BUBBA!!!! Thankee for the vindication. ROFL! (Have you tried my chili, kiddo?)
Not yet, but it is in my future. I like chili and I like black beans. I'm planning to omit the green pepper (don't like bell peppers) and add more chili powder and cayenne pepper. Not sure I'll retain the "chili" name of the dish, either. ;-)
My usual comment is that I find it strange to have both ground and diced beef in the same chili.
It gives a range of textures. It may not be to one's preference, but strange it ain't, at least not to me. I'm reminded of gazpacho, which often consists of puréed or very finely chopped vegetables, as well as the same vegetables diced.
We're talking about chili, not gazpacho. Large variations in texture is not normally considered a plus.
You are kind of contradicting yourself. First, you say you find it strange to have different textures in chili; now you say it is not normally considered a plus. If it is strange, then who has been considering all those textures for pluses or minuses and defining them as normal or not? Are you sure you are not mixing up personal expectations or preferences and statistics?
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:48:02 +0200, [email hidden] (Victor Sack)
Quoted message said:
Damsel in dis Dress said:
BUBBA!!!! Thankee for the vindication. ROFL! (Have you tried my chili, kiddo?)
Not yet, but it is in my future. I like chili and I like black beans. I'm planning to omit the green pepper (don't like bell peppers) and add more chili powder and cayenne pepper. Not sure I'll retain the "chili" name of the dish, either. ;-)
Oh, so you're one of THEM! I see how it is now. Whatcha gonna call it? Black bean slop? ROFL!
This looks scrumptious! Wonder what we'd do with the rest of the bottle of champagne. Do they sell it in mini bottles?
BTW: Yes, but you'll probably have to hunt for it.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
the recipe I use calls for a full bottle of champagne. What you do is add it in two parts and reduce it to a syrup each time. I just use leftover champagne (whatever the amount) for that dish. It's a great way to dispose of champage from a party the night before.
Hmm I don't understand the concept of leftover champagne <G>
LOL! I totally understand, but even the impossible happens from time to time. No need to sacrifice a perfectly good bottle of fresh champagne as a mere ingredient.
😉
--
A husband is someone who takes out the trash and gives the impression he just cleaned the whole house.
This looks scrumptious! Wonder what we'd do with the rest of the bottle of champagne. Do they sell it in mini bottles?
the recipe I use calls for a full bottle of champagne. What you do is add it in two parts and reduce it to a syrup each time. I just use leftover champagne (whatever the amount) for that dish. It's a great way to dispose of champage from a party the night before.
I have a recipe for a spit roasted lobster that is basted in champagne and butter, with a basting pan to catch the juices as they drop off, and the contents of which are turned into a sauce to serve with the lobster, Homard a la Broche. -- JL
the recipe I use calls for a full bottle of champagne. What you do is add it in two parts and reduce it to a syrup each time. I just use leftover champagne (whatever the amount) for that dish. It's a great way to dispose of champage from a party the night before.
I have a recipe for a spit roasted lobster that is basted in champagne and butter, with a basting pan to catch the juices as they drop off, and the contents of which are turned into a sauce to serve with the lobster, Homard a la Broche.
Spit roasted lobster? How do you get them on the spit? 😉
--
A husband is someone who takes out the trash and gives the impression he just cleaned the whole house.
This looks scrumptious! Wonder what we'd do with the rest of the bottle of champagne. Do they sell it in mini bottles?
the recipe I use calls for a full bottle of champagne. What you do is add it in two parts and reduce it to a syrup each time. I just use leftover champagne (whatever the amount) for that dish. It's a great way to dispose of champage from a party the night before.
I have a recipe for a spit roasted lobster that is basted in champagne and butter, with a basting pan to catch the juices as they drop off, and the contents of which are turned into a sauce to serve with the lobster, Homard a la Broche. -- JL
It gives a range of textures. It may not be to one's preference, but strange it ain't, at least not to me. I'm reminded of gazpacho, which often consists of puréed or very finely chopped vegetables, as well as the same vegetables diced.
We're talking about chili, not gazpacho. Large variations in texture is not normally considered a plus.
You are kind of contradicting yourself. First, you say you find it strange to have different textures in chili; now you say it is not normally considered a plus. If it is strange, then who has been considering all those textures for pluses or minuses and defining them as normal or not? Are you sure you are not mixing up personal expectations or preferences and statistics?
There's two things:
1. My personal reaction the texture.
2. The general standard for the dish.
It could well be that in general, a variation in texture is considered a plus, but that I don't personally care for it. However, in this case I am agreeing with the general consensus (or at least what I perceive to be the general consensus).
Brian
-- If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up. -- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)