Edwin Pawlowski > wrote in message
. com...
> > What about the father?

> If you feel the slave/wife is a suitable term you have the
> option of not getting married and not having children and
> the responsibility that goes along with them.

You dodged the question, Ed; answer it.

> That's what makes America great!

That's not "what makes America great." It's always been our ability to
adapt to changes and capitalize on trends.

The Ranger

;"The Ranger" > wrote in message
...
> Edwin Pawlowski > wrote in message
> . com...
>> > What about the father?
>
>> If you feel the slave/wife is a suitable term you have the
>> option of not getting married and not having children and
>> the responsibility that goes along with them.
>
> You dodged the question, Ed; answer it.

I dodged nothing. Fathers have a responsibility to raise the children also.
I was not the one bringing up the slave/wife issue. In most cases the
traditional roles are father works, mother nurtures. It is the way we were
made and mothers have generally better instincts for that. if people want
to reverse the roles, that is fine by me. Better than warehousing kids.

In my house I helped with feeding, baths, homework etc. Get this shocking
behavior, I'd also take the kids down to the corner store for an ice cream
while my wife cleaned up the kitchen after dinner. But there are no slaves
in our house!

"Siobhan Perricone" > wrote in message
...
> On 22 Jan 2005 19:48:05 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote:
>
> >>"Edwin Pawlowski"
> >>
> >>I worked, she stayed home and took care of the house and kids. That gave
> >>them plenty of real Useful Skills for life rather than learning from a
day
> >>care center.
> >
> >Day Care Center is simply a politically correct euphemism for
"Orphanage",
> >where unwanted children are dumped off so those certain immature,
selfish, self
> >centered individuals who are incapable of accepting the responsibility
can
> >rationalize their claim to parenthood.
>
> No, it's just a fancy name for "babysitter" There have always been
> babysitters, there always will. Anyone who expects parents to raise
> children with any assistance is living in a dream world. Oh right... it's
> you, Sheldon.
>

From the way I see parents treating their children at the supermarket, I
think many would be better off in daycare. At least daycare providers have
to be certified in most areas. The facilities are inspected, and there is
some expectation that the children won't be verbally or physically abused.

"Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Siobhan Perricone" > wrote in message
> >
> > No, it's just a fancy name for "babysitter" There have always been
> > babysitters, there always will. Anyone who expects parents to raise
> > children with any assistance is living in a dream world. Oh right...
it's
> > you, Sheldon.
>
> Depends. Baby sitters used to be grandma or the nice neighbor lady that
> really cared about your child. Far different than some (note: I said
some,
> not all) of the warehouses for kids used today. Some are good, some are,
> well, very poor.

I have the same observation about parents - some good, some very bad.

Edwin Pawlowski > wrote in message
.. .
> Fathers have a responsibility to raise the children also.

I must have missed that in your other posts...

> In most cases the traditional roles are father works,
> mother nurtures.

But these roles are changing -- thankfully. The father should be more
than a simple paycheck, hiding at work from anything resembling family,
because "society" demands it. You work to live, not live to work.

> It is the way we were made and mothers have generally
> better instincts for that.

Nonsense; men haven't had to go and kill for food (unless for sport*)
for a long time. Wives haven't had to till the earth or be
baby-production machines since before the end of the nineteenth century.
It's all about what you bring into a relationship, not what "society"
expects or demands.

The Ranger

"The Ranger" > wrote in message
>> It is the way we were made and mothers have generally
>> better instincts for that.
>
> Nonsense; men haven't had to go and kill for food (unless for sport*)
> for a long time. Wives haven't had to till the earth or be
> baby-production machines since before the end of the nineteenth century.
> It's all about what you bring into a relationship, not what "society"
> expects or demands.
>
> The Ranger

Study anthropology. Society has changed in our country, but our instincts
are centuries behind. Then travel a bit (or at least read National
Geographic) to see how some areas of the world are still little developed
and man still hunts to survive. Those instincts are going to remain with
humans for many more years.

With the advent of artificial insemination we no longer have the need to get
horny either. BTW, if women are not going to be the "baby producing
machines", who will??????

"Vox Humana" > wrote in message
>>
>> Around here, Biff and Buffy are at Kennedy fund raisers.
>
> In Connecticut?
>
>
Sad to say, yes, many support the rum runners from MA as well as our own
Sen. Dodd.

