Last election, I put up a big "Vote Obama" post in light of what I considered to be eight disastrous years of Bush, unnecessary war, and an economy that was going to take well more than four years to fix. I was at first surprised by some of the angry comments I got. A reader named Art wrote, "You’re a consommate [sic] chef. Leave it at that. Keep your friggin’ political opinions to yourself," followed two minutes later by Joe: "Because you can cook, you can tell me for whom I’m to cast my vote? I don’t think so. Keep it in the kitchen—not the voting booth."
My response was more or less, "This site is my fucking yard and I can put up whatever sign I want." And this led to more comments, pro and con, but all in all it developed into a fascinating, useful conversation.
One of the things I love most about this blog is the people who read and comment on it. Passionate discussion—I love it. I never take down comments unless they’re gratuitously harmful. I welcome dissent, even when it’s anonymous (something I very much discourage because it so easily leads to meanness; I understand that some people must remain anonymous for one reason or another, but in this Internet age anonymity encourages snipers).
So I put this question to you, much-beloved readers: Is it justifiable for me, known and read primarily for writing about food, cooking, and the work of the professional kitchen, to voice my opinion on a matter unrelated to food? (Although now that I put it that way, I wonder is there anything unrelated to food?)
UPDATE 11/6/12: AND THE WINNERS ARE!
Thank you all for the comments; as always they are uncommonly thoughtful and that is the biggest generosity of all. I've decided to give two books away because I couldn't decide and it seemed more bipartisan that way. I have no idea who's winning today's presidential election, but the following have won a copy of Ruhlman's Twenty:
A.S. November 5, 2012 at 7:48 pm
Asking others if it is “Justifiable” is an odd way of thinking about it. You of course have every right to express your non-food opinions here and anywhere else. But you have to realize that by doing so you can alienate some perhaps large proportion of your fans and loyal readers. Is it worth it? We readers can’t answer that; we don’t know how important these issues are to you, nor do we know how important we fans are to you. Maybe you feel so strongly about the issues that it doesn’t matter to you if you alienate half of us. Or maybe you couldn’t care less about the half of your fans that you alienate. Those are balances that you have to weigh – we can’t do it for you. You have the great fortune to be able to have your thoughts read by many thousands of people. The flip side is that you can chase some of those people away – do you care if you do just to tell us who you think we should vote for? It’s not a question we can answer for you.
Terry Simpson November 5, 2012 at 1:09 pm
Political opinions, like food, need to be well seasoned. The opinion should provide balance and not be distasteful. The opinion should have texture and depth, and not leave a bitter aftertaste. The opinion should be presented well – so it appeals to the eye. It should not have too much spice, or too much sweetness. It should not be overcooked. Political opinions, like foods, can never appeal to everyone’s taste – but one can respect the care that the author/cook took in preparation and the thoughtfulness of them
Honorable Mentions:
Paul Post November 5, 2012 at 2:17 pm
Freedom
leaming2956 November 5, 2012 at 2:54 pm
Freedom of speech is a guaranteed right under the Constitution. That certainly includes what you express on your website. Readers are equally free to ignore, agree or disagree with your opinion. As you point out, there is a great deal at stake in this year’s election. So in addition, to your urging us to “pay attention and vote”, I would also add, “stay informed”. Ignorance is a dangerous thing in these complex times.
Mary November 5, 2012 at 3:18 pm
Your site, your voice. Sure…. But in addition, you graciously share your site and let other voices speak too — guest posts and comments for example. That you choose most often to give voice to matters of food is your fault not a blogosphere rule to be policed. That you occasionally voice matters regarding alcoholic beverages is charming. That you less occasionally give voice to broader issues like writing, travel, and politics… well, you initiated the blog, you spend the time writing the posts, you decide. Is this blog yours? Not entirely since you share it. It is in many ways a co-created site between you, your s.o. (nice photos!), and each of your readers all together. I think you do anticipate us readers on occasion and so we make our way into your thoughts and your prose. But does that mean one person can walk onto the site and dictate that “Only shall food matters be writ about here!”? Well, that is a tad silly. A point which I believe the above scallops make admirably.
end of update: my original post resumes here:
I now think I was wrong four years ago to title the post as I did. No one should tell you who to vote for, or how to live your life. It should be your choice. But you do have to act in order to keep it that way.
I also believe it’s fair for me to express my opinion about political issues, generally—you can read them or not. Importantly, Proposition 37 in California is a no-brainer. Do you want to know what’s in your food? Or do you want big companies who, let's be honest, don’t really care about your health, to prevent you from knowing what you're eating? Vote Yes on Prop. 37. It’s not just an important food issue, and it's not about whether GMOs are good or bad (on which the verdict may be out for decades to come). It's an issue of our democracy, establishing a transparent food system.
I believe that no matter who wins the presidential election, the economy will get better because America is a growing country, an open, productive society. Therefore, the issues I care about are these. Please stop reading here if all you are interested in is the above sautéed scallops (plenty of oil, high heat, season just before sautéing, goes beautifully with asparagus ... or hmm, how about butternut squash?).
I believe that our government needs to encourage and help small businesses innovate and grow (speaking as one myself).
I am for less war (and less money spent on making it).
I am outraged by anyone who believes they can tell any woman what she should do with her body. I don’t even think people should legislate what you eat, let alone decree on more permanent, um, issues. (As a woman near and dear to me put it, tell them they have to pay for the child support and see how they vote.)
I am appalled by the intransigent Republicans in the House of Representatives who have prevented important issues such as the Farm Bill from moving forward. That the Speaker is from Ohio just adds salt to the wound.
Obama has not done all that I’d hoped he’d be able to do, though he said from the beginning he had an 8-year not a 4-year plan. He is not the smooth negotiator Clinton and Reagan were, nor the bully that LBJ was. But, if it matters to anyone, I’m voting for Obama, and am praying that my state of Ohio, which on Wednesday at last returns to “flyover” status, carries him. He's doing the right things and surely four years of experience as President of the United States will make him better at it than he has been (and he's done much good—ending a war, cutting taxes for my family and other middle income folks, working toward affordable health care, to name a few small matters).
Romney has shown that he will say just about whatever he has to in order to gain votes, and I simply don’t trust what he says. He hasn't convinced me that he possesses the wisdom required to lead a country of this size and power. If I owned a Fortune 500 company, or even a company that did $100 million in sales, or if I personally were extremely wealthy, I might be inclined to vote Republican (in which case I, personally, would have to admit to having a corrupt soul). That said, two of my dearest friends are solidly middle class, one of them a small business owner himself, and they will be voting for Romney, Lord knows why. My Boston-based copy-editor Karen notes that her state, which elected Romney governor, will surely trounce him in the election. That means something to me.
Here’s what I will tell readers and feel justifiably content in doing so: pay attention, and vote. And then think about how lucky you are to live in a country where this, along with free speech, is not only allowed but encouraged.
Again, it will be my honor to sign and send a copy of my cookbook Ruhlman’s Twenty: 20 Techniques, 100 Recipes, a Cook’s Manifesto to the best comment (pro or con) on whether a food writer should voice non-food-related political opinions the way other non-food people do (e.g., Eastwood and Springsteen, who have just a teensy bit bigger audience than I do).
Why am I giving away a cookbook? Because this I know: the world is better when we cook food for the people we love.
Vote.
Other links you may like:
- My recent post on Is Food Writing Important?, which appeared in the Huffington Post.
- Video of a presentation from The Chautauqua Institution, August 2008: "What's for Dinner: Food and Politics in the 21st Century" which proves I should not read from a speech; if you watch, fast fwd to 24:00 to Dan Barber's more entertaining foie gras story.
- GOOD is a website that provides information on a little bit of everything, but has an interesting take on it all.
- Civil Eats is a website that shares reflections on the American food system.
© 2012 Michael Ruhlman. Photo © 2012 Donna Turner Ruhlman. All rights reserved.
Paul Roub
I think the answer's straightforward - if you have a strong opinion, and an argument for it, express it. We're allowed to, here in the US, and it's ludicrous to waste that privilege. Some will applaud, some will attack, some will ignore you.
"Stick to writing about (area of obvious expertise)..." is what people say when they don't have an actual counterargument.
Mantonat
Well said.Most of our founding fathers had actual vocations that they were dedicated to. Nobody was telling them to stop talking about politics and stick to their areas of expertise. In fact, the top two presidential candidates are a lawyer and a venture capitalist. What gives them the right to think they can effectively run a country and a government?
Bilbo Douchebaggins
A food writer is also a citizen, as is a mailman, doctor, pilot, etc. So yes, you have the right (and moral duty?) to express your political opinions as a citizen of your country.
Paul Cuomo
simply put, ITS YOUR BLOG, TALK ABOUT WHATEVER THE FUDGE YOU WANT
Victoria
Even celebs and famous people should be allowed and encouraged to have opinions about the politics in our country, as long as it is an informed opinion. And they should be allowed to express them, and people and decide if those opinions are enough to turn them off a celebrity's "brand". Do I think Ted Nugent is totally off his rocker when it comes to his politics? Hell Yes. Is "Cat Scracth Fever" still a great song? Fuck Yes. Does liking that song mean I approve of every single thing Ted Nugent has ever done or will ever do? No. And it doesn't have to. He's still allowed to be his own person. And we're allowed to like everything about him, or like some things and dislike others.
Chris Shores
There is a time and place for everyone to express their political opinion. If the forum matches the need to express your opinion then it would be acceptable in my mind. Such a place would be Genetically Modified Foods problem in this country.
Steven
I think it's clear that you have used this space to write about far more than simply things that are kept "in the kitchen." You are a human being who is expressing an opinion and an endorsement, and, equally important, in no way would I feel degraded by disagreeing. If you were a robot meant to simply give cooking-related information, this would be a different story. I'm not sure what's wrong with being a human being on a personal blog though. Some of your best writing has been extremely personal and only tangentially related to cooking, such as your posts about your father.
Mike Draper
Write whatever you want, just know that you may lose followers because they don't want to subscribe to some political BS. Believe me, Reuters and Bloomberg News have already ruined their usefulness as a go-to source for info. Most of their tweets are garbage re-tweets. If I wanted to see Reuters Political tweets I would follow that handle....You smell what I am steppin' in?
chad
Yes, it is justifiable. Now I will hope that you get too many entries and have to decide by random drawing, and my name is drawn. Long live representative democracy and freedom!
Zachery Darnell
I welcome your point view as I welcome anyone's informed opinion. I value yours over most because in the role of chef you have been exposed to experiences and people most of us will never have; because of that, I feel that it would be foolish to arbitrarily ignore your opinions. Your political views, like mine, are an amalgamation of experiences. I cannot fathom why anyone would shut out someone with a huge wealth of experience, such as yourself, simply because your views may be different. By posting your views and reasons behind them you are promoting discourse and the dissemination of political ideas which is always a good thing.
P Lindsley
While I value your opinion, and believe you have the right to share it any way you choose, I don't want to hear your political views. I follow you because you are an expert in food and cooking. I am a fan because of topic specific information, reviews, ideas, and sound culinary judgment. Learning about food, chefs, restaurants, is my hobby. When I follow you, I want to escape news, politics, and religious debates, I want to hear and learn about food. I don't eat at a chef's restaurant because he is left or right wing, just like I won't buy your cookbook because of your political views. I will buy your book because of your food views, recipes, and opinions around restaurants.
Douglas Lee
As a fellow blogger, albeit one with much less experience and skill, I think sharing your beliefs and the reasoning for your vote is a very good thing. I have a football blog, and have received heaps of criticism for writing within it my support for marriage equality and denouncements of racism and bigotry.
They have not been been random mentions, but rather inspired by football-related news, yet have received the same types of criticism you have.
When it comes down to it, I would not be mentally able to keep writing everyday if I constrained it to football. That's the beauty of having your own site, and I find that being myself and allowing my reasoned opinions to shine through is essential to my not burning out.
Some readers have dramatically announced their departures from the site due to my outspoken support for gay marriage, but I'm more than fine with that. It's a major civil rights issue, and GMO labeling and women's rights are just as important.
There are countless cooking sites, Mr. Ruhlman. I'd imagine that most of us are here because we appreciate your work - we know your books, have seen you on television. You are what you write, especially in a medium such as this; your beliefs inform who you are and how you write. If people are so pissed off that the future of our food system and women's rights are important to you, then they can always choose not to read your fine work anymore. They can find another cooking site.
But to not be yourself, to not share your beliefs, that would be a disservice to yourself, to this site, and to your readers.
Jacob Wojnar
One should not openly express an opinion they are not prepared to defend. If you believe strongly enough to burn bridges, take up arms, and end lives, then say what you feel you need to say; be both ready and willing to do every one of those things to defend your point. If you're not prepared for that, don't waste your energy. It will only invite conflict from the uninformed, unreasonable, and deliberately argumentative.
Matt K
You should ABSOLUTELY use your blog to write about whatever you want. People are just as welcome to read it or not.
Brenda Johnson
I think "this site is my fucking yard and I can put up whatever sign I want" is a pretty good justification right there, but we can be nicer about this. I think there's a good argument for why you may have something of an obligation to bring up politics. There are very few political forums where people encounter opinions different from their own. People stay in their own little yards, as it were. Now, it's true, people come to your yard for the food, but it's also because they share your viewpoints (broadly speaking) on food issues and respect your opinions in that realm. Though we may differ on political issues, I expect your readers share that much. If you post the occasional political topic, it may result in some of your readers getting a chance to encounter a position they've been unlikely to hear elsewhere, and to hear about it from someone they know isn't crazy, stupid, or part of the Vast Kenyan Conspiracy (unless you are, in which I'm sorry I outed you). And that sort of thing helps us all.
lux
As you said back in 2008 -- it's your website. You're entitled to put whatever you want on it, and that includes your opinions on the American political process. If people don't like it, they're free to go read some other blog.
And we will definitely be voting YES on Prop 37 here in California!. 🙂
ruth
I find you offensive.
I find the fact that you have opinions on things other than food offensive (but only if those opinions are different from my own).
I find your scallop photo offensive because I am allergic to scallops and I know you're just taunting me with their delciousness.
Welcome to the Internet - land of kneejerk reactions where utter jackholery rules the day. Is the writer expressing political opinions on his blog any different than the shop owner who puts a political sign in his store window? No. We all see it and we all have the free will to form our own opinions and decide whether to buy what he's selling.
I'm still buying what you're selling.
Alan
It is true that most people expect things to be within the subject they are looking for: if this is a cooking blog, most people would only expect cooking related posts. However, it is also foolish to expect subjects to be their own little islands: after all, everything is interrelated somehow. And politics with cooking? Genetically Modified Foods, FDA regulations on Health and Safety at restaurants, even Drug and Alcohol policies are inherently close to cooking, so it opens a gateway to talk about larger and larger subjects.
Not just that, but in the words of Theodore Roosevelt, voting is the least of a citizen's duty: actually being involved, stating your opinions and defending them (in a clear, concise and controlled manner) is one of the greatest forms of participation in a democracy. After all, it proves that you are not voting for the sake of voting, or avoiding voting because you think the system is broken. It means that you believe that the system either works, or cannot work because people don't participate.
And when people don't participate is when things go downhill.
Brian Kelly
It is nice to find some relief from the non-stop politics in election years by keeping the site focused around food. That said, it's you're site and whether or not I agree with you, I 100% support your right to post whatever you want.
Sharon
Yeah, what he said. As a fellow swing state victim, I've freaking had it with this election and can't wait for it to be over. This site is a refuge. That said, a single post about a blogger's political views isn't likely to turn me off. Like food, it's all good in moderation.
Patrick
I think it’s justifiable for anyone to voice their opinions on any topic they want. We live in a society that values free speech. Now, because the outcomes of sharing those opinions might not always be desirable, it might be more beneficial to ask, “Should I voice my opinions on ______?” The answer to that question is a lot more complex, involving too many variables to delve into with 250 words or less, but here’s my brief response.
1) What is the purpose, in your mind, of your blog? If it’s to share your thoughts, expertise, recipes, and advice with whoever feels like reading it, then I would say you’re in the clear to write whatever you want. If its purpose is also to maintain a high reader base so that people know about your upcoming books and want to buy them, then you might decide that raising issues that are hotly debated by many in your readership is not the best option. That of course also raises the question of what issues are likely to be debated by people following your blog.
2) Regardless of the purpose of the blog, how much do you feel convicted to stand up for the issues you care about? History is full of people who have stood up to be counted for their cause. Some succeed in swaying opinions; others fall into obscurity or worse. How much does the issue matter to you, and what are you willing to sacrifice for it?
Mike Tremoulet
My wife the photographer and I discuss this often. On the one hand, your blog is fundamentally yours - have at it. On the other hand, your blog is your business and your brand - and your business doesn't have to take a political side, regardless of whether or not you do. Does it dilute your focus to insert political posts, or pictures of your kids/pets, et cetera? Or is it being authentic and personal? Can't answer that for you - it's a choice about how you run your business (and yes, being a writer is running a business).
Paul Edson
For me, your "brand" has never been about food qua food, but rather about food and cooking in the context of life as you/we live it. Because that's the direction I'm coming from, your politics are a completely appropriate matter for discussion here in your kitchen (or yard, or whatever you choose to call it).
Joe Massie
Your site, you can write about whatever you want. If someone doesn't want to read about your political views, they don't have to. Just like they don't have read a recipes that does not interest them.
Marti Kennedy
If we all stop talking to each other about what we find important, simply because we don't share the same political philosophy, we will never solve any of this nation's problems. We used to be a nation that could come to the middle ground to discuss solutions. If people with the forum to do so (like bloggers of all stripes) cannot start these conversations, who can? Who will?
Reese M.
Just like the rest of us, you are more than what you do for a living. If you want this blog to reflect more of who you are as a person, it's logical to include matters "unrelated to food".
There is a clear distinction in my mind between stating one's beliefs and openly telling people how to vote. Tell me how you feel about any given issue, and why you feel that way. Do not order me to feel the same way.
Your post four years ago may have skirted the line a bit, notably with the title. But that does not mean you should not share your opinions as you see fit.
I think that if you feel so inclined, you should have the freedom to state your political positions on whatever issue is important to you. As you said, it is your yard and you absolutely should put up whatever sign you want without getting harassed for it.
Aaron
You absolutely have the right to do so, and I would encourage it. I think with the amazing proliferation of news websites and blogs, 24-hour TV channels, etc. it is so easy for people to only hear from people who share the same views. People really follow you for your knowledge and views on food, but if they happen to hear a dissenting political opinion and it forces them to think about it, that can only be seen as a positive for our national discourse. Your opinion may not change theirs, and they may stop checking your blog as regularly, but it can demonstrate that somebody whose knowledge and skills they respect (albeit in a different field) have an alternate view they may refrain from thinking that everyone who disagrees with them is crazy or anti-American or dangerous, or any of the other phrases that people on the far left and far right like to throw out about their opponents.
Joseph Tashash
Although I am a proponent of individual free speech, I believe that individuals in command of a popular media vehicle must utilize that platform responsibly, regardless of the topic of focus. In an age of rampant voter apathy, individuals are influenced by the musings of pop culture, however misguided this practice may be.
Paul C
There are two types of people 'Pigs' and 'Chickens'. When it comes time to make Bacon and Eggs for breakfast the Pig has a vested interest in getting it right, after all the Chicken can lay another egg tomorrow whereas the Pig has only slab of belly to give.
If you're a Pig then it is your right and responsibility (you owe it to yourself!) to speak up when breakfast plans look set to fail.
Just about everyone living in America has skin in this particular game, so should have equal right to speak to their concerns.
If other pigs disagree then they should work together ( discuss, argue, compromise ) to steer the breakfast plans in the right direction...
If a chicken disagrees he can just lay another egg tomorrow.
Rick G
Politics have become more like baking and less like cooking over the past few decades. Baking recipes have specific, solid rules, while cooking allows for more pliability. Neither is better than the other--they have to be that way to make a decent product. In politics, however, pliability has become a disappearing art. Too many in office and in the electorage have opted for the "baking style"--fixed, firm ideas and mindsets. We need more of a "cooking style" to come back--allowing alternate measures and substitutions. As long as your comments allow some pliability and recognition of the wisdom of "other," then I think it's fine to make political comments. When those comments appear solid and immovable, then it's not as welcome. Right now, in politics, there are too many bakers and not enough cooks! weird analogy, but I'm going with it.
Debbye
You're right! It's your site and you can post anything you choose. Even though our politics differ I support your right to state your beliefs. If you charged for access to content on this site and I paid to swoon over those scallops then I would definitely complain about political content. As long as the content is free please use your site as you see fit. (I do prefer the food content though!)
Seth Clearwater
Of course it’s justifiable, even encouraged, for you to express your opinion on politics or whatever other non-food issue strikes your fancy. In the modern media landscape, where every little niche has cable networks and blogs devoted to it, we’ve come to see politics as just another over-exposed genre of reality (that is to say, fake) television; we’re comforted by that distance. But like the Jersey Shore or Hoarders, we see Horse-Race Politics as fundamentally disconnected from reality. To so many, cognitive dissonance ensues when a food writer talks politics as much as it would if Snooki or Sean Hannity opined on the correct brine strength for chicken.
But that comfort masks the truth of the matter: politics, like food, has profound and wide-ranging import to our lives. “Politics,” at its heart, is the matter of citizens and all that concerns them. When we allow ourselves to isolate politics to revenue-hungry media outlets, we forget that those politicians are making decisions that affect our rights, liberties, wallets, and our very lives. We forget how terrifyingly close to us politics really is.
So when someone like you writes about politics, uncomfortable as it may be for those who have become complacent in their narrow views and blinders, it reminds us that we all have a stake and a say in what our politicians do. These days, that’s a damn good reason right there.
tim
With rare exceptions (e.g. Orson Scott Card) I have long disassociated myself from someone I follow/read and their political opinions. I just don't care. There are plenty that do and will put forth a lot of emotion into disagreeing with you. But this is your playground and your brand. Manage it as you see fit.
Carolyn
I'm Canadian (yes, I know I can't win your cookbook... I already have a copy of Twenty and love it!), so my view from north of the 49th is likely different than the majority of people reading your blog. I think it's great that you're diving into meatier topics in the days before an election. I fully agree that you have the right to express what you think, just like people have the right to read or not read what you write. Perhaps I'm more tolerant of your views because I agree with them. Not that Canadian elections are without fault and to be modeled, but I am so thankful that I live in a country where the rights of women, gays and other basic human rights are entrenched and not part of the general discourse.
Ellen Malloy
Americans spend a lot of time & energy trying to not talk about the two most important things in all of our lives: politics and religion. As we take a measure of the divisions and anger about this election (and the religious ideas woven into the political discourse), I have to wonder if part of the reason is because we avoid talking about these issues openly.
That said: maybe a great way for someone like you to approach it in a way that stays true to the topic of your blog is to deal with, specifically, food issues at stake.
That said, your blog. People can get over themselves and their demands of how they think the world should run.
Jason W. Hamner
I think its *wiser* to go with the old Michael Jordan quote "Republicans buy shoes, too" and leave the politics to political commentators, but I respect writers/bloggers... food or otherwise... who are willing to possibly piss off some percentage of their readership to state a political opinion. A statement of presidential preference every 4 years seems like a complete non-issue to me, but it would get to be more of a consideration as it became more frequent. I think it would be fine if the political thoughts were well thought out and well written, less and less so as they got closer to slogans and talking points.
Debbie
Mr. Ruhlman, You certainly don't need me to tell you that you're respected as a subject matter expert in food and cooking. But, you are. Just because food is your area of expertise, other parts of your brain, personality, reasoning ability don't automatically atrophy.
If you're really, really smart at one thing, you're probably going to be smart about a lot of things. I think you show your intelligence about an abundance of topics. But, even if your political opinions were shriveled and silly, I would still be interested in what you think and why. We should all be more curious and less judgmental. We'd learn more that way.
Maureen Sanchez
I think it depends entirely on how many people you want to either piss off or empassion. Because no matter your opinion, particularly in this election, it will do one of those two things. People follow you because of your amazing ability to talk about food. About life in a kitchen. About passionate chicken-roasting. About what it takes to be a chef. About excellence in Thomas Keller's kitchens. Do you really want to alienate people who love what you are GREAT at by becoming a pundit for one side or the other in an incredibly acrid political climate? Why would you?
I think it dilutes what you really good at. You and your wife -- she's got mad, mad photog skills. You're so sharp-tongued in your writing I can often taste the food. So why get off the rails ?
Kathy
Hell yes, it's justifiable. Your opinion is just that: your opinion. (Insert old saying about opinions and assholes here.) Any sentient person can distinguish between an opinion and a mandate, and those who can't aren't to be reasoned with anyway. It's your yard, as you say. Put up any damn sign you want!
William Frost
I'm contractually unable to express my opinions on political matters, as someone who works for the US government abroad. Even though I hate getting into political arguments, it often chafes at my soul to have that constraint, even though I agree with it in my own case. Therefore, I can never advocate that others live under it. I'm working for your government to enhance freedom around the world; please, use the freedom you have!
(This message reflects only my own beliefs, and is not in any way an expression of USG or State Department policy. And yes, I have a US address you can mail stuff to.)
Genevieve Keller
I've experienced some of the same type of response from my friends and family on posting political opinions on Facebook. It seems that expressing your opinion has now led to people seeing it as an open invitation to attack not only your political opinions, but all choices/comments you've made.
Personally, I like to know more about each person I either follow or know. Seeing "behind the curtain" as it were, gives me an insight into your life that might also inform me of the reasons behind choices you've made in your field of expertise.
Maureen Sanchez
I'll put it a different way. Lifted straight from my facebook wall this morning:
just one more day. I can do it. I can do it. I can do it. I can get through the political posts and rhetoric for one.more.day. and not unfriend people over it. i can do it I can DO it! God grant me the serenity to ignore the things I cannot change and the wisdom to accept that we all have the right and obligation to vote for our choice. And the ability to smile in the face of people calling each other names and putting each other in buckets -- and offending enormous amounts of people in their political rants by doing so. Amen.
Terry Simpson
Political opinions, like food, need to be well seasoned. The opinion should provide balance and not be distasteful. The opinion should have texture and depth, and not leave a bitter aftertaste. The opinion should be presented well - so it appeals to the eye. It should not have too much spice, or too much sweetness. It should not be overcooked. Political opinions, like foods, can never appeal to everyone's taste - but one can respect the care that the author/cook took in preparation and the thoughtfulness of them
Brenda Johnson
Nice!!!!
lux
this one gets my vote for winning comment 🙂
Schlake
It depends on what this is all about. If it is about cooking/food/the kitchen, then keep posts that aren't about its subject out. If it is about anything, then post anything. But I think most people, myself included, come here to see stuff about cooking and food and the kitchen. If you have other interests, the technology is simple enough, make another section for discussing them in. It will be extra work on your part, but it is a nice courtesy to extend to people and I think it raises the value of this section by keeping this section narrowly focused on one topic.
Steve Cross
While i disagree with your political stance and who you are voting for it is your right to post whatever you want on your blog. The great thing about the blog that you write is that you do not bombard us with your political stance on every subject, to many blogs end up being a bully pulpit for the owner and become a bore.
I have learned many things from your blog mainly the great Velvet Tango Room. Being fairly new to Northeast Ohio I have found a great bar to go to in Cleveland. I have also enjoyed the many great blogs that are promoted on your blog, they also have taught my wife and myself new and interesting things to see and do that I would not have been exposed to if I had not read your blog.
And finally, I believe that anyone who votes has a right to express their feelings in whatever legal way they choose. Keep up the good work, promote good food and drink, and do not let anyone try to dictate that they are right and you are wrong for whoever you vote for on November 6th.
Caleb Land
This problem is a result of status worship and the backlash against status worship in our culture. The media is quick to ask for a sound-bite from celebrity x on whatever the hot button issue of the day is, and then those who disagree with said opinion are quick to dismiss it just because celebrity x said it.
To be straightforward, just because you are a food expert does not mean you have expertise, discernment, or wisdom in the political realm. However, it also does not mean that your political opinion is invalid. The bottom line: It is my job as the reader to weigh the argument. Is it logical and well-reasoned? Is it truthful and moral, etc? This is your blog, say what you want. we can choose to read it, or ignore it, or remove you from our RSS feed. It is for you to decide if airing your opinion is worth the angry comments and potential lack of readership. If so, go for it (and hopefully mail me that book)!
Carri
Haters are gonna hate. They are just as likely to leave you if you have a food related opinion that they disagree with, so why not help further the cause and get people to think and vote? If we didn't put ourselves out there we'd be a part of the problem, it's better to be a part of the solution!
Sean
"Is it justifiable for me, known and read primarily for writing about food, cooking, and the work of the professional kitchen, to voice my opinion on a matter unrelated to food? "
It is absolutely justifiable for you, or anyone else, to offer an opinion on any matter you wish. It's equally justifiable for someone to tell you to pound sand. That's the very nature of the marketplace of ideas - you can speak your mind without fear of government reprisal, but anyone listening is free to ignore you or speak back.
I suspect your surprise at the response from four years ago is from a difference between the way you see your blog and the way (at least some of) your readers see your blog. I suspect to you, this forum is a personal and professional space, that while often devoted to food, is not solely devoted to it. For some of your readers, this space is only to be dedicated to your craft, and you are to keep your personal opinions out of it. Fair or unfair, I suspect that's the reason for the vitriol four years ago.
RM
I think your stance on Prop 37 in California glosses over the issue. Should we know what is in our food? Absolutely. I am completely in favor of increasing the accuracy and amount of information on food labels, but 37 is not the correct way to go about it. It is a measure that intends to demonize GMO foods rather than give better information to the consumer. The vast majority of research on GMOs and health have shown no negative impacts; those few papers that do have been torn apart as junk science by legitimate researchers.
ruhlman
excellent point I should address; I'm not necessarily against GMO, but I am against the secrecy
thimes
The first amendment says it all:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Add in a little "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" too.
If your question is "Is it a good business decision to mix work and politics?", then I am adamantly opposed. The Supreme Court got Citizen's United wrong and I can only hope that future legislation corrects that.
If our education system has failed people to the point where we start taking blog posts (no offense) as factual and influential, while news broadcasts are nothing more than opinions to be discounted, then we are truly in trouble.
Pass the bourbon please, I need a drink.
Ben
It's interesting to understand how we can become the 'THIS' guy or the 'THAT' guy. I remember my amusement at realizing that when I married my wife years ago I became known as 'Jeanie's Husband', not by my name. They knew me just as what was most important to themselves at the moment.
I know it's not intentional, but it happens.
I respect that you can shake it off. You have enough self worth to know that notoriety with food doesn't define you as a person. It's just one facet of you.
Post what you want. I'll read what I want. See? Didn't hurt each other in the process.
Me? I'm still 'Jeanie's Husband' and very proud of it, too. All years' worth...
Jennifer Sanborn
Mr. Ruhlman- It is your right to say whatever you want to say on your own blog, whether it fits in with "food writing" or not. You are paying to have the space hosted, and you are the only one who will receive any blowback from those who disagree with what you put out here. You are not only a food writer, but a person, and it is good that you remain politically aware of non-food topics.
That said, I think a food blog and its readers are best suited to discussing political topics that relate to food (and there are oh so many of those, from personal food choices in social situations to national agricultural policy). This is not to say that your opinions outside of food are not important, as they are, but I don't read your blog for your opinions on the insurance industry, disaster relief, or military spending. It's not that your opinions aren't valid, but I would rather read about those subjects from people who spend their lives doing the same level of research that you have put into learning about meat curing, stock making, and ratios in cooking. To simplify, my dentist is a good guy, but I don't ask him about how to fix my roof. It's not that I can't, but that I'd rather discuss my gums with him, and the roof with a carpenter.
I think that non-food political topics (and the inane comment wars and general discomfort they can cause) might alienate an audience that comes to you for writing on food. While I don't have to have the same position you do on abortion or border patrols or speed limits in Montana in order to read your thoughts about food, some people do, and seem to think that we must all agree on all topics. I think showing too much of your non-food-related hand might cause more bother than the extra traffic might be worth.
Tana Butler
Simply put: YES, and I want you and Tom Colicchio and others deeply involved in making good food to continue to link food and politics. Wendell Berry said, "Eating is an agricultural act." Michael Pollan furthered: "And a political one."
It is imperative—vital—that your voice be heard above the din of the (pardon this harsh but necessary phrase) brainwashed masses who watch FOX and think it credible. It's vital that you share your knowledge—of the infrastructure of agriculture, of the man behind the curtain, of the unvarnished truth that a clean environment gives us clean food.
There will always be ostriches who refuse to connect where our food comes from, what's in it, and what's not in it. As one who cares deeply, I want to listen to people like you, who know that real food doesn't come from Big Ag, or Corporate "Food."
Please continue to educate people in connecting those dots. You’re one of the lifeguards in this big pool, in my humble opinion. I appreciate that.
