What's new

Woman Sues CVS over Racial Slur

Now you are starting to get it.

I've known about it all along. I wish you you could see it, instead thinking you were talking about me. I haven't said a word about Cyrone Torbin's motives, character, or intent.
 
Now, assuming that is true, all you have to do is connect that to some reason that Cyrone Torbin's comment on putting "White Bread Cracker" on a receipt was in any comparable, if you want to pretend you were making a relevant argument.

Of course, if you're just interested in pointless ad hominems, your work is done. If you were just trying to distract from Cyrone Torbin's callousness by trying to make me focus on me, you failed. Frankly, I don't really care either way what you think of me on that score. I don't need a massive amount of information or depth to recognize marginalization. You don't even pretend the comment was anything else.

I am fully aware that you do not need to know what you are talking about to peddle your view of how horrible we all are. You sit here and talk about relevancy when you jump to conclusions about things you do not have a damn clue about. You come in here with your word games looking for fault and throwing out charges of racism, sexism and any other catch words you wish to use that day. I do not buy it and I will continue to call you on it. You are spinning ******** and I will not buy it. No matter how much you want to shine it and call it anything other than what it is, crap.
 
I love how you say you're not marginalizing it, and follow that with an entire paragraph where you marginalize and dismiss the woman's experiences, despite being completely ignorant of them.

Not talking about experiences here man, talking about one experience. The one she is suing the company over. CVS is not responsible for the history of racism. They are responsible for her being called "Ching-Chong" on a receipt. They should have to pay, but it should not be a million dollars.

By saying I'm marginalizing it by putting an economic value on it, then she has also marginalized it (probably her lawyer). She just got it completely wrong. I'm sure CVS and Ms.Lee will settle at some price that is much more reasonable though. That is usually how these things work out, ask for a ridiculous number, then settle for something more realistic.
 
I've known about it all along. I wish you you could see it, instead thinking you were talking about me. I haven't said a word about Cyrone Torbin's motives, character, or intent.

And yet you assume you know enough about him and this woman to judge their average lifes.
 
Do you really think this lawsuit won't just end up getting settled?

Do you think she really has a case? If she has no case, why would CVS settle?

I don't know if CVS will settle or not. I'm sure that if this is really an isolated incident for CVS, they won't need to settle.
 
And yet you assume you know enough about him and this woman to judge their average lifes.

When you find evidence that I judged anything more than his words of marginalization, come back with this. Until then, I see no reason to offer your comment any weight.
 
Do you think she really has a case? If she has no case, why would CVS settle?

I don't know if CVS will settle or not. I'm sure that if this is really an isolated incident for CVS, they won't need to settle.

As for why they might settle, perhaps having this story just go away and not tarnish their brand would be enough reason for some sort of settlement.
 
Back
Top