On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 02:29:52 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>>
>> >Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>> >> > > >
>> >> >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I need
>> >> to >>> replicate it).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au jus.
>> >>
>> >> That's it.
>> >
>> >Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin broth
>> >served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy types. I don't
>> >know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but there may be some.
>>
>> Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that there
>> isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want to say that
>> there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
>
>In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French transliteration),
>"au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
>
>A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
>
><http://www.customculinary.com/bases/beef-bases/product_detail.cfm?lnid=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U 3D_ys>

This kind of ignorance shouldn't be encouraged, but it does give you a
good idea of the kind of people that buy a product like this.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:43:11 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>Janet wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> In article >, cshenk1
>> @cox.net says...
>> >
>> > Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>> >
>> > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>> > > > > >
>> > > >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I
>> > > need to >>> replicate it).
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au jus.
>> > >
>> > > That's it.
>> >
>> > Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
>> > broth served with meat here.
>>
>> no, it's called jus.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Au_jus
>>
>> If you're going to use a French term, get it right.
>>
>> Janet UK
>
>Please note even your quoted version shows the difference in USA terms.
>We are an international group. You will never get all to use the
>specifics you want from a particular country.
>
>Au Jus in the USA is a thin, meat based (far as I know) 'gravy'
>(actually a broth with no thickening we'd recognize here).
>
>Suggest ignore it if we add 'au' to the front of jus.

How can you not see it is the 'juice' from the meat, not some ghastly
made gravy.

Bruce wrote:
>
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French transliteration),
> >"au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
> >
> >A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
> >
> ><http://www.customculinary.com/bases/beef-bases/product_detail.cfm?lnid=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U 3D_ys>
>
> This kind of ignorance shouldn't be encouraged, but it does give you a
> good idea of the kind of people that buy a product like this.

Don't judge the people though. It's the common description here
in the USA. Similar to the shepherd's pie/cottage pie issue that
had been argued here before. Even Martha Stewart put out a recipe
for "Shepherd's Pie" and it used ground beef rather than lamb.

I once bought a "gravy packet" of Knorr's Au Jus. I knew what it
meant. It's a thin beef gravy...just juice slightly thickened.
Rip off though. I could have made the same using a cup of water,
a teaspoon of beef bouillon and maybe a teaspoon of flour or
cornstarch for way less money.

Your ingredient list posts are on topic and fine. What annoys
most is that you also preface it or follow up by calling people
idiots for using that product. "Sheeple" comes to mind. You are
like a vegan trying to convert everyone else to your diet. Like a
reformed smoker bitching at everyone else that still smokes. Like
a born again christian determined to save the rest of the world's
souls. And one more - with politics. Your opinion is just as
valuable as any other but no need to start name calling people
that don't agree with you.

And that's my opinion.

wrote:
>
> "cshenk" wrote:
> >Au Jus in the USA is a thin, meat based (far as I know) 'gravy'
> >(actually a broth with no thickening we'd recognize here).
> >
> >Suggest ignore it if we add 'au' to the front of jus.
>
> How can you not see it is the 'juice' from the meat, not some ghastly
> made gravy.

Sadly or not, in the USA it does mean thin beef gravy. See my
last post mentioning Knorr's Au Jus. I got ripped off paying over
$1.00 for that nonsense.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 07:07:36 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Bruce wrote:
>>
>> This kind of ignorance shouldn't be encouraged, but it does give you a
>> good idea of the kind of people that buy a product like this.
>
>Don't judge the people though. It's the common description here
>in the USA. Similar to the shepherd's pie/cottage pie issue that
>had been argued here before. Even Martha Stewart put out a recipe
>for "Shepherd's Pie" and it used ground beef rather than lamb.
>
>I once bought a "gravy packet" of Knorr's Au Jus. I knew what it
>meant. It's a thin beef gravy...just juice slightly thickened.
>Rip off though. I could have made the same using a cup of water,
>a teaspoon of beef bouillon and maybe a teaspoon of flour or
>cornstarch for way less money.
>
>Your ingredient list posts are on topic and fine. What annoys
>most is that you also preface it or follow up by calling people
>idiots for using that product. "Sheeple" comes to mind.

I tend to use words like that in response to other people's bitching
about my ingredient lists. Although most people are actually sheeple,
now that I think about it.

>You are
>like a vegan trying to convert everyone else to your diet.

But I'm not even a vegetarian.

>Like a
>reformed smoker bitching at everyone else that still smokes. Like
>a born again christian determined to save the rest of the world's
>souls.

