|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves
McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Hamburger chef Jamie Oliver has won his long-fought battle against one of the largest fast food chains in the world – McDonalds. After Oliver showed how McDonald’s hamburgers are made, the franchise finally announced that it will change its recipe. Oliver repeatedly explained to the public, over several years – in documentaries, television shows and interviews – that the fatty parts of beef are “washed” in ammonium hydroxide and used in the filling of the burger. Before this process, according to the presenter, the food is deemed unfit for human consumption. According to the chef and hamburger enthusiast, Jamie Oliver, who has undertaken a war against the fast food industry, “Basically, we’re taking a product that would be sold in the cheapest way for dogs, and after this process, is being given to human beings.” Besides the low quality of the meat, the ammonium hydroxide is harmful to health. Oliver famously coined this the “the pink slime process.” “Why would any sensible human being put meat filled with ammonia in the mouths of their children?” Oliver asked. In one of his colorful demonstrations, Oliver demonstrates to children how nuggets are made. After selecting the best parts of the chicken, the remains (fat, skin and internal organs) are processed for these fried foods. In reply to all of the bad press this process has received from Oliver, the company Arcos Dorados, the franchise manager for McDonalds in Latin America, said such a procedure is not practiced in their region. The same, it should be noted, applies to the product in Ireland and the UK, where they use meat from local suppliers. In the United States, however, Burger King and Taco Bell had already abandoned the use of ammonia in their products. The food industry uses ammonium hydroxide as an anti-microbial agent in meats, which has allowed McDonald’s to use otherwise “inedible meat.” Most disturbing of all is the horrifying fact that because ammonium hydroxide is considered part of the “component in a production procedure” by the USDA, consumers may not know when the chemical is in their food. On the official website of McDonald’s, the company claims that their meat is cheap because, while serving many people every day, they are able to buy from their suppliers at a lower price, and offer the best quality products. But if “pink slime” was really the “best quality” that McDonalds can muster in the US, then why were they able do better in Latin America and Europe? More to the point, why can they apparently do better now in the United States? These questions remains unanswered by the franchise which has denied that the decision to change the recipe is related to Jamie Oliver’s campaign. On the site, McDonald’s has admitted that they have abandoned the beef filler from its burger patties. Source: http://politicalblindspot.org http://tinyurl.com/nxu9l5x |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:54:26 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Hamburger chef Jamie Oliver has won his long-fought battle against one of the largest fast food chains in the world – McDonalds. After Oliver showed how McDonald’s hamburgers are made, the franchise finally announced that it will change its recipe. Oliver repeatedly explained to the public, over several years – in documentaries, television shows and interviews – that the fatty parts of beef are “washed” in ammonium hydroxide and used in the filling of the burger. Before this process, according to the presenter, the food is deemed unfit for human consumption. According to the chef and hamburger enthusiast, Jamie Oliver, who has undertaken a war against the fast food industry, “Basically, we’re taking a product that would be sold in the cheapest way for dogs, and after this process, is being given to human beings.” Besides the low quality of the meat, the ammonium hydroxide is harmful to health. Oliver famously coined this the “the pink slime process.” “Why would any sensible human being put meat filled with ammonia in the mouths of their children?” Oliver asked. In one of his colorful demonstrations, Oliver demonstrates to children how nuggets are made. After selecting the best parts of the chicken, the remains (fat, skin and internal organs) are processed for these fried foods. In reply to all of the bad press this process has received from Oliver, the company Arcos Dorados, the franchise manager for McDonalds in Latin America, said such a procedure is not practiced in their region. The same, it should be noted, applies to the product in Ireland and the UK, where they use meat from local suppliers. In the United States, however, Burger King and Taco Bell had already abandoned the use of ammonia in their products. The food industry uses ammonium hydroxide as an anti-microbial agent in meats, which has allowed McDonald’s to use otherwise “inedible meat.” Most disturbing of all is the horrifying fact that because ammonium hydroxide is considered part of the “component in a production procedure” by the USDA, consumers may not know when the chemical is in their food. On the official website of McDonald’s, the company claims that their meat is cheap because, while serving many people every day, they are able to buy from their suppliers at a lower price, and offer the best quality products. But if “pink slime” was really the “best quality” that McDonalds can muster in the US, then why were they able do better in Latin America and Europe? More to the point, why can they apparently do better now in the United States? These questions remains unanswered by the franchise which has denied that the decision to change the recipe is related to Jamie Oliver’s campaign. On the site, McDonald’s has admitted that they have abandoned the beef filler from its burger patties. Source: http://politicalblindspot.org http://tinyurl.com/nxu9l5x That's another reason to eat