Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Del Taco
18 views
Skip to first unread message
Geoff Miller
Mar 7, 2012, 11:00:02 PM3/7/12
to
I've long maintained that you know you've left the San Francisco Bay
Area when you start seeing two things: Circle-K convenience stores and
Del Taco fast-food places.
There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
impression on me.
I finally tried Del Taco for the first time last weekend -- the
restaurant in Watsonville, in south Santa Cruz County, to be exact.
Not in the Bay Area, but close.
This particular Del Taco is an outbuilding in a shopping center the
main anchor of which is Target. It's immediately adjacent to an oil
change place. One would expect all that; Watsonville is a
lower-middle-class town, sunbstaintially if not predominatly
Mexican-American. It has, as the advertising slogan for the Nissan
XTerra SUV used to say: "Everything you need; nothing you don't." Fair
enough. I was hungry. Bring on _la comida_.
As I locked my car and walked toward the entrance, book in hand, three
figures emerged from a minivan that had parked right in front of the
door: a fortyish mother, a daughter in her early teens, and another
daughter of maybe ten or eleven who, with the characteristic heavy
brow, thick eyeglasses, and inability to modulate her voice, was
clearly retarded.
These specimens managed to nip inside just ahead of me, and then were
predictably indecisive as many females tend to be, wanting to play
Twenty Questions with the pudgy, dull-normal, teenaged Mexican-
American girl behind the counter (who, just as predictably, didn't
know anything about anything) instead of just fucking *ordering* and
then stepping aside to make way for the next customer in line -- the
one who knew exactly wat he wanted and needed to waste no time with
unnecessary conversation. (That would be me. And in fact, was.)
Once the Clueless Contingent finally placed their order and then moved
on to be flummoxed by the complexity of the self-serve soda fountain
(and paused to inquire as to whether the root beer contained
caffeine(!)), I was able to place my own order: a "Big Fat Soft Taco"
(chicken), a "Shrimp Soft Taco," a chocolate-chip cookie, and a small
soda.
Interregnum: Why does anyone pay for anything other than a small soda
at fast-foot places that have a self-serve soda fountain, and
therefore unlimited refills? Ever? Is there a nationwide epidemic of
_persona feco crania?_
I'll pause to mention that this place has a kiddie play structure
inside, but that it's mercifully enclosed in a separate area by
soundproof plate-glass windows and an equally soundproof swinging
glass door. Praise be unto Allah...
My food was ready within four or five minutes -- not as quickly as I'd
exected or would've preferred, but tolerable. I grabbed my tray and
repaired to a booth as far as possible from all other customers.
The food was actually pretty decent, with appealing flavor and
texture. A few Taco Bell-style hot sauce packets provided an extra
zing.
The cookie was, well, your basic prefab chocolate-chip cookie. I'm
not big on chocolate-chip cookies even at the best of times, having
OD'd on them by mid-childhood along with such things as Crest
toothpaste, boiled hot dogs, and Kraft macaroni and cheese. (No, I
didn't eat the Crest toothpaste. I'm talking about flavors here.) But
at least it was sweet and wasn't a peanut butter cookie.
As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
especially at a fast-food "restaurant?" That's like going to church
when you're on vacation. (And for that matter, who the hell goes to
church anymore, in the first place? "Norman [Rockwell], is that
you?")
The only real downside of this experience was the price: $11.75 for
two tacos, a small soda, and a cookie. Rather stiff, I must say. I
recall getting out of Booger King with a Whopper with cheese, a
standard cheeseburger, and a shake for three or four dollars less, and
getting substantially more food for my money.
Geoff
--
"How cool would it be to gather every living Auschwitz survivor
together to record a song?" -- Jim Goad
spamtrap1888
Mar 8, 2012, 1:04:43 AM3/8/12
to
On Mar 7, 8:00 pm, Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net> wrote:
> As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
> fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
> into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
> especially at a fast-food "restaurant?" That's like going to church
> when you're on vacation. (And for that matter, who the hell goes to
> church anymore, in the first place? "Norman [Rockwell], is that
> you?")
Assuming they say grace before meals at home, why not in public?
> As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
> fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
> into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
> especially at a fast-food "restaurant?" That's like going to church
> when you're on vacation. (And for that matter, who the hell goes to
> church anymore, in the first place? "Norman [Rockwell], is that
> you?")
Probably it started when mom couldn't explain to the kids why they
wouldn't be thankful for fast food. In fact, with all the self-
professd Xtians around, I'm surprised I never see people saying grace
in public. What are they, ashamed of their superstitiousness?
>
> The only real downside of this experience was the price: $11.75 for
> two tacos, a small soda, and a cookie. Rather stiff, I must say. I
> recall getting out of Booger King with a Whopper with cheese, a
> standard cheeseburger, and a shake for three or four dollars less, and
> getting substantially more food for my money.
$4.95!!!) Likely they gouged you for the soda.
http://www.deltaco.com/coupons.html
David Kaye
Mar 8, 2012, 1:09:52 AM3/8/12
to
"Geoff Miller" <geo...@netgate.net> wrote
> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
> impression on me.
Does Hayward make much of an impression on you? There's one (or at least
there used to be one) at Mission and Jackson in Hayward.
> How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
> especially at a fast-food "restaurant?"
Those who want to show off and let people know how much better they are than
those heathens around them.
> (And for that matter, who the hell goes to
> church anymore, in the first place? "Norman [Rockwell], is that
> you?")
Norman Rockwell actually prided himself on painting impossibly nostalgic
portraits he knew never existed in reality. In fact if you look at some of
them you notice he's doing parody some of the time.
> The only real downside of this experience was the price: $11.75 for
> two tacos, a small soda, and a cookie. Rather stiff, I must say.
American marketing has discovered that people associate fast food with cheap
food. It's quite often not the case.
This evening I stopped at a KFC/Taco Bell and had their special "popcorn
chicken" with mashed potato and gravy and corn along with a soda for $5.94.
It was a skimpy meal. Meanwhile, at the Treasure Island Bar & Grill I can
have two tacos with Mexican style strip steak and all the trimmings,
overloaded on 4 tortillas and thus you can make 4 tacos out of it for $6.
Or I could go visit the Canton Cafe and have a huge plate of curry sliced
beef with lots of onions, carrots, and bell peppers over rice for $6.
This marketing gimmick of getting the customer to "assume" that something is
cheap is reflected in all kinds of marketing. The very large box of laundry
detergent often costs more per ounce than the smaller boxes. The "generic"
underwear you get from the Chinese import stores is usually of poorer
quality and more expensive than the kind you can buy in any clothing store.
> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
> impression on me.
there used to be one) at Mission and Jackson in Hayward.
> How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
> especially at a fast-food "restaurant?"
those heathens around them.
> (And for that matter, who the hell goes to
> church anymore, in the first place? "Norman [Rockwell], is that
> you?")
portraits he knew never existed in reality. In fact if you look at some of
them you notice he's doing parody some of the time.
> The only real downside of this experience was the price: $11.75 for
> two tacos, a small soda, and a cookie. Rather stiff, I must say.
food. It's quite often not the case.
This evening I stopped at a KFC/Taco Bell and had their special "popcorn
chicken" with mashed potato and gravy and corn along with a soda for $5.94.
It was a skimpy meal. Meanwhile, at the Treasure Island Bar & Grill I can
have two tacos with Mexican style strip steak and all the trimmings,
overloaded on 4 tortillas and thus you can make 4 tacos out of it for $6.
Or I could go visit the Canton Cafe and have a huge plate of curry sliced
beef with lots of onions, carrots, and bell peppers over rice for $6.
This marketing gimmick of getting the customer to "assume" that something is
cheap is reflected in all kinds of marketing. The very large box of laundry
detergent often costs more per ounce than the smaller boxes. The "generic"
underwear you get from the Chinese import stores is usually of poorer
quality and more expensive than the kind you can buy in any clothing store.