I just tell you (plural) what's in some of the supermarket horrors I
see mentioned here. How can that ever hurt anyone? If you still want
to eat it, at least you know what you're eating. And if you suddenly
start to grow tits on your back or a third testicle, you'll have an
idea why.

>And one more - with politics. Your opinion is just as
>valuable as any other but no need to start name calling people
>that don't agree with you.

I don't think there are any simpletons in this newsgroup. We're all
able to read and write well, which means we're all part of the 10% or
so elite of our countries

Nevertheless, without the simpleton vote Trump would never have been
elected. Doesn't mean only simpletons voted for him.

>And that's my opinion.

Likewise

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:21:21 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:

> I just tell you (plural) what's in some of the supermarket horrors I
> see mentioned here. How can that ever hurt anyone?

You're just basically ****ing into the wind. Enjoy.

> If you still want
> to eat it, at least you know what you're eating. And if you suddenly
> start to grow tits on your back or a third testicle, you'll have an
> idea why.

If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.

Cindy Hamilton

On 9/29/2017 9:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:21:21 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>
>> I just tell you (plural) what's in some of the supermarket horrors I
>> see mentioned here. How can that ever hurt anyone?
>
> You're just basically ****ing into the wind. Enjoy.
>
>> If you still want
>> to eat it, at least you know what you're eating. And if you suddenly
>> start to grow tits on your back or a third testicle, you'll have an
>> idea why.
>
> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
Only if you post a picture! <giggling>

Jill

On 9/28/2017 10:18 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Al pastor = "Shepherd
Steve Wertz - unrepentant woman stalker and total head case begging poor
Omelet to shoot him with a sniper rifle in austin.food:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ost
>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


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

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.centraltexasfoodbank.org...ntation-057jpg

Hide the Ho Ho's!!!

On 9/29/2017 5:07 AM, Gary wrote:
> And one more - with politics. Your opinion is just as
> valuable as any other


No, as a common or garden variety troll and also a serf of the royals
his opinion is worth far less than even a child's!@

On 9/29/2017 5:21 AM, Bruce wrote:
> Nevertheless, without the simpleton vote Trump would never have been
> elected. Doesn't mean only simpletons voted for him.


Without the "people of color" vote Obummer would never have had 2 terms
to destroy America.

Doesn't mean all people of color are racist, just the ones who voted on
skin color alone.

See how that works, Auztard?

On 9/29/2017 7:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

You already have 2?!???

On 9/29/2017 7:51 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 9/29/2017 9:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:21:21 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>>
>>> I just tell you (plural) what's in some of the supermarket horrors I
>>> see mentioned here. How can that ever hurt anyone?
>>
>> You're just basically ****ing into the wind.Â* Enjoy.
>>
>>> If you still want
>>> to eat it, at least you know what you're eating. And if you suddenly
>>> start to grow tits on your back or a third testicle, you'll have an
>>> idea why.
>>
>> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
> Only if you post a picture! <giggling>
>
> Jill
+1!

On 9/29/2017 8:58 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> You're lecturing a troll.

Steve Wertz - unrepentant woman stalker and total head case begging poor
Omelet to shoot him with a sniper rifle in austin.food:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ost
>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


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

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.centraltexasfoodbank.org...ntation-057jpg

Hide the Ho Ho's!!!

On 9/29/2017 12:09 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 9/28/2017 7:29 PM, cshenk wrote:
>> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I need
>>> to >>> replicate it).
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks very good.Â* Only thing missing is some au jus.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au jus.
>>>
>>> That's it.
>>
>> Not sure what you mean.Â* Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin broth
>> served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy types. I don't
>> know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but there may be some.
>>
> I could have gotten a souffle cup of jus (which is simply strained
> drippings from the roasted beef) or horseradish sauce.Â* I didn't request
> either one.Â* Everyone happy now?
>
> Jill

No. They should have used a ramekin

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 10:32:23 AM UTC-4, Casa de Masa wrote:
> On 9/29/2017 7:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
>
> You already have 2?!???

On more than one occasion I've been told I have balls.

