Tag Archives: Texas

Friday Funny – Yankee Judging a Texas Chili Cook-off

15 Feb

Yankee Judging a Texas Chili Cook-off
Please note, Judge #3 was an inexperienced Chili taster named Frank, who was visiting from Boston.

Frank: ‘Recently, I was honored to be selected as a judge at a chili cook-off. The original person called in sick at the last moment and I happened to be standing right there at the judge’s table, asking for directions to the Coors Light truck, when the call came in. I was assured by the other two judges (Native Texans) that the chili wouldn’t be all that spicy and, besides, they told me I could have free beer during the tasting, so I accepted and became Judge #3.

Here are the scorecard notes from the event:

CHILI # 1 – MIKE’S MANIAC MONSTER CHILI

Judge # 1 — A little too heavy on the tomato. Amusing kick.
Judge # 2 — Nice, smooth tomato flavor. Very mild.
Judge # 3 (Frank) — Holy crap, what the hell is this stuff? You could remove dried paint from your driveway. Took me two beers to put the flames out. I hope that’s the worst one. These Texans are crazy.

CHILI # 2 – AUSTIN’S AFTERBURNER CHILI

Judge # 1 — Smoky, with a hint of pork. Slight jalapeno tang.
Judge # 2 — Exciting BBQ flavor, needs more peppers to be taken seriously.
Judge # 3 — Warning! Danger! Keep this out of the reach of children. I’m not sure what I’m supposed to taste besides pain. I had to wave off two people who wanted to give me the Heimlich maneuver. They had to rush in more beer when they saw the look on my face.

CHILI # 3 – FRED’S FAMOUS BURN DOWN THE BARN CHILI

Judge # 1 — Excellent firehouse chili. Great kick.
Judge # 2 — A bit salty, good use of peppers.
Judge # 3 — Call the EPA. I’ve located a uranium spill. My nose feels like I have been snorting Drano. Everyone knows the routine by now. Get me more beer before I ignite. Barmaid pounded me on the back, now my backbone is in the front part of my chest. I’m getting shit-faced from all of the beer.

CHILI # 4 – BUBBA’S BLACK MAGIC

Judge # 1 — Black bean chili with almost no spice. Disappointing.
Judge # 2 — Hint of lime in the black beans. Good side dish for fish or other mild foods, not much of a chili.
Judge # 3 — I felt something scraping across my tongue, but was unable to taste it. Is it possible to burn out taste buds? Sally, the beer maid, was standing behind me with fresh refills. This 300 lb. bitch is starting to look HOT … just like this nuclear waste I’m eating! Is chili an aphrodisiac?

CHILI # 5 – LISA’S LEGAL LIP REMOVER

Judge # 1 — Meaty, strong chili. Cayenne peppers freshly ground, adding considerable kick. Very impressive.
Judge # 2 — Chili using shredded beef, could use more tomato. Must admit the cayenne peppers make a strong statement.
Judge # 3 — My ears are ringing, sweat is pouring off my forehead and I can no longer focus my eyes. I farted, and four people behind me needed paramedics. The contestant seemed offended when I told her that her chili may have given me permanent brain damage. Sally saved my tongue from bleeding by pouring beer directly on it from the pitcher. I wonder if I’m burning my lips off. It really ticks me off that the other judges asked me to stop screaming. Screw them.

CHILI # 6 – VERA’S VERY VEGETARIAN VARIETY

Judge # 1 — Thin yet bold vegetarian variety chili. Good balance of spices and peppers.
Judge # 2 — The best yet. Aggressive use of peppers, onions, garlic. Superb.
Judge # 3 — My intestines are now a straight pipe filled with gaseous, sulfuric flames. I crapped on myself when I farted, and I’m worried it will eat through the chair. No one seems inclined to stand behind me except for Sally. Can’t feel my lips OR my face anymore. I need to wipe my ass with a snow cone.

CHILI # 7 – SUSAN’S SCREAMING SENSATION CHILI

Judge # 1 — A mediocre chili with too much reliance on canned peppers.
Judge # 2 — Ho hum, tastes as if the chef literally threw in a can of chili peppers at the last moment. **I should take note that I am worried about judge number 3. He appears to be in a bit of distress as he is cursing uncontrollably.
Judge # 3 — You could put a grenade in my mouth, pull the pin, and I wouldn’t feel a thing. I’ve lost sight in one eye, and the world sounds like it is made of rushing water. My shirt is covered with chili, which slid unnoticed out of my mouth. My pants are full of lava to match my shirt. At least during the autopsy, they’ll know what killed me. I’ve decided to stop breathing. It’s too painful. Screw it; I’m not getting any oxygen anyway. If I need air, I’ll just suck it in through the 4-inch hole in my stomach.

CHILI # 8 – BIG TOM’S TOENAIL CURLING CHILI

Judge # 1 — The perfect ending, this is a nice blend chili. Not too bold but spicy enough to declare its existence.
Judge # 2 — This final entry is a good, balanced chili. Neither mild nor hot.. Sorry to see that most of it was lost when Judge #3 farted, passed out, fell over and pulled the chili pot down on top of himself. Not sure if he’s going to make it. Poor feller, wonder how he’d have reacted when we started tasting some really hot chili?
Judge # 3 – -No Report.

Advertisements

Bad Reasons for Laws: If It Saves One Life

23 Jan

Life happens all around us and sometimes it isn’t very good. News of someone losing their life is almost daily occurrence for most people. We all process this in our own ways. Politicians and pundits however take death and spin it to advance their ideology. After all we the people don’t want people to die, or at the worst die in vain do we? No we don’t and if the law they propose saves just one life then it’s worth it. Is it really?

One of the more recent local examples of this reasoning was when “conservative” Texas Governor Rick Perry tried to force women to take a vaccination for the  Human papillomavirus (HPV)[1]. Back in 2007, Governor Perry decided to by-step the Texas legislature and issue an executive order making it mandatory for girls starting int the sixth grade to get the HPV vaccine Gardasil, made by Merck & Co.

Perry’s reasoning was based on “if it saves one life”. Durring the 2012 US Presidential Republican Primary debate, Perry said the following:

“Did we do it right? Should we have talked to the legislature?” he asked. “Probably so, but at the end of the day, I will always err on the side of saving lives.”[3]

Fortunately the outcry of the public prompted the Texas legislature to create and pass a bill overridding his executive order. Perry did not veto the bill knowing his veto would be overturned by the legislature. While Perry might have had the best interest of the girls and women of Texas in mind, the execution of that interest was almost as poor as his reasoning.

If people used this type of reasoning to create legislation and laws in order to make the world a “safer” place then we would all live in some type of self contained “safe” bubble. People would survive but no one would thrive. Federal, state or other local legislation, laws or even dictatorial type executive orders should never, ever be created or enforced by either political party just to “save one life”. While the emotional outcry for one life lost in some tragic manner seems to demand an emotional response, wiser people know a knee-jerk creation of legislation, laws or executive orders doesn’t bring about real solutions. More often than not it creates more problems than it solves.

 

Resources

  1. Human papillomavirus – Wikipedia
  2. Texas Gov. Orders Anti-Cancer Vaccine – Washington Post
  3. Perry in first GOP debate: ‘I kind of feel like a piñata here at the party’ – KHOU

Bad Reasons for Laws: Think of the Children

21 Jan

Starting off this series on bad reasons for laws is one most of  us have heard plenty of lately: think of the children! The idea of course is to strike at many people’s inherit desire to protect innocent children. Most people want no harm to come to their children or any others. Children possess the hopeful potential to make this world better than it is and we try to protect and nurture that hope. However, there is a fine line between showing a child as an example for a law and exploiting them for it.

With the tragedy of Sandy Hook Elementary politicians and pundits began their crusade for or against new laws by pulling on the emotions of Americans. Those against gun rights and those against gun control both have used children to pull people toward their side. However, the most egregious displays has to be when President Obama had children surround him when signing, not a law, but toothless executive orders for more government intrusion on gun ownership.

Children exploited by President Obama for more government gun restrictions.

Agree or not with more restrictive gun laws or rules, using children in this manner is down right deplorable. Later the White House released the videos of these same children reading letters to the President on the issue. I honestly don’t know which is worse.

On the other side the NRA used the President’s children in a video about the President’s hypocrisy for more gun rights restrictions by the federal government. While not quite as bad as President Obama’s use of children, the NRA could have make their point without using directly using the President’s children in their video.

Both sides think trotting out children is a useful strategy in swaying public opinion. Even on more local issues, like seat belt laws. Who would ever be against requiring children to be safe on today’s roads with all the horrible drivers? Apparently in Texas even those who say they are conservative like to use kids. Case in point, Texas State Senator Dan Patrick. While Dan has been conservative in the past before becoming a State Senator, his credentials have become tarnished more and more. In 2010 Dan backed a new law which added three years and over a foot and a half to the requirements for mandatory booster seats for children.

Senator Patrick told on air how lobbyists spoke with him about the “need” to increase the height and age requirements and he backed it “for the children”. This was disturbing to hear coming from someone who champions less government in our lives as their campaign platform.

So the next time anyone comes out and uses the reason, no the excuse for creating or voting for a new law is they were trying to “think of the children” do some research. Odds are it was very likely a bad piece of legislation if they have to resort to stooping that low.

Words Mean Something: Sheila Jackson Lee Talks but Says a Lot of Nonsense

13 Dec

This woman  is an embarrassment to Houston, Texas and the country as a whole. Sheila Jackson Lee keeps getting re-elected by wide margins due to a rigged congressional district. She couldn’t sound like a bigger idiot if she tried. Seriously do a youtube search on her and witness first hand the brilliance of her speaking and thinking skills. Her latest gem is getting lots of feedback, mostly negative. If you haven’t seen it here it is. Viewing could lower one’s IQ by a few points.

What the heck is shipshod? She wants to “use that terminology”? What does that mean? Has anyone heard of a narnstarter? I sure haven’t. Of course there is the typical political garbage spin heard from the vast majority of politicians.

After viewing this atrocity I was quickly reminded of a comedy show I used to watch back in the 90’s. The name of the show was In Living Color and for a time it was hilarious. There was one skit which was brought back to my mind though. It was this one:

I don’t care what a person’s race, religion, nationality, etc… are. If someone is just trying to sound intelligent by using “big” words they are doing a disservice to themselves and those who they are speaking. Just stop speaking and do everyone a favor.

Let’s contrast her speech with one by Ted Poe:

The difference is crystal clear.

Testing 1, 2, 3: Ricky Perry Supports Drug Testing for Those Getting Government Assistance

15 Nov

Rick Perry waded into the waters of government assistance by joining those who support drug testing as a requirement to receive those funds.

“Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst called on the Texas Legislature to enact reforms to the state’s welfare and unemployment benefit programs, including authorizing drug screenings for those applying for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits.”

Many people are unaware of what the TANF and UI are and do. A brief summary from the article explains:

“TANF provides temporary cash assistance to needy families with children as families pursue financial independence. UI benefits are paid to eligible individuals from taxes paid by employers. The system insures employees against loss of wages when they lose their job through no fault of their own, providing financial assistance for a fixed period of time while the individual seeks new employment.”

Apparently there are those feel this requirement would negatively affect those who receive those government funds. Logically though it makes very good sense. Once money is taken from tax payers it needs to be spend in the most efficient manner possible by the government, be it on the local, state or federal level. One way to accomplish this goal is to make sure those receiving tax payer funds are using it as intended.

There is already misuse of government assistance right now. Doing something as simple as a drug test is not a burden to those who truly need the temporary help till they can get back to a financial position of not needing it. If people are willing and able to take a drug test to get a private sector job there is clearly no problem with requiring the same thing when receiving temporary government assistance.

State Senator Jane Nelson has headed the call of Perry and Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst by pre-filing a bill in the Texas Senate which would require drug screening/testing for TANF applicants.

“I appreciate Gov. Perry’s support as we work to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used responsibly in our welfare system,” Sen. Nelson said. “We must ensure that recipients of these public funds are drug-free and, in keeping with the mission of this program, on a path to self-sufficiency.”

Below is a video of the announcement:

Source –

Office of the Governor

Solo Act: Texas Petitions for Secession

13 Nov

The idea has been talked about for years but this is a new twist on Texas secession, a petition to the White House on the petitions.whitehouse.gov website [1]. While a novel and romantic idea, I don’t think people who signed the petition honestly understand everything involved in such an large endeavor.

Elections have consequences it has been said, even by me, and this continued deep divide of the country is one of them. There were those on the left who said they would leave the country of George W. Bush was elected [2]. Of course they all put the spin cycle on high and stayed, except for that one guy.

What would it take for a state to leave the United States of America? A revolution. Not a peaceful one either but a violet, bloody revolution. There is much talk about a global economy and how intertwined the countries of all the nations are and no one is an economic island anymore. The same could be said on a smaller scale for the United States and each state. No state is an island anymore.

The economies of each are so intertwined with each other, breaking out would cause a major economic upheaval. Questions about currency, legal contracts numerous other areas which affect the economy would have to be answered quickly. The law just doesn’t move at that speed.

Speaking of law, there’s another area which would have to be revamped in short order. How would Texas setup the new government? One could assume it would look similar to the current one. The devil is in the details though. Sure a temporary government and legal system could be setup, but how many times have we all seen “temporary” things become permanent due to other issues getting moved ahead in priority.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg of Texas seceding, alone. More than likely if one state left, there would be more than one more leaving as well. It would be like a domino effect. While the idea of more than just Texas going it alone sounds good at first, there are even more complications which would arise. Will the other states form a new government with Texas? If so, how will it be setup? Will it use the US Constitution as the framework or something else? How will the new government get ratified and approved? What happens until then?

Very daunting questions which would have to once again be quickly answered. So is a state or states leaving the United States just a pipe dream? Yes and no. Yes because it’s no where near as easy as many people screaming for secession think it would be. No, because if the desire is there by the masses and they have the will, desire and feel they would rather have liberty or death, it can be done. It was done once before over 200 years ago by men and women who left English monarchy to form a more perfect union.

We currently have a good framework in the Constitution through which to work and change our government. It can get corrupt and it is up to we the people to be ever vigilant to guard it and our freedom. If the government fails we must all share the blame. If the government gets too powerful for the process to work we must choose what to do next.

Jefferson once said, “a little rebellion now and then is a good thing,” and this was regarding violent rebellion. We must all remember no nation will last forever. Everyone has fallen or at the very least changed into something different than how it started out. One day the United States of America very well may not exist, at lest how it exists now. What comes after is for us to decide now and determine how to get there.

Source –

  1. Peacefully grant the State of Texas to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government
  2. Salon: I Take it Back