B Vaughan

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 12:39:06 -0400, "James Silverton"
<not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:

    >"Frank F. Matthews" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >message news:[email protected]...

    >> In my experience the bread in France was quite good. It
    >> simply lacked endurance. If you couldn't finish it within 1/2
    >> day of purchase feed it to the birds.
    >That's what real bread is supposed to be like: no oils,
    >preservatives or conditioners to pretend it's fresh after a day!
    >You can get what the French call English bread for toast etc.

The bread I make at home is still reasonably edible for almost a week,
and I don't use any conditioners or preservatives. It's a good crusty
Italian-style loaf, not the soft squishy stuff called bread in the
American supermarket. I make whole wheat bread, though, which is
something rather rare in Italy. Compared to the bread I can buy, it's
a bit denser in its texture.

A little olive oil added to the bread does help to preserve it, as
does using milk or part milk instead of water. I don't see this as a
bad thing. We are two people and maybe between the two of us we eat
three slices of bread a day. When I buy bread, I usually buy those
small skinny loaves (250 grams) that are all crust, and I still end up
feeding some of it to the birds or making bread crumbs out of part of
it. The bread I make gets eaten in its entirety, which, if you don't
like to waste food, is a good thing.


--
Barbara Vaughan
My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it
I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup

Ian Burton

"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Ian Burton wrote:
    >> "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]...
    >>>dgs wrote:
    >>>>Padraig Breathnach wrote:
    >>>>>Cathy L <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>>>We love the bread sticks at Olive Garden.
    >>>>>Bread sticks are an abomination.
    >>>>Anyone who admits to patronizing the fake plastic pseudo-Italian
    >>>>suburban chain-food pile of crap that is the "Olive Garden" is an
    >>>>abomination. Especially if that person claims to "love the bread
    >>>>sticks."
    >>>Well, it does have ONE thing to recommend it (as do most franchise
    >>>operations that maintain strict quality control). When you come into town
    >>>tired and hungry, and don't want to spend time looking for a place to
    >>>eat, the food is adequate, and you know in advance what you're likely to
    >>>get. Walking into a strange restaurant in an unfamiliar place can be too
    >>>much of a crap shoot. True, you MAY find a culinary jewel - but (except
    >>>in Brussels or Paris) you're much more likely to find something that
    >>>makes you glad you included that bottle of Pepto Bismol when you packed!
    >> "Except in Brussels or Paris"? You should add or in all of Italy!
    > For that I must take your word - I've not yet been to Italy. ;-)

I sincerely wish you get there soon.
--
Ian Burton
(Please reply to the Newsgroup)
    >

Magda

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:50:04 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, "Frank F. Matthews"
<[email protected]> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:


... In my experience the bread in France was quite good. It simply lacked
... endurance. If you couldn't finish it within 1/2 day of purchase feed it
... to the birds.

You can buy 1/2 baguette, it's not a problem. When I buy a baguette and can't finish it
the same day, I cut it in small bits the next day and dip them in my coffee-milk.

Iceman

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
    > Iceman wrote:
    > > Let me add a few more: the rest of France, the rest of Belgium, Spain,
    > > Portugal, Switzerland, Greece, Morocco, Turkey, Thailand, Cambodia,
    > > Vietnam, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and
    > > Mexico. In any of those places, it is difficult to have a bad meal as
    > > long as you avoid obvious tourist restaurants.
    > Well, perhaps your taste is a bit more eclectic than mine.
    > I'm adventurous enough where food is concerned, but not when
    > I'm exhausted and hungry and don't FEEL like a culinary
    > "adventure". (Then I prefer to know what I'm getting BEFORE
    > it confronts me at the table!)

If I've never heard of something or can't identify it then that makes
me WANT to try it. 90% of the time, it's great, or at least different
and interesting. There have been a few times where I've gotten
something vile, but I'm still glad I had the experience.

    > > And in the rest of the world, a minimal amount of research and common
    > > sense can steer you to a good "local" place most of the time.
    > But in a strange city, arriving tired and hungry and too
    > late in the evening to spend time exploring? (Those are the
    > times when, if your hotel has a bistro or restaurant, you're
    > most likely to give it a try.)

Well, if I get in to a city at 11:30 PM, then I'll probably settle for
something in the hotel or on the same block rather than getting a taxi
to the night market or whatever.

Dave Smith

"David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate" wrote:

    > I agree completely, though banning smoking inside still affects diners
    > outside. I had a real problem with a couple in a table next to me at a
    > restuarant in Trieste last month- non stop smokers, and it was blowing
    > my direction. If I hadn't been half-way through eating, I'd have asked
    > to move. I was sorely tempted to ask them to stop, but I don't know how
    > that would have gone down. I'm surprised that they don't have separate
    > areas for outdoor seating in countries/states with the ban. It would
    > make things more comfortable for non-smokers I think.

Sometimes non smokers need to take a chill pill. I have seen non smokers bitch about
smoke when they were upwind. I have seen a non smoker have a hissy fit the moment the
saw someone light up in the smoking section at the far end of the restaurant. His
reaction was faster than the speed of smoke.

David Horne

Dave Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

    > "David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and
    > deansgate" wrote:
    >
    > > I agree completely, though banning smoking inside still affects diners
    > > outside. I had a real problem with a couple in a table next to me at a
    > > restuarant in Trieste last month- non stop smokers, and it was blowing
    > > my direction. If I hadn't been half-way through eating, I'd have asked
    > > to move. I was sorely tempted to ask them to stop, but I don't know how
    > > that would have gone down. I'm surprised that they don't have separate
    > > areas for outdoor seating in countries/states with the ban. It would
    > > make things more comfortable for non-smokers I think.
    >
    > Sometimes non smokers need to take a chill pill.

Not in my experience. Sometimes smokers should consider their
neighbours. Simple as that.

    > I have seen non smokers bitch about smoke when they were upwind. I have
    > seen a non smoker have a hissy fit the moment the saw someone light up in
    > the smoking section at the far end of the restaurant. His reaction was
    > faster than the speed of smoke.

Yes, I was riveted when you reported that here a couple of months ago.
It must have been a traumatic experience for you.

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://www.davidhorne.net/pictures.html http://soundjunction.org

Dave Smith

"David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate" wrote:

    > > Sometimes non smokers need to take a chill pill.
    > Not in my experience. Sometimes smokers should consider their
    > neighbours. Simple as that.

That is why they go outside.

    > > I have seen non smokers bitch about smoke when they were upwind. I have
    > > seen a non smoker have a hissy fit the moment the saw someone light up in
    > > the smoking section at the far end of the restaurant. His reaction was
    > > faster than the speed of smoke.
    > Yes, I was riveted when you reported that here a couple of months ago.
    > It must have been a traumatic experience for you.

Not traumatic. It was just that his whining and carrying on spoiled the meal a lot more
than the smoke would have, even if I had been able to smell it. Then there is the
woman I ran into on my vacation last month who ranted at two smokers who were standing
outside because she found the smell of their smoke so offensive. they moved politely.
A few minutes she moved over and stood even closer to them than she had been when she
complained. That is how much a pain in the ass some self righteous non smokers can be.

Dave Frightens Me

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:11:12 +0200, B Vaughan<[email protected]> wrote:

    >Children, especially, are eating tons of unhealthy carbohydrates. TV
    >advertisements push various Kinder (Italian, in spite of the German
    >name) and Mulino Bianco products as breakfast foods and after-school
    >snacks for kids. These are all basically sweets, not the basis of a
    >healthy meal. The Kinder products always advertise milk as an
    >ingredient and the packages always have pictures of glasses of milk
    >being poured into the sugary cakes. However, milk is down there with
    >the flavourings if you check the ingredient list.

Nice British spelling of "flavourings"! ;o)

These products are just fine, as long as they burn off those calories.
I start the day with a sugary dose of that stuff and a long sugary
coffee, and don't suffer obesity. These kids need to be kicked outside
to play or walk to school.

    >The difficulties are 1) that now they are sedentary, and 2) that the
    >bread and pasta now has a much higher glycemic index than it did in
    >their grandparents' day.

I don't know about the second one, because it's not my area.

As to the first, I spent a lot of my youth sedentary playing video
games, but never suffered obesity. Generations of tv watchers did the
same, so I am not so sure that's a major cause. Then again, I always
liked walking...
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

David Horne

Dave Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

    > "David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and
    > deansgate" wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > > Sometimes non smokers need to take a chill pill.
    > >
    > > Not in my experience. Sometimes smokers should consider their
    > > neighbours. Simple as that.
    >
    > That is why they go outside.

Most of the time, only if they have to. You must live in a different
reality to the one I do. In restaurants in Europe, unless there is a
rule to the contrary, you can expect smokers to light up next to you,
and in my experience the only ones that have ever asked me if I minded
were the ones I knew personally. Most of the time, I have little choice
but to put up with someone at the adjoining table spoilng the enjoyment
of my food. In England, I won't enter a restaurant unless it as a
non-smoking section, but even then, I'm more inclined now to choose
completely non-smoking, as I've bad experiences in restos with
supposedly separated sections.

