So CNN has Hillary in 'streaking candidate' mode with a whopping 5% increase in her numbers since last week. Absolutely torturing the numbers of their own polling in order to get the results they want the world to believe, you need to see the polling info for yourself.

First, there were supposedly 1,006 respondents to the poll.ONLY 26%of the people declared themselves registered Democrats, 23% were Republicans and 51% were labelled as independents or members of other parties. So this is a poll where 3/4 of the respondents are NOT even democrats, yet they say of this group 42% of them chose Clinton as their first choice for the Democratic nomination! Really? How is that?

The margin of error on the data??? Unknown. Why? The polling info states on Page 5 that it threw out data with a margin of error above 8.5%. So if they couldn't make sense of the data (like gee how many white REPUBLICAN MALES want Hillary as the nominee?) then they just chucked the numbers and kept the ones they liked. In the pages that break out the demographic of 'Republican' or 'Conservative' voters, the columns are all marked N/A.

Again, another stunning example of how organizations like CNN will 'create' victory out of the jaws of defeat by manipulating data. They are trying to con your into thinking she has 42% national support, when this is clearly not the case. She only gets 42% of the people who answered the question.

Is there not some kind of national journalism oversight organization to address this sort of thing?

So I'm stunned at the lack of townspeople (media) with pitchforks and burning torches (calls to withdraw)going after Ben Carson for his no Muslims in the White House comments.

Oh sure, the story has been reported on, but the only condemnation of his comments is (surprise!) from a Muslim advocacy group.

Where's Hillary on tape calling him a racist (ironic) or islamophobic, or pandering to peoples baser instincts? Hmmmmm?

Where's Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper passing judgement? How come Wolf Blitzer hasn't fired up the Situation Room?

Jeez if Trump or Bush had said it, then holy crap on a cracker, we got us a right wing racism fest! Ben Carson says it and the room goes "Ooooo, he's going there. Provocative stuff."

So does Ben have immunity from sustained media criticism because HE can play the race card against them if needed? Have Hildabeasts people said "Leave the black guy alone. You can't win on this one today. Move on."??

Well the last time I checked, giving aid and comfort to the enemy was TREASON, so why is Obama not in cuffs?

I know people are going to say, "Oh c'mon you moron, Obama didn't actually send a suitcase of money to ISIS. You are just a conspiracy nut."

Well here's the logic......

1) You (meaning the U.S.) have been 'training' the Iraqi army for close to a decade to 'take over' and lead the fight for their country. While a few units have shown true bravery in action, the vast majority of Iraqi fighters have earned the label 'lady golfers' who deliberately abandoned high tech weapons in large amounts. It's deliberate because no one ever sets any demolition charges to destroy the materiel in place, OR even drives it away!! Duh! We're talking armored vehicles and hummers that you could pile people into, and drive away to deny the enemy. The White House has distorted the intel of at least 50 analysts who have reported on exactly these conditions in order to make the war look more successful than it has actually been. Instead, you armed ISIS through inaction.

2) You wanted to train men in Syria to fight Asaad. You spent half a BILLION dollars (where are the expense accounts?)and have just '4 or 5 guys' according to embarrassing Pentagon admissions this past week. Weapons meant for Syrian rebels were actually stolen from them by both al-Qaeda and ISIS. AFTER the first report of stolen weapons, WHY were more sent without safeguards to make sure the right people got them and kept them?

3) We have heard over and over again how the brave Peshmerga fighters have been begging, literally begging for weapons to defeat ISIS and they get zero. How can you not be seen as supporting ISIS when you fail to arm it's deadliest opponent on the battlefield?

So with policies and processes that lie about the actual state of the war, AND provides vast amounts of weapons to the enemy, how can it be anything BUT treason?

So anyone out there gonna swear out the criminal complaint that has Obama doing the 'perp walk' out of the White House? Hmmmmmm?

Well it is a little surprising there is any confusion on who was in control of the weapon used, insofar as checking the pawn dates on file. This should be dead simple unless the record keeping at the shop was lousy.

We should know from any log book kept, the date the weapon comes in and goes out. Is there video surveillance in the shop? The cops say the shooter only pawned the gun two days before they arrested him, and he says two months. Check the tapes or the pawn slip.

Second, if crime show TV has taught us anything, you don't match up bullet fragments. They can only give you information on the composition of ammunition used. How much lead, type of copper cladding (if any), the composition of the lead. A 9mm is an extremely common round. If for example it was from a Glock 9mm, there could be hundreds or even thousands of Glocks in that city in 9mm.

You would need enough of the bullets recovered at the crime scenes to match the lands and grooves of a particular gun. In the case of Glocks, the firing pins also leave a very distinct mark, however as I understand it,the shooter(s) policed their brass, leaving no shell casings behind.

You can't match a single land or a single groove and say only one gun creates that mark. You usually need the entire circumference of the round being tested for a match. All a fragment could tell you is that if it was actually a metallurgical match, that the bullets you have could be from the same lot #. So there could be 1,000's of rounds with the same lot# on the box. That means people all over the country, or even several people in your city could also have the same ammunition in their guns.

Since this guy can't afford a top shelf lawyer, they haven't made motions to see this evidence against him as yet. Usually though DA's do not want to lay charges unless they feel there is a very strong chance of conviction, so there will need to be other pieces of evidence such as the movement of the suspect, video of the vehicle, or eyewitness accounts of the vehicle in certain locations at certain times. Maybe he books off work, or doesn't come in at all on days/nights of shootings. People who say they heard him brag about it, or make comments like he knows a little too much about the subject.

Should be interesting if anything else happens while he's in custody, or if the shootings stop cold turkey.

I am quite amused by the 'Trump doesn't correct the Muslim President guy' kerfuffle that has broken out since the debate. It's hilarious for the following reason. If your EVER had any doubts that CNN was completely a biased network, Friday night should have proved it to anyone with any doubt.

In the course of discussing this Trump 'gaffe', night time anchor guy Don Lemon gets invited to comment. He basically berates Trump, and says OMG he can't believe so many Americans are so stupid to think Obama is a muslim, etc.

BUT THEN, taking a page from the Hillary Clinton handbook, he basically says "Well, so what if Obama WAS a Muslim. I wouldn't care. In fact, it might be cool to have a Muslim president!"

WHHHAAAATTTT?

So what IF he was a Muslim???? Well Don, you phuckin' genius, it would mean HE'S BEEN LYING FOR ALMOST SEVEN YEARS WHILE PRESIDENT. We suspect he's lied about a whole bunch of other stuff, but I mean it's not like he's ever told a whopper before...
"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."
"I never set a red line in Syria."
"Benghazi was caused by a You Tube video."
"Obamacare won't add a dime to the deficit."

Ya know, he's just a truth telling machine set on auto-pilot that guy....Anyway, so CNN, arguably the place where a large percentage of Americans get their news has at least one (if not several)on air talents who could really care less how blatantly their president lies to them.

Stunning.

If you can find it, the story of the crash is recounted on the TV show called 'Mayday'. The episode is entitled 'Split Decision'.

Whenever governments hide information or restrict information, it's usually to hide their own embarrassment over something. There had been a story that the munitions belonging to the soldiers on board had been undeclared, and the weight of the aircraft cargo underreported, and that this material may have detonated. The Canadian government can be somewhat odd when it comes to how it secures documents, but the sealed for 75 years thing can be changed by government edict. As an example, the manual for the old .308 FN-C1A1 battle rifle was once classified as 'secret'. This is the manual that comes with the rifle from the factory, and that any civilian would normally get as well. We slapped a couple pieces of green plastic around it and labelled it with instructions on the penalties involved for releasing the information contained therein! Much bad juju for you if you tell anyone about our rifle! (lol)

As I recall, the suspected munitions came in two forms. One was a thermally sealed plastic triangular bag with a flammable powder (likely fine grain gunpowder)in one compartment, and some wooden matches in the other compartment. Meant to be used as a signalling/survival tool I suspect any kind of decent abrasion could could have ignited the match heads.

The other explosive thought to be on board was a 'spooky' kind of landmine. Essentially a claymore mine that had been reduced to about 1/4 the normal size. Containing a sheet of 'plastique' (likely C4 or Semtex) a load of small ball bearings, and a frangible plastic face, there is always the remote possibility that a static electrical charge could have detonated the device.

I forget the name of the company that made them, but the info I recall is that they were raided by the BATF a couple years after the crash, and forced into bankruptcy. They had done other work for the specops community as well, regarding specialized grenade launchers and small arms.

Hope this helps!

No, not bubble gum. lol The chips will all be in the Cool Ranch flavor, just dyed the rainbow colors for the promotional period.

These will be available for a limited time! Get you collectors edition now!

I'm sure in 100 years, they'll be worth $500 a bag, and likely still edible. lol

So Doritos has announced it will be making available rainbow colored Doritos in order to support the LGBT community.

NOT available in stores, you can only get your bag of rainbow Doritos for a minimum $10 charitable donation to the It Gets Better Project which helps out LGBT youth.

These Doritos in all their fabulous colors, will be on display during the Dallas Gay Pride Parade tomorrow, along with a Doritos float.

So here's the question. Do we think Doritos has a sincere desire to help out LGBT youth and to celebrate the gay lifestyle, OR do we think it is a shrewd marketing ploy? Was the LGBT community even a demographic Doritos has been tracking?

Seems that companies sometimes engage in this kind of marketing simply to avoid being targeted as 'homophobic' or somehow anti-gay. Same as when companies make products in pink and say it's the women's version. Golf clubs, softball gear, team jerseys and logo hats, even pink rifles and handguns!

So is this a legit product placement by Doritos, or do they stand accused of 'gaying it up' to make a buck and avoid any anti-gay controversy?

So I see Hildabeast was doing her best to smear Trump with the race card regarding the 'Obama is a Muslim' guy at the Trump campaign event last night.

So now because Trump doesn't correct the guy and maybe get into a shouting match with the guy (for the press to salivate over), he just lets the guy go and ask the question. Trump NEVER says anything like "Oh yeah, he's a Muslim, or a terrorist." He just simply says that a lot of people have said things and he's gonna check it out.

So is Obama a Muslim? I actually believe he is and here's why. Forget his parents registered him at aged 6, as an Indonesian Muslim citizen for Koran class. Forget he got in trouble for making faces IN Koran class. He was a kid, his parents did the paperwork.

Forget the suspicious name changes from Obama to Soetoro and back to Obama again without any paperwork. Forget he has allegedly used multiple social security numbers in his life, and told the Illinois state bar that he was never known by any other name. That's called perjury Barry/Barak.

Forget that in speeches he has numerous times referred to the Koran in the context of a Muslim. He quotes verses, says the Koran 'reveals to us', and speaks of Islam 'that has been revealed to him on three continents'. Finally forget that during an interview with ABC he says that "John McCain has been very good about not talking about MY MUSLIM FAITH." The interviewer says "Christian faith" and Obama parrots back (with no emotion or excusing the error) says "Christian faith" and keeps on talking.

Forget ALL of that. Many are familiar with the quote of Obama where he refers to the Muslim call to prayer as one of the prettiest sounds on earth. He then proceeds to recite it for the interviewer from the NYT, Nicholas Kristof. Kristof notes it's done with a 'first-class' Arabic accent.

Well the verses of the call to prayer START with the shahada as the opening lines. The shahada is the Muslim declaration of faith, and according to Muslim scholars, reciting the verses makes one a Muslim.

Regardless if he 'practices' Islam or not, he has said it at least once, (if not hundreds of times) in his life, and therefore he is in the eyes of Allah, a Muslim. You can say whatever you want about him being a Christian, or going to church, etc. The FACT is saying the shahada ONE TIME, makes you a Muslim in the eyes of the Islamic faith.

Of course the EASY solution is just get the non-conforming states to produce a more secure drivers license. Done. End of problem. No need for a passport.

In Canada we have to take our passports on any domestic flight that crosses into U.S. or could in an emergency have to land in the U.S.

So if I fly from Vancouver to Toronto late at night, the flight can (at the discretion of the pilot) go below the border into U.S. airspace. This is usually done so that cabin staff can legally serve alcohol according to the bar hours of the state they are flying over.

If for some reason the plane was forced to land say in North Dakota, the passengers better have passports available for the U.S. Customs people on the ground.

Same for flights that cross U.S. airspace as part of the regular flight plan. Say Ottawa to Moncton. The route will usually cross over into the U.S. directly through Maine, and even Vermont on occasion. Even though the flight is directly to and from Canadian cities, we still need a passport because we transit U.S. airspace.

