Cheri wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On 9/6/2015 9:59 AM, Gary wrote:
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Robert" wrote:
> > > > > Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a
> > > > > whole new category of crazy cat lady;-)
> > > >
> > > > Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
> > >
> > > He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he did
> > > all the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of the
> > > others. sheldon was just one of many.
> > >
> > Great typo there, Gary!
> >
> > Jill
>
> Yeah, that had me LOL too.
>
> Cheri

Snicker me too but i fixed it on quoting.



--

Gary wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> jmcquown wrote:
> >
> > On 9/6/2015 1:45 PM, Cheri wrote:
> > >
> > > "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >> On 9/6/2015 9:59 AM, Gary wrote:
> > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > >>>> "Robert" wrote:
> > >>>>> Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a
> > whole new >>>>> category of crazy cat lady;-)
> > > > > >
> > >>>> Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
> > > > >
> > >>> He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he
> > did all >>> the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of
> > the others. >>> sheldon was just one of many.
> > > > >
> > >> Great typo there, Gary!
> > > >
> > >> Jill
> > >
> > > Yeah, that had me LOL too.
> > >
> > > Cheri
> >
> > It certainly seemed to fit who Gary was replying to.
> >
> > Jill
>
> LOL. Just so you both know - I purposely spelled it that way. Just
> giving him back a little of his gutter talk. Did you notice that Carol
> "fixed" the spelling when she replied? heh heh

LOL! Ya caught me! Most wouldnt notice (grin).

Carol

--

Brooklyn1 wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 09:59:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> "Robert" wrote:
> >> >Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a whole
> new >> >category of crazy cat lady;-)
> >>
> >> Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
> >
> > He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he did all
> > the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of the others.
> > sheldon was just one of many.
>
> Nope, one cook for each 24 hour duty stint... with three cooks on
> board two did rotating cooking duty and one baked every day, all on a
> 90 day rotation as well. The only help were mess cooks, they worked
> the spud locker (spuds were pared by machine), served on the steam
> line (only time they were permitted in the galley), worked the
> scullery, and policed the mess decks... only the one duty cook
> prepared meals, there was barely enough room in a DD's galley for one
> cook, more than one cook at a time would be very dangerous. There are
> no chefs in the US military.

BULLSHIT. Calling you on this. You assume no one is familair with
Navy ships here and will believe that balderdash you are spewing.
Hopefully they will not.

Folks, by the time they had machines to peel the potatoes, they
*reduced* the galley staff to 20 for a crew of 300.

With the exception of a Postal control (PC) with 24 crew, we do not and
never had any ship with 1 person 'doing it all'. MCM's have 3 for the
70 person crew (one of which I am told twins to other duties). PC's
just have one to feed the 24 or so crew.

Husband is laughing. 1968-1991. Did 2 stints on the USS New Jersy
between the recoms. 15 years sea duty. The number of cook staff was
HIGHER in the older days, not lower than today. The gear shifted how
many were needed.


--

On 2015-09-06 23:47:25 +0000, cshenk said:

>> Nope, one cook for each 24 hour duty stint...

[ mercy snip ]

> BULLSHIT. Calling you on this. You assume no one is familair with
> Navy ships here and will believe that balderdash you are spewing.
> Hopefully they will not.
>
> Folks, by the time they had machines to peel the potatoes, they
> *reduced* the galley staff to 20 for a crew of 300.

I would think most home-cooks (the vast majority of us here), can
figure out that a single cook for 300 people over a 24 hours period of
time, even with a couple of mess cooks would be very very difficult.
Like "walking to Mars" difficult.

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 17:05:13 -0700, gtr > wrote:

>On 2015-09-06 23:47:25 +0000, cshenk said:
>
>>> Nope, one cook for each 24 hour duty stint...
>
>[ mercy snip ]
>
>> BULLSHIT. Calling you on this. You assume no one is familair with
>> Navy ships here and will believe that balderdash you are spewing.
>> Hopefully they will not.
>>
>> Folks, by the time they had machines to peel the potatoes, they
>> *reduced* the galley staff to 20 for a crew of 300.
>
>I would think most home-cooks (the vast majority of us here), can
>figure out that a single cook for 300 people over a 24 hours period of
>time, even with a couple of mess cooks would be very very difficult.
>Like "walking to Mars" difficult.

Did he claim that? LOL. Many years ago I worked for about 12 months in
a small restaurant, and the idea of a single person managing to serve
300 meals (even with a couple of mess cooks, as you say,) is quite
ridiculous. Unless it was junk food perhaps.

On 2015-09-07 00:10:35 +0000, Jeßus said:

> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 17:05:13 -0700, gtr > wrote:
>
>> On 2015-09-06 23:47:25 +0000, cshenk said:
>>
>>>> Nope, one cook for each 24 hour duty stint...
>>
>> [ mercy snip ]
>>
>>> BULLSHIT. Calling you on this. You assume no one is familair with
>>> Navy ships here and will believe that balderdash you are spewing.
>>> Hopefully they will not.
>>>
>>> Folks, by the time they had machines to peel the potatoes, they
>>> *reduced* the galley staff to 20 for a crew of 300.
>>
>> I would think most home-cooks (the vast majority of us here), can
>> figure out that a single cook for 300 people over a 24 hours period of
>> time, even with a couple of mess cooks would be very very difficult.
>> Like "walking to Mars" difficult.
>
> Did he claim that? LOL.