David Kaye
Mar 8, 2012, 1:16:35 AM3/8/12
to
"spamtrap1888" <spamtr...@gmail.com> wrote
> I see all kinds of deals on their website. (Five chicken tacos for
> $4.95!!!) Likely they gouged you for the soda.
Considering that a soda is the item on the menu with the highest markup of
all, *anytime* they charge you for soda they're gouging you. The food cost
of a 12-ounce soda is less than 7 cents at current costs. They often sell
these for a minimum of $1.39. In short, they're luring you into the store
with food in order to sell you expensive soda.
> I see all kinds of deals on their website. (Five chicken tacos for
> $4.95!!!) Likely they gouged you for the soda.
all, *anytime* they charge you for soda they're gouging you. The food cost
of a 12-ounce soda is less than 7 cents at current costs. They often sell
these for a minimum of $1.39. In short, they're luring you into the store
with food in order to sell you expensive soda.
Jerry Sauk
Mar 8, 2012, 1:53:06 AM3/8/12
to
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:00:02 -0800, Geoff Miller wrote:
> I've long maintained that you know you've left the San Francisco Bay
> Area when you start seeing two things: Circle-K convenience stores and
> Del Taco fast-food places.
>
> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
> impression on me.
>
> I finally tried Del Taco for the first time last weekend -- the
> restaurant in Watsonville, in south Santa Cruz County, to be exact.
> Not in the Bay Area, but close.
>
> This particular Del Taco is an outbuilding in a shopping center the
> main anchor of...
> I've long maintained that you know you've left the San Francisco Bay
> Area when you start seeing two things: Circle-K convenience stores and
> Del Taco fast-food places.
>
> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
> impression on me.
>
> I finally tried Del Taco for the first time last weekend -- the
> restaurant in Watsonville, in south Santa Cruz County, to be exact.
> Not in the Bay Area, but close.
>
> This particular Del Taco is an outbuilding in a shopping center the
<snip>
Too long.
How much interest can you show for a failing/failed fast food joint?
They're closing all over the U.S. And they're not nearly as wordy in
the franchisee bankruptcy proceedings.
It's nice to see you back, anyway.
-sw
Jerry Sauk
Mar 8, 2012, 1:58:40 AM3/8/12
to
You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we
say in Texas, you couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions
printed on the heel. You are a canker, an open wound. I would rather
kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You took your last vacation in
the Islets of Langerhans.
You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little
worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a
cad, and a weasel. I take that back; you are a festering pustule on a
weasel's rump. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench,
a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.
I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same
species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at
the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut.
Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are
a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. You are a technicolor yawn.
And did I mention that you smell?
You are a squeaking rat, a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal bagpipe
player. You were not born. You were hatched into an unwilling world
that rejects the likes of you. You didn't crawl out of a normal egg,
either, but rather a mutant maggot egg rejected by an evil scientist
as being below his low standards. Your alleged parents abandoned you
at birth and then died of shame in recognition of what they had done
to an unsuspecting world. They were a bit late.
Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting
to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a
nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able
to access it ever so much more rapidly. If cluelessness were crude
oil, your scalp would be crawling with caribou.
You are a thick-headed trog. I have seen skeet with more sense than
you have. You are a few bricks short of a full load, a few cards short
of a full deck, a few bytes short of a full core dump, and a few
chromosomes short of a full human. Worse than that, you top-post. God
created houseflies, cockroaches, maggots, mosquitos, fleas, ticks,
slugs, leeches, and intestinal parasites, then he lowered his
standards and made you. I take it back; God didn't make you. You are
Satan's spawn. You are Evil beyond comprehension, half-living in the
slough of despair. You are the entropy which will claim us all. You
are a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered inbred
trout-defiler. You make Ebola look good.
You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid,
nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an
ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with
you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in
a land that reality forgot. You are not ANSI compliant and your markup
doesn't validate. You have a couple of address lines shorted together.
You should be promoted to Engineering Manager.
Do you really expect your delusional and incoherent ramblings to be
read? Everyone plonked you long ago. Do you fantasize that your
tantrums and conniption fits could possibly be worth the $0.000000001
worth of electricity used to send them? Your life is one big
W.O.M.B.A.T. and your future doesn't look promising either. We need to
trace your bloodline and terminate all siblings and cousins in order
to cleanse humanity of your polluted genes. The good news is that no
normal human would ever mate with you, so we won't have to go into the
sewers in search of your git.
You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and
obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living
emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a
loathsome disease, a drooling inbred cross-eyed toesucker. You make
Quakers shout and strike Pentecostals silent. You have a version 1.0
mind in a version 6.12 world. Your mother had to tie a pork chop
around your neck just to get your dog to play with you. You think
that HTTP://WWW.GUYMACON.COM/FUN/INSULT/INDEX.HTM is the name of a
rock band. You believe that P.D.Q. Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived. You prefer L. Ron Hubbard to Larry Niven and Jerry
Pournelle. Hee-Haw is too deep for you. You would watch test patterns
all day if the other inmates would let you.
On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are
deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of
wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted.
Spammers look down on you. Phone sex operators hang up on you.
Telemarketers refuse to be seen in public with you. You are the source
of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go.
May you choke on your own foolish opinions. You are a Pusillanimous
galactophage and you wear your sister's training bra. Don't bother
opening the door when you leave - you should be able to slime your
way out underneath. I hope that when you get home your mother runs
out from under the porch and bites you.
You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock.
You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted
boggish foot-licking half-twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You
gormless crook-pated tosser. You bloody churlish boil-brained clotpole
ponce. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You cockered
bum-bailey poofter. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You
dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill. May your
spouse be blessed with many bastards.
You are so clueless that if you dressed in a clue skin, doused
yourself
in clue musk, and did the clue dance in the middle of a field of horny
clues at the height of clue mating season, you still would not have a
clue. If you were a movie you would be a double feature;
_Battlefield_Earth_ and _Moron_Movies_II_. You would be out of focus.
You are a fiend and a sniveling coward, and you have bad breath. You
are the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel.
You wear strangely mismatched clothing with oddly placed stains. You
are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just knowing that
you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go
away. You are jetsam who dreams of becoming flotsam. You won't make
it. I beg for sweet death to come and remove me from a world which
became unbearable when you crawled out of a harpy's lair.
It is hard to believe how incredibly stupid you are. Stupid as a stone
that the other stones make fun of. So stupid that you have traveled
far beyond stupid as we know it and into a new dimension of stupid.
Meta-stupid. Stupid cubed. Trans-stupid stupid. Stupid collapsed to
a singularity where even the stupons have collapsed into stuponium.
Stupid so dense that no intelligence can escape. Singularity stupid.
Blazing hot summer day on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one
minute than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. It
cannot
be possible that anything in our universe can really be this stupid.
This is a primordial fragment from the original big stupid bang. A
pure
extract of stupid with absolute stupid purity. Stupid beyond the laws
of nature. I must apologize. I can't go on. This is my epiphany of
stupid. After this experience, you may not hear from me for a while.
I don't think that I can summon the strength left to mock your moronic
opinions and malformed comments about boring trivia or your other
drivel. Duh.
The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped
away most of your of what you wrote, because, well ... it didn't
really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative flame was
pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a
load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after
you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more
success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal"
people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering.
But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this
world who find these things to be difficult. If I had known that this
was true in your case then I would have never have exposed myself to
what you wrote. It just wouldn't have been "right." Sort of like
parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the
emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a
demand on you.
P.S.: You are hypocritical, greedy, violent, malevolent, vengeful,
cowardly, deadly, mendacious, meretricious, loathsome, despicable,
belligerent, opportunistic, barratrous, contemptible, criminal,
fascistic, bigoted, racist, sexist, avaricious, tasteless, idiotic,
brain-damaged, imbecilic, insane, arrogant, deceitful, demented, lame,
self-righteous, byzantine, conspiratorial, satanic, fraudulent,
libelous, bilious, splenetic, spastic, ignorant, clueless, EDLINoid,
illegitimate, harmful, destructive, dumb, evasive, double-talking,
devious, revisionist, narrow, manipulative, paternalistic,
fundamentalist, dogmatic, idolatrous, unethical, cultic, diseased,
suppressive, controlling, restrictive, malignant, deceptive, dim,
crazy, weird, dyspeptic, stifling, uncaring, plantigrade, grim,
unsympathetic, jargon-spouting, censorious, secretive, aggressive,
mind-numbing, arassive, poisonous, flagrant, self-destructive,
abusive, socially-retarded, puerile, and Generally Not Good.
I hope this helps...
Peter Lawrence
Mar 8, 2012, 6:11:25 AM3/8/12
to
On 3/7/12 10:04 PM, spamtrap1888 wrote:
> On Mar 7, 8:00 pm, Geoff Miller<geo...@netgate.net> wrote:
>>
>> As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
>> fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
>> into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
>> especially at a fast-food "restaurant?" That's like going to church
>> when you're on vacation. (And for that matter, who the hell goes to
>> church anymore, in the first place? "Norman [Rockwell], is that
>> you?")
>
> Assuming they say grace before meals at home, why not in public?
> Probably it started when mom couldn't explain to the kids why they
> wouldn't be thankful for fast food. In fact, with all the self-
> professd Xtians around, I'm surprised I never see people saying grace
> in public. What are they, ashamed of their superstitiousness?
In Christian faith, there's no consensus about praying in public. Some feel
> On Mar 7, 8:00 pm, Geoff Miller<geo...@netgate.net> wrote:
>>
>> As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
>> fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
>> into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
>> especially at a fast-food "restaurant?" That's like going to church
>> when you're on vacation. (And for that matter, who the hell goes to
>> church anymore, in the first place? "Norman [Rockwell], is that
>> you?")
>
> Assuming they say grace before meals at home, why not in public?
> Probably it started when mom couldn't explain to the kids why they
> wouldn't be thankful for fast food. In fact, with all the self-
> professd Xtians around, I'm surprised I never see people saying grace
> in public. What are they, ashamed of their superstitiousness?
that it's okay, while others hold on to the belief that prayer should be
done in private (which include houses of worship) lest they be considered
acting out like how the Pharisees did in ancient times. (The Pharisees
would make a point of praying in public to show everyone how pious they
were. Something that's pointedly frowned upon in the New Testament.)
- Peter
Peter Lawrence
Mar 8, 2012, 6:22:19 AM3/8/12
to
On 3/7/12 10:09 PM, David Kaye wrote:
> "Geoff Miller"<geo...@netgate.net> wrote
>>
>> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
>> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
>> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
>> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
>> impression on me.
>
> Does Hayward make much of an impression on you? There's one (or at least
> there used to be one) at Mission and Jackson in Hayward.
Don't think that one is still there.
> "Geoff Miller"<geo...@netgate.net> wrote
>>
>> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
>> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
>> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
>> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
>> impression on me.
>
> Does Hayward make much of an impression on you? There's one (or at least
> there used to be one) at Mission and Jackson in Hayward.
There are three Del Tacos I know of in the Bay Area (Newark, Campbell, and
San Francisco). The San Francisco one is located on Market Street right
next door to a 7-11 near 3rd Street.
- Peter
Steve Daniels
Mar 8, 2012, 11:36:45 AM3/8/12
to
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:00:02 -0800, against all advice, something
compelled Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net>, to say:
>As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
>fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
>into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
>especially at a fast-food "restaurant?"
Scribes and Pharisees unfamiliar with Matthew 6:5.
--
I believe a self-righteous liberal or conservative with a cause
is more dangerous than a Hell's Angel with an attitude.
Andy Rooney
compelled Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net>, to say:
>As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
>fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
>into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
>especially at a fast-food "restaurant?"
--
I believe a self-righteous liberal or conservative with a cause
is more dangerous than a Hell's Angel with an attitude.
Andy Rooney
spamtrap1888
Mar 8, 2012, 1:18:53 PM3/8/12
to
On Mar 8, 8:36 am, Steve Daniels <sdani...@gorge.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:00:02 -0800, against all advice, something
> compelled Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net>, to say:
>
> >As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
> >fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
> >into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
> >especially at a fast-food "restaurant?"
>
> Scribes and Pharisees unfamiliar with Matthew 6:5.
>
Well, yeah, this would be consistent with evangelicals' distaste for
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:00:02 -0800, against all advice, something
> compelled Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net>, to say:
>
> >As I was eating and reading a book, I was fascinated to note that the
> >fortyish woman was leading her two daughters in prayer before tearing
> >into their meal. How quaint. Who the hell says grace in public,
> >especially at a fast-food "restaurant?"
>
> Scribes and Pharisees unfamiliar with Matthew 6:5.
>
prayer in the schools, or at school-affiliated football games,
graduations, etc. Prayer should be confined to the home -- I think
that was one of the causes that Jerry Falwell fought hardest for.
Geoff Miller
Mar 8, 2012, 4:56:16 PM3/8/12
to
"David Kaye" <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> asks:
> Does Hayward make much of an impression on you?
Nothing against the place; it's just that I very seldom have any
reason to go there. Not counting driving through on 880, I think the
last time I was in Hayward was in the late '90s. Before that, once in
the late '70s. On the rare occasions when I'm in the East Bay at all,
I'm usually in Alameda.
What I meant was that I remembered seeing another Del Taco somewhere
within my customary personal orbit, but couldn't remember where.
There may very well be several of them throughout the Bay Area, but if
so, they must be spread pretty thin.
> Those who want to show off and let people know how much better they are than
> those heathens around them.
suppose.
I don't feel any particular animus to religion in general or
Christianity in particular, as is common in the Bay Area. As an
"apathist," I look at that stuff more like an anthropologist would
observe some girl in a bonnet churning butter in an Amish community:
as an interesting but harmless anachronism.
It's hard to put my finger on why I think it's odd for people who pray
at home to pray in public. I suppose it's that I consider religion
and spirituality a private matter, perhaps even more so than the
details of one's sexual proclivities.
> Norman Rockwell actually prided himself on painting impossibly nostalgic
> portraits he knew never existed in reality. In fact if you look at some of
> them you notice he's doing parody some of the time.
His paintings are so squeaky-clean and wholesome, and the time they
depict really was so much simpler and more innocent than ours, that
it's difficult not to take their sincerity at face value.
But then, I like the paintings of Thomas Kinkade, so what do *I* know?
> American marketing has discovered that people associate fast food with cheap
> food. It's quite often not the case.
Geoff
--
"God is like a maker of fine wines and good food, and religion is his
product. The problem, imho, is that the product gets run through
people before entering the environment." -- Jeff Zurschmeide
Geoff Miller
Mar 8, 2012, 11:22:46 PM3/8/12
to
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 00:53:06 -0600, Jerry Sauk <jerr...@hotmail.com>
writes:
> Too long.
I hear that a lot. *guffaw*
> How much interest can you show for a failing/failed fast food joint?
> They're closing all over the U.S. And they're not nearly as wordy in
> the franchisee bankruptcy proceedings.
my review (Hoo hoo!)? After all, they're still here for the time
being, and still being patronized.
I have to say, your suggestion that one should Google for any mention
of bankruptcy proceedings before reviewing a fast-food restaurant
chain is a new one on me. But then, our naton weas founded on (and
thrives on) audacity, does it not? Fuckin' A, bubba!
> It's nice to see you back, anyway.
> -sw
And thanks also for confirming what I'd long suspected: that the
estimable Jerry Sauk is a sock puppet of yours.
I have to admit, you've played the part very well.
Geoff
--
"It's always a load of horseapples. As a credible excuse, it falls
somewhere between: 'Say what you like about the Waffen-SS, but they
sure were snappy dressers' and 'I was vacuuming in the nude and, uh, I
must have slipped.' Spare us, please." -- Blair Haworth
David Kaye
Mar 9, 2012, 4:47:47 AM3/9/12
to
"Geoff Miller" <geo...@netgate.net> wrote
>
> Not really.
