Chili HAS beans. - Page 4

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Chili HAS beans. (Page 4 of 11)

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:10:21 AM EST

[#1]

Around here (Kentucky/Indiana area) they think chili has noodles in it... WTF?

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:11:54 AM EST

[#2]

I like both. You all can die. I also like my chilimac.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:12:15 AM EST

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Real Chili doesn't have room for beans...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/dsryda/20111108-beef-texas-chili-con-carne.jpg

That looks like shit in a bowl.

as compared to BEING shit in a bowl.... IE ground beef and beans....

What's up with the tortilla chips? You aren't going to eat those turds with them, are you?

Working on your post count ? or just a sociopath?

Post count is irrelevant these days, with the advent of the 24/365 crew.

I'm not a sociopath, either. I just strongly believe that chili HAS beans, because I live in a part of the country that isn't attached to Mexico.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:13:00 AM EST

[#4]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

See we believe that there is "chili" and there is "chili with beans". These are accurate descriptors.

You believe, incorrectly, that there is "chili" and there is "chili without beans", but that is the only exclusion, meaning that there are idiots out there that put spaghetti noodles or rice or some other stupid shit in their mix and that would qualify as "chili". It's just wrong. You're wrong. And what does someone from Montana even know about chili in the first place?

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:13:38 AM EST

[#5]

Kansas City fucks up chili as bad as they fuck up BBQ.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:15:45 AM EST

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

See we believe that there is "chili" and there is "chili with beans". These are accurate descriptors.

You believe, incorrectly, that there is "chili" and there is "chili without beans", but that is the only exclusion, meaning that there are idiots out there that put spaghetti noodles or rice or some other stupid shit in their mix and that would qualify as "chili". It's just wrong. You're wrong. And what does someone from Montana even know about chili in the first place?

It's called chilimac. Holy fucking ballsack. It also requires cheese. Specifically cheddar.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:16:42 AM EST

[#7]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

See we believe that there is "chili" and there is "chili with beans". These are accurate descriptors.

You believe, incorrectly, that there is "chili" and there is "chili without beans", but that is the only exclusion, meaning that there are idiots out there that put spaghetti noodles or rice or some other stupid shit in their mix and that would qualify as "chili". It's just wrong. You're wrong. And what does someone from Montana even know about chili in the first place?

Montana?

And I refuse to accept noodles and/or rice being part of chili ANYWHERE so they do not exist.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:17:21 AM EST

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Real Chili doesn't have room for beans...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/dsryda/20111108-beef-texas-chili-con-carne.jpg

That looks like shit in a bowl.

as compared to BEING shit in a bowl.... IE ground beef and beans....

What's up with the tortilla chips? You aren't going to eat those turds with them, are you?

Working on your post count ? or just a sociopath?

Post count is irrelevant these days, with the advent of the 24/365 crew.

I'm not a sociopath, either. I just strongly believe that chili HAS beans, because I live in a part of the country that isn't attached to Mexico.

So a racist Sociopath who lives in mommy's basement?

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:17:52 AM EST

[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

See we believe that there is "chili" and there is "chili with beans". These are accurate descriptors.

You believe, incorrectly, that there is "chili" and there is "chili without beans", but that is the only exclusion, meaning that there are idiots out there that put spaghetti noodles or rice or some other stupid shit in their mix and that would qualify as "chili". It's just wrong. You're wrong. And what does someone from Montana even know about chili in the first place?

Montana?

And I refuse to accept noodles and/or rice being part of chili ANYWHERE so they do not exist.

The "MO" under your avatar. Montana. Duh. And your definition simply doesn't fit.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:18:25 AM EST

[#10]

hey where's 1andy2???? we need his input....

I know, i'll just fly the flag of texas, that should catch his attention....

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:18:40 AM EST

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It does...in hell

Texas' idea of 'chili' is a soup. A thin, chunky soup.

You've never seen chili.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:19:24 AM EST

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

See we believe that there is "chili" and there is "chili with beans". These are accurate descriptors.

You believe, incorrectly, that there is "chili" and there is "chili without beans", but that is the only exclusion, meaning that there are idiots out there that put spaghetti noodles or rice or some other stupid shit in their mix and that would qualify as "chili". It's just wrong. You're wrong. And what does someone from Montana even know about chili in the first place?

