In re: cooking, I don't. At all. It's safer that way. Thank goodness there's a Boston Market down the street or I'd starve to death. People who cook impress me. Like people who sew. It's like magic. They make things, and I've no idea how.
There's fancy cooking, that's difficult 'til you learn (and do do do), and there's get-supper-on-the-table / decent-food-in-your belly cooking, that is learnable, not scary once you do it, and not that difficult.
The biggest rules of thumb are:
1) When in doubt, add less -- you can always add more, but you can't take stuff out
2) When in doubt, cook more slowly, over lower heat -- you can't uncook stuff, but you can cook longer/turn up the heat
3) Macaroni is easy
4) Believe it or not, a roast beef is one of the easiest things you'll ever cook
5) The world doesn't end if you screw something up
1) When in doubt, add less -- you can always add more, but you can't take stuff out
Or do what I do and have to keep adding stuff because you used too much before and voila! 25 cups of posole! Or 10 meals worth of tuna-corn-black-bean salad! Food for months!
(oh and invest in tupperware or rubbermaid or whatever.)
I love huge orange cats.
That's what I was gonna say!
I should make some chili this weekend, speaking of easy. Like most things I cook, I'm sure there are better ways, but none easier.
Cindy, I've made note of your excellent advice, should I ever get the courage to turn my oven on. Maybe this weekend I'll make something in my brand-new crockpot. If you smell smoke Saturday night, don't worry, it's just me.
ION, here is the main reason watching Close To Home is fun: JAG is talking to Brenda Walsh's black friend and Falzone from Homicide, and the previous conversation was about the death of Lindsay from TV's Angel.
Ooh, Zenkitty, I've heard good things about crockpots. Throw some stuff in there, turn it on, and Bob's your uncle. Apparently.
I actually have an uncle named "Bob". I don't think he's Zenkitty's uncle too.
But you never know, do you?
The real problem with that, I think, is that charities with the smallest fundraising %age are often the ones that get most of their money from the government in large chunks. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it doesn't make them automatically better.
It's just a really sloppy way of evaluating in any case, big or small. If you spend say 1 mil on fundraising, and raise 20 mil, that looks pretty good. 5%. But what if (as is very, very often the case) you could be raising more by spending more? What if spending 10 mil would mean you rasied 100 mil? So, that's 10% - doens't look nearly as good on those charts. But it's an extra 69 million towards your mission, which, you know, is kind of the whole point.
And other factors too - good management (like Jesse!) costs money, you know.
I actually have an uncle named "Bob". I don't think he's Zenkitty's uncle too.
Well, she hasn't used the Crock Pot, yet, has she?