I spent some of my growing up years in Hayward and found it a mixed bag. I
liked the work hard/play hard mentality there. The older sections are
definitely hard-scrabble, but people seem to make it work. On the other
hand, it's a hideous-looking place. They once had a charming downtown along
Mission, but the city fathers hated the fact that the Bay Area's oldest gay
bar was there, along with a porn store, mixed in with tattoo parlors,
old-fashioned pawn shops, family-owned diners, and a couple newsstands.
They managed to tear it all down and put in a strip mall, which is way out
of scale for the area and causes me to go "ugh" when I see it. I have to
admit I've eaten at Panda Express there a couple times, though.
> Oh, maybe. It's possible that some of them a sincerely devout, I
> suppose.
I'm thinking about Jews. They have one of the oldest religions and yet they
have no need to foist it on others. You don't see them praying in public,
and except for some rarities such as around Yom Kippur, you don't see
outward manifestations of their devoutness.
I remember as a kid being a Catholic and wearing the ashes of Ash Wednesday
on my forehead. I also remember feeling smug about it, feeling that others
weren't as good as we Catholics were, belonging to the One True Christian
church and all that. Man...I'm so far away from that ethic today...
> "apathist,"
I like that word. Thanks!
> His paintings are so squeaky-clean and wholesome, and the time they
> depict really was so much simpler and more innocent than ours, that
> it's difficult not to take their sincerity at face value.
Rockwell was actually politically progressive. He was hindered by his
contract with the Saturday Evening Post, which didn't allow him to do
political or controversial themes. When his contract ended he came out with
several important paintings, especially "The Problem We All Live With":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Problem_We_All_Live_With
He had said in various interviews that he didn't draw reality, but drew
scenes that depicted how he wanted things to be. Don't be so sure that the
times were any more wholesome then than they are today. People just tended
to keep things to themselves rather than blurt out their prejudices and
ill-will in public.
I guess I'm going a little far to say that some of his stuff was parody, but
it clearly wasn't any sort of snapshot of how the world was. They weren't
scenes of anything in existence; for the most part he didn't paint real
scenes. He also said that he wasn't a very happy guy. He saw therapists
from time to time to try to get him out of his funk.
>
> But then, I like the paintings of Thomas Kinkade, so what do *I* know?
Not much. While there is an appreciation among art folks for Norman
Rockwell, there is none for Thomas Kinkade. He's a huckster. I remember
that when people began to tire of his paintings and started selling them at
flea markets his people began buying them up in order to keep people from
seeing them there. While he had some talent, he negated it by creating
lithographs of his work and hiring people to apply cursory paint touch-ups
so that he could technically say that he was selling oil paintings.
>
> Not really.
I spent some of my growing up years in Hayward and found it a mixed bag. I
liked the work hard/play hard mentality there. The older sections are
definitely hard-scrabble, but people seem to make it work. On the other
hand, it's a hideous-looking place. They once had a charming downtown along
Mission, but the city fathers hated the fact that the Bay Area's oldest gay
bar was there, along with a porn store, mixed in with tattoo parlors,
old-fashioned pawn shops, family-owned diners, and a couple newsstands.
They managed to tear it all down and put in a strip mall, which is way out
of scale for the area and causes me to go "ugh" when I see it. I have to
admit I've eaten at Panda Express there a couple times, though.
> Oh, maybe. It's possible that some of them a sincerely devout, I
> suppose.
have no need to foist it on others. You don't see them praying in public,
and except for some rarities such as around Yom Kippur, you don't see
outward manifestations of their devoutness.
I remember as a kid being a Catholic and wearing the ashes of Ash Wednesday
on my forehead. I also remember feeling smug about it, feeling that others
weren't as good as we Catholics were, belonging to the One True Christian
church and all that. Man...I'm so far away from that ethic today...
> "apathist,"
I like that word. Thanks!
> His paintings are so squeaky-clean and wholesome, and the time they
> depict really was so much simpler and more innocent than ours, that
> it's difficult not to take their sincerity at face value.
contract with the Saturday Evening Post, which didn't allow him to do
political or controversial themes. When his contract ended he came out with
several important paintings, especially "The Problem We All Live With":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Problem_We_All_Live_With
He had said in various interviews that he didn't draw reality, but drew
scenes that depicted how he wanted things to be. Don't be so sure that the
times were any more wholesome then than they are today. People just tended
to keep things to themselves rather than blurt out their prejudices and
ill-will in public.
I guess I'm going a little far to say that some of his stuff was parody, but
it clearly wasn't any sort of snapshot of how the world was. They weren't
scenes of anything in existence; for the most part he didn't paint real
scenes. He also said that he wasn't a very happy guy. He saw therapists
from time to time to try to get him out of his funk.
>
> But then, I like the paintings of Thomas Kinkade, so what do *I* know?
Rockwell, there is none for Thomas Kinkade. He's a huckster. I remember
that when people began to tire of his paintings and started selling them at
flea markets his people began buying them up in order to keep people from
seeing them there. While he had some talent, he negated it by creating
lithographs of his work and hiring people to apply cursory paint touch-ups
so that he could technically say that he was selling oil paintings.
Julian Macassey
Mar 9, 2012, 11:21:07 AM3/9/12
to
On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 01:47:47 -0800, David Kaye <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I spent some of my growing up years in Hayward and found it a mixed bag. I
> liked the work hard/play hard mentality there. The older sections are
> definitely hard-scrabble, but people seem to make it work. On the other
> hand, it's a hideous-looking place. They once had a charming downtown along
> Mission, but the city fathers hated the fact that the Bay Area's oldest gay
> bar was there, along with a porn store, mixed in with tattoo parlors,
> old-fashioned pawn shops, family-owned diners, and a couple newsstands.
> They managed to tear it all down and put in a strip mall, which is way out
> of scale for the area and causes me to go "ugh" when I see it. I have to
> admit I've eaten at Panda Express there a couple times, though.
Normally, when a part of town starts sporting dirty book
>
> I spent some of my growing up years in Hayward and found it a mixed bag. I
> liked the work hard/play hard mentality there. The older sections are
> definitely hard-scrabble, but people seem to make it work. On the other
> hand, it's a hideous-looking place. They once had a charming downtown along
> Mission, but the city fathers hated the fact that the Bay Area's oldest gay
> bar was there, along with a porn store, mixed in with tattoo parlors,
> old-fashioned pawn shops, family-owned diners, and a couple newsstands.
> They managed to tear it all down and put in a strip mall, which is way out
> of scale for the area and causes me to go "ugh" when I see it. I have to
> admit I've eaten at Panda Express there a couple times, though.
shops, thrift stores, tattoo parlours and pawn shops, the
property values have dropped and that part of town falls off the
map. Sometimes such districts get bulldozed, like Hayward and
Long Beach, sometimes they get restored and gentrified like State
Street, Santa Barbara and Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena.
Briefly, they replace the gay bar with a Hooters and the
diner with an Olive Garden. Not really an improvement.
> I'm thinking about Jews. They have one of the oldest religions and yet they
> have no need to foist it on others. You don't see them praying in public,
> and except for some rarities such as around Yom Kippur, you don't see
> outward manifestations of their devoutness.
aeroplanes.
--
This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with
Negroes, entertainers, and any others. - Harry J. Anslinger
David Kaye
Mar 9, 2012, 6:43:50 PM3/9/12
to
"Julian Macassey" <jul...@tele.com> wrote
> Normally, when a part of town starts sporting dirty book
> shops, thrift stores, tattoo parlours and pawn shops, the
> property values have dropped and that part of town falls off the
> map.
But this really wasn't the case in Hayward. The downtown area was called
"the waterfront" by the cops because it has always had that waterfront kind
of feel to it. The pawn shops have been there for 60+ years, the Turf Club
(gay bar) for at least 50, the porn store for 40-45 years, and as far as
thrift shopw I don't remember many downtown. Those shops were mixed in with
other mom'n'pop businesses which were thriving.
