I'm a huge Starbucks fan and am a regular customer here in Austin. As for the logo "controversy?" Laughable. These fake ass ing "Christians" have their heads so far up their own asses that they can't tell the difference between internet porn and a mermaid with two tails.
Um ... I'm not sure the article is legit. It's a wacko blog post.
And even if it is legit, and there are strange Christians threatening to do very bad things, they certainly don't represent all of us.
As for the difference between porn and mermaids ... would some lefties out there care to distinguish between Rev. Wright and Rev. Hagee? Since we can't tell the difference and all ...
Last edited by Don Quixote; 05-10-2008 at 12:33 AM.
I can totally see Conner or one of his supporters doing this just for the publicity.
This has nothing to do with Christians or Starbucks.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 05-10-2008 at 12:37 AM.
I'm beginning to see this for myself. I would hope he and his friends were as tolerant of Pres. Bush and the American Right, as they are of Ayers, Wright, Hezbollah, Weathermen, FARC, etc. I mean, they're all about tolerance, right?Welcome to the wonderful world of boutons. Where a hard core Christian group is bagged on for complaining about a naked chick on a company seal but it's okay when AQ and radical Shi'ia kill American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Good job, croutons
I really don't give a about coffee.
I drink it every once in a while. And, while I do like latte's from Starbucks, I wouldn't miss it if Starbucks were to go down under.
However, I have to agree with the Funt in terms of what they do for the communities and their hiring records.
Starbucks has deals with African nations that make the countries the sole proprietors of their coffee beans. Starbucks pays a little more but it ensures that the African nations have a viable product to export, not only for Starbucks but to other countries and compe ors as well.
Tell me, does McDonald's and Duncan Donuts do this as well?
**oh yea, all these crazy 'christians'. They're just as bad as the fundamentalist muslims who want to blow up the world.**
Yeah, Harbucks is good. I have several friends who work for them. They're a fine company.
But, really, wake me up when we see a large movement of Christians plotting against, and aiming to violently destroy, the West.
WGAF. I hate coffee, and the only times I go to Starbucks are when I'm reading comics in a Barnes and Noble. Their logo could be a naked hobo beating an 8-year old child with a dead fish while holding a pie shaped like Germany in his other hand for all I care. Their strawberries and creme frap is delicious.
Who the wants coffee from Africa?
Sincerely,
Juan Valdez
Tell me,Tell me, does McDonald's and Duncan Donuts do this as well?
why should I give a ?
Racist Republicans wouldn't give a .
But, if I would've said that Starbucks rapes the Africans and strips them of any kinds of economic independence while enslaving them, you'd probably be walking around with a hard on.
Maybe if I said that about Jews . . .
It's so awful I have to stand in a 10-people long line every time I want to get a coffee.
Also, it must be so God damm awful, people ar willing to pay almost $4 for a cup of latte.
You probably shouldn't give a , since you seem fully content to be a short-sighted, selfish ass. People who actually care about more than the 500 sq. ft. surrounding their house, however, may be comforted to know that Starbucks is a company that tries to do some good for the countries from which they buy their beans and the communities in which they have stores.
Why don't you tell me how many Britney Spears albums you own while you are at it. There's no accounting for taste. There is for stupidity, but I'll just give you afor those jumping to the defense of poor little Starbucks.
Leave Starbucks alone!
Why don't you tell me how many Britney Spears albums you own while you are at it. There's no accounting for taste. There is for stupidity, but I'll just give you a
Leave Starbucks alone![/CENTER]
And I'm not defending Starbucks. I could care less how they do as a company. All I know is those places are always packed. I guess there has to be a reason for it.
Also, I find it funny you said Starbucks is awfull and then proceeded to say you prefer your cofee from Dunking Donuts
Lots of people like things that suck.Sure, people like it. Doesn't mean it doesn't suck.All I know is those places are always packed. I guess there has to be a reason for it.I think Dunkin Donuts coffee doesn't suck. I think Starbucks coffee sucks. Your argument is something popular cannot possibly suck. I disagree and used Britney to illustrate just how stupid that argument is. Saying that I can't think something sucks because other people don't think it sucks is truly laughable.Also, I find it funny you said Starbucks is awfull and then proceeded to say you prefer your coffee from Dunking Donuts
So? Lot's of people think the Beatles and the Rolling Stones suck. Lot's of people are wrong.