Montana?

And I refuse to accept noodles and/or rice being part of chili ANYWHERE so they do not exist.

The "MO" under your avatar. Montana. Duh. And your definition simply doesn't fit.

MO is Missouri. We're not as cool as Montana (MT)

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:20:16 AM EST

[#13]

There is just something about the beans and tomatoes that turn tejas whannabe meat sauce into chilli

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:20:41 AM EST

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Real Chili doesn't have room for beans...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/dsryda/20111108-beef-texas-chili-con-carne.jpg

That looks like shit in a bowl.

as compared to BEING shit in a bowl.... IE ground beef and beans....

What's up with the tortilla chips? You aren't going to eat those turds with them, are you?

Working on your post count ? or just a sociopath?

Post count is irrelevant these days, with the advent of the 24/365 crew.

I'm not a sociopath, either. I just strongly believe that chili HAS beans, because I live in a part of the country that isn't attached to Mexico.

So a racist Sociopath who lives in mommy's basement?

No basement.

Not racist, Mexican food sucks, which means your Mexican cuisine-influenced chili sucks.

Not a sociopath.

The fact you jumped to calling me a racist because I mentioned Mexico is quite left of you.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:21:54 AM EST

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

See we believe that there is "chili" and there is "chili with beans". These are accurate descriptors.

You believe, incorrectly, that there is "chili" and there is "chili without beans", but that is the only exclusion, meaning that there are idiots out there that put spaghetti noodles or rice or some other stupid shit in their mix and that would qualify as "chili". It's just wrong. You're wrong. And what does someone from Montana even know about chili in the first place?

Montana?

And I refuse to accept noodles and/or rice being part of chili ANYWHERE so they do not exist.

The "MO" under your avatar. Montana. Duh. And your definition simply doesn't fit.

MO is Missouri. We're not as cool as Montana (MT)

Never heard of it.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:21:57 AM EST

[#16]

Chili is "mexican influenced"?

Your ignorance is astounding.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:22:38 AM EST

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Real Chili doesn't have room for beans...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/dsryda/20111108-beef-texas-chili-con-carne.jpg

That looks like shit in a bowl.

as compared to BEING shit in a bowl.... IE ground beef and beans....

What's up with the tortilla chips? You aren't going to eat those turds with them, are you?

Working on your post count ? or just a sociopath?

Post count is irrelevant these days, with the advent of the 24/365 crew.

I'm not a sociopath, either. I just strongly believe that chili HAS beans, because I live in a part of the country that isn't attached to Mexico.

So a racist Sociopath who lives in mommy's basement?

No basement.

Not racist, Mexican food sucks, which means your Mexican cuisine-influenced chili sucks.

Not a sociopath.

The fact you jumped to calling me a racist because I mentioned Mexico is quite left of you.

Junior, you just bypassed full retard with that. You have obviously never had real Mexican food.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:23:52 AM EST

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're damned right

Oh geez, You must not be a native. Chili does NOT have beans. Somebody tried to stretch it during the depression by adding beans.

Chili is NOT cheap to make. If your chili is cheap to make, it aint chili. If you serve your "chili" in a bowl because it will run off a plate, it aint chili.

Finally, "Anybody who knows beans about chili knows there aint no beans in chili!"

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:25:39 AM EST

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Real Chili doesn't have room for beans...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/dsryda/20111108-beef-texas-chili-con-carne.jpg

That looks like shit in a bowl.

as compared to BEING shit in a bowl.... IE ground beef and beans....

What's up with the tortilla chips? You aren't going to eat those turds with them, are you?

Working on your post count ? or just a sociopath?

Post count is irrelevant these days, with the advent of the 24/365 crew.

I'm not a sociopath, either. I just strongly believe that chili HAS beans, because I live in a part of the country that isn't attached to Mexico.

So a racist Sociopath who lives in mommy's basement?

No basement.

Not racist, Mexican food sucks, which means your Mexican cuisine-influenced chili sucks.

Not a sociopath.

The fact you jumped to calling me a racist because I mentioned Mexico is quite left of you.

Junior, you just bypassed full retard with that. You have obviously never had real Mexican food.

My cousin is married to a legally-immigrated Mexican.