In that neighborhood is Buffalo Bill's, America's first brewpub licensed
since Prohibition, Rubiolo wedding photography, several upscale restaurants,
diners, a vacuum cleaner store, etc. The neighborhood was never rundown in
any sense of the word.
It's just that the town fathers hated the fact that the main junction in
town, A and Mission, had "unsavory" businesses. Now, they actually paid the
Turf Club to move a couple blocks away, but they put some really odd
restrictions on them. For instance, they cannot fly the rainbow flag or a
rainbow banner anywhere on the property that is visible from the street(!)
Yes, this is true. I confirmed it with the bar's owner. This whole thing
is fascinating since the Turf Club has the nicest indoor decor and the best
outdoor patio of any of the downtown businesses.
Hayward is a weird place because it's always been a "waterfront" kind of
place, but never rundown. Now, there are tract neighborhoods such as
Fairway Park, about 5 miles south of downtown, built by legendary builder
Oliver Rousseau, which is actually quite rundown today. There is other
postwar housing that was not very well built. And the nearby strip malls
have all suffered as well. Hayward was poorly planned, not at all like
nearby San Lorenzo (built by David Bohannon, and the model for Levittown)
also in the postwar period. Those homes were very well-built, and thus the
neighborhoods have remained very nice. They haven't suffered the strip mall
blight, either.
But on the other hand, the Hayward hills sport some of the most luxurious
homes you'd want to see. And Hayward has always prided itself on incredibly
nice parks.
> Briefly, they replace the gay bar with a Hooters and the
> diner with an Olive Garden. Not really an improvement.
Few things pleased me more than the SF Hooters going out of business.
Hopefully the riff-raff they attracted went with it.
> Normally, when a part of town starts sporting dirty book
> shops, thrift stores, tattoo parlours and pawn shops, the
> property values have dropped and that part of town falls off the
> map.
"the waterfront" by the cops because it has always had that waterfront kind
of feel to it. The pawn shops have been there for 60+ years, the Turf Club
(gay bar) for at least 50, the porn store for 40-45 years, and as far as
thrift shopw I don't remember many downtown. Those shops were mixed in with
other mom'n'pop businesses which were thriving.
In that neighborhood is Buffalo Bill's, America's first brewpub licensed
since Prohibition, Rubiolo wedding photography, several upscale restaurants,
diners, a vacuum cleaner store, etc. The neighborhood was never rundown in
any sense of the word.
It's just that the town fathers hated the fact that the main junction in
town, A and Mission, had "unsavory" businesses. Now, they actually paid the
Turf Club to move a couple blocks away, but they put some really odd
restrictions on them. For instance, they cannot fly the rainbow flag or a
rainbow banner anywhere on the property that is visible from the street(!)
Yes, this is true. I confirmed it with the bar's owner. This whole thing
is fascinating since the Turf Club has the nicest indoor decor and the best
outdoor patio of any of the downtown businesses.
Hayward is a weird place because it's always been a "waterfront" kind of
place, but never rundown. Now, there are tract neighborhoods such as
Fairway Park, about 5 miles south of downtown, built by legendary builder
Oliver Rousseau, which is actually quite rundown today. There is other
postwar housing that was not very well built. And the nearby strip malls
have all suffered as well. Hayward was poorly planned, not at all like
nearby San Lorenzo (built by David Bohannon, and the model for Levittown)
also in the postwar period. Those homes were very well-built, and thus the
neighborhoods have remained very nice. They haven't suffered the strip mall
blight, either.
But on the other hand, the Hayward hills sport some of the most luxurious
homes you'd want to see. And Hayward has always prided itself on incredibly
nice parks.
> Briefly, they replace the gay bar with a Hooters and the
> diner with an Olive Garden. Not really an improvement.
Hopefully the riff-raff they attracted went with it.
spamtrap1888
Mar 9, 2012, 6:58:00 PM3/9/12
to
On Mar 9, 3:43 pm, "David Kaye" <sfdavidka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Julian Macassey" <jul...@tele.com> wrote
>
> > Normally, when a part of town starts sporting dirty book
> > shops, thrift stores, tattoo parlours and pawn shops, the
> > property values have dropped and that part of town falls off the
> > map.
>
> But this really wasn't the case in Hayward. The downtown area was called
> "the waterfront" by the cops because it has always had that waterfront kind
> of feel to it. The pawn shops have been there for 60+ years, the Turf Club
> (gay bar) for at least 50, the porn store for 40-45 years, and as far as
> thrift shopw I don't remember many downtown. Those shops were mixed in with
> other mom'n'pop businesses which were thriving.
>
> In that neighborhood is Buffalo Bill's, America's first brewpub licensed
> since Prohibition, Rubiolo wedding photography, several upscale restaurants,
> diners, a vacuum cleaner store, etc. The neighborhood was never rundown in
> any sense of the word.
>
> It's just that the town fathers hated the fact that the main junction in
> town, A and Mission, had "unsavory" businesses. Now, they actually paid the
> Turf Club to move a couple blocks away, but they put some really odd
> restrictions on them. For instance, they cannot fly the rainbow flag or a
> rainbow banner anywhere on the property that is visible from the street(!)
> Yes, this is true. I confirmed it with the bar's owner. This whole thing
> is fascinating since the Turf Club has the nicest indoor decor and the best
> outdoor patio of any of the downtown businesses.
>
My impression was that suburban gay bars were hurting these days.
> "Julian Macassey" <jul...@tele.com> wrote
>
> > Normally, when a part of town starts sporting dirty book
> > shops, thrift stores, tattoo parlours and pawn shops, the
> > property values have dropped and that part of town falls off the
> > map.
>
> But this really wasn't the case in Hayward. The downtown area was called
> "the waterfront" by the cops because it has always had that waterfront kind
> of feel to it. The pawn shops have been there for 60+ years, the Turf Club
> (gay bar) for at least 50, the porn store for 40-45 years, and as far as
> thrift shopw I don't remember many downtown. Those shops were mixed in with
> other mom'n'pop businesses which were thriving.
>
> In that neighborhood is Buffalo Bill's, America's first brewpub licensed
> since Prohibition, Rubiolo wedding photography, several upscale restaurants,
> diners, a vacuum cleaner store, etc. The neighborhood was never rundown in
> any sense of the word.
>
> It's just that the town fathers hated the fact that the main junction in
> town, A and Mission, had "unsavory" businesses. Now, they actually paid the
> Turf Club to move a couple blocks away, but they put some really odd
> restrictions on them. For instance, they cannot fly the rainbow flag or a
> rainbow banner anywhere on the property that is visible from the street(!)
> Yes, this is true. I confirmed it with the bar's owner. This whole thing
> is fascinating since the Turf Club has the nicest indoor decor and the best
> outdoor patio of any of the downtown businesses.
>
There doesn't seem to be the demand for them any more. What keeps the
Turf Club going?
Message has been deleted
David Kaye
Mar 9, 2012, 7:57:46 PM3/9/12
to
"spamtrap1888" <spamtr...@gmail.com> wrote
> My impression was that suburban gay bars were hurting these days.
> There doesn't seem to be the demand for them any more. What keeps the
> Turf Club going?
For the most part that's true. Even in SF this is the case where there used
to be about 150 GBLT nightspots back in the 1980s just before AIDS hit. Now
there are maybe 40 places in SF. Back in "the day", Hayward consistently
had 5 GBLT bars. One would close and another would open somewhere else. It
was very consistent. Now there is one. Used to be 2 but the other turned
into a Korean karaoke bar with pictures of big-breasted women and leering
men. But that's another story...
The Internet has changed everything, and not for the good I'm afraid. Used
to be that gay men socialized together a lot. Now so many are into the
Craigslist quickie that they're missing that important socialization step.
Thus when I do meet gay men I can hardly stand them because they for the
most part don't know the first thing about social interaction. I can be
sitting at a bar and suddenly a guy comes up and sits down and immediately
begins to tell me about his sex life, the fact that he's lonely and how hot
he thinks I or the bartender or the guy across the room is -- all in 3 to 5
minutes. No style whatsoever. Now, straight men can do this too, but we
call them clods and we don't associate with them. Unfortunately, a lot of
gay men act like clods.
I think the Turf Club works because it's an extremely social place with lots
of barbecues, pool tournaments, softball games, and other events. The
bartenders are very welcoming, and the owner seems to be very welcoming as
well. It survived this long because the previous owners were longtime
partners who kept it going because it was the center of their social life.
> My impression was that suburban gay bars were hurting these days.
> There doesn't seem to be the demand for them any more. What keeps the
> Turf Club going?
to be about 150 GBLT nightspots back in the 1980s just before AIDS hit. Now
there are maybe 40 places in SF. Back in "the day", Hayward consistently
had 5 GBLT bars. One would close and another would open somewhere else. It
was very consistent. Now there is one. Used to be 2 but the other turned
into a Korean karaoke bar with pictures of big-breasted women and leering
men. But that's another story...
The Internet has changed everything, and not for the good I'm afraid. Used
to be that gay men socialized together a lot. Now so many are into the
Craigslist quickie that they're missing that important socialization step.
Thus when I do meet gay men I can hardly stand them because they for the
most part don't know the first thing about social interaction. I can be
sitting at a bar and suddenly a guy comes up and sits down and immediately
begins to tell me about his sex life, the fact that he's lonely and how hot
he thinks I or the bartender or the guy across the room is -- all in 3 to 5
minutes. No style whatsoever. Now, straight men can do this too, but we
call them clods and we don't associate with them. Unfortunately, a lot of
gay men act like clods.
I think the Turf Club works because it's an extremely social place with lots
of barbecues, pool tournaments, softball games, and other events. The
bartenders are very welcoming, and the owner seems to be very welcoming as
well. It survived this long because the previous owners were longtime
partners who kept it going because it was the center of their social life.
Peter Lawrence
Mar 11, 2012, 2:38:35 PM3/11/12
to
On 3/9/12 4:48 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> been closing all over the U.S. and figured that had to be the case.
>
> <clickety click>
>
> Well, Whadya know? I was right!?<and the crowd roars!>
Huh?
The last time that Del Taco was in Chapter 11 was way back in 1994.
Maybe you're confusing Del Taco with the Seattle-based chain Taco Del Mar,
which did file for bankruptcy in 2011.
In fact, Del Taco has started to expand into Texas. In started in Dallas
with one store in 2010, and now there are 10 Del Tacos located in Texas.
- Peter
> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 20:22:46 -0800, Geoff Miller wrote:
>>
>> Are they? Even if that were true, of what relevance would it have to
>> my review (Hoo hoo!)? After all, they're still here for the time
>> being, and still being patronized.
>>
>> I have to say, your suggestion that one should Google for any mention
>> of bankruptcy proceedings before reviewing a fast-food restaurant
>> chain is a new one on me. But then, our naton weas founded on (and
>> thrives on) audacity, does it not? Fuckin' A, bubba!
>
> Actually I wasn't quite sure about the bankruptcy, I just know they've
>>
>> Are they? Even if that were true, of what relevance would it have to
>> my review (Hoo hoo!)? After all, they're still here for the time
>> being, and still being patronized.
>>
>> I have to say, your suggestion that one should Google for any mention
>> of bankruptcy proceedings before reviewing a fast-food restaurant
>> chain is a new one on me. But then, our naton weas founded on (and
>> thrives on) audacity, does it not? Fuckin' A, bubba!
>
> been closing all over the U.S. and figured that had to be the case.
>
> <clickety click>
>
> Well, Whadya know? I was right!?<and the crowd roars!>
Huh?
The last time that Del Taco was in Chapter 11 was way back in 1994.
Maybe you're confusing Del Taco with the Seattle-based chain Taco Del Mar,
which did file for bankruptcy in 2011.
In fact, Del Taco has started to expand into Texas. In started in Dallas
with one store in 2010, and now there are 10 Del Tacos located in Texas.
- Peter
Jerry Sauk
Mar 11, 2012, 6:55:40 PM3/11/12
to
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 11:38:35 -0700, Peter Lawrence wrote:
> On 3/9/12 4:48 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 20:22:46 -0800, Geoff Miller wrote:
>>>
>>> Are they? Even if that were true, of what relevance would it have to
>>> my review (Hoo hoo!)? After all, they're still here for the time
>>> being, and still being patronized.
>>>
>>> I have to say, your suggestion that one should Google for any mention
>>> of bankruptcy proceedings before reviewing a fast-food restaurant
>>> chain is a new one on me. But then, our naton weas founded on (and
>>> thrives on) audacity, does it not? Fuckin' A, bubba!
>>
>> Actually I wasn't quite sure about the bankruptcy, I just know they've
>> been closing all over the U.S. and figured that had to be the case.
>>
>> <clickety click>
>>
>> Well, Whadya know? I was right!?<and the crowd roars!>
>
> Huh?
>
> The last time that Del Taco was in Chapter 11 was way back in 1994.
>
> Maybe you're confusing Del Taco with the Seattle-based chain Taco Del Mar,
> which did file for bankruptcy in 2011.
Maybe you're confusing your STL's, specifcially, Seattle with St
> On 3/9/12 4:48 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 20:22:46 -0800, Geoff Miller wrote:
>>>
>>> Are they? Even if that were true, of what relevance would it have to
>>> my review (Hoo hoo!)? After all, they're still here for the time
>>> being, and still being patronized.
>>>
>>> I have to say, your suggestion that one should Google for any mention
>>> of bankruptcy proceedings before reviewing a fast-food restaurant
>>> chain is a new one on me. But then, our naton weas founded on (and
>>> thrives on) audacity, does it not? Fuckin' A, bubba!
>>
>> Actually I wasn't quite sure about the bankruptcy, I just know they've
>> been closing all over the U.S. and figured that had to be the case.
>>
>> <clickety click>
>>
>> Well, Whadya know? I was right!?<and the crowd roars!>
>
> Huh?
>
> The last time that Del Taco was in Chapter 11 was way back in 1994.
>
> Maybe you're confusing Del Taco with the Seattle-based chain Taco Del Mar,
> which did file for bankruptcy in 2011.
Louis.
http://franchise.business-opportunities.biz/2009/12/18/del-taco-bankruptcy-filing/
http://www.beltstl.com/2011/06/saving-the-del-taco-saucer-from-politics-as-usual/
So that was a franchisee. No telling how many other franchisers of
Del taco have also filed. I've heard several stores of DT closings in
a few states.
> In fact, Del Taco has started to expand into Texas. In started in Dallas
> with one store in 2010, and now there are 10 Del Tacos located in Texas.
overall.
-sw
Jerry Sauk
Mar 11, 2012, 7:24:17 PM3/11/12
to
Peace,
Jerry
harry k
Mar 12, 2012, 12:33:28 PM3/12/12
to
Might I mention an outstanding example of it? Te-bowing.
Harry K
Uncle Steve
Mar 14, 2012, 10:39:46 AM3/14/12
to
may be seen in that light, but of course some people do go to such
events merely because they like to watch the game itself. I have no
idea how you might distinguish authentic sports fans from hypothetical
artificial fans.
Regards,
Uncle Steve
--
With Socialism, Usenet can free itself from the Troll Empire.
harry k
Mar 15, 2012, 10:56:03 AM3/15/12
to
Harry K
Jerry Sauk
Mar 17, 2012, 10:42:31 PM3/17/12
to
"Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
news:l2p7lrwc...@sqwertz.com...
> > And thanks also for confirming what I'd long suspected: that the
> > estimable Jerry Sauk is a sock puppet of yours.
>
> happen to not be very good at it according my last two posts.
Who is impersonating me? Give me name's. Oh and BTW I have saved this
message on my personal computer, to be used as PROOF int he court's that you
are guilty of identify theft. I will get around to making the arrangement's
as soon as I have time, hopefully this summer I'll get laid-off and have
some extra time.
