Costco is Still Evil, Carl’s Jr. Prime Rib Six Dollar Burger, And Dodgers-Angels Weekend Hijinks
Nope. No quick-hitters tonight.
- It probably has something to do with the Fourth of July weekend coming up, or it might just have been a slightly atypical Sunday afternoon crowd, or it might have been because we went to a different Costco than the one we usually go to—Northridge—but boy was Costco packed today!
So what does a packed Costco mean? Stupid kids running around, coming nano-millimeters from hitting your cart with their faces, idiot adults constantly blocking aisles with themselves or their shopping carts (remember this?), and the huddled masses blitzing from free sample to free sample.
What was really strange, though, was the fact that our wait that the checkout line was pretty damn short. Either Costco had every register working (I wasn’t paying attention), or everyone was just taking their sweet time shopping while we quickly grabbed what we wanted.
As for the assault to my wallet, I bought some cheese danishes, trail mix, and yogurt. I’ll set the over/under on how long it’ll take me and my sister to finish all three at two weeks.
(Don’t be a fool and take the over :P)
- So I sampled the new Carl’s Jr. Prime Rib Six Dollar Burger on Saturday.
(Those commercials made the sandwich look really tasty!)
I can sum up the review of the burger in two words: IT SUCKED. You know a burger sucks when the best part of it is the (Ciabatta) bun.
(OK, that’s not fair. The meat patty was typical Six Dollar Burger good.)
The three or so pieces of Prime rib that found its way on top of my burger made dirt-cheap Vegas buffet Prime rib taste awesome by comparison. Honestly, I couldn’t tell what was Prime rib, and what was grilled onion. And don’t get me started on the horseradish sauce; it was so sweet, I thought they topped my burger with yogurt! Not to mention, the sauce had as much of a kick as shrimp cocktail sauce.
The worst thing was, the combo costs $8 here in the valley! Can I do a chargeback, on the basis that the item was significantly not as described? 
- So let me get this straight. The Los Angeles Dodgers Actually in Los Angeles got five three hits on Sunday and lost, but they got zero hits on Saturday, and won? How crazy is that?
After the seventh inning, I was rooting for the Dodgers to go hitless the rest of the way, just to see history happen. Needless to say, I was elated when Dodgers’ closer Takashi Saito finally got the last out.
(I will neither confirm nor deny that the fact that the Los Angeles Angels Outside of Los Angeles were on the wrong end of history didn’t make the moment a bit sweeter).
By the way, just as I will never call the Anaheim Angels that ridiculous moniker that they choose to go by, I will not call the Angels’ performance anything other than what it should be: a no-hitter. I don’t care what the rule book says; the Angels held the Dodgers hitless for an entire game, and that should be counted as a no-hitter. I couldn’t agree more with what MSNBC’s Mike Celizic wrote:
A pitcher throws a six-inning shutout and gets the win when rain ends the game, he gets a shut-out. If a batter is working on a hitting streak and loses it in a five-inning, rain-shortened game, baseball doesn’t say that doesn’t count because he should have had two more at-bats. So, why this silly rule about no-hitters? Why is a six-inning, rain-shortened game a complete game for everyone else but not for the guy who throws a no-hitter?
And for the record, Scioscia made the right call in pulling Weaver in the top of the seventh. He had to find a way to manufacture a run! Also, I completely disagree with the official scorer on the booted ball by Weaver that led to the Dodgers’ only run. That has to be ruled a base hit; it was much too bang-bang for it to be called an error.
Until next time!
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment