"sf" wrote
Christine Dabney wrote:

>> >What I know of you is only what you have posted and you have not been
>> >here
>> >long enough to be noted as other than a blip in this one thread so far
>> >on my
>> >part. In this one however, you disabuse all methods of Q that are not
>> >like
>> >your own and utterly ignore home versions which are termed that widely
>> >across the country. In a conversation about home versions, you just
>> >jumped
>> >in and insulted most of the respondants here in the thread.
>> >
>> >Enjoy yourself. It is afterall, usenet.
>>
>> Dave Bugg has been a long time poster here. Kili was married in his
>> restaurant, among other things.

> She didn't know she was supposed to hold him in awe. To someone like
> Carol who has been here a relatively short amount of time in terms of
> years, but posts *actively*, someone like Dave who rarely posts here
> *is* an unknown.

Yeah, I've only been here since late 2008. Relative new comer in the schema
of things!

I guess he's been around a bit, but not often enough to have a recognizable
name so he came off as a newbie to me. Interesting that his posting type
comes off exactly that way if you never heard of him before this thread. In
deference though I deleted his 2 missives to me as they were mere flame
bait.

>> I personally respect his knowledge
>> about bbq..and have learned a lot from him about smoking.
>
> Nobody was talking about smoking anything - just pulled pork with bbq
> sauce on it.

Yup. My objection is the new cook was made to feel like a fool after he
makes a perfectly decent dish and using the common name for it. To put this
in perspective, I slipped on the ice Tuesday trying to get to my car. Been
off work this week and yes, my butt is very colorful thank you (grin).
Charlotte, age 17 is one of those 'hidden cooks' meaning she has the basics,
but is a little bashful to show them normally. She made dinner. Cut
potatoes in bacon fat with onions and rosemary and lots of black pepper, a
baked chicken with a dryrub, and steamed carrots and cabbage seasoned with
sesame oil. Did I tell her what would have been better? Hell no! I ate
every bit. Grin, it was actually pretty good. She's a decent home cook
now, and probably outstanding compared to other 17YOs of this time.

SHE's making the crockpot pulled shoulder for the neighbor's party. She'll
need a hand come decanting time but that's a daddy job to lift the crock out
over the strainer in the big stockpot. It's too heavy for either of us to
do in one swoop but she knows how to manage if there's no big guy around
just like I do. End result? Pulled moist pork with sauce added. We call
it BBQ southern pulled pork here.

sf wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:22:56 -0800 (PST), Bryan
> > wrote:
>
>> Dave answered about smoked beans, but what I meant was that something
>> cooked over direct heat from wood or charcoal that was basted with
>> sauce might not meet Dave's strict definition, but it meets almost
>> everyone else's.
>
> I was teasing you, Bryan. I would have added that it must take a long
> time to string them on all those little hooks for smoking;

ROTFLOL!!!!!!
--
Dave
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders,
give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new
problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

notbob wrote:
> On 2010-12-31, Dave Bugg > wrote:
>
>> Please, what is my definition of BBQ
>
> What? Don't you know!?

Uh, I just don't know anymore. Everyone keeps saying 'my' definition, but
I'm not so sure 'my' definition has been stated by anyone. :-)
--
Dave
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders,
give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new
problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

