Connect with us

Opinion

Which goes on top? Lettuce or tomato?

Published

3 minute read

I do not remember if my parents put the lettuce on my hamburger before the tomato or afterwards. It was almost 50 years ago, but I doubt if I ever thought about it.
Apparently it is a big issue to a customer at the local burger joint. Why not just flip it over? Allergies? Sensitive taste buds? I do not know, but it was important, apparently.
Years ago, when fast food joints were becoming popular, restaurants would make batches of items and you were leery of getting a burger or fries that had been sitting too long. You order a special alteration and you believed you were getting freshly cooked food. If that was true then it is seldom true in today’s restaurants. On demand time management planning and open concepts means fresher foods and usually you can see them cook your foods.
Fast food restaurants, to me is a quick and convenient way to quell hunger pains. They are not there to tantalize my taste buds or to fill my nutritional needs, but to fulfil a maintenance function.
Now the customer with the lettuce issue was a younger person and one could think it was a generational thing but then I made the next error.
I let a little old lady go ahead of me. She had specific instructions about every stage of preparation of her order. I was looking for the hidden camera and some jokester jumping out telling me to smile.
I tend to avoid certain sandwich restaurants because there are too many questions. Now when I order a steak, I do tend to want it a bit rarer than most but in another country I tend to want it cooked a bit more, unless it is a more well-known place. That is just to be safe.
What is it? Why is it that the order of food placement, lettuce on top, mayo before mustard become so important?
Have we become so obsessive compulsive that we cannot handle even the smallest of change?
A person suggested it is a control issue. We need to be in control, over the staff, the business, the meal. Is that what it is?
Is it just small-mindedness? I do not know.
I do know that got a tasty burger at a good price and I did not feel hungry anymore.
Darn it, I never looked to see if the lettuce was on top of the tomato.

Follow Author

International

U.S. Claims Western Hemispheric Domination, Denies Russia Security Interests On Its Own Border

Published on

FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse)

By John Leake

U.S. launches military strikes against Venezuela and seizes Maduro while CIA escalates involvement in attacking Russian refineries.

I woke up this morning and saw the news that, last night, the U.S. launched a military operation against Venezuela and swiftly captured President Nicholas Maduro. The Trump administration released the following image of the detained man on board a U.S. military aircraft.

As I drank my morning coffee, my thoughts drifted not to Venezuela, but to the French diplomat and political philosopher, Alexis de Tocqueville, who visited America 1831-1832 to study our prison system. Along the way, he made many observations of American society, which he later presented in his book, Democracy in America, published in two volumes in 1835 and 1840.

The U.S. is now hauling Nicolas Maduro back to New York to stand trial for various offenses. The Justice Department has cited the legal precedent of the Panamanian dictator, Manuel Noriega, who was seized by a U.S. military raid in 1990 and hauled back to Miami to stand trial for various charges.

To President Trump’s credit, he isn’t indulging in too much humbug virtue-signaling about this military action. In his statements to the press, he has already mentioned that the U.S. will now be “very strongly involved in Venezuela’s oil industry.”

Apparently aware of the incongruity of taking out Maduro while leaving the (far more powerful) Mexican cartels intact on our own border, Trump said, “something is gonna have to be done with Mexico.”

Tocqueville would have doubtless remarked that the American people should do something about their own monstrous addiction to narcotics and stimulants before they self-righteously fulminate against the depravity of their suppliers.

This is the moral and spiritual equivalent of a morbidly obese sugar addict railing about the depravity of Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill and demanding that their high fructose corn syrup refineries be bombed.

Speaking of bombing refineries: A few days ago the New York Times published a report about the CIA’s escalating involvement in helping Ukraine to target Russian oil refineries.

Additionally, the US State Department re-issued an urgent advisory warning Americans not to travel to Russia. The renewed advisory instructs American citizens currently in Russia to depart immediately, citing the danger associated with the ongoing war with Ukraine.

Back in Feb. 2022, when Russia launched its military operation against Ukraine, many Americans were appalled that Russia would violate the territorial sovereignty of its neighboring country, even though it has long been understood by anyone paying attention that the CIA had been meddling in Ukraine since 2005, and that NATO had been updating and preparing the Ukrainian army for war with Russian since 2014, when the CIA assisted in overthrowing Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was in favor of good Ukrainian-Russian relations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated—most notably in his Feb. 6, 2024 interview with Tucker Carlson—that Russia would like to have friendly and cooperative relations with the United States, but achieving this will require that the United States recognize the legitimate interests of the Russian people and state.

With last night’s attacks on Venezuela, the Trump administration reasserted the full force of the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, in which President James Monroe stated in his annual address to Congress that the U.S. would not tolerate European meddling in the Western Hemisphere.

The U.S. invoked the Monroe Doctrine when it supported the overthrow and execution of the French backed Emperor Maximilian of Mexico, even though he was a thoroughly decent and liberal minded man.

To express my personal view of the matter: I agree with Rochefoucauld’s view that war is always about a kingdom or nation trying to secure and extend its interests. He was extremely skeptical of all moral justifications for war. Great powers want to expand—they want what other people have—and they are therefore extremely suspicious when other great powers show up in their backyard.

The U.S. sees Venezuela as a vital strategic asset with the largest proven oil reserves on earth. The U.S. government perceives Maduro’s regime to be dysfunctional and ideologically misaligned with U.S. interests, and therefore wants to replace him with a U.S. puppet regime that will open the country and its vast mineral assets to exploit them in a strategic partnership with the U.S.

