Friday, November 19, 2004

Thursday, November 18, 2004

Fajitaficated tuna? In a sandwich? Never!

I'm not adventurous when it comes to lunch. Ham on white, some mustard, chips (crisps), a Coke. That is all I need; that is all I ask. Usually. Today though I took a walk on the wild side. When the sandwich man came around, I peered into his plastic bag and decided on the Tuna Fajita sandwich.

I gambled and lost.

The sandwich is, in a word, gross. I'm trying to trace down the reason for its grossness.

Looking at the ingredients list reveals some clues. Listed first is tuna -- good sign. The next ingredient is fajita -- problem. I was always under the impression that fajita is an ends, not a means. You can't add a li'l' bit o' fajita essence to something, like coffee, to give it that extra something. Fajita is the end product: strips of marinated meat wrapped up in a tortilla. So, by definition, fajita can't be added as an ingredient to dish because fajita isn't an ingredient at all!

Perhaps they meant the spices that go into the marinade for the meat. Sure, that would make more sense, but not enough to convince me. The spices that go into fajitas really aren't all that different from other Mexican dishes. The key element is the process of cooking the marinated meat and then wrapping it in the tortilla. So, fajita is more of a process than it is a mish mash of spices.

Now, could you call the process of making a fajita fajitafication? Sort of like the process of making shrimp scampi is scampification? Has the tuna been fajitaficated prior to being put in the sandwich?

In any case, this sandwich has thoroughly confused yours truly. It is definitely not a candidate for the Salvador Deli.

The Cubs of yore

Ah yore... That sure was a good time wasn't it. Maybe not as good as olden days, or as good as days gone by, but days of yore were always good days indeed.

The Cubs of yore were hot. Hotter than your average tamele in fact. Here is a list of the hottest Cubs players of all time.

All of the 1984 Cubs, some of whom are listed below
Manny Trillo, Dallas Greene
Goose Gossage, Tuffy Rhodes
Chico Walker, Ryne (Das Ryne Valley) Sandberg
Bobby Dernier, The Sarge
Hector Villanueva, Delino (Double D) Deshields
Shawon (o-meter or Schwing) Dunston
Michael Tucker, the sweet sweet swing of,
Ron Cey, "Livin' Large" Lloyd McClendon
Jody Davis, Glenallen "Scotty" Hill
Keith Morland, Wavin' Wendy Kim - coach
Vance Law, John Vukovich - coach

Honorable mention
Fred "Creaky Bones" "Nail in the coffin" "Walkin' Dead" McGriff
Matt "Fatt" Stairs - wanted to erect a Krispy Creme doughnuts stand next to his position

Wednesday, November 17, 2004

Who cares about a lously grand jury indictment?

This is really unbelievable.

House Republicans are looking to change a rule that restricts members from holding leadership positions if they are under grand jury indictments. The change would allow a member to hold a leadership position.

The move is prompted by the impending state grand jury indictment of House Majority Leader Tom Delay (R-TX). It is alledged that Delay illegally used funds to promote a state redistricting plans. Delay was also admonished by the ethics committee after asking federal aviation authorities to track a plane full of renegade Texas Democrat legislators last year. Three political operatives closely associated with Delay are currently under indictment.

Who came up with the rule? Well, Republicans did, about a decade ago, when Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL), chairman of the House Ways-and-Means Committee, was under indictment.

But, now that one of their own is suspected of malefesance, well, time for a change. Hey, it is only a state grand jury indictment. What's the big deal?

Oh yeah, and Delay gerrymandered the Texas districts to help the GOP win a larger majority in the House. What I love about this is that House GOP members aren't even hiding the fact that the redistricting efforts of Delay are behind this.

I guess when you are in power, you can do whatever the hell you want to do, no matter how unethical, underhanded or devious... or illegal.

A Republican balanced budget amendment

I don't have enough time to do the requisite research, but can anyone tell me how it is possible that Republicans proposed a balanced budget amendment in the mid-1990s and then went to on approve a budget written by a Republican president that sent federal spending into orbit while at the same time cutting taxes necessary to pay for it all?