October 11, 2003 by s.z.

Ketchup Vs. Dr. Pepper: The Polls are Now Open I suppose it's time to choose our next experiment for the Regrettable Food Project (modeled after the very popular "Julie/Julia Project," except instead of preparing dishes from the pages of Julia Childs' Mastering the Art of French Cooking, we choose recipes from the pages of James Lileks' Gallery of Regrettable Food). This week I thought maybe we'd broaden our corporate sponship bids beyond Spry by going after lucrative Heinz and Pepsi Products endorsements.  So, your nominees are: A.  Something from the 1965 classic, "Cookin' With Dr. Pepper" (a dropped consonant is always a sign of good eatin', so you know that these recipes, which literally range from soup to nuts, are chock full of yummy Dr. Peppery appeal).  As the intro tells us, "We invite you to be adventurous--and try this novel approach to mealtime versatility: Mate Swapping Potlucks".  Well, actually, putting Dr. Pepper in everything.  "Young homemakers will especially welcome these new ideas.  They are excitingly original--and backed by our test kitchens' promise of perfect results every time."  Well, I can buy that these ideas are "original"-- I haven't seen anybody else put Dr. Pepper in Chocolate Cake, Potato Salad, or Shrimp Dip before.  But "Perfect results every time"?  Since I haven't had perfect results even ONCE, I just don't know . . .But I guess since they made a PROMISE, I can sue them if I have another Magic Meat Pie experience. For our recipe from this booklet, I propose something simple: Festive Meat Loaf.  It's your basic meat loaf (ground beef, bread crumbs, chopped onion, a cup of Dr. Pepper), but inside is a special surprise: 5 whole hard-boiled eggs! or B.  How about something from "57 Prize-Winning Recipes from H.J. Heinz," which came out in 1957.  (I assume that if they were updating it for 2003, you'd only get 3 Prize-Winning Recipes, but each one would contain 10 cups of ketchup.)  This recipe book is featured on pages 101-108 of Regrettable Food, in the chapter entitled "Submit to the Power of Ketchup."  (It's the one with the woman speculatively eyeing the chef with the giant tomato head, and the fey guy in the Harlequin costume putting ketchup in the spinach so it will appeal to men.) From this booklet, I suggest Spice Nut Cake (page 108 in your Lileks handbook).  It's your basic spice cake, with the addition of 2/3 cup Heinz Ketchup.  You top it with green cream cheese frosting, for that festive look. So, vote for your choice!  We'll announce the winner in a couple of days, and prepare it right here in this blog for your enjoyment.  Or something. 11:54:33 PM

Bill O'Reilly Seeks Help of Followers; Afraid of Crucifix-Wielding Bjork For today's Most Ridiculous Item of the Day Bill O'Reilly announced that he was going to be on "The Tonight Show" on October 15th (hey, no lawsuits--Bill said it, not us), and urged his audience to get tickets for it, if they could. Bill added: I'm encouraging this because of the Bjork factor. I appeared on The Tonight Show along with the singer and the crowd well, was a bit different. In fact when I walked out, they all whipped out crosses! So it might be nice to have some Factor people there just for moral support. While we are not here to judge anyone for their unconventional life-style, we urge all Non-Factor People attending the "Tonight Show" taping on the 15th to pack plenty of holy water and wolfwane, just as a precaution.  2:12:12 AM

Ann Coulter Names Another Traitor In response to those persistant, illiterate requests to out somebody who was actually a traitor, not just a guy who published a newspaper who printed stuff she didn't like, Ann named the religious fundementalist who made the following statement to one of his associates, whose screed the cleric had just read: "I read your book.  When you get through, you say, "You say, 'If I could just get a nuclear device inside Foggy Bottom, I think that's the answer' and you say, 'We've got to blow that thing up." When informed that the speaker was Reverend Pat Robertson , Ann said, quote, "Nevermind."  1:51:28 AM

Being There For Rush I'm not going to poke fun of Rush Limbaugh and his drug addiction problem.  I am, however, going to poke fun of Dittoheads and THEIR addiction problem. I actually made this decision early this morning, while I was skimming through the top threads on Lucianne Goldberg's site.  There I saw an opinion piece which Lucianne had posted (along with an approving comment) about how those mean people should stop dumping on Rush in his time of trouble, and how Rush should just take the time he needed to get treatment and not worry about the political ramifications.  You'd think that Lucianne's people would approve of a message like this -- and a couple of them did, only to be stridently denounced by everybody else.  The majority said that the writer of the original article was obviously a Hitleryite, because otherwise she wouldn't be so eager to tell Rush what to do.  And most people there said that the author of the op-ed piece AND the Luccianners who liked it must be liberals, because otherwise they wouldn't dream of thinking that Rush even HAD a drug problem.  Most posters claimed that the stories about Rush were started by snitches (obviously being directed by the evil Democrats) who made false reports to the skanky National Inquirer, in an effort to destroy Rush.  One poster said that Rush's radio show had "raised him," and as a long time listener he would know if Rush had been on drugs for the past four years -- and since Rush still sounded as sharp and sensible as ever, Rush obviously WAS NOT abusing drugs, and only a Clinton-lover would say he was.  I'd provide you with the link and give you some exact quotes, but as of this afternoon that article and the comments thread associated with it were nowhere to be found at Lucianne.com.  One might conclude that somebody thought there was something to hide.  Actually, I can fully comprehend the pain and confusion the Dittoheads must be experiencing now, and think it's understandable that they would scramble to come up with explanations that will allow them to come to terms with Rush's confession this afternoon, while still maintaining their faith in his divinity.  Right-wing pundits will have to do some similiar scrambling in order to counteract any suggestion that the announcement that the "voice of conservatism" is a drug addict has somehow tarnished their cause.  Having done some more web surfing this evening, I think I have a fair idea of most of the rationalizations and justifications that the Dittoheads are using to make everything make sense again.  I have listed them below.  I suggest that all conservative pundits pick whichever ones they like best, and make free use of them in the days to come: 1.  Rush is not a hypocrite, because while he advocated locking up those who abuse illegal drugs, he never said anything about LEGAL drugs.  Oxycontin is LEGAL. 2.  While it IS illegal to buy Oxycontin outside of prescribed channels, Rush wouldn't have had to resort to this method if it weren't for the government's persecution of pain-medicating doctors.  When the DEA won't allow doctors to prescribe for their patients the incredibly massive doses of painkillers they need, we force these sufferers to send their housekeepers out in the streets for them.  3.  But the above only refers to legal drugs that only became illegal due to uncompassionate and misguided laws, not to drugs that are INTRINSICALLY illegal, such as crack. 4.  Rush Limbaugh did not take drugs to get high, like those drug users he always subjected to such scorn; no, he used drugs to cope with his crippling pain. 5.  While Rush's doctor had stopped writing him prescriptions for painkillers, and so apparently thought that Rush's pain wasn't all that severe, Rush couldn't have been using drugs just to "feel good," because prescribed opiates are MORAL and so do not give the pill popper any pleasure, unlike illegal opiates, such as heroin. 6.  And speaking of Rush's doctor, isn't it HIS fault that Rush became addicted to drugs?  Shouldn't he have been, like, doing blood tests or something and have KNOWN that Rush was illicitly getting Oxycontin, and then FORCED him to stop taking them? 7.  Rush said he chose to treat his back pain with prescribed medication instead of further operations -- and while the medication wasn't prescribed for HIM, his maid's husband did have a prescription for it.  Anyway, it was still a medical decision, and so we again blame his doctor for giving him such bad advice. 8.  Rush has taken the responsible, noble step of admitting that he has a problem and seeking help for it, and we should all admire him for that. 9.  While it's true that he only admitted his problem because he had gotten caught, he did undergo quick-fix rehabs twice before, which shows that he was TRYING to quit.  And the fact that he failed twice before does not show a lack of character on his part, it only shows how addictive drugs can be, and now powerless people are once in their grasp, and how we should have compassion for these unfortunates. 10.  But only the ones addicted to legal drugs. 11.  While 30 days is only enough time to detox and not enough time to establish any lasting behavioral changes, Rush can come out in 30 days and say he's cured because Jesus can heal any of us in an instant. 12.  And while Rush was taking Oxycontin only to deal with his crippling back pain, and so will presumably be in crippling pain again once he stops the drugs, if he isn't crippled when he gets out (and is back to playing golf), it's due to Jesus again. 13.  And since Rush was a productive member of society while using the drugs he needed to cope with the pain, let none dare label him an "addict."  If he can function so admirably (once he has the drugs he needs to keep him from being disabled by pain), then what was so wrong with him doing what he did to get the chemical help he needed?  If it hadn't been for that National Inquirer snitch, no one would have known that Rush was even using drugs -- so the SNITCH is the bad guy. 14.  The above rationalizations only apply to Rush.  Other people, using Non-Legal drugs to manage their pain, do not get to use this excuse, and we applaud the snitches that turn THEM in.  Because while scientists have just announced that emotional pain is registered by the same brain receptors as physical pain, and psychiatrists have said that many drug addicts use drugs and alcohol to self-medicate their emotional pain, those other drug addicts do not know the emotional pain of being a rich, famous, powerful white man, and presumably don't have physical pain either, and so they are not allowed to self-medicate.  Only Rush has truly experienced pain. 15.  The fact that Rush was able to do his radio show, to send forth such brilliant bon mots and profound wisdom to a needy world, while addicted to an opiate goes to show just what a great guy he is.  We should worship him all the more because of his addiction. 16.  But kids, YOU should just say no to drugs.  Rush said that he is no role model.  Well, not in being a drug addict, he means.  But you should emulate his hardworking, self-made, up-from-middle-class sucesss story in every other way, of course. 17.  Although Rush also said that takes full responsibility for his problem, that just indicates the kind of stand-up, courageous guy he is.  As pundits and Dittoheads, it is our job to prove that Rush isn't fully responsible for his problem, while also showing how his own addiction is in no way at odds with the harsh anti-drug stance he has always shown on his show.  And we willingly accept this mission, because we know that Rush has always been there, in his mansion, high on the Oxycontin he made his maid procure for him, for us. 1:09:10 AM