Seemingly (Above: "Nope, one cook fro each 24 hour duty stint...")

> Many years ago I worked for about 12 months in a small restaurant, and
> the idea of a single person managing to serve 300 meals (even with a
> couple of mess cooks, as you say,) is quite ridiculous. Unless it was
> junk food perhaps.

I suppose ye olde prisons and orphanages managed to accomplish
something within range from panoply of the many "thin gruels"
available. And, of course, a store house of MRE could pull it off.
Still, just scraping 300 MRE into huge vats seems like a tough call,
three times a day...

"cshenk" > wrote in message
...
> Gary wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> jmcquown wrote:
>> >
>> > On 9/6/2015 1:45 PM, Cheri wrote:
>> > >
>> > > "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> > > ...
>> > >> On 9/6/2015 9:59 AM, Gary wrote:
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > >>>> "Robert" wrote:
>> > >>>>> Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a
>> > whole new >>>>> category of crazy cat lady;-)
>> > > > > >
>> > >>>> Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
>> > > > >
>> > >>> He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he
>> > did all >>> the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of
>> > the others. >>> sheldon was just one of many.
>> > > > >
>> > >> Great typo there, Gary!
>> > > >
>> > >> Jill
>> > >
>> > > Yeah, that had me LOL too.
>> > >
>> > > Cheri
>> >
>> > It certainly seemed to fit who Gary was replying to.
>> >
>> > Jill
>>
>> LOL. Just so you both know - I purposely spelled it that way. Just
>> giving him back a little of his gutter talk. Did you notice that Carol
>> "fixed" the spelling when she replied? heh heh
>
> LOL! Ya caught me! Most wouldnt notice (grin).
>
> Carol

Oh, I imagine most did.

Cheri

"cshenk" > wrote in message
...
> Cheri wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>>
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On 9/6/2015 9:59 AM, Gary wrote:
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > "Robert" wrote:
>> > > > > Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a
>> > > > > whole new category of crazy cat lady;-)
>> > > >
>> > > > Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
>> > >
>> > > He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he did
>> > > all the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of the
>> > > others. sheldon was just one of many.
>> > >
>> > Great typo there, Gary!
>> >
>> > Jill
>>
>> Yeah, that had me LOL too.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> Snicker me too but i fixed it on quoting.

Yep.

Not only a bunch of other cooks and chefs, but purposed top-line commercial
equipment.

Julia and Jacque's style of cooking is not to throw huge mounds of food to
400 people who probably had as much discerning abilities to taste good food
as 400 people in a feeding frenzy at a Vegas buffet, their style was all about
developing layers of flavor and nuances of deliciousness. So to speak.
That is not to say that Sheldon didn't do a fine job of cooking for 400 sailors.

N.

No chefs in the US military?
That is very odd, since there are regular cooking competitions among the different service
branch CHEFS.

N.

I give a lot of leeway to Pepin these days, I think that from the appearance of
his hands, he has some crippling arthritis beginning, and knife work might be
fairly difficult.

N.

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:00:06 -0600, Shalako > wrote:

>On 9/6/2015 3:43 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better quality than
>>> any used by civilians,
>>
>> LOL, you're losing your marbles.
>>
>
>WTF do YOU know about how OUR Navy sources food?
>
>Anything?

The 4F douchebag draft dodger never wore the uniform. I'm kind of
suprised at with so many at rfc it appears I'm the only one who ever
served. And yet they all claim to know as though they were there...
they know nothing, the cowards. I was on a Sherman class destroyer,
rather large for its time, carried a crew of between 350-450, varied
with duty but mostly 400... there were only three cooks not counting
the chief who never cooked, two cooked one day on one day off and one
baked nights... every 90 days we rotated so everyone got baking duty.
In port one cook went on liberty or leave leaving two cooks to cover
for the one gone, but then about one third of the crew was gone too...
unless we were in port for Christmas and Thanksgiving, then there were
lots of civilian guests; rlatives, friends, dignataries, and kids from
local orphanages, even professional busty models who'd put on a great
show, musicians too. with my people in NY and the ship's home port in
Newport, RI I was near enough to visit at other times so I would take
the cooking duty so the other two could go home... then I'd cook for
well over a thousand and be at it for more than 24 hours straight...
I'd be carving hams, turkeys, and roast beefs for everyone, no help, I
didn't want any help anyway, they'd only be in my way. An aircraft
carrier maybe has 20 cooks. We had 3 cooks, one barber, two laundry
men, one postman who also tended the ship's store, one corpman (no
doctor), one chaplain. The rest of the crew did other jobs, about
half below decks in the engine room (snipes), there were those on the
bridge; helmsmen, signalmen, radarmen. There were gunners mates who
maintained the fire power... most of a war ship is taken up with
firepower; the definition of a war ship is a floating platform for
armament. About 30 were deckhands/Bosn'mates, they maintained the
ship's exterior; painting, polishing, wash downs, rigging, small boats
(coxwains), replenishment, etc. There were record keepers too,
yeomen/clerks... and lets not forget the officers. With a full crew
of 400 there weren't enough to do all the jobs so many did more than
one job... the cooks also maintained the food storage holds and
reefers, cleaned the galley, and painted their own spaces, everyone
painted their own spaces. At sea at any one time 1/4 of the crew was
sleeping, but most never missed a meal, there were actually four meals
a day, those going on midnight watch were fed too, midrats. The cooks
were about the only ones who knew the entire crew because everyone had
to eat, but most of the rest of the crew their paths rarely crossed,
some never met everyone. Navy life is a hard life but I wouldn't have
missed it for anything, if I could I'd do it again, it was the best of
times. Carol and Gary know absolutely nothing of navy life... Carol
was probably screwing a sailor so is regurgitating his boastings but
she'd never been in the Navy, she was obviousy never aboard a navy
ship. I've met a lot of people who have friends and relatives in the
military and like to talk like they know all about it and served by
association, but they know absolutely zero, knowing someone in the
military makes them nothing but what they are, a 4F draft dodging
cowardly shirker. All the men in my family served, uncles in the
army, air force, and marines, my father was in the navy, my younger
brother was in the navy, I was in the navy. Carol was some sailer's
ho, likely several sailors ho. Gary is a coward, he's been a coward
all his life, he'll die a coward. Gary could never be a shipmate,
he'd stab you in the back same as he did me and several others. Carol
is a back stabber too. Actually rfc has hosted quite a few
backstabbers, posters who feign friendliness but who are not to be
trusted... slithering snakes come to mind. The one positive comment I
can make about the dwarf is, in all these years he has never pretended
to be my buddy, so for that I have to respect him, and at least of the
weird foods he displays he can cook. The rest can't prepare flackie
wakies for breakfast if their kids lives depended on it... all these
liars bragging about stir frying, woks, wok burners, and rice cookers
have not once displayed a bowl of chinky fly lice... all liars who
dine at the Golden Arches and such. All friggin' fakes!

