A mother is suing McDonald’s for making her kids want to eat there — and apparently she’s a horrible mother and they’re the boss or something. If she wins, I assume the kids will force her to spend all the money on toys. And when the kids are older, they’ll probably keep their mother’s corpse in the attic to keep collecting her social security. That’s what happens to bad mothers: corpse in the attic.
Anyway, this once again demonstrates the need for some remedial freedom as a disturbing number of people don’t seem to get the concept at all. Everyone in the country should have to attend, and if you fail you get fired out of a cannon so that you land in another country (or the ocean). I get to fire Bloomberg.
Hmmmm, I guess I better work up that lawsuit against the local liquor store…
“I get to fire Bloomberg.”
Fight you for it.
What are the chances her younguns are gonna turn out to street people junkies before they turn twenty? Most Obamavoters are street people junkies with the same lack of proper child rearing this mother provides so it’s a safe bet.
This woman is opening up a whole new chaprter in law. If she’s successful, maybe I can sue Tropicana for making me love their orange juice, or maybe I can sue the makers of Kit Kat chocolatte bars for making me love them. Especially the dark chocolatte ones. Mmmmm, baby.
Any woman who takes her children to McDonalds once a month is guilty of child abuse. She had better learn to cook at home. Sounds like a lazy liberal to me.
All I can do is shake my head and wonder about silly commiefornistanis. What no one has really touched on is, how greedy is this lawyer who would take this case instead of slapping this woman and having her committed? How ignorantly stupid is this court that would not have this woman arrested for filing such a junk suit? And where is child protective services of commiefornistan? This woman is obviously mentally unstable and unfit to be a parent.
Of course if she would have taken better care of her man she wouldn’t have had to worry her little head about it.
Dark chocolate, Infidel? I think you mean tastes-like-grapefruit chocolate.
Yuck!
This reminds me of the suit against Budweiser by a guy who was bummed out when he didn’t get hot chicks in bikinis to swoon over him like in the commercials. The judge wisely ruled that no amount of beer was sufficient to offset his incredibly high douche bag quotient and dismissed the case.
I’ve eaten Big Mac’s exactly twice in the last 20 years. Both times I puked within an hour. Same thing used to happen with Kentucky Fried Rat.
But I sure cherish my right to eat crap and puke afterwards.
Um…does this woman know that you can buy the toys WITHOUT buying the meal? Problem solved.
Go without the kids,buy the toys, go home and stfu you busybody jackhole.
Jimmy, I guess ratburgers at White Castle cause projectile vomiting, then? They changed the name to Sliders just to overcome the fact that in Jersey they are universally known as Ratburgers or just “Rats”.
Tort reform, please. Loser pays.
As for advertising to children, the first word I ever learned was the word “free.” I actually think I learned it before I learned my ABC’s. The reason for this was that my mum would cut me loose in the cereal isle, and I got to pick what I wanted. Of course, I picked whatever had the coolest free-in-the-box toy. Quisp had good toys. Some of the toys had rubber bands that launched tiny choking hazards (yay 1960’s). I survived the food and toys.
Here’s the thing. Eliminating the advertising and cool toys would not have changed my choice in breakfast fare. Had I been denied the toys and Trix the Silly Rabbit commercials, I doubt I would have turned to eating Grape Nuts.
I get to fire Bloomberg.
Okay. I’ve got Michelle.
The lawsuit alleges that “McDonald’s exploits very young California children and harms their health by advertising unhealthy Happy Meals with toys directly to them” and that “children 8 years old and younger do not have the cognitive skills and the developmental maturity to understand the persuasive intent of marketing and advertising.”…//
Hmm, two things children 8 and younger don’t have enough of, cognitive skills to understand advertising, and the wherewithal to take advantage of the great deals.
Read a little more, this mom isn’t unable to stop her kids from eating McD’s, she’s a child nutrition advocate that is using her kids to create a lawsuit to push her agenda.
What the people won’t vote for, judges will cram down their throats.
We may need those railguns pretty soon to start chunking these people into the ocean.
I’m going to sue the soap companies. Their advertising has caused me to shower on a daily basis while using their products. I have found that eventually, as you shower, the soap slowly but surly is consumed…until there is nothing left and you’re forced to purchase more soap! You could spend thousands in this futile pursuit of cleanliness. Banning soap in San Francisco is a good first step but it hardly goes far enough. Does anyone out their know a good lawyer.
zzyxx –
Take a walk down Market Street from, say, Fifth Street to Ninth Street, preferably the south side of Market Street. You may decide that San Francisco has already banned soap and showers.
Does she have problems saying ‘no’ to adults, too? This could be a pretty easy fix: ‘Ma’am, you need to knock your head against the wall until some common sense gets rattled into gear.’ If she can’t say no, we could save everyone some time and money (and toys).
Anyway, we’re having a late dinner here tonight. I might just give ol’ Michelle a call and see what she approves of for dinner.
Ofcourse they advertise to kids, parents in commiefornia don’t have the backbone to stand up to a 5 yr old. It’s the same here in NY, I used to work at Toys r Us and every day you’d see parents bring their kids in and the kids would start crying and throwing a fit over some stupid toy. Nine times out of ten the parents would give in and buy the little brat whatever they want.
Why is she not having this case dismissed? Can you say fribulous?
This would be an easy case for the McDonald’s attorney to win. I’m sure there’s plenty of research out there that shows that NO ONE actually WANTS to eat at McDonald’s.
Some people should just NOT breed. If you can’t say no to a five year old it’s time to put you back in a diaper, shove a binkie in your mouth and send you for a very long nap. Some times I think that of all the things we do in life, procreations should be dependent on a license. Driving, hunting, marriage and breeding. It’s a time whose idea has come.
“Remedial Freedom” should come with a bat to the back of the head for a warm-up!
I have found that once you get the kid’s credit card away from them and close their checking accounts, you can control what they spend money on.
Frank, sorry, but I am going to have to sue you for writing
interesting and funny posts that compel me to
read this blog and comment on it when I should be
sleeping.
If I can’t get a cash settlement, the lawsuit will proceed,
forcing you to remove
the humor,
common sense,
and good cheer that draw people here.
It’ll be like MSNBC. Yeesch.
Burmashave:
Try putting brown sugar and chocolate milk on Grape Nuts – they are actually quite tasty then.
Ok frank, just wait until YOU have to say no to buttercup! Believe me, it ain’t easy.
OTOH, this mother is a moran.
She could take her kids camping with the Palins in Alaska… but then they’d be whining for moose burgers.