It’s simple. He wasn’t fired for his opinions. He was fired because as an executive representative of his company he pushed his opinions on an innocent bystander in a threatening and inappropriate manner that reflected poorly on his employer.
Too bad he is such a moron; no tears shed-—ever.
posted on 08/03/2012 1:09:04 PM PDT
(The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
Its simple. He wasnt fired for his opinions. He was fired because as an executive representative of his company he pushed his opinions on an innocent bystander in a threatening and inappropriate manner that reflected poorly on his employer.
Well, more accurately, fired for posting it on YouTube in a manner that made it easy to find the originator and the company he worked for. Had he never posted that video, he'd still be berating others with his opinion AND enjoying his cushy job.
Least he's still got his opinion!
posted on 08/03/2012 1:16:01 PM PDT
(Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
As I see it, he was fired because his stunt, which he was stupid enough to film and post on YouTube, generated unwelcome publicity for his employer, possibly damaging that company's reputation in the community. Such bad publicity has the potential of reducing sales of the company's products, thereby decreasing profits and putting the business in danger of bankruptcy.
This is why employees and those looking for work are strongly advised to be careful what they post online. No employer wants an employee who could cause controversy which would hurt business.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson