All posts by Nativegrl77

Barbecue – History of Barbecue


Image result for Ellsworth B. A. Zwoyer of Pennsylvania patented a design for charcoal briquettes in 189 To barbecue means to slow-cook meat at a low temperature.

Zwoyer’s Design Patent #D27483 – charcoal briquette.


To barbecue means to slow-cook meat at a low temperature for a long time over wood or charcoal. In America, barbecue (or BBQ) originated in the late 1800’s during Western cattle drives. The cowboys were fed the less than perfect cuts of meat, often brisket, a tough and stringy piece of meat that required five to seven hours of cooking to tenderize. Other barbecue meats used were pork butt, pork ribs, beef ribs, venison and goat.

However, barbecue was not invented in America and no one knows who invented the barbecue. The word ‘Barbecue’ might come from the Taino Indian word ‘barbacoa’ meaning meat-smoking apparatus. ‘Barbecue’ could have also originated from the French word “Barbe a queue” which means “whiskers-to-tail.”

No one is sure of the correct origins of the word.

Who Invented the Charcoal Briquette?

Ellsworth B. A. Zwoyer of Pennsylvania patented a design for charcoal briquettes in 1897. (See the image to the right) After World War One, the Zwoyer Fuel Company built charcoal briquette manufacturing plants in the United States with plants in Buffalo, NY and Fall River, MA.

There are stories circulating that Henry Ford invented the very first briquette in 1920 with the help of Thomas Edison. However, the 1897 patent obviously predates this and Ford and Edison both knew Zwoyer.

Ford is the man who popularized the gas-powered car in America and invented the assembly line for automobile manufacturing. Ford created a briquette from the wood scraps and sawdust from his car factory.

E.G. Kingsford bought Ford’s briquette and placed it into commercial production.

So scared they will avoid seeing a doctor …go hungry, get sick and some immigrants die

Friends,People's Action

Some facts about being an immigrant that most folks ignore!

At American Friends Service Committee in Iowa, we talk to fearful families like these all the time. They’ve been in the U.S. for years, working and paying taxes, hoping our government will finally sort out its broken immigration system and give them credit for all of the contributions they make to our society.

But now, when their child gets sick, or they run out of food, they’re scared – so scared, in fact, that they’ll avoid seeing a doctor, or go hungry.

This is not right. But I’m ashamed to admit, this is exactly what our government wants: to make it harder and harder for immigrant families to live peacefully and be a part of our communities.

The irony is that the same lawmakers who are most likely to criminalize and demonize immigrants solely for political gain – Grassley, King and Reynolds – are the same ones who depend most on contributions from the industries that rely the most on immigrant labor, especially Big Ag. This is especially true of those lawmakers who claim to be farmers themselves. This is an open secret in Iowa, but it’s one that’s rarely discussed.

Immigrants who do qualify for citizenship or residency already go through a rigorous screening process when they apply for permanent status,, including one that ensures they will not become a “public charge” by relying on public assistance.

That’s why the Trump administration’s new “screen” on immigrants is phony, and so unfair: its only purpose is to stigmatize and disqualify all immigrants who have ever sought any kind of medical or food aid, even temporarily.

Who among us hasn’t needed help at some point in our lives, whether from our extended family, church community, neighbors or social services?

As a child growing up in small-town Iowa, my family had to ask for help more than once. We were grateful to receive it, and it’s part of what made me feel this state was a great place to live. And that’s why I work hard to ensure that other families who need help today get what they need, too. This is the kind of generosity of spirit that Iowa is known for, and should always be known for. We shouldn’t let fearful, small-minded folks define us any other way.

We’re gearing up to fight back against Trump and his minions and we need your help to do so. Can you donate $20.18 Today to help us push back against changing the “public charge” rule and against these racist ideas? If you’ve already donated in the past, you can use the express donate links below to make your donation immediately.
In Solidarity,
Erica Johnson

Sent via

Green links are for donations!

Urge Congressional Leaders to #ProtectBlackDissent

Newly leaked documents show that the FBI has lied about the extent of its tracking of Black activists, while consistently obscuring the real threat of white supremacy.1 In the wake of recent attacks in Dayton, OH, Gilroy, CA and El Paso, TX, it’s time for Congress to act quickly and decisively to hold the Bureau accountable.

FBI director Christopher Wray testified to Congress earlier this year that his agency no longer uses the “Black Identity Extremist” (BIE) label and that they focus on violence and not ideology in determining what to investigate.2 Yet documents obtained by The Young Turks make clear that the Bureau under Trump has not only continued programs related to the groundless BIE label, but prioritized these investigations over the targeting of white supremacists and other known terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda. They also developed a new infiltration program called “Iron Fist” to “mitigate the threat posed by the BIE movement at a national level” — without citing any actual terrorist activities conducted by these groups.

The FBI cannot be trusted. We’re calling on Congressional leaders to help end “Iron Fist” and all FBI programs based on the made-up “Black Identity Extremist” label, to stop the Bureau from grouping white supremacist incidents with Black protests against police violence, and to force them to be transparent about the funding used to investigate domestic terrorist groups.

