<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html/</link>
<description><![CDATA[
辛辣炒飯料理大對決，你選哪一道？]]>
	</description>
<language>zh-tw</language>
<generator>Roodo Blog System</generator>
<copyright>All Rights Reserved</copyright>
<atom:link href="http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781-comment.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[好吃的咖哩炒飯,讚讚好吃]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-16343123</guid>
	<author>ybb34712@yang31204(烏烏 )</author>	<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 18:27:47 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[好吃的咖哩炒飯,讚讚好吃]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-16343119</guid>
	<author>ybb34712@yang31204(烏烏 )</author>	<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 18:27:44 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[明太子真的配飯好好吃
我在日本還看到有明太子的卡通造型產品
好可愛,不過沒買回家,嗚
這集可能明天就要砍了
要存檔的人請盡快喔]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209537</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2005 06:13:02 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[咖哩炒飯的特選食材竟然是愛文芒果，而且最後還附上原味優格作的芒果沙拉，太奸詐了。不過我還是喜歡魚卵，一直到最後還是選明太子泡菜炒飯。

講到飛魚子，我這次回台灣有吃到加了飛魚子作的魚丸，飛魚子一粒一粒脆脆的，口感很不錯。]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209535</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2005 06:10:06 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[吃過宜蘭的飛魚子後
你就會知道明太子並不怎樣]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209533</guid>
	<author>goog8@ms49.url.com.tw(小李)</author>	<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:08:29 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[不早說，原來摻了辣鱈魚子，魚子就已經很了不起了，辣鱈魚子力道更加，不用看秀就知道，當然要選明太子泡菜炒飯，只希望不要太鹹。]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209531</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2005 05:22:29 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[咖哩炒飯]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209529</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2005 13:18:51 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[當然是明太子泡菜炒飯囉,自己炒過泡菜炒飯,色香味俱全,也吃過明太子義大利麵,真是美味爽口,如果將兩樣加在一起,必定能觸動味蕾,昇華成另一種層次.]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209527</guid>
	<author>yujoou.kuo@msa.hinet.net(郭喵咪)</author>	<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jul 2005 00:44:13 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[這集我也還沒看，但是明太子好像是辣鱈魚子的樣子，聽起來很好吃，先投明太子一票。]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209525</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:34:29 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[明太子其實還蠻下飯的
如果用來炒飯應該不錯吃
不過泡菜就不了解用來炒飯效果如何ㄌ]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209523</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2005 04:15:19 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[明太子泡菜?沒聽過。
等看完再做決定　<img src=http://www.bo2k.idv.tw/images/blog/Face/11.gif>]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209521</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2005 03:17:38 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[當然是咖哩啦，連看都不用看～～
]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209519</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2005 00:13:49 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[真是佩服你
挑戰都中斷了 還這麼認真

還用影片 真有心

http://blog.roodo.com/abulaboy]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209517</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:56:33 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[我不能拒絕咖哩的美味,咖哩炒飯一票~]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209515</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:28:44 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
	<title>回應：料理東西軍：咖哩炒飯vs明太子泡菜炒飯</title>
	<description><![CDATA[好難選..兩個都想吃...@@]]>
	</description>
	<link>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html</link>
	<guid>http://blog.roodo.com/subing/archives/262781.html#comment-8209513</guid>
		<category>文章回應</category>
	<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:20:09 +0800</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>