Harry's Bar Sandwiches - Egg and anchovy sandwich

INGREDIENTS

1 cup mayonnaise
12 thick bread slices
6 large hard-boiled eggs
12 anchovy fillets

METHOD

Spread some mayonnaise generously over one side of each slice of bread. Place half the egg slices in mounds on half the bread slices, leaving a 1-inch margin of bread.

Top with the anchovy fillets, then the remaining egg slices.

Cover with the remaining bread and press firmly on the edges to seal the sandwiches. Trim the crusts if you wish.

When you cut the sandwiches in half, they will have the characteristic Harry's Bar shape. Serve immediately.

Does YouTube belong in the Supreme Court?

More to the point: If the White House's own YouTube channel contains some 480 videos (including President Obama's weekly radio address and administration-oriented events), if Congress members (and those clamoring for elected jobs on Capitol Hill) consider their presence on the mainstream video sharing site as a given -- if both the executive and legislative branches of the federal government have jumped on the social media train -- then what's taking the judicial branch so long?

The gnawing technological gap was in display yesterday, when the Supreme Court halted a federal judge's decision to upload videos of the closely watched trial challenging California's gay marriage ban on YouTube. Federal trials are not televised, much less posted on video sharing sites. But U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who is presiding over the gay marriage case, is clearly aiming for history -- and offering a civic lesson. "I've always thought that if the public could see how the judicial process works, they would take a somewhat different view of it," Judge Walker said.

It must be noted that the High Court's 8-1 ruling, with Justice Stephen Breyer dissenting, is temporary. The stay sought by proponents of Prop. 8, the successful ballot measure that limits marriage to heterosexual couples, have until tomorrow to halt the video uploads. YouTube awaits. In a statement to HuffPostTech, Steve Grove, YouTube's head of news and politics, wrote: "Though courts have a long tradition of allowing citizens to attend trials in person, YouTube gives courts an opportunity to further open up their proceedings to a global audience. We look forward to working with state and federal courts to bring more openness and transparency to judicial proceedings." YouTube aside, the Supreme Court sent a very loud and troublesome and altogether unacceptable message: We're staying stuck in the 20th century, technological changes be damned.

And it underlines a reality that, for many, the 220-year-old SCOTUS is arguably the most mysterious of our federal institutions.

Other than physically attending a hearing inside its four-story building in Washington, D.C., the average citizen cannot get a real time view of the Court's proceedings. Television cameras are not allowed inside the courtroom, thanks to former Chief Justice Warren Burger, who headed the High Court from 1969 to 1986. Outside posting its current docket and calendar, which lists dates for specific oral documents, on its virtual headquarters, SupremeCourtUS.gov feels and looks like the Web circa 1994, the year the White House and other federal agencies went online. By current standards, SCOTUS's online presence is more than dated, it's not at all user-friendly.

"I don't understand why the Supreme Court doesn't put its hearings online. Their explanations sound like pretty flimsy rationalizations, but usually when there's a rationalization, there's a fairly obvious motive behind it. What's theirs? Fear they'll look foolish? Fear they'll play to the cameras? Do they really lack that basic degree of confidence and self-control? I honestly don't get it," David Weinberger, a fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, wrote to HuffPostTech.

The reality is, unless you're a SCOTUS nerd -- following the latest news on the SCOTUSblog or Above the Law; reading up on the history of the current justices in Jeffrey Toobin's informative and entertaining "The Nine"; watching re-runs of SCOTUS-themed episodes of "The West Wing" (hey, Aaron Sorkin, after you're done with that Facebook movie, can you introduce Facebook to The Nine and a create an online-only fictional SCOTUS series starring Alison "C.J. Cregg" Janney as the first female Chief Justice?) -- court proceedings that impact each and everyone of our lives feel disconnected, downright anachronistic. At a time in which the Internet and technology have brought average citizens closer to their government, the judicial branch in general and SCOTUS in particular feel distant -- out of touch, even.