It's not about your so-called "celebrity." It's about your audience. You have a trustworthy voice. Use it.
Mark S. (@_Mark_S)
If you decide that expressing your opinion is worth whatever hackles are raised by doing so, express it. People who disagree with people regarding politics, religion, sports teams, favorite restaurants typically fight by saying stick to , while they opine off the top of their heads, but you have the same rights to do so as you wish. Not to mention, your views on items of note, whether narrowly defined or not, are valued because they are typically well thought out.
GW
I want my plumber to fix my pipes. He has an absolute right to voice his opinion, but I have an absolute right to not listen and to find another plumber, also food writer. There are plenty of other good cooks.
Good bye Ruhlman
Lynn
Whether you are a cook or a handyman, your vote counts. Your political opinion counts. Each candidate presents varied opinions on many subject matter. Whoever sits in the oval office will affect all of us. It will most likely affect those in the middle class and lower. I have lived through Martial Law. The greed and need for power affected everyone. Silence only perpetuates the wrong. People like you, who have a following must in some way feel the responsibility to educate the public if not your followers. Sometimes, people need to be reminded that everyone's opinion does count. To suppress the opinion of another is bullying and simply leads to many negative ideals. Obama may have disappointed many but he took over what can be deemed as a terrible fixer-upper. Opinions count. But one must always study the facts and the "facts" presented before casting one's opinion. That is one's responsibility in upholding the freedom of speech.
Christine
In a word: Yes. Period.
Jane
Maybe its because this election has been so exhausting if someone I know is expressing their political opinion I just tune it out. So over it. That being said this is your forum and you absolutely have the right to express your opinion. Those who want to read it will and those that do not won't - like me at this point.
Let's get this thing over with so we can all move on and focus on what is really important - living our lives without constant disingenuous attempts to manipulate us with lies, lies and yes more lies (that includes the many despicable people on both sides). Did I mention dishonesty? Now, who is Kim Kardashian voting for - I need to fill out my ballot?
Witloof
Michael, you write with great curiosity, vigor, and intelligence and your opinions, even if I don't always agree with them, strike me as thoughtful and considered. So why shouldn't you share your views on the state of the country, especially as they relate to what's on our plates? Your writing has always held a larger view of the world than just food and cooking. Food has been your medium to express your ideas about how life should be lived in general -- thoughtfully, openheartedly, generously, with great attention to detail and an insistence on demanding the best of and for ourselves.
People who eat well, families who eat good food together every day, are rich, even if they don't have a lot of material possessions.
Second rate food fuels a second rate life.
The people who lead our country have a profound influence on our daily existence, and that certainly includes the food we eat. If our food and water supply wrecked by pollution and fracking, if our USDA is corrupted by lobbyists and we can't depend on the safety of our food, if our farmland lost to urban sprawl; if we are taxed into poverty and unable to afford first quality food, decent housing, and education for our children, what kind of life can we have, and what kind of world are we leaving behind us?
Your blog is your place to express your opinions on matters large and small. Let your readers know what you're thinking. If we don't agree, at least you have opened our minds to another way to look at the world.
Obamanos!
Carole
I absolutely think it's acceptable for you to express your opinions. Our open discussions are part of what makes this country great. Everyone has the ability to educate and inform another person. I believe it was the great musician Sly Stone who said,
"Stand for the things you know are right.
It's the truth that the truth makes them so uptight
Stand, all the things you want are real
You have you to complete and there is no deal"
Heather
I think this blog is your backyard and you can write whatever you please on it. That said, while the sum total of all your published writing is not exclusively on food, it is what you are most known for and, almost, exclusively what you write about on this blog. So you might expect a few disappointed readers.
It sounds to me like the gentlemen you quoted were more disappointed in what your politics are, than that you wrote about politics.
Kristina~Former Chef
Food is a political issue and anyone who doesn't think so has their head in the sand. You've already written about food politics, and this is your blog. If you want to write about presidential politics, local politics, or even something completely off topic, that's your right. Right now the country is so divided it frightens me. Given what's going on, especially in your state, it makes sense to write about politics right now. It wouldn't make sense if suddenly every post was political.
Write about what you believe in, plain and simple. If you are effective in your explanations, then you may even sway people to your point of view. If not, you may lose readers, but that choice is yours to make.
Natasha
If no one ever talks about anything but his or her assigned niche, how will any discussion, learning or understanding happen?
It is absolutely vital that we have these conversations, because otherwise we will continue to view politics (and religion and so forth) as a very "us vs them" situation. Without conversations, these problems lead to us considering it justifiable to deny the humanity of those who disagree with us. You can, I'm sure, imagine the cycle that leads to. It seems to me we’re in it now.
To me, the bigger problem is in a combination of ONLY having these conversations at big times (around presidential elections, for example) and a refusal to actually listen and converse with respect to those who disagree. Of course, the latter is a symptom of the former, I strongly suspect. If we’d have these conversations when emotions are not so high, if we’d refuse to ever allow ourselves to forget the person we are talking to (or about, should it apply) is another human, for all the good and all the evil that encompasses, we might have to learn to engage in civil discourse. That practice might be good for all of us.
Yes, most people are going to expect you to keep it to food and food-related issues. Yes, your opinion will be weighed more in those realms. No, that doesn’t mean they’re the only realms you may or should speak about.
Eric Eakin
It's a free country. Let the market decide.
Chris
Your blog carries no more significance than someone who has a blog as their outlet for their own opinions. Yes you are published and a prominent authority on food. Does that make your opinion any less welcomed? It shouldn't. This venue you created under your name, under the title of food and cooking but food is something so cultural that it easily spills over into our lives in many different ways. Sitting at a table with family over food discussing politics just happens. Food is not just preparations and recipes but apart of culture itself and your want/need to discuss your personal politics only makes sense to me. I don;t feel you write any of this out of personal promotion or getting something out of it other than stating your heart felt opinion, so whenever you mind or heart is swayed to speak your mind here you should always feel welcome to do so.
Patrick
If you believe you have a duty to influence the political process to improve your community (from your perspective) in a way that does not diminish the influence of others, then it is completely justified. All of us that benefit from or are otherwise affected by politics are burdened with this obligation, if for no other reason than self-interest. For example, you might want to pay lower taxes or know what’s in your food, and either way your interests compel you to jump into the political space to give effect to your desires. Indeed, seen this way it is unjust not to speak out on a political question of importance as you would be letting yourself and your loved ones down. The reason that the critics give – that you should stick to food – unnecessarily confines your liberty, prevents robust debate on issues of importance to everyone, and therefore diminishes us all: liberal and conservative alike.
Carly
Anytime anyone with a remotely-recognizable name says anything remotely controversial, it's the same stupid response: Stick to cooking/acting/modeling/whatever. I say that if you've got a soapbox and/or a megaphone, you earned it. Politics touches everything, including food. People need to understand that when we follow individuals on blogs, on Twitter, or wherever, that those are being run by actual people - they express opinions, they make mistakes, whatever.
As a fan of you, I'm not entitled to dictate what you do or do not say. My only choice is whether or not to follow. If someone doesn't like reading your personal views, then they can stick to reading your books if they like. It's entirely up to you, as someone in the public eye, whether you want to say what's on your mind or not. For what it's worth, many people do choose to stay mum on anything interesting or let a PR rep do all of their talking, and those are people I choose not to follow on any sort of social media even if I'm a fan of their work otherwise. You probably do lose some followers by being honest, but you also gain some, and gain a lot of respect from people like me who appreciate it when people put themselves out there and act like flesh and blood human beings.
Dru
say it brother! my blog is asking for people to vote yes on prop 37, can't see any reason not to vote to have labels for how food is grown!
Marsha
Yes, it's your blog, and you do, indeed, have a right to post your political views. You have a right to annoy those readers interested only in food topics. You have a right to offend the (apparently - according to the polls) 50% of the population who disagrees with your presidential choice. But don't complain when you lose them as readers. What you might ask yourself is why you feel compelled to risk your readership and your brand by posting your political views on a food blog. Do you really think you will influence anyone's decision at this point? Why is it so important to you that you state your political position? To the 50% of the population that agrees with you, you're preaching to the choir. So what's the point? To the 50% of the population that disagrees with you, you're not going to change any minds AND you're going to piss them off -- is that what you want?
Josh Nanberg
This is not a computerized cookbook. Irma Rombauer told us how to sauté scallops decades ago. She even told us how to roast a chicken.
It's also not just your back yard.
What this is--and what any good blog should be--is a community. And it's a community you've created. You invited us here, and we came. We came of our own free will, and we're free to leave at any time.
But it's your community. We're all here because we respect the way you cook and you write. We admire your passion and we respect your opinion. That's why I think it's more than appropriate for you to voice that opinion on whatever matters you see fit.
Politics and food both evoke emotion. They bring out different emotions, of course, but at the end of the day, who among us hasn't had as visceral a response to a lovingly-prepared meal as we have had to a campaign commercial or a debate.
As a writer, you've chosen to share your reactions, your emotions and your passions with the rest of us. You do it better than most, which is why we keep coming back.
Finally, I'll just say when it comes to voting, people should make their own damn decisions. They should consider whichever sources they may deem worthy of consideration and disregard those they don't. But nobody should claim that because you’re known for one thing that your opinion on another is invalid or should be silenced.
Nancy
I have mixed feelings. I am, on the one hand, very much in support of free speech. This is your own little home on the web and you should be able to post whatever you want to post. I don't even care if it is a reasoned opinion, it is your space - do what you want.
I don't, however, come here to read political opinion. I am actively avoiding reading political opinion (with the exception of Margaret and Helen) since I know how I'm going to vote and I'm unlikely to change my mind by reading dissenting opinions. I also don't believe anyone else is likely to change their mind based on my opinions. People, in general, are pretty determined not to change their opinions.
That said, I also have the remarkable freedom to simply skip political posts. Amazing, isn't it? Freedom of speech goes hand in glove with freedom to not listen. I don't have to get angry if I disagree with someone else's opinion. I don't have to join a bunch of angry comments.
So, do as you wish. You certainly don't need my permission but you have it anyway.
Teri
Do I ask my butcher to diagnose a hairy mole? No, but I listen if he has an opinion about it. Write what you want, I am here for the food, but will read your political opinion and decide on my own. Though I admit I agree with you, so it makes it easier to read.
Austin Val
Yes. You needn't give up your rights simply because you blog. If people don't like your political opinions, they can vote with their mouses and stop reading your blog. At least you're not the Yarn Harlot (www.yarnharlot.ca) who sets off a firestorm every time she uses "vagina" or "nipple" in her knitting blog.
kathleen
How can we have strayed so far from the founding fathers - whose core value was: It's your frickin' yard. You therefore have the right to put up whatever sign you want. I'm sure Jefferson - rabid in the expression of his own opinions at every opportunity - probably has some treatise on the subject. That's why we can still call it a democracy.
Andrew
You can absolutely justify expressing your views, political or otherwise, as you are entitled to employ your platform however you see fit. You may have difficulty convincing readers that your background qualifies you to make political endorsements. If you do so on a frequent enough basis to substantially alter the overall content or theme of your platform, you may lose viewership from those who gravitated here due to their interest in cooking. On a more occasional basis, you may alienate some readers whose views differ from yours if this is something they are particularly opinionated or passionate about. You might gain some more regular viewers too. You inherently justify your expression by knowingly taking on that risk.
Dean
Michael, the language that best responds to your question has already been written. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." You have the right and when you feel strongly, you have the duty, to speak your mind. You're best known to the public for writing about food, but that is not a fence to limit you. Speak your mind as you wish, and thank you for providing a forum that lets people speak theirs.
Trevt777
I think the question is not whether you should be "allowed" to speak about politics, but rather whether its a good idea. The answer to the first question is obviously, resoundingly, yes. Of course you should speak your mind however you see fit. Especially on your blog, and especially on the internet. What the hell is the internet for if not for stating one's opinions.
But in these days of political turmoil and an electorate that appears to be just about evenly divided, you're bound to contradict half your audience. I come to this website to read about food and cooking, and the craft. Of course it deviates from that sometimes. I hold you in high regard for those subjects.
I happen to read extensively about political issues, studied political science, and have a career that requires me to pay attention to politics. I have strong feelings about questions of politics, and they differ from yours.
So, I come here as a break in my day --- and somewhat as a break in the insanity of following the election. I'm sure its silly of me, but I guess I view this blog as an escape.
A community where, regardless of our political stripes, we can discuss and agree (and disagree) on the subject of food. Certainly a republican and a democrat and a libertarian can all agree on great food. Food is, afterall, one of the few things that ties us ALL together regardless of geography or politics.
Call me an idealist, but food and cooking are pristine, albeit in a perverse sort of way. So when I check in here to find a post about politics, I feel somewhat slighted. I go away with a bad taste in my mouth. I go away thinking how I disagree with you, rather than enjoying the sense of community that a non-political discussion would otherwise be.
I guess my grandmother said it best -- don't talk about politics or religion at the dinner table. I know its not the same, but in a sense it is. I think this frustration is the source of the, let's call them inartful, responses you've received.
So should you be allowed to state your opinions on politics --- without question yes and I will defend your ability to do so. SHOULD you---on that one I'm not so sure.
Lene Johansen
People are funny when their writers go off topic, and politics is one of those issues EVERYONE has an opinion about. It is your blog, you can do whatever you want with it, but some people are going to take offense. It seems like Internet is permitting people to behave in ways we would not do to each other's face and get really nasty about it too.
However, with your brand in mind, if you do want to write about politics and the election, it is so easy to related it back to your field. Baylen Linnekin writes about food policy in Reason every week (f.ex. this http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/27/10-experts-weigh-in-on-federal-food-poli), and no one should take offense if you wrote about the election in terms of food policy issues.
An to go off topic, or on, depending on how you see it. If we want to stop the federal governments invasion of our food freedom, stopping the perpetual wars, and all the other things we hated about Bush (and about Obama if you are going to be honest about these things) we should all vote Gary Johnson this election cycle.
Grant E.
You are absolutely justified in giving your opinion. As you correctly stated: It is your website, and your choice as to what goes up on it. However, even as we are free to choose our actions and words, we are not free from the consequences our actions and words bring.
Politics tend to bring out the worst in people, from both sides. When entertainers, businessmen, writers, cooks, doctors, or lawyers take a public stand on politics they invite that ugliness into their office, website, or kitchen. Fair or not, their work or craft is now labeled with a political ideology. If you don't believe me, think of well known public figure with a with a well know political ideology dissimilar from yours: Are you more or less likely to buy his/her product, eat his/her food, use his/her service?
I always cringe when people, well known for something other than politics, delve into the political fray. It's not because I disagree with their views (I'm never one to turn down a passionate discussion), but because for many, it will inevitably water down what that person is well know for. This is the true shame: that someone who has worked hard to perfect their craft/product/service will not get the recognition they deserve from a percentage of their audience simply for their personal beliefs. That's why I believe, although you are completely justified in voicing your opinion, for your work's sake, it was unwise.
Dennis
Of course you should post your non-food-related opinions if you want to, and you nailed the reason yourself: your blog, your "yard", your rules. You clearly understand the unstated premise of freedom of speech, that is, that you're never free of the consequences of speech, but if the risk of turning off or losing some percentage of your readership is outweighed by the strength of your convictions, it's your risk to take.
I personally try not to stop reading people who I disagree with sometimes--because I know I disagree with almost everyone on something, sometime. It's unfortunate that the internet often seems to divide into echo chambers and shouting matches, but that's what it is. My biggest concern would be with unruly comment threads, should the trolls seek you out--the internet would probably be much more civil if you could punch someone through it.
Nick Pinto
This is America and you have the right of free speech. People have the right to agree or disagree with you. When you mix your livelihood with your opinion, then you must also be willing to accept the affect of your opinion on your livelihood. This isn't a dinner party with friends or fringe friends. This is a forum where you cultivate various forms of your income and people trust and/or like you for your specific knowledge and tend to spend money with you. Once you combine livelihood and opinion then you should quietly reap the rewards or suffer the consequences. I myself believe in the one person - one vote system; use it! I personally come here for your expertise and opinion on food and associated items, not for your political thoughts. Hopefully they are far and few in between. By the way, I've already purchased Ruhlman's Twenty a few months back.
Joe Santos
The nature of the platform is what matters most here. This is a personal blog. It's mostly about food, yes, but you often share other aspects of your life. I would think that most of your readers know by now what they've signed up. Now, if you were writing an article for Bon Appetit magazine on charcuterie and you decided to toss in some pro-Obama proselytizing or anti-Romney barbs? In that case your readers would be completely justified in being annoyed. Wrong platform. Wrong audience. Wrong time.
