On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:50:27 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

>On 4/25/2013 10:03 AM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:42:49 -1000, dsi1
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/24/2013 10:46 PM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "dsi1" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> That attractive picture on the Spam can was the biggest rip-off. You
>>>>> cannot turn Spam into a festive ham! If you serve this dish as the
>>>>> main attraction of a holiday spread, someone will end up dead during
>>>>> the course of the meal. They'll kill themselves. It's that depressing!
>>>>
>>>> lol well I don't like it but Himself does. He has fond memories of his
>>>> mother battering and frying slices when he was a child. I keep some in
>>>> the freezer but it doesn't see the light of day very often)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Let's face it, Spam is the food of poor folk.
>>
>> SPAM ain't all that inexpensive... costs about $4/lb... and when
>> cooked shrinks quite a bit. SPAM is definitely not po' folk food.
>>
>
>
>Your average Spam eater learned to eat the stuff because that's what
>their parents made due to lack of refrigeration or lack of fresh meat or
>lack of money or they were fighting a war and that's was in their
>rations. It's also a good product for folks that are geographically
>isolated. My parents bought Spam because they were poor folk. Back in
>those days, people ate Spam because they had limited choices. These
>days, I don't get Spam because I got a lot more options.

Are you really so ignorant? One can say the same about many foods...
do you live on PB & J... no one lives on SPAM.