Harold's Chicken 3B -over by Leo High School
8316 S Ashland
Never had me a Chick-fil-A; probably won't. I do not like chain-gang eateries - with the sole exception of White Castle. I prefer Mon and Pop operations - Greek restaurants, Top-Notch, WonderBurger, Illinois Bar & Grill Delux Baskets of heart-attack inducing and colon blocking goodness. Harold's Chicken is far superior to the now Jim Crow-de-clawed, slimmed down plantation cracker with white whiskers known acronymically as KFC ( formerly the Colonel). The late Harold Pierce* was a Chicago business man who retired to St. Anne, Illinois, after opening his numbered chain Harold's Chicken all over the south side. Harold sent his daughter to Bishop McNamara High School in Kankakee, Il where I had the privilege of teaching the young lady and meeting the Chicago entrepreneur. Harold was a man's man who fished and hunted and shared his fields and ponds with impoverished teachers. Harold was all about family. This fine man went home to Christ in March 1988.
At the time that I knew Mr. Pierce in the mid-1980's, all of Harold's operations were limited to black neighborhoods - like Station # 38 above. Harold had no intention of leaving the neighborhoods, nor of expanding his base to include Mick, Dago, Polack and Loogan neighborhoods. "You white boys would burn me out, Hickey, have some more gizzards, Son." Today Harold's kids can be found operating among the Occupy Chicago trust-fund kids who me met their first black friend in pre-school of North Shore Country Day. Harold met white cops and firemen who took product home to Hegewisch, Morgan Park, Beverly an Scottsdale and his product is still honest to the man's core values - not necessarily Chicago Values 2012.
The late Harold Pierce would be castigated by the Wilmette New Trevian (Chicagoan in voto) Mayor as not having Chicago Values. Chicago Values, at the moment, means one must publicly acknowledge the sanctity of same sex marriage - though Illinois has yet to be fully baptized in the creed. Things were, after all, a Civil Union of minds and hearts.
Nope, eating at Harold's Chicken might be anathema, because Harold Pierce's values were not Chicago Values. Value meals are the outward sign of Gay Grace.
A business may no longer believe, much less publicly proclaim anything that does not pass the Progressive taste tests -
- Ban Sabra Hummus, because it is Israeli and we should all be Eye-less on Gaza. Fact is, them Home-boy Jews whip up some dandy chick peas and garlic.
- Pile-on Walker Wisconsin - I was there last weekend and will return this weekend to get my Swiss On in New Glarus and Green County!
- Boycott Katy Perry ( whoever she happens to be) because her video's proceeds will support veterans - so saith Naomi Wolf ( whoever she happens to be)
- Boycott whomever comes within wallet distance of Al Sharpton, or Jesse Jackson, père
- Cry hate and havoc upon every Catholic Bishop on the planet with emphasis on our heroic Chicago-born and bred Francis Cardinal George**
- Close down a cake shop because the owner values traditional marriage
- Sarah Palin - the real Mother Jones.
- Fossil Feulishmess - No Keystone for this Nation; Planned Parenthood of Red China will benefit
- Big Breeder Families are hateful and selfish
Now comes Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, with his New Families Structure study, which gathers a much larger sample of 15,000 Americans ages 18 to 39. In a Slate article, he summarized his peer-reviewed research that appeared earlier in the Social Science Research journal: On 25 of 50 different "outcomes" the study evaluated, "the children of women who've had same-sex relationships fare quite differently than those in stable, biologically intact mom-and-pop families. …
"Even after including controls for age, race, gender and things like being bullied as a youth, or the gay-friendliness of the state in which they live, such respondents were more apt to report being unemployed, less healthy, more depressed, more likely to have cheated on a spouse or partner, smoke more pot, had trouble with the law, report more male and female sex partners, more sexual victimization, and were more likely to reflect negatively on their childhood family life, among other things."
This is a debate-changing study, especially because it challenges more recent court findings in which judges cite the "no difference evidence" as a reason for overturning laws that define marriage as between a man and a woman.
Unsurprisingly, some of Regnerus' colleagues want to drive him out of academia on a rail. They've criticized his study for receiving sponsorship money from a conservative group, the Witherspoon Institute, and they've found some shortcomings (don't all social science studies have them?) in his methodology. The study has little to do with gay marriage, critics charge, because it's about same-sex child rearing.
Regnerus acknowledges that more study is needed (what scholar doesn't?), and he clearly outlines the steps he took to ensure the study's methodological correctness and objectivity. He doesn't claim to know the cause of the differences. Ironically, one scholar of the pro-gay persuasion who refused an invitation to participate on a panel to ensure the study's objectivity now is blasting the study for its lack of objectivity. He's leading a 200-scholar posse to demand the journal's editor explain why he dared publish such a piece and that he should collar more writers who are "sensitive" to LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) parenting issues.
While Regnerus' social science credentials appear impeccable, it's just a start of academic Star Chamber proceedings against him for daring to step beyond the given wisdom. Three of his colleagues published an op-ed on The Huffington Post, charging that his "reckless" research "besmirched" the university. He is to appear before a panel of university officials that's investigating him for "scientific misconduct."
Chicago Values are merely a very heavy hammer to bop unfortunately honorable people over the noggins. Progressives have succeeded, because they have cowed the cowardly and nudged the normally courteous people off of the public stage.
The Harold Pierce was a proud man, an out-doors man, a family man and man who tossed together product that is still some very serious bird.
*Harold Pierce, a black Chicago entrepreneur, founded the restaurant in 1950. The character of Harold's developed primarily out of necessity, because the larger fast food chains tended to avoid African-American neighborhoods. In turn, Chicago's legal and social obstacles to black-owned businesses at the time prevented Harold's from expanding into downtown or the North Side. Harold's became one of the few examples of a thriving fast food chain that was owned by, and primarily served, the black community.Harold's fried chicken is different from that served at other fast food chicken restaurants (Kentucky Fried Chicken, Brown's Chicken, Popeyes, etc.) in two significant ways. The first is the cooking medium. Harold's chicken is cooked in a mix of half beef tallow and half vegetable oil, while most other chains use only vegetable oil. This provides a taste that is more similar to the traditional home-cooked fried chicken that was invented in theAmerican South.
The second major difference between Harold's chicken and most other restaurants is that at Harold's, the chicken is not fried until it is ordered, while most chains fry their chicken in large batches and store it on warming racks until it is purchased. Harold Pierce set up a chain-wide policy from the beginning that all Harold's chicken would be cooked only after it was ordered, in order to preserve the freshly cooked taste of the chicken. Originally, this meant that there was a twelve to fifteen minute wait between ordering the chicken and receiving it. Harold Pierce's son has altered the original method, however: the chicken is now fried half-way beforehand, and then cooked to completion when it is ordered. This maintains the chicken's freshness while shortening the delivery time to seven or eight minutes.
** I was born and raised here, and my understanding of being a Chicagoan never included submitting my value system to the government for approval. Must those whose personal values do not conform to those of the government of the day move from the city? Is the City Council going to set up a “Council Committee on Un-Chicagoan Activities” and call those of us who are suspect to appear before it? I would have argued a few days ago that I believe such a move is, if I can borrow a phrase, “un-Chicagoan.” Francis Cardinal George
from Bill Baar's West Side