Just so we're clear, Mr Angry Chilli Douche, you're stating here that at one time in a certain place people made chilli using beans, yes?
BEANS WERE USED AS A MEAT SUBSTITUTE IN CHILI RECIPES BECAUSE POOR PEOPLE NOT FROM SAN ANTONIO COULD NOT AFFORD THE AMOUNT OF BEEF REQUIRED.
lemme guess... aside from working with every major hollywood studio, so you know all facts about every movie...
you also work on the official chili definition committee.
So instead of just being an ignorant douche you CHOOSE to be an ignorant douche.
Beans are a filler/extender for poor people. EKT.
Just so we're clear, Mr Angry Chilli Douche, you're stating here that at one time in a certain place people made chilli using beans, yes?
Well chili is not exactly haute cuisine anyway so its food for poor people or food for poorish people.
it isn't chili at that point, it's a different dish. The dish as others has said is "Chili con Carne" chili with meat. If you substitute meat with beans it is no longer chili con carne is it?
Huh? Chili was created with beef in mind, beef is cheap depending on where you are in the world. Where it was invented beef was cheap.
it isn't chili at that point, it's a different dish. The dish as others has said is "Chili con Carne" chili with meat. If you substitute meat with beans it is no longer chili con carne is it?
Why? It still has meat in it doesn't it?
So you're saying it's no longer chilli if it has onion in it? What about when I thicken mine slightly with corn starch? What about if someone dips crackers in it? Are you stupid?
it isn't chili at that point, it's a different dish. The dish as others has said is "Chili con Carne" chili with meat. If you substitute meat with beans it is no longer chili con carne is it?
Mike Gayner, chili can have onion as onion isn't a meat substitute. Dipping crackers in already cooked chili is perfectly acceptable as the chili and crackers were prepared and cooked separately. You can't really even give a good argument for what you're arguing for.
Beans are meat substitutes. I'm not saying adding beans to chili is WRONG, I'm saying chili doesn't have beans in it. As in when you prepare and cook chili, it should contain no beans what so ever.
By that logic "traditional" chili that you make isn't chili because the cuts of meat used haven't been placed between the saddle and blanket of a riding horse for a 10-12 hour day of riding to break down the meat/connective tissue to make it edible.
I'm nominating bfdd for most retarded ATOTer of 2010 award for his stubborn insolence in this chilli debate.
i had a 1k protein shake with an entire can of turkey chili, some cottage cheese, 4 oz of steak, 1tbsp of flax seed oil, small salad, some rice, and an apple last night before bed.
what did you phags eat? learn to eat like a man. Oh noes there's beans in my chili. I'm not to look like an emo twig anymore.
i had a 1k protein shake with an entire can of turkey chili, some cottage cheese, 4 oz of steak, 1tbsp of flax seed oil, small salad, some rice, and an apple last night before bed.
What did you phags eat? Learn to eat like a man. Oh noes there's beans in my chili. I'm not to look like an emo twig anymore.
How am I the most retarded for my stubborness? I don't think it's any more or less retarded than you saying adding crackers to already made chili some how changes the dish.
So you're saying it's no longer chilli if it has onion in it? What about when I thicken mine slightly with corn starch? What about if someone dips crackers in it? Are you stupid?