Pho

[Michael Eisenstadt]

some time back Houston White took me to a Vietnamese restaurant
(on N.Lamar just before 183) and introduced me to Pho so I know
what you're talking about. They served it with cilantro.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Loving" <lovingigor@hotmail.com>
To: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 9:09 AM
Subject: RE: Frat of the Land--Restaurant meal size fix


> It is the menu that is the culprit. I eat huge bowls of Pho all the time
which is 75% fish stock flavored with spices. If we all ate Vietnamese food
we'd be short and skinny... maybe? Or you can eat at EL Rancho and have mole
enchiladas with cheese and chicken , grease and beans and rice plus a whole
bag of chips or shrimp enchiladas with spinach and cream sauce with charro
beans and rice... And the serving is good for three people which I gobble
up. Maybe we should elect Emiril President so we can have food laws?.
>
>
>
> >From: Frances Morey
> >Reply-To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
> >To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
> >Subject: Frat of the Land--Restaurant meal size fix
> >Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:54:11 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >Dave,
> >It is a thorny problem, having the government or the lawyers any more
involved in food industry rights and wrongs than they already are with
permits, inspections, standards, etc. Kerry could certainly admonish the
food industry to heal themselves without additional governmental
intervention by simply offering more 400 and 500 calorie meals for average
sized people who are intelligent enough to choose to control their weight
and not just cater to the people impressed by wrteched excess whose eyes,
imagined needs and budgets are bigger than their stomachs. I'm not so sure
that laws and law suits are the answer due to the ubiquitous nature of the
problem. Court cases and fines have little to do with feeding massive
numbers of people who eat 50% of their meals away from home.
> >
> >Instead of dithering about the tax cut, though, I think he should declare
that time has come to double the minimum wage. That way the working people
in the food industry can enjoy a poor man's stock-split and take pride in
their employment. Double up stocks-splits aren't just for shareholders
anymore but should be broadened to include those for whom labor is their
stock in trade. Gee, they could make up the difference by just reducing the
size of some of the meals they offer, charging one third less for half size
meals.
> >
> >Oh, but the price of fast food would skyrocket. So what, I hear there are
places called grocery stores where people can actually buy very reasonably
priced food and actually prepare meals at home. Grocery stores are also a
part of the food industry. Are fast food workers to be treated as if they
are today's version of slaves, earning half of what it is estimated that it
costs to live? If all the minimum wage workers in America suddenly got paid
twice as much as they are now earning the economy would recover at warp
speed.
> >That is what I would do if I were Kerry. Fighting conservative political
rhetoric with a few good ideas in the spirit of nobless oblige--that could
bring out voters for the Democrats.
> >Your lil' ol' home economist,
> >Frances
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >dmcqklaatu@netscape.net wrote:
> >
> >I watched the debate on this on CSPAN. Congresswoman Shiela Jackson Lee
of Houston tried heroically to derail it, but couldn't. One of the
Republican arguments for the bill...swear to God...was that Santa Claus was
fat, and happy.
> >
> >
> >Frances Morey wrote:
> >
> > >The problem is that restaurants only offer too-much-food per order. You
cannot order and consume a small meal in any known restaurant. It is as if
they engage in amount and price fixing across the board. Small meals aren't
offered on the menu, period! That's the problem! These establishments do
indeed make you fat if you cannot order half size meals for half the money
to suit your body's needs rather than the restaurant's bottom line. The
coertion involved that ought to be made illegal is ignoring the requirements
of smaller people and only serving meals that might be about right for
professional football players or ironworkers and which are generally a
quantity large enough to feed a family of four.
> > >People typically finish their plate, now platter, no matter how much is
on it and that is where the obesity comes from. Restaurant culpability is in
failing to offer the smaller size meal choices on their menus--and present
the customer a plate that it's okay to finish.
> > >FM
> > >
> > >David Rubinson wrote:
> > >Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:03:04 -0500
> > >To: (Recipient list suppressed)
> > >From: David Rubinson
> > >Subject: Fat of the Land
> > >
> > >Children grow up in the "developed" countries bombarded with messages
to CONSUME.
> > >An endless repetitive assault of advertising, PR, and subliminal
brainwashing.
> > >Americans grossly over consume- and food is just one small item.
> > >We have exported our desperate consumption everywhere on the planet.
> > >So now children of the lucky countries we have decided to "develop" are
also getting obese.
> > >Diabetes is epidemic.
> > >The corporations who maliciously push this over consumption call the
rewards they glean - "PROFIT."
> > >Profit - from their children's gullilbility and defenselessness.
> > >Profit from selling poison and planet-destroying "product."
> > >Their CEOs grab millions from the process, their shareholders crow
about the earnings ratios.
> > >And lives are being ruined on a global basis.
> > >These corporations make very sure to send a lot of the "profits" along
to the rule makers, senators, congresspeople, government regulators.
> > >And so, those sworn to protect us abandon us, abandon their own
children- in the pursuit of monetary gain.
> > >They take money and let us die.
> > >It's that simple.
> > >There has been a Radical Regime Change -- and if that's OK with you,
then do nothing.
> > >
> > >---------------------------------
> > >
> > >http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/11/politics/11BURG.html?th
> > >
> > >March 11, 2004
> > >Vote in House Offers a Shield for Restaurants in Obesity SuitsBy CARL
HULSE
> > >
> > >WASHINGTON, March 10 ­ Saying overeating is a problem for individuals,
not the courts, the House easily approved legislation on Wednesday to bar
