Mediaboss Marketing

I recently tried President Obama's favorite NYC burger at Upland. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

I recently tried President Barack Obama's favorite NYC burger at the restaurant Upland.

It features two patties with American cheese, peppadew peppers, tomato, lettuce, and avocado.

I loved how juicy the burger was, and the avocado gave it an extra level of richness and freshness.

Visit Insider's homepage for more stories.

Before the pandemic began, I decided to search for the best burger in NYC.

Me with the Emily burger in March 2020. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

I visited Peter Luger in the fall of 2019 (ah, simpler times) to try the cheeseburger, which had just been blasted by famed New Yorker critic Pete Wells in his zero-star review of the iconic Brooklyn steakhouse.

I actually loved the burger, but my rave review ended up filling my inbox with emails from readers who had very different opinions on where you could find the best burger in the Big Apple. Like any good reporter, I decided I had to try them all.

The pandemic briefly put a hiatus on my search (thankfully, not before I got to review Emily's delicious burger), but now I'm back! And for my third burger on the list, I got some presidential inspiration.

Upland is one of former President Barack Obama's favorite restaurants in New York City.

President Barack Obama leaves Upland restaurant on March 10, 2017 in New York City. James Devaney/GC Images

Obama has visited the California-inspired restaurant a number of times, including for a lunch with Bono (casual). Upland is on his roster of favorite NYC eateries, joining the likes of Carbone and Cosme.

And Obama isn't Upland's only famous diner. A Vogue article once proclaimed that it was "the perfect brunch spot" beloved by Jennifer Aniston, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Gigi Hadid.

Upland has everything from pizza to pasta on the menu, but it's been reported that one of Obama's favorite dishes to order is the cheeseburger.

The $26 Upland cheeseburger. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

In addition to the presidential seal of approval, Upland's cheeseburger has also earned a spot on multiple "Best burgers in NYC" lists.

But what also intrigued me was that the burger is frequently described as a "California-style fast-food cheeseburger." Born in California and raised on fast food (what? It was the '90s!), I was excited to see if Upland's cheeseburger could be Manhattan's answer to In-N-Out.

Story continues

So on a recent summer day in NYC, I made my way to Upland.

The front of Upland in New York's Gramercy neighborhood. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

Upland is located in Manhattan's Gramercy neighborhood. I almost missed it while walking down Park Avenue South, as the entire entrance is currently covered with scaffolding classic New York.

But my eye happened to catch the glowing menu by the door, so I rounded the corner and made my way inside.

The California inspiration was already apparent in Upland's decorations.

The entrance to Upland's dining room. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

Upland's entrance features a wall of more than a dozen jars filled to the brim with lemons, which almost seem to glow under the dim lights.

As I walked into the dining room to find the host, I was greeted with the sight of sophisticated green leather booths and a back wall lined with wine bottles. It all felt very Napa chic.

But it was a gorgeous day in New York City, so I opted to sit outside and order a drink.

The $16 Tea-Coupe cocktail. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

While waiting for my friend and fellow taste-tester Clay, I decided to try the Tea-Coupe cocktail.

The $16 drink features Tito's vodka, raspberry-steeped chai, lime, and a fresh raspberry balancing on the glass.

While I loved the Tea-Coupe's pretty light-orange hue, the cocktail was a bit watery for my taste and, overall, not very memorable. Clay felt the same about his $16 Green Marjorita, which features Milagro silver tequila, Del Maguey Vida Mezcal, arugula, fennel, and lemon.

But we both loved the $14 ros on tap. We each got hefty pours of the perfectly crisp wine, which paired deliciously with our lunch.

As I sipped on my cocktail, I checked out Upland's lunch menu.

Upland's menu. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

In addition to the famous cheeseburger, Upland also serves five different pizzas and four different pastas, along with a number of salads and main dishes that include salmon and a grilled chicken sandwich.

I knew I had to order the burger, but I also wanted to try another Obama favorite. So I also asked for the sausage and kale pizza, which Barack and Michelle Obama ordered during their lunch with Bono.

It didn't take long for the cheeseburger to arrive with a heaping pile of golden fries.

Upland's cheeseburger is served with a delicious mountain of golden fries. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

Before I get to the burger, I need to rave about the fries for a quick second.

It's clear that the fast-food inspiration for this dish didn't just translate to the burger. Upland's delicious fries are an elevated version of those you'd get at McDonald's.

They're thin and crispy, with just the right amount of softness in the middle, and each fry was nicely cooked and salted. Even with a huge burger and pizza at our table, Clay and I didn't leave a single fry behind.

After munching on a few fries, it was time to take on that beautiful burger.

