jhlurie

I just tasted the Island Fruit 7UP Plus, which legally probably can't be called Diet Soda (because it includes Fruit Juice), but which IS relatively low-cal and low carb. The main sweetener is Splenda. Its VERY good. Not an exaggeration. Just plain excellent. It tastes kind of like a good Champagne Cola. And FINALLY someone has made a Splenda soda where the sweetness is properly balanced--it's sweet for just a moment but not overly sweet. There's no aftertaste.

This is just your classic sweet/savory divide. Substitute wheat toast for the bagels and see if it proves out. Okay, maybe that's not a great idea, since in that case the savory people may instead opt to have nothing.

so how come everytime i go there my health gets violated. (i've literally been 3 times in 5 years, because everytime i go I wind up with some sort of intestinal distress.) ← For me, it was twice in two years, a few years back, and since then I've given up on Taco Bell forever. I have a cast-iron stomach normally too, so it was even more puzzling. I also live in an area where a lot of authentic mexican has appeared in recent years, so really TB suffers in comparison. TB is on my "agree to disagree" list with my fellow eGers though, since a few people who's opinions I really respect here seem to really love it. One explained to me that it's not that he really thought of TB as mexican food, it's more that it is its own thing that's kind of like mexican. I can kind of get that, since I like the basic McDonald's cheeseburger quite a bit and yet don't really think of it as a "real" hamburger. Getting back to the core topic here--restaurants where we've decided we'll trust enough to at least try anything new--I'll add Chipotle to my personal list. I'd never tried it until recently, but agree with ludja that it's just good across the board. It's a simple concept, done well. It's probably only marginally more "real mexican" than Taco Bell, and like ludju I've got real taquerias as an alternative, but what Chipolte does works.

Ha! Are you accusing SobaAddict of playing mind games with his teasers?

But isn't it the dolsot which makes the rice at the bottom all crispy? I love that part of this dish. That wouldn't make it essential, of course, but it would perhaps be a good motivating force for people to try and find a substitute. Can this dish be done with some other kind of stone bowl?

Alright. The downside is that even with Larroquette it was pretty unfunny. The upside is that this particular episode had a much greater quantity of actual "foodie" content--the whole argument about living well vs. longer, the scene in the farmer's market, the class conflict in the kitchen (although the REAL Bourdain would have had Hispanic cooks as well as dishwashers), the pecking order in the kitchen, the practical joking, and most especially the whole Bourdainesque scene/voiceover about how chefs hate picky eaters but love people who appreciate food. It just needs to be funnier.

Okay... John Larroquette is on KC tonight? This will be the real benchmark. If the show can underwhelm us with a guy this funny as the guest, then we'll know it's hopeless.

Corn on Pizza? Sell it in Fort Lee (for those of you from elsewhere, that's also NJ). If the Brazilians don't eat it, the Koreans and Japanese will!

Soba has special foodblog powers to automatically know the best dates for people to start. You're likely to be Hurricane free this week, yes?

To be fair, we have to remember that this was a Pilot. A lot of "setup" had to occur to put everything in play. In future episodes, the show won't need to waste time, or exposition, placing the characters in this setting, or introducing them. As for the "shock value" thing, that's more because this is FOX than because it's American.

It wasn't horrible. I'm just not sure it was Bourdain. The only part which really seemed to invoke his spirit was the intro voiceover. I haven't given up on it or anything, I'm just having to see this like it's an alternate universe or something.

Like Jennifer I'm going to play devil's advocate, although from a different direction. It's been my perception that Martha's post-prison attitude is something of a P.R. construct. What she does or says behind closed doors may not even remotely be the same. It's kind of like when you see some public figure go onto Saturday Night Live after they've been in some kind of scandal, in a P.R arranged stunt to make it look like they can take being made fun of. What's actually happening is that they are taking control of the situation and making sure that they set the parameters for that mockery. It's spin control, pure and simple. I'm not saying it's wrong, but it IS a manipulation. Martha is doing much the same only on a larger scale. It's true she's making lemons from lemonade, in public, and yes... in a sense that pretty admirable, but that doesn't really speak to what she thinks (or acts like) off camera. Personally I don't think what she does off camera is our business, but that doubt about her sincerity is just enough for me to hold back a piece of my potential admiration. Can we admire her for simply putting up a front if she doesn't actually believe it?

Adam can't hog all of the glory. You're a native Scot binky?

Well, the Early Bird is obviously an attempt to reach a certain market segment who otherwise wouldn't come near the place. Personally I'm not all that snobby about Early Birds. The restaurant business is competitive these days. I suppose they figure that even the Early Birders might get curious about the rest of the food and come back. And face it... they are in a cursed location. They need to be clever. While things aren't as bad as they were when River Gorge was there--when the road crews left absolutely no access--there's still the problem that from the main road it's not clear to the casual passer-byer how to get to the place. So if they have to try and draw some of the Seniors living across the street (there's a big senior citizen housing development literally across the way), then so be it. If the quality is good, god bless 'em.

Had a short visit at Pop Burger yesterday, and it indeed is quite interesting. For those under the impression that they are pseudo-White Castles, that couldn't be further from the truth. As Eddie said, they indeed are char-grilled, on superior rolls, with very good quality fixins. Mine were a TINY bit dry, but I was there a bit early and so they may not have been in the swing of things. They were good enough that I've resolved to return if I'm in that neighborhood again.

First it was Puffy. Then Sean "Puffy" Combs. Then P. Diddy, which I think stood for "Puffy Diddy". Then Sean "P. Diddy" Combs. Then just Diddy. Next up, he'll just be a glyph, like Prince was at one point. As for Martha, did she really think overexposing herself like this was the cure for her post-prison PR needs? This, with the MarthApprentice show on top of it? (and yes, we should probably have a seperate topic for that--we had one for the food aspects of The Donald's show as well)

I think the value of good writing is quite clear. It demonstrates education and intelligence. While people can posess those qualities and still be bad writers, the percentages favor the good writers. Of course I'm supposing that education and intelligence have some connection to "taste". I'll admit that's a thornier part of the argument. Then again, its probably easier to prove than the opposite. Personally, my ideal review would actually be written, in stages, with input from more than one individual. The first (and perhaps second) visit would be anonymous, presumably by some trusted confederate(s) of the writer. A follow-up visit would be done by the "known" writer, which would provide the opportunites which Steven suggests exist in that scenario. In essense, you'd get the benefit of both experiences.

I think that other place has actually been there for years, they just recently renovated. It's called something like "Sabor".

Not all raw milk cheese is as strong as what CharityCase is describing--I've had quite a number of mild ones. It's hard to recommend specific ones though, because for legal reasons they are almost always local products.

Martha! Live! Burnett! Wow! Oprah? Not worried.

Things to remember about the Brazil Day fair: --Yellow and green napkins are apparently enough to dress most Brazilian women under 30... --The bigger the (corn) kernel, the bigger the piece which gets stuck between your teeth... --The really COOL hangar steak guys spin the hangar thing. Really. --Those fried croquette thingies are approximately 1000% better if the girl just plucked them out of the oil five seconds ago. --I'm not sure if there are actually 50,000 Brazilians in Newark, but it seemed like there were that many on that street. We walked through about 7 blocks of crowds, turned the corner where the band was set up and saw what had to be at least 10 more blocks of the same in the other direction.

Okay, I'll take the bait. And what reviews or reviewers should be treated "more equally" than others? ← "More equally" appears to be your phrase, not Steven's. As Steven says, I think you can make a variety of judgments about a review right off the bat. I'll listen more to good writers than bad ones. I'll tend to believe people who fact check over people with obviously incorrect information in their articles. I'll appreciate a writer who has specific knowledge of a kind of food over a complete novice (and if I know the genre or ethnicity of the food myself on an expert level, it's often pretty apparent whether or not the writer does as well). On occasion, I'll give some extra weight to a review based on the publication it appears in. It's true that most of us trust our own senses over anyone else's. I'll walk into plenty of restaurants without ever seeing a review, if I like the smell, the look, the menu, etc. Heck, due to being involved in this board that's almost become a habit. In many cases a review is just additional information. It's not supposed to replace that process. Except... ...one last variable is economics. A review of an expensive restaurant often fulfills a different purpose than one of a more economical one. Many people think twice before going to an expensive restaurant--they see it as more of an investment. In turn, it becomes more important to verify (and rank) the reviews. It's all well and good to say that things should be equal until you "decide for yourself", but that's a luxury some people can't afford. If you are someone budgeted to go to only one "fancy" restaurant a year, for example, the process of reading reviews will be much more important to you than someone who can go to any restaurant they choose on a lark. You HAVE to give weight to the various reviews, because unless they are all unanimous, you are taking a risk no matter what. You are going to have to make a decision without tasting the food yourself, so you really ARE better off deciding who's the best person to believe. That's just reality, at least for some people.

I've gone once now, and I plan to go again at some point. It's an interesting place--not world class or anything but pretty good. The prices SEEM high, but the portions are fairly huge so it all balances out. They even have an "early bird" special ($10 range, but only before 6PM), which oddly enough, features all non-Spanish dishes, but of seemingly good quality (and again, huge size). Also, the Sangria is in the place's name for a reason--they've got about 10 different kinds, including odd flavors like "Watermelon Sangria", "Champagne Sangria", and "Peach Sangria" (as well as the more traditional Red and White varieties).

I was actually pretty impressed with the place. If it's quality has fallen, then it's a real shame, but I was still pretty happy. The roast pork WAS a tiny bit inconsistent. About a third of it was a bit dry, but the rest was, as Jason reports, quite succulent. The dry part seemed to be in the middle, while the edges were the moist parts. Beef and Chicken with Celery in XO sauce was indeed great (although I'm never attempting to eat one of those rice bird's nests again!). Celery can be one of the most disgusting vegetables in the world if it sits around, but the stuff in this dish tasted just picked (or at least recently picked). The beef was also sauteed with a very light hand, which I appreciated.

Is this a new Jello spectrum? I recall grape on the top of the one I last saw.