The $800,000 Happy Meal & To Trans or not To Trans?

Ever wondered who should be held accountable when fast food goes wrong? Let us take you through some intriguing cases involving McDonald's that reflect on the importance of personal responsibility. We scrutinize an incident where a Florida family was awarded $800,000 after a McDonald's chicken nugget caused a little girl to suffer second-degree burns, and we revisit the famous case of a woman who received $2.7 million in punitive damages after being burned by McDonald's coffee back in 1992. We examine the facts and consider the repercussions of these incidents.

Shifting gears, we dive into the Biden administration's recent attempts to regulate air conditioning and hot water heaters in an effort to reduce carbon emissions. We discuss the Department of Energy's proposed regulations and how they might affect you as a consumer, as well as their potential impact on the environment. As we wrap up, we tackle the contentious issue of transgender athletes in women's sports, challenging the assertion that there's no biological advantage and reflecting on the opinions of notable athletes. Join us for a thought-provoking conversation that is sure to engage and challenge your thinking. Don't miss out!

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:02

What you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. You don't know what that is, mr Trash. I'd show you. But I'm too old, I'm too tired, I'm too fucking blind. If I were a man I was five years ago I'd take a flamethrower to this place.

Speaker 2: 0:46

Do you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth?

Speaker 1: 0:53

You want answers. I think I'm entitled to it. You want answers, I want the truth.

Speaker 2: 0:57

You can't handle the truth In this topsy-turvy world. We've said it once, we've said it twice, we've said it a million times the truth shall only set you free. This is Tim. This is Get Off my Law, and I'm Ryan Lees of the Gen Xer. Oh, I want to talk about personal responsibility today and I want to talk about how your actions can affect other people and sometimes your actions that, if you look at it from the outside in, you shouldn't be rewarded for certain actions.

Speaker 2: 1:26

And I'm going to get right off the bat here that a Florida family that was awarded $800,000 after a McDonald's chicken nugget burnt a four-year-old girl. Now, when you read that headline, you sit there and say, oh my god, in 2019, this girl suffered second degree burns because of a chicken nugget. There, you know, mcdonald's, you're at fault. Mcdonald's, you're at fault. You should pay this kid $15 million and that's what the family was seeking. This is coming out of Fort Lauderdale, florida, but if you dive in a little deeper and you look at who is technically probably more responsible for the actions of this child being burned, it's the mother, but of course, the mother doesn't want to take personal responsibility. The mother's looking for a payday. She needs a check for McDonald's for burning her child. But when you listen to the story, when you listen to all the details of what happened to this poor girl and how she got burned by this nugget and she was four years old at the time evidently what happened? This mom decided to take her kids through the drive-thru and she decided to get her some nuggets and whatever you know. And they went through the drive-thru and she gave her children, who were sitting in the back seat alone, their food, their happy meals. And then she said that she heard her daughter scream in pain and promptly pulled over to the parking lot and found the nugget lodged between her thigh and the seat belt. Now, evidently it was there for anywhere between three to four minutes. So my first question, right off the bat, is, as a mother, why would you give a happy meal in regards to chicken nuggets to a four-year-old who is sitting in the back seat? By themselves, besides hot dogs, chicken nuggets are probably and I know they are they could be a huge choking hazard. So, basically, you are giving hot food and a potential choking hazard to your child in the back seat of your car, who happens to be four years old, and you want $15 million out of McDonald's.

Speaker 2: 3:44

Now the defense for McDonald's argued that the child's wound, or the child's burned, healed after three weeks and suffered no further discomfort. Okay, but they contain the mother's. The girl's mother is bothered by the scar we're bothered by. We are bothered by the scar. Okay, maybe you shouldn't reach in the back of the seat. Maybe you shouldn't get your four-year-old, four-years-old hot food handed to them in the back of the seat of the car unaccompanied and have them eat it alone at four years old, when they're chicken nuggets. Now the little girl as it definitely is has said she's not bothered by the scar. Her mother is.

Speaker 2: 4:30

Now McDonald's is saying that they followed all the food safety rules which require the nuggets to be hot enough I love this to avoid salmonella poisoning. Well, no duh, if you don't cook the food, you can potentially get salmonella. And then they basically said that once they hand the food over, the restaurant has no longer control of the food, which makes sense to me. Now both sides during the trial had agreed that the nuggets caused a burn, but dispute the temperature. Now it only took two hours for the jury to come back and say we're not giving you the 15 million, we're giving you 900,000 because you suffered third degree burns and spent more. I mean you said second degree burns Because the fact that McDonald's didn't want to give you food that was uncooked and potentially give you salmonella poisoning. Now I love if you watch the video of the child in court, who's now eight. She acts like she's acting like you're in court. You're in a court of law. Your mother should teach you don't hang over this, don't roll over this, don't do this, don't hang on the rail. You're acting like a four year old. But the mother again is taking no personal responsibility for handing the hot food to a child who was four years old and unaccompanied in the backseat of the car. And then they said that it could take anywhere between two to four minutes of direct contact pressing into the child's skin for these burns to be caused. Now this goes all the way back to back in tooth. I forgot when it was. It was back in. It was back in 1992, one of the. She was in New Mexico. She was awarded two points. This woman was rewarded $2.7 million in punitive damages after she was burned by McDonald's coffee in 1992.