It does not mean it doesn't suck. But it means something. If nobody went to Starbucks . . . well, there for sure their coffee would suck.Sure, people like it. Doesn't mean it doesn't suck.
The fact that you don't like Starbucks coffee certainly does not mean Starbucks' coffee sucks. Unless you are a great coffe connesieur which I was not aware of.I think Dunkin Donuts coffee doesn't suck. I think Starbucks coffee sucks.
My argument is that something that popular has less chances of sucking. It does not hold true always, but I can bet you I can find many more popular things that don't suck than popular things that suck.Your argument is something popular cannot possibly suck.
My argument is far from stupid. Your analogy, OTOH, is.I disagree and used Britney to illustrate just how stupid that argument is.
You can say and think whatever you want.Saying that I can't think something sucks because other people don't think it sucks is truly laughable.
You can say that a good old rib eye stake sucks because you are a vegie, or because you don't like beef. That does not prove rib eye stakes suck.
Why? Who is the arbiter of taste? Lots of people like Britney, and she sucks. According to you, she simply can't suck because she's very popular.
Not necessarily. That Luby's in Texas had good food, but no one went there after that guy killed all those people there.It does not mean it doesn't suck. But it means something. If nobody went to Starbucks . . . well, there for sure their coffee would suck.
Sure it does. As far as tatse is concerned, mine is the only opinion that matters.The fact that you don't like Starbucks coffee certainly does not mean Starbucks' coffee sucks.
Who determines what sucks? How many billions of things are you talking about. Have you researched this thoroughly? Do you have a chart?My argument is that something that popular has less chances of sucking. It does not hold true always, but I can bet you I can find many more popular things that don't suck than popular things that suck.
It's a great one. Things that suck can be enormously popular and successful.My argument is far from stupid. Your analogy, OTOH, is.
Then why are you telling me I can't?You can say and think whatever you want.
To me, it would suck.You can say that a good old rib eye stake sucks because you are a vegie, or because you don't like beef. That does not prove rib eye stakes suck.
Therefore, as far as individual taste is concerned, it would be very true.
It looks like you are the arbter of taste. You have decided Britany sucks, you have decided Starbucks sucks. Congrats.
According to you, she simply can't suck because she's very popular.
When did I say that?
Not necessarily. That Luby's in Texas had good food, but no one went there after that guy killed all those people there.
Another great analogy.
You seem to be inspired this morning.
Sure it does. As far as tatse is concerned, mine is the only opinion that matters.
That is one way to look at it. Another would be that your taste sucks.
Who determines what sucks?
Not sure what it is. But it is clear there are two levels of suckage. What sucks for you or me, and you are me are the judges of that, and what Sucks (capital S), which is the more difficult level of suckage to determine.
How many billions of things are you talking about. Have you researched this thoroughly? Do you have a chart?
No research, no chart.
It's a great one. Things that suck can be enormously popular and successful.
True. But they are the minority.
Then why are you telling me I can't?
Link?
To me, it would suck.
Therefore, as far as individual taste is concerned, it would be very true.
Swap the rib eye for a Ferrari, the Mona Lisa, Ankor Wat, the Aurora Borealis, the Spurs winning a 5th ring . . . the fact that you might think all those things suck does not mean they doi ndeed Suck.
I go to Starbucks at least 3 times a week, but their coffee is average at best. It is just so convenient, and that is why I go there.
See? You've got it. You can stop right there. It's individual taste.
As could yours.That is one way to look at it. Another would be that your taste sucks.
Again, what is your proof of this? You are professing to know the personal taste of every person in the world now.True. But they are the minority.
You want me to link this thread?Link?
Why not? the only thing that matters in a person's opinion is....Swap the rib eye for a Ferrari, the Mona Lisa, Ankor Wat, the Aurora Borealis, the Spurs winning a 5th ring . . . the fact that you might think all those things suck does not mean they doi ndeed Suck.
...,that person's opinion.
You really suck at understanding this.
" bucks" I like it
YOU ARE ALL A BUNCH OF SUCKERS, YOU AND THE 9 DUMBASSES IN THE LINE IN FRONT OF YOU.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