And likely to stay that way.

"It's almost as if the federal courts, the Supreme Court, the judicial branch in general, is immune to this ongoing Internet revolution. Elected officials have grappled with it more head-on, because they're constantly campaigning. They're in the thick of things and they've seen first hand how it's changed everything, from the way money is raised to how people self-organize," Joe Trippi told me in a phone interview. Trippi headed Howard Dean's online-fueled campaign in 2003 and a year later wrote the prescient book "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised: Democracy, the Internet, and the Overthrow of Everything." "Our judicial system is largely stuck in its old ways, and there's something sort of elitist about the whole thing -- 'we know what's good for you, we're gonna make a decision and that's it.' But eventually, they'll have to let the people in."

"When it comes to government, the Internet is all about transparency," Trippi continued, "and transparency has to come to the courts, too."

Make that increased transparency.

To be sure, court proceedings are public. A trial is a public event. Quoting former Justice Byron White, Paul Lippe, CEO of Legal OnRamp, a Facebook-meets-Wikipedia-meets-Linked In for lawyers, said: "The judicial branch is the only branch of government that justifies all its decisions in writing." Its entire record -- arguments and decisions -- are printed and published, he pointed out. In short, there was transparency in court proceedings long before the Internet has revolutionized and redefined our version of it. Still, Lippe concedes that the courts must adapt to a more Web-based generation and engage the online public at large. Wherever you stand on the gay marriage issue, "all interested stakeholders will benefit from a more transparent process, and in an ideal world most would come away with a greater respect for the argument and concerns of those with whom they disagree," Lippe explained.

Which takes us back to the Prop. 8 trial, a highly controversial and emotional case. A social media-driven gay grassroots community has been blogging, tweeting and Facebooking about the trial before it began yesterday. So have backers of Prop. 8. Opponents of same-sex marriage fear that releasing video of the proceedings to the public will subject witnesses to harassment and intimidation -- what courtspeak calls "irreparable harm." With its decision to halt the YouTube broadcasts, the High Court agrees.

"But the claim of 'irreparable harm' cuts both ways. The people testifying on behalf of gay marriage could be discriminated against. I'm not taking a side here -- that's just a fact," Don Tellock, a former assistant attorney general for the state of New York who's now a litigation partner at Schiff Hardin, specializing in information/data security and technology cases, told me. "There's a reason why trials are public -- we want to see justice being meted out so we know that everyone can get a fair shot. And in our new YouTube-driven era, in an era in which people want more information and want to be engaged, the it's not just definition of transparency that is changing, it's also the definition of what's public. Now, a public trial means that it should be available online for everyone to see and for everyone to share."

Here's hoping SCOTUS realizes that soon enough.

*** JUDICIARY 2.0: This is the first in a continuing series about social media's impact in our judicial system. Are you a lawyer or a law student? A concerned citizen? In the age of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, how do you define transparency? What's public, and private? Should all trials be streamed online? Share your comments below.***

PRESERVED LEMON RELISH

2 preserved lemons, rinsed and chopped fine
6 green onions, sliced
1/2 c. chopped parsley, or mixed parsley and cilantro
3 - 4 T olive oil
juice of 1/2 fresh lemon

Mix everything together, adding enough olive oil to make the mixture loose enough to spoon onto whatever you're serving it with. Season with freshly-ground pepper. The lemons are probably salty enough that you won't have to add much salt, if any. Good with grilled fish, grilled chicken - probably be good with grilled lamb, too. Simple!

