sales.
Now, it wasn’t so hard to do, was it? Feel better now. Go for it Mr Dunne.

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

'Roskill' and 'Talk To Me'

I shall be taking down quite a few of the freebies on 'Roskill' soon, so now's the time to buy them from my site. 'Talk To Me' will be available in a few weeks. Go to www.authorneilcoleman.com   Follow the links.

The crux of it---if you don't like Gay marriage, then don't--

I just had to quote this. I heard a teacher colleague say this morning---‘if you don’t like gay marriage then don’t marry a gay person.’  Fair enough, but I doubt that many would leave it at that.
For those churches who do not want any part of it--- that’s OK too---- don’t. Is not the State capable of marrying and sanctioning such a union? Another point---- if you’re church sanctions gay marriage and you are vehemently opposed--- don’t you see the writing on the wall?  Or perhaps you can go along with it because you love everything else about the place you worship. I suspect that many Catholics have faced such dilemmas around other issues.
The bottom line--- the sky shall not fall and we are not heading towards Hell.

The debate in Parliament about same sex marriage (Definition of Marriage Ammendment Bill)

I have been watching the debate in Parliament about ‘same sex’ marriage. I was expecting a passionate and possibly acrimonious debate. I was expecting it to become one where entrenched views would override a genuine exchange of views.
I have to say that so far I have been surprised at the ‘reaching out occurring whereby members  (Remember this is a conscience vote) are doing their utmost, not to offend, not to position themselves by making statements that will harm members of any section of our society.
I have seen Nicky from Auckland Central, reaching to her community. I was equally impressed by the member from North Dunedin, who is a Presbyterian Minister, acknowledging the difficult decision he had to make in supporting this bill. Then we had Phillip from Mangere, a member of the Labour Party, making a huge effort to encourage fellow members to keep the debate non personal and I respect his position within his community where there is a real anxiety about the passage of this Bill.
Along came Winston Peters, whose NZ First Party is going to vote as one, opposing the Bill. At first I was annoyed at this stance, believing that it is most improbable that ‘all’ of the members of that party really think the same on this issue. Winston’s position is that the electorate as a whole should be given the chance to vote in a binding referendum. Not such a bad idea.
I will go and listen to the rest of the debate now, hoping that the manner in which it has been conducted so far continues. If it does, then my hope is that other debates on other issues can happen in the same way in the future.

This is the first time I have watched live on TV a 'conscience' vote in Parliament -----the result---remember this is the first stage---if it passes it goes to a 'select committee.' Real democracy at work! Well done Louisa Wall--- the sponsor of this Bill---Member of Parliament from Manurewa
FOR-------------------78 (ammended to 80)
AGAINST-------------40
ABSTENTIONS------0

Next morning (Thursday)   Looking back over last night's events made me think quite alot. The manner in which the debate was conducted was exemplary. I wish that could be extended to other business in the house. I know that there is a great deal of tradtion around how debates are run and that goes back hundreds of years in the Westminster System but once in a while we see something other than the clowning around trying to score political points.  Perhapes there could be more emphasis on 'Private Members' Bills and slightly less of Party policitcs. It would make for some 'pretty interesting struggles then at electorate level. 'Don't be so naive ,' you say. Just a thought----yes, just a thought.