    > > > I have seen non smokers bitch about smoke when they were upwind. I have
    > > > seen a non smoker have a hissy fit the moment the saw someone light up in
    > > > the smoking section at the far end of the restaurant. His reaction was
    > > > faster than the speed of smoke.
    > >
    > > Yes, I was riveted when you reported that here a couple of months ago.
    > > It must have been a traumatic experience for you.
    >
    > Not traumatic. It was just that his whining and carrying on spoiled the
    > meal a lot more than the smoke would have, even if I had been able to
    > smell it.

A couple of things. You should have told him to quit whining if it
bothered you. There's also the possibility that it really bothered him.
Either way, sounds like the problem during the meal was the relationship
between the two of you. I don't see what that has to do with smoking in
restaurants per se.

    > Then there is the woman I ran into on my vacation last month who ranted at
    > two smokers who were standing outside because she found the smell of
    > their smoke so offensive. they moved politely. A few minutes she moved
    > over and stood even closer to them than she had been when she complained.
    > That is how much a pain in the ass some self righteous non smokers can be.

Whatever. Maybe you're attracted to self-righteous people. I object to
smoke because I don't like it- don't like it in a really big way. Simple
as that. Someone's self-righteousness, whether perceived or real, might
be annoying, but I sure as hell can get through my fish course without
it bothering me.

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://www.davidhorne.net/pictures.html http://soundjunction.org

Dave Frightens Me

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:40:14 +0200, B Vaughan<[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 09:04:52 +0100,
    >[email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
    >the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:

    >>Tobacco is certainly not just an American problem. Indeed, it's one
    >>front where I wouldn't mind a little more Americanism in a lot of europe
    >>in terms of its social stigmatisation. I was reminded of this on
    >>Saturday night when I had to escape the fug of smoke in the foyer of an
    >>otherwise snazzy modern concert hall in Paris. Not to mention the
    >>brilliantly designed "smoking area" at the CDG terminal which
    >>conveniently wafts all the smoke into the rest of the waiting area...
    >Here is one case where Italy is now in the forefront. I was in a local
    >bar a few weeks ago on a really rainy day. Two patrons had stepped
    >outside to smoke, but they remained under the overhang of the door of
    >the bar to avoid getting wet. Another patron yelled at them to put out
    >the cigarettes and informed them that the law forbids smoking within
    >10 feet of the doorway. (I didn't know that.) Smokers in Italy may be
    >more stigmatized than in the US.

I believe that societal pressure in Italy is a much bigger influence
to the '**** you and what you think' culture of the US. I am glad for
this, as Italians will happily ignore laws, but ignoring the opinion
of the populace...

    >Now if we can only stigmatize those odious souped-up scooters that
    >buzz around town at all hours of the day and night, polluting the air
    >and waking the dead. I think it's ironic that towns are restricting
    >drivers without fuel efficient cars from entering their centers;
    >forbidding every car from entering their centers on Sundays; and
    >instituting alternate license plate schemes for cars. Yet many of
    >those cars have urgent and legitimate business that requires a car,
    >while the only thing motivating the scooter drivers is superfluous
    >testosterone.

Those scooters are always 50cc pumped up numbers, that can easily piss
all over my legal 125cc. They rev incredibly, and are capable of
incredible feats, like monos up to 40kms/h.

Are the old folk in Italy too deaf to complain about this stuff?
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

David Horne

Dave Frightens Me <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:

    > On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:40:14 +0200, B Vaughan<[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 09:04:52 +0100,
    > >[email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
    > >the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:
    >
    > >>Tobacco is certainly not just an American problem. Indeed, it's one
    > >>front where I wouldn't mind a little more Americanism in a lot of europe
    > >>in terms of its social stigmatisation. I was reminded of this on
    > >>Saturday night when I had to escape the fug of smoke in the foyer of an
    > >>otherwise snazzy modern concert hall in Paris. Not to mention the
    > >>brilliantly designed "smoking area" at the CDG terminal which
    > >>conveniently wafts all the smoke into the rest of the waiting area...
    > >
    > >Here is one case where Italy is now in the forefront. I was in a local
    > >bar a few weeks ago on a really rainy day. Two patrons had stepped
    > >outside to smoke, but they remained under the overhang of the door of
    > >the bar to avoid getting wet. Another patron yelled at them to put out
    > >the cigarettes and informed them that the law forbids smoking within
    > >10 feet of the doorway. (I didn't know that.) Smokers in Italy may be
    > >more stigmatized than in the US.
    >
    > I believe that societal pressure in Italy is a much bigger influence
    > to the '**** you and what you think' culture of the US. I am glad for
    > this, as Italians will happily ignore laws, but ignoring the opinion
    > of the populace...

