Word: raisining
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...hunger to know what life would be like if the Republican revolution succeeds, here is a tangible example: small children would eat more Raisin Bran and less Cheerios, at least in Michigan. Of course, the libertarian Republicans would not insist. Their "Contract with America" would simply hand the choice to the states, where, they say, it belongs. But to the maker of Cheerios, the provision that passed the House last week is nothing less than a cereal killer...
...federal program that feeds needy women, infants and children into a bloc grant and give individual states the right to decide the program's nutritional guidelines. That means current restrictions on the sugar content in cereal, which allow the purchase of dowdy old Cheerios but not the more sugary Raisin Bran, would become a thing of the past. As a result, says Joseph Stewart, a senior vice president of Raisin Bran's maker, Kellogg, "Raisin Bran could no longer be denied the opportunity to participate in this program...
Kellogg's lobbyists argue that Raisin Bran doesn't have too much added sugar. Rather, it is sweeter because of sugar that occurs naturally in dried fruit. Dried fruit, they add, is very nutritious. Kellogg even joined forces with Sun-Maid, the California raisin producer, to press for an end to the sugar limit. The debate got so intense that at one meeting in 1991 Agriculture Secretary Edward Madigan and Kellogg chairman Arnold Langbo started shouting and pounding the table. (Kellogg denies the meeting got that heated...
That was before the revolution. Now one state says it will be open to adding Raisin Bran to its WIC menu: Michigan, where Kellogg has its corporate home, in Battle Creek. "We do support this move overwhelmingly," said John Truscott, a state spokesman. "We would absolutely allow Raisin Bran...
...Those like Cheney "who urge walking away because Aristide isn't our kind of democrat are wrong," says Baker. "If supporting democracy is a cornerstone of our foreign policy, which it is and should be, then you can't treat what democracy produces as a fruit salad, taking a raisin here while rejecting a pecan there. The test should be whether Aristide was chosen in a free and fair election. He was. Supporting him is therefore an American interest. It isn't an interest that justifies war, but it does justify rigorous sanctions...