I suggest that, rather than increasing the number of items their menu, they decrease the number of items, and concentrate on preparing those few items left as they used to, and preparing them fresh, not from frozen.

As an example, their string beans used to taste of what I believe to be ham hocks or something similar—southern down home country cookin’—now it seems that that ham taste is gone.

Better to revert to their original recipes and cooking methods than trying to “modernize.”

And I think we have to admit that Trump seems to see (at least potential) opportunity almost everywhere he looks. The real source of MAGA.

* For some of that insanity see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNnX4HtFSiY

https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/1960372066370117729

“Normally “for cause” means neglect of one’s job or malfeasance on the job. Yet even Trump’s people have made no claims that Lisa Cook has failed to fulfil her duties at the Fed or done anything wrong in her role as governor.”

Committing crimes is kind of prima facie evidence of unsuitably for positions of trust in the government, or anywhere else.

“Furthermore, there is no evidence that Cook even knew what the security instruments said — she may have done nothing more than promise to make her mortgage payments.”

So, it’s okay that one of the most powerful people in authoritative financial positions doesn’t read her own legal documents before signing them?

“And a claim of mortgage fraud requires both that the borrower make a deliberate misrepresentation — as opposed to making a mistake on a complicated process — and that this misrepresentation caused financial harm to the lender. We’ve seen no evidence at all for either proposition.”

Letitia James, call your office.

“So far, the Justice Department hasn’t even made any formal charges, let alone won a conviction.”

This is true, and one of the few points he makes with any significance, but the lack of charges or convictions never stopped the Democrats from engaging in public mud-flinging, despite their “baseless allegations” made “without evidence.”

However, that is what courts are intended to settle, and Cook deserves to have her case litigated. So notice what Krugman does to pre-bunk (horrible locution) any judgment in Trump’s favor:
“If Powell caves, or the Supreme Court acts supine again and validates Trump’s illegal declaration, the implications will be profound and disastrous.”

Only SCOTUS decisions that support Democrats are valid. Got it.
Dear Paul: If the justices validate Trump’s declaration, then it’s not illegal: he met your challenge to “Show me the legal basis for this action.” — and prevailed.

Bonus points:
(1) Name a recent president who already did something like this:
“The United States will be well on its way to becoming Turkey, where an authoritarian ruler imposed his crackpot economics on the central bank, sending inflation soaring to 80 percent:”

(2) Name a political party that has a standard operating procedure like the following:
“The goal of his attempt to fire her is to replace independent ___ officials with lackeys who will take ______ orders — not just by getting rid of ____ but by intimidating everyone else.”

As [Krugman says he] wrote yesterday, the real message here is “If you get in our way we will ruin your life.”

We’ve gotten that message from the Democrats loud and clear.

When I’m on the road, I want to relax and eat something tasty. Not wishing I’d gone elsewhere and thinking I ought to pull off at the next gas station and brush my teeth.

Maybe I’m picky.

In theory, I agree with you; in practice, it’s a good theory.

A couple traveling alone with some time to spare looking around town can do what you suggest, and we have on occasion.
A family with either many kids, or picky eaters, or both (!!), or that is on a tight travel deadline, is usually better served with a known commodity that most of them are at least used to, if not always enthusiastic about.

Seeking out again only works if you go through the same places, but we have occasionally been rewarded, if only by accident.
Literally, in some cases.
Our family car had a tendency to break down at a certain place on our annual drive to grandma’s house, to the point that we expected it to happen. The first time, we located the auto parts store and found a sandwich-and-ice-cream shop on the same town square. Fortunately, we didn’t have really serious break-downs.

Another time, going on a special vacation trip, we were not so lucky, and had to call some friends to come tow us home. We got the truck parked under a tree on a little grass island in the parking lot of the local Pie Shop.
Best pie ever, eaten sitting on blankets in the shade, followed by a nap.

I can’t speak to “The Ball and the Cross,” but unless it is stranger than you describe, it doesn’t compare with “Thursday” as Chesterton’s strangest book.

I would argue that with “Thursday” Chesterton created the genre of mind-bending thrillers. No small thing. Furthermore I would argue that it is Chesterton’s most influential literary work. (Not including at that level his popular Father Brown series.)

Many top 20th C writers spoke highly of “Thursday” — C.S. Lewis, Jorge Borges, Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh, Kingsley Amis and later, Robert Anton Wilson and Philip K. Dick, all admired it. Several of whom wrote mind-bending fiction of their own.

Keep in mind that “Thursday” was published in 1908 — before Kafka even. A remarkable book. Recommended.

A salute to G.K. Chesterton!