Terry Savage Tries To Justify Her Vile Attack Of Young Girls Giving Away Free Lemonade

[media id=17469] Conservative pundit Terry Savage went on MSNBC to try and justify her idiotic column called There is no 'free' in which she accost

up

Conservative pundit Terry Savage went on MSNBC to try and justify her idiotic column called There is no 'free' in which she accosted a few young girls because they dared to show compassion and give away lemonade instead of selling it for profit on a fourth of July day. Tamrin Hall of MSNBC gives her a soft ball platform to perform on. Even with the hands off treatment, Terry comes off like so many conservative pundits do. She makes about as much sense as Rand Paul. You just scratch your head and say, huh? Did I actually see and hear what I just saw?

Hall: So many people people are talking about this...OK, you drove up on these kids with your brother, you get out and the lemonade is free. What's the big deal that it was free?

Savage: I love the furor this is causing as if there was some incompatibility between being an entrepreneur and being generous. These little girls just never had a lesson on what a lemonade stand is supposed to be...

Savage has no idea who these kids are, what these children have been learning from their families and what motivated them in their being so generous in the first place. I guess it's a crime that they wanted to be engage in the act of caring and giving and not selfishness on a national holiday and for Terry, it was up to her to set them all straight about how things are done. I mean, what a conceited and arrogant conservative fool. What Terry is actually doing is trying to indoctrinate these kids into being conservatives, who bow down to the almighty free market GOD, so they can become as heartless as she is.

I'm glad my post about Terry's column caused such an outrage. Here's what the conservative buffoon wrote in her column:

The three young girls -- under the watchful eye of a nanny, sitting on the grass with them -- explained that they had regular lemonade, raspberry lemonade, and small chocolate candy bars. Then my brother asked how much each item cost.

"Oh, no," they replied in unison, "they're all free!" I sat in the back seat in shock. Free? My brother questioned them again: "But you have to charge something? What should I pay for a lemonade? I'm really thirsty!"

His fiancee smiled and commented, "Isn't that cute. They have the spirit of giving." That really set me off, as my regular readers can imagine. "No!" I exclaimed from the back seat. "That's not the spirit of giving. You can only really give when you give something you own. They're giving away their parents' things -- the lemonade, cups, candy. It's not theirs to give."

I pushed the button to roll down the window and stuck my head out to set them straight.

"You must charge something for the lemonade," I explained. "That's the whole point of a lemonade stand. You figure out your costs -- how much the lemonade costs, and the cups -- and then you charge a little more than what it costs you, so you can make money. Then you can buy more stuff, and make more lemonade, and sell it and make more money." I was confident I had explained it clearly. Until my brother, breaking the tension, ordered a raspberry lemonade. As they handed it to him, he again asked: "So how much is it?"

And the girls once again replied: "It's free!" And the nanny looked on contentedly. No wonder America is getting it all wrong when it comes to government, and taxes, and policy. We all act as if the "lemonade" or benefits we're "giving away" is free.

Her behavior to these young girls was truly outrageous.
(h/t Heather)

About John Amato

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.