Unfortunately I actually don't see this as too far from the truth with Hildabeast. I imagine sort of a Clockwork Orange situation of her being strapped into a chair, eyes forcibly held open, subjected to hours of kitten and puppy videos. Maybe mountain meadows of flowers, and tropical sunsets.

Of course the tranq darts of thorazine helped get her to the chair...

Personally I'd rather have her in the chair for a couple days, an ampule or two of scopolamine, and a microphone.

"So,Hillary, let's talk about a real estate deal you did years ago called Whitewater....."

Then there's Watergate, Vince Foster's 'suicide', the bimbos of Bill, her 'Foundation', Benghazi, Humagate, and I'm sure dozens of other little indiscretions along the way that would make for fascinating reading on her way to a lifetime in SuperMax. The question would be how many current or former cabinet members would join her?

Well it is kind of hilarious watching the western world get sucked in here. Let me explain. The 'refugees' are supposedly fleeing the war in Syria, correct? The war they are stuck in the middle of. The war where they were trying to fight the Syrian government, and ISIS.

ISIS stole weapons from these people like a bully steals lunch money, and the Syrian military uses them as a test bed for field expedient weapons systems. They are not really 'refugees' as they are bad soldiers having their butts handed to them daily.

Now, ask yourself when you look at the video on nightly news casts how many military aged men are there? Are we really supposed to believe none of them have wielded a weapon say in the last year trying to kill either an ISIS member or Syrian soldier? So what they REALLY are is a retreating army, not a bunch of stunningly innocent shop keepers whose falafel cart was truck bombed by ISIS.

The other amazing fact is how many of these people remembered to grab cash, jewelry, and their iPhones, but seemingly missed on grabbing their wallets, purses, passports, and paperwork like birth and wedding certificates.

But,if you really believe these are just poor people in a bad situation that we should help out, then you'll want to ignore the video of Imam Sheikh Muhammed Ayed speaking at the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. His message of love and peace for the refugees? That the Muslims should 'breed' with the Europeans and take over their countries. Muslims he said will "Soon trample them underfoot, Allah willing."

So there's gratitude for ya.

*drops mic*

Well Buffalo would be the place to do it. If you've ever been to the Anchor Bar in Buffalo (reputed home of the Buffalo chicken wing) you would know the addictive goodness of the humble wing.

Served with a frosty Genesee 12 Horse Ale, that my friend is Sunday football at the bar with your buds.

The cheese? Should have been blue to go with the wings. lol

Of course only in Canada would this be a 'show trial'. lol

We talkin' the 'Angel of Death' Abu? The 'Iraqi Rambo' Abu? He's a mercenary who has allegedly killed both American troops and ISIS fighters while in Iraq.

Would consider him the epitome of the 'my enemies enemy is my friend' thinking that goes on vis a vis Middle East policy positions. Use the guy while he's of benefit to you and your cause, and then pump a couple in the back of his pumpkin for killing Americans when he's no longer useful. That's the way we usually do it, is it not?

Should we glorify the guy for being an ISIS killer? Not really. He's one of thousands engaging in self preservation versus the actual offensive prosecution of a war against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. Some people kill for defense, some to break free from enslavement, some for revenge, some for religion, and some for cash. Of course based on his history, Obama may just invite this guy to the White House for a beer.

I would suggest that with the Russians and their new toys showing up in Syria, the Assad regime will likely turn the tide and rout the rebels over the next 9-12 months. That will force a lot of fighters over the border into Iraq, and Abu will find himself in a target rich environment. I say we send him and his buddies more ammo. I used to laugh at the 'kill em all, let God sort em out' mentality of some people. Let's just say I'm a little more embracing of the concept than I used to be. You can only send so many bad guys to meet Allah personally before you realize things are not changing for the best, or how you want them to change.

Nothing more than the usual death, destruction, and betrayal that goes on in the world's largest sandbox every single day.

Am I cynical? Lol. Ya think?

Well there are all kinds of possible contenders on the Dem side. As noted above, current Veep and vodka enthusiast Joe Biden has a shot. There have been rumblings about unlocking Al Gore from his carbonite prison on Tatooine, and Governor Moonbeam Jerry Brown has gurgled a couple quotes about testing the waters. I'm wondering however why everyone's favorite fake indian Elizabeth Warren hasn't entered to finally squash the Clinton campaign like a bug? Between the votes she and Bernie Sanders would pull in primaries, Clinton could simply disappear because of vote splitting.