On Dec 30, 11:56*pm, "cshenk" > wrote:
> "sf" wrote
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Christine Dabney wrote:
> >> >What I know of you is only what you have posted and you have not been
> >> >here
> >> >long enough to be noted as other than a blip in this one thread so far
> >> >on my
> >> >part. *In this one however, you disabuse all methods of Q that are not
> >> >like
> >> >your own and utterly ignore home versions which are termed that widely
> >> >across the country. *In a conversation about home versions, you just
> >> >jumped
> >> >in and insulted most of the respondants here in the thread.
>
> >> >Enjoy yourself. *It is afterall, usenet.
>
> >> Dave Bugg has been a long time poster here. *Kili was married in his
> >> restaurant, among other things.
> > She didn't know she was supposed to hold him in awe. *To someone like
> > Carol who has been here a relatively short amount of time in terms of
> > years, but posts *actively*, someone like Dave who rarely posts here
> > *is* an unknown.
>
> Yeah, I've only been here since late 2008. *Relative new comer in the schema
> of things!
>
> I guess he's been around a bit, but not often enough to have a recognizable
> name so he came off as a newbie to me. Interesting that his posting type
> comes off exactly that way if you never heard of him before this thread. In
> deference though I deleted his 2 missives to me as they were mere flame
> bait.
>
> >> I personally respect his knowledge
> >> about bbq..and have learned a lot from him about smoking.
>
> > Nobody was talking about smoking anything - just pulled pork with bbq
> > sauce on it.
>
> Yup. *My objection is the new cook was made to feel like a fool after he
> makes a perfectly decent dish and using the common name for it. *To put this
> in perspective, I slipped on the ice Tuesday trying to get to my car. *Been
> off work this week and yes, my butt is very colorful thank you (grin).

Cool. Like a baboon.

> Charlotte, age 17 is one of those 'hidden cooks' meaning she has the basics,
> but is a little bashful to show them normally. *She made dinner. *Cut
> potatoes in bacon fat with onions and rosemary and lots of black pepper, a
> baked chicken with a dryrub, and steamed carrots and cabbage seasoned with
> sesame oil. *Did I tell her what would have been better? *Hell no! *I ate
> every bit. *Grin, it was actually pretty good. *She's a decent home cook
> now, and probably outstanding compared to other 17YOs of this time.
>
> SHE's making the crockpot pulled shoulder for the neighbor's party. She'll
> need a hand come decanting time but that's a daddy job to lift the crock out
> over the strainer in the big stockpot. *It's too heavy for either of us to
> do in one swoop but she knows how to manage if there's no big guy around
> just like I do. *End result? *Pulled moist pork with sauce added. *We call
> it BBQ southern pulled pork here.

You can call a skunk a "black and white kitty" if you want, but I
thought that part of a parent's job was to teach their children the
correct names of things. You know, tree, cloud, fire truck.
It ain't barbecue jes because you call it barbecue, any more'n that
polecat's a tabby. Show Me the fire.

--Bryan

notbob > wrote:

>Omelet > writes:

>> At 8k ft. altitude, I'd use a pressure cooker to cook them first, then
>> take the out to the pit! ;-)

>I bought a PC jes to do beans a bit faster, Om. Guess what! They don't
>come out quite the same. The pulp is jes a bit different, a bit
>gummier. Not sure why. I need to explore this phenom, as canned beans
>are also pressure cooked and I have no problem with them. <shrug>

I am not sure about 8K feet, but I recently cooked a batch of
pinto beans at 5K feet, with no pressure cooker, with no problems.
It just took awhile (110 minutes, to be precise.)

Steve

(Steve Pope) writes:


> I am not sure about 8K feet, but I recently cooked a batch of
> pinto beans at 5K feet, with no pressure cooker, with no problems.
> It just took awhile (110 minutes, to be precise.)

Used to take about 90 mins in SFBA. Now take about 3 hrs. No problem.
I'm in no hurry.

nb

On Dec 30, 10:28*pm, notbob > wrote:
> Bryan > writes:
> > It's not BBQ, but it's closer to BBQ than the OP's stuff in the crock
> > pot.
>
> hee hee hee.... *I love this stuff. *
>
> OK, why is it "closer"? *
>
> The heat source? *Wood? *Guess what. *Raw pork don't give a good
> gawddamn what the source of heat. *Microwave, electricity, propane,
> yada. *The pork will cook exactly to the correct doneness regardless of
> the heat source. *It will fall apart to finger pulling goodness, no
> matter.

You really believe the above paragraph? I guess you do. You wrote
it.
>
> Time? *I've learned that pork will pull when it's done, whether it took
> 3 hrs or 13 hrs. *
>
> Smoke flavor? *Let's explore that. *How much does smoke inpact the
> flavor of what is "traditionally" called BBQ? *Yes, there's the "ring".
> The "bark". *But, quite frankly, after I add some..... some..... dare I
> say it?.... bbq sauce!!.... the whole smoke thing is pretty much
> academic.

No. It's not.

>*Don't like sauce on yer perfect Q? *You're in the minority,
> Pal, regardless of how traditional/fanatical/puritanical you may be.

I'm a sauce person myself, and sauce that has been basted on and
cooked on is radically different than sauce simmered in a pot.

> *If this wasn't true, there would be no conflict between vinegar and tomato,
> would there. *hee hee....

Most red barbecue sauce contains both vinegar and tomato.
http://www.maull.com/history.html
>
> I love this! *

I think you'd love St. Louis Style BBQ too:

"Another time-honored method is to quickly sear the steaks over high
heat, then place on a covered grill or smoker and cook over low heat
(170-200 degrees) for several hours. When the steaks are done, they
are brushed with or dipped in St. Louis-style barbecue sauce and
returned to the grill for caramelizing, turning often. This step may
be repeated numerous times before serving. The low heat causes the
protein in this usually tough cut of meat to break down, while the fat
dissolves and is absorbed by the meat."
source-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Louis-style_barbecue

Here's something else:

10 lbs. of chicken leg quarters
3-24 oz. bottles of Maull's Genuine Barbecue Sauce
3 drops of Pure Cap (or more for extra hot)
A pile of shagbark hickory bark (in a pinch, you can use hickory
wood)
Charcoal briquets
Lump charcoal
Weber Kettle
Chimney starter
Bucket of ice water
Trigger spray bottle filled with fresh water
Cut up leg quarters into three pieces: leg, thigh, and the back
portion
which you will discard (or save for making chicken broth).
Put chicken in ice water while you prepare your grill.
Fill chimney to the top and start charcoal. When charcoal is
ready, pour the coals in and push them out to the perimeter. There
should be no coals directly under the center of the grill, and all
three
bottom vents should be closed. You may need to place a few more
unstarted briquettes on top of the already started ones.
Place pieces of bark on top of charcoal and while using the spray
bottle
to extinguish flames with your dominant hand, use the other to put
the
chicken on the grill. Put the lid on the kettle with vent partially
closed.
The first 1-1/2 hours are flipping the chicken, adding hickory and
additional lump
charcoal as needed , spraying hot spots, and moving each piece around
so
that the least done pieces get moved to hotter areas of the grill.
This
part is an acquired skill. By the time that the chicken is "done,"
the
coals will be very burned down, but there should still be enough left
to
start pieces of hickory, and additional lump.
Take one of the bottles of Maull's and add to it three (3) drops (or
more) of Pure
Cap. Shake well, pour into a bowl and use this for the first basting
of each side.
After basting each side with this heated-up sauce, using about 2/3 of
the sauce,
mix in new Maull's, diluting the capsaicin to baste each side again,
using most
of the sauce and again "diluting." Baste again and replace the lid in
between every
basting to smoke on the sauce.
Expect 1/2 hour chicken and grill prep
1-1/2 hours cooking
1 hour basting
----
3 hours total, but well worth it

This saucing regime also works well for pork shoulder (butt) steaks.
Maull's is made by Louis Maull Co., St. Louis, MO
Pure Cap is made by Garden Row Foods, Franklin Park, IL

>
> nb * *

--Bryan

notbob > wrote:

(Steve Pope) writes:

>> I am not sure about 8K feet, but I recently cooked a batch of
>> pinto beans at 5K feet, with no pressure cooker, with no problems.
>> It just took awhile (110 minutes, to be precise.)