"Michael O'Donnell" > wrote in message
t...
> In article Rhonda Anderson savoured the salmon then said
> > >
> As a bloke, I bet he wasn't sad at all.
> I bet he just likes the saucy old birds at the home swanning over him,
> making him cups of tea, and banging on about how 'vital and virile' he
> is ... LOL !! Good on him, I say
>

I had an office next to a retirement center years ago. There was about 50
women for every man. The women always complained about the men. It seems
like men were an annoyance. It would have been unheard of for them to fawn
over one of the men.

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:29:06 GMT, Siobhan Perricone
> wrote:

>On 22 Jan 2005 19:48:05 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote:
>
>>>"Edwin Pawlowski"
>>>
>>>I worked, she stayed home and took care of the house and kids. That gave
>>>them plenty of real Useful Skills for life rather than learning from a day
>>>care center.
>>
>>Day Care Center is simply a politically correct euphemism for "Orphanage",
>>where unwanted children are dumped off so those certain immature, selfish, self
>>centered individuals who are incapable of accepting the responsibility can
>>rationalize their claim to parenthood.
>
>No, it's just a fancy name for "babysitter" There have always been
>babysitters, there always will. Anyone who expects parents to raise
>children with any assistance is living in a dream world. Oh right... it's
>you, Sheldon.

it's pretty obvious that sheldon was 'raised' without any human
intervention.

your pal,
blake

On Tue 25 Jan 2005 11:25:10a, blake murphy tittered and giggled, and
giggled and tittered, and finally blurted out...

> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:29:06 GMT, Siobhan Perricone
> > wrote:
>
>>On 22 Jan 2005 19:48:05 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote:
>>
>>>>"Edwin Pawlowski"
>>>>
>>>>I worked, she stayed home and took care of the house and kids. That
>>>>gave them plenty of real Useful Skills for life rather than learning
>>>>from a day care center.
>>>
>>>Day Care Center is simply a politically correct euphemism for
>>>"Orphanage", where unwanted children are dumped off so those certain
>>>immature, selfish, self centered individuals who are incapable of
>>>accepting the responsibility can rationalize their claim to parenthood.
>>
>>No, it's just a fancy name for "babysitter" There have always been
>>babysitters, there always will. Anyone who expects parents to raise
>>children with any assistance is living in a dream world. Oh right...
>>it's you, Sheldon.
>
> it's pretty obvious that sheldon was 'raised' without any human
> intervention.
>
> your pal,
> blake

And apprently received no human genes.

Wayne

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue 25 Jan 2005 11:25:10a, blake murphy tittered and giggled, and
> giggled and tittered, and finally blurted out...
>
> > On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:29:06 GMT, Siobhan Perricone
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>On 22 Jan 2005 19:48:05 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote:
> >>
> >>>>"Edwin Pawlowski"
> >>>>
> >>>>I worked, she stayed home and took care of the house and kids. That
> >>>>gave them plenty of real Useful Skills for life rather than learning
> >>>>from a day care center.
> >>>
> >>>Day Care Center is simply a politically correct euphemism for
> >>>"Orphanage", where unwanted children are dumped off so those certain
> >>>immature, selfish, self centered individuals who are incapable of
> >>>accepting the responsibility can rationalize their claim to parenthood.
> >>
> >>No, it's just a fancy name for "babysitter" There have always been
> >>babysitters, there always will. Anyone who expects parents to raise
> >>children with any assistance is living in a dream world. Oh right...
> >>it's you, Sheldon.
> >
> > it's pretty obvious that sheldon was 'raised' without any human
> > intervention.
> >
> > your pal,
> > blake
>
> And apprently received no human genes.

Thus all the references to interspecies sex.

"Michael O'Donnell" > wrote in message
t...
> In article Vox Humana savoured the salmon then said
> >
> > "Michael O'Donnell" > wrote in message
> > t...
> > > In article Rhonda Anderson savoured the salmon then said
> > > > >
> > > As a bloke, I bet he wasn't sad at all.
> > > I bet he just likes the saucy old birds at the home swanning over him,
> > > making him cups of tea, and banging on about how 'vital and virile' he
> > > is ... LOL !! Good on him, I say
> > >
> >
> > I had an office next to a retirement center years ago. There was about
50
> > women for every man. The women always complained about the men. It
seems
> > like men were an annoyance. It would have been unheard of for them to
fawn
> > over one of the men.
>
> LOL ! - that's quite funny
>
> I used to hear my old granny & grandad ( non-related, both widowed and
> in separate 'assisted living' ) talk about other people in the home.
> There was much eyelash batting, and talk of the opposite sex, from both
> of them ! Also wicked gossip - who fancied who, new people moving in.
> I tell ya, it was like they both lived on the set of "Melrose Place" for
> old timers


Yep. Old people specalize in that sort of thing. We had an elderly couple
as neighbors until recently. If I wanted to know ANYTHING that was going on
in the neighborhood, I would find an excuse to talk with them. God only
knows what they told people about us!