We know Debbie Wasserman Schulz would likely vapor lock if a couple more people announced, because there would be no way for her to keep on protecting Hildabeast from a televised debate. At best she could work with CNN to fix the questions Clinton would get.

Well there ya go then. It's not their fault, they're just poor. So all poor people know they now have the approval of sociologists to just have at it, because apparently being a productive, law abiding member of society is beyond them. No matter how wise their parents, grandparents, schoools, coaches, pastors, and anyone else they run into, JUST being poor means they will pursue a criminal lifestyle.

So the solution is simple then. We've heard for years it costs $50,000 a year to keep someone in prison. We'll just have to pay the prisoners $40,000 a year to stay out of jail. Simple right? If the state simply has two guys living together in a house, and pays them $80,000 a year to just not go to jail, that will COMPLETELY solve the problem of black crime in Minnesota then right? They can still work, have a full time job, and pay taxes, but they can wake up, every January 1st knowing that the least they'll make this year is $40,000.

There you go. Problem solved. No more black crime in Minnesota. No need to thank me, just chuck me one of those Presidential Medals of Freedom or some other trinket of your undying gratitude for solving Americas crime problem. Just pay the criminals to stay home.

(Rolls Eyes).....*drops mic*

Yeah, I left out whoever made no impression on me. Scott Walker for example. Talked. Said nothing. Same with Huckabee. He tries, but no is is really listening to him. He makes a meaningful case on issues, but people just kind of offer a polite golf clap, like "Yeah, ok. Good. Thanks for that Mike." You know, no pizazz. You would never expect a Huckabee supporter for example to jump up on a chair and scream "You effin' rule man!" If you watch golf however, at least a couple times a weekend I'll hear some fan scream "Trump 2016!" during the live broadcast.

What I did notice however was post debate how utterly disappointed CNN was that Trump didn't blow up. For a week, they had been setting the stage about how Trump would get his butt handed to him on substance questions, how everyone was going to beat him over the head with one liners, how so many have an axe to grind, and yet he walked out mostly unscathed.

It reminded me of the CNN coverage of the Treyvon Martin and Michael Brown cases. Their legal consultant Sunni Hostins (spelling?)was practically salivating over the prospect of convictions in these cases, and when she didn't get her pound of flesh, she went a little mental on air.

Same with Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper, they can't wait for the train wreck that is the Trump campaign to finally manifest itself. I guarantee the first time a poll shows that Trumps numbers haven't risen, or if they back slide even 1%, they will be pronouncing the campaign dead in the water. That's it. It's over. The fat lady has sung. There will be glee in CNN land when that happens.

'Keyed' restrooms are usually the policy for urban businesses with a large street population in the area. Even bag ladies want to clean themselves up, so the bathrooms tend to become shower facilities as well.

During the colder/winter months people will use the bathrooms to sleep in for a few hours and get out of the cold. The bathrooms get used for taking/selling drugs, drinking alcohol, and a reasonably comfortable place to sleep off the effects of either.

So the bathrooms get full and paying customers have to wait or the staff have to remove people who are drunk, high, verbally abusive, or even violent. I would think you would actually want cops to come in a couple times a day just to let people know they might get busted if they abuse the place.

Personally, I avoid Starbucks on principle. Prices are too high, and the whole 'barrista' concept is pretentious. If you need to graduate from a specialized training regime in order to simply grind coffee, dump it into a machine so that it gets mixed with hot water, and then pour the result into a cup, you have made a serious vocational error. I don't need my coffee to be an 'experience', I just need it with milk and sugar.

I think it was the comedian Steve Martin who said of people at Starbucks "The longer it takes you to order your coffee, the bigger an a-hole you are." You know the type right? "Oooo, I'll have a venti caf, half decaf, mocha, soy milk, extra foam, one shot vanilla, one shot caramel, no sprinkles in a double cup!"

Cops will have their revenge though. Either they can call for a nationwide boycott by cops, their families and friends, OR cops might encourage loud visits to their local Starbucks by city health inspectors.

So just wondering if anyone watched the marathon that was the debate tonight?

Thought most candidates made some ground up on Trump as the discussion turned to more issues of substance.

Thought Carly Fiorina came off quite well. She played a very power oriented game. Her answers were basically a bigger military, better relations with allies, better tax code, make America great. She got her shots in at Trump.