What Barbara described is not an unusual occurence in parts of the US
that ban smoking actually. I don't understand what you're saying anyway.
Italy was often a dining nightmare (when stuck indoors) when I was there
in the 90s thanks to the pervasive fug of smoke. It's the law which has
changed that surely.

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://www.davidhorne.net/pictures.html http://soundjunction.org

mini Mini

[email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote in
news:1hm8orh.j7gdod1cctk7sN%this_address_is_for_sp [email protected]:

    > Dave Frightens Me <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:
    >>
    >> I believe that societal pressure in Italy is a much bigger influence
    >> to the '**** you and what you think' culture of the US. I am glad for
    >> this, as Italians will happily ignore laws, but ignoring the opinion
    >> of the populace...
    >
    > I don't understand what you're saying
    > anyway. Italy was often a dining nightmare (when stuck indoors) when I
    > was there in the 90s thanks to the pervasive fug of smoke. It's the
    > law which has changed that surely.


Sort of. I think what DMF is trying to say is: if "the people" don't like
the law they ignore it. Thus the fact that people _do_ obey this law means
that the popular pressure is high enough for the law to work. Subtle & very
Italian difference... Does that make sense?

David Horne

mini Mini <[email protected]> wrote:

    > [email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
    > the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote in
    > news:1hm8orh.j7gdod1cctk7sN%this_address_is_for_sp [email protected]:
    >
    > > Dave Frightens Me <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> I believe that societal pressure in Italy is a much bigger influence
    > >> to the '**** you and what you think' culture of the US. I am glad for
    > >> this, as Italians will happily ignore laws, but ignoring the opinion
    > >> of the populace...
    > >
    > > I don't understand what you're saying
    > > anyway. Italy was often a dining nightmare (when stuck indoors) when I
    > > was there in the 90s thanks to the pervasive fug of smoke. It's the
    > > law which has changed that surely.
    >
    >
    > Sort of. I think what DMF is trying to say is: if "the people" don't like
    > the law they ignore it. Thus the fact that people _do_ obey this law means
    > that the popular pressure is high enough for the law to work. Subtle & very
    > Italian difference... Does that make sense?

Yes, of course it does, but I'm not sure I agree with it as a national
stereotype- that's all. It's the way laws work in many countries.

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://www.davidhorne.net/pictures.html http://soundjunction.org

Dave Frightens Me

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 09:58:36 -0700, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >For that I must take your word - I've not yet been to Italy. ;-)

What are you waiting for girl???

This place is enough to remind you of what life's all about!
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Dave Frightens Me

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 21:28:13 +0100,
[email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:

    >Dave Frightens Me <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:
    >> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:40:14 +0200, B Vaughan<[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >> >On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 09:04:52 +0100,
    >> >[email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
    >> >the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:
    >>
    >> >>Tobacco is certainly not just an American problem. Indeed, it's one
    >> >>front where I wouldn't mind a little more Americanism in a lot of europe
    >> >>in terms of its social stigmatisation. I was reminded of this on
    >> >>Saturday night when I had to escape the fug of smoke in the foyer of an
    >> >>otherwise snazzy modern concert hall in Paris. Not to mention the
    >> >>brilliantly designed "smoking area" at the CDG terminal which
    >> >>conveniently wafts all the smoke into the rest of the waiting area...
    >> >
    >> >Here is one case where Italy is now in the forefront. I was in a local
    >> >bar a few weeks ago on a really rainy day. Two patrons had stepped
    >> >outside to smoke, but they remained under the overhang of the door of
    >> >the bar to avoid getting wet. Another patron yelled at them to put out
    >> >the cigarettes and informed them that the law forbids smoking within
    >> >10 feet of the doorway. (I didn't know that.) Smokers in Italy may be
    >> >more stigmatized than in the US.
    >>
    >> I believe that societal pressure in Italy is a much bigger influence
    >> to the '**** you and what you think' culture of the US. I am glad for
    >> this, as Italians will happily ignore laws, but ignoring the opinion
    >> of the populace...
    >What Barbara described is not an unusual occurence in parts of the US
    >that ban smoking actually. I don't understand what you're saying anyway.

David, you frequently don't understand what I'm saying, although I'm
not sure just why! :o)

    >Italy was often a dining nightmare (when stuck indoors) when I was there
    >in the 90s thanks to the pervasive fug of smoke. It's the law which has
    >changed that surely.

No, it's the societal pressure that allowed the law to actually work.

The fug is gone, believe me on that. Smokers are told to go outside,
and that's the end of it. They wont give up for health reasons, but
they will if it means they'll miss out on some part of the social
interaction.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--