"Michael O'Donnell" > wrote in message
t...
>
> LOL ! - that's quite funny
>
> I used to hear my old granny & grandad ( non-related, both widowed and
> in separate 'assisted living' ) talk about other people in the home.
> There was much eyelash batting, and talk of the opposite sex, from both
> of them ! Also wicked gossip - who fancied who, new people moving in.
> I tell ya, it was like they both lived on the set of "Melrose Place" for
> old timers

Sounds a lot like one of our Sandy Eggo - R.F.C. Cook-Ins. Just add a large
amount of beer and strong spirits to the mix and you have it! The wicked
gossip starts immediately. After liberal liquor lubrication, licentiousness
begins. Nothing is ever accomplished though because of the stretched tummies
caused by enormous amounts of delicious food.

Charlie, armature hedonist

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:09:36 GMT, "Charles Gifford"
> wrote:

>Sounds a lot like one of our Sandy Eggo - R.F.C. Cook-Ins.

<snip>

Hey! Charlie! When's the next one?? Or am I persona no grata nowadays?

"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by
stupidity."

- Nick Diamos

"Terry Pulliam Burd" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:09:36 GMT, "Charles Gifford"
> > wrote:
>
> >Sounds a lot like one of our Sandy Eggo - R.F.C. Cook-Ins.
>
> <snip>
>
> Hey! Charlie! When's the next one?? Or am I persona no grata nowadays?

Never! You are essential! Your combination of beauty and naughtiness are
delightful. I am hopeful that we will have our annual event again. It is
always in the first two weeks of June. I have not approached our recent
hosts yet. It is time to start thinking about it though!

Hugs,
Charlie

In article , Denise~* at
wrote on 1/20/05 13:48:

>
>> No sillier than your assuming your child is "entertainment" for everybody
>> in public. Not everyone wants to be entertained by someone elses kids.
>> I'd rather pay for my entertainment and choose its venue. Silly and giddy,
>> possibly loud and boisterous, underfoot and in the way, are not
>> characteristics that I find appealing when I'm trying to shop or eat in a
>> rewtaurant. AFAIC, it's an unpleasant distraction.
>
> Actually, it wasn't an assumption. Just about every time we go out I
> get a compliment and/or a smiles toward my kid. the compliment is
> typically about how cute/well behaved he is. It's nice to hear, and
> also reinforces my belief that I must have a special child, because I
> don't think this is all learned behavior. I think my boy's personality
> is very different than the average child. I think the noisiest he gets
> is typically a boisterous giggle, because we would be probably making
> faces to each other or doing something silly while shopping or standing
> in line.
>
> One thing I never do is let him run around aimlessly either. He always
> sits in the cart, and if he ever got too old to do that, he would be
> taught to walk by my side & behave.
>
> I think a lot that might have to do with this is that I am a work at
> home mom & he has never had to spend any time in daycare. We also
> "talk" to him and treat him with a level of respect that I don't believe
> some parents do. We also hold the belief that most "popular" and PC
> child rearing practices are bull.
>
>> You are absolutely correct. When a parent IS a good mentor, then a child
>> should certainly be with them in public. All too often, however, parents
>> act as though their child isn't even there and exert absolutely no
>> authority over them in controlling their behaviour. What really ****es me
>> off are the parents that think their child's misbehavior is "cute". It
>> clearly is not. Just last week I encountered a couple in the supermarket
>> with three children who were probably under the age of five. They were
>> near the end of an aisle I was trying to exit, noisily running back and
>> forth, rolling around on the floor, and blocking the aisle. I had to turn
>> around and traverse the entire aisle to get away from them. There is no
>> excuse for such behavior.
>>
>> When I see well-behaved children, I make it a point to comment on this to
>> the parent. Unfortunately, this is all too seldom.
>
> So why would you assume the opposite just because it's seldom that you
> see it?

<snip>

When my mother first came to America (she's a native German), she was
shocked by what she saw. Some of it was "natural," like the culture shock
one would expect, but certain others went beyond merely "shocking," such as
the (non-)disciplining of children. Mom's European upbringing was naturally
applied to my sister and me (I'm the oldest of two children).