One caveat? Even though it's perfectly fine for you, as a blogger, to voice your opinions on politics, you will no doubt turn off and even lose some readers. Be prepared to accept that when it happens. Like it or not, if I found out that your politics were of the reactionary Tea Partier variety my respect for you as an individual would plummet and I'd be a lot less interested in your gustatory rhapsodizing and pro tips from the kitchen.
margalit (@margalit)
You have every right and obligation to share your opinions, regardless of what the subject matter of your blog usually is. Just because food is you livlihood and passion does not mean that your thoughts on other things are not equally important. The fact that you care enough to share your feelings on how our country is governed shows me, a devoted reader, that you are more well-rounded than simply about food. I just wish more people in influential positions outside mere celebrity would be so brave and committed to speak out on the direction our country is heading. As a parent, you are interested in the future your children will occupy. That alone gives you the reason and the right to state your beliefs. Politics matter. It isn't like your opinions are ill-thought out. It is apparent that you have given great thought to your opinions on our political future. Regardless of the haters who can't wait to attack anyone with dischordant opinions to their own, this is your blog, your teeny piece of the internet and you get to say what you will here.
That you choose to share with us your ideas should be applauded and not dissed. I'm a long-time blogger and I have always felt that as long as you aren't actively threatening someone's welfare, you get to say what you want on your blog, no matter what the content. Freedom of speech and all that...
From a Massachusetts voter that hates Romney with every fiber of my being.
Paul Post
Freedom
Victoria
First, for you to express your opinion is a right guaranteed by the Constitution.
Second, I am interested in your opinion so am interested in reading it. (And as an Obama supporter, I am happy to hear how you will vote tomorrow - but I would be interested in your opinion whatever it was/is.)
Third, if I didn't want to read your opinion, I wouldn't.
For me, I have two litmus tests. I'm pro choice and support the right for each person to be able to marry the person he or she wants to marry.
You Ruhl. (Sorry)
Steve
While I object to/find distasteful people inserting their political beliefs in improper forums (e.g., award shows, non-political topic interviews, the workplace, etc.), I agree in your sentiment that your blog is your damn yard (while at the same time I may not agree with your all your politics). I believe the question of appropriateness turns on forum, Rhulman.com is a "your perspective" blog and you are not reporting news, recounting facts, or performing professional duties. If you can't be completely honest about your perspective, then your blog loses authenticity.
Jen
Roger Ebert gets the same flack on his blog for daring to post his opinions on non-cinematic matters. It is your blog, and you're free to write what you will, just as I am free to read it (or not). On one of the other blogs I read, one of the commenters became too vocal (in a verbally abusive way) about the blogger's "off-topic" post, to which another commenter posted the following awesome response: http://getyourowneffingblog.wordpress.com/
ohiofarmgirl
sure! do whatever you want on your site. i dont care who you vote for or promote ..heck i dont even agree with everything you have so say about food. but i ran right out and got Salumi when it came out..and i'd love to have Twenty. the point is... i'm not sure when everyone decided they all needed consensus. why do we all have to agree? doesnt make sense to me at all. who you are is part of your brand and if it works, then bully for you. me? i stay way from any politico speach - and i've been criticized for that, for heavens sakes. you cant make everyone happy. but you can make ME happy by giving me one of your books! i'm even close so the postage will be cheap! vote for me, Ohiofarmgirl, for your give away!
Jason
It’s the magnificence of our country that anyone may voice any opinion. So yes, especially this being your blog, you have every right to post non food related opinions. Having facts and making a good argument always improve a posting. However, the majority of your readers come to the site expecting writing regarding food and cooking. So, it is understandable if a reader is frustrated or disappointed by the post. If one doesn’t want to read what you have to say, do what most people do and don’t read the posting!
What we should strive for is civil discourse. Hate and anger spewed does nothing to enhance our understanding of differing positions. We are divided partly because we fail, or refuse to try, to understand one another. Politicians can be very divisive but the Americans whom elect them, I believe, share beliefs which are more alike than we realize. We should be able to debate, disagree, and still go out for a dark and stormy afterwards.
leaming2956
Freedom of speech is a guaranteed right under the Constitution. That certainly includes what you express on your website. Readers are equally free to ignore, agree or disagree with your opinion. As you point out, there is a great deal at stake in this year's election. So in addition, to your urging us to "pay attention and vote", I would also add, "stay informed". Ignorance is a dangerous thing in these complex times.
Paul Kobulnicky
Life is a series of inter-related matters. Most off these matters involve the ways in which we all interact. So, a post where you say, as you have done many times, "here is what is important to me" is always appropriate. With respect to elections, you would no more be telling others how to vote than you tell them how to eat when you write about what is important to you in cooking and eating.
It is you who are taking the risk and it is you who may lose readers/viewers. If you feel making a statement is important, then by all means do it.
BCW
Michael, I believe the title of your blog easily answers your question: "Michael Ruhlman - Translating the Chef’s Craft for Every Kitchen."
You choose not to call it "Michael Ruhlman - On Food and Politics."
I imagine readers who choose to read "Charcuterie" or "Salumi" have fair and reasonable expectations regarding the material they will find inside, based on what is communicated via the titles and subtitles of those books. And I suspect your editors and publisher would perhaps have made some changes in how the books were marketed if there were chapters devoted to electoral politics.
If you do choose to change the blog to "Michael Ruhlman - On Food and Politics", great. Go for it. I'm sure there are a number of readers who would enjoy hearing more about your views on such things.
But as a writer, I think it is fundamentally fair and responsible to communicate to your readers a reasonable expectation regarding the content they will encounter.
BCW
One other note. I just noticed that under your photo at the top of the page, it says this:
"Welcome to Ruhlman.com where I blog about food, cooking, recipes and technique, because the world is better when we cook for ourselves. "
Again, it is simply a matter of communicating to readers what they can expect to find in your writing on this blog.
Carly
I think your point is fair, but honestly, if political posts that have nothing explicitly to do with food are as few and far between as they are on this one, then I think a title change would be a bit silly. I won't begrudge anyone the decision to go off-topic once or twice a decade.
Jo
For a long time I was apathetic about voting and then one day it hit me, my grandmother who had to quit school to help support her family age 12 would so disappointed in me and angry that I did not appreciate the privilege that we have in the USA to vote for the person that we believe will do the best job for our country. Since then I have voted every year, my husband and I spent over an hour going through the propositions school board etc on our lengthy ballot and then drove to the post office to get our early ballots in the mail. I believe in president Obama because we do know him and what he stands for. He may not be perfect but he does his best for our country. And I know what bad shape our country was in under bush, a year before he left office business had slowed I was a securities paralegal and personally witnessed what the banks and investment bankers did. I don't trust Romney he has no concept of the struggles of the middle class or anyone else. Vote from your heart, vote from your gut, just vote.
staceyg
I was living in Cameroon in 2002, during a presidential election. Many people I spoke with there said they would not bother to vote because, among other kinds of disenfranchisement, the ballot boxes were quite literally stuffed ahead of time for Paul Biya. I tell this story to people in the U.S. who say they won't bother to vote, hoping that they will realize what a privilege it is. While we could talk about whether our ballot boxes are metaphorically stuffed, given the amount of money it takes to run for the presidency, etc.,, we are lucky to live in a place where we can say what we like and vote as we see fit. I'm glad you're an intelligent voice in the world. Keep writing whatever you want.
J. Garrett
See, the thing is, we are so inundated with celebrity endorsements, political endorsements, phone endorsements, etc., etc. that when we come to an admired, talented chef's site, the last thing I want to see is a political endorsement!
Have you thought about why anyone would care who you vote for?
Really, your political leaning is no more important than mine, I am just a citizen. If one of my friends ask me who I am voting for I will tell them.
If you must put your vote out there, maybe put it in another place on your blog. I had to de-twitter another chef who wanted to proclaim his political leanings in a post not even close to an election.
Let me just say, this applies to both parties. Whether it is my candidate or not.. We come to these blogs to learn about cooking and food. If we want to see something about politics there are a lot of websites for that.
Sure, this is your website. Do as you please, But you asked for our opinion and this is mine.
Mary
Your site, your voice. Sure.... But in addition, you graciously share your site and let other voices speak too -- guest posts and comments for example. That you choose most often to give voice to matters of food is your fault not a blogosphere rule to be policed. That you occasionally voice matters regarding alcoholic beverages is charming. That you less occasionally give voice to broader issues like writing, travel, and politics... well, you initiated the blog, you spend the time writing the posts, you decide. Is this blog yours? Not entirely since you share it. It is in many ways a co-created site between you, your s.o. (nice photos!), and each of your readers all together. I think you do anticipate us readers on occasion and so we make our way into your thoughts and your prose. But does that mean one person can walk onto the site and dictate that "Only shall food matters be writ about here!"? Well, that is a tad silly. A point which I believe the above scallops make admirably.
Simona
I agree with you that everything is related to food in the sense that our choices in the political arena have an impact on food: the Farm Bill and California Prop 37 are two important examples that shows a direct relation, but Medicare, taxation, war, education, etc. have all a strong relation to the food we have available and we eat (or don't). I think it is laudable that people bring their informed perspective to the debate. It is also important, because those informed perspectives are necessary to balance the screams of the ignorant people who have to resort to scare tactics to impose their message, because frankly they have nothing meaningful to say. So, both the message and the tone of delivery are important, so thank you for contributing to putting the conversation on a civil level.
Nina
Answering without reading responses above, I agree, it is your yard, say what you want. But further, I wish MORE people would do this. Just as my friends on FB and other social media reveal their true passions and personalities through heated political posts, and it gives me pause and causes me to reexamine some of those acquaintances because they believe SO DIFFERENTLY than I do that we are completely incompatible even as casual acquaintances, it's important. Just as a site like OpenSecrets.org helps me to learn where to throw my financial support and where to guide it away, say, from a big box retailer who does not split their donations equally, but donates the vast, vast majority of them to a party that's against so many things that are near and dear to me, it helps me make more educated decisions, as a consumer, a friend, a home cook and a mother. Some may see that as making things more divisive, I see it as giving me more info so I can make better choices and support people and institutions I agree with more often than not.
Brent
Michael, I love your perspective on food, which is what keeps me a reader of yours. Given that food is where you've gained fame, fortune, and reputation , maybe people expect to see food-centric issues when they choose to visit and get annoyed when they don't get it. I think there is some validity to this feeling of annoyance or betrayal.
While I think it's appropriate to sprinkle personal, political, or even inciting rants into posts about food on a foodie's blog, to devote entire posts to politics or only tangentially related topics is abusing your audience's reasons for visiting I think.
Savor This
“We find comfort among those who agree with us—growth among those who don't” - Frank A. Clark
It's easy during this miserable election to hang out where you are cozy or go to the other side to get riled up and angry. Ask most people on the street who they support and they will have an answer. Ask them why or how their candidate will meet those expectations and they resort to sound bites, mumbles and idiotic comments. That's why I welcome opinions and comments from thinking people, regardless of their vocation or viewpoint. All the better if it is personality you already respect for their ability to research, vet and work to improve some other part of life you believe in. If you don't share their opinion, you might at least come away a little more informed or challenge them right back. And that is what will really help us move forward.
Detroit Leaning
“THINK! It ain’t illegal yet.” - American hero George Clinton
Information literacy sounds like an intimidating concept, but it boils down to what we learned well by the end of elementary school (on the playground if not in the classroom): Consider the source!
Blogs are a great place for discourse, but inherently subjective and advertised as such. Ruhlman isn’t presenting this as a neutral platform even on cooking topics. I love public discussion, I’m interested in opinions I’ve determined to have value (RESPECT AND AGREEMENT ARE NOT SYNONYMOUS!), but at the end of the day…..my vote is MINE. That absolute ownership is one of the great things about being American.
Respectfully, I don’t give two figs about how Ruhlman thinks I should vote. I’ve never been at a crossroads on a political decision and turned to a blog, my Facebook/Twitter feed, or signs on somebody’s front lawn for direction. These outlets might inspire further research and discussion, but don’t directly influence my vote. I appreciate that Ruhlman lets the comments flow pretty much unedited, but that demonstrates a generosity of his spirit as opposed to him guaranteeing my right to freedom of information.
Steve
I am so very ready for this election season to be over, but I have no problem with you using your own blog to voice opinions on matters unrelated to food. I visit your blog because I find it interesting and the fact that it opens my mind to things I didn’t know previously. The fact that I may not agree with all of your opinions on non-food-related matters is irrelevant. It’s a sad reflection on the state of America when we will only seek out opinions from people or other sources who agree with us – the issue is not so much media bias as confirmation bias.
Life is much less interesting when we close our minds to genuine discourse, political or otherwise. It’s ridiculous to end friendships merely because others’ views, no less seriously contemplated than our own, differ from ours. Let’s embrace these types of differences that make us great, and always appreciate that we live in a country where we can discuss these differences over a well-crafted cocktail. Or even better, a plate of bacon.
Anne B.
Hell yes....express!!! Food is integral to all parts of life and life is integral to all parts of food.....only a fool or a coward attempts to compartmentalize. L'Chaim!!!
David
The notion that you cannot offer your opinion on subjects outside of your primary area of expertise is fundamentally at odds with principles on which this country was founded. Our forefathers understood that there is no marketplace more important than the "marketplace of ideas," in which the truth emerges from competition of ideas in free and public discourse. The great failure of the current political discussion is that far too many people prefer to stay within an "echo chamber" in which their ideas and beliefs are never challenged.
As someone who primarily writes about food rather than politics, you have readers that cross political boundaries. As a result, when you post about politics -- whatever your position is -- you are challenging the worldview of many people who do not regularly subject themselves to such challenges. That, in and of itself, makes voicing your opinion worthwhile. And like your food writing, you have chosen to do so in a thoughtful manner, which makes the exercise all the more constructive.
People don't have to buy what you are selling. But to criticize you for for participating in the "marketplace" is inherently un-American.
Richard
Seconding every word David just said!
Rob Levitt
This is your blog, but what is it's function? Of course you can say whatever you want here, but did you set this site up to talk politics? Did you set it up to discuss anything besides food? Do you often post about non-food topics? The question to ask isn't should you discuss politics on your blog, it's why do people come to this site? You said it yourself in your post, at both events we did together and no doubt, in countless other public and private settings, "The world is a better when we cook food for the people we love." Or sometimes you say, "Cooking is what makes us human." THese sentiments speak to the core of why I come to this blog. To read about food. To learn about techniques or customs I'm unfamiliar with or to gain insights, new perspectives on things already relevant to what I do. This is where I take a break from my day to day. This is where I turn when I'm researching a recipe or technique. This is where I look when I just want a good quick read. I never knew of Cleveland's West Side Market. Now I do, and really want to visit. I fell like in this election more than any other I am being bombarded with political rhetoric. On Facebook and Twitter, people are putting their opinions out there and that is their right, but I find myself constantly unfriending people not because they are in favor of the wrong guy, but because the constant bashing is making me like them less as a person. Social media is supposed to be just that- social. Your blog is a respite. Somewhere online I can go to cheer up when my computer is constantly throwing politics at me. To come here and have to talk politics (prop 37 is different- it is food related, as is foie gras ban discussions) takes that away form me. Food should bring joy. It should bring people together regardless of political beliefs. The table is the one place we should put all that aside and just be a community, actual or virtual.
Dan
Is there anything more community than sharing opinions? The presidency is to be decided but let's discuss the best way to season fish shall we?
Arlene
I think your original post as well as this new one are both on target. As you say, this is a great country in which you can be anything you want. In this case you are a chef, food blogger, author, and great friend to others (including your faithful readers) in the food community. We VOLUNTARILY look to you for your opinion on food, farming, etc. It would be hypocritical of us to tell you to limit your opinions and leave politics out of your blog. It IS your backyard - go for it.
Adam J
Justifiable? Absolutely. Why? Within this post (on your blog, that you pay for) you outline exactly why you feel the way you do with the same thought and commentary you offer your food writing. That sort of thought changes an endorsement to a discussion that will serve anyone with an open mind. I suspect that many people read subject specific blogs because they don't want to read about politics, sports, religion, food, fashion etc. but anger and bossiness isn't appropriate. Frequent political discussion would likely change the way people view the blog, something I imagine you're keenly aware of. Your "lawn" doesn't have any fences or require payment for admission; all are welcome to leave if they don't like the signage. If you were to completely re-zone your "lawn" into a "political headquarters" from a "restaurant" it would, in my opinion, be a shame but you'd have to justify it only to yourself.
Natalie Luffer Sztern
Most recently someone said to me: there are two kinds of people in this world wherever you live: Good People and Bad People and the only thing that turns Good People into Bad People is Politics.
Nancy
I would add a third: Good People Who Stand By And Do Nothing. Though I guess if the "good" and "bad" designation is based on one's impact on the world, that would make them Bad People after all.
I stand corrected.
Mike
Mark -
I think it's very simple. You should say what you want to say; your readers can say what they want in response.
I live in Northern California. Four years ago, I was the campaign manager for McCain in my county. I had countless yard signs stolen, trash thrown on my yard, and passersby yell obscenities at my wife as she loaded our children into her car.
I've since moved to a new neighborhood. This year, I decided not to put out any yard signs - even for a friend who's running a quite competitive race as a conservative-leaning independent. It wasn't worth it to suffer through the hostility again.
I do share my political beliefs with my friends - most of whom are Democrats by virtue of where I live. They like me personally, so they listen respectfully to what I have to say, and they offer their own opinions. Sometimes the discussion gets more heated than it should; sometimes we don't talk about certain topics that could lead to an unpleasant argument. So we're respectful and polite, I'd say.
For now, I prefer keeping my political conversations to my private acquaintances. I assume at some point in the future, I'll get back to more public involvement.
For you, if you're willing to accept the (probably often ugly) response, you should talk about whatever you'd like. If you don't want the response, you should stick to the food.
Nancy
It's frightening how quickly self-righteousness becomes thuggery. I'm sorry you and your family were subject to it and sickened that you felt you couldn't openly support your friend because of it.
Dialogue—real, honest dialogue, not just sound bite-slinging and regurgitation of party lines—is sorely needed in a world where we're more isolated and divided than ever, filtering out opposing views with a click. I may not agree with you (or Ruhlman for that matter: I'm currently of the opinion that anyone who seeks power is not to be trusted with it), but I'll certainly defend your right to speak your mind. Even more so if you listen more than you speak... which Ruhlman does here (in his yard) pretty damn consistently.
Whatever our opinions may be, the more of us who thoughtfully and respectfully speak out in the face of apathy, ignorance and intimidation, the less apathy, ignorance and intimidation there will be. In my opinion.
Brian B
It's a very fine you are looking to tread. I would never say anyone should not be able to express their opinions, views or thoughts, however are you using your position and fame to influence others opinions, views or thoughts? When someone votes for a particular candidate not because of what they believe about the guy but rather because some actor or singer stood up and said "I voted for this guy and you want to be like me right" I take issue. While it is more a reflection on the individual being unable to think for themselves I think anyone with a relative amount of fame and/or a platform needs to understand this and be responsible with it. I think celebrity activism is just one of many things wrong with this country’s political system. I’d much rather see celebrities and athletes encourage people more to get out and make up their own minds instead of encouraging a vote one way or the other. In the end, you are free to and encouraged to share your views as much as I am, I just hope that no one reading your blog uses it as a sole source of information.
Judi
YES! AbsoLUTEly yes!
Stephen Falko
Of course you are justified to voice your opinion on any topics you wish. As you say this is “your yard”. And it is healthy to spend at some time listening to conflicting opinions. Of course I am just as justified in ignoring your opinion, or in granting it as much or as little weight as I deem appropriate.
The rare time I disagree with something you have written about food, I carefully examine my previous view. You are very much an expert in this area, and I respect your opinions. So you might well change mine, and sometimes have.
For over two decades I have worked with alternative propulsion vehicles (electric, hybrid, and fuel cell). If you were to opine in my area of expertise and I completely disagreed with you I wouldn’t give it a second thought. It is quite unlikely that someone without in depth experience is going to hold a contrary viewpoint that is both based on sound facts and conflicts with what I know to be true.
The beauty of the internet is that I am responsible for which sites I visit and I can easily stop spending my time at a site that no longer holds my interest. As long as this site is primarily about food, I will enjoy the occasional off topic commentary, by someone whose opinions I admire, about almost any subject. Even when I believe you are wrong.
Lyndsey
Since this is your blog, I think you are free to write whatever you want to write about. That's the whole point of our political system - to preserve your rights. Different parties just have different beliefs on how to preserve those rights. Not everyone is going to agree with what you write - be it on who to vote for or even how to cook something. Our duty is not to make everyone happy, but to learn to live in harmony despite our differences. Will you lose some readers, probably. But hopefully you will keep/gain those who are mature enough to respect others for their differences and opinions. The freedom to do that is what makes our country so great.
Zachary Reiss-Davis
As many others have said, it's your blog, write about whatever you want. But keep in mind, your audience "pays" (in time, inclination to purchase books, and advertising eyeballs) to hear your opinion about food. Only you can answer if providing a "product" (blog post) that's not what your audience expects is worth it.
I want to ask for a bit more information about Prop 37 though, which is clearly in your wheelhouse. While I 100% agree that food labeling is important, and that big-agra causes lots of problems, I haven't been convinced that Prop 37 will be a valid solution to, well, anything, instead of being a terribly written mess of a legislating by ballot box at its worst, ala Prop 65 in California a number of years ago, which was relatively similar.
Several other food bloggers who have strong environmental and small / local farming movement credentials have posts, such as http://petergiuliano.tumblr.com/post/33939678079/for-californians-only-on-proposition-37 and http://arduousblog.com/2012/09/20/why-prop-37-could-be-a-net-win-for-monsanto/ explaining "no" votes.
Can you take the time to explain why you like this bill? I'm currently planning on voting no, but am certainly sway-able either way right now, and am a California voter.
Janel E
For all your concern about food issues, I'm inclined to agree with many of them but I don't follow you to read your political opinion. Your political opinions are not original nor are they really saying much that other chefs and food writers have not said. They're all of the same persuasion, so why alienate your conservative readers and patrons? We already know you follow the Democrat party line.
Paul
Thanks for sharing your viewpoint. Civil political discussions are always appreciated, and I happen to agree with your take on the election.
Ed
Its your blog, so you can whatever say the hell you want. Simple!
However, the question you might want to ask is "Does it make any difference what you say?". The nation is so polarized that there are damn few "undecideds". I'm moderate Democrat living among very conservative Republicans. My "moderate" views are looked on as far-left by the wing-nuts I'm surrounded by. They are so set in their ways that the almost daily flip-flops by Romney are not even given a passing thought. They are immune to logic! I asked one of them if they would vote for Hitler if he was a Republican. He thought a second and then said "probably". So what can you do?
If you haven't done so, check out Andy Borowitz. His Borowitz Report and this Twitter feed will make a Democrat laugh and Republican smolder 🙂
ruhlman
yeah, I think you're right, ed, i honestly don't think I could change a single vote.
Karla
Of course I think you can post about politics. Having read your body of work I find you to be an intelligent man who reaches well reasoned conclusions. I'm always interested in what people of your ilk think and why.
Matt Pedone
There are many politically outspoken celebrities in this country, most of whom deal with criticism for not "sticking to their day job". One such individual is the punter for the Minnesota Vikings, Chris Kluwe. He has been blogging for a local newspaper, and I think his words sum this up best:
"I will not stand for the continual eroding of society. I will not tolerate the presentation of a biased argument under a thin coat of presumed neutrality. I will not contribute to the cheapening of discourse and thought that decays every single news as entertainment outlet in this country. I absolutely will not compromise my ethics and morality, ideals that lead me to treat others with empathy and honesty, to demand truth not only from myself but from those around me.
I reject you, and I encourage others to do the same – to you, and to all others like you. To those who perpetrate deception and fraud. To those willing to hide the truth of their beliefs. To those who value flash over substance, short term gains over long term consequences.
Without honesty, we have nothing."
(http://blogs.twincities.com/outofbounds/2012/11/05/out-of-bounds-blog-no-final-foundations-and-farewells/)
This is YOUR website, Mr. Ruhlman. If you feel strongly about the election, SAY SO. To do otherwise is dishonest.
Tags
As long as you've assiduously attended to your mise en place, no one should object if you "serve it forth." Your major is in writing, your minor in gastronomy. Does anyone reading your words rely on your cooking skills, or do they rely on your ability to relay instructions clearly? Do students in a cooking class protest when an instructor gives them useful information that is not of a culinary nature? Don't let anyone tell you what to write, but don't be afraid to put your wisdom through its paces in choosing your words. After all, you may have to eat them later.
Peter W
Whether or not you should have posts on polarizing political issues is an issue of branding. You have the right to post whatever the hell you please on your own blog. However, if you put forth a polarizing opinion, you must understand that you will then be branding yourself in a way that may isolate yourself from some people who may have been interested. The chick-fil-a controversy is a good example of this. Dan Cathy was fully in his rights to express his opinion on homosexuality, but he did so at risk of identifying his company and his reputation with the anti-gay agenda. So the question is, are you okay with the risk of distancing yourself from people who may be supportive readers but would be sickened by your political view? One controversial post every four years may not drive anyone away, but if this becomes a regular topic, don't be surprices if you lose about 50% of your readers.
Peter W
*surprised
Tags
If a reader objects to your opinion because you're a teacher, then let them look at it as an observation from a student, which is what every good teacher is anyway.
Tana Butler
By the way, Michael: I think Donna should have put the elephants on the white scallops. (I hope you laugh.)
Phyllis
I'm not laughing, Tana! Why must democrats always play the "race" card? Really: black and white scallops? Pathetic!!!
Mallory
The right to hold and express a political opinion may be justifiable for a notable food author. However, the concomitant ability for celebrity to influence others’ opinions seems unfair.
One’s fame gives opinion weight disproportionate to expertise. A quick word from an entertaining voice often carries more gravitas than the humble, but honed, authority. Just as chefs improve their craft through devotion to skill and classical technique, the profession of policy analysis requires dedication before becoming accurate and balanced enough for extensive public consumption.
An illustrative case is the above reference to Proposition 37. The author calls for Californians to vote yes on Prop. 37 so that they may know what is in their food. However, this statement belies subtleties within the bill, namely the proliferation of special interest exemptions that may render the bill moot.
The emotion, conviction, and decisiveness with which celebrities publicly convey their opinions not only obscure the complexity of issues but give readers the false impression that they are fully informed. Those with a platform model a mode of decision making that empowers readers to over simplify and firmly entrench themselves- a most un-democratic legacy in an increasing polarized time.
PS, I sincerely am a big fan!
Dan
A "big fan" that just told you to STFU.
Stephen Braun
You know when scallops are done, right? You don't time 'em, you just use all your senses in a natural, organic way that could be labeled "instinct" or "your gut." Goes for cooking in general--you know somewhere down deep when something is amiss, when a sizzle isn't quite right, when the smell is off, when the crust is done, when the flavors harmonize. Well...I'm tuning into my gut on this issue of you veering into politics on your blog. Michael, I lova ya...read most of your books, respect the heck outta you...but my gut says that even though, clearly, you have every right to talk about whatever you want to on your blog, my gut says it would be better if you kept the focus on food and cooking, veering into politics only when it's clearly food-related (i.e. foie gras amendments, etc.) Why? I can't tell you, exactly, but it's the same reason you can't tell somebody when the scallops are done. You just know.
Mary
It depends upon your topmost goal for this blog. If it's to express yourself, then yes. If it's to write about food and cooking to the largest possible audience, then no.
karen downie makley
As a writer, you should understand "standard usage." Usually, the term applies to grammar, but in this case we could apply it to the expectations set up by this blog forum. Heretofore, the "standard usage" of your blog has been for food-related topics. You did not set up your blog to be a weekly, Royko-style rant on whatever captured your attention that day in current events. Political commentary is not the "standard usage" of this blog. OF COURSE, you are entitled to your opinion. OF COURSE, it's YOUR blog. But if you have to spout off on matters unrelated to food, you might consider starting a second politically-oriented blog. We (readers) come here with the expectation to read about and discuss food.
Dan
Your expectations are irrelevant. This is one man's creation. Whatever he deems appropriate, is.
Sunny Diaz
Food is vital regardless of culture, time, or setting. Food is power, thus it is political. How can anyone expect that you would set aside your political beliefs when everything we love, hope for, and dread cannot happen without food? It is the Kevin Bacon of all issues.
Stacy
People come to blogs to read other people's opinions and perspectives on the world. You may be a food writer, but what does "food" mean? It's necessary calories for survival, it's culture and tradition, it's health and wellness, it's economics and trade. Every day we vote with our forks, and every year we vote with our votes.
Should a chef only write about recipes and restaurants? You have a family, pay taxes, live in a community, and have values. I'm a vegetarian who reads your blog, and you haven't convinced me to eat charcuterie, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't write about it, or that I've stopped visiting. You're under no obligation to write what I want you to write, because hey! It's a free country. If I don't want to read your blog, there are thousands more I can choose from. Or I could go outside and take a walk. Or watch Fox News. Or buy a Big Gulp. Any of those are my own political statement, whether you (or your readers) like it or not.
Stephanie
This is your yard. You get to put up any yard sign you want to. (And it's rather a bit of a cheek to tell you otherwise!)
David Tucker
Yes it is proper for you to opine on any issue that is important to you and that you have an opinion about. You have worked hard to establish your reputation as a thoughtful person on food issues and I'd imagine you take the same thoughtful approach on other issues. I don't have to agree with your opinions, and if your opinions are consistently dead wrong then I'd be more and more chary of your food opinions, but having a platform and a voice is a wonderful thing and you should take advantage,of that.
allen
Cooking brings people together, promotes international diplomacy, cooperation, and friendship. The peak of these traits were during the Clinton administration. We were concerned about diplomatic relations as a country. He got a B. J. & still functioned amid turmoil.
Think of what a Grocery store vegetable aisle looked like 20 years ago: no lemon grass, now we have every kind of pepper known readily available and more spices. Diplomacy = better trade relations = more friendly echange = better selection, & better food!
8 years of flushing it all down the toilet, I think we can at least try to restore that. But the primary concern in this election is trying to serve everyone Russian caviar and champagne on a ground beef budget. Will that turn our dinner into beef barley soup for all, or a rib eye & vegies 'round the house.
I have no idea what the outcome will be, but I just made myself hungry & need to eat!
A.S.
Asking others if it is "Justifiable" is an odd way of thinking about it. You of course have every right to express your non-food opinions here and anywhere else. But you have to realize that by doing so you can alienate some perhaps large proportion of your fans and loyal readers. Is it worth it? We readers can't answer that; we don't know how important these issues are to you, nor do we know how important we fans are to you. Maybe you feel so strongly about the issues that it doesn't matter to you if you alienate half of us. Or maybe you couldn't care less about the half of your fans that you alienate. Those are balances that you have to weigh - we can't do it for you. You have the great fortune to be able to have your thoughts read by many thousands of people. The flip side is that you can chase some of those people away - do you care if you do just to tell us who you think we should vote for? It's not a question we can answer for you.
ruhlman
great questions all. I do consider it. on twitter I was asked "Find me a food writer who isn't a liberal, baby-murder supporter. You're all saying the same thing, towing [sic] the party line." she was quickly called a Right Wing Nut Job but the point is not inaccurate that most people passionate about food, cooking, food issues, do tend to be liberals. I wish I'd asked people to say who they intended to vote for. I'm guessing 80% of the people who read this blog are liberal or left leaning, 20% sausage loving, venison dressing liberals. all of whom I love. I'm a "more the merrier" sort. as I said, two of my very closest pals are repubs, one my best man and life long friend is as seriously conservative as they get (tho not a RWNJ). So I would hope only the RWNJ's unfolo and delete my feed. fine by me. thanks for your thoughtful comment.
David in PA
You absolutely have the right to express your opinion about who to vote for. You even have the right to generalize that people who are "foodies" tend to be liberal leaning. I'm not sure on what facts that is based, but you have the right. You also have the right to describe conservatives as the codeword "RWNJ". I'm not sure if you know any so called RWNJ. The conservative view of our nation is really about individual liberty and a limited government based on the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution provide the basis for Liberty and free speech. Conservatives are staunch defenders of Liberty and free speech. Without that defense, you wouldn't be able to express your opinions on this blog. Be thankful for conservatives, they are really looking out for you and your liberty!
Deb in Indiana
This site is your fucking yard and you can put up whatever sign you want.
Well-reasoned, sufficient and complete. On this opinion, I completely agree with you. I may not agree with all the thoughts you express, but we are not in my yard, now, are we?
Thanks for giving me a forum to express my thoughts. I am aware that you have no obligation to do so.
ruhlman
well, what are your thoughts? this table is open. this is the whole point. i think one of the best comments so far was one word: freedom. i think we all can agree on that.
A.S.
By the way, I will add that the thing I find most misguided in your post isn't the standard issue liberalism - as a reddish voter in a blue area, I am used to it. But your thoughts on prop 37 are disappointing. There is little to no evidence that GM food present any danger to anyone. But by enshrining labeling in the State Constitution, you are implying something is wrong with it. That implication is unscientific and unnecessary. (yes, really there is an implication with the label - if I required a label on a bottle of water that said "warning - contains dihydrogen monoxide - excess amounts may be fatal", some people would be scared away.)
We have regulatory agencies that are better equipped to require appropriate warnings of danger. That's where any labeling requirement should come from.
ruhlman
I am not against GMOs--I don't think anyone knows definitive answer to this, but it's symbolic of my desire for a transparent food system.
diane p
Ruhlman, why is it that your pal, Anthony Bourdain, and his travel companions (Eric Ripert, Ludo Lefebvre, et al) always say when eating in Europe, that the vegetables always taste so much better over there than they do here in America? I've wondered if it's the GMO's, the corporate take over of farms, or a seed stock that's been adulterated over time? Do you have any insight as to why?
Tags
"Implying" something is wrong? Nothing screams "something is wrong" like hiding and deception. Prop 37 shines a light that exposes and thus discourages slick legerdemain.
allen
Freedom fries?!??
What kind of arrogant, dumb ass, self centered, F'd up shit was that!
allen
Y'all can keep yur brie cheese, pate, fancy wine & backets (sic), we gots our freedum fries.
Pam Seiffert
I love reading your blog and I especially love reading all the comments. I'm the kind of person who always reads the letters to the editor. Of course, you should blog about politics. It is your right an an American to state your opinion. I suspect you really don't care if some are offended and I think you shouldn't worry about it. If people really read you for your food ideas, they shouldn't worry about an aside. Keep up the good work, Michael.
Ryan J.
I suspect that Ruhlman.com is not where you derive a majority of your financial security, but nonetheless, this site is one of your business properties. It represents Michael Ruhlman, the food author. As such, every aspect of this blog (from the posts and links, to the ads) is a forward facing representation of your business identity and personal reputation. Anything and everything can tarnish this reputation.
While it is clear from your other activities and prior posts that you possess an intelligent, unique point of view, your reputation (and thus, your livelihood) is built almost entirely upon the viewpoint you provide as a food writer. That viewpoint by no means diminishes your ability to possess brilliant points of view in other areas like politics, economics, or art history. However, your bread and butter is (pardon the pun) writing on the such topics as bread (https://ruhlmancom.bigscoots-staging.com/2011/01/multigrain-bread/) and butter (https://ruhlmancom.bigscoots-staging.com/2012/07/butter-is-a-vegetable/). If that livelihood was not inextricably intertwined with this site, your flexibility on writing topics would be greatly expanded.
That is not to say that just because you can, you should. After reading many of your books, it is clear to me that you are a master of focusing your prose. As a writer, we learn to "murder [our] darlings". All too often, blogs suffer from a lack of focus. Though I am personally intrigued by your political thoughts, unless those thoughts provide food policy perspective, they seem off-topic and inappropriate for the Ruhlman.com archive.
Deb in Indiana
Because you are kind enough to give me a forum does not mean that I want to climb on a soapbox. My point is only that if you wish to share your opinions, you have a handy space for doing so, and no-one should say you nay.
I'd also say that if you wished to edit comments on your blog, that would be your right as well, although it would make your forum much less interesting. Just dull, though, not somehow immoral or unethical. I like the choice you have made, to leave your comments wide open, and I respect you for having done so, but once again -- your choice, and no-one else's to dictate.
It's your right to choose, Michael, how you run your blog. I get to choose whether I visit and whether I comment, and even whether I choose to put up a blog of my own. Anyone who tries to tell you that you should limit your content because they are used to seeing recipes instead of opinion should scroll 'way up to the top of the page, where it says "MICHAEL RUHLMAN."
BTW, although I am generally chary of sharing my political opinions, I will admit that I am pro-choice.
Robert
I think anyone should feel free to share their opinions but they have to accept that some will not agree. Those that don't agree maybe a lot more vocal than the writer they disagree with.
Wilma de Soto
There is nothing more powerful to me than words that are well put. Indeed, you write primarily about food and cooking, but you are first and foremost a person who is well-expressed in words, a writer; whether it be about food or any other topic of your choosing.
Wordsmyths are far and few and I welcome any well-placed words put forth by them. This blog is your domain and if you choose to express yourself about topics near and dear to your heart whether it be this extremely important election, the passing of your father, the perfect poached egg, making stock or why your great toenail is painted blue in summer, those of who choose to read it should respect it; even though we might disagree.
Tomorrow is a very important day for everyone for this country. We all of us have a stake in the outcome. Being a food writer should not silence your thoughts or beliefs about this, especially in your own house. All here say pretty much whatever they like on this blog. Why should you be denied the same privilege you extend to us in this space?
I say write, write, write.
Aaron Sapp
One of the guiding principles I try to live my life by is that everyone is a person first. They may be a food writer, they may be a Mormon, they may have been raised by a single mother, they may not have official documentation to be living where they are, they may be unintentionally pregnant; but all of them are people first.
A mentor of mine once said, "the system only works if good people are willing to be a part of it."
So, because you a person (not just a food writer) you have the obligation, not just the right to contribute to the system in the best way you see fit.
SethH
Michael, I hang out here because you're awesome, and I try to never make the mistake of thinking anyone is somehow less awesome because we differ politically either a lot or a little (somewhere in between in this case).
Yes, you'll probably lose some readers who'll be alienated by your political views, but as long as you're not switching from food to politics full time, they'll come back, because you actually are awesome.
Tim Jertson
The answer is simple. The way toward a better country, and possibly world, is the frank exchange of ideas and opinions. The trend toward hiding our personal beliefs so as not to offend has simply led to polarization. Stand up for what you believe in. It is not necessary to tell others that they are wrong if they disagree with you. It is necessary to tell the "truth." I in this case that means simply being honest about how you feel. It's your vote, so vote your way!
Carly
Just wanted to add, after reading a lot of comments, and starting to see one major distinction between myself and many people saying that no, they don't think you should say anything about politics:
I don't come here to learn about cooking and food. I mean, I do learn things about them here, but I find purely informational and instructional blogs about food to be crushing bores. I don't know everything about food or even that much, relatively speaking, but I know enough not to want to be "taught" all the time. I come here because I enjoy your writing, I'm interested in what you find interesting, and the discussion is engaging. So yeah, I could care less if you go off-topic sometimes, be it controversial or not.
Teri
You have the right to write anything you want on your blog. And as an extremely pro-life conservative who disagrees with your politics, I have the right to stop reading your blog, which I will exercise now. God bless America.
Phyllis
I am also unsubscribing to this site. I came here for the food expertise and leave now due to uninformed political ranting. How can one think Obama cares about food when Michelle threw their little girls to the wolves when she declared them to be obese for all the world to hear. Let me guess there's a "good for the majority" reason for a mother to sell her babies out. No more Ruhlman, his books or his products!!
Eric Souder
It is pure ignorance if we think that politics does not somehow effect our food. Look for example at the legislation against foie gras due to pure lack of education on the process and preparation of a staple of haute cuisine. But even extending beyond the halls of fine dining, one has to worry when it takes a first lady to alert the country to the dangers facing children in regard to their eating habits. In my current kitchen, a cook said quite bluntly "I don't feel like voting either way, cus either way I'm fucked. These guys don't care about me." Perhaps it's a few too many years of academic training, but I think a voice does count no matter how small, and if it takes one cooking blog to put the bug in the ear of the average home cook or diner, then we should embrace that to its fullest potential. Making a cook switch from recipe books to a 20:12 ratio for bread production is important, but showing someone that they can make the choice to do so and thereby better their cooking is another of perhaps far more value.
Brad McNeal
i replied vociferously once to a Ruhlman non-food tweet. My point, then and now, is that, i read food blogs as a release from politics. It just was an unwelcome intrusion. Your expertise, well honed talents in one area do not make you an authority or give sway in other areas. Accordingly, I detest celebrity endorsements as a matter of course.
Diane
You're a writer who found your way being passionate about cooking and food. I deeply appreciate your posts addressing issues associated with these topics- namely health and sustainability.
You are also a son, husband, and father with a conscious-- and I deeply appreciate your taking a stand, and speaking out about your political beliefs. Especially in times like these. Keep on rocking in the free world, Ruhlmans! Thank you for sharing your combined creative paths.
Al W
Comment 1
In this case, "food writer" is a sub-set of American and by all means that makes it A Okay!
Al W
Comment 2
I live in Oregon wine country and for years we hosted back yard dinner parties. I used to put together the guest list to spur lively discussion. If you only speak with people you agree with, how do you learn. But when Bush declared his "mandate" and announced it was us against them, the dinner parties quit being fun. There was a bunker mentality from the right and descent was looked at as un patriotic. The right stole my flag and then they tried to steal my Church. Apparently one can't be a Patriotic, Church going Liberal.
For Halloween I wore a blue sweatshirt with a star labeled "Columbus" in the middle of the chest. I was Ohio as a blue state!
I think it is sad that I see your laying out your opinion in a forum that could affect your ability to make a living, as brave.
Keep up the good work, and it is your fucking yard! Do whatever you want.
Marty Miller
I come to this blog and follow you on Twitter because I value your sage advice on food and cooking--not your political views. You have no training or expertise in politics, so please do not pretend that you do. I don't need some Ed Schultz wannabe trying to tell me what to believe. When I want to learn about politics, I watch MSNBC. Besides, I have a hard enough time deciding if Ed Schultz is always right.
For similar reasons, I also think that you should stop putting your picture on your blog and on the back of your books. I come here to learn about food and cooking, not to be reminded that you are better looking and younger than me. If I want that sort of thing I can pick up the latest copy of GQ. Thankfully I was recently able to find a used copy of The Elements of Cooking which had the big green “Used” sticker positioned so it covered up your face. Took me three months and emails to a dozen different eBay sellers to find one like that (although I think the guy may have just moved the sticker up on the back cover, as it’s starting to peel off a little bit).
So please stick to food and cooking—the things that you know well. Politics is not your forte.
szg
Michael:
Each of us has an obligation to be informed and engaged in our political process. Admittedly, it can often be confusing, complex and confounding to sort through all the policy and electoral choices that we face. But, that's where people like you and others have a role to play.
It is up to your readers to decide when to believe your viewpoints and when to discount them. As an example, I care a lot about what you have to say about the GMO proposition in California. But, I don't really care what you have to say generally about American's foreign policies.
I care about what you have to say about the GMO prop is that I view you as a guidepost on many food matters. You walk in the food world in a way that I cannot, nor do I have the time to figure it all out. So, I have to seek out people I respect and see what they think to help me shape my own views.
Now, we won't always agree. And others in the food world will disagree with you too. But it is only through rational give and take that our system of government can actually function. If all the reasonable people throw up their hands and disengage, it only serves to weaken our system and strengthen those that wish to manipulate it for their own purposes.
rwoof1
Michael,
This election is about moral choices; compassion vs greed. We all need to speak up whenever possible and point out why the "we" is more important than the "I".
Dan
This is, without a doubt, the worst of all possible attitudes.
Frank
I think the short answer is yes, it’s entirely justifiable. Each person’s opinion is important in a democracy, and their right to express it is enshrined in the Constitution. One’s vocation should never disqualify someone from participating in the national discussion of how best to run our country. You are blessed to have a platform to share yours with a large audience if you so choose. Whether you choose to or not is another question.
I think it was Cleveland Brown’s coach Paul Brown who told his players to avoid politics “because both Democrats and Republicans buy tickets.” That was a business decision on Brown’s part. If you decide to stay away from politics because both Democrats and Republicans buy cookbooks then that’s your right and it’s understandable. I would never second guess you for that.
I would ask you to consider that food *is* political though, and in that context your voice is not just important but needed. Whether you mean to or not you make a political statement when you buy an organically raised boutique pig from a local farmer. Is there any doubt that Monsanto and Smithfield Foods are also making their own (anonymous) political statements in the form of direct political donations and political lobbying? We need educated voices to counter THAT kind of politics. If some of your readers are offended by your opinions, then do you really need every reader?
Chris R.
Consider: why should you "keep your mouth shut?" Surely it shouldn't be because people disagree and don't like your opinions. And frankly, I would say that they have reason to listen to you (and anyone with well-thought-out opinions): disagreement is important to democracy. John Stuart Mill defended free speech on the grounds it protects against errors. By adding your voice to the mix, you help protect against error on the search for truth and the right thing to do.
Sarah
I speak from a variety of personas. One is a former law student (quick to criticize the drafting of laws) with an interest in food law and policy, one is the daughter of small business owners, one is a graduate of a prestigious liberal arts university, one is a food blogger, one is an eater, one is a sustainable food movement proponent. Making voting decisions is not a clearcut process for me, even when it comes to things like Prop 37.
But there's a reason I put your blog in my favorites folder, with only a few others. It's because I view you as a real, complex human being who thinks with reason, an open mind, and conviction.
I read John Stuart Mill in college, just like many of us, but I don't necessarily believe that a greater exchange of ideas necessarily leads to the emergence of truth. As I can see in many responses to your post, there are many of us who believe it is ok for someone to believe differently than you so long as that person stays out of our faces. What I respect is the fact that you will engage with a variety of viewpoints, even if they disagree with your own. This to me speaks even more loudly than your stance on particular issues. This is not moral or political relativism--this is basic human respect.
People are not required to pay money to read your blog. They are not forced to read every post. I won't stoop down to explain the concept of free speech. If readers and consumers alone were responsible for shaping content, we would live in a world of stifled creativity and innovation. Whatever my political leanings and love of food might be, there is something greater that I value in your blog.
You have never, at least so far as I have seen, pretended to be a smiling puppet. You have never tried to efface yourself from your posts on food.
I could go on about food and politics, but that would be unfairly reducing you to someone who can only write about the latter insofar as it relates to the former.
Recently I lamented to a friend that all food blogs are starting to look the same--glossy photos, recipes, self-promotion, or kissing the behinds of food royalty. Among these, your blog is a breath of fresh air. I would even say I don't really read it primarily for food-related reasons.
And if you're interested, I'll admit that it was your post that had me rethink my stance on Prop 37--same argument, but from someone I have come to respect. If that doesn't demonstrate the power of speech, I don't know what does.
former butcher
I remember when there were good points made by both sides of the political debate. I can remember when the only thing that persuaded my mother to vote for Kennedy over Nixon was that he was Irish and Catholic.
Today we have vast amounts of money invested in getting us to think that there is only one true American point of view. They have their own media, their own bought and paid for congressional delegates, and their own sense of righteousness.
As a thinking individual, it is hard to ignore the assault on reason and personal freedom promulgated by these demogogues. The wing-nut crazies feel emboldened and entitled to make their views enacted into law. This is most drastically, and sadly, true in Ohio where an appointed official is trying desperately to silence the votes of those who might vote against his party's candidate.
In voicing a rebuke of this political thuggery, Michael is reacting as any thinking American would and should.
I am a Vermont Democrat, but what wouldn't I give to have the voices of Aiken, Stafford, or Jeffords in the Congress again? Other states had their Republican heroes too.
The rest of us try to be civil and carry on with our lives while "birthers", "truthers" , outright racists (at least they're honest), and Tea Party crack pots howl at the moon. It's like being in a bar that's being taken over by the rowdiest drunks. You have to say SOMETHING!
We can't just stare at the floor when some bully says 'charcuterie?? that some kind of French socialist crap?"
Don't hesitate to speak up, Michael. Silence just encourages them.
James in NZ
Before anyone discounts what I'm going to say as the unimportant opinions of a foreigner, let me point out that even though I live in New Zealand, I'm an American. Watching the US from afar, with the growing division between 'blue' and 'red' states, people who cannot be friends with people who have differing political opinions, and the failure of the country to invest in its future, I see also that fearing to write what you think on your own blog is a sign of an even more worrisome trend that anyone who knows history should recognize. I say you should write what you like, and anyone who does not like it should remind themselves of that quote attributed erroneously to Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
CD
To answer your question: No, you shouldn't. Your food writing is interesting, insightful and usually offers something new. A quick scan of your political comments reveal standard liberal boilerplate (Obama's a saint, Romney is evil) that we've all heard before in other venues and do nothing to advance the issues or present them in a new way. And they're boring, a cardinal sin for a writer. And I would say the same thing if you were spouting standard conservative rhetoric.