I HAVE had real Mexican food.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:27:27 AM EST

[#20]

Quoted:
http://vegantoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Chili-Beans-300x250.jpg

So what are these for?

Farting .... No beans in chilli

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:27:43 AM EST

[#21]

Quoted:
http://vegantoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Chili-Beans-300x250.jpg

So what are these for?

Stretching chili into chili with beans. Duh.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:29:29 AM EST

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

See we believe that there is "chili" and there is "chili with beans". These are accurate descriptors.

You believe, incorrectly, that there is "chili" and there is "chili without beans", but that is the only exclusion, meaning that there are idiots out there that put spaghetti noodles or rice or some other stupid shit in their mix and that would qualify as "chili". It's just wrong. You're wrong. And what does someone from Montana even know about chili in the first place?

Them noodle people put chili on top of the noodles. They don't call it chili because of the noodles. I know this because I live smack dab in the middle of "let's put chili on our spaghetti" land.

Chili has beans. When they make it without beans, it's called "Chili without beans," and it is labeled as such in order warn unsuspecting purchasers.

Look here, Authentic Texas Style Chili with added warning "No Beans." Now, if authentic Texas style chili came without beans, there wouldn't be any reason to include that verbiage on the label. It'd just be understood. It be like labeling a can of chili "Chili with meat and spices."

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:29:29 AM EST

[#23]

Quoted:
http://vegantoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Chili-Beans-300x250.jpg

So what are these for?

East coast metrosexuals who don't know the difference between chili and soup.

Just in case you beaners needed a reminder, Obama puts beans in his chili: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/04/obamas-chili-recipe_n_89826.html

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:30:47 AM EST

[#24]

Quoted:

Look here, Authentic Texas Style Chili with added warning "No Beans." Now, if authentic Texas style chili came without beans, there wouldn't be any reason to include that verbiage on the label. It'd just be understood. It be like labeling a can of chili "Chili with meat and spices."

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-O7DaIFQwK-o/UGR-MT5iZkI/AAAAAAAABtY/ZQRZ-AZCET0/s203/no-beans-large.png

You poor ignorant man.

Wolf Brand Chili is owned by ConAgra which happens to be headquartered in NEBRASKA.

What in the blue fuck does Nebraska know about Chili?

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:32:38 AM EST

[#25]

Chili is chili. Literally, it is a stew made from peppers.

You can have it con carne... With red meat.

Con pollo... With chicken.

Or con frijoles... With beans.

Or any combo of the above as individual taste dictates.

I prefer without beans unless I can't find both ground steak and ground pork to add in with the chili's and other peppers.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:33:02 AM EST

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's okay, they're all just ignorant. Obviously have never made their own chili. Only exposure is Wolf's or Hormel or whatever the local cafeteria pours on top of their spaghetti.

Sad really.

They say they know chili, but they don't even know what chili is.

I make chili.

It starts with beans and ground beef, and ends with something that would make you kick yourself in the ass for being so wrong for so many years.

You DON'T make chili. For starters chili has cubed beef. You started off wrong before you even tried to profane it.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:33:40 AM EST

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're damned right

Oh geez, You must not be a native. Chili does NOT have beans. Somebody tried to stretch it during the depression by adding beans.

Chili is NOT cheap to make. If your chili is cheap to make, it aint chili. If you serve your "chili" in a bowl because it will run off a plate, it aint chili.

Finally, "Anybody who knows beans about chili knows there aint no beans in chili!"

Here's someone who doesn't understand the origins of chili, America's very own peasant food.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:33:41 AM EST

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Real Chili doesn't have room for beans...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/dsryda/20111108-beef-texas-chili-con-carne.jpg

That looks like shit in a bowl.

as compared to BEING shit in a bowl.... IE ground beef and beans....

What's up with the tortilla chips? You aren't going to eat those turds with them, are you?

Working on your post count ? or just a sociopath?

Post count is irrelevant these days, with the advent of the 24/365 crew.

I'm not a sociopath, either. I just strongly believe that chili HAS beans, because I live in a part of the country that isn't attached to Mexico.

So a racist Sociopath who lives in mommy's basement?

No basement.

Not racist, Mexican food sucks, which means your Mexican cuisine-influenced chili sucks.