Upland's burger features two patties and avocado. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

Upland's $27 cheeseburger features two grass-fed beef patties, American cheese, peppadew peppers, lettuce, tomato, and avocado, all nestled between sesame buns.

As you can see in the photo above, all the ingredients were visible with just one look at the burger. Cheese was deliciously oozing all over the double patty stack, the peppers and tomato slice gave everything a beautiful pop of color, and the avocado sat right on top like a crown jewel.

And planted right in the middle of the bun was a tiny version of the California flag, a cute touch that I loved. The red and green from the flag also matched the colors in the burger, which made me wonder if it had been a source of inspiration for the ingredients.

We were ready to dig in, and Upland's cheeseburger definitely made an impression.

I loved the richness of the avocado in Upland's cheeseburger. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

The first thing I noticed was how juicy the patties tasted, instantly reminding me of an In-N-Out double-double. There are so many ingredients packed into this cheeseburger, but the patties are still the star of the show.

Clay, a fellow Californian, was also a huge fan of Upland's take on the flavors of our native state.

"I love a burger that I can smell on my hands," he said. "And I love that there are two patties instead of one. I feel like the last place in New York to do that well was Superiority Burger, which closed down."

The tomato adds some moistness to the hefty burger, while the peppers give each bite a nice crunch. And the creamy avocado helps give the dish a distinguishing spin so it doesn't just feel like an In-N-Out re-creation, adding that extra level of both richness and freshness.

My only wish was that the burger had a bit more of a kick. The peppadew peppers were very subtle, and I think the dish could have shined even more with some heat to tie everything together.

Next up was the sausage and kale pizza, which looked glorious.

Upland's sausage and kale pizza. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

In addition to its namesake ingredients, the $23 pie features three different types of cheeses: Young pecorino, stracciatella, and Parmigiano.

I hate kale with a passion, but this pizza easily won me over.

The delicious pizza features three different cheeses. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

I'm the rare millennial that absolutely can't stand kale, so it's a huge deal for me to say that I really loved this pizza.

The kale is charred to a crisp on this dish, giving each bite some great texture. And the sausage has a nice kick thanks to the chili pepper flakes sprinkled all over the top.

The crust is a bit thicker and flakier than you'll usually find in a New York pie, but it's surprisingly fluffy and soft. And the stracciatella cheese is well distributed throughout the pizza, giving every slice a lovely creaminess.

"I love the crust and cheese," Clay told me. "The cheese was definitely the best part, and I like that it was spread around rather than just placed in the middle."

I saw that you could order a side of Upland's hot sauce for the mushroom pizza, so I asked the waiter to bring us some to try with our pie. The extra heat worked really well, cutting through the creaminess and saltiness of all those cheeses.

Since it was a hot day, Clay and I also decided to treat ourselves to Upland's brownie sundae.

Upland's brownie sundae. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

The waiter sold us on Upland's new dessert menu, and we had no regrets about trying this $14 dish. The brownie sundae includes salted-caramel ice cream, adorable mini wafer balls, some fresh whipped cream, and a hot fudge sauce that covers everything.

Clay loved the crunch that the wafer balls gave to the soft ice cream and brownie, while I couldn't get enough of the delicious salted-caramel flavor. It was the perfect way to finish off our feast. A pizza, burger, and sundae? Talk about a great Friday.

Upland's cheeseburger definitely gets my Californian stamp of approval.

I would definitely order Upland's cheeseburger again. Anneta Konstantinides/Insider

I'm not surprised that Obama loves Upland's cheeseburger. It's juicy, fresh, rich, and full of different flavors and textures. There are so many different burger places in NYC, but Upland's version is full of surprising and memorable touches.

Plus, there are so many other great dishes on the menu. I'd happily go back again for the sausage and kale pizza, and I'd love to try the mushroom pie and pappardelle as well. There's no doubt that everyone could find something that would make them happy at Upland.

But wait, how did Upland's cheeseburger fare when it comes to the best burgers in NYC?

I guess you'll just have to wait and see.

Read the original article on Insider

Link:
I tried Obama's favorite NYC burger and can see why it gets the presidential stamp of approval - Yahoo News

On September 13, the Biden Administration announced ten nominations to various agencies, including Maria Marisa Lago for Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade at the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and Elaine Trevino for Chief Agricultural Negotiator at the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR).

Lago, who will serve as Commerces top trade remedy official, currently serves as the Director of the New York City Department of City Planning and Chair of the New York City Planning Commission. Prior to the New York City posts, Lago served in the Obama Administration as the U.S. Department of the Treasurys Assistant Secretary for International Markets and Development where she was responsible for overseas development activities in conjunction with the World Bank and foreign counterparts, international financial services regulation, climate finance, trade in financial services, and technical assistance to developing countries. Lago also previously served as the head of the Office of International Affairs at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, was the Global Head of Compliance for Citigroups corporate and investment bank, and held other prominent posts in New York State and Boston.