Cindy Hamilton

On 9/29/2017 12:16 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/29/2017 12:09 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 9/28/2017 7:29 PM, cshenk wrote:
>>> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I need
>>>> to >>> replicate it).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks very good.Â* Only thing missing is some au jus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au jus.
>>>>
>>>> That's it.
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean.Â* Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin broth
>>> served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy types. I don't
>>> know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but there may be some.
>>>
>> I could have gotten a souffle cup of jus (which is simply strained
>> drippings from the roasted beef) or horseradish sauce.Â* I didn't
>> request either one.Â* Everyone happy now?
>>
>> Jill
>
> No.Â* They should have used a ramekin

If I'd have roasted it at home I'd have used a ramekin. To go would
require a covered souffle cup.

Jill

In article >,
says...
>
> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 10:32:23 AM UTC-4, Casa de Masa wrote:
> > On 9/29/2017 7:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > > If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
> > >
> > > Cindy Hamilton
> >
> > You already have 2?!???
>
> On more than one occasion I've been told I have balls.

Yes, but whose? :-)

Janet UK

jmcquown wrote:
>
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
> >
> Only if you post a picture! <giggling>

Please don't. :-o

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 06:23:25 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:21:21 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>
>> I just tell you (plural) what's in some of the supermarket horrors I
>> see mentioned here. How can that ever hurt anyone?
>
>You're just basically ****ing into the wind. Enjoy.

For you, yes. Because you don't care what you eat. You come up with a
"scientific" explanation of why all that crap just has to be in there
and why you would use the same chemicals if you made the product (yeah
right). To thee I say Bon appétit!

>> If you still want
>> to eat it, at least you know what you're eating. And if you suddenly
>> start to grow tits on your back or a third testicle, you'll have an
>> idea why.
>
>If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.

Considering your total acceptance of these science projects, I'm
betting 4.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:58:37 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 07:07:36 -0400, Gary wrote:
>
>> Your ingredient list posts are on topic and fine. What annoys
>> most is that you also preface it or follow up by calling people
>> idiots for using that product. "Sheeple" comes to mind. You are
>> like a vegan trying to convert everyone else to your diet. Like a
>> reformed smoker bitching at everyone else that still smokes. Like
>> a born again christian determined to save the rest of the world's
>> souls. And one more - with politics. Your opinion is just as
>> valuable as any other but no need to start name calling people
>> that don't agree with you.
>
>You're lecturing a troll. Just accept the fact that his posts are
>100% worthless and serve no purpose except to get gullible people
>riled up. And then move on.

I'd be quite happy if you moved on, Supermarket Steve. Yet you keep
dwelling on me.

On 9/29/2017 10:38 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 10:32:23 AM UTC-4, Casa de Masa wrote:
>> On 9/29/2017 7:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> You already have 2?!???
>
> On more than one occasion I've been told I have balls.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
Brass?

On 9/29/2017 11:48 AM, Janet wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 10:32:23 AM UTC-4, Casa de Masa wrote:
>>> On 9/29/2017 7:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> You already have 2?!???
>>
>> On more than one occasion I've been told I have balls.
>
> Yes, but whose? :-)
>
> Janet UK
>

Ben Wa's?

On 9/29/2017 12:08 PM, Gary wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>>>
>> Only if you post a picture! <giggling>
>
> Please don't. :-o
>

Heh:



_...----.._
,:':::::. `>.
,' |:::::;' |:::.
/ `'::' :::::\
/ _____ `::;\
: /:::::\ ` :
| ,. /: MISL:\ |
|;:::. `::::::;' |
:::::: `::;' ,. ;
\:::' ,::::/
\ \:::/
`. ,:. :;'
`-.::::::.. _.''
```----'''

On 9/29/2017 1:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:58:37 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 07:07:36 -0400, Gary wrote:
>>
>>> Your ingredient list posts are on topic and fine. What annoys
>>> most is that you also preface it or follow up by calling people
>>> idiots for using that product. "Sheeple" comes to mind. You are
>>> like a vegan trying to convert everyone else to your diet. Like a
>>> reformed smoker bitching at everyone else that still smokes. Like
>>> a born again christian determined to save the rest of the world's
>>> souls. And one more - with politics. Your opinion is just as
>>> valuable as any other but no need to start name calling people
>>> that don't agree with you.
>>
>> You're lecturing a troll. Just accept the fact that his posts are
>> 100% worthless and serve no purpose except to get gullible people
>> riled up. And then move on.
>
> I'd be quite happy if you moved on, Supermarket Steve. Yet you keep
> dwelling on me.
>


I wonder if you're noticing yet just how many folks have seen right
through your act...

On 9/29/2017 1:48 PM, Janet wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 10:32:23 AM UTC-4, Casa de Masa wrote:
>>> On 9/29/2017 7:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> You already have 2?!???
>>
>> On more than one occasion I've been told I have balls.
>
> Yes, but whose? :-)
>
> Janet UK
>

I've known women that keep their husbands in their pocket

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 12:16:35 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 9/29/2017 12:09 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 9/28/2017 7:29 PM, cshenk wrote:
>>> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I need
>>>> to >>> replicate it).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks very good.* Only thing missing is some au jus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au jus.
>>>>
>>>> That's it.
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean.* Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin broth
>>> served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy types. I don't
>>> know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but there may be some.
>>>
>> I could have gotten a souffle cup of jus (which is simply strained
>> drippings from the roasted beef) or horseradish sauce.* I didn't request
>> either one.* Everyone happy now?
>>
>> Jill
>
>No. They should have used a ramekin

Actually for take out it would have been a disposable cup with a
lid... same as for a dipping sauce from a Chinese take out... a
ramekin is a glass oven proof container, not something a restaurant
wouldn't want to see again... even purchased in bulk could cost a
couple bucks each... and ramekins typically don't have lids:
https://www.amazon.com/Porcelain-Ram...words=ramekins

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:38:53 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 10:32:23 AM UTC-4, Casa de Masa wrote:
>> On 9/29/2017 7:23 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> > If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>> >
>> > Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> You already have 2?!???
>
>On more than one occasion I've been told I have balls.
>
>Cindy Hamilton

Maybe refering to those billiard balls on your chest... still they'd
be enjoyable to pocket with my cue stick. LOL

Cindy Hamilton wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> > >> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
> > >> > > >
> > >> >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I
> > need >> to >>> replicate it).
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au
> > jus. >>
> > >> That's it.
> > >
> > > Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
> > > broth served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy
> > > types. I don't know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but
> > > there may be some.
> >
> > Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that there
> > isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want to say that
> > there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
>
> In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French transliteration),
> "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
>
> A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
>
> <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...detail.cfm?lni
> d=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys>
>
> Let the whining about fake food begin!
>
> Cindy Hamilton

Actually we are saying the same thing. Bruce is just getting wierd.
Claiming the 'Au' should be dropped off then quoting what seems a USA
dictionary that adds it in then saying I'm wrong or something.

Whatever.

Carol

--

Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 02:29:52 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
> >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" >
> wrote: >>
> >> >Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I
> need >> >> to >>> replicate it).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au
> jus. >> >>
> >> >> That's it.
> >> >
> >> >Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
> broth >> >served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy
> types. I don't >> >know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but
> there may be some. >>
> >> Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that there
> >> isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want to say
> that >> there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
> >
> > In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French transliteration),
> > "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
> >
> > A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
> >
> > <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...t_detail.cfm?l
> > nid=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys>
>
> This kind of ignorance shouldn't be encouraged, but it does give you a
> good idea of the kind of people that buy a product like this.

You are being very thickheaded on this one arent you?

NOT ALL COUNTRIES USE THE SAME TERMS. Got it? Get over it and instead
enjoy learning abot others and how they term things.

A true Au Jus is made from the drippings from roasting of a piece of
meat and it's defatted. Because the name may make no sense in some
areas, it has a tendency to be called 'Au Jus Gravy' in some parts of
the USA. There are also packaged products labeled that (add water).

Did you need me to send you a recipe link? You seem a bit confused.

--

Cindy Hamilton wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:21:21 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>