Not a sociopath.

The fact you jumped to calling me a racist because I mentioned Mexico is quite left of you.

Junior, you just bypassed full retard with that. You have obviously never had real Mexican food.

My cousin is married to a legally-immigrated Mexican.

I HAVE had real Mexican food.

So she's a shitty cook.

Real Mexican food, prepared by a good cook, is fucking delicious.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:33:52 AM EST

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's okay, they're all just ignorant. Obviously have never made their own chili. Only exposure is Wolf's or Hormel or whatever the local cafeteria pours on top of their spaghetti.

Sad really.

They say they know chili, but they don't even know what chili is.

I make chili.

It starts with beans and ground beef, and ends with something that would make you kick yourself in the ass for being so wrong for so many years.

You DON'T make chili. For starters chili has cubed beef. You started off wrong before you even tried to profane it.

No kidding. Ground beef?

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:35:12 AM EST

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's okay, they're all just ignorant. Obviously have never made their own chili. Only exposure is Wolf's or Hormel or whatever the local cafeteria pours on top of their spaghetti.

Sad really.

They say they know chili, but they don't even know what chili is.

I make chili.

It starts with beans and ground beef, and ends with something that would make you kick yourself in the ass for being so wrong for so many years.

You DON'T make chili. For starters chili has cubed beef. You started off wrong before you even tried to profane it.

Obviously you are all unaware of St Louis Style chili, which is the BEST CHILI.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:36:01 AM EST

[#31]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Look here, Authentic Texas Style Chili with added warning "No Beans." Now, if authentic Texas style chili came without beans, there wouldn't be any reason to include that verbiage on the label. It'd just be understood. It be like labeling a can of chili "Chili with meat and spices."

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-O7DaIFQwK-o/UGR-MT5iZkI/AAAAAAAABtY/ZQRZ-AZCET0/s203/no-beans-large.png

You poor ignorant man.

Wolf Brand Chili is owned by ConAgra which happens to be headquartered in NEBRASKA.

What in the blue fuck does Nebraska know about Chili?

Hell if I know.

I've never eaten canned chili, and I never will (unless ITEOTWAWKI).

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:36:43 AM EST

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:

It's okay, they're all just ignorant. Obviously have never made their own chili. Only exposure is Wolf's or Hormel or whatever the local cafeteria pours on top of their spaghetti.

Sad really.

They say they know chili, but they don't even know what chili is.

I make chili.

It starts with beans and ground beef, and ends with something that would make you kick yourself in the ass for being so wrong for so many years.

You DON'T make chili. For starters chili has cubed beef. You started off wrong before you even tried to profane it.

Obviously you are all unaware of St Louis Style chili, which is the BEST CHILI.

I too old to deal with this level of stupid.

Y'all have fun.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:37:00 AM EST

[#33]

Quoted:

Texas' idea of 'chili' is a soup. A thin, chunky soup.

Meh - I don't get as upset about the Chilu argument these days, but your statement above is a perfect example of why the beanies are so wrong about their fanatical adherence to legumes in chili.

The fact that you describe chili without beans as a think, chunky soup tells me that YOUR chili is a thin, chunky soup WITH beans. in other words - it's not really chili in the first place and therefore needs something to thicken it to make it palatable. Enter beans. Your whole premise is incorrect, of course.

Chili is a thick, hearty stew that absolutely doesn't need beans. If you ever had a pot of REAL chili, you'd be thinking to yourself: Why did I ever think that chili needed beans? Fact is that beans are some of the most bland, tasteless foods you can ever eat. The only way to make them palatable to most people is to high spice the broth they're cooked in. I don't know of any dish that calls for plain beans so that you can "enjoy" the taste of beans by themselves. A Yankee's definition of chili appears to be a thin, chunky soup that's been thickened with beans - in other words, it's still a think, chunky soup but it has merely had its texture altered. Does that make the chili TASTE better though? Hardly.

Take a look at this bowl of awesomeness:

Adding beans to that bowl of chili would be akin to putting a few drops of water in your coke - it simply wouldn't do anything.

If you want to keep making thin meat SOUPS, add beans, and call it chili - knock yourself out...

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:37:27 AM EST

[#34]

Quoted:

I make chili.