Bidens nomination of Almond Alliance of California President Elaine Trevino, who will lead agricultural trade negotiations at the USTR, has so far received considerable support from several other trade associations, including the International Dairy Foods Association, the American Farm Bureau Foundation, the American Feed Industry Association, and the National Milk Producers Federation. In its announcement of Trevino, the White House stated Trevino understands tariff and nontariff barriers to trade and the importance of maintaining Americas strong trade agreements and global positioning. Trevino previously worked on behalf of two California Governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Gray Davis overseeing international export and trade programs, among other areas. United States Trade Representative Ambassador Katherine Tai said of Trevino that her experience will help the Biden-Harris Administration craft durable trade policy that creates broad-based prosperity and noted that Trevino would be the first woman of color and the first Latina in this critical position [].

[View source.]

View original post here:
Biden Administration Announces Nominations Of Obama-Era Official And Trade Association Advocate To Top Trade Posts At Department Of Commerce - JD...

Led by the USA, the international community took an ambiguous approach to Afghanistan in the past two decades. The goal was to build a modern state, but from the very start, a light footprint was preferred. As Paul D. Miller told Hans Dembowski in an interview, three major mistakes made by two consecutive US presidents ultimately caused failure.

Today, the common narrative is that it was wrong to try to build a modern, democratic Afghan state. As I remember it, however, the necessity of doing so was generally understood 20 years ago. After the attacks on New York and Washington DC of 11 September 2001, the goal was to ensure that Afghanistan would never become a safe haven for terrorists again. The implication was that a power vacuum was unacceptable.Exactly, there was no other choice. That is what former officials of the Bush administration are still saying today. In 2001/2002 that view was shared internationally, including by NATO leaders and UN officials. Unfortunately, this insight did not make them draft a coherent state-building strategy. State building is a complex challenge and takes a lot of time, however. Institutions have to be established and consolidated step-by-step. Capable staff cannot simply be bought. To earn public trust, officers need training and considerable practical experience. However, we and our allies did not commit to long-term engagement.

To what extent was state building attempted in Afghanistan at all?It varied from year to year. In the first five years, the focus was on political reconstruction in the sense of holding elections and passing a constitution. Both worked out fairly well. The constitution was based on Afghanistans 1964 constitution and updated by Afghans who represented the countrys people and understood its constitutional history. The constitution was Afghan owned rather than imposed by western powers. On the downside, there were no significant efforts to build infrastructure. Afghanistan badly needed roads, hospitals and schools, but also institutions such as law courts and municipal governments. Things changed somewhat in the years 2007 to 2011 when insurgents were gaining strength. In that period, much more was done to ramp up the legal system, develop rural areas and build administrative capacities. However, by that point, reconstruction efforts were rushed and thus often wasteful, the conflict further intensified, and international support later focused almost entirely on the Afghan army and police.

Did western allies fight or foster corruption?They did both. The core problem was that they tried to do too much too fast, especially in the second phase that I just mentioned. A lot of money suddenly flowed into a very poor country that had recently been the worlds worst failed state and lacked competent institutions. The result was the rule of money. The illegal-drugs trade obviously added to the problems. Poppy cultivation began to expand fast from 2006 on, and by 2009 or so, the Taliban were relying on opium money. Others were involved in the drugs economy too, including influential leaders who officially supported the government. By the end of 2010, a destructive dynamic had set in. The focus was increasingly on fighting insurgents and not on reconstruction. The US administration lost faith in state building, which obviously became more difficult the more the conflict escalated.

Why did things go wrong?Well, I think there were three major mistakes in the first two presidential administrations:

In the later two administrations, I have nothing good to say about President Joe Bidens withdrawal or about President Donald Trumps peace negotiations with the Taliban, which bypassed our Afghan partners and placed no meaningful demands on the Taliban, but several decisive mistakes were made long before Trump or Biden took office.

What role did other western governments play?Well, Washington basically called the shots. At first, the idea was that individual governments would assume specific responsibilities in Afghanistan, but a sense of frustration set in by 2006. The Bush administration felt that our allies were not doing enough, which was a bit unfair, because it wasnt doing enough itself.

I find it bewildering that western leaders cared so little about the drugs economy. It accounts for up to 30% of Afghanistans gross national product (GNP). Such a huge black market is incompatible with a modern state and the rule of law.There were actually many proposals for solving the drugs problem. Some suggested saffron cultivation could be an alternative to poppy cultivation. Others said the international community should simply buy the entire harvest to produce medical morphine. There were attempts to eradicate poppy fields. Everything stayed piecemeal, however. The point is that you cannot make meaningful progress against the drug trade if you do not have a legal system. That is especially true in a war zone. We ended up with a chicken and egg problem. Without peace, you cannot build a legal system and other institutions, but you cannot have peace, unless you have a legal system.

It is also estimated that aid accounted for about 50% of Afghanistans GNP in recent years. There really was not much of an Afghan state.Well, you have to consider the history of Afghanistan, which has basically been a client state for hundreds of years. For a long time, it depended on the British Empire, later on the Soviet Union. Afghanistans official government always relied on outside funding and used that funding to pay off local clients in exchange for their support. Nonetheless, the country was largely at peace thanks to many different compromises and accommodations. That changed with the Soviet invasion of 1979.

Western failure in Afghanistan is now often blamed on Afghans supposedly medieval mindset. I find that rhetoric condescending and misleading. The real problem is that Afghan society is controlled by warlords as medieval Europe was, by the way. People want to survive. They do not care much about whether the armed men in front of them are legitimate in one way or another. The priority is not to get hurt and somehow keep feeding ones family. Official legislation hardly matters in the rural regions of developing countries, where traditions rule daily life and it is certainly not relevant in situations of strife.The Soviets destroyed the structures of Afghan society, such as the tribal networks, landowning khans, and local mullahs. That led to the rise of warlordism and, eventually, the drug economy. After 2001, the international community should not have tolerated power vacuums at the local level. The results were persisting warlordism and opportunities for the Taliban. In the west, everyone knows that Taliban rule was brutal when they controlled the country in the late 1990s. It is less well understood that they nonetheless provided a sense of order, which was obviously very rough. They even banned poppy cultivation for one year, though many observers argue they only did so to drive up the global opium price. What matters now, however, is that Afghans are tired after four decades of war. They long for safety and some believed the Taliban were good at providing it.

And they feel disappointed in western powers. Could the US-led intervention have achieved more?Well, both Bush and Obama signed agreements with Afghan governments, pledging long-term support. I am convinced we could have done more had we had more patience. State building cannot be done fast and definitely not quickly in a very poor, war-torn country. The depressing truth is that our leaders chose the right words, but did not follow up with action. Our Afghan partners lost faith, and the USA failed to fulfil what our presidents had promised.

Paul D. Miller is a professor of the practice of international affairs at Georgetown University in Washington DC.[emailprotected]

Go here to see the original:
In regard to Afghanistan, Bush and Obama made three major mistakes - D+C Development and Cooperation

Sept 14 (Reuters) - Three former U.S. presidents - Republican George W. Bush and Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama - have banded together behind a new group aimed at supporting refugees from Afghanistan settling in the United States following the recent American withdrawal ending 20 years of war.

The former leaders and their wives will serve as part of Welcome.US, a coalition of advocacy groups, U.S. businesses and other leaders.

It launched on Tuesday with a website that will be "a single point of entry," to make it easier for Americans to donate, host a refugee family through the home rental app Airbnb Inc (ABNB.O) or find other ways to help, John Bridgeland, an official in former President George W. Bush's administration and co-chair of the effort, said at a media event.

Tens of thousands of Afghans have already arrived in the United States as part of a U.S. evacuation. Many of them would have been at risk had they remained under the Taliban after their work with U.S. and allied troops or with American and international agencies.

"Thousands of Afghans stood with us on the front lines to push for a safer world, and now they need our help," Bush and his wife Laura said in a statement.

Organizers said there has been a bipartisan outpouring of support for Afghan refugees, including Republican and Democratic governors who have signed onto the effort.

A number of U.S. state and local leaders have said they would welcome refugees into their communities, although immigration remains a divisive issue in parts of the country.

Under former President Donald Trump, a Republican, refugee admissions from around the world were slashed to their lowest levels in decades, a policy President Joe Biden, a Democrat, has pledged to reverse.

Welcome.US also draws support from more than 280 people and entities, including U.S. businesses such as Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O), Starbucks Corp (SBUX.O)and Walmart Inc (WMT.N), as well as numerous nonprofit organizations, veterans' groups and resettlement agencies.

Biden's administration is working to accommodate as many as 50,000 refugees on military bases in the United States. Others remain in processing centers near U.S. airports where they landed, and more evacuees are in U.S. installations or stuck in third countries abroad.

Some refugee organizations have been pushing for the United States to adopt a program of private or community sponsorship for individual refugees, similar to a model used in Canada, and see this coordinated national volunteer effort as one way to jump-start that process.

"We want to take advantage of this moment and the great need to access all the capacity out there in the United States to support Afghan evacuees," Nazanin Ash of the International Rescue Committee said at Tuesday's launch.

(This story corrects to remove reference to CVS Health Corp and replace it with Walmart Inc in paragraph 9)

Reporting by Mica Rosenberg in New York and Susan Heavey in Washington; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Ross Colvin

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read the original:
U.S. Ex-presidents Bush, Clinton, Obama band together to aid Afghan refugees - Reuters

I think a big part of it is that Obama does represent something that, in a boring and literal way, is undeniably true: this country had never had a black president. This is the root of the argument about representation: if there is somebody who is powerful and respected in the country, although everyone hates politicians, its the president and Obama looked good in these photos. He and his family looked very cool. They always looked like they were having fun, even when they were serious. The reason I recalled JFK in the piece is that thats who he most looked like. He looks like hes in Camelot. He looks good in a tux. He looks good in a suit.

And youve heard, for a long time, from white liberals and black conservatives and black liberals, that whats necessary is for black people to see themselves in positions of power. Thats what I wrote about in the section about the little kid that everybody finds very moving, where hes rubbing Barack Obamas head because he wants to see if his hair is just like his. This is one method of creating a post-racial utopia: its basically trickle-down liberation. If a black person, so the argument goes, can achieve the highest office in the land and look this good, then the belief is that it will trickle down. Which, to me, as much as people say that this is about uplift for black people and our understanding of ourselves and what we can achieve, has always really been addressed to white people. Because, if white people see that a black person can, in fact, occupy the office and that things dont go to hell when a black person is in charge, then perhaps some of their antipathies will lessen.

I do happen to think things went to hell under Obama, but I think theres a way you can read things otherwise mainly if youre silent about cities being on fire. Theres another potential way to read it, which is that youll gain liberation through seeing these photos and from seeing this image of the black elite projected every day. There was a black elite under Obama in a way that there had never really been before. Jay-Z and Beyonc were elite before Barack Obama, but theres a different game being played when theyre frequently visiting the White House and Jay-Z is rapping about having Obamas cell phone number. At that point, youre making a national argument that the black elite is the elite.

The problem with that is that its very hard to connect it to any real sense of redress for whats happening for most black people. Im quite deeply wary of this when Im in certain rooms, and people expect me to have something to say that represents all black people. I mean, I make movies and went to a private school, and I have nothing to tell them about whats going on other than what I know from talking to people and reading.

Theres two ways you can address whats happening now to black people. One is expressed in the belief that there is something about seeing black people that causes X, Y, or Z to happen and if thats true, then the representation argument is correct. You need to see black people in the White House, you need to see them in tuxes, you need to see them on billboards, and on Wall Street, or whatever. But if what youre actually talking about is capital, land, and premature death, then youre getting at the heart of whether or not black people can be folded into the national project. Im not so certain they can be, and I dont really think they should be.

When it comes to how you get to a post-racial society, there are to be a bit vulgar about it two paths you can walk. One is the Paul Gilroy route, which involves the premise that racism precedes race. That being the case, in order to find liberation, you have to go through a winding struggle, and on the other side, perhaps there isnt race in any way thats recognizable to us now. But between here and there is a revolution. The other route, which I think Obama is perhaps the best proponent of, is that through the achievements of a handful of black elites and some massive shift in everybodys psyche, you wind up in a place where America can reconcile all of these antagonisms.

I think Obama came probably as close as you can come to demonstrating whether that will work, and there probably are lots of people whose minds were changed. I also think the tail end of his presidency was marked by white nationalists marching in the streets and black people setting cities on fire. Part of why I was very interested in the visual representation of his presidency is that I think thats where he was at his best. He was very good in front of the camera. But also because this ultimately shows the failure and limits of this kind of representation, whether it winds up being on-screen or in his books or whatever. It cant really change the fact that were talking about violence. Were not really talking about how certain images make every individual in the country feel.

The implication of that sort of black excellence thing is that, if we see Obama in the White House, then we can rise out of the ghetto something that depends on a belief that people are in the ghetto by choice, as opposed to somebody keeping them there. So, by the end of his presidency (even before it became clear who was succeeding him), nobody had really come to terms with the fact that a black elite couldnt seem to do anything to stop working-class black people from marching and rioting. I think he got what he wanted, and what a lot of people wanted, which was a black elite that became the elite. But that being the case, theres not much they can say back to the people who are in the streets.

See original here:
Barack Obama, the Hollow Icon - Jacobin magazine