mo' chicken at Chick Fillet! -- John H. Hope you're having a great day! |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:54:26 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Hamburger chef Jamie Oliver has won his long-fought battle against one of the largest fast food chains in the world – McDonalds. After Oliver showed how McDonald’s hamburgers are made, the franchise finally announced that it will change its recipe. Oliver repeatedly explained to the public, over several years – in documentaries, television shows and interviews – that the fatty parts of beef are “washed” in ammonium hydroxide and used in the filling of the burger. Before this process, according to the presenter, the food is deemed unfit for human consumption. According to the chef and hamburger enthusiast, Jamie Oliver, who has undertaken a war against the fast food industry, “Basically, we’re taking a product that would be sold in the cheapest way for dogs, and after this process, is being given to human beings.” Besides the low quality of the meat, the ammonium hydroxide is harmful to health. Oliver famously coined this the “the pink slime process.” “Why would any sensible human being put meat filled with ammonia in the mouths of their children?” Oliver asked. In one of his colorful demonstrations, Oliver demonstrates to children how nuggets are made. After selecting the best parts of the chicken, the remains (fat, skin and internal organs) are processed for these fried foods. In reply to all of the bad press this process has received from Oliver, the company Arcos Dorados, the franchise manager for McDonalds in Latin America, said such a procedure is not practiced in their region. The same, it should be noted, applies to the product in Ireland and the UK, where they use meat from local suppliers. In the United States, however, Burger King and Taco Bell had already abandoned the use of ammonia in their products. The food industry uses ammonium hydroxide as an anti-microbial agent in meats, which has allowed McDonald’s to use otherwise “inedible meat.” Most disturbing of all is the horrifying fact that because ammonium hydroxide is considered part of the “component in a production procedure” by the USDA, consumers may not know when the chemical is in their food. On the official website of McDonald’s, the company claims that their meat is cheap because, while serving many people every day, they are able to buy from their suppliers at a lower price, and offer the best quality products. But if “pink slime” was really the “best quality” that McDonalds can muster in the US, then why were they able do better in Latin America and Europe? More to the point, why can they apparently do better now in the United States? These questions remains unanswered by the franchise which has denied that the decision to change the recipe is related to Jamie Oliver’s campaign. On the site, McDonald’s has admitted that they have abandoned the beef filler from its burger patties. Source: http://politicalblindspot.org http://tinyurl.com/nxu9l5x Then quitting eating there Krause. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/20/2013 3:28 AM, Tom Nofinger wrote:
On Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:54:26 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote: Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Hamburger chef Jamie Oliver has won his long-fought battle against one of the largest fast food chains in the world – McDonalds. After Oliver showed how McDonald’s hamburgers are made, the franchise finally announced that it will change its recipe. Oliver repeatedly explained to the public, over several years – in documentaries, television shows and interviews – that the fatty parts of beef are “washed” in ammonium hydroxide and used in the filling of the burger. Before this process, according to the presenter, the food is deemed unfit for human consumption. According to the chef and hamburger enthusiast, Jamie Oliver, who has undertaken a war against the fast food industry, “Basically, we’re taking a product that would be sold in the cheapest way for dogs, and after this process, is being given to human beings.” Besides the low quality of the meat, the ammonium hydroxide is harmful to health. Oliver famously coined this the “the pink slime process.” “Why would any sensible human being put meat filled with ammonia in the mouths of their children?” Oliver asked. In one of his colorful demonstrations, Oliver demonstrates to children how nuggets are made. After selecting the best parts of the chicken, the remains (fat, skin and internal organs) are processed for these fried foods. In reply to all of the bad press this process has received from Oliver, the company Arcos Dorados, the franchise manager for McDonalds in Latin America, said such a procedure is not practiced in their region. The same, it should be noted, applies to the product in Ireland and the UK, where they use meat from local suppliers. In the United States, however, Burger King and Taco Bell had already abandoned the use of ammonia in their products. The food industry uses ammonium hydroxide as an anti-microbial agent in meats, which has allowed McDonald’s to use otherwise “inedible meat.” Most disturbing of all is the horrifying fact that because ammonium hydroxide is considered part of the “component in a production procedure” by the USDA, consumers may not know when the chemical is in their food. On the official website of McDonald’s, the company claims that their meat is cheap because, while serving many people every day, they are able to buy from their suppliers at a lower price, and offer the best quality products. But if “pink slime” was really the “best quality” that McDonalds can muster in the US, then why were they able do better in Latin America and Europe? More to the point, why can they apparently do better now in the United States? These questions remains unanswered by the franchise which has denied that the decision to