Fake…just like every “blacks for Trump” ploy to pretend their paid activists are just normal everyday black folk who just realized Trump is their guy, the fake staged chick-fil-a hug, the fake AI photos (the closest trump wants to get to real black people), the racist idea that black people now identify with him because he’s been indicted for 91 felonies just like them, the gold tennis shoes…every attempt to pretend he cares about other races has been so incredibly tone deaf and racist that they all backfired incredibly badly. Trump won’t even get 8% after his response to BLM.

No actual democrat now supports Trump. Lie #1. Even Berniebros hated him, they just hated Clinton more.

Lie #2, she says she supports Trump and that aligns with her Christian values…Christian values of adultery, rape, fraud, theft, dishonesty, supporting a man who embodies false piety, sloth, wrath, gluttony, pride, greed, envy, and lust, supporting a man who puts himself before god, actually made a golden idol of himself (holy fuck could he be more clear!?), works and plays on the sabbath, dishonors his father’s legacy, has ordered many deaths, and adultery, theft, false witness, and covetousness galore.
Don’t forget he’s also selling fake, edited bibles…claimed to be real leather but it’s definitely not, made in China for $2 and sold for $70, with the constitution and bill of rights added but amendment 11-27 are missing. Hilarious he wants to omit those rights while wrapping himself in a flag…not one bit out of character to pretend the 13th and 14th and 15th don’t exist, and the 22nd is right out.

Get fucking real you idiot child.
Still waiting.

Your video, Chick-fil-a Bear, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Sell that pecker to chick-fil-a... And who are the stupid ones here letting a chicken live in the house...

They opening Chick-fil-A's in OZ now?

Pretty much everything @ChaosEngine said, and as pointed out in the Humans Need Not Apply video. There are far more factors going into this than the economists are willing to look at.

Shelf checkouts might result in slightly higher theft rates, and each person might be at the register than they would be with a properly trained cashier, but you now have one minimum wage employee watching 6 or 12 registers, rather than 6 or 12 people... that is a huge savings. That's 5 to 11 jobs lost, and at the low end, where people can least afford to lose job opportunities. It's just a matter of time until McDonald's, Wendy's and the like all add app-based ordering, or ordering at a kiosk, and that saves a couple employees there (Chick-fil-a already has that in their app, order, notify when you are there, they process the order)... and it wouldn't be too difficult to automate the McDonald's cooking line either... the burgers aren't flipped, the grill cooks both sides at the same time, drop them in place, grill down, cook, up, then put them in the stream tray, easy for a cheap bot to do. Portion control would be far easier with a bot too... there are huge incentives for them to move to automate...

The only real incentive not to automate as fully as everyone can is the fact it would cause a huge disruption to the economy if a Universal Basic Income isn't in place. I'd expect the biggest push for a UBI to eventually come from the various industries that want to automate, who'd gladly pay an automation tax to help pay the UBI in order to greatly increase their bottom lines, because we are very close to where a UBI, even based on an automation tax, is still cheaper than employing people.

Makes me think of the guy who videotaped the woman at the Chick-Fil-A drive thru, figuring he would be lauded as a hero for challenging someone who worked for that company. And it backfired and he became unemployed because of his "principles", which was pretty much what he expected of that woman. And then he played the victim. But he brought it on himself, the woman who tweeted about AIDS in Africa is a whole other story.

Now that everyone has the power to self-publish and broadcast just about anything to the entire world I'm seeing the power that it unleashes in others. I posted a comment on an unsolicited news posting in my FB feed, regarding the Pulitzer Prize picture of the black woman holding out her hands to be handcuffed by the police in riot gear. And everyone in the comment section is going predictably teary-eyed and goose pimply over it, with the usual cliches of iconic, defining, inspiring, uplifting, etc.

And I wrote "don't be so easily manipulated, it's stagey and predictable and Kardashians use this shit to sell sugar water." or something like that. My point being that we have gone from prize-winning pictures of the Viet Nam war (e.g.) to the whole process being co-opted by pop culture, like everything and anything else. Of course I got bombarded with claims of racism and people who pitied my soul. And some were musing on whether to try to track down my employer. I deleted my comment, this world has gotten too fucking weird for me.

Upvote since I like Chick-Fil-A and it did make it in the shot

OMFG... the threads... First Bob calls liberals two faced, but Conservatives were upset at the Dixie Chicks when they spoke out against Bush and his wars. Many conservatives demanded the Dixie Chips sponsors drop them and had large CD burning events, all over the fact they spoke their mind and their beliefs. Now these same people are upset at A&E for suspending a guy (a rather worthless suspension since the upcoming season is already filmed and he's already in it, and it is making free publicity for a stupid show about rich people).

This isn't a free speech issue. He isn't in jail for espousing anti-gay and racist remarks. He was suspended for saying something that made his part time employer look bad. Food Network fired Paula Dean. There was a PR lady who was going to Africa on a business trip that got fired after she tweeted she hopes she doesn't get AIDS, but no problem since she's white. You represent your company, officially or not, and make them look bad, your employer can fire you. You can say what you want, but sometimes that speech has consequences. A&E created the Duck Dynasty image, he made their network look bad, they have the right to suspend him... suspend, they didn't even fully fire him. Were they really outraged they would have pulled the show or edited him out of the upcoming season, but they didn't do any of that. They made a publicity grabbing move to suspend him.

This video also highlights the one key point I've been saying the whole time. That Jesus Himself said it is impossible for a rich man to get into heaven, doesn't matter if they want to or do follow Him, they have their reward here, and won't have one in Heaven. So Phil goes off on how gays are "full of murder" and how they won't inherit the Kingdom of God, but ignores that part where Jesus Himself said that people like Phil won't go to Heaven.

Then high, blaming it on some Atheist agenda. The same thing would have happened regardless of what religion or lack there of he had. This has nothing to do with Atheist wanting to make Christians look bad, as there is plenty of outrage over what he said in many Christian circles... you do know most liberals are Christian as well. Yes, most Atheist tend to be liberal, but the largest voting block of Democrats and Greens are Christian. People who take the Bible as the literal word of God, and believe Jesus was serious when He said to help the needy and poor, that the rich won't go to Heaven, that blessed are the peacemaker and not the warmongering Republicans, that when you pray, to pray in secret and not make a show of it the way modern Conservatives do, that know the reason for the destruction of Sodom according to the Bible was that "she was a land of plenty and did nothing to help the needy and poor", basically full of modern Conservatives, that the thing with the Angels happened after the city was condemned to be destroyed and they were there to rescue Lot's family, before Lot pulled the father of the year by offering his young daughters (think Olson Twins) over the angelic warriors of God (think Conan the Barbarian and Rambo) with magical powers, rather than just a simple "no". Anyhow, plenty of Christians are upset at what Phil said, because it makes Christians look bad, he not only bashed gays, but thought blacks were fine under the old Jim Crow era laws, thought Nazis were Jesus free, though Jesus and the Bible was their main defense for all they did... He basically made the Conservative Christians look like they ignore the main teaching of Jesus which was to Love one another. Jesus hung out with the sinners and tax collectors and told them of the love of God, not how God is going to condemn them all to Hell. If Jesus was alive in modern day America, he'd be hanging out in San Francisco talking about the love of God, not fighting to deny them equal rights under the law.

And of course Shiny... The controversy with Chick-fil-a isn't so much what some stupid old rich man says, he also made it clear that was the position of the company as a whole. And that anti-gay money was going to organizations that actively campaign not only to make being gay illegal in the US, in other countries where it is gay and punishable by death, they campaign to keep the death penalty attached to it. That said, at least Siny agrees that A&E had no choice... though, based on past posts, I don't think Shiny sees that the whole modern day Conservative movement is driven by the greed factor, that modern Christian Conservatives are willing to toss out every government program to help the needy and the poor so that they can give tax breaks to the rich...

