I have known, and admired, Julia Busuttil Nishimura, for many years now and always felt connected through our love of Italian food, Tuscany (Julia lived in Florence and in Orbetello, just 10 minutes away from where we lived in Porto Ercole while I was writing Acquacotta) and Japan. So I have been eagerly awaiting her debut cookbook, Ostro: The Pleasure that Comes From Slowing Down and Cooking with Simple Ingredients, and it is a beauty it is full of food I want to make and eat. It's also a joy to look at, as it is presented so beautifully with photographs of Julia (and often her darling little boy Haruki) at home and tables full with food that look Caravaggesque. I have already made her everyday banana loaf, several times, after years of searching for my ideal everyday cake, it is now my go-to banana loaf. I tested her ricciarelli (soft almond cookies from Siena) and pork braised in milk (a classic Italian dish that I have always loved) when she was writing the book and I have long-known her absolutely wonderful, incredibly moist lemon olive oil cake (which is also divine with blood oranges). I absolutely love her homemade approach to everything, including all the wonderful handmade pasta like trofie and orecchiette (look at those beautiful dishes below), but also things like classic tiramisu homemade savoiardi, homemade mascarpone (yes and yes, I absolutely believe that for the freshest, most delicious mascarpone, it needs to be homemade especially if you live outside of Italy). Yes, these are all things you can also buy in a packet, but Julia's point is, it is a pleasure to make these things by hand, and the ingredients are so simple water, flour, cream, eggs, you probably have them all in your house already. She is a woman after my own heart. Her book inspires you to give it a go. What is the author of the articles background in food? - Enthusiast - Food Critic - not enough information - Chef
not enough information

Voters in Pennsylvania head to the polls Tuesday in a special congressional election with national implications for President Donald Trump and opposition Democrats. The election is taking place in a congressional district that Trump won by 19 points in 2016, but where Democrats now hope for an upset that could be a preview of the midterm congressional elections in November. The race pits Democrat Conor Lamb against Republican Rick Saccone. Saccone got some high-profile help on Saturday when Trump spoke on his behalf at a rally in Moon Township, Pennsylvania. "We need him. We need Republicans. We need the votes. Otherwise, they are going to take away your tax cuts. They are going to take away your Second Amendment rights," Trump warned the crowd. Though Trump easily won the district in 2016, Lamb appears to be competitive in part because he is a moderate-to-conservative Democrat who personally opposes abortion and any new gun control measures. Lamb is hoping to pull off an upset with help from former Vice President Joe Biden. "Passion and commitment rules in politics. Passion and commitment generates grass-roots support," Biden told a recent Lamb rally. Republicans have poured money into the race, including millions of dollars in television advertisements in the final days before the election. Trump is trying to help Republicans avoid another setback on the way to the November midterm elections, where Democrats are favored to make gains. In making his pitch to voters this election year, the president remains focused on his tax cut bill, new tariffs on steel and aluminum, and a diplomatic opening to North Korea. But Trump remains stuck at about 40 percent approval in the polls, historically low for a second-year president, and a potential drag for Republican candidates in November. "He's doing nothing to expand his base," said Jim Kessler of Third Way, a centrist Democrat advocacy group. "And also, political damage is kind of like sunburn. You don't really notice it as it is happening. And later in the day you... After the end of the story Kessler is probably - not enough information - working as a campaign manager - still working for an advocacy group - still involved in politics
still working for an advocacy group

(Question)
But corrected figures, provided by the U.S. military and published Tuesday by SIGAR, suggest that the actual decline was 17,980. Pentagon officials acknowledged originally providing inaccurate figures to SIGAR because of a failure "to account for the transfer of most of the Afghan Border Force from the Afghan National Police to the Afghan National Army," according to a SIGAR statement. According to the new figures, there were 313,728 members of the Afghan defense forces as of January 31, 2018. That compares to a total of 296,409, as previously reported. "SIGAR receives all of the (Afghan National Defense and Security Forces) personnel strength numbers published in the quarterly report from USFOR-A and has no means of independently verifying them," the statement added. The new figures still amount to a sharp decline. Afghan forces suffered unprecedented casualties in 2017, reportedly losing about 10,000 personnel, according to reports. SIGAR has been unable to publicly disclose the exact number of Afghan forces killed, because that information continues to be classified by Washington and Kabul. The violence has led to increased reports of Afghan military desertions, but that information too has been classified. Senior U.S. military officials repeatedly have acknowledged the nearly 17-year-old conflict remains a stalemate, even while touting some successes under the new strategy announced by President Donald Trump in August. Those success include the increasing capability of the Afghan military, which began conducting airstrikes two years ago. The Afghan air force carries out between four to 12 airstrikes every day, according to the Afghan Ministry of Defense. But the Kabul government controls just over half of the country's districts, SIGAR says. Trump's strategy appeared to commit the U.S. to Afghanistan indefinitely. It involves pressuring Pakistan to end its support for Afghan militants, supporting Kabul's effort to engage the Taliban in peace talks, and dropping more bombs on the country. The U.S.-led... U.S military officials probably believe that: - the U.S should remain in Afghanistan. - not enough information - the Afghan military should stop doing airstrikes. - the U.S should leave Afghanistan.
(Answer)
the U.S should remain in Afghanistan.