>Used to take about 90 mins in SFBA. Now take about 3 hrs. No problem.
>I'm in no hurry.

Pinto beans take me about 30 minutes are sea-level, after an
overnight soak.

Steve

On Dec 30, 10:08*pm, sf > wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:22:56 -0800 (PST), Bryan
>
> > wrote:
> > Dave answered about smoked beans, but what I meant was that something
> > cooked over direct heat from wood or charcoal that was basted with
> > sauce might not meet Dave's strict definition, but it meets almost
> > everyone else's. *
>
> I was teasing you, Bryan. *I would have added that it must take a long
> time to string them on all those little hooks for smoking; but I was
> typing one handed at the moment with a sleeping baby in the other arm
> and didn't take the time to peck it out.
>
"Little hooks" seems like asking for cut up lips. Don't you have a
proper roach clip?

--Bryan

On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 15:38:59 -0800 in rec.food.cooking, "Dave Bugg"
> wrote,
>KC is THE bbq mecca in the midwest. KC also hosts the biggest bbq
>competition in the world.

Mecca? So, no pork, right?

cshenk wrote:

> SHE's making the crockpot pulled shoulder for the neighbor's party.
> She'll need a hand come decanting time but that's a daddy job to lift
> the crock out over the strainer in the big stockpot. It's too heavy for
> either of us to do in one swoop but she knows how to manage if there's
> no big guy around just like I do. End result? Pulled moist pork with
> sauce added. We call it BBQ southern pulled pork here.

down south my way that would just be called "pulled pork" since no pit
or smoke was involved. We don't even add the extra "southern"
nomenclature as that seems to be unnecessarily obvious.

"Goomba" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

>> SHE's making the crockpot pulled shoulder for the neighbor's party.
>> She'll need a hand come decanting time but that's a daddy job to lift the
>> crock out over the strainer in the big stockpot. It's too heavy for
>> either of us to do in one swoop but she knows how to manage if there's no
>> big guy around just like I do. End result? Pulled moist pork with sauce
>> added. We call it BBQ southern pulled pork here.
>
> down south my way that would just be called "pulled pork" since no pit or
> smoke was involved. We don't even add the extra "southern" nomenclature as
> that seems to be unnecessarily obvious.

Not every area uses the same terms. Thats what the problem with this thread
has been.

Doesnt matter. The NYE dish went off to the neighbors a bit ago and they
are perfectly happy. They've had it here several times so this was 'on
request' cooking for a friend with a party. I added a set of 'rice ball
treats' (not rice crispies but sushi type rice with sweet bits of fruits and
things).

"phaeton" wrote

> *Laugh all you want and thumb your noses down at crock pot cookery. I
> had been slow cooking most hunks of meats in a large pot on the stove
> or in the oven, and probably hadn't used the crock pot for anything
> except beans and hamhocks in about a year as well. School starts up
> again soon, and I work 10 hour days, so the crock pot will probably
> get some more miles on it in the next few months.

Not laughing! Simple device, capable of more than some think. Start a new
thread and tell me what sorts of things you'd like to have. Been crockpot
cooking now since 1978. There's almost always something in ours.

On Dec 31, 12:35*pm, David Harmon > wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 15:38:59 -0800 in rec.food.cooking, "Dave Bugg"
> > wrote,
>
> >KC is THE bbq mecca in the midwest. KC also hosts the biggest bbq
> >competition in the world.
>
> Mecca? *So, no pork, right?

LOL

Bryan > wrote:

>How about we agree that it's OK to
>call the stuff in the crock pot that has never seen smoke, barbecue
>pork, but not barbecued pork (*barbecued* being reserved for meat that
>has been subjected to smoke)? Barbecue, as a noun means what the
>purists like Dave say.

I don't like it. For one thing, once you abbreviate either
form to "BBQ Pork" you can no longer distinguish between the
two forms.

