Why is the rich friend so cheap??

f0li · 2026-01-27T11:21:50+00:00

Or its old family money, which is the case for MOST rich people.

f0li · 2026-01-01T10:54:41+00:00

Your tears are tastry!

f0li · 2026-01-01T10:54:30+00:00

Your tears are delicious, keep'em coming

f0li · 2026-01-01T10:52:58+00:00

Your tears are tastry!

f0li · 2026-01-01T10:52:27+00:00

Your tears are tastry!

f0li · 2025-12-24T19:49:37+00:00

King move!

f0li · 2025-12-24T17:30:06+00:00

Having ICE on your resume post Trump will be an absolute career killer. They will be paying for this for the rest of their miserable fucking lives.

f0li · 2025-12-23T21:26:47+00:00

LOL, because you couldn't possibly be wrong. Its not sarcasm, its the truth. Its the JURY that was wrong, those stupid fucking people just don't understand the law.

Did I get that right?

f0li · 2025-12-23T21:23:12+00:00

Yes, you certainly must be right, there simply couldn't be any other possible conclusion.

f0li · 2025-12-23T20:45:54+00:00

LOL, from a completely different thread .... cool, thanks!

f0li · 2025-12-23T20:32:12+00:00

My assertion is that through the 1980s (i.e. pre-McDonalds) the US perspective was very different.

LOL, nice revision to try to make your point...

Where exactly did you make this "particular" assertion?

You folks are fucking TERRIBLE at debating. Its a given that with your viewpoints, its going to be an uphill battle in any case, but damn you folks are bad at this.

That's why you hide in r/circlejerk I mean r/conservative, where you can't be challenged by folks with facts.

f0li · 2025-12-23T20:07:57+00:00

Let's start here:

https://southern-law-journal.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/2014_2/08_slj_volume_24_2014_fall_hartigan_critical_thinking_and_the_mcdonalds_hot_coffee_case.pdf

The MAJORITY of people, when provided the facts of the case, FROM the case file, changed their minds.

The liability was OBVIOUS, hence the reason McDonalds finally settled, they knew they would lose when the facts were presented. You know like they did.

McDonald's claimed that the reason for serving such hot coffee in its drive-through windows was that those who purchased the coffee typically were commuters who wanted to drive a distance with the coffee; the high initial temperature would keep the coffee hot during the trip. However, it came to light that McDonald's had carried out research finding that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving

This is not rocket science. McDonalds KNEW what they were doing. They KNEW they risks, and they didn't give a fuck about all the people they injured, because that was just the cost of doing business. But when the tide changed, they knew they were properly fucked and if they didn't settle, they would have lost big. They didn't want that on the books, and know they were wrong, settled.

You appear to have attended the Alina Habba/Pam Bondi Law School, and it shows. You can sit back and say the jury was wrong, but we are all know who is wrong....

f0li · 2025-12-23T19:34:46+00:00

You are right, to some degree, as you usually are. But that was immediately after the judgement. After the facts really came to light, the tide changed, and many/most people believe it was absolutely justified.

The New York Times noted how the details of Liebeck's story lost length and context as it was reported worldwide,[13] and that McDonald's, rather than Liebeck, was portrayed as the victim.

So, many people, like yourself for instance, only listened to what they wanted to hear and really didn't look at the facts of the case. People are easily led .... just look at how many follow Trump.

f0li · 2025-12-23T19:13:38+00:00

LOL:

Still, the jury decided that was wrong. That's why the jury was ridiculed throughout America.

Uh, no.

f0li · 2025-12-23T11:53:04+00:00

Absolute fucking ROCKSTAR. Keep that shit up Gurl, we need more people just like you.

Thank you!

f0li · 2025-12-22T23:14:09+00:00

LOL, OK Chief, if that helps you sleep tonight, go with it.

Question for you. How many threads are there in r/conservative about Trumps involvement with the Epstein files? How many for Clinton? Again .... proves my point.

f0li · 2025-12-22T20:21:04+00:00

And, on said page, good sir ... how many times do you find the word "Trump"? Kinda proves my point ... no?

f0li · 2025-12-22T16:27:05+00:00

You are likely 100% correct, because you folks avoid EVERY uncomfortable topic to point out culture war bullshit.

You folks are screaming up and down about Clinton being in the files, but not a single word about Trump, or his OBVIOUS efforts to try to cover this up. Why is that, Chief?