Based on that, I have to agree: I have witnessed some incredible behaviors
by children, because their parents are doing nothing to rein them in. Worse
is the parents' attitude that the product of their loins can do no wrong.
(Of course, the parents themselves aren't exactly faultless, either.)

Dieter Zakas

In article , Vox Humana at
wrote on 1/23/05 17:23:

>
> "Siobhan Perricone" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 22 Jan 2005 19:48:05 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote:
>>
>>>> "Edwin Pawlowski"
>>>>
>>>> I worked, she stayed home and took care of the house and kids. That gave
>>>> them plenty of real Useful Skills for life rather than learning from a
> day
>>>> care center.
>>>
>>> Day Care Center is simply a politically correct euphemism for
> "Orphanage",
>>> where unwanted children are dumped off so those certain immature,
> selfish, self
>>> centered individuals who are incapable of accepting the responsibility
> can
>>> rationalize their claim to parenthood.
>>
>> No, it's just a fancy name for "babysitter" There have always been
>> babysitters, there always will. Anyone who expects parents to raise
>> children with any assistance is living in a dream world. Oh right... it's
>> you, Sheldon.
>>
>
> From the way I see parents treating their children at the supermarket, I
> think many would be better off in daycare. At least daycare providers have
> to be certified in most areas. The facilities are inspected, and there is
> some expectation that the children won't be verbally or physically abused.
>
>
Regarding children running amok at the supermarket...do their parents
realize the liability to which they're exposing themselves? Consider, for
example, an employee handling a pot of hot soup, such as refilling the
container from which patrons can serve their own portions. A kid zooming
about the store collides with this worker, and hot soup is not only splashed
on the employee, but it creates a slipping hazard. Anyone not watching his
step could easily find himself also on the floor, possibly injured...to say
nothing of the kid's own harm, such as being scalded by hot soup.

Then there are the endangerment issues, which encompass a wide range of
things. Abduction is one thing; "I turned my back on Jimmy for only a
moment, and when I turned around again, he was gone." Three weeks later,
Jimmy's body is found in a ditch someplace.

I used to work in a computer superstore as a cashier. in additions to having
demo models of the stuff we sold, we also had demos of games, as well as a
kids section. One day, a woman dropped of a small boy, which I believe was
her nephew, while she went to work. The idea was that he could amuse himself
at the store for about TWO HOURS while he waited for his mother to pick him
up. When we learned about this, we notified the police, who took the boy
into custody. Apparently, these two women - the boy's mother and his aunt -
thought it would be "convenient" and "cheap" to let the store personnel keep
an eye on the kid for that two-hour period.

I don't know the ending to that story, but I'll bet the two women were
charged with child endangerment. :-)

Dieter Zakas

In article >,
Dieter Zakas > wrote:

> Regarding children running amok at the supermarket...do their parents
> realize the liability to which they're exposing themselves? Consider, for
> example, an employee handling a pot of hot soup, such as refilling the
> container from which patrons can serve their own portions. A kid zooming
> about the store collides with this worker, and hot soup is not only splashed
> on the employee, but it creates a slipping hazard. Anyone not watching his
> step could easily find himself also on the floor, possibly injured...to say
> nothing of the kid's own harm, such as being scalded by hot soup.

I don't think the consider such things, but I imagine they would turn
around and sue the store.

--
to respond (OT only), change "spamless.invalid" to "optonline.net"

<http://www.thecoffeefaq.com/>

> wrote in message
...
> On 21 Jan 2005 06:37:24 GMT, Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>
>>> Now, i'm enjoying the experience even more, as either me or the good
>>> wife will order all the bulk/boring/staples from my local store on the
>>> internet ( they deliver and lug all the heavy stuff for a flat $5 rate !
>>> ) and I/we/she go out for 'specialty items' and support the smaller
>>> specialty stores more now ( wherease we'd often get all the meat & veg
>>> from the supermarket due to time/tired/convenience factors ).
>
>>Somes stores in our area have just started local delivery. I've been
>>thinking of looking into that.
>
> I wish a store local to me would do delivery. Surely it would be worth
> some teenager's time to make $10 for delivering it. What stores are
> delivering in your area? Any large chains?
>

Nice idea, but how do you handle those items that you want to pick out
yourself - produce, fish, and meat mainly?


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Peter Aitken > wrote in message
. com...
> > wrote in message
...
> > On 21 Jan 2005 06:37:24 GMT, Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
[snip]
> > > Somes stores in our area have just started local delivery.
> > > I've been thinking of looking into that.
> > >
> > I wish a store local to me would do delivery. Surely it
> > would be worth some teenager's time to make $10 for
> > delivering it. What stores are delivering in your area?
> >Any large chains?