gtr wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On 2015-09-06 23:47:25 +0000, cshenk said:
>
> > > Nope, one cook for each 24 hour duty stint...
>
> [ mercy snip ]
>
> > BULLSHIT. Calling you on this. You assume no one is familair with
> > Navy ships here and will believe that balderdash you are spewing.
> > Hopefully they will not.
> >
> > Folks, by the time they had machines to peel the potatoes, they
> > *reduced* the galley staff to 20 for a crew of 300.
>
> I would think most home-cooks (the vast majority of us here), can
> figure out that a single cook for 300 people over a 24 hours period
> of time, even with a couple of mess cooks would be very very
> difficult. Like "walking to Mars" difficult.

Yup. In modern ships with a crew of 300, there are 3 galleys.
Enlisted (biggest), CPO (next biggest, works with the main one) and
officers Mess (some level of work with the other but financially
separate). Average 20 CS split in 3 shifts plus some 15-20 FSAs
augment.

BTW, the '4th meal' is called Mid-rats and only night workers can get
it. They have to have a card normally to get fed (some ships are
looser, carriers especially). It's from 11pm to 12:30 am normally.

Larger deck ships (crews of 1,000 or more) have more mess decks and
more crew to handle them and the bigger the crew, the more apt they are
to have 24/7 food or at most a mild 2 hour time (2-4am) when food isnt
hot and ready. It might just be a soup and salad bar at some times,
but its there.

Want amazing? Carriers. 90 CS on average, 3,000 regular chipboard crew
and when you add the airwing and marines, can hit 7,000. Now THAT can
be crazy! They do it though. I dunno how, but they do.

Carol

--

On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 18:18:45 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 16:34:44 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>>jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>> On 9/6/2015 1:45 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>> >
>>> > "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> > ...
>>> >> On 9/6/2015 9:59 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> "Robert" wrote:
>>> >>>>> Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a whole new
>>> >>>>> category of crazy cat lady;-)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he did all
>>> >>> the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of the others.
>>> >>> sheldon was just one of many.
>>> >>>
>>> >> Great typo there, Gary!
>>> >>
>>> >> Jill
>>> >
>>> > Yeah, that had me LOL too.
>>> >
>>> > Cheri
>>>
>>> It certainly seemed to fit who Gary was replying to.
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>>LOL. Just so you both know - I purposely spelled it that way. Just
>>giving him back a little of his gutter talk. Did you notice that Carol
>>"fixed" the spelling when she replied? heh heh
>
>Did you notice I knew it was not a typo lol

Of course not, it was a cowardly ferret like play at back stabbing.

On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 21:25:42 -0400, Brooklyn1
> wrote:
>
>>On 9/6/2015 3:43 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better quality than
>>>> any used by civilians,
>>>
>>> LOL, you're losing your marbles.
>>>
>The 4F douchebag draft dodger never wore the uniform.

LOL, that makes so much sense...

So, you still stand by this claim of yours?
"Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better quality
than any used by civilians"

On the face of it, that is a ridiculous claim, and nobody needs any
military service anywhere to know that.