It's all a free publicity stunt. I'm sure A&E will cave in, or Phil will issue some semi apology, "like I still believe it is a sin, but I'm sorry I likened them to murderers and I'm sorry about offending any blacks, I was just noting my personal observations growing up" type thing and he'll continue to rake in millions, going against the very Jesus he claims to follow... and he'll be right back on.

The guy who made this video really failed to give a thoughtful analysis of the situation. Before I comment, I will clarify that I do not agree with the thought or spirit behind Phils comments. I think they were crude, and fundamentally wrong on a few different levels. I do agree with Phil, however, that homosexuality is a sin. However, so is stealing and lying and cheating on your taxes, and so I do not single out homosexuals for their sins in particular. To do so would be hypocrtical because I fall short of the glory of God daily and I need Jesus just as much as they do.

My comment is that this situation has little to do with Phil or Duck dynasty; it is simply acting as a vehicle for a lot of pent up outrage and angst against the media and the politically correct culture. It's an overreaction, basically, because conservatives in general and Christians in particular feel marginalized by the current cultural climate.

It's an interesting cultural milestone because while Chick-fil-a was popular, it was never in the spotlight of the media or very much in the national consciousness. As a money making and ratings juggernaut, Duck Dynasty is right on the main nerve of it all, and so its fans, typically conservatives and Christians, cannot be easily ignored. Greed has given them a voice because the threat of a boycott is seen as a clear and present danger to many different bank accounts.

So we see two forces now pitted against eachother; one is the real motive of the corporation, which is to milk duck dynasty for every dollar it can. The other is its obligation to appease the politically correct establishment by blacklisting all who have violated the new cultural norms. A&E had no choice in the matter; they clearly had to do something. But, it is all just a facade; they dearly wish they had 100 Phils with 100 hit shows instead of just 1.

So, it is interesting to me because greed is taking the air out of the politically correct atmosphere. Because of Duck Dynastys popularity, the right actually has a louder voice in the culture than the left on this issue. If Duck Dynasty was just an obscure show, Phil would be history. Yet, because it generates so much wealth for shareholders, Phil is pretty much invincible. It all comes back to the bottom line, an idol to which seemingly anything can ultimately be sacrificed, even the progressive agenda itself.

>> ^lantern53:

Most people don't like gay people and you can blame gay people. If gay people acted like everyone else, in that they kept their private affairs private, most would have no trouble with them. It's when they parade down the street with red codpieces, or french kiss in front of children, or wear dogcollars with little metal studs, or fling semen from 2nd story windows...
that is the kind of thing that pisses people off. You don't see Neil Patrick Harris doing that, which is why he's so adorable.


You are a troll, yes?

Unless you live in a very rare kind of area (perhaps you moved into your city's gay especially felonious gay district without realizing it?), I have serious doubts that you've witnessed those kinds of actions when you haven't seen them among straight people. I've seen plenty of apparently straight people french-kissing in public in front of children and wearing studded collars. (I have yet to see anyone with a red codpiece outside of a Renaissance Festival or a play.)

Or perhaps your objection is that they "don't keep it in private," that they don't hide that they're gay. That they kiss their girl/boyfriend in public where you can see it, or hold hands in public, just the way that straight couples do.

People can dislike it all they want, but gay people, bisexuals exhibiting their same-sex attraction, and transmen and transwomen enacting their gender have as much right to the public space as you do.

So suck it.


<==== pissed off (and slightly drunk) bisexual

>> ^bobknight33:

The left is all inclusive unless you have a different point of view.
Who had anti gay signs? Over 21 million people at there on 8/1. I would guess there might be a few but go ahead Show one, just one. Not Photoshoped.

Its easier to just swing through the drive through.

And thus you get the point. These people won't come out and actively admit to their discriminatory views, but make fast food a proxy for denying a minority the same rights and they show up in the millions. These are the same people that obscure, yet act on their viewpoints on a day-to-day basis, making the lives of minorities more difficult than most can grasp.


It's unfortunate we have to go through this, but we humans evolved to fear things we don't understand. Thus the best thing we can do is work to increase understanding.

Again. Why should he offer an apology? He did nothing wrong.

He is allowed to denote $ to causes that he believes in.
He should be proud he is standing up for what he believes in.

You believe in the gay thing and are proud also in that belief. No one is bashing you for that belief.

You stated\
" They needlessly pissed off at least half their customer base." Maybe 5% not 1/2


-Proclaimed that people who don't share their stance are morally inferior.
-Declared on television that gay marriage is dangerous and destructive to the fabric of the country
" They've said that in the future they're going to stay out of situations like this which seems to indicate that they regret what they did. If they regret their actions..an apology WOULD be in order"


If I am not mistaken his statement was on a religious station so he was speaking his religious beliefs. He does not regret saying those words. He just regrets the childish hatred from the " open minded" community. You guys don't seem too open minded.


You stated\

"-Proclaimed that people who don't share their stance are morally inferior."
I don't know if he stated this but would be wrong to say.

You stated\
-Declared on television that gay marriage is dangerous and destructive to the fabric of the country "

I don't know of any hard evidence to support this statement Time will tell. I strongly believe that Divorce and single parenting is dangerous and destructive to the fabric of the country. I believe there are no "winners" in a divorce. I would rather see pro marriage agenda being push rather than call now for a quick divorce ad.



>> ^VoodooV:

Found this on another website and it would appear relevant:
Chick-fil-a and it's CEO met several criteria before earning a boycott.
-Donated to antigay causes.
-Announced that they did so
-Seemed proud of their stance
-Proclaimed that people who don't share their stance are morally inferior.
-Declared on television that gay marriage is dangerous and destructive to the fabric of the country
-Are a private company
- They needlessly pissed off at least half their customer base. They've said that in the future they're going to stay out of situations like this which seems to indicate that they regret what they did. If they regret their actions..an apology WOULD be in order.
It's called empathy bob, try it out sometime.


>> ^bobknight33:
Why should he offer an apology? He did nothing wrong.>> ^VoodooV:
>> ^bobknight33:
Gays 0 Chick Fil-a 1

bob's math isn't too good either. CEO didn't issue an apology, but they did release a statement saying that in the future they are going to stay out of hot-bed political issues.
It appears they have learned their lesson, but probably too late. Pro-gay supporters will very rarely eat there again, meanwhile the anti-gay supporters may be eating there a lot now...but they won't be able to sustain their attendance. They'll either go broke or die of a heart attack.
Net win for civil rights

Found this on another website and it would appear relevant:

Chick-fil-a and it's CEO met several criteria before earning a boycott.

-Donated to antigay causes.
-Announced that they did so
-Seemed proud of their stance
-Proclaimed that people who don't share their stance are morally inferior.
-Declared on television that gay marriage is dangerous and destructive to the fabric of the country
-Are a private company
-Are a company that requires minimal effort to boycott
-Are small enough that a boycott might have an effect

They needlessly pissed off at least half their customer base. They've said that in the future they're going to stay out of situations like this which seems to indicate that they regret what they did. If they regret their actions..an apology WOULD be in order.

It's called empathy bob, try it out sometime.

>> ^bobknight33:

Why should he offer an apology? He did nothing wrong.>> ^VoodooV:
>> ^bobknight33:
Gays 0 Chick Fil-a 1

bob's math isn't too good either. CEO didn't issue an apology, but they did release a statement saying that in the future they are going to stay out of hot-bed political issues.
It appears they have learned their lesson, but probably too late. Pro-gay supporters will very rarely eat there again, meanwhile the anti-gay supporters may be eating there a lot now...but they won't be able to sustain their attendance. They'll either go broke or die of a heart attack.
Net win for civil rights

Why should he offer an apology? He did nothing wrong.>> ^VoodooV:

>> ^bobknight33:
Gays 0 Chick Fil-a 1

bob's math isn't too good either. CEO didn't issue an apology, but they did release a statement saying that in the future they are going to stay out of hot-bed political issues.
It appears they have learned their lesson, but probably too late. Pro-gay supporters will very rarely eat there again, meanwhile the anti-gay supporters may be eating there a lot now...but they won't be able to sustain their attendance. They'll either go broke or die of a heart attack.
Net win for civil rights