It starts with beans and ground beef, and ends with something that would make you kick yourself in the ass for being so wrong for so many years.

That ain't chili, son.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:37:37 AM EST

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Chili has beans only if you put them in. Then it is henceforth known as "chili (cuz you started with chili) with beans (cuz you added beans to the chili)"

And it is now changed forever.

There is chili, and then there is chili without beans which technically isn't chili.

Try to enter your abomination in a sanctioned event and get back to us.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:39:45 AM EST

[#36]

I like chili without beans and chili with beans, but I cant stand Cincinnati style chili - cinnamon, spaghetti, grated cheddar cheese, oyster crackers etc do not belong on/in chili.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:41:23 AM EST

[#37]

Beans, usually three types, are placed in my chili.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:41:32 AM EST

[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Texas' idea of 'chili' is a soup. A thin, chunky soup.

Meh - I don't get as upset about the Chilu argument these days, but your statement above is a perfect example of why the beanies are so wrong about their fanatical adherence to legumes in chili.

The fact that you describe chili without beans as a think, chunky soup tells me that YOUR chili is a thin, chunky soup WITH beans. in other words - it's not really chili in the first place and therefore needs something to thicken it to make it palatable. Enter beans. Your whole premise is incorrect, of course.

Chili is a thick, hearty stew that absolutely doesn't need beans. If you ever had a pot of REAL chili, you'd be thinking to yourself: Why did I ever think that chili needed beans? Fact is that beans are some of the most bland, tasteless foods you can ever eat. The only way to make them palatable to most people is to high spice the broth they're cooked in. I don't know of any dish that calls for plain beans so that you can "enjoy" the taste of beans by themselves. A Yankee's definition of chili appears to be a thin, chunky soup that's been thickened with beans - in other words, it's still a think, chunky soup but it has merely had its texture altered. Does that make the chili TASTE better though? Hardly.

Take a look at this bowl of awesomeness:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_NLo6sXVHd3o/TMAyHIEcM_I/AAAAAAAAApY/IdJfucxhafI/s1600/real_texas_chili+005b.jpg

Adding beans to that bowl of chili would be akin to putting a few drops of water in your coke - it simply wouldn't do anything.

If you want to keep making thin meat SOUPS, add beans, and call it chili - knock yourself out...

That's a great looking bowl of Texas style chili.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:41:45 AM EST

[#39]

Chilli has beans...usually

http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/chili

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:42:04 AM EST

[#40]

Quoted:
Well this thread got me hungry. Eating Hormel Chile WITH BEANS with Fritos. Out of a can but I'm at work so I'm forgiven.

NO you are not.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:43:28 AM EST

[#41]

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

Sorry to hear that you are so poor that you need tasteless filler to occupy space in your 'chili.' Keep your head up. Things will get better.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:44:06 AM EST

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Texas' idea of 'chili' is a soup. A thin, chunky soup.

Meh - I don't get as upset about the Chilu argument these days, but your statement above is a perfect example of why the beanies are so wrong about their fanatical adherence to legumes in chili.

The fact that you describe chili without beans as a think, chunky soup tells me that YOUR chili is a thin, chunky soup WITH beans. in other words - it's not really chili in the first place and therefore needs something to thicken it to make it palatable. Enter beans. Your whole premise is incorrect, of course.

Chili is a thick, hearty stew that absolutely doesn't need beans. If you ever had a pot of REAL chili, you'd be thinking to yourself: Why did I ever think that chili needed beans? Fact is that beans are some of the most bland, tasteless foods you can ever eat. The only way to make them palatable to most people is to high spice the broth they're cooked in. I don't know of any dish that calls for plain beans so that you can "enjoy" the taste of beans by themselves. A Yankee's definition of chili appears to be a thin, chunky soup that's been thickened with beans - in other words, it's still a think, chunky soup but it has merely had its texture altered. Does that make the chili TASTE better though? Hardly.

Take a look at this bowl of awesomeness:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_NLo6sXVHd3o/TMAyHIEcM_I/AAAAAAAAApY/IdJfucxhafI/s1600/real_texas_chili+005b.jpg

Adding beans to that bowl of chili would be akin to putting a few drops of water in your coke - it simply wouldn't do anything.

If you want to keep making thin meat SOUPS, add beans, and call it chili - knock yourself out...