Due to the way language has now become variously used, for me the best
approach is to only say BBQ, barbecue, or barbecued if at least one of
the following three conditions are meant:

(1) You are refering to barbecue as would meet the definitions
used in barbecue competitions held in north America.

(2) You are explicitly not refering to one of the meats for
which definition (1) applies, ie "barbecued potato chips"

(3) If you are not meeting conditions (1) and (2), then say
barbecye only if your audience knows exactly what you are talking about.
e.g. you're inviting them over for grilled ribs, but they know
that's what you mean when you say "barbecued ribs".

Whereas using the term broadly in this way is best avoided in
restaurant menus or reviews, or food discussions with a wide
audience, etc. It will only lead to confusion and a need for
clarification.


Steve

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:00:29 GMT, "Randy Johnson" >
wrote:

>
> On 31-Dec-2010, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
> > Been crockpot
> > cooking now since 1978. There's almost always something in ours.
>
> There's pretty much always somethin' in mine too - dust and cobwebs. ;~)

It's been so long since I've used mine that I don't even know where it
is, but a crockpot is a good utensil to cool a hunk of beef for tamale
filling too.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:19:41 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> (3) If you are not meeting conditions (1) and (2), then say
> barbecye only if your audience knows exactly what you are talking about.
> e.g. you're inviting them over for grilled ribs, but they know
> that's what you mean when you say "barbecued ribs".

What gets me is when people are dragged over the coals for calling
them oven barbecued ribs. Everyone, except the purists, knows exactly
what they are talking about.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf > wrote:

>On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:19:41 +0000 (UTC),

>What gets me is when people are dragged over the coals

Good one!

>for calling them oven barbecued ribs. Everyone, except the
>purists, knows exactly what they are talking about.


S.

"Randy Johnson" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote:

>> Been crockpot
>> cooking now since 1978. There's almost always something in ours.

> There's pretty much always somethin' in mine too - dust and cobwebs. ;~)

Hehe that's my oven. I always check before firing it up.

"sf" wrote
> "Randy Johnson" wrote:
>> "cshenk" wrote:

>> > Been crockpot
>> > cooking now since 1978. There's almost always something in ours.

>> There's pretty much always somethin' in mine too - dust and cobwebs. ;~)

> It's been so long since I've used mine that I don't even know where it
> is, but a crockpot is a good utensil to cool a hunk of beef for tamale
> filling too.

Heheh all a matter of what you are used to! I've noted most of what I do in
there others use a stove top or the oven for. I mostly use the stove top,
the crock pots, and the rice maker here (oh, and breadmaker).

On Dec 31, 6:04*pm, sf > wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:19:41 +0000 (UTC),
>
> (Steve Pope) wrote:
> > (3) If you are not meeting conditions (1) and (2), then say
> > barbecye only if your audience knows exactly what you are talking about.. *
> > e.g. *you're inviting them over for grilled ribs, but they know
> > that's what you mean when you say "barbecued ribs". *
>
> What gets me is when people are dragged over the coals for calling
> them oven barbecued ribs. *Everyone, except the purists, knows exactly
> what they are talking about.
>
Oven barbecued ribs are as lame as oven fried chicken.

--Bryan

sf wrote:

>> (3) If you are not meeting conditions (1) and (2), then say barbecye only
>> if your audience knows exactly what you are talking about. e.g. you're
>> inviting them over for grilled ribs, but they know that's what you mean
>> when you say "barbecued ribs".
>
> What gets me is when people are dragged over the coals for calling them
> oven barbecued ribs. Everyone, except the purists, knows exactly what
> they are talking about.

As I wrote six months ago: 'The fact that the meaning can be deciphered
doesn't mean that the expression is correct. If the hypothetical teenager
said her car broke down and she stopped on the skirt, does that mean "skirt"
is now synonymous with shoulder?'

Bob

?

sf wrote:
>>
>> What gets me is when people are dragged over the coals for calling them
>> oven barbecued ribs. Everyone, except the purists, knows exactly what
>> they are talking about.

We know exactly what you are talking about too, but we also know it does not
exist.

oven barbequed --- no
oven baked with bbq sauce --- yes.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> ?
>
> sf wrote:
>>>
>>> What gets me is when people are dragged over the coals for calling
>>> them oven barbecued ribs. Everyone, except the purists, knows
>>> exactly what they are talking about.
>
> We know exactly what you are talking about too, but we also know it
> does not exist.
>
> oven barbequed --- no
> oven baked with bbq sauce --- yes.

Yup... The method of cooking definitely ain't bbq.

--
Dave
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders,
give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new
problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

(Steve Pope) writes:

> notbob > wrote:

> Pinto beans take me about 30 minutes are sea-level, after an
> overnight soak.

I hate "overnight soak" beans. Hence, the longer cooking period.

nb

notbob > wrote:

(Steve Pope) writes:

>> Pinto beans take me about 30 minutes are sea-level, after an
>> overnight soak.

>I hate "overnight soak" beans.

Weird. To me, this is the only method that leads to an ideal texture.
It also seems very closest to the texture of those canned beans
where the texture is just right.

What do find is wrong with this method?

Steve

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:13:28 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

> "sf" wrote
> > "Randy Johnson" wrote:
> >> "cshenk" wrote:
>
> >> > Been crockpot
> >> > cooking now since 1978. There's almost always something in ours.
>
> >> There's pretty much always somethin' in mine too - dust and cobwebs. ;~)
>
> > It's been so long since I've used mine that I don't even know where it
> > is, but a crockpot is a good utensil to cool a hunk of beef for tamale
> > filling too.
>
> Heheh all a matter of what you are used to! I've noted most of what I do in
> there others use a stove top or the oven for. I mostly use the stove top,
> the crock pots, and the rice maker here (oh, and breadmaker).

I hit the wrong key... that should read "cook", not cool. Completely
different meaning as written. Sorry, 'bout dat. But I really do not
know where my crockpot is. I'm hoping to score a used one sometime
for a couple of bucks because I won't use it enough to make it
worthwhile to buy a new one for $20.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:04:16 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

> "Randy Johnson" wrote
> > "cshenk" wrote:
>
> >> Been crockpot
> >> cooking now since 1978. There's almost always something in ours.
>
> > There's pretty much always somethin' in mine too - dust and cobwebs. ;~)
>
> Hehe that's my oven. I always check before firing it up.

That's so Asian of you! They use their oven as if it was just another
cupboard.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 15:25:38 -0700, notbob > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) writes:
>
> > notbob > wrote:
>
> > Pinto beans take me about 30 minutes are sea-level, after an
> > overnight soak.
>
> I hate "overnight soak" beans. Hence, the longer cooking period.
>
Different strokes.


--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:04:16 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
>> "Randy Johnson" wrote
>>> "cshenk" wrote:
>>
>>>> Been crockpot
>>>> cooking now since 1978. There's almost always something in ours.
>>
>>> There's pretty much always somethin' in mine too - dust and cobwebs. ;~)
>> Hehe that's my oven. I always check before firing it up.
>
> That's so Asian of you! They use their oven as if it was just another
> cupboard.
>
Isn't that because so few even *have* an oven?

sf > wrote:

>On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 15:25:38 -0700, notbob > wrote:

>> (Steve Pope) writes:

>> > notbob > wrote:

>> > Pinto beans take me about 30 minutes are sea-level, after an
>> > overnight soak.

>> I hate "overnight soak" beans. Hence, the longer cooking period.

>Different strokes.

Well, there are also a few possible methods of overnight soaking:

1. Pre-boil than soak, vs. just soak

2. Changing water between soaking and boiling, vs. using same water

3. Adding salt during soaking vs. no salt until later

Myself, I never pre-boil, I always change the water, and I never
add any salt until they are most of the way through boiling.
Through trial and error I have found this procedure works best
for me.