gtr wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On 2015-09-07 00:10:35 +0000, Jeßus said:
>
> >On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 17:05:13 -0700, gtr > wrote:
> >
> > > On 2015-09-06 23:47:25 +0000, cshenk said:
> > >
> > > > > Nope, one cook for each 24 hour duty stint...
> > >
> > > [ mercy snip ]
> > >
> > > > BULLSHIT. Calling you on this. You assume no one is familair
> > > > with Navy ships here and will believe that balderdash you are
> > > > spewing. Hopefully they will not.
> > > >
> > > > Folks, by the time they had machines to peel the potatoes, they
> > > > *reduced* the galley staff to 20 for a crew of 300.
> > >
> > > I would think most home-cooks (the vast majority of us here), can
> > > figure out that a single cook for 300 people over a 24 hours
> > > period of time, even with a couple of mess cooks would be very
> > > very difficult. Like "walking to Mars" difficult.
> >
> > Did he claim that? LOL.
>
> Seemingly (Above: "Nope, one cook fro each 24 hour duty stint...")
>
> > Many years ago I worked for about 12 months in a small restaurant,
> > and the idea of a single person managing to serve 300 meals (even
> > with a couple of mess cooks, as you say,) is quite ridiculous.
> > Unless it was junk food perhaps.
>
> I suppose ye olde prisons and orphanages managed to accomplish
> something within range from panoply of the many "thin gruels"
> available. And, of course, a store house of MRE could pull it off.
> Still, just scraping 300 MRE into huge vats seems like a tough call,
> three times a day...

LOL, no, we get real food. I had an MRE only once and it was due to a
typhoon where we had to be there to manhandle the ship at need to the
pier (inport, yard period, engines shut down and in overhaul). USS
Essex, I think that was 2005. We were having a refit and the galley
was out of operation. Nothing happened other than a lot of rain but it
was a bit scarey for a time.

The MRE wasn't great but not too terrible seeing it was what we had.

--

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 20:55:41 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>> None of that is true or there'd be no fine restaurants or bakeries.
>> Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better quality than
>> any used by civilians, every cut of beef the navy receives is the best
>> of USDA Prime... some few navy cooks weren't very good, especially on
>> the larger vessels but for the most part navy chow was better than
>> what you eat at home. It's far easier to cook better quality food in
>> large quantity than in small amounts. Most of what's served at large
>> fancy schmancy restaurants nowadays is prepared at huge wholesale
>> commissaries, they've adopted military style cookery to ensure
>> consistant quality. You dine at fast food joints, probably mostly
>> from convenience stores and roach coaches, you don't cook anything,
>> you've just proven that fact again, for the umpteenth time. I know
>> very well who here cooks and who only talks... you don't even make
>> sense when you talk cooking... you're a 4F loser and you were NEVER in
>> the US Navy.
>
>Do you realize how ****ing ridiculous you sound? I can't even believe
>that YOU believe what you're babbling about.
>
>-sw

I know you never pretended to be my pal but you're still a know
nothing coward who never served... go get you some more tortillas and
hot peppers to do your tex mex garbage.

Brooklyn1 wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:00:06 -0600, Shalako > wrote:
>
> > On 9/6/2015 3:43 PM, Je?us wrote:
> >> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1
> >> > wrote:
> > >
> >>> Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better quality
> than >>> any used by civilians,
> > >
> >> LOL, you're losing your marbles.
> > >
> >
> > WTF do YOU know about how OUR Navy sources food?
> >
> > Anything?
>
> The 4F douchebag draft dodger never wore the uniform. I'm kind of
> suprised at with so many at rfc it appears I'm the only one who ever
> served. And yet they all claim to know as though they were there...
> they know nothing, the cowards. I was on a Sherman class destroyer,
> rather large for its time, carried a crew of between 350-450, varied
> with duty but mostly 400... there were only three cooks not counting
> the chief who never cooked, two cooked one day on one day off and one
> baked nights... every 90 days we rotated so everyone got baking duty.
> In port one cook went on liberty or leave leaving two cooks to cover
> for the one gone, but then about one third of the crew was gone too...
> unless we were in port for Christmas and Thanksgiving, then there were
> lots of civilian guests; rlatives, friends, dignataries, and kids from
> local orphanages, even professional busty models who'd put on a great
> show, musicians too. with my people in NY and the ship's home port in
> Newport, RI I was near enough to visit at other times so I would take
> the cooking duty so the other two could go home... then I'd cook for
> well over a thousand and be at it for more than 24 hours straight...
> I'd be carving hams, turkeys, and roast beefs for everyone, no help, I
> didn't want any help anyway, they'd only be in my way. An aircraft
> carrier maybe has 20 cooks. We had 3 cooks, one barber, two laundry
> men, one postman who also tended the ship's store, one corpman (no
> doctor), one chaplain. The rest of the crew did other jobs, about
> half below decks in the engine room (snipes), there were those on the
> bridge; helmsmen, signalmen, radarmen. There were gunners mates who
> maintained the fire power... most of a war ship is taken up with
> firepower; the definition of a war ship is a floating platform for
> armament. About 30 were deckhands/Bosn'mates, they maintained the
> ship's exterior; painting, polishing, wash downs, rigging, small boats
> (coxwains), replenishment, etc. There were record keepers too,
> yeomen/clerks... and lets not forget the officers. With a full crew
> of 400 there weren't enough to do all the jobs so many did more than
> one job... the cooks also maintained the food storage holds and
> reefers, cleaned the galley, and painted their own spaces, everyone
> painted their own spaces. At sea at any one time 1/4 of the crew was
> sleeping, but most never missed a meal, there were actually four meals
> a day, those going on midnight watch were fed too, midrats. The cooks
> were about the only ones who knew the entire crew because everyone had
> to eat, but most of the rest of the crew their paths rarely crossed,
> some never met everyone. Navy life is a hard life but I wouldn't have
> missed it for anything, if I could I'd do it again, it was the best of
> times. Carol and Gary know absolutely nothing of navy life... Carol
> was probably screwing a sailor so is regurgitating his boastings but
> she'd never been in the Navy, she was obviousy never aboard a navy
> ship. I've met a lot of people who have friends and relatives in the
> military and like to talk like they know all about it and served by
> association, but they know absolutely zero, knowing someone in the
> military makes them nothing but what they are, a 4F draft dodging
> cowardly shirker. All the men in my family served, uncles in the
> army, air force, and marines, my father was in the navy, my younger
> brother was in the navy, I was in the navy. Carol was some sailer's
> ho, likely several sailors ho. Gary is a coward, he's been a coward
> all his life, he'll die a coward. Gary could never be a shipmate,
> he'd stab you in the back same as he did me and several others. Carol
> is a back stabber too. Actually rfc has hosted quite a few
> backstabbers, posters who feign friendliness but who are not to be
> trusted... slithering snakes come to mind. The one positive comment I
> can make about the dwarf is, in all these years he has never pretended
> to be my buddy, so for that I have to respect him, and at least of the
> weird foods he displays he can cook. The rest can't prepare flackie
> wakies for breakfast if their kids lives depended on it... all these
> liars bragging about stir frying, woks, wok burners, and rice cookers
> have not once displayed a bowl of chinky fly lice... all liars who
> dine at the Golden Arches and such. All friggin' fakes!

Try again Sheldon. Lets start that the crew of the Sherman class was
324 crew. You are so off scale now, it's really obvious to all.

I don't know if you are drunk or starting to lose it with age. I hope
the former.

Carol, ITCS ret 1983-2009






--

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> wrote:
>>
>> "Robert" wrote:
>> >Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a whole new
>> >category of crazy cat lady;-)
>>
>> Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
>
> He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he did all
> the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of the others.
> sheldon was just one of many.

Yeah. My husband was on a ship. I know how it works.

On 9/6/2015 7:55 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Do you realize how ****ing ridiculous you sound?


Do you realize how evil you a

>> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

On 9/6/2015 8:34 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> This has nothing to do with serving.


YOUR STALKING:

>> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

On 9/6/2015 8:58 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> He's comparing Navy foo


**** OFF STALKER!

>> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

On 9/6/2015 8:14 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 20:55:41 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>
>>> None of that is true or there'd be no fine restaurants or bakeries.
>>> Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better quality than
>>> any used by civilians, every cut of beef the navy receives is the best
>>> of USDA Prime... some few navy cooks weren't very good, especially on
>>> the larger vessels but for the most part navy chow was better than
>>> what you eat at home. It's far easier to cook better quality food in
>>> large quantity than in small amounts. Most of what's served at large
>>> fancy schmancy restaurants nowadays is prepared at huge wholesale
>>> commissaries, they've adopted military style cookery to ensure
>>> consistant quality. You dine at fast food joints, probably mostly
>>> from convenience stores and roach coaches, you don't cook anything,
>>> you've just proven that fact again, for the umpteenth time. I know
>>> very well who here cooks and who only talks... you don't even make
>>> sense when you talk cooking... you're a 4F loser and you were NEVER in
>>> the US Navy.
>>
>> Do you realize how ****ing ridiculous you sound? I can't even believe
>> that YOU believe what you're babbling about.
>>
>> -sw
>
> I know you never pretended to be my pal but you're still a know
> nothing coward who never served... go get you some more tortillas and
> hot peppers to do your tex mex garbage.
>


Oh the ignominy of the alky's kiss off...

Je_us wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 21:25:42 -0400, Brooklyn1
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 9/6/2015 3:43 PM, Je?us wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1
> >>> > wrote:
> > > >
> >>>> Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better
> quality than >>>> any used by civilians,
> > > >
> >>> LOL, you're losing your marbles.
> > > >
> > The 4F douchebag draft dodger never wore the uniform.
>
> LOL, that makes so much sense...
>
> So, you still stand by this claim of yours?
> "Truth is the ingredients the navy receives are far better quality
> than any used by civilians"
>
> On the face of it, that is a ridiculous claim, and nobody needs any
> military service anywhere to know that.

Nope. There was a time when that happened, but it was all services and
it was WWII. Not after that.

--

Nancy2 wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> No chefs in the US military?
> That is very odd, since there are regular cooking competitions among
> the different service branch CHEFS.
>
> N.

They are called Culinary Specialists now in the Navy and they range
from learning to make rice to very fancy chefs.

In personal experience, the larger the ship crew, the better the food.
Navy chow is known among the military as a notch above any other food
seen in field.

--

Nancy2 wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> Not only a bunch of other cooks and chefs, but purposed top-line
> commercial equipment.
>
> Julia and Jacque's style of cooking is not to throw huge mounds of
> food to 400 people who probably had as much discerning abilities to
> taste good food as 400 people in a feeding frenzy at a Vegas buffet,
> their style was all about developing layers of flavor and nuances of
> deliciousness. So to speak. That is not to say that Sheldon didn't
> do a fine job of cooking for 400 sailors.
>
> N.

I Nancy, Sheldon fed a crew of 324 and had about 20 cooks to help with
it. It is very doubtful he was more than a junior cook.



--

On 2015-09-07 01:55:41 +0000, Sqwertz said:

> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>> ...I know very well who here cooks and who only talks... you don't even
>> make sense when you talk cooking... you're a 4F loser and you were
>> NEVER in the US Navy.
>
> Do you realize how ****ing ridiculous you sound? I can't even believe
> that YOU believe what you're babbling about.

He's cornered and will gnaw off his own leg to get somewhere safe where
he can comfortably gnaw off his own leg.

Let the old duffer go. He's old. He's tired. He feels the
inexplicable need to poof up what was an exciting anonymous life with a
bit more zazz than it may have had. "I caught one THIS big." "I
cooked for a guy who knew the pope, er... worked for the Pope... er...
the POPE!"

Brooklyn1 wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> The 4F douchebag draft dodger never wore the uniform. I'm kind of
> suprised at with so many at rfc it appears I'm the only one who ever
> served. And yet they all claim to know as though they were there...
> they know nothing, the cowards. I was on a Sherman class destroyer,
> rather large for its time, carried a crew of between 350-450, varied
> with duty but mostly 400... there were only three cooks not counting
> the chief who never cooked, two cooked one day on one day off and one
> baked nights... every 90 days we rotated so everyone got baking duty.
> In port one cook went on liberty or leave leaving two cooks to cover
> for the one gone, but then about one third of the crew was gone too...
> unless we were in port for Christmas and Thanksgiving, then there were
> lots of civilian guests; rlatives, friends, dignataries, and kids from
> local orphanages, even professional busty models who'd put on a great
> show, musicians too. with my people in NY and the ship's home port in
> Newport, RI I was near enough to visit at other times so I would take
> the cooking duty so the other two could go home... then I'd cook for
> well over a thousand and be at it for more than 24 hours straight...
> I'd be carving hams, turkeys, and roast beefs for everyone, no help, I
> didn't want any help anyway, they'd only be in my way. An aircraft
> carrier maybe has 20 cooks. We had 3 cooks, one barber, two laundry
> men, one postman who also tended the ship's store, one corpman (no
> doctor), one chaplain. The rest of the crew did other jobs, about half
> below decks in the engine room (snipes), there were those on the
> bridge; helmsmen, signalmen, radarmen. There were gunners mates who
> maintained the fire power... most of a war ship is taken up with
> firepower; the definition of a war ship is a floating platform for
> armament. About 30 were deckhands/Bosn'mates, they maintained the
> ship's exterior; painting, polishing, wash downs, rigging, small boats
> (coxwains), replenishment, etc. There were record keepers too,
> yeomen/clerks... and lets not forget the officers. With a full crew of
> 400 there weren't enough to do all the jobs so many did more than one
> job... the cooks also maintained the food storage holds and reefers,
> cleaned the galley, and painted their own spaces, everyone painted
> their own spaces. At sea at any one time 1/4 of the crew was sleeping,
> but most never missed a meal, there were actually four meals a day,
> those going on midnight watch were fed too, midrats. The cooks were
> about the only ones who knew the entire crew because everyone had to
> eat, but most of the rest of the crew their paths rarely crossed, some
> never met everyone. Navy life is a hard life but I wouldn't have
> missed it for anything, if I could I'd do it again, it was the best of
> times. Carol and Gary know absolutely nothing of navy life... Carol
> was probably screwing a sailor so is regurgitating his boastings but
> she'd never been in the Navy, she was obviousy never aboard a navy
> ship. I've met a lot of people who have friends and relatives in the
> military and like to talk like they know all about it and served by
> association, but they know absolutely zero, knowing someone in the
> military makes them nothing but what they are, a 4F draft dodging
> cowardly shirker. All the men in my family served, uncles in the army,
> air force, and marines, my father was in the navy, my younger brother
> was in the navy, I was in the navy. Carol was some sailer's ho,
> likely several sailors ho. Gary is a coward, he's been a coward all
> his life, he'll die a coward. Gary could never be a shipmate, he'd
> stab you in the back same as he did me and several others. Carol is a
> back stabber too. Actually rfc has hosted quite a few backstabbers,
> posters who feign friendliness but who are not to be trusted...
> slithering snakes come to mind. The one positive comment I can make
> about the dwarf is, in all these years he has never pretended to be my
> buddy, so for that I have to respect him, and at least of the weird
> foods he displays he can cook. The rest can't prepare flackie wakies
> for breakfast if their kids lives depended on it... all these liars
> bragging about stir frying, woks, wok burners, and rice cookers have
> not once displayed a bowl of chinky fly lice... all liars who dine at
> the Golden Arches and such. All friggin' fakes!

Deep breaths! Deep breaths!

Nobody will read your spew unless you learn to put in a few
double-stops for paragraphs.

"cshenk" > wrote in message speaking of Sheldon

> I don't know if you are drunk or starting to lose it with age. I hope
> the former.


I imagine a large amount of both.