Speaker 2: 6:27

I always think of the movie Clerks. Old Kevin Smith movies, his very, his first movie, his first hit also. And they talk about dumb things that customers say. And there's this guy that comes into the convenience store, pours a coffee and looks at him and says I'm supposed to drink this coffee. Hot Coffee is hot, water is wet, the sky is blue and she got $2.7 million because of the fact that she took the coffee, put the cup between her legs this is the woman in 1992 and burned herself because the lid came off or she was drinking the coffee with the lid off.

Speaker 2: 7:02

Again, it's personal responsibility. Why should we be repersonal responsible for your actions of stupidity? Can someone explain that to me? I laugh because there's this whole you know, everyone knows, it's the whole transgender thing and transgender men in sport are women in sports. And how, now that you have some of these very popular professional athletes and athletes who, female athletes, have, come out and say you know, we're not bothered by trans women in sports, we're not bothered by it? Now I laugh because a lot of these people are women that are retiring from their sport, so they don't have to deal with you know, they won't have to deal with this.

Speaker 2: 7:44

And what's her name? Megan Rapinoe. Rapinoe, whatever, it is the soccer player that always has the wacky hair. Now she has evidently come out and said that you know, it doesn't bother me, there's no big issue. You know we can do this and she called it. You know she's like. It's just.

Speaker 2: 8:04

She said last week in Time Magazine that women's sports are being weaponized by those targeting trans women competing with biologic women. She responded it's total bullshit, adding show me all the trans people who are nefariously taking advantage of the trans sports. It's just not happening. Well, you know what. You can look at the swimmer. You know you can look at her. You can look at some other people that were. You know, some men who went over to women's sports, men that would finish like 376 out of 375, all of a sudden are breaking women's records. But you know, and she goes, basically goes on to talk about the fact that you know there's real, it's really not an issue because of the fact that you know it's not. You know we could still be competitive because there's really no biological advantage.

Speaker 2: 8:50

Now, the thing you think back. I was thinking about this. I remember back in 2017, I think it was 2017. Yeah, 2017, the US women's soccer team Got beat five to two by a team of a team made up of 15 year old boys. So you're said they got defeated by a group of adolescent males, five to two. But taking a look at that, there there is no, there is no biological advantage for a trans woman. Let's just say, at a man playing a women's sports, you know to compete and into women's sports, then how the hell did you get beat by a bunch of 15 year olds you want to talk about? I mean, you want to talk about they, they, these high school boys beat the best women Soccer team allegedly in the world. But then you're gonna sit there and said there's no advantage for men to come in and play women's sports. It's great that you're retiring and you don't need to worry about the fact that this is gonna happen to you because you're out. You can say whatever the hell you want, because it is, it is the, it is the vogue, it is the in thing to say that you know it doesn't bother me of a, of a trans man or a female wants to compete, because you're not in sport. You're not gonna be in the sport anymore. I Think it was also back in um, I Forget.

Speaker 2: 10:16

Who did Serena Williams play? I have to, I have to think about this Serena Williams. I remember, years ago, she played a man, she, she played, she played against a man and I think he was like in, I think he was, I think he was like in this 50s, I don't remember. I'm trying to think and and basically she had come out a couple of years back and Said that she doesn't. You know, they asked her if she wants to come in and, you know, compete against the man. This was, this was like probably back in 2012-13. I'm not even exactly sure and she wanted to. You know she said she. You know she says no, I don't want to, I don't want to compete against men that you know they hit harder, they serve harder.

Speaker 2: 10:57

You know, it's just one of those things that we don't want to do, because you go back to the whole Billy Jean King and Bobby right that rigs thing and back in the 1970s where they had the match and Billy Jean King who's tennis player, of course, was and Was, it is a lesbian, was, not a known lesbian back then, you know, was beaten. I mean, she beat Bobby Riggs, who was in his late 50s. So I think there was like a 44 year difference in their age. I forget, but there. Like I said, there was this guy. Yes, there was a. It was a 50 year old gentleman who beat. He beat Serena and Venus and, like I said, I can't remember Serena or Venus she came out and said listen, I don't want to play against you know, this was like I said. Like maybe eight, ten years, she says I don't want to play against men. If I played against men I'm gonna lose. They hit harder, they serve harder. So why don't we now have a trans Male or a trans woman or whatever the hell you want to call it, come in and play against women's tennis now? No, they don't want to do that. Now Serena is probably like, yeah, that's okay, because she's at the tail end of her career. I Always laugh because you see things in the news and you're wonder to yourself how could someone think of themselves so important?

Speaker 2: 12:08

And you think about what their job Actually is and what the job actually does, and they want this Extraordinary, a extraordinary amount of money. Now, I don't begrudge anyone for getting a large amount of money, but you had Pat say Jack, retire from Wheel of Fortune. He was 76, he is 76 years old and I guess Ryan Seacrest is taken over. So now Vanna White, the letter Turner. The show I guess in some regards cannot go on without Vanna turning the numbers. Is Is Asking for the same amount or the same salary that Pat say Jack had before he left.

Speaker