people from suing restaurants on the ground that their food makes customers
fat.
> > >
> > >Advocates of the Republican-written measure, which has become known on
Capitol Hill as the cheeseburger bill, said it was needed to curb the threat
of obesity claims against fast-food franchises that provide millions of jobs
along with their burgers and fries.
> > >
> > >"The food industry is under attack and in the cross hairs of the same
trial lawyers who went after big tobacco," said Representative Ric Keller, a
Florida Republican who is the chief sponsor of the measure, which was
adopted 276 to 139.
> > >
> > >The White House endorsed the bill on Wednesday, saying in a statement
that "food manufacturers and sellers should not be held liable for injury
because of a person's consumption of legal, unadulterated food and a
person's weight gain or obesity."
> > >
> > >The outlook is unclear in the Senate, where Democrats have blocked
consideration of such limitations on lawsuits. The main sponsor, however, is
the No. 2 Republican, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
> > >
> > >"This bill says, `Don't run off and file a lawsuit if you are fat,' "
said Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Republican of Wisconsin,
chairman of the Judiciary Committee. "It says, `Look in the mirror because
you're the one to blame.' "
> > >
> > >Opponents said the legislation was unnecessary and irresponsible in
light of this week's government report identifying obesity as a condition
fast catching up to tobacco as the No. 1 preventable cause of death in the
United States. Democrats said the fact that the House was devoting almost a
full day to the proposal illustrated the misplaced priorities of the
Republican majority.
> > >
> > >"With all the challenges facing this country and with the limited
schedule set by the Republicans this year, is this the best bill to
consider?" asked Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts.
"Under the Republican leadership, this House has become a place where
trivial issues are debated passionately and serious ones not at all."
> > >
> > >The measure was the latest Republican-led effort to provide legal
immunity for a specific industry after efforts to impose broader limits have
been blocked. Last week, a measure to provide immunity to gun manufacturers
and dealers was defeated. Last year, a broad energy measure stalled over
resistance to granting immunity to producers of a gasoline additive blamed
for water pollution. In the past, Republicans pressed for immunity for the
tobacco industry and producers of vaccines.
> > >
> > >While Republicans on the House floor said there had been a spate of
such suits against restaurants, Democrats said there had been few.
> > >
> > >John Banzhaf, a law professor at George Washington University who has
been a main critic of the measure, said that he knew of only one suit that
would be covered by the measure and that it had been dismissed in court.
Professor Banzhaf said a handful of other such suits had proceeded based on
labeling and ingredients. He also acknowledged that there were lawyers
exploring suing restaurants over obesity.
> > >
> > >"There seems to be a hysteria that a couple of law professors are going
to pick on poor little defenseless companies like McDonald's, Kraft and
KFC," Professor Banzhaf said. "It just doesn't make sense."
> > >
> > >Supporters said the mere prospect of lawsuits justified the measure,
which the House majority leader, Tom DeLay of Texas, said was intended to
discourage the "Ronald McDonald made me do it defense."
> > >
> > >"It is ridiculous that we even need to do a bill like this, but we do,"
Mr. DeLay said.
> > >
> > >The legislation is formally known as the Personal Responsibility in
Food Consumption Act. It would bar new cases and dismiss pending federal and
state suits in which damages are sought as compensation for conditions
connected to weight gain or obesity attributed to restaurant food. The
authors said it would not prevent suits brought because of a restaurant's
negligence, false advertising, mislabeling or tainted food.
> > >
> > >Though the bill was championed by Republicans, 55 Democrats joined 221
Republicans in supporting it. Opposing it were 137 Democrats, one Republican
and one independent.
> > >
> > >Democratic critics failed in multiple efforts to win changes in the
measure, which was backed by the National Restaurant Association and the
National Federation of Independent Businesses and opposed by some legal and
health interests.
> > >
> > >"For small-business owners, the threat of a frivolous lawsuit remains
one of their greatest worries," Jack Faris, president of the business group,
said.
> > >
> > >But Dr. Neal Barnard, president of the Physicians Committee for
Responsible Medicine, called the measure unwise because obesity was gaining
new recognition as a significant health problem.
> > >
> > >"Given that we are just now beginning to discover the industry's
involvement, granting them sweeping immunity is, at best, dangerously
short-sighted," Dr. Barnard said.
> > >
> > >Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy |
Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > David Rubinson
> > > ,,,, ,,,,
> > > \\\ ///
> > >~~~~~~~~~~{τΏτ}~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >~~~~~~~~~~( . ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > :::::::::::::::::: ooo:::ooo
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> > > :::::::::::::::::: ( )
:::( )::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> > > ( ) ( )
> > >
> > >
> > > in J A M A I C A
> > > YAH !! MON !!
> > >
> > >Quote of The Day:
> > >
> > >"... Haiti is the world's most explicit example of what globalisation
really means. It was the unwitting test bed for the current lunacies..."
> > >
> > >John Maxwell, Jamaica Observer March 4, 2004
> > >
> > >---------------------------------
> > >Do you Yahoo!?
> > >Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster.
> > >
> >
> >__________________________________________________________________
> >Introducing the New Netscape Internet Service.
> >Only $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
> >
> >Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
> >
> >New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
> >Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
> >Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp
> >
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> Frustrated with dial-up? Lightning-fast Internet access for as low as
$29.95/month.