> > I just tell you (plural) what's in some of the supermarket horrors I
> > see mentioned here. How can that ever hurt anyone?
>
> You're just basically ****ing into the wind. Enjoy.
>
> > If you still want
> > to eat it, at least you know what you're eating. And if you suddenly
> > start to grow tits on your back or a third testicle, you'll have an
> > idea why.
>
> If I grew a third testicle, I think it would definitely be newsworthy.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

LOL!

--

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 18:19:27 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 02:29:52 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French transliteration),
>> > "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
>> >
>> > A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
>> >
>> > <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...t_detail.cfm?l
>> > nid=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys>
>>
>> This kind of ignorance shouldn't be encouraged, but it does give you a
>> good idea of the kind of people that buy a product like this.
>
>You are being very thickheaded on this one arent you?
>
>NOT ALL COUNTRIES USE THE SAME TERMS. Got it? Get over it and instead
>enjoy learning abot others and how they term things.
>
>A true Au Jus is made from the drippings from roasting of a piece of
>meat and it's defatted. Because the name may make no sense in some
>areas, it has a tendency to be called 'Au Jus Gravy' in some parts of
>the USA. There are also packaged products labeled that (add water).
>
>Did you need me to send you a recipe link? You seem a bit confused.

You're *******ising another language, that's all I'm saying. But it's
all moot, because I'm sure nobody would ever buy this:

Hydrolyzed Corn Protein, Salt, Beef Broth, Sugar, Beef Fat, Caramel
Color, Contains 2 Percent Or Less Of Yeast Extract, Onion Powder,
Disodium Inosinate, Disodium Guanylate, Natural Flavors, Lactic Acid,
Calcium Lactate.

Would they?

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 18:11:34 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>Cindy Hamilton wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>> > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>> > >
>> > >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > >> > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I
>> > need >> to >>> replicate it).
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >
>> > >> > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au
>> > jus. >>
>> > >> That's it.
>> > >
>> > > Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
>> > > broth served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy
>> > > types. I don't know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but
>> > > there may be some.
>> >
>> > Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that there
>> > isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want to say that
>> > there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
>>
>> In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French transliteration),
>> "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
>>
>> A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
>>
>> <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...detail.cfm?lni
>> d=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys>
>>
>> Let the whining about fake food begin!
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>
>Actually we are saying the same thing. Bruce is just getting wierd.
>Claiming the 'Au' should be dropped off then quoting what seems a USA
>dictionary that adds it in then saying I'm wrong or something.
>
>Whatever.

Merriam-Webster dictionary (an American dictionary) says "au jus"
means "served in the juice obtained from roasting ".

Ok so far?

On 9/29/2017 5:26 PM, Bruce wrote:
> You're *******ising another language

Oh shut up and **** the HEll off!@

On 9/29/2017 4:47 PM, wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 12:16:35 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>> On 9/29/2017 12:09 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>>> On 9/28/2017 7:29 PM, cshenk wrote:
>>>> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I need
>>>>> to >>> replicate it).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks very good.Â* Only thing missing is some au jus.
>>>>>>
>>> I could have gotten a souffle cup of jus (which is simply strained
>>> drippings from the roasted beef) or horseradish sauce.Â* I didn't request
>>> either one.Â* Everyone happy now?
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>> No. They should have used a ramekin
>
> Actually for take out it would have been a disposable cup with a
> lid... same as for a dipping sauce from a Chinese take out...

True, Sheldon. In restaurant parliance it is called a "souffle cup"
(and it has nothing to do with souffles). It's a small covered cup for
takeout. If I'd made it at home and strained the drippings I'd have
served it in a ramekin.

Jill

Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 18:11:34 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
> > Cindy Hamilton wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> >
> >> On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> >> > >
> >> > >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> >> > >> > wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
> >> > >> > > >
> >> > >> >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff,
> I >> > need >> to >>> replicate it).
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au
> >> > jus. >>
> >> > >> That's it.
> >> > >
> >> > > Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
> >> > > broth served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy
> >> > > types. I don't know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but
> >> > > there may be some.
> >> >
> >> > Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that
> there >> > isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want
> to say that >> > there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
> >>
> >> In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French
> transliteration), >> "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
> >>
> >> A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
> >>
> >>
> <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...detail.cfm?lni
> >> d=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys> >>
> >> Let the whining about fake food begin!
> >>
> >> Cindy Hamilton
> >
> > Actually we are saying the same thing. Bruce is just getting wierd.
> > Claiming the 'Au' should be dropped off then quoting what seems a
> > USA dictionary that adds it in then saying I'm wrong or something.
> >
> > Whatever.
>
> Merriam-Webster dictionary (an American dictionary) says "au jus"
> means "served in the juice obtained from roasting ".
>
> Ok so far?

THats exactly what I SAID and what you are getting from all of us. You