Cheri

"gtr" > wrote in message news:2015090621461988800-xxx@yyyzzz...
> Brooklyn1 wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> The 4F douchebag draft dodger never wore the uniform. I'm kind of
>> suprised at with so many at rfc it appears I'm the only one who ever
>> served. And yet they all claim to know as though they were there... they
>> know nothing, the cowards. I was on a Sherman class destroyer, rather
>> large for its time, carried a crew of between 350-450, varied with duty
>> but mostly 400... there were only three cooks not counting the chief who
>> never cooked, two cooked one day on one day off and one baked nights...
>> every 90 days we rotated so everyone got baking duty. In port one cook
>> went on liberty or leave leaving two cooks to cover for the one gone, but
>> then about one third of the crew was gone too... unless we were in port
>> for Christmas and Thanksgiving, then there were lots of civilian guests;
>> rlatives, friends, dignataries, and kids from local orphanages, even
>> professional busty models who'd put on a great show, musicians too. with
>> my people in NY and the ship's home port in Newport, RI I was near enough
>> to visit at other times so I would take the cooking duty so the other two
>> could go home... then I'd cook for well over a thousand and be at it for
>> more than 24 hours straight... I'd be carving hams, turkeys, and roast
>> beefs for everyone, no help, I didn't want any help anyway, they'd only
>> be in my way. An aircraft carrier maybe has 20 cooks. We had 3 cooks,
>> one barber, two laundry men, one postman who also tended the ship's
>> store, one corpman (no doctor), one chaplain. The rest of the crew did
>> other jobs, about half below decks in the engine room (snipes), there
>> were those on the bridge; helmsmen, signalmen, radarmen. There were
>> gunners mates who maintained the fire power... most of a war ship is
>> taken up with firepower; the definition of a war ship is a floating
>> platform for armament. About 30 were deckhands/Bosn'mates, they
>> maintained the ship's exterior; painting, polishing, wash downs, rigging,
>> small boats (coxwains), replenishment, etc. There were record keepers
>> too, yeomen/clerks... and lets not forget the officers. With a full crew
>> of 400 there weren't enough to do all the jobs so many did more than one
>> job... the cooks also maintained the food storage holds and reefers,
>> cleaned the galley, and painted their own spaces, everyone painted their
>> own spaces. At sea at any one time 1/4 of the crew was sleeping, but most
>> never missed a meal, there were actually four meals a day, those going on
>> midnight watch were fed too, midrats. The cooks were about the only ones
>> who knew the entire crew because everyone had to eat, but most of the
>> rest of the crew their paths rarely crossed, some never met everyone.
>> Navy life is a hard life but I wouldn't have missed it for anything, if I
>> could I'd do it again, it was the best of times. Carol and Gary know
>> absolutely nothing of navy life... Carol was probably screwing a sailor
>> so is regurgitating his boastings but she'd never been in the Navy, she
>> was obviousy never aboard a navy ship. I've met a lot of people who have
>> friends and relatives in the military and like to talk like they know all
>> about it and served by association, but they know absolutely zero,
>> knowing someone in the military makes them nothing but what they are, a
>> 4F draft dodging cowardly shirker. All the men in my family served,
>> uncles in the army, air force, and marines, my father was in the navy, my
>> younger brother was in the navy, I was in the navy. Carol was some
>> sailer's ho, likely several sailors ho. Gary is a coward, he's been a
>> coward all his life, he'll die a coward. Gary could never be a shipmate,
>> he'd stab you in the back same as he did me and several others. Carol is
>> a back stabber too. Actually rfc has hosted quite a few backstabbers,
>> posters who feign friendliness but who are not to be trusted...
>> slithering snakes come to mind. The one positive comment I can make
>> about the dwarf is, in all these years he has never pretended to be my
>> buddy, so for that I have to respect him, and at least of the weird foods
>> he displays he can cook. The rest can't prepare flackie wakies for
>> breakfast if their kids lives depended on it... all these liars bragging
>> about stir frying, woks, wok burners, and rice cookers have not once
>> displayed a bowl of chinky fly lice... all liars who dine at the Golden
>> Arches and such. All friggin' fakes!
>
> Deep breaths! Deep breaths!
>
> Nobody will read your spew unless you learn to put in a few double-stops
> for paragraphs.

He's never learned that paragraphs are his friends. I admit that I don't
read a lot of his posts because some of them are like being hit in the face
with a huge wall of text.

Cheri

cshenk wrote:
>
> Nancy2 wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
> > No chefs in the US military?
> > That is very odd, since there are regular cooking competitions among
> > the different service branch CHEFS.
> >
> > N.
>
> They are called Culinary Specialists now in the Navy and they range
> from learning to make rice to very fancy chefs.
>
> In personal experience, the larger the ship crew, the better the food.
> Navy chow is known among the military as a notch above any other food
> seen in field.

I've read many times that the submarine crews get the best chow.
Any knowledge if this is true?

Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 18:18:45 -0300, wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 16:34:44 -0400, Gary > wrote:
> >
> >>jmcquown wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 9/6/2015 1:45 PM, Cheri wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> >>> > ...
> >>> >> On 9/6/2015 9:59 AM, Gary wrote:
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> "Robert" wrote:
> >>> >>>>> Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a whole new
> >>> >>>>> category of crazy cat lady;-)
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> He talks about feeding 400 semen several times a day like he did all
> >>> >>> the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of the others.
> >>> >>> sheldon was just one of many.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >> Great typo there, Gary!
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Jill
> >>> >
> >>> > Yeah, that had me LOL too.
> >>> >
> >>> > Cheri
> >>>
> >>> It certainly seemed to fit who Gary was replying to.
> >>>
> >>> Jill
> >>
> >>LOL. Just so you both know - I purposely spelled it that way. Just
> >>giving him back a little of his gutter talk. Did you notice that Carol
> >>"fixed" the spelling when she replied? heh heh
> >
> >Did you notice I knew it was not a typo lol
>
> Of course not, it was a cowardly ferret like play at back stabbing.

Just for the record...ferrets are not cowardly nor do they backstab. I
don't either. To tease you a little bit seems to make you cry and lash
out. I do feel like your friend and I back you up often but I'll
tease you when you drink too much and spout out about some subject
dumbly.

I tease people that I like occasionally. The ones I don't like, I
ignore.

I am not your enemy, Sheldon. :-o

gtr wrote:
> On 2015-09-07 01:55:41 +0000, Sqwertz said:
>
>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:51:29 -0400, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>
>>> ...I know very well who here cooks and who only talks... you don't
>>> even make sense when you talk cooking... you're a 4F loser and you
>>> were NEVER in the US Navy.
>>
>> Do you realize how ****ing ridiculous you sound? I can't even believe
>> that YOU believe what you're babbling about.
>
> He's cornered and will gnaw off his own leg to get somewhere safe where
> he can comfortably gnaw off his own leg.
>
> Let the old duffer go. He's old. He's tired. He feels the
> inexplicable need to poof up what was an exciting anonymous life with a
> bit more zazz than it may have had. "I caught one THIS big." "I cooked
> for a guy who knew the pope, er... worked for the Pope... er... the POPE!"
>
>
\|||/
(o o)
,---ooO--(_)--------.
| |
| Please don't |
|feed the Sqwerty & |
| Marty TROLLS! |
| |
`-------------ooO---'
|__|__|
|| ||
ooO Ooo

Cheri wrote:
> I admit that I don't read a lot of his posts because some of them are
> like being hit in the face with a huge wall of text.
>
> Cheri

He certainly is the lone proponent of that style.

Great imagery.

I'm having a Phil Spector memory.

Cheri wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "cshenk" > wrote in message speaking of Sheldon
>
> > I don't know if you are drunk or starting to lose it with age. I
> > hope the former.
>
>
> I imagine a large amount of both.
>
> Cheri

Dunno. He's shifting though quite a lot and that can happen with
dimensia. He has no family it seems to help him out. He may just be in
a bad mood though.

Carol

--

Gary wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> cshenk wrote:
> >
> > Nancy2 wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> >
> > > No chefs in the US military?
> > > That is very odd, since there are regular cooking competitions
> > > among the different service branch CHEFS.
> > >
> > > N.
> >
> > They are called Culinary Specialists now in the Navy and they range
> > from learning to make rice to very fancy chefs.
> >
> > In personal experience, the larger the ship crew, the better the
> > food. Navy chow is known among the military as a notch above any
> > other food seen in field.
>
> I've read many times that the submarine crews get the best chow.
> Any knowledge if this is true?

So I have been told but since they are just now starting to allow women
on subs, I have no experience other than what I have been told.

There is a mid-range in cooking I think. On a really big ship, you
will have some really good cooks who can pass skills and make the food
good. On a really small ship, it's a crap shoot. I gather on a sub,
you get a lot of quality frozen meals that require less actual skill
but added to it is a lot of canned goods that take time to learn to
cook right and they specialize in that?

Apparently at least at one time, before a sub pulled out the
passageways were lined with canned goods and you walked on them. They'd
peel them out in even layers so over time, it was easier to walk around
as the level dropped.

We'd need an actual sub sailor here to tell us if what I was told is
true or not, and if it is reasonably current.

Carol

--

Julie Bove wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "Gary" > wrote in message
> ...
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > "Robert" wrote:
> > > > Seriously Your feeding 400 cats four times a day? Your in a
> > > > whole new category of crazy cat lady;-)
> > >
> > > Oh is that it ? I thought it was booze talking and yapping.
> >
> > He talks about feeding 400 seamen several times a day like he did
all
> > the work himself. There were many chefs taking care of the others.
> > sheldon was just one of many.
>
> Yeah. My husband was on a ship. I know how it works.

What kind of ship Julie? Just curious on it and what job he did. He
might have been a passenger and nothing wrong with that, but even as a
passenger he might have observed somting interesting.

--

On 2015-09-07 18:08:10 +0000, cshenk said:

>> Yeah. My husband was on a ship. I know how it works.

Me too!

> What kind of ship Julie? Just curious on it and what job he did. He
> might have been a passenger and nothing wrong with that, but even as a
> passenger he might have observed somting interesting.

As children we were on trans-Atlantic liners, SS America, Independece
and Constitution. The food was regal to say the least. I remember
well the the strolling violin trio in the dining room, they'd do
pizzicato things to make the kids laugh. We ate like lords.

On Mon, 07 Sep 2015 05:40:30 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>cshenk wrote:
>>
>> Nancy2 wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>> > No chefs in the US military?
>> > That is very odd, since there are regular cooking competitions among
>> > the different service branch CHEFS.
>> >
>> > N.
>>
>> They are called Culinary Specialists now in the Navy and they range
>> from learning to make rice to very fancy chefs.
>>
>> In personal experience, the larger the ship crew, the better the food.
>> Navy chow is known among the military as a notch above any other food
>> seen in field.
>
>I've read many times that the submarine crews get the best chow.
>Any knowledge if this is true?

Asolutely true, the smaller ships had the best chow.

"la voz del norte" > wrote in message
...
> Cheri wrote:
>> I admit that I don't read a lot of his posts because some of them are
>> like being hit in the face with a huge wall of text.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> He certainly is the lone proponent of that style.
>
> Great imagery.
>
> I'm having a Phil Spector memory.

LOL on the PS thing, true.

Cheri