Safeway and Albertsons. There's also a couple that use FedEx for
pharmaceutical deliveries but I haven't looked into those yet.

> Nice idea, but how do you handle those items that you want
> to pick out yourself - produce, fish, and meat mainly?

Why do you still need to do this? If the products you are ordering have
set details already, there's one less detail to worry about. No "picker"
would load bad food (bruised, molding, etc.) into an order on purpose.
That has too many (short-term _AND_ long-reaching) ramifications. Given
the times I've used Safeway, and Webvan (when it was a going-concern),
I've never had to worry about the quality when ordering perishables --
and I'm just as snobbish as you when it comes to my food. Petty
attitudes such as you exhibit will keep home-delivery from becoming a
reality.

The Ranger

Dog3 wrote:

> Schnucks delivers here. I'm not sure about Dierbergs. Straubs will also
> deliver but the charge is outrageous. I used to order from Schnucks when
we
> first moved here and I got sick. LOL... The probably thought I was nuts.
> "Hi, I'd like an order to be delivered. A gallon of 2% milk, a loaf of
> whole weat bread, a case of vodka, 1/2 gallon of orange juice etc..."
>


In old movies set in NYC (usually) the characters (if middle - upper class)
are often calling "downstairs" to get a food/likker order delivered.

In my nabe here in Chicago most all the groceries and several likker
emporiums offer home delivery for around five bux or so. Many of us don't
have cars so it's a nice convenience. AFAIK you generally have to go the
store and pick out the stuff, check it out, and then they'll deliver it.

Then there's Peapod, which is fairly popular here. I've ordered from them
several times in the depth of winter. Cute delivery guys!

--
Best
Greg

"The Ranger" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Aitken > wrote in message
> . com...
>> > wrote in message
> ...
>> > On 21 Jan 2005 06:37:24 GMT, Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
> [snip]
>> > > Somes stores in our area have just started local delivery.
>> > > I've been thinking of looking into that.
>> > >
>> > I wish a store local to me would do delivery. Surely it
>> > would be worth some teenager's time to make $10 for
>> > delivering it. What stores are delivering in your area?
>> >Any large chains?
>
> Safeway and Albertsons. There's also a couple that use FedEx for
> pharmaceutical deliveries but I haven't looked into those yet.
>
>> Nice idea, but how do you handle those items that you want
>> to pick out yourself - produce, fish, and meat mainly?
>
> Why do you still need to do this? If the products you are ordering have
> set details already, there's one less detail to worry about. No "picker"
> would load bad food (bruised, molding, etc.) into an order on purpose.
> That has too many (short-term _AND_ long-reaching) ramifications. Given
> the times I've used Safeway, and Webvan (when it was a going-concern),
> I've never had to worry about the quality when ordering perishables --
> and I'm just as snobbish as you when it comes to my food. Petty
> attitudes such as you exhibit will keep home-delivery from becoming a
> reality.
>

Do you really think it's petty to want the highest quality? I don't - to me
that's one of the foundations of good cooking. Whenever I am shopping I
regularly come across a situation where most or all of the whatever (steaks,
heads of lettuce, apples, tuna fillets, etc) are "fine" - they are not stale
or anything like that - but careful looking finds me the best of the lot.
This might be a porterhouse with a slightly larger fillet section, a salmon
fillet with more belly meat, a head of lettuce with fewer broken leaves. If
this sort of thing does not make a difference to you, fine, but it does to
some people. I would use delivery in any case, but only for those many
things where there is no selection involved - sodas, canned good, etc.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Dog3 wrote:

> Schnucks delivers here. I'm not sure about Dierbergs.


Yeah, they do as well.

http://www.dierbergs.com/dierbergs.c...ries+to+go.htm
>


Brian

Dog3 wrote:
> "Default User" > wrote in
> oups.com:
>
> > Dog3 wrote:
> >
> >> Schnucks delivers here. I'm not sure about Dierbergs.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, they do as well.


> Thanks for the link. It's good to know. I don't think I want to pay
the
> delivery charge though. Dierbergs is about 5 blocks from my house.


It's the kind of thing that would be handy if you were laid up with a
bum leg or something that made it difficult to go shopping. I wouldn't
normally use it because I actually kind of like going to the grocery
store. It's the only sort of shopping that I don't mind.


Brian

"Default User" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Dog3 wrote:
>> "Default User" > wrote in
>> oups.com:
>>
>> > Dog3 wrote:
>> >
>> >> Schnucks delivers here. I'm not sure about Dierbergs.
>> >
>> >
>> > Yeah, they do as well.
>
>
>> Thanks for the link. It's good to know. I don't think I want to pay
> the
>> delivery charge though. Dierbergs is about 5 blocks from my house.
>
>
> It's the kind of thing that would be handy if you were laid up with a
> bum leg or something that made it difficult to go shopping. I wouldn't
> normally use it because I actually kind of like going to the grocery
> store. It's the only sort of shopping that I don't mind.
>
>

That's a really good point. I am not much of a planner - I do not go to the
store with a detailed list for a week's meals. I do like to wander around
the store looking at things and getting ideas. In fact, I think that's
important if you want to create the best meals at home. You need to plan
around what's the best quality at the market today (and perhaps what's on
sale). Deciding ahead of time that you are going to have XXX no matter what
is a recipe for disaster if the XXX at the market is low quality. Do you
really think that the pickers (or whatever they are called) will be able to
tell a top quality tuna steak from one that's just OK?


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Peter Aitken > wrote in message
. com...
[snip]
> Do you really think that the pickers (or whatever they
> are called) will be able to tell a top quality tuna steak
> from one that's just OK?

Yes, as a matter of fact it's been my experience to have the pickers
doing a great job.

Peapod used to have the actual drivers pick the groceries (I don't know
if they still do). Those friends that used them found the drivers just
as interested in finding the best of the lot -- especially for repeat
customers.

I haven't given Safeway a long enough try but so far, I've been pleased
with what I've received from them.

The Ranger
--
Nothing which was ever expressed originally in the English language
resembles, except in the most distant way, the thought of Plotinus, or
Hegel, or Foucault. I take this to be enormously to the credit of our
language.
-- David Stove

Peter Aitken > wrote in message
. com...
[snip of previous text since you can't read anyway]
> Do you really think it's petty to want the highest quality?
[snip remain screed]

And here I thought you'd shown improvement in your general reading
comprehension... Guess not.

I'll help you out by simplifying it even more. You can't pick any better
than the person picking for you. It's antiquated thinking like yours
that keeps the home delivery market closed down.

The Ranger

"The Ranger" > wrote in message
...
>
> I'll help you out by simplifying it even more. You can't pick any better
> than the person picking for you. It's antiquated thinking like yours
> that keeps the home delivery market closed down.
>
> The Ranger

You are quite right. I have used Vons' (Safeway) service a few times and the
meat, fruit and veggies they pick out are better than what I find myself.
They choose products from the back of the store early in the morning -- not
from the items on display in the store. Another interesting thing about
Vons' service is that their trucks have not only refrigerated storage, but
also freezer areas. They often offer discounts and free delivery to repeat
customers. The only problem is that, because I don't have to carry it, I
tend to order more than I otherwise would.

Charlie

"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
. com...
> "Default User" > wrote in

> sale). Deciding ahead of time that you are going to have XXX no matter
> what is a recipe for disaster if the XXX at the market is low quality. Do
> you really think that the pickers (or whatever they are called) will be
> able to tell a top quality tuna steak from one that's just OK?

Depends on the market. When I was in high school I was the delivery guy and
often the order picker. This was a small store with a real butcher. We
carried good quality, we knew our customers, we treated them well. In the
few years that I worked there, we never had a return because we only sold
the best available.

Using a large store with many order pickers I'm sure the quality varies.
You won't get the personal service pf picking out the right size russet
potatoes for Mrs. Schmidt. And if the tuna steak was not up to par, it
would not be sent.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

"The Ranger" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Aitken > wrote in message
> . com...
> [snip of previous text since you can't read anyway]
>> Do you really think it's petty to want the highest quality?
> [snip remain screed]
>
> And here I thought you'd shown improvement in your general reading
> comprehension... Guess not.
>
> I'll help you out by simplifying it even more. You can't pick any better
> than the person picking for you.

Perhaps *you* cannot choose better than the pickers, but I guarantee you
that I and many others can. You are willing to settle for "OK" in your food,
I am not.

> It's antiquated thinking like yours
> that keeps the home delivery market closed down.
>

I see your IQ has not budged from room temperature. I thought that despite
your past nastiness and pettiness I would give you a second chance, since
you seemed to be acting more like a human being lately. My mistake. Say
hello to sheldoon in my killfile.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.