The FBI is directing its resources into improperly surveilling and criminalizing Black activists for their right to dissent at the exact time white supremacists are organizing online and violently attacking communities of color. This dangerous prioritization and false assessment is putting millions of lives at risk.

Join us today in urging Rep. Elijah Cummings (Chair of the House Oversight & Reform Committee), Rep. Jerry Nadler (Chair of the House Judiciary Committee), and Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee) to use their oversight powers to force the FBI to meet our demands and #ProtectBlackDissent.


1. Leaked FBI Documents Reveal Bureau’s Priorities Under Trump, The Young Turks
2. FBI Abandons Use of Term “Black Identity Extremism, The Wall Street Journal

War On Women … it’s 2019 and the era of trump has got to end!


The War On Women …

In this era of trump, it appears as if inappropriate behavior on so many levels has not only found folks inciting, perpetrating and or engaging in intimidation; it also seems ok all over the World not just here in the good’ole US of A.  There are folks assaulting women, beating POC, some are  participating in hate crimes, others are not only tossing out threats like these things aren’t against the law. Now, there are reports of folks more willing to commit mass murder in the name of MAGA   ….it has to stop

In 2016, we saw conservative activists and Republican Governors assaulting not only a woman’s right to choose but making it incredibly difficult for Women to get to a clinic by quietly closing them one after the other. Thing is, these clinics also provide other services …like mammograms, cancer screenings, referrals and when it comes to abortions the idea that someone least we talk about a potus would state that women should receive some sort of punishment, gets a …wtf?

Question, do you think anyone in the White House has done research on unsafe abortions at all? or cares?

In a nation created by and of immigrants, the current guy, holding power as POTUS, seems to lean toward white nationalism, was is a birther and his War On Women flag was confirmed when he gave employers control over a woman’s body… that’s my take.  It’s bad enough that clinics are being systematically closed by those leaning right, but now women in need of any type of reproductive procedure must travel several miles for it! If they can travel.  These clinics, which are there to help women and men, are now left without safe affordable health care close enough that delivers “health care” in all its forms. The loss of these clinics and the impact on regular women rarely get news coverage; continue to be quietly eliminated along with killing the reputations of doctors.

Unfortunately, Doctors in the business of helping women by providing general health care as well as safe reproductive products/ procedures have suffered over thirty years of intimidation, threats and violence, were in the crosshairs of a republican trifecta with an odd take on family values! It is a sad day when their strange family values are pushing women, forcing them to fight for or struggle with health issues that affluent women probably do not!

We must remind folks of what facilities like Planned Parenthood do…

Why is it so difficult for people like brett kavanaugh to believe and accept that women at the age of 17 and older who request a reproductive procedure understand that it is a right, not a privilege. While it seems like providing a place where safe affordable health care is given is the right thing to do, oddly enough it still needs to be reiterated to republicans…so let us say it over and over …Women exercise their right to choose at this moment constitutional ! It’s about Freedom and CHOICE.  I have to admit, one would assume that republicans, pledging to be Constitutionalist would back away from actions that clearly conflict with laws on the books least we talk about the idea that freedom and choice sound like at least two beliefs conservatives seem to push whenever possible but of course only when it suits their ideology … going out of their way to disrespect a woman’s intelligence and  or the relationship with their doctor’s by legislating against it, is shameful.

~ Nativegrl77

Separation of Church and State …

United States

John Locke, English political philosopher argued for individual conscience, free from state control

The concept of separating church and state is often credited to the writings of English John Locke.[1] philosopher According to his principle of the social contract, Locke argued that the government lacked authority in the realm of individual conscience, as this was something rational people could not cede to the government for it or others to control. For Locke, this created a natural right in the liberty of conscience, which he argued must therefore remain protected from any government authority. These views on religious tolerance and the importance of individual conscience, along with his social contract, became particularly influential in the American colonies and the drafting of the United States Constitution.[21]Thomas Jefferson stated: “Bacon, Locke and Newton..I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived, without any exception, and as having laid the foundation of those superstructures which have been raised in the physical and moral sciences”[22][23] Indeed such was Locke’s influence,

The concept was implicit in the flight of Roger Williams from religious oppression in Massachusetts to found what became Rhode Island on the principle of state neutrality in matters of faith.[24][25]

Reflecting a concept often credited in its original form to the English political philosopher John Locke,[1] the phrase separation of church and state is generally traced to the letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists, in which he referred to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as creating a “wall of separation” between church and state.[2]United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. This led to increased popular and political discussion of the concept. The phrase was quoted by the

The concept has since been adopted in a number of countries, to varying degrees depending on the applicable legal structures and prevalent views toward the proper role of religion in society. A similar principle of laïcité has been applied in France and Turkey, while some socially secularized countries such as Norway have maintained constitutional recognition of an official state religion. The concept parallels various other international social and political ideas, including secularism, disestablishment, religious liberty, and religious pluralism.

source: internet