OT: Chipotle ?
Papi_Chulo
Miami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
Ok – I know many don’t like the “OT” threads – but obviously this is important.
I’m not much into fast food – but man I’m kinda addicted to Chipotle as of late – feels like I’ve been eating there like 3x/wk lately – if they had naked chicks to go along with the food; that’d be awesome :).
Anybody else not on a $350k/yr salary into Chipotle?
40 comments
"The emergence of a “Seinfeld nation” will shift spending to fast casual food restaurants, “especially those catering to a more affluent-than-average clientele, given savings on family expenses,” said Avery Shenfeld, CIBC World Markets chief economist in Toronto. Seinfeld, a hit situation comedy about single friends, aired from 1989 through 1998. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. of Denver “would be a good example,” said Shenfeld"
You can read more at my important "Seinfeld Nation" post here:
https://www.tuscl.net/postread.php?PID=3…
"Anybody else not on a $350k/yr salary into Chipotle?"
Chipotle IS for the $350k crowd. The folks that can't make that paltry sum have to dine off of the Dollar Menu at Taco Bell.
@Shadow-I saw Twisted Taco on TV. I'm going there someday.
"Teens Still Love Starbucks, Chipotle, and Taco Bell"
http://www.eater.com/2014/10/10/6956485/…
Who doesn't like the OT threads???
I like Moe's more than Chipotle but they are pretty close.
It definitely is.
I've only been there a handful of times, but I think Chipotle is great. The only reason I don't go more often is because they're too expensive.
It costs 7 or 8 bucks for one meal at Chipotle. If you give me 7 or 8 bucks, I can make my own tacos at home and get a lot more for the same amount of money I'd be spending at Chipotle
I prefer Illegal Pete's
Chick Fil A must be doing something right.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/201…
Maybe God's work?
And against gay marriage. When they were protested, Americans went there in droves!
Before I get chastised again by lopaw, I have no problems with gay couples. I do have a problem with the fact that a civil union (same legal rights) wasn't good enough. They just have to think I have to call it marriage. Not gonna happen.
Anyway, marriage is more a religious term, so if a church wishes to marry gays, they certainly may do so.
That is great news! But what's the situation in NJ? Next time I stroke a manager there, I may just have send out some feelers about the idea!
Yep. A thread about Big Guy's Sausages would have been a better place
http://m.onlineordersnow.com/bigguyssaus…
I'm guessing Red Lobster then. Grilled shark ?
Pascoe's research on masculinity and high school
Through ethnographic research in a high school setting, CJ Pascoe examines how American high school boys use the term fag. Pascoe's work suggests that boys in high school use the fag epithet as a way to assert their own masculinity, by claiming that another boy is less masculine; this, in their eyes, makes him a fag, and its usage suggests that it is less about sexual orientation and more about gender. One-third of the boys in Pascoe's study claimed that they would not call a homosexual peer a fag; fag is used in this setting as a form of gender policing, in which boys ridicule others who fail at masculinity, heterosexual prowess, or strength. Because boys do not want to be labeled a fag, they hurl the insult at another person. The fag identity does not constitute a static identity attached to the boy receiving the insult. Rather, fag is a fluid identity that boys strive to avoid, often by naming another as the fag. As Pascoe asserts, "[the fag identity] is fluid enough that boys police their behaviors out of fear of having the fag identity permanently adhere and definitive enough so that boys recognize a fag behavior and strive to avoid it". Pascoe's study reports that gender policing is most common among white boys, while black boys are more concerned with "acting" appropriately black. The black youth in Pascoe's study often ridiculed one another for "acting white", and did not express gender policing to the same degree as white boys.[14]
Make that all 57 states. No matter, since, as I said marriage is a religious term, and I do not have to accept it. Remember, people married long before government found a way to take more of our money. Gay marriage gives them a chance for even more.
Before the modern makeover, marriages, at least in the West, were most often contracts between two families (with both the Church *and* the State staying mostly out of it except as arbiters), in order to cement alliances and expand the family workforce. In fact, until around the 16th century, the Church accepted a couple's word that they had exchanged marriage vows, with no witnesses or corroborating evidence needed.
History is replete with examples of how polygamy, incest, rape, same-sex unions, infidelity and many of the other things we consider to be "anti-marriage" were all held to be acceptable and legal within marriage.
Objections to gay marriage based on "tradition" just don't hold water.