For dinner tonight, I wrapped chicken breast in basil followed by bacon.
I roasted potatoes, garlic, red peppers and asparagus to accompany this delectable entrée.
It was f-ing tasty.
F
For the record, our fridge is always replete with leftovers. Our three largest food containers are sitting on its arctic shelves containing at least three full servings of three different meals, at this very moment. The other facet of this essential truth is that when I offer my son his pick of these recyclable feasts tonight, he will suggest we have Jell-O instead. Herein lies my dilemma for the evening.
In a strange reversal of tradition, allow me to drag the conversation back to the prevalent issue of turkey. That is, the entirely ridiculous fact that white meat generally costs more than dark. Okay, I guess this has more to do with chicken than with turkey, but still! What’s the deal? By every scalar metric, those being moistness, taste, and tenderness, dark meat seems the overwhelming superior. Certainly, whenever a waiter asks me which of the two I’d prefer my sandwich be hewn from I can’t help but stare at him for a moment as if I were being lured into some kind of trap.
Not satisfied with my herculean application of intellect, I decided to do some research, and by “research” I mean, “type a question into Google and see what the internet thinks.” It appears that the common counter-argument for the monetary superiority of white meat is two-fold: first, that containing less fat than its dark mirror is somehow a good thing, and second, that white meat contains a smaller ratio of bone to meat, and thus is better value for the pound. But it wasn’t until I broached the subject with an old friend of mine, a habitual Orderer of The White, that the truth began to unfold before me.
He exposed to me that the rougher texture and lack of moisture in the white meat made it a more ready vessel for what was really important. The absorption and transmission of Swiss Chalet’s special dipping sauce.
Ja.