I come to your blog as a welcome respite from the political bombardment we are constantly exposed to, especially now in this election season, as my mailbox and TV overflows with political ads and mudslinging.
I would be interested in your take on how politics intersects with food and the culinary arts even if I disagreed with your conclusions, as long as you treated the "other side" with some fairness and understanding.
Dan
It is immoral to even be asking the question. The right to express your opinion is never dependent upon the permission of someone else and giving this power to someone is simply wrong.
diane p
Ruhlman, truth be told, I don't always agree with you when you state your opinion, but still, I keep coming back! It just so happens this time, I completely agree with you.
The fact is, Americans don't agree about anything, but that's what happens in a true democracy, opinions are given the freedom to be expressed, cultivated, and debated. Good or bad, the cacophony of opinions are the price of a democratic system. It is what makes America great. So, go on and express yourself, I don't think your thoughts about our country, voting, and political issues are going to keep others from coming back. Don't think you should moderate yourself, what you do for us in your involvement, commentary, sharing, insight and recipes regarding food, is what we thrive on. We Americans are passionate people, especially about our politics, but as Americans, we have always had the resolve, the ingenuity, and the drive to come up with the right solutions in the end. And besides, if the Mayan's are right, we will soon have nothing to worry about...after December 21, 2012!
Vicki
Did you see CNN Money today? The money guys are saying Romney would be better to get the economy going and deal with the fiscal cliff, etc. (I agree) so since you have a business it would seem like you would want Romney. If Obama wins, which I expect he will do, I expect the stock market will go down and the economy to limp along and probably go into another recession next year. Oh well....
cheryl
The fact that you give your opinion is what brings me back time and again. Stand for something or fall for anything. I'm voting Obama/Biden.
Keith
Politics in this country affect the food choices available to us. Truth in food labeling, GMO foods, food inspection, animal rearing practices and the list goes on. If this is food blog; how can you not comment on politics?
Vicki
Deep-pocketed financiers who supported Obama during the 2008 election cycle have abandoned the president and flocked toward Romney, providing more donations to his campaign than any other industry except retired workers.
Individuals who work in the securities and investment industry have doled out nearly $20 million to the Romney campaign, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, while they've given out less than $6 million to Obama. During the 2008 election, Obama raked in almost $16 million from Wall Street and John McCain, the Republican nominee, received donations totaling only $9 million.
Victoria
Your right to express your opinion is guaranteed by the Constitution.
Personally, I'm interested in your opinion because I believe you are intelligent and well-spoken, and you live in Ohio, which has had a spotlight shined on it for weeks. However, if I had no interest in what you had to say, I would simply stop reading that particular post.
But I must admit, I find it rather frightening that people only want to read the points of view of those who have the same point of view. If you aren't prepared to evaluate everything, how can you make an intelligent decision?
I drove three hours back to New York City yesterday so I could enthusiastically cast my vote for President Obama.
Russ H
It is of course appropriate for you to give your view on non-food matters. Before you are a food expert, you are first and foremost a writer. A writer only has two things to trade on. His views and his courage. Noted science fiction writer, Harlan Ellison, once said on writing:
"Don't be afraid. That simple; don't let them scare you. There's nothing that can do to you... a writer always writes. That's what he's for. And if they won't let you write one kind of thing, if they chop you off at the pockets in the market place, then go to another market place. And if they close off all the bazaars then by God go and work with your hands till you can write, because talent is always there. But the first time you say, "Oh, Christ, they'll kill me!" then you're done. Because the chief commodity a writer has to sell is his courage. And if he has none, he is more than a coward. He is a sellout and a fink and a heretic, because writing is a holy chore."
Now Harlan, in his unique style, has gone a bit over the top in his prose, but his point is spot on, I read this years ago and it always stuck with me. And I think it address your question precisly.
Melissa
This is your blog, so you can obviously say whatever you want here. And this is the U.S. of A., so you're entitled to your opinions, whatever they may be.
However, I come here to read about food. If a posting is not somehow related to food, I move on. That's not to say that food isn't political. Production, inspection, labeling, distribution, and other aspects of food are tied to our government at various levels. Therefore, those aspects of politics are certainly appropriate to write about here. And it's certainly appropriate for you, on a food blog, to write about candidates and their positions on issues such as these that are related to food.
But on the banner of this blog, you say that you're "translating the chef's craft for every kitchen." Given that, you need to stay on topic when you write here. Political posts that are not about food-related subjects are not on topic to this blog. Write about those elsewhere, and leave this blog for the food.
If you want to give us your opinions here about who to vote for based on food-related topics, that's fine. If you want to give us your opinions here about who to vote for based on "eight disastrous years of Bush, unnecessary war, and an economy that was going to take well more than four years to fix" without showing us how those directly relate to food, that's not fine.
Melissa
You're building the Michael Ruhlman brand and I can't decide what that ultimately means for you. Since you are a public figure, I believe you have a responsibility to lead, create a consistent environment for as many people to participate in what you are creating with this blog as you can, honor and respect other human beings, connect with us as your readers, and most importantly, honor your own purpose. I think you accomplished this with this post. Thank you for putting it out there and inviting us to break bread with you this amazing day! I'm off to vote!
Paul
In many ways, it is far more important that people with an established audience exercise their right to engage in political advocacy than their right to vote. In large elections, the statistical probability that a writer’s one vote will change the outcome is effectively zero. But a writer with an established audience might be able to persuade hundreds or even thousands of people to vote for his preferred candidates or policies. That actually could change the outcome of a close election (indeed, economists estimate that Oprah’s 2008 endorsement of Barack Obama earned him approximately 1 million primary votes)..
With that greater impact, however, comes greater responsibility. Because an individual’s vote is unlikely to change the outcome of an election, individual voters have little incentive to vote intelligently; they vote their gut/heart, and the aggregate cost of this rational irrationality is the mess that is is American policy. These aggregate costs are multiplied when political advocates spread bad ideas to their readers. If a writer convinces 1,000 people to vote for an unjust law, he is 1,000 times more morally culpable than if he had simply voted and kept his opinion to himself.
The takeaway is that writers with established audiences should feel comfortable advocating that their readers support specific candidates or policies, as long as the writer has an objectively reasonable basis for believing that the candidate or policy is the best available option. Gut feelings and intuition aren’t enough; there’s too much riding on these choices.
Billie
Every single person on this planet, no matter what their profession has the right to speak out about the things that are important to every single one of us. I am just a secretary, does that mean that I do not have the ability to see around me what is going on in the world, in our country in my own home town? Of course we all see the things that are happening and we have the right, that is what voting is all about, to speak up and say what we feel. I may not be considered the smartest person, but I do believe that I and all of us has the responsibility to speak up and defend what is right and condem what is wrong. Our country is blessed that we have a constitution that says we have Free Speech!! So I say, speak up, shout it out, and go vote!
Dorothy
If "corporations are people" able to express political opinions then surely a mild-mannered (ha!) blogger is entitled to express his political opinion!
Brad
Michael,
One of the things that draws me back day-after-day to your blog is that you speak/write your mind. For better or worse, politics is a big part of our lives here in America and I encourage all of us to become as informed as possible. Your post on 4.30.12 (Foie gras wars back on) was “political” and yet served to further inform me on some issues that I had not paid much attention to. I come to your site for insights on food, and often find myself leaving with insights that go beyond the table. (AIDS awareness, Farm bills, Honey bees and school lunches to name a few).
Anytime someone puts themselves out into a public forum, I think they should bring some responsibility to the party. You share your views, your reasons, your recipes – and you encourage others to respond and do the same. This is democracy at its best and I encourage you to continue. For those who do not want to read/hear about politics from another point of view – feel free to head over to Mother Jones or FOX News and you can bathe in your ignorance ☺
indigotea
You may lose some readers by espousing causes outside your primary expertise, but it's worth it. I don't understand those who froth at the mouth if anyone with the slightest bit of celebrity weighs in.
I care about the logic, not the personality. If you can make your case convincingly, go for it. If you just wanted to say vote Obama (like me) because I'm a cool guy, nobody's going to fall for that.
Kevin
Since we're voting, I vote that you send the book to Rob Levitt. You have the same right to express yourself as the CEO of Chick-fil-a, but is it a wise business decision? I miss the days when it was said you shouldn't talk about sex, politics, or religion. Unfortunately that seems to be the only thing poeple talk about anymore.
Bonnie
Should a food writer voice non-food-related political opinions the way other non-food people do... why not? I want to know what motivates and inspires people who have the spotlight about money management and food. I will not let a financial planner who is a tea-party devotée manage my money. Likewise, I would not listen to a food aficionado who does not question the politics of big 'farma'. I want to be an informed consumer. Post away Michael!
Bill
This is your site. You've created it through your own hard work, just like you've made a (presumably) good living through your own industriousness and talents. Do you believe, as President Obama does, that the government has the first claim on the fruits of your labor because you use public goods to do your work? Do people who aren't industrious and productive like you not have the same access to roads and police and the internet?
You've done the work, so you're entitled to say anything you want on this site. In doing so, though, you have to accept that a large percentage of your readers will be alienated, and might well (as I have and will) decline to spend their money to support you any longer. So be it -- you know this, and you are willing to pay that price.
The reasons why you should, in prudence, refrain from political commentary come down to two things: First, you are gratuitously alienating readers, many of whom disagree with you. (For instance, maybe I am "outraged" that anybody would think that a woman's convenience would possibly justify killing the innocent life within her. And by the way, no woman (but every man) is required to care for a child she doesn't want: adoption is always an option, and a great one for many, many needy people.) Second, you have literally no expertise to offer on politics other than your obviously partisan impressions. For instance, it is a joke to say that you are for small business and then pretend that President Obama doesn't have small business owners (like you, by the way) as a class warfare target. Extra taxes taken from small businesses won't touch the deficit, but they absolutely do impede investment and job growth. Anybody who prioritizes job growth has to prioritize small business--and here's news to you: that ain't President Obama.
Like I said, it's your site. Say what you want. Vote for whom you want. But why gratuitously alienate a lot of readers, whose good will is good for you? Especially when you've got nothing but largely ignorant and tired sloganeering to offer.
Dale
Not to worry, Michael. Nate Silver, in his "538" column in the NYTimes, has the probability at 92% Obama 8% Romney.
Steve
We are great because anyone, regardless of age, race, creed, professionetc. should be able voice an opinion in whatever constructive manner they choose. We are strong when we are able to disargee with one another. We are lucky because there is always another channel of information which can turn to.
We are weak when our anger, confusion or naivety seeks to limit what we or others would say and the manner in which they say it.
Benjamin Atkinson
Why would a food writer use their blog to comment on politics or other non-food issues?
It cleanses the palette.
I think everyone with a public platform should regularly serve up some dogma and opinion. Go ahead, vent that spleen!
Your audience, like a bed of root vegetables, needs to be thinned periodically. Dashing off an opinion is a good way to cull the intolerant, the insipid and the Vandals. The trolls that remain are there to test your patience and grace. I think it's a healthy and natural process.
I don't need to embrace your entire world view to appreciate your perspective on food.
So toss me the occasional rant and let's get back in the kitchen!
With respect,
Ben
Zalbar
Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, Todd Aiken, Fox News, all offer political commentary. I don't consider them experts in those fields so I don't see why your opinions should be deemed any less valid.
p.s. sorry for lumping you in with those people, but you you did ask.
sjthespian
I think you already said it best, “This site is my fucking yard and I can put up whatever sign I want.” Really, it's your blog. If you want to talk about food, that's great, and that's what brought me to the blog in the first place. However, I don't recall reading a disclaimer that it would be all you would write about. Anything you want to put in your blog shows you to be a real person and not just someone who puts out food tips -- and that's a good thing!
Who knows, we might find out that you have opinions that we agree with and give us more of a reason to read your blog. For that matter, we might find out that we don't agree and it will give us additional reasons to discuss and maybe even change our opinions or at least broaden our views.
Lynn
I am responding not to get your book (I already have it and love it!), but just to give you a thought - I (and many, many others) come to your website to read your writings and wisdom about food. I came today and when I arrived at the politcal topics, my eyes glossed over. You absolutely have the right to post whatever you want in your yard so to speak, of course you do. However, we come to your website to get away from the political inundation that is everywhere we look and listen. I believe people need to educate themselves about the issues and vote - but not because Bruce Springsteen or Michael Ruhlman votes in one way or another.
P.S. Thank you for your work! I'll keep coming back.
melissa
Yes.
Do I think presentation matters? Of course. I think you win more hearts and minds (if not all the minds) by presenting your opinions in a calm, logical way, and not challenging those who disagree with a "if you don't like it, get off my lawn."
Do I think because you've established yourself as an influential voice about food, that you should only stick to that? No. If your blog has a primary theme, then overall, yes, it's good to make sure the majority of posts are about that, but it doesn't mean you can't be a person. If you want to express something personal occasionally, it's your blog. You go into it with the understanding that there will always be people who will tell you to "shut up and sing" (to borrow from the Dixie Chicks), and you have to be okay with that.
And as you said, a lot of the issues at stake this year (and every election) DO directly impact your readers in the world of food, small business, and other relevant topics.
tl;dr: Say what you want, do it graciously, expect not everyone to understand or agree, and in the meantime keep doing what you love.
Tom
Free speach is almost universally a good thing. It is your site and you should feel free to express your opinions in whatever manner you feel is appropriate. Over the last decade, food issues have become progressively more political. Your venturing over from food writing to political commentary is a natural extension of that.
As a former Clevelander and now a Massachusetts resident, I will add that your generalities about Republicans may be a bit misguided. What we need in Washington is not a particular political party, but elected officials who are willing to work together. While the Congressional Republicans have been unhelpful and uncompromising, the Democrat-controlled House of 2007-2009 was just as bad.
In my adopted home state, we have the choice today between a Republican Senator who has shown enthusiasm for working with the other party and a doctrinal leftist (not meant to be insulting) who was unable to name a Republican that she would work with next year when asked.
I would only encourage all of us to look past political stereotypes and elect leaders who are willing to work together, compromise, and help our nation move forward.
Tom
I can't believe that I mis-spelled "speech".
Lesley
You have every right to write whatever you wish on your [the key word] blog; it's an expression of your freedom of speech. However, freedom of speech doesn't translate into the responsibility (and certainly not the requirement) to be heard; those who don't wish to read what you say don't have to, and won't.
And that's the issue - do you want to express yourself or do you want to express yourself and be heard/read? By choosing to express your political views on a blog that is described as "Translating the Chef's Craft for Every Kitchen", you risk alienating half your readership over an issue that isn't part of your blog's mission, and you put your business at risk.
Some recent examples of people's livelihood affected by their political expressions include the Dixie Chicks and Chick Fil A. Personally, I like to listen to the Dixie Chicks and I like a Number 1 Combo, and I find food blogs enjoyable and relaxing. I'd like to enjoy them all without the stressful addition of politics, which are by definition, divisive.
ps. I do appreciate that when you posted your views, you gave the reasons for your conclusions, which people may disagree with but generally aren't offended by. However, when you then bashed people who have different political views, you crossed the line into offending a large portion of your readership. Why would you want to do that?
Timothy Mess
Mr. Ruhlman,
I enjoy your blog and publications for the thoughtful, well written written words and photographs on food and cooking. I therefore conclude you are, in general, a thoughtful and contentious person in most other matters in life. Your occasional drift into politics and other important current events often changes how I look at something. I usually find them valuable. I am grateful for that.
Here is something concerning food and politics that has always bothered me. How come as a society we spend so much time discussing the dietary requirements, makeup and cost of the free lunch program at school and ignore one critical piece? In the public schools I am familiar with, in CO, there is not a single refrigerator a student can store their lunch below 40F and a suitable rewarming station to then bring it to above 140F for consumption? Wouldn't allowing the students to safely consume last night's dinner left overs improve the quality and cost for everyone?
darren
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The same amendment that gives you the right to say what you wish, also gives those who disagree with you the right to tell you how out of line they think you are in an attempt to stifle you. Very often when we confront something we disagree with we forget that others have the same rights as us, no matter how inflammatory, disagreeable, and provocative some of what they have to say may be. To use our speech to silence others is disgusting and shows how insecure others are in what they believe.
And I voted for Obama too.
Elize
Hi. I am writing from South Africa, from a subtropical area (East London) on the east coast of our beautiful continent, Africa. I am a passionate foodie who (embarrassingly) just discovered you, Michael Ruhlman. Of course you can write about your political persuasions on your own blog!
