Takoma Park's elected officials are taking a stand against foie gras.

No word from Heather yet regarding plans to move back across the District Line in protest:

Aside from the sheer silliness of this I can't get too outraged at Takoma Park's elected leaders acting like they're from Takoma Park or something, even if it's likely that foie gras in neither prodeuced nor served anywhere in the town.

I never really bought into "the ducks like it" propanganda, and gratuitiously cruel practices like pumping up an animals' internal organ to many times it's actually size seem a legitimate subject for debate. On the other hand, I still eat it (try the smoked foie at Vidalia) because, I guess, I'm gratuitously cruel.

I've already contacted a realtor to put our house of the market.
God, I wish. This is a culinary wasteland.

Not really a ban. They just frown on it:

the City Council unanimously approved a resolution last week opposing "the production and sale of foie gras" and encouraging residents "to avoid supporting this extreme form of animal cruelty."

On the other hand, the proposal to ban Birkin bags from markets and the food co-op in favor of Free-Trade baskets was considered too frivolous to gain support.

Yum.

If it's not actually illegal, I don't have to eat a plate of foie in front of city hall in protest.

We have sort of a reverse-chic thing going here.

Yer damn right I am. I now feel obligated to serve foie at my next soirée. I wonder what will happen if the government finds out? Hippies can turn into real authoritarians when they get their teeth into an issue.

A couple of residents sound off in today's Washington Post. They're in favor.

I can't take seriously anybody who doesn't know the difference between foie gras and Pate.

Outside of the cartoons, has anybody ever heard of "pate du foie gras?" Pate with foie de _____ (fill in the blank), yes, but mushing up the $50/lb foie gras to put it in the $15/pound pate never seemed to make much sense.

It's real. A quick Google produced a lot of hits. Here's a couple.
Wikipedia:
About.com

Apparently it does exist, but my Googling makes it appear more theoretical than real -- of a dozen FG sellers, a couple offer mousse and only one that I can find actually offers a pate. This confirms my recollection of never having seen a pate de foie gras in my local charcutirer's counter.

At any rate, Ms. Meyers - as many people do -- misuses the word by describing foie gras as a pate and I therefore remain firm in my dismissal of her credibility on the subject.

And, in addition, her outrage has had the opposite of the intended effect: after all this Googling, I'm tempted to have a lobe o' liver airlifted in this afternoon.

Perhaps what she meant is terrine de foie gras, which is indeed the most classical way of preparing it. It's nothing but the liver infused with a spirit (cognac, armagnac, or port being the most common), and perhaps a few spices amd truffles, then kneaded gently and pressed into a terrine and baked in a water bath. (I had a particularly awful example of this at 701 a few days ago.) Confusing terrine and pate is pretty common, even for non-PRTP dwellers.

Keep in mind that most people in this country have never had foie gras. I doubt most people have eaten in a restaurant that offers foie gras more than once or twice in their lives. Few such people would ever consider researching food. So they get their information from popular culture. If James Bond asks for pate de foie gras, as he does in the books, and, I believe, in both Sean Connery's and Roger Moore's portrayals, that's what people remember, especially if it's occasionally reinforced elsewhere.

If I'm not mistaken, pate de foie gras was easier to come by in the 70s, as a "delicacy" that could be mail-ordered in a can, with little concern about freshness or preparation. It also showed up in this form in one of the Bond flicks, packed in a suitcase along with (of course) a bottle of Dom Perignon and some beluga caviar, and whatever else was considered both sophisticated and decadent back then.

And I can't take seriously anybody who thinks that such a ban is a proper function of government (not saying that you are or aren't such a person, Waitman).

* Political / philosophical rant banned*

Not that I'm advocating a ban (see upthread) but I've always found the "government has no business" argument intriguing. If government has no business investogating what might be widespread cruelty to ducks and -- should it determine the practice cruel -- ending it, it surely has no business prohibiting me from fattening up my cat and eating, whipping my horse in the street or starving my dog to death because it ate my slippers. Property is property, after all.

Maybe they could ban high fructose corn syrup too. That one might actually be worth something.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was already banned. I know nothing at the Takoma Park Coop has HFCS. The parents at my kid's schools were up in arms about the school offering chocolate & strawberry milk.

Here's another article about the ban from the Baltimore Examiner. Maybe I could make a few bucks on the side foie smuggling over the DC line...