change the recipe is related to Jamie Oliver’s campaign. On the site, McDonald’s has admitted that they have abandoned the beef filler from its burger patties. Source: http://politicalblindspot.org http://tinyurl.com/nxu9l5x Then quitting eating there Krause. If pink slime wasn't wholesome, nutritious and delicious, the USDA would have never allowed it to be a major ingredient in food products. (The USDA; another fine government program tasked with protecting the American people.) |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/20/2013 8:02 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 9/19/13 10:09 PM, wrote: On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:54:26 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Back in the olden days Swift was a vendor for McDonalds and they served real ground beef. As time went by, quality slipped. The burgers taste like cardboard. These days I like BK if I am forced to eat fast food. Roy Rogers was probably the best. RIP There are still a few "Roy's" in the DC metro area. There's one in Solomons, about 20 miles south of here. Very nice "fast food" chicken," not gooped up with thick, fatty crust like the Kentucky Fried variety, and you can still get a decent-looking burger and fix it up the way you want. We had a big event a few weeks ago...the opening of a BK up in Dunkirk. It's drawing big crowds. :) I'm surprised that someone as health conscious as yourself partakes of greasy fried foods. Does your doctor ever order chol. and trig. tests for you? Ask him about it at your next monthly physical. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/20/13 12:01 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:23:37 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 9/19/13 10:09 PM, wrote: On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:54:26 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald?s Burgers ?Unfit for human consumption? Back in the olden days Swift was a vendor for McDonalds and they served real ground beef. As time went by, quality slipped. The burgers taste like cardboard. These days I like BK if I am forced to eat fast food. Roy Rogers was probably the best. RIP There are still a few "Roy's" in the DC metro area. There's one in Solomons, about 20 miles south of here. Very nice "fast food" chicken," not gooped up with thick, fatty crust like the Kentucky Fried variety, and you can still get a decent-looking burger and fix it up the way you want. We had a big event a few weeks ago...the opening of a BK up in Dunkirk. It's drawing big crowds. :) Roy Rogers is owned by McDonalds. I bet it is the same meat then. I wouldn't know, since I don't order burgers at fast food joints. All I said was the burger at Roy's was "decent-looking." The three times a year we end up at Roy's down in Solomons, I order the chicken, although once this past summer, they had some tasty looking cod and I tried it. It was delicious, but it was part of a very short promotion. My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:38:14 -0400, Hank©
wrote: There are still a few "Roy's" in the DC metro area. There's one in Solomons, about 20 miles south of here. Very nice "fast food" chicken," not gooped up with thick, fatty crust like the Kentucky Fried variety, and you can still get a decent-looking burger and fix it up the way you want. We had a big event a few weeks ago...the opening of a BK up in Dunkirk. It's drawing big crowds. :) I'm surprised that someone as health conscious as yourself partakes of greasy fried foods. Does your doctor ever order chol. and trig. tests for you? Ask him about it at your next monthly physical. === Anyone who needs a monthly physical at age 69 1/2 is on their last legs anyway. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/20/13 1:11 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:38:14 -0400, Hank© wrote: There are still a few "Roy's" in the DC metro area. There's one in Solomons, about 20 miles south of here. Very nice "fast food" chicken," not gooped up with thick, fatty crust like the Kentucky Fried variety, and you can still get a decent-looking burger and fix it up the way you want. We had a big event a few weeks ago...the opening of a BK up in Dunkirk. It's drawing big crowds. :) I'm surprised that someone as health conscious as yourself partakes of greasy fried foods. Does your doctor ever order chol. and trig. tests for you? Ask him about it at your next monthly physical. === Anyone who needs a monthly physical at age 69 1/2 is on their last legs anyway. I'll keep that in mind. I see my doctor a couple or three times a year for routine stuff, though I have seen more doctors these past few months than I usually do, what with eye surgery and a colonoscopy. Yes, ScottyWhine, I needed an exam of my tush to let me know I was a perfect ass. You would need no such exam, eh? It's written on your face. Oh, I don't eat fast food burgers. No one's. Haven't for decades. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 9/19/13 10:09 PM, wrote: On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:54:26 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Back in the olden days Swift was a vendor for McDonalds and they served real ground beef. As time went by, quality slipped. The burgers taste like cardboard. These days I like BK if I am forced to eat fast food. Roy Rogers was probably the best. RIP There are still a few "Roy's" in the DC metro area. There's one in Solomons, about 20 miles south of here. Very nice "fast food" chicken," not gooped up with thick, fatty crust like the Kentucky Fried variety, and you can still get a decent-looking burger and fix it up the way you want. We had a big event a few weeks ago...the opening of a BK up in Dunkirk. It's drawing big crowds. :) Best fast food sandwich is a KFC honey baked chicken breast sandwich. Not deep fried, and great bun. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/20/2013 3:56 PM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/19/13 10:09 PM, wrote: On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:54:26 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Back in the olden days Swift was a vendor for McDonalds and they served real ground beef. As time went by, quality slipped. The burgers taste like cardboard. These days I like BK if I am forced to eat fast food. Roy Rogers was probably the best. RIP There are still a few "Roy's" in the DC metro area. There's one in Solomons, about 20 miles south of here. Very nice "fast food" chicken," not gooped up with thick, fatty crust like the Kentucky Fried variety, and you can still get a decent-looking burger and fix it up the way you want. We had a big event a few weeks ago...the opening of a BK up in Dunkirk. It's drawing big crowds. :) Best fast food sandwich is a KFC honey baked chicken breast sandwich. Not deep fried, and great bun. For me it's a Whopper, but only at the BK right down the street. This one manager has been there for years and she runs a very tight ship... Burgers come fresh, hot, crisp, and stacked neatly so you don't have to rebuild the frekin' thing..... Management makes a huge difference, the burgers there always are fresh like a fresh Subway Sandwich... |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 9/20/13 2:51 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:14:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. IMHO the burger itself is secondary to the bun and the dressings on a whopper. It is basically a tossed salad on a bun with a little chunk of char broiled flavoring. Don't waste your money on a double meat whopper. Some are stores better than others and I can't really say why. They are supposed to all use the same recipe but some have fresher produce or something. I ate a lot of free whoppers when I was doing the register surveys and rollouts around Tampa St Pete. Like most restaurants, some are squeaky clean, other are **** holes. Look around the register and as much as you can see from the counter. It will give you a clue. If they don't pull out the register and clean under it, they don't clean much else either. We are infrequent visitors to fast food places, maybe once in every three months. Don't like burgers that much, have seen Popeye's food and find it despicable looking, Kentucky Fried chicken seems covered in fat, read strange things about the "meat" at Taco Bell, et cetera. WaWa has a nice tuna wrap. I use McD's a lot when traveling. Free WIFI. Being over 55, I eat a McDouble, or a grilled onion cheddar and a senior drink. Costs around $1.84 and is less than a 400 calorie meal. I see obese people eating these huge burgers with fries. Maybe 1500 calories? You can get grilled chicken at most places instead of a deep fried batter substance. Most road trips, we split a 12" Subway. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
In article , says...
On 9/20/13 2:51 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:14:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. IMHO the burger itself is secondary to the bun and the dressings on a whopper. It is basically a tossed salad on a bun with a little chunk of char broiled flavoring. Don't waste your money on a double meat whopper. Some are stores better than others and I can't really say why. They are supposed to all use the same recipe but some have fresher produce or something. I ate a lot of free whoppers when I was doing the register surveys and rollouts around Tampa St Pete. Like most restaurants, some are squeaky clean, other are **** holes. Look around the register and as much as you can see from the counter. It will give you a clue. If they don't pull out the register and clean under it, they don't clean much else either. We are infrequent visitors to fast food places, maybe once in every three months. Don't like burgers that much, have seen Popeye's food and find it despicable looking, Kentucky Fried chicken seems covered in fat, read strange things about the "meat" at Taco Bell, et cetera. WaWa has a nice tuna wrap. KFC tastes like eating a salt lick to me. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/20/13 5:32 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 9/20/13 2:51 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:14:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. IMHO the burger itself is secondary to the bun and the dressings on a whopper. It is basically a tossed salad on a bun with a little chunk of char broiled flavoring. Don't waste your money on a double meat whopper. Some are stores better than others and I can't really say why. They are supposed to all use the same recipe but some have fresher produce or something. I ate a lot of free whoppers when I was doing the register surveys and rollouts around Tampa St Pete. Like most restaurants, some are squeaky clean, other are **** holes. Look around the register and as much as you can see from the counter. It will give you a clue. If they don't pull out the register and clean under it, they don't clean much else either. We are infrequent visitors to fast food places, maybe once in every three months. Don't like burgers that much, have seen Popeye's food and find it despicable looking, Kentucky Fried chicken seems covered in fat, read strange things about the "meat" at Taco Bell, et cetera. WaWa has a nice tuna wrap. KFC tastes like eating a salt lick to me. Yeah, they use a lot of salt. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 13:16:08 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
ScottyWhine, I needed an exam of my tush to let me know I was a perfect ass. You would need no such exam, eh? It's written on your face. === Your proof is written all over the internet. What a legacy you leave. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:23:12 -0500, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/20/13 2:51 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:14:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. IMHO the burger itself is secondary to the bun and the dressings on a whopper. It is basically a tossed salad on a bun with a little chunk of char broiled flavoring. Don't waste your money on a double meat whopper. Some are stores better than others and I can't really say why. They are supposed to all use the same recipe but some have fresher produce or something. I ate a lot of free whoppers when I was doing the register surveys and rollouts around Tampa St Pete. Like most restaurants, some are squeaky clean, other are **** holes. Look around the register and as much as you can see from the counter. It will give you a clue. If they don't pull out the register and clean under it, they don't clean much else either. We are infrequent visitors to fast food places, maybe once in every three months. Don't like burgers that much, have seen Popeye's food and find it despicable looking, Kentucky Fried chicken seems covered in fat, read strange things about the "meat" at Taco Bell, et cetera. WaWa has a nice tuna wrap. I use McD's a lot when traveling. Free WIFI. Being over 55, I eat a McDouble, or a grilled onion cheddar and a senior drink. Costs around $1.84 and is less than a 400 calorie meal. I see obese people eating these huge burgers with fries. Maybe 1500 calories? You can get grilled chicken at most places instead of a deep fried batter substance. Most road trips, we split a 12" Subway. Obese people are that way because they can't afford nutritious, healthful, lower -calorie foods. At least that's what the liberals say (including those right here). -- John H. Hope you're having a great day! |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:06:04 -0400, skin a cat wrote:
On 9/20/2013 2:51 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:14:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. IMHO the burger itself is secondary to the bun and the dressings on a whopper. It is basically a tossed salad on a bun with a little chunk of char broiled flavoring. Don't waste your money on a double meat whopper. Some are stores better than others and I can't really say why. They are supposed to all use the same recipe but some have fresher produce or something. I ate a lot of free whoppers when I was doing the register surveys and rollouts around Tampa St Pete. Like most restaurants, some are squeaky clean, other are **** holes. Look around the register and as much as you can see from the counter. It will give you a clue. If they don't pull out the register and clean under it, they don't clean much else either. Two whoppers for five bucks last week at Burger King so I grabbed two and came home to share. Nobody was home, so I at both:) Come on guys, every once in a while is still ok... When I drive down to NC to play a week of golf with my brother, I always get two double whoppers during the ride down. This is maybe two or three times a year. I agree - every once in a while is OK. -- John H. Hope you're having a great day! |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:23:12 -0500, Califbill wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/20/13 2:51 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:14:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. IMHO the burger itself is secondary to the bun and the dressings on a whopper. It is basically a tossed salad on a bun with a little chunk of char broiled flavoring. Don't waste your money on a double meat whopper. Some are stores better than others and I can't really say why. They are supposed to all use the same recipe but some have fresher produce or something. I ate a lot of free whoppers when I was doing the register surveys and rollouts around Tampa St Pete. Like most restaurants, some are squeaky clean, other are **** holes. Look around the register and as much as you can see from the counter. It will give you a clue. If they don't pull out the register and clean under it, they don't clean much else either. We are infrequent visitors to fast food places, maybe once in every three months. Don't like burgers that much, have seen Popeye's food and find it despicable looking, Kentucky Fried chicken seems covered in fat, read strange things about the "meat" at Taco Bell, et cetera. WaWa has a nice tuna wrap. I use McD's a lot when traveling. Free WIFI. Being over 55, I eat a McDouble, or a grilled onion cheddar and a senior drink. Costs around $1.84 and is less than a 400 calorie meal. I see obese people eating these huge burgers with fries. Maybe 1500 calories? You can get grilled chicken at most places instead of a deep fried batter substance. Most road trips, we split a 12" Subway. Obese people are that way because they can't afford nutritious, healthful, lower -calorie foods. At least that's what the liberals say (including those right here). Who said that, liar? |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
"John H" wrote in message ... When I drive down to NC to play a week of golf with my brother, I always get two double whoppers during the ride down. This is maybe two or three times a year. I agree - every once in a while is OK. ---------------------------- I miss the gooey cheeseburgers sold at drive-in movie theaters back in the 60s. Couple of those in the foil bags and an order of fries in paper boxes that were oil stained by the time you made it back to your car. Probably enough goop to block an artery now but damn, they were good. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/22/13 4:25 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
"John H" wrote in message ... When I drive down to NC to play a week of golf with my brother, I always get two double whoppers during the ride down. This is maybe two or three times a year. I agree - every once in a while is OK. ---------------------------- I miss the gooey cheeseburgers sold at drive-in movie theaters back in the 60s. Couple of those in the foil bags and an order of fries in paper boxes that were oil stained by the time you made it back to your car. Probably enough goop to block an artery now but damn, they were good. Hmmm...Bowl Drive In on the Boston Post Road (Orange Avenue) in West Haven? |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Sunday, 22 September 2013 17:30:48 UTC-3, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 9/22/13 4:25 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... When I drive down to NC to play a week of golf with my brother, I always get two double whoppers during the ride down. This is maybe two or three times a year. I agree - every once in a while is OK. ---------------------------- I miss the gooey cheeseburgers sold at drive-in movie theaters back in the 60s. Couple of those in the foil bags and an order of fries in paper boxes that were oil stained by the time you made it back to your car. Probably enough goop to block an artery now but damn, they were good. Hmmm...Bowl Drive In on the Boston Post Road (Orange Avenue) in West Haven? We probably don't have the choices you do south of the border, but up here I find Wendy's burgers to be a step above the other crap. Their chicken sandwiches are tasty too. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/22/13 6:36 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 14:16:08 -0400, John H wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:06:04 -0400, skin a cat wrote: On 9/20/2013 2:51 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:14:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: My wife says Burger King is better than McDonald's for burgers, but that opinion is based upon "tastings" decades ago. IMHO the burger itself is secondary to the bun and the dressings on a whopper. It is basically a tossed salad on a bun with a little chunk of char broiled flavoring. Don't waste your money on a double meat whopper. Some are stores better than others and I can't really say why. They are supposed to all use the same recipe but some have fresher produce or something. I ate a lot of free whoppers when I was doing the register surveys and rollouts around Tampa St Pete. Like most restaurants, some are squeaky clean, other are **** holes. Look around the register and as much as you can see from the counter. It will give you a clue. If they don't pull out the register and clean under it, they don't clean much else either. Two whoppers for five bucks last week at Burger King so I grabbed two and came home to share. Nobody was home, so I at both:) Come on guys, every once in a while is still ok... When I drive down to NC to play a week of golf with my brother, I always get two double whoppers during the ride down. This is maybe two or three times a year. I agree - every once in a while is OK. I think a double is a tad too much chewy meat substitute. I don't mind a half pounder if it is a fresh beef, preferably lightly hand packed. AKA a good "bar burger". I've tried a Five Guys burger a couple of times, and they seem several cuts above the burgers served by competitors such as McDonald's, Wendy's, et cetera, but I am not much of a burger fan. Five Guys, however, does overcook them. And the fries from Five Guys don't taste as if they came from a processing plant, like McDonald's fries do. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/23/13 10:45 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 08:55:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/23/13 1:31 AM, wrote: Harry is saying they won't build a store like that in a really ****ty neighborhood although I would not count on Walmart not doing it. It wouldn't be a super store but it will have the basic necessities at the cheapest prices around. It's not just a "****ty" urban neighborhood problem, it's also a "****ty" rural problem. We have a relative who lives in western North Carolina, near a small city. The two supermarkets in her city aren't so super, and the prices they charge are outrageous, substantially higher than our overpriced markets here in the Washington, D.C., area. They don't have a McDonalds on every corner either so I am not sure where you are going with that. In those kinds of places you can have a garden or barter food from people who do. It is how the country folks survived for the last 8000 years or so. I'm not convinced Wal-Mart has lower grocery prices. Two of the local outlets of national chains publish ads and flyers with "shopping baskets" full of the usual foods and their prices, and while Wal-Mart is cheaper on a few items, in the end both of the national grocery chain stores beat Wal-Mart's prices by an average of 20%. About a year ago, when visiting relatives in Florida, I was dragged, kicking and screaming, into a nearly new Wal-Mart super store in their town. It had a complete supermarket inside, and a Wal-Mart liquor store attached to its side. Huge store. I was not impressed with the variety or quality of the produce or fresh beef and chicken products I saw there, the grocery side of the store was not that clean, and the shelves were not being replenished properly. I was going to cook a few meals for everyone, so I drove over to the Publix, a huge store, too, but with much nicer fresh goods, an active bakery, better prices than Wal-Mart, and fully stocked shelves. I'm sure Wal-Mart will be selling all the chicken we're going to be importing from China, and I'll bet the Waltons get an exemption from labeling the country of origin of that poultry. Let the buyer beware. Walmart will beat Publix on price if you shop but I agree it is not as nice. You get what you pay for. If you are really that poor you will find the best nutrition for your dollar tho assuming you understand how. I threw a bone to Michelle and you are still arguing with me. I guess you can't help it. Send her a letter. I guess I really shouldn't be surprised anymore by the lack of compassion on the right for those who are poor or the lack of understanding of the challenges the poor face just to eke out an existence. Around here, for fresh food items, Wal-Mart does not beat out the national chain stores. It's not really the issue, anyway. The fact that there isn't a McDonald's on every corner isn't any sort of equivalence for the fact that both urban and rural poor do not have the ability to make what dollars they have go farther in efforts to feed healthy foods to their families because they don't have access to supermarkets that sell healthy food at reasonable prices. If all you can get to is a little corner bodega that sells mostly fatty, salty "convenience" food and a little bit of fresh food, then you are going to pay through the nose for it and it would not be healthy food for your family. And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the choices the latter have will be limited further. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/23/2013 10:45 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 08:55:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/23/13 1:31 AM, wrote: Harry is saying they won't build a store like that in a really ****ty neighborhood although I would not count on Walmart not doing it. It wouldn't be a super store but it will have the basic necessities at the cheapest prices around. It's not just a "****ty" urban neighborhood problem, it's also a "****ty" rural problem. We have a relative who lives in western North Carolina, near a small city. The two supermarkets in her city aren't so super, and the prices they charge are outrageous, substantially higher than our overpriced markets here in the Washington, D.C., area. They don't have a McDonalds on every corner either so I am not sure where you are going with that. In those kinds of places you can have a garden or barter food from people who do. It is how the country folks survived for the last 8000 years or so. AYKM!?? I'm not convinced Wal-Mart has lower grocery prices. Two of the local outlets of national chains publish ads and flyers with "shopping baskets" full of the usual foods and their prices, and while Wal-Mart is cheaper on a few items, in the end both of the national grocery chain stores beat Wal-Mart's prices by an average of 20%. About a year ago, when visiting relatives in Florida, I was dragged, kicking and screaming, into a nearly new Wal-Mart super store in their town. It had a complete supermarket inside, and a Wal-Mart liquor store attached to its side. Huge store. I was not impressed with the variety or quality of the produce or fresh beef and chicken products I saw there, the grocery side of the store was not that clean, and the shelves were not being replenished properly. I was going to cook a few meals for everyone, so I drove over to the Publix, a huge store, too, but with much nicer fresh goods, an active bakery, better prices than Wal-Mart, and fully stocked shelves. I'm sure Wal-Mart will be selling all the chicken we're going to be importing from China, and I'll bet the Waltons get an exemption from labeling the country of origin of that poultry. Let the buyer beware. Walmart will beat Publix on price if you shop but I agree it is not as nice. You get what you pay for. If you are really that poor you will find the best nutrition for your dollar tho assuming you understand how. I threw a bone to Michelle and you are still arguing with me. I guess you can't help it. Send her a letter. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
|
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the choices the latter have will be limited further. --------------------------- First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years .... about $4 billion per year. The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order to cut back on massive abuse of the program. BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control: http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423 |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the choices the latter have will be limited further. --------------------------- First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years .... about $4 billion per year. The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order to cut back on massive abuse of the program. BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control: http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423 The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them. Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the Republicans to crap on the poorest among us. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/23/13 5:22 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:44:50 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the choices the latter have will be limited further. --------------------------- First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years .... about $4 billion per year. The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order to cut back on massive abuse of the program. BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control: http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423 The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them. Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the Republicans to crap on the poorest among us. If they have 28 democrats, including BOTH of yours, there must be something else going here besides just feeding the poor. Maybe I will go look at Thomas and see just what is really in this bill. Those 28 votes in the Senate were on an Amendment, not on the House bill. The House bill will not pass the Senate. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/23/2013 4:44 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the choices the latter have will be limited further. --------------------------- First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years .... about $4 billion per year. The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order to cut back on massive abuse of the program. BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control: http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423 The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them. Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the Republicans to crap on the poorest among us. You have a way with words. Unfortunately it's not a good way ,or an honest one. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/23/13 8:30 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:58:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/23/13 5:22 PM, wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:44:50 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the choices the latter have will be limited further. --------------------------- First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years .... about $4 billion per year. The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order to cut back on massive abuse of the program. BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control: http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423 The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them. Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the Republicans to crap on the poorest among us. If they have 28 democrats, including BOTH of yours, there must be something else going here besides just feeding the poor. Maybe I will go look at Thomas and see just what is really in this bill. Those 28 votes in the Senate were on an Amendment, not on the House bill. The House bill will not pass the Senate. That is the problem with KOS, they don't put a date on their articles. Have you actually looked at how the house is saving that $39b? (actually a CBO projection that may not be true anyway) It is H.R 3102 Actually, no. I rarely read the details about the Crazy Republican bills emanating from the U.S. House. When the GOP majority in the House stops terrorizing the country, I'll pay a bit more attention to them. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On 9/23/13 8:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 20:35:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/23/13 8:30 PM, wrote: Have you actually looked at how the house is saving that $39b? (actually a CBO projection that may not be true anyway) It is H.R 3102 Actually, no. I rarely read the details about the Crazy Republican bills emanating from the U.S. House. When the GOP majority in the House stops terrorizing the country, I'll pay a bit more attention to them. You really need to read legislation before you approve of it or condemn it. Unfortunately congress has the same opinion you do. That is how we get so much bad legislation. Poppycock. If the House GOP virtually unanimously puts forth a piece of purely political legislation, I pretty much know it is nonsense without reading it. |
So *that* is why those burgers taste like...crap...
On Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:54:26 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption” Hamburger chef Jamie Oliver has won his long-fought battle against one of the largest fast food chains in the world – McDonalds. After Oliver showed how McDonald’s hamburgers are made, the franchise finally announced that it will change its recipe. Oliver repeatedly explained to the public, over several years – in documentaries, television shows and interviews – that the fatty parts of beef are “washed” in ammonium hydroxide and used in the filling of the burger. Before this process, according to the presenter, the food is deemed unfit for human consumption. According to the chef and hamburger enthusiast, Jamie Oliver, who has undertaken a war against the fast food industry, “Basically, we’re taking a product that would be sold in the cheapest way for dogs, and after this process, is being given to human beings.” Besides the low quality of the meat, the ammonium hydroxide is harmful to health. Oliver famously coined this the “the pink slime process.” “Why would any sensible human being put meat filled with ammonia in the mouths of their children?” Oliver asked. In one of his colorful demonstrations, Oliver demonstrates to children how nuggets are made. After selecting the best parts of the chicken, the remains (fat, skin and internal organs) are processed for these fried foods. In reply to all of the bad press this process has received from Oliver, the company Arcos Dorados, the franchise manager for McDonalds in Latin America, said such a procedure is not practiced in their region. The same, it should be noted, applies to the product in Ireland and the UK, where they use meat from local suppliers. In the United States, however, Burger King and Taco Bell had already abandoned the use of ammonia in their products. The food industry uses ammonium hydroxide as an anti-microbial agent in meats, which has allowed McDonald’s to use otherwise “inedible meat.” Most disturbing of all is the horrifying fact that because ammonium hydroxide is considered part of the “component in a production procedure” by the USDA, consumers may not know when the chemical is in their food. On the official website of McDonald’s, the company claims that their meat is cheap because, while serving many people every day, they are able to buy from their suppliers at a lower price, and offer the best quality products. But if “pink slime” was really the “best quality” that McDonalds can muster in the US, then why were they able do better in Latin America and Europe? More to the point, why can they apparently do better now in the United States? These questions remains unanswered by the franchise which has denied that the decision to change the recipe is related to Jamie Oliver’s campaign. On the site, McDonald’s has admitted that they have abandoned the beef filler from its burger patties. Source: http://politicalblindspot.org http://tinyurl.com/nxu9l5x 4 tax liens / 2 bankruptcies / Dr-Dr-Dr By the way Krausie, you still got that Hatteras? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com