Support the fast food workers

[thereisnospoon]

Spoken like a virgin who knows little about *******.

I bet that post really boosted your ego. didn't it?
You asshole.
It is my sincere hope you slip on a marble and fall into a pile of thumbtacks.

I hope you get gang banged by a pack of monkeys with aids.

And you are STILL an asshole.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Look here stupid. This is not the supreme court.

Huff, sniff, kiss my ass, it's all the same to you, doofus.

And now we're supposed to tip the kid that operates a cash register that calculates the change for him/her so he/she does not have to use their fingers to subtract?
Yer such a kidder.

Yes, because I say so.

That and 50 cents gets you a senior coffee at Burger King.
In other words, nobody gives a **** if you say so. It ain't happening.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Just how many of the "fast food workers" on this picket lines really that?

Just how many are paid by unions to man the picket lines?

All of them.

As they should be in a capitalistic society.

Yes, in keeping with the liberal mantra, never take responsibility for one's self. Let others do that.
I think you are full of shit. You don't believe in the shit you post.
You are just here to rattle the chains of others. A ball buster.
Well, people like you are never taken seriously. You're a Jester. A clown. A fool.

 

[theHawk]

I'm guessing the $1 menu will soon become the $5.99 menu.

 

[Noomi]

I support the workers, I don't support the business. McDonalds are bastards to work for, only in it for their own interests.

 

[Snookie]

Actually the POTUS does not have that luxury.
This is the leader of the free world. People place much trust in the words of the POTUS. They rely on those words.
You libs use "so what" as a defense mechanism for your screw ups.
Not permitted. Especially in light of the current situation. Obama is planning opn showering a sovereign country which has no real national security or economic interest to the US, with millions of dollars worth of Tomahawk missiles. Not only that he risks the safety of Israel as Iran has already threatened to retaliate against Israel with an attack if the Obama goes through with this plan.
The attack plan is a failure of foreign policy on so many levels, it's incalculable.
First, there is no real goal that has been set.
Second, there is no hard evidence which can confirm that the Assad government was responsible for the use of chem weapons.
Third, US Intel has no idea where the stockpile of the remaining chem weapons are located.
Fourth, we have no idea who the bad guys are. In fact there exists the probability that there are no god guys.
SO why is Obama so insistent on going forward? No one knows. And I doubt if there will be any clarification in Tuesday evening's speech. \
Lastly. There are so many domestic issues which require more immediate attention. We need not get involved in what is essentially a civil war with no end in sight.
What should bother everyone is, where was this concern 30 months ago when the Obama admin was advised civilians were being killed by the thousands.
Over 100,000 Syrians have died and over 2 million have been displaced. There was not outrage from our POTUS over that..WHY?!!
Now that the method of death has changed, so has the level of outrage? Please.
Hopefully Congress will walk away from this.
Obama will most likely go ahead and do what he wants anyway. And that will be tragic. Because many more thousands will die. And for what?

I am against all military aggression that is supported by the war powers act which I know is unconstitutional.

So then why are you in support of this plan?
BTW if the War Powers Act were as you say unconstitutional, it would no longer exist.
Unless you are an attorney with a specialty in matters Constitution, you cannot 'know'. Therefore you are guessing.

I am not in support of this plan.

The constitution enumerates it quite clearly in Article II section 8 [Off the top of my head, "congress shall have the power to declare war", no ifs, ands, or buts.]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I support the workers, I don't support the business. McDonalds are bastards to work for, only in it for their own interests.

OMG! A business that wants to make money.

You should work for one that wants to lose money, see how well that goes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I come in peace, in the spirit of MLK.

Are you saying King was a Marxist?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I support the workers, I don't support the business. McDonalds are bastards to work for, only in it for their own interests.

McDonalds is in business for themselves?

Who the **** SHOULD they be in business for, comrade?

Communists, stupid as a pile of dogshit, but less useful...

 

[Katzndogz]

I'm guessing the $1 menu will soon become the $5.99 menu.

McDonalds used to have burger, fries and a small drink for $1. They will keep prices down by automating and jettisoning workers.

 

[Katzndogz]

I support the workers, I don't support the business. McDonalds are bastards to work for, only in it for their own interests.

McDonalds is in business for themselves?

Who the **** SHOULD they be in business for, comrade?

Communists, stupid as a pile of dogshit, but less useful...

Since McDonalds is a franchise and can't collectively be bastards to work for, the statement is nonsense.

 

[Snookie]

All of them.

As they should be in a capitalistic society.

Yes, in keeping with the liberal mantra, never take responsibility for one's self. Let others do that.
I think you are full of shit. You don't believe in the shit you post.
You are just here to rattle the chains of others. A ball buster.
Well, people like you are never taken seriously. You're a Jester. A clown. A fool.

that was not supposed to get out.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Since McDonalds is a franchise and can't collectively be bastards to work for, the statement is nonsense.

There are both company stores and franchises. If you are a franchise owner - trust me - McDonalds are bastards to work for....

 

[Katzndogz]

Since McDonalds is a franchise and can't collectively be bastards to work for, the statement is nonsense.

There are both company stores and franchises. If you are a franchise owner - trust me - McDonalds are bastards to work for....

If you are a franchise owner, you are not an employee of McDonalds by definition.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If you are a franchise owner, you are not an employee of McDonalds by definition.

Ah, YOU have never been a McDonalds franchise owner....

 

[Snookie]

Since McDonalds is a franchise and can't collectively be bastards to work for, the statement is nonsense.

There are both company stores and franchises. If you are a franchise owner - trust me - McDonalds are bastards to work for....

If you are a franchise owner, you are not an employee of McDonalds by definition.

I guess it is something like a capitalistic sharecropper.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I support the workers, I don't support the business. McDonalds are bastards to work for, only in it for their own interests.

uncensored already noted your absurdity, so all I can do is heartily agree.

You are beyond ridiculous when you bray about a company being in something for their own interests.

A nun and a saint might not be in things for themselves. But nations generally are, people usually are and businesses absolutely are and should be. Oftentimes, in fact, they have fiduciary obligations to look out for the interests of their own enterprise.

Why if McDonald's failed to act in the best interest of the business known as McDonald's it's shareholders could justifiably sue the management and win.

 

[Snookie]

I support the workers, I don't support the business. McDonalds are bastards to work for, only in it for their own interests.

uncensored already noted your absurdity, so all I can do is heartily agree.

You are beyond ridiculous when you bray about a company being in something for their own interests.

A nun and a saint might not be in things for themselves. But nations generally are, people usually are and businesses absolutely are and should be. Oftentimes, in fact, they have fiduciary obligations to look out for the interests of their own enterprise.

Why if McDonald's failed to act in the best interest of the business known as McDonald's it's shareholders could justifiably sue the management and win.

Sez you, dumb ass.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I support the workers, I don't support the business. McDonalds are bastards to work for, only in it for their own interests.

uncensored already noted your absurdity, so all I can do is heartily agree.

You are beyond ridiculous when you bray about a company being in something for their own interests.

A nun and a saint might not be in things for themselves. But nations generally are, people usually are and businesses absolutely are and should be. Oftentimes, in fact, they have fiduciary obligations to look out for the interests of their own enterprise.

Why if McDonald's failed to act in the best interest of the business known as McDonald's it's shareholders could justifiably sue the management and win.

Sez you, dumb ass.

Dumb ass. Nice of you to sign your idiotic posts.

Anyway, you ******* retarded gerbil ****, it is not I alone who "sez" that.

You perhaps are unfamiliar with such concepts as "fiduciary obligation."

No surprise.

Most concepts of the modern world clearly elude you and your laughably petty "mind."

But it is not all THAT modern:

A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders. The powers of the directors are to be employed for that end. The discretion of directors is to be exercised in the choice of means to attain that end, and does not extend to a change in the end itself, to the reduction of profits, or to the nondistribution of profits among stockholders in order to devote them to other purposes.

-- Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., 170 N.W. 668, 684 (Mich. 1919).

Stoopie thinks the proper answer to the court is "sez you!"

Stoopie is essentially useless here, but it's absence of intelligence does provide for some amusement.

 

[Snookie]

uncensored already noted your absurdity, so all I can do is heartily agree.

You are beyond ridiculous when you bray about a company being in something for their own interests.

A nun and a saint might not be in things for themselves. But nations generally are, people usually are and businesses absolutely are and should be. Oftentimes, in fact, they have fiduciary obligations to look out for the interests of their own enterprise.

Why if McDonald's failed to act in the best interest of the business known as McDonald's it's shareholders could justifiably sue the management and win.

Sez you, dumb ass.

Dumb ass. Nice of you to sign your idiotic posts.

Anyway, you ******* retarded gerbil ****, it is not I alone who "sez" that.

You perhaps are unfamiliar with such concepts as "fiduciary obligation."

No surprise.

Most concepts of the modern world clearly elude you and your laughably petty "mind."

But it is not all THAT modern:

A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders. The powers of the directors are to be employed for that end. The discretion of directors is to be exercised in the choice of means to attain that end, and does not extend to a change in the end itself, to the reduction of profits, or to the nondistribution of profits among stockholders in order to devote them to other purposes.

-- Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., 170 N.W. 668, 684 (Mich. 1919).

Stoopie thinks the proper answer to the court is "sez you!"

Stoopie is essentially useless here, but it's absence of intelligence does provide for some amusement.

who gives a shit. tl, tr.