On 10/6/2017 10:03 AM, Bruce wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 07:04:57 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
>> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 6:52:43 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 03:31:35 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 9:40:18 PM UTC-4, Brucy wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 21:26:31 -0400, jmcquown >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/5/2017 7:53 PM, cshenk wrote:
>>>>>>> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ingredients:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> INGREDIENTS: PEANUTS, CONTAINS 2% OR LESS OF: SEA SALT, SPICES
>>>>>>>> (CONTAINS CELERY), DRIED ONION, DRIED GARLIC, PAPRIKA, NATURAL FLAVOR,
>>>>>>>> SUGAR, GELATIN, TORULA YEAST, CORNSTARCH, DRIED CORN SYRUP,
>>>>>>>> MALTODEXTRIN.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's wrong with just peanuts? No, even peanuts have to be turned
>>>>>>>> into a science project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pretty much natural stuff and spices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The peanut butter I eat contains ground peanuts and a little salt.
>>>>>> nothing else.
>>>>>
>>>>> Great.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bruce is horrified people might eat something on some bad
>>>>>> for you list. I have no idea why. I like dry roasted peanuts but I
>>>>>> don't have the capability to make them at home. So occasionally I buy a
>>>>>> jar of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's wrong with that?
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not going to kill me to occasionally snack on dry
>>>>>> roasted peanuts.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think all these things necessarily kill you. It just says a
>>>>> lot about the quality of the product and the producer if they need a
>>>>> science project.
>>>>
>>>> No, dummy. It's about amping up the flavor so people will buy their
>>>> product rather than someone else's.
>>>
>>> How sad is that, bimbo?
>>
>> I'm sorry I called you dummy.
>
> That's ok. I shouldn't have called you a bimbo either

Oh this is truly NAUSEATING!

You miserable nancy boy suckup.

>> It was a childish reaction to your
>> posing questions to which you would know the answer if you gave
>> it a minute's thought. Unless that's your version of the Socratic
>> Method, and you think that by posing those questions we will learn
>> something we do not already know.
>
> You mean when I asked "What's wrong with that?" I only meant to say
> there was nothing wrong with what Jill said.

Oh shut up and go away!