Moroccan Raw Carrot Salad Epicurious | 2005

by Gil Marks
Olive Trees and Honey

Shlata Chizo Carrot salads are a relatively new dish, especially raw ones. Until well into the twentieth century, most Europeans ate only cooked carrots, primarily in stews and soups. In the Middle East, people also used them as a component of cooked dishes, but sometimes added grated or minced raw carrots as a minor ingredient to various salads. It was in northwestern Africa that carrots, both cooked and raw, became the featured component of salads — typically an accompaniment to couscous or part of an assortment of salads. Moroccans brought carrot salads to Israel in the 1940s, and they quickly became ubiquitous. These salads are a traditional Rosh Hashanah dish in Israel, a symbol of a sweet and fruitful year to come. At many Israeli restaurants, cooked carrot salad automatically appears on the table with the bread, pickles, and hummus. The carrots are usually flavored with charmoula, a characteristic Moroccan marinade of oil, lemon juice, garlic, cumin, and salt. Most cooks add heat with chilies, sometimes in dangerous proportions. I have tasted some that left me gasping and other that proved a lively appetizer, so adjust the amount of chilies to your own preference and that of your guests. For fancy presentation, Israelis serve raw carrot salad, commonly called gezer chai ("live carrots"), in quartered avocados or on a bed of lettuce leaves, garnished with a sprig of mint. Yield: Makes 5 to 6 servings 1 pound carrots, coarsely grated (about 4 cups) 1/4 cup vegetable oil or extra-virgin olive oil 3 to 4 tablespoons fresh lemon juice 1/4 cup chopped fresh cilantro or parsley 2 to 4 cloves garlic, mashed or minced 1 teaspoon ground cumin or 1/2 teaspoon ground cumin and 1/4 teaspoon ground cinnamon 1 teaspoon sweet paprika Pinch of salt About 1/2 teaspoon harissa (Northwest African chili paste), 1 tablespoon minced green chilies, or 1/4 to 1/2 teaspoon cayenne (optional) In a large bowl, mix together all the ingredients. Cover and let marinate in the refrigerator for at least 2 hours or up to 2 days to allow the flavors to meld and permeate the carrots. Served chilled or at room temperature. VARIATIONS Moroccan Cooked Carrot Salad (Shlata Chizo Metbucha): o not grate the carrots, but cut them on a diagonal into 1/4-inch-thick slices. Cook in gently boiling water until crisp-tender, about 10 minutes. Drain, rinse under cold water, and drain again. Toss with the dressing as above. Moroccan Carrot-Orange Salad (Shlata Chizo):Omit the cumin and add 1 1/2 teaspoons orange blossom water or 1/2 cup fresh orange juice, 1/4 cup chopped fresh spearmint, and, if desired, 1 tablespoon sugar or honey. Turkish Carrot Salad with Yogurt (Havuc Salatasi):Substitute 1 cup plain yogurt for the lemon juice. Source Information Reprinted with permission from Olive Trees and Honey by Gil Marks. © 2004 Wiley Publishing, Inc.

Make Cookies in 90 Seconds with Your Waffle Iron

Baking cookies in your oven is fine and all, but if you want to turn out some tasty cookies in a very short time, consider turning to your trusty waffle iron. Turns out you're only 90 seconds away from crispy, chewy, cookie-goodness.

Photo by Fine Living & Martha Stewart

Although your oven will still have its place for making large batches of cookies, using your waffle iron can bake up a cookie in just 90 seconds. It's the perfect solution for previously prepared dough when you just need a quick sugar fix instead of an entire pan hanging around the house to tempt you.

It's a simple process of heating your waffle iron (no matter what shape or size it might be) on high and coating it with a non-stick spray. Using a small cookie scoop or tablespoon, spoon batter into each section of your waffle iron. This will ensure even baking and that all your cookies will finish at the same time. All that's left is to remove them from the heat and chow down!

We ran across the idea on food weblog The Kitchn, and after a little more searching found two tested and approved recipes to try your hand at—one from Martha Stewart and the other from recipe weblog Fine Cooking. If you'd like to see the process in action, you can head over to Martha Stewart for a short video (with a slow load time) to see them made before you go all MacGyver meets Cookie Monster on your own. If you've tried this method before, let's hear how it worked out for you in the comments.

A Fast Way to Bake Cookies: Use a Waffle Iron [The Kitchn]