I suppose this is all fine and well, but to be completely fair and honest, how can the U.S. government reassert the Monroe Doctrine, claiming Western Hemispheric domination, while denying that Russia has legitimate security interests in a border region of ethnic Russians that starts 280 miles from Moscow?

When contemplating this, consider that Venezuela is 2000 miles from Miami and poses zero military threat to the United States.

It seems to me that the Trump administration should stop applying such a crass and extreme double standard and immediately recognize Russia’s legitimate security interests. This means immediately ending CIA operations in Ukraine and terminating all support for the corrupt Zelensky regime.

Author’s Note: If you found this post interesting and informative, please become a paid subscriber to our newsletter. For just $5.00 per month, you can support us in our efforts to investigate and report what is going on in our bizarre world.

Subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Energy

The U.S. Just Removed a Dictator and Canada is Collateral Damage

Published on

Early this morning, the United States says it carried out a ground raid supported by air strikes inside Venezuela, reportedly involving elite U.S. forces, including Delta Force, and removed Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores from the country.

President Donald Trump confirmed the operation publicly and stated that the United States intends to “run Venezuela” during a transition period, explicitly including control over the country’s oil sector. That single statement should alarm Canada far more than any diplomatic condemnation ever could.

Kelsi Sheren is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

While this move may be justified on moral or strategic grounds for the U.S., it is unequivocally bad news for Canada, really really bad. Canada’s energy position just weakened significantly and now Canada’s leverage with the United States has always rested on one simple fact: the U.S. needed Canadian oil.

Not liked it. Needed it.

Canada became Washington’s largest and most reliable foreign energy supplier not because it was cheap, fast, or efficient but because alternatives were unstable, sanctioned, or politically toxic. Venezuela was one of those alternatives.

It isn’t anymore.

If the U.S. succeeds in stabilizing Venezuelan oil production under its influence, Canada loses something it cannot easily replace and wish it did sooner, strategic indispensability. When your biggest customer gains options, your negotiating power not only shrinks, it completely disappears.

Venezuelan crude is largely heavy oil, the same category as much of Canada’s oil sands production. Many U.S. refineries, especially along the Gulf Coast, are designed to process heavy crude. For years, sanctions and mismanagement kept Venezuelan barrels off the market. Canadian heavy helped fill that gap. That advantage just cracked open. If Venezuelan supply re-enters global markets under U.S. oversight, Canadian oil faces more competition, downward pressure on prices, wider discounts for heavy crude and reduced urgency for new Canadian infrastructure. Urgency that Mark Carney refused to see was needed.

Canada’s oil is already expensive to extract and transport. It is already burdened by regulatory delays, pipeline bottlenecks, and political hostility at home. Now it faces a rival with larger reserves, lower production costs, shorter shipping routes and U.S. strategic backing

That is not a fair fight, but the liberals put us in this position and only have themselves to blame. Ottawa officially has no cards left to play. Canada’s response options are beyond limited and that’s the real problem.

Ottawa cannot meaningfully condemn the U.S. without risking trade and defence relations. It cannot influence Venezuelan reconstruction. It cannot outcompete Venezuelan oil on cost and it has spent years undermining its own energy sector in the name of climate virtue signalling. This is just the snake eating it’s tail and now realizing its proper fucked.

Canada is watching a major shift in global energy power from the sidelines, with no leverage and no contingency plan. This is the cost of mistaking morality for strategy. This is the cost of an ego gone unchecked.

Canada likes to tell itself that being stable, ethical, and predictable guarantees relevance. It doesn’t, Canada isn’t even in the game anymore it just hasn’t realized it. It only works when your partner has no better options.

The U.S. did not remove a communist dictator in Venezuela to protect Canadian interests. It did it to secure American interests energy, influence, and control. Thats what a real leader does, puts it’s country and it’s citizens first.

Canada’s reliability is now a nice bonus, not a necessity. That shift will show up quietly in trade negotiations, in infrastructure decisions and how quickly Canadian concerns get brushed aside. No dramatic break. Just less attention. Less urgency. Less patience and soon enough Canada won’t be invited to the table to even begin the conversation. Canada has just been down graded to the kids table.

This moment didn’t begin today. It began when Canada failed to build pipelines, ego drove away energy investment, allowed its regulatory system to become a chokehold and treated its largest export sector as an embarrassment.

While Ottawa debated optics, the U.S. planned for contingencies. Today was one of them.

The removal of a communist dictator in Venezuela may be a massive victory for it’s citizen and a strategic win for the United States but for Canada, it is a warning shot. Canada just became more optional in a world that punishes irrelevance quickly and quietly.

Being polite won’t save us. Being virtuous won’t save us.

Only being necessary ever did and today, Canada no longer became necessary.

KELSI SHEREN

– – – – – – – – – – – –

One Time Donation! – Paypal – https://paypal.me/brassandunity

Buy me a coffee! – https://buymeacoffee.com/kelsisheren

Let’s connect!

Youtube – https://www.youtube.com/@thekelsisherenperspective

Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/thekelsisherenperspective?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet&igsh=ZDNlZDc0MzIxNw%3D%3D

X: https://x.com/KelsiBurns

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kelsie_sheren/

Substack: https://substack.com/@kelsisheren

TikTok – https://x.com/KelsiBurns

Continue Reading

Trending

X