Jerry Sauk
Mar 17, 2012, 10:50:13 PM3/17/12
to
I don't give a flying crap what people do in private, and you have a RIGHT
to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the law of
free-speach, but DO NOT POST your religious crap in alt.fast.food. The
internet has certain protocal rule's that you require that you post only
ON-TOPIC post's in the right newsgroup.
So the next time you feel the need to pray at del-taco, please post about it
in alt.religion and not here, since food and religion have absoultey nothing
to do whith each other.
Thank you for your cooperation.
"spamtrap1888" <spamtr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5d863512-c002-40d7...@pz2g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the law of
free-speach, but DO NOT POST your religious crap in alt.fast.food. The
internet has certain protocal rule's that you require that you post only
ON-TOPIC post's in the right newsgroup.
So the next time you feel the need to pray at del-taco, please post about it
in alt.religion and not here, since food and religion have absoultey nothing
to do whith each other.
Thank you for your cooperation.
"spamtrap1888" <spamtr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5d863512-c002-40d7...@pz2g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
David Kaye
Mar 18, 2012, 1:12:03 AM3/18/12
to
"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote
>I don't give a flying crap what people do in private, and you have a RIGHT
> to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the law
> of
> free-speach, [....]
Actually, this is not correct. A Del Taco is a private company on private
property, and as such, the owner can prevent people from praying while in
their store just as they can prevent people from wearing "gang colors" or
"provocative clothing" or prevent them from bringing in food from another
restaurant, etc.
On the other hand they cannot refuse to serve someone just because they're
wearing a Star of David or a yarmulke or a crucifix or if they "look Middle
Eastern". But, yes, they can prevent them from praying publicly.
For the record, I was in the food and beverage industry and I know these
laws forward and backward.
>I don't give a flying crap what people do in private, and you have a RIGHT
> to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the law
> of
Actually, this is not correct. A Del Taco is a private company on private
property, and as such, the owner can prevent people from praying while in
their store just as they can prevent people from wearing "gang colors" or
"provocative clothing" or prevent them from bringing in food from another
restaurant, etc.
On the other hand they cannot refuse to serve someone just because they're
wearing a Star of David or a yarmulke or a crucifix or if they "look Middle
Eastern". But, yes, they can prevent them from praying publicly.
For the record, I was in the food and beverage industry and I know these
laws forward and backward.
spamtrap1888
Mar 18, 2012, 2:31:51 AM3/18/12
to
On Mar 17, 7:50 pm, "Jerry Sauk" <jerrys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I don't give a flying crap what people do in private, and you have a RIGHT
> to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the law of
> free-speach, but DO NOT POST your religious crap in alt.fast.food. The
> internet has certain protocal rule's that you require that you post only
> ON-TOPIC post's in the right newsgroup.
>
> So the next time you feel the need to pray at del-taco, please post about it
> in alt.religion and not here, since food and religion have absoultey nothing
> to do whith each other.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation.
KFC
> I don't give a flying crap what people do in private, and you have a RIGHT
> to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the law of
> free-speach, but DO NOT POST your religious crap in alt.fast.food. The
> internet has certain protocal rule's that you require that you post only
> ON-TOPIC post's in the right newsgroup.
>
> So the next time you feel the need to pray at del-taco, please post about it
> in alt.religion and not here, since food and religion have absoultey nothing
> to do whith each other.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation.
Would disagree
Ah-men
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h71MyCnam8w
ViLco
Mar 19, 2012, 7:35:37 AM3/19/12
to
Jerry Sauk wrote:
> Give me name's.
dick
asshole
cunt
> Give me name's.
dick
asshole
cunt
Jerry Sauk
Mar 19, 2012, 4:35:45 PM3/19/12
to
"David Kaye" <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jk3qqo$pgc$1...@dont-email.me...
> "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote
>
> >I don't give a flying crap what people do in private, and you have a
RIGHT
> > to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the
law
> > of
> > free-speach, [....]
>
> Actually, this is not correct. A Del Taco is a private company on private
> property,
Complete bullshit. If you work in the industry like you claim you do then,
>
> >I don't give a flying crap what people do in private, and you have a
RIGHT
> > to pray in Del taco since it is public property and covered under the
law
> > of
> > free-speach, [....]
>
> Actually, this is not correct. A Del Taco is a private company on private
> property,
you know that million's of people every day enter and leave fast-food
store's freely. It's PUBLIC property. If it was private, then how would
the company's expect to do any friggin business at all.
Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
David Kaye
Mar 19, 2012, 4:27:17 PM3/19/12
to
"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote
> Complete bullshit. If you work in the industry like you claim you do
> then,
> you know that million's of people every day enter and leave fast-food
> store's freely. It's PUBLIC property. If it was private, then how would
> the company's expect to do any friggin business at all.
There is no use talking to you because you don't even know what the terms
public and private actually mean.
> Complete bullshit. If you work in the industry like you claim you do
> then,
> you know that million's of people every day enter and leave fast-food
> store's freely. It's PUBLIC property. If it was private, then how would
> the company's expect to do any friggin business at all.
public and private actually mean.
Steve Daniels
Mar 19, 2012, 4:35:57 PM3/19/12
to
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
compelled "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
Or what?
compelled "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
spamtrap1888
Mar 19, 2012, 4:33:41 PM3/19/12
to
Earl
Mar 19, 2012, 7:45:14 PM3/19/12
to
Jerry Sauk
Mar 20, 2012, 8:44:26 PM3/20/12
to
news:jk84r2$ise$1...@dont-email.me...
Well one thing I agree with you about is, is that there is no point in
continuing.. after you instead of citing FACT'S like I did, resorted to
slandering me. This discussion is CLOSED.
make that re-closed since we already talked about it here last year.
continuing.. after you instead of citing FACT'S like I did, resorted to
slandering me. This discussion is CLOSED.
make that re-closed since we already talked about it here last year.
Jerry Sauk
Mar 20, 2012, 8:47:28 PM3/20/12
to
"Steve Daniels" <sdan...@gorge.net> wrote in message
news:256fm71mgbbkaku35...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
> compelled "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>
> >Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
> >Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>
>
>
> Or what?
>
The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
> compelled "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>
> >Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
> >Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>
>
>
> Or what?
>
from this group. That might not seem like much to you since you are new to
the group, but ALL GROUPS that are cross-posted to will recieve the news of
the kill-filing, and they will probably all killfile you also.
I know what I am talking about, alt.fast-food used to have a serious
trolling problem, but I have completely cleaned-up the problem and will
CONTINUE to work for that as new people join.
Jonz
Mar 20, 2012, 11:37:09 PM3/20/12
to
On 3/20/2012 5:47 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "Steve Daniels"<sdan...@gorge.net> wrote in message
> news:256fm71mgbbkaku35...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
>> compelled "Jerry Sauk"<jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>>
>>> Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>>> Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>>
>>
>>
>> Or what?
>>
>
> The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
> from this group...
> "Steve Daniels"<sdan...@gorge.net> wrote in message
> news:256fm71mgbbkaku35...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
>> compelled "Jerry Sauk"<jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>>
>>> Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>>> Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>>
>>
>>
>> Or what?
>>
>
> The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
Promises, promises.
Jonz
Message has been deleted
Steve Daniels
Mar 21, 2012, 12:56:37 PM3/21/12
to
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:47:28 -0600, against all advice, something
compelled "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>
>"Steve Daniels" <sdan...@gorge.net> wrote in message
>news:256fm71mgbbkaku35...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
>> compelled "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>>
>> >Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>> >Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>>
>>
>>
>> Or what?
>>
>
>The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
>from this group.
Oh my god. How will I ever live through that.
>
>"Steve Daniels" <sdan...@gorge.net> wrote in message
>news:256fm71mgbbkaku35...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
>> compelled "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>>
>> >Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>> >Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>>
>>
>>
>> Or what?
>>
>
>The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
>from this group.