Our corrupt and inept South African president, Jacob Zuma, just withdrew one of many court cases against an extremely sharp and perceptive cartoonist, Zapiro, for various hilarious and apt public mockeries in the press of our president and his cabinet. This was a victory for freedom of speech. In the meantime, our ANC government is cracking down on freedom of speech, to the dismay of writers, press and liberalists. So: Americans, revel in your freedom of speech and enjoy Ruhlman's comments. Debate, engage, argue. There are so many countries where this luxury does not exist. Let us hope what Mandela fought for in our beloved country is not misinterpreted and corrupted by his subsequent followers and leaders of the ANC.
Lisa H
Thousands of conservatives lined up to praise and support the owner of the corporation Chic-Fil-A right to freely express his opinion in denouncing gay rights. Supporters cried about free speech and how liberals are so bad for call him out on the issue. Did Mr Cathy’s public support of this have anything to do with food? Did he spend his money looking into making his industry better, healthier? Did he use that money to bring locally grown or/and ethically raised meats to his restaurants. No, he just openly used his position to push his non-food agenda.
So by the same logic, you have that right as well.
As readers of your work and blog, we know what is important you in your chosen field. You do a lot to educate people on issues and champion local farmers and businesses. Therefore, if you believe one candidate supports your views more than the other in these issues, then it is your right as an American to say so.
If it offends people, so be it. Go have a garden party because you can’t please everyone, so you gotta please yourself.
Danny Breeds
If anyone stops reading a food blog because they disagree with a writer's political beliefs, they really weren't worth having as readers in the first place. They obviously don't prioritize food the way you might because they put their team "winning" in front of it. They are also gigantic freaking hypocrites because they pay their money every day to people who have different political views unless they've only seen movies starring Jon Voight and Clint Eastwood in the last ten years. Somehow, I don't think that's the case and if it is, God help them.
I'd like to know how many people who are complaining about you airing your views have actually bought a book from you, supported an advertiser from a show you were on, or even a company that your partner with. I'd be willing to bet the actual bark is way louder than their financial bite.
And finally, the President has little to no effect on the economy. We're going to create 12 million jobs no matter WHO wins. Some of the posts I've read here lecturing you on small business are laughable. Aren't you and Donna a small business? They presume to tell you how it really works when you are out there everyday promoting and building your brand? Personally, I'd rather they just said thank you and went on their way instead of trying to "educate" you on how your life works.
Presidential elections come down to two things, Wars and Judges. I know who I trust more on both counts.
Skip
You are an American. You are an adult. You have the right to vote. Your vote comes down to an opinion hopefully based on knowledge, research, open-minded discussion and not a knee-jerk loyalty to some party and its self-serving-and-sustaining slanted political statements. You being an extremely informed and deep thinking writer on many subjects and not just food alone, I am very interested in what you have to say. Whether I agree with you or not, I will value the fodder you have given me to challenge and shape my own opinions. I will value your opinion far more than I do the politicians who sit on science committees and have never studied science but only the Bible. I will value your opinions on animal husbandry and farming and the humaneness and dietary concerns and economics in those endeavors. I suspect you know more about them than the average Congressman from Iowa, Kansas, etc. Because of the honesty and humanity I feel when I read your blog and your books, I will be interested in your opinions of people and what they do. Ultimately it comes down to no matter what I think, it’s the United States and you have the right to write about what you think and I have the right to read it or not and agree and disagree with you. So Michael, right on! Write on! I’ll be reading and thinking about it.
Mantonat
You'll be happy to know that there's a Romney ad running on your home page right now!
Bricktop Polford
Your fucking yard and my choice not to give a flying fuck what you think about politics. (And I don't).
There was another food blog I read where the author had a non sequitor screed against Bush, I mean completely out of the blue. I commented that I read his blog to read about food, and to get away from politics. He posted then later deleted my comment. I deleted him from my feeds.
You MR don't seem so thin skinned, and even though there's the usual considerably large amen corner posted above, at least contrary POVs such as mine are available to be read. I just hope that if Romney wins, this place is not going to turn in to a food version of MSNBC. If so, then I'm out. Chances are though, we're going to stumble along like we have the last four years.
Michael
Our first, and most sacred right is that to speak freely.
The mediums by which to do so are limited only by the imaginations of the right holders. Four years ago you made the choice to use your own blog, which you rely on for income, to proclaim your political and social opinions in a concise and intelligent manner.
The medium you chose lends a self sanctity to your words. You believe in your position and you deny the right to others to make you afraid of your beliefs.
And for that, for others who do the same, We are the United States of America.
Todays political world has become less about free social ideas and more about a forced doctrine supported by the illusion of political and social platform cohesiveness.
As citizens of this great (and still young) country we should use whatever mediums we have available to us to explain our views to each other. In doing so we can hope to find balances that preserve the ideals that made the creation of this country possible in the first place.
I suspect that you and I may agree in principle on many things, and we may disagree on others. In any case, know this: Anyone who calls themselves a citizen of the United States will always have my full and unwavering support and defense to make your thoughts known, no matter what they are.
David in PA
You absolutely have the right to express your opinion about who to vote for. You even have the right to generalize that people who are “foodies” tend to be liberal leaning. I’m not sure on what facts that is based, but you have the right. You also have the right to describe conservatives as the codeword “RWNJ”. I’m not sure if you know any so called RWNJ. The conservative view of our nation is really about individual liberty and a limited government based on the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution provide the basis for Liberty and free speech. Conservatives are staunch defenders of Liberty and free speech. Without that defense, you wouldn’t be able to express your opinions on this blog. Be thankful for conservatives, they are really looking out for you and your liberty!
Annie A.
Everything is political. To say that you have to focus on food and abstain from politics is akin to telling someone they have to focus on breathing and abstain from having their heart beat.
Food, by very nature of what it is, is controlled in some manner by the government. Local government sales tax, federal government involvement from the USDA to the FDA. Even more than just food, the people we vote for govern our freedoms with things like interstate commerce or censorship or the internet.
To ask you to abstain from politics is to ask you to abstaining from any input into how the government controls the very products you use to cook, to blog, and to make a living doing those things.
Krishna
To paraphrase Voltaire:
I might disagree with you Sir, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Dan
I agree with Rob Levitt way up there. It's your place, you can do what you want. However, people come here to read about food and cooking. We love you for it. And when you start talking about political things, if your views don't line up with ours (perfectly, mind you), then it shatters that feeling of connectedness. In the end, it's a marketing decision for you. Do you value your ability to speak about politics more than you do your readers? It's a personal call.
In my view, the only politics I'd like to read about here has to deal with 3 Crabs brand being the best damned fish sauce on the planet, and that those who don't believe so deserve hellfire and damnation. I'm sure we can all agree on that topic.
Marika S.
I have yet to hear a good arguement as to why food or politics should remain in a rarified sphere of discussion and not be let out in mixed company. Ideas, especially ideas different from our own, help us understand and grow. It's only if we are afraid we might *shudder* learn something new and change our mind that the thought of free and open exchange becomes disturbing. Whether we are talking about farming, food, wine, art or politics, we all have a responsibility to educate ourselves and not leave the critical decisions to "experts". Since a blog like this lets us exchange different ideas as well as have fun and learn, how is discussing things outside the immediate definition of "food" anything but a win-win for all of us?
Tim W
When I think of food, I think of family. When I think about arguing about politics, I also think about family. To me, discussions about philosophies, politics, jobs, and lord knows what else were always discussed over the dinner table. They've always felt rather hand in hand to me so you absolutely have my vote.
Larry Allin
During presidential election season we are inundated with political messages; from TV to print ads, junk mail to junk phone calls. Your blog offers, or at least says it does, a pleasant diversion from all that political messaging. I think your political opinions are not what the typical reader would be expecting when you label it "Translating the Chef’s Craft for Every Kitchen".
My suggestion would be to put your political perspective in a secondary page and add a simple link to it, perhaps "For Michael's perspective on the election". Those who visit your blog to simply enjoy learning of "the Chef's Craft" and escape the non-stop electioneering may do so. Those who may be interested in learning your thoughts on the election may do so by following the link, just as they might to learn more about your books
While I greatly appreciate your efforts on our behalf, count me among those who long ago overdosed on political news/opining/analysis/etc.
Vicki
Well for all of you who voted for Obama, you should take a look at your 401K today. The Dow just lost 2% after election day or around 300 points. More to come I'm afraid as the fiscal cliff looms -- the money guys thought that Romney would better handle the economy, oh well....
Tommy
Considering the the Dow was up 65% during Obama's first term, I am not worried. Your post is spreading false fears. No real substance to see here readers. Move along.
(Numbers originally from Neil Degrasse Tyson tweet)
Change in DJIA during Pres. terms: Carter: -1%; Reagan 1: +37%, Reagan 2: +77% GHBush: +50%; Clinton1: +100%; Clinton2: +60%; GWBush1: -3%; GWBush2: -22%; Obama: +65%
Vicki
Predictions are that the dow could drop as much as 90% -- also it has dropped over 5% in the few weeks since Obama has been reelected.
Hang on to your hats democrats or should I say your 401 K's and also your bank accounts since he is sure to raise taxes.....
Darcie
The Dow was at 8k when Obama took office and now is at the 13k mark, so it can't be fear of Obama driving the fall. Wall Street has a real Chicken Little streak, and right now the sky falling issue is the "fiscal cliff." I'm confident this downward trend is a blip (one that I expected, actually) and once a compromise is reached, the Dow will rebound. (The Dow is likely to rebound, at least temporarily, before then as the vultures come in for the pickings as share prices drop.)
Now if the obstructionists in Congress continue to be recalcitrant, all bets are off. But I believe that the people have spoken and there is real motivation for a compromise to be reached.
Nanci Courtney
Check it out Vicki - I believe 'the money guys' got us where we are today. Anyone who thinks food is not political is beyond naive.
John LaRosa
Hi Michael, I missed your original post, but in my opinion, it is your right to express your political opinions when and how you choose. Personally, I like it when people mix social discourse with their work. It shows that they are multi-dimensional, not just mindless worker bees.
In addition, and maybe this is because I was schooled in the Cleveland area, I think your assessments of Romney and Obama are spot on. Today, I'm very proud of my old Ohio home for sticking with the President. Ditto for my new home in Virginia (although I'm still stuck with Boehner's little buddy, Eric Cantor).
As for the economy, well, it's anyone's guess. Countless economists have showered us with their wholly inaccurate wisdom. I'll put my faith in hard work, solid ethics, and that "level playing field" Obama talks about. FYI, as someone who owned a small business during the Reagan/GHW Bush years, current business owners have nothing to complain about. My taxes were far higher than they are today.
Witloof
I know this is over {and I didn't win} but for anyone who thinks that politics have nothing to do with the food they eat:
http://www.appetiteforprofit.com/2012/11/07/lies-dirty-tricks-and-45-million-kill-gmo-labeling-in-california/
Katie G
I'm in the "It's your blog, write what you want" camp. However, I read political news on other sites and come here for food related commentary.
It would be ideal if your did express your political views through a link on your site. Then a full discussion could be had.
Your winner expressed it best in my opinion.
Phineas
Michael,
Wish I'd seen your question earlier, not that I'd give myself a chance at the prize, but because timely comments always carry more weight.
Absolutely you should post whatever you like on your site. Surely your readers have certain expectations about what they'll likely see, and you can always temper your content based upon feedback and your own judgement and desires.
Only Hugo Black and William O. Douglas are more absolutist than I when it comes to freedom of speech, censorship, and the like.
After all, the right to express ourselves is our most important right--as it is the one via which we can get all the others. I believe it was Martin Garbus who said that.
Love your blog, love your commenters (absolutely marveled at the caramelization/Maillard effect debate in a recent post--nice considering Maillard was revealed as such 100 years ago this year!). Bright people, always thoughtful. Few blogs have as thoughtful as commenters as you do.
Nice going.
Bob
Frankly, while I don't come here for the political content, it's Michael's blog. And it *does* matter what political issues are important to him as a chef (for example, I'd sooner take his insight on Prop 37 in California than I would some flack from Monsanto).
The important thing is to be respectful of everyone's opinions (though, as the author/owner, Michael's got the green light to call b.s. whenever he wants) - we're too polarized as a nation, too zero-sum in our thinking. It's right or left, conservative or liberal, right or wrong ... when the best work is done when people can tap other people for insight and viewpoints.
It's called learning.
Michael was already a capable writer, but his experience at CIA, his adventure in learning, transformed his life. It introduced him to new friends (Chef Pardus, Thomas Keller, Brian Polcyn, among others) and we're enjoying the fruits of those labors through Michael's continued writing in the culinary arena.
Darcie
Dang, wish I would have checked in sooner, I would have loved to get a copy of Twenty. I like it when people that I do business with or follow put their political ideals out there. The free exchange of ideas is the essence of democracy, and even if I don't agree with your position, I will respect you. (I think it was wrong of mayors to attempt to exclude Chick-Fil-A; let the consumers decide).
I am very proud of the state of Minnesota, where I live, for not only supporting Obama, but also rejecting constitutional amendments banning gay marriage and requiring disenfranchising voter ID. Not only that, but we now have a DFL (Democrat-Farm-Laborer) House AND Senate, which was unexpected. The only downside is that Michelle "Crazy Eyes" Bachmann kept her seat. However, the very slim margin that she won by in the most conservative district in the state was telling. All in all a good result.
Chip Desormeaux
I say you should just stick to food and noble causes (as related to food).
Wanda
Michael, I support your right to express your opinion, obviously. But . . . I just bought your book, The Making of a Chef, because I love two of your books that I already owned. I love getting down to an understanding of food techniques and the chemistry behind ingredient interaction. (I am a retired chemistry teacher.) I enthusiastically checked out your website and was jarred by your political opinion. I stand strongly on the other side because i have grandchildren and cannot understand how we can keep spending money we don't have by the trillions!!! I am somewhat socially liberal but we can't have anything if we don't have economic solvency. It reminds me of children who want to be happy and just don't get that we don't have any money! So now when I look at my books I can't simply be excited about my cooking adventures. I am now reminded that we are continuing to become more and more in debt in this country by the trillions because I am aware of your political opinion which differs from mine in a really crucial way.Now using your books will bring politics into my kitchen. It makes me sad.
Micah Bedwell
Post your opinions on anything - as if one couldn't read your political leanings in your cooking. Let the ostriches keep their heads in the sand. I have "20..." already. Fantastic.
Kelly M
Thank you Ohio!
Randy Martinez
Hi Mike, I simply cannot believe that people want to shut you up. Just the same thing happened when you blogged on vitamins. First, a democratic society depends on people expressing their ideas and thoughts. You have the right to express your ideas in whatever forum you choose. They have the right to disagree but to try to tell you that you do not have the right to post your thoughts is simply undemocratic. If someone would say to you "Hey Mike, this is where I think you are wrong" and express an opinion, that is fine. However, what they are saying to you is at its essence is this: you are a food blogger and you know nothing about politics, so shut up". Just amazing! We constantly hear about the lack of math and science education in the US...its not that...its the lack of Civics education and the denigration of thorough and respectful debate on the issues that affect us all.
Gael N
Just wanted to get a late comment on this. While I am supportive of your thoughts in food and politics I think the best way to think about this is to flip this the other way. The best I can think of is Joel Salatin. He has many views I disagree with but he's so engaging and ingenious that I'm hooked to everything he says. Charlie Trotter is a noted Libertarian and even though he campaigned against foie gras, I would still read everything he says. I also feel like a lot of that philosophy for both translates to the way they run their businesses so it's worth paying attention to.
Then again I am also perfectly comfortable with boycotting Chick-fil-A. For me the tipping point wasn't just political opinion but action. The organization was directly funding anti-gay groups. Knowing that the dollar I would be spending on my sandwich could also be a dollar funding those campaigns was too much for me.
But really from what I've read is that there are a lot of problems with food and cooking culture in the USA. A lot of that is that directly due to the farm bill and tactics of large corporations which is pretty blatantly supported by Republicans. I almost wonder how anyone can talk about such an issue without addressing politics at all? Michael Pollan was the best at showing how closely tied organic and factory farming are to politics. If these are issues that you're passionate about then you MUST take a serious interest in politics. Anyone surprised by your political views seriously hasn't read any of your blog.
https://b9yes.com
Hello, i think that i noticed you visited my weblog tһus i g᧐t heгe tօ resturn the
desire?.Ӏ'm trying to iin finding isssues to enhance my website!Ι suppose itѕ adequate tߋ make
usse of sߋmе of your ideas!!