That's not a stew. That's just a pile of meat on a plate. Don't get me wrong, I'd eat the hell out of whatever it is, but calling that chili? Yeah, okay.

If I put pickles and mustard on your meat loaf, can we call it a Texas style hamburger?

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:44:11 AM EST

[#43]

Quoted:
Chilli has beans...usually

http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/chili

O RLY?

If I have to choose between trusting the International Chili Society and the "learners dictionary"

I think I'll go with the ICS.

1. Traditional Red Chili is defined by the International Chili Society as any kind of meat or combination of meats,
cooked with red chili peppers, various spices and other ingredients, with the exception of BEANS and PASTA
which are strictly forbidden.

2. Chili Verde is defined by the International Chili Society as any kind of meat or combination of meats, cooked
with green chili peppers, various spices and other ingredients, with the exception of BEANS and PASTA which
are strictly forbidden.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:45:13 AM EST

[#44]

Quoted:
I like chili without beans and chili with beans, but I cant stand Cincinnati style chili - cinnamon, spaghetti, grated cheddar cheese, oyster crackers etc do not belong on/in chili.

I won't eat Cincinnati Chili unless it's on a coney.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:45:18 AM EST

[#45]

Quoted:

That's not a stew. That's just a pile of meat on a plate. Don't get me wrong, I'd eat the hell out of whatever it is, but calling that chili? Yeah, okay.

If I put pickles and mustard on your meat loaf, can we call it a Texas style hamburger?

da fuq?

Its about the only thing in this thread that's been posted that actually qualifies as Chili.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:46:53 AM EST

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"If you dont like America then you can get out"

Chili is American, Chili has beans

You sir, are a traitor to the great state of Texas. I challenge you to a dual at a place and time of your choosing. Swords or pistols?

Now we're fucking getting somewhere!!!!

TXL

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:47:24 AM EST

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Chilli has beans...usually

http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/chili

O RLY?

If I have to choose between trusting the International Chili Society and the "learners dictionary"

I think I'll go with the ICS.

1. Traditional Red Chili is defined by the International Chili Society as any kind of meat or combination of meats,
cooked with red chili peppers, various spices and other ingredients, with the exception of BEANS and PASTA
which are strictly forbidden.

2. Chili Verde is defined by the International Chili Society as any kind of meat or combination of meats, cooked
with green chili peppers, various spices and other ingredients, with the exception of BEANS and PASTA which
are strictly forbidden.

Just because a mob of idiots got a hold of the rule books doesn't make it right.

Or are you saying that you don't have the right to buy full auto machine FTF from a pal, because it says so right there in the NFA?

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:49:15 AM EST

[#48]

Quoted:

Just because a mob of idiots got a hold of the rule books doesn't make it right.

Or are you saying that you don't have the right to buy full auto machine FTF from a pal, because it says so right there in the NFA?

It's not a mob with a rule book. Its historical fact.

Traditional red chili is made without beans and for sure without fucking pasta.

If you'd like to throw extra shit into your chili and call it chili with beans or chili with pasta

thats fine.

But it ain't chili.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:56:58 AM EST

[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If there are no beans, it is not chili.

You know I am right, so don't bother arguing.

You're wrong.

If it doesn't have beans in it, it's chili without beans.

CHILI WITHOUT BEANS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

You were a breach birth, weren't you?

I think it's more like the umbilical was around his neck.

Posted: 9/27/2012 7:59:20 AM EST

[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Of course it does, hot dog and spaghetti topping are the ones without beans.

I agree.

Goddamn... Y'all have never had real chili have you? Where do you get the idea that it's some thin-ass hamburger meat sauce shit? Is that all you've ever had? That's NOT what chili is. Chili is nice sized pieces of beef, slow simmered for many hours. It's not the shit you seem to have been subjected to. Therefore you have no right to even express an opinion on what chili should contain.

Talk about spices, beer or no beer, stock or no stock, the cut of meat... Those are the only legit discussions of what chili "is".

Fuck.

I've heard that Texas "chili" shit makes your brain shrink. No idea if it's true though, so I'm treating it as a rumor until I can confirm.

Consider it confirmed...

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Chili HAS beans. (Page 4 of 11)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us