This dumbass is saying sorry now. Sure you are sorry-you want that job back. What a dickhead. lol
BTW, I am opposed to Chick-Fil A but this guy is just dumb.
~Following My Own Flow~
So this guy is going to be one of the few who apply for unemployment this month. His employer is paying it. An employer has the right to fire its employees. The employee did not represent the employer to their expectations. All is fair.
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the ******* irony in that." - Justin Halpern
Now why don't you actually respond to my post. Funny thing that, you responded to everyone else?
http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1060782603 (Viral video of man picking on Chick-fil-A worker gets him fired)
No Lives Matter
Either way, this isn't about the First Amendment. Like I said earlier, it MIGHT be grounds for a civil suit, but it's not a violation of the First Amendment.
Last edited by StillBallin75; 08-11-12 at 10:18 AM.
- Colonel Paul YinglingNobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.
Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.
All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.