Chris Christie was basically the same. Big on military, kick bad guy butt, make America great, help the middle class, tax cuts. He seemed a little ticked part way through complaining that Trump and Fiorina were comparing business achievements and how everyone knows they are successful people, and let's talk about real stuff.

Kasich was all about how he has been the consensus builder during his political life and how we can make deals with our enemies and allies by being reasonable and having a goal. He felt bills that Obama threatens to veto should be sent up to the WH so that he actually does kill them. The GOP can then show voters what the Dems are doing to mess up the country at election time.

Rubio was very strident on immigration, the military, how Obama has failed the country. He was very powerful on what's broken in America and why it needs to change.

I thought Rand Paul and Ben Carson came off as the most intellectual members of the group. Paul especially provided thoughtful answers in my opinion. Not sure if he would ever get my vote, but he seems like the guy in the room you go to for a second opinion on things, because he just seems a little more complete in his thinking on issues.

Ben Carson I hate to say comes off as having some kind of cognitive problem when it comes to his cadence when he speaks. It's like he knows what he wants to say, tries to be very careful about how he says it, but then later wishes he had said it better. There's no doubt he's an intelligent guy, and I think like Paul he takes a different route to arrive at solutions to a problem. When he gives an answer you go "Hmmm. Ok, I could maybe agree with that. Tell me more." He just never gets the complete thought out. It may just be the lights and the cameras, and maybe he feels a little pressure to perform.

Huckabee? Makes a nice grandfather for someone, don't see him as an in the trenches guy who can scrap for the job.

Bush? Talked a lot, but didn't say much. Seemed a little defensive, like "Hey, I really am smart you know." but not a real fire and brimstone kinda guy. Did get in a couple good shots at Trump though.

Ted Cruz to me really came off as the guy I don't want anywhere near the nuclear button. To me he came off as a little too much "Kill em all, let God sort em' out." when it comes to Muslims. I dig that it makes for a cool t-shirt, you know, a big skull, some crossed M-4's a couple daggers, whatever. He seems to say it however with a small twinkle in his eye. You kill people when you have to, not because you actually enjoy doing it. Just a thought Ted, maybe dial it back a little.

Everyone played their pro-life card, states rights card, Reagan was the greatest president card, lower tax on the middle class, beef up the military, the Iran deal sucks card, etc. In other words a lot of what was heard was expected. Fiorina was amazing on pro-life, and also made an interesting point on more liberal drug laws by discussing how she lost a son to drug use.

Best overall point of the night in my opinion went to Rand Paul on the middle east, and talking about boots on the ground. He wanted to know why we were fighting wars for the Syrians and the Iraqis, and the Arabs in general. Give em money, guns and maybe some air support, but it's their country and let them fight for it. If they can't be bothered, then why should we care? Boots on the ground should be Arab boots and not NATO boots.

Yes I know it's more complicated than that, but he has a point insofar as we don't seem to go to war anymore to win. War in it's most simplistic form is that you kill people and break things until the other guy gives up. We seem to go to war now with the "Um, excuse me, but if it's not too much trouble Mr. Terrorist, could you maybe not, I mean if it's not too much trouble, kind of maybe stop being so cranky with your guns, and car bombs, and stuff?"

Finally The Donald. He was far less animated tonight and tried to be a little more serious instead of the circus freak. He gets credit for forcing the discussion on topics like immigration that Republicans have to hammer out a unified position on as a party. Fiorina noted how the Dems had the White House, Congress and Senate when Obama was elected, but never got the issue settled. Both she and Trump noted the Dems will never actually want the immigration issued settled. It takes away a big chunk of what they can beat the GOP over the head with.

Anyone else have comments?

Well no worse than Teresa Heinz Kerry back when John Kerry was running for the nomination. They stopped at a Wendy's for a lunch time photo op.

Teresa, seemingly hypnotized by the confusing Wendy's menu finally sees something that she might be up for. She points to a picture on the wall and says to the pimply faced kid behind the counter something like "Oh that looks good, I'll have that, what do you call it?"

The kid looks at the picture, and then back at her like she's from Mars and answers, "Um, that's chili ma'am."

Teresa apparently had never seen a bowl of chili in her life, never mind actually eaten one.

Oh yeah, you're 'in touch' with the common folk.....hilarious