Steve

On Jan 1, 3:40*pm, "l, not -l" > wrote:
> On 31-Dec-2010, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
> > Bryan > wrote:
>
> > >How about we agree that it's OK to
> > >call the stuff in the crock pot that has never seen smoke, barbecue
> > >pork, but not barbecued pork (*barbecued* being reserved for meat that
> > >has been subjected to smoke)? *Barbecue, as a noun means what the
> > >purists like Dave say.
>
> > I don't like it. *For one thing, once you abbreviate either
> > form to "BBQ Pork" you can no longer distinguish between the
> > two forms.
>
> Apparently it already has a name - Cheater BBQ, with a cookbook on the
> subject - Cheater BBQ: Barbecue Anytime, Anywhere, in Any Weather. * Call it
> CBBQ when abbreviation is required.
>
> For those interested in the book, it is available on Amazon -http://tinyurl.com/CheaterBBQ
>
I could pair it up with this:
http://www.amazon.com/Semi-Homemade-...dp/0470645946/
so it'd qualify for "FREE Super Saver Shipping."

--Bryan

On 1/1/2011 6:33 PM, Bryan wrote:
> On Jan 1, 3:40 pm, "l, not > wrote:

>>
>> For those interested in the book, it is available on Amazon -http://tinyurl.com/CheaterBBQ
>>
> I could pair it up with this:
> http://www.amazon.com/Semi-Homemade-...dp/0470645946/
> so it'd qualify for "FREE Super Saver Shipping."
>
> --Bryan

<falls over>

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold

Goomba wrote:
> sf wrote:
>> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:04:16 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>>
>>> "Randy Johnson" wrote

>>>> There's pretty much always somethin' in mine too - dust and
>>>> cobwebs. ;~)
>>> Hehe that's my oven. I always check before firing it up.
>>
>> That's so Asian of you! They use their oven as if it was just
>> another cupboard.
>>
> Isn't that because so few even *have* an oven?

Just this last Thanksgiving I commented to my (step)mother from
Japan that when she first came here way back when it must have
been intimidating to make an American style turkey dinner. She
said Yes! and we didn't have oven in Japan. It was all new to her.

nancy

On 2011-01-01, Nancy Young > wrote:

> said Yes! and we didn't have oven in Japan. It was all new to her.

I've heard that. Ovens rare in Japan. No concept of baked goods.

nb

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 23:15:49 +0000 (UTC), (Steve
Pope) wrote:

> sf > wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 15:25:38 -0700, notbob > wrote:
>
> >> (Steve Pope) writes:
>
> >> > notbob > wrote:
>
> >> > Pinto beans take me about 30 minutes are sea-level, after an
> >> > overnight soak.
>
> >> I hate "overnight soak" beans. Hence, the longer cooking period.
>
> >Different strokes.
>
> Well, there are also a few possible methods of overnight soaking:
>
> 1. Pre-boil than soak, vs. just soak
>
> 2. Changing water between soaking and boiling, vs. using same water
>
> 3. Adding salt during soaking vs. no salt until later
>
> Myself, I never pre-boil, I always change the water, and I never
> add any salt until they are most of the way through boiling.
> Through trial and error I have found this procedure works best
> for me.
>
>
I soak overnight if I know I want to make beans the following day. If
I decide on the spur of the moment that I want beans that day, I do
the boil and soak method. Haven't hit a time in the pressure cooker
that I like yet. They have overcooked every time. I tried adding
salt at the beginning, but like potatoes - it makes no difference to
me. I start salting beans when I start tasting and adding the other
ingredients. Salt doesn't "toughen" them, but I don't think it adds
any more flavor than if I waited and added it later - so why bother?