Jerry Sauk
Mar 23, 2012, 8:53:57 PM3/23/12
to
"Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:47:28 -0600, Jerry Sauk wrote:
>
> > The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
> > from this group. That might not seem like much to you since you are new
to
> > the group, but ALL GROUPS that are cross-posted to will recieve the news
of
> > the kill-filing, and they will probably all killfile you also.
> >
> > I know what I am talking about, alt.fast-food used to have a serious
> > trolling problem, but I have completely cleaned-up the problem and will
> > CONTINUE to work for that as new people join.
>
> This guy is really that stupid. Now you can see why Geoff, Tim, and I
>
> > The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
> > from this group. That might not seem like much to you since you are new
to
> > the group, but ALL GROUPS that are cross-posted to will recieve the news
of
> > the kill-filing, and they will probably all killfile you also.
> >
> > I know what I am talking about, alt.fast-food used to have a serious
> > trolling problem, but I have completely cleaned-up the problem and will
> > CONTINUE to work for that as new people join.
>
> took such a liking to him back in the early days.
>
> -sw
Liking? All we did was fight and argue about pointless worthless topic's.
Jerry Sauk
Mar 23, 2012, 8:59:03 PM3/23/12
to
news:k02km715dhmkrcppp...@4ax.com...
Do I need to remind you that if you get killfiled here, you might also
automatically be in other group's? Serves you right for cross-posting.
automatically be in other group's? Serves you right for cross-posting.
Julian Macassey
Mar 23, 2012, 10:20:53 PM3/23/12
to
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 18:59:03 -0600, Jerry Sauk <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Do I need to remind you that if you get killfiled here, you might also
> automatically be in other group's? Serves you right for cross-posting.
Being killed by Jerry Sauk is an honour.
>
>
> Do I need to remind you that if you get killfiled here, you might also
> automatically be in other group's? Serves you right for cross-posting.
--
"He has been a good man, a good friend and ally to the United States,
we need to remember that." Dick Cheney about Hosni Mubarak Feb 5 2011
BCFD36
Mar 24, 2012, 1:33:48 AM3/24/12
to
On 3/20/12 5:47 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "Steve Daniels"<sdan...@gorge.net> wrote in message
> news:256fm71mgbbkaku35...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
>> compelled "Jerry Sauk"<jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>>
>>> Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>>> Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>>
>>
>>
>> Or what?
>>
>
> The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
I'm familiar with printf, fprintf, scanf, seekf, but not killf. Has
> "Steve Daniels"<sdan...@gorge.net> wrote in message
> news:256fm71mgbbkaku35...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:45 -0600, against all advice, something
>> compelled "Jerry Sauk"<jerr...@hotmail.com>, to say:
>>
>>> Assuming that you are NOT that stupid and are just a troll, a word of
>>> Warning, trolling is NOT permitted in alt.fast-food.
>>
>>
>>
>> Or what?
>>
>
> The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
stdio.h been expanded and I haven't heard?
>
>
--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire
Message has been deleted
BCFD36
Mar 24, 2012, 2:02:39 AM3/24/12
to
On 3/23/12 10:58 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>
> -sw
Oops. You caught me. fseek would be the correct call. But a search
hasn't turned up killf. Maybe it is a C++ extension of one of the io
classes.
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 22:33:48 -0700, BCFD36 wrote:
>
>>> The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
>>
>> I'm familiar with printf, fprintf, scanf, seekf, but not killf. Has
>> stdio.h been expanded and I haven't heard?
>
> seekf?
>
>>> The penalty for trolling will be up to, and INCLUDING, being killf-filed
>>
>> I'm familiar with printf, fprintf, scanf, seekf, but not killf. Has
>> stdio.h been expanded and I haven't heard?
>
>
> -sw
Oops. You caught me. fseek would be the correct call. But a search
hasn't turned up killf. Maybe it is a C++ extension of one of the io
classes.
Will Dockery
Mar 24, 2012, 11:07:56 AM3/24/12
to
On Mar 8, 12:00 am, Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net> wrote:
> I've long maintained that you know you've left the San Francisco Bay
> Area when you start seeing two things: Circle-K convenience stores and
> Del Taco fast-food places.
>
> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
> impression on me.
>
> I finally tried Del Taco for the first time last weekend -- the
> restaurant in Watsonville, in south Santa Cruz County, to be exact.
> Not in the Bay Area, but close.
<great story snipped for brevity>
Unfortunately, I haven't come across a Del Taco in years, down here in
the Deep South.
Taco Bell everywhere, but miss the option of a Del Taco... good to
hear they do still exist.
--
Music & poetry from Will Dockery & Friends:
http://www.reverbnation.com/willdockery
> I've long maintained that you know you've left the San Francisco Bay
> Area when you start seeing two things: Circle-K convenience stores and
> Del Taco fast-food places.
>
> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
> don't consider that a significant foothold. One is on Hamilton Avenue
> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. I don't
> remember where I saw the other one. It must not have made much of an
> impression on me.
>
> I finally tried Del Taco for the first time last weekend -- the
> restaurant in Watsonville, in south Santa Cruz County, to be exact.
> Not in the Bay Area, but close.
<great story snipped for brevity>
Unfortunately, I haven't come across a Del Taco in years, down here in
the Deep South.
Taco Bell everywhere, but miss the option of a Del Taco... good to
hear they do still exist.
--
Music & poetry from Will Dockery & Friends:
http://www.reverbnation.com/willdockery
Earl
Mar 24, 2012, 9:43:33 PM3/24/12
to
posts something wrong.
Jerry Sauk
Mar 26, 2012, 12:50:55 AM3/26/12
to
"Earl" <earl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Go6dncrZTKbZ5fPS...@giganews.com...
Charles Bishop
Apr 1, 2012, 9:50:32 PM4/1/12
to
In article
<0fe45826-3131-4d2e...@px4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, Will
Dockery <will.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 8, 12:00=A0am, Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net> wrote:
>> I've long maintained that you know you've left the San Francisco Bay
>> Area when you start seeing two things: Circle-K convenience stores and
>> Del Taco fast-food places.
>>
>> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
>> don't consider that a significant foothold. =A0One is on Hamilton Avenue
>> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. =A0I don't
>> remember where I saw the other one. =A0It must not have made much of an
there are two others within about 5 miles of the first, Western end of the
SFV.
Willing to sample their menu and report back for food.
--
charles
<0fe45826-3131-4d2e...@px4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, Will
Dockery <will.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 8, 12:00=A0am, Geoff Miller <geo...@netgate.net> wrote:
>> I've long maintained that you know you've left the San Francisco Bay
>> Area when you start seeing two things: Circle-K convenience stores and
>> Del Taco fast-food places.
>>
>> There are only two Del Tacos in trhe Bay Area that I'm aware of, and I
>> in Campbell, a suburban enclave northwest of San Jose. =A0I don't
>> remember where I saw the other one. =A0It must not have made much of an
>> impression on me.
>>
>> I finally tried Del Taco for the first time last weekend -- the
>> restaurant in Watsonville, in south Santa Cruz County, to be exact.
>> Not in the Bay Area, but close.
>
><great story snipped for brevity>
>
>Unfortunately, I haven't come across a Del Taco in years, down here in
>the Deep South.
>
>Taco Bell everywhere, but miss the option of a Del Taco... good to
>hear they do still exist.
A Del Taco here in the San Fernando Valley, LA, CA. Just a 'sec . . . Ah,
>>
>> I finally tried Del Taco for the first time last weekend -- the
>> restaurant in Watsonville, in south Santa Cruz County, to be exact.
>> Not in the Bay Area, but close.
>
><great story snipped for brevity>
>
>Unfortunately, I haven't come across a Del Taco in years, down here in
>the Deep South.
>
>Taco Bell everywhere, but miss the option of a Del Taco... good to
>hear they do still exist.
there are two others within about 5 miles of the first, Western end of the
SFV.
Willing to sample their menu and report back for food.
--
charles
0 new messages