I think we all do our best to avoid petty, partisan politics around here.
But it’s inevitable that sometimes, some hot button issues come up that need to be addressed.
Topics that everyone is passionate about.
Important enough that hills will be died upon.
Of course I could only be talking about Boneless Chicken Wings.
No one elected these kleptocrats to tell us what our definition of “stantive” foods should be.
Samuel Adams wouldn’t have put up with it and neither will I.
It seems like common sense on the surface.
How can you sell a thing as without bones when it’s not necessarily without bones?
The issue should not be with the word “Boneless.”
It should be with the word “Wings,” which Boneless Wings most definitely are not.
There’s your false advertising.
There’s the thing that does harm to the consumer.
I’ll let this great American patriot explain:
Find the lie in his argument.
you’ve got the option to’t.
“We would be disgusted if a butcher was mislabeling cuts of meat.
But then we go around pretending the breast of a chicken is its wing?
… We can call them Buffalo Style Chicken Tenders.”
The logic is flawless.
The sentiment is accurate.
The argument cannot be refuted.
It’s the same when you eat something with an exoskeleton or outer shell.
You knew what you were getting into when you ordered food made from a bivalve.
Now if you got a piece of clam shell in your waffle, you have a legitimate gripe.
But that was never a guarantee of bonelessness.