--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Jan 1, 7:03*pm, sf > wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 23:15:49 +0000 (UTC), (Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Pope) wrote:
> > sf > wrote:
>
> > >On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 15:25:38 -0700, notbob > wrote:
>
> > >> (Steve Pope) writes:
>
> > >> > notbob > wrote:
>
> > >> > Pinto beans take me about 30 minutes are sea-level, after an
> > >> > overnight soak.
>
> > >> I hate "overnight soak" beans. *Hence, the longer cooking period.
>
> > >Different strokes.
>
> > Well, there are also a few possible methods of overnight soaking:
>
> > 1. Pre-boil than soak, vs. just soak
>
> > 2. Changing water between soaking and boiling, vs. using same water
>
> > 3. Adding salt during soaking vs. no salt until later
>
> > Myself, I never pre-boil, I always change the water, and I never
> > add any salt until they are most of the way through boiling.
> > Through trial and error I have found this procedure works best
> > for me.
>
> I soak overnight if I know I want to make beans the following day. *If
> I decide on the spur of the moment that I want beans that day, I do
> the boil and soak method. *Haven't hit a time in the pressure cooker
> that I like yet. *They have overcooked every time. *I tried adding
> salt at the beginning, but like potatoes - it makes no difference to
> me. *I start salting beans when I start tasting and adding the other
> ingredients. *Salt doesn't "toughen" them, but I don't think it adds
> any more flavor than if I waited and added it later - so why bother?
>
> --
>
> Never trust a dog to watch your food.

Weird. The "overnight soak" is the only method I use. Well, maybe
not 100% true:

1) Soak for 10-ish hours

2) Rinse thoroughly

3) Boil in fresh water for 15 minutes (I read everywhere that "Some
beans, and especially kidney and red beans, contain toxins that must
be destroyed by boiling". I have yet to find any distinction of what
"some beans" are, so I boil all of them)

4) Rinse thoroughly

5) Good to go!

This method never seems to fail for me.

-J

phaeton > wrote:

>Weird. The "overnight soak" is the only method I use. Well, maybe
>not 100% true:
>
>1) Soak for 10-ish hours
>
>2) Rinse thoroughly
>
>3) Boil in fresh water for 15 minutes (I read everywhere that "Some
>beans, and especially kidney and red beans, contain toxins that must
>be destroyed by boiling". I have yet to find any distinction of what
>"some beans" are, so I boil all of them)
>
>4) Rinse thoroughly
>
>5) Good to go!
>
>This method never seems to fail for me.

That's pretty much exactly what I do, except that the "15 minute"
number is usually slightly longer. It's always around 18 minutes
for garbanzos, and somewhere between 20 and 30 (rarely, 35)
minutes for most common beans (pinto, kidney, etc.). Lentils
are variable but usually 15 to 18 minutes before they are tender.

(I'm at 100 feet elevation.)

I don't necessarily "rinse thoroughly" but I do drain completely
after soaking. IMO one always wants to boil beans in completely fresh
water -- many substances can retard and interfere with bean cooking, and
they may include some substances that have soaked into the water
during the soaking phase.

Steve

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 17:10:15 -0800 (PST), phaeton
> wrote:

> 3) Boil in fresh water for 15 minutes (I read everywhere that "Some
> beans, and especially kidney and red beans, contain toxins that must
> be destroyed by boiling". I have yet to find any distinction of what
> "some beans" are, so I boil all of them)

Yeah. I like to boil for a while, toss the boiling water and start
again with fresh. I don't do it because of toxins, I do it to try to
cut down on whatever it is that causes flatulence although the best
method is to just eat more beans (eat them on a regular basis, vs.
occasionally). I'm getting better about making beans a regular part
of my diet.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 01:20:27 +0000 (UTC), (Steve
Pope) wrote:

> I don't necessarily "rinse thoroughly" but I do drain completely
> after soaking. IMO one always wants to boil beans in completely fresh
> water -- many substances can retard and interfere with bean cooking, and
> they may include some substances that have soaked into the water
> during the soaking phase.

I've never thought it through that thoroughly, I just do it.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.