: > I do feel like Helen Steele is a hypocrite. I don't think I've made that big
: > of a leap in thinking that. Obviously you disagree. She put herself in the
: > spotlight so I think that leaves her "fair game" .
: You don't know what you are talking about mate. It was your beloved Ronald who put Helen in the spotlight and made life misery for her for a long time. All because she dared to stand up to the might of the corporation you call "caring". I suspect this is what is really bugging you about her. That she is a strong character not intimidated by McD the big bully. This is what you should be teaching your kids if you want them to think for themselves rather than "Oh well Ronald is better than power rangers" Helen is a good example of an independent thinker.
No mate, that is not what is bothering me about Helen Steele. I love independant thinkers. She can stand up against anybody she wants and I applaud her for that. And my children can stand up for themselves just fine. I encourage them to stand up even to adults if they feel their opinion is justified. I have held Malcolm X up to them as a great leader, even though he opposed capitalism, so I am all in favor of independance. I just think she should examine herself a little closer.
I feel, as I have already stated that the alcohol industry is one that has caused more suffering that McDonalds. You feel, as is your right, that she doesn't represent an entire industry or can't be held responsible for
that industry. She shouldn't be held responsible for an entire industry, but you would think she could pick a better industry to work for if she is so concerned about the welfare of the human race. Ronald McDonald didn't put her in the spotlight, she did.
: Do you think you can get away with double standards by simply calling her "fair game"? Please give us some more credit.
Maybe you just don't want anyone critisizing St. Helen. I probably use a poor choice of words when I said "fair game". I was just pointing out the fact that she put herself in the news and opened herself up to criticism. Of course, you don't think she was responsible for this.
: > I am pro-capitalism, but a not a die-hard Republican--I voted for Clinton
: > twice. Just threw that in so no presumptions could be made.
: Oh my god. You DO surprise me now. Do you really mean that. Let me get this right. You actually voted Democratic party not once by mistake but twice? That IS very radical. No wonder why you don't want to criticise McD. You have already contributed enough to the radical movement by voting Clinton.
Do I detect just a small bit of satire? I was only trying to point out that not all people who don't jump on the anti-McDonalds wagon fit into a
nice, neat catagory.