have an issue with that?

--

On 2017-09-29 7:33 PM, cshenk wrote:
> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 18:11:34 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>
>>>> On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff,
>> I >> > need >> to >>> replicate it).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au
>>>>> jus. >>
>>>>>>> That's it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
>>>>>> broth served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy
>>>>>> types. I don't know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but
>>>>>> there may be some.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that
>> there >> > isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want
>> to say that >> > there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
>>>>
>>>> In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French
>> transliteration), >> "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
>>>>
>>>> A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
>>>>
>>>>
>> <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...detail.cfm?lni
>>>> d=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys> >>
>>>> Let the whining about fake food begin!
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> Actually we are saying the same thing. Bruce is just getting wierd.
>>> Claiming the 'Au' should be dropped off then quoting what seems a
>>> USA dictionary that adds it in then saying I'm wrong or something.
>>>
>>> Whatever.
>>
>> Merriam-Webster dictionary (an American dictionary) says "au jus"
>> means "served in the juice obtained from roasting ".
>>
>> Ok so far?
>
> THats exactly what I SAID and what you are getting from all of us. You
> have an issue with that?
>
Bruce is correct. I've had waiters say to me: "Would you like some au
jus with that".
And for our next lesson: how to pronounce "risotto":-)

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 20:33:47 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 18:11:34 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>>
>> > Cindy Hamilton wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>> >
>> >> On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
>> >> > >> > wrote:
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
>> >> > >> > > >
>> >> > >> >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff,
>> I >> > need >> to >>> replicate it).
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au
>> >> > jus. >>
>> >> > >> That's it.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
>> >> > > broth served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy
>> >> > > types. I don't know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but
>> >> > > there may be some.
>> >> >
>> >> > Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that
>> there >> > isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want
>> to say that >> > there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
>> >>
>> >> In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French
>> transliteration), >> "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
>> >>
>> >> A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
>> >>
>> >>
>> <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...detail.cfm?lni
>> >> d=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys> >>
>> >> Let the whining about fake food begin!
>> >>
>> >> Cindy Hamilton
>> >
>> > Actually we are saying the same thing. Bruce is just getting wierd.
>> > Claiming the 'Au' should be dropped off then quoting what seems a
>> > USA dictionary that adds it in then saying I'm wrong or something.
>> >
>> > Whatever.
>>
>> Merriam-Webster dictionary (an American dictionary) says "au jus"
>> means "served in the juice obtained from roasting ".
>>
>> Ok so far?
>
>THats exactly what I SAID and what you are getting from all of us. You
>have an issue with that?

That means that:

"There's not enough au jus with that meat"

Means:
"There's not enough served in the juice obtained from roasting with
that meat"

Still ok?

On 2017-09-29 10:23 PM, graham wrote:
> On 2017-09-29 7:33 PM, cshenk wrote:

>> THats exactly what I SAID and what you are getting from all of us. You
>> have an issue with that?
>>
> Bruce is correct. I've had waiters say to me: "Would you like some au
> jus with that".
> And for our next lesson: how to pronounce "risotto":-)


You should have ordered pie for dessert to see if the waiter asked if
you wanted some a la mode with it.

In article >, cshenk1
@cox.net says...
>
> Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 02:29:52 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 7:41:45 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:29:47 -0500, "cshenk" >
> > wrote: >>
> > >> >Bruce wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> > >> >
> > >> >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:58:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> > >> >> > wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > On 2017-09-28 12:34 PM, wrote:
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >>> https://s26.postimg.org/oxkbqwlzd/prime_dinner.jpg
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> >>> I also got a cup of asparagus/brie soup (wonderful stuff, I
> > need >> >> to >>> replicate it).
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Looks very good. Only thing missing is some au jus.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > No. What is missing is jus. If there is no jus it is not au
> > jus. >> >>
> > >> >> That's it.
> > >> >
> > >> >Not sure what you mean. Au Jus is what they call a fairly thin
> > broth >> >served with meat here. Considered in the family of gravy
> > types. I don't >> >know of any that aren't meat derived Au Jus but
> > there may be some. >>
> > >> Then 'au jus' means 'in broth'. So it doesn't make sense that there
> > >> isn't enough 'in broth' (au jus) with the meat. You want to say
> > that >> there's not enough 'broth' (jus) with the meat.
> > >
> > > In U.S. usage (which completely ignores the French transliteration),
> > > "au jus" means "unthickened beef broth":
> > >
> > > A helluva lot of restaurants use this:
> > >
> > > <http://www.customculinary.com/bases/...t_detail.cfm?l
> > > nid=4&catid=44&pId=609#.Wc4R7U3D_ys>
> >
> > This kind of ignorance shouldn't be encouraged, but it does give you a
> > good idea of the kind of people that buy a product like this.


>
> You are being very thickheaded on this one arent you?
>
> NOT ALL COUNTRIES USE THE SAME TERMS.

When Americans use a French term, just accept, IT IS FRENCH and that
the way the French speak French is the correct way.

Janet UK

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> You should have ordered pie for dessert to see if the waiter asked if
> you wanted some a la mode with it.

I had apple pie with vanilla ice cream for dessert last night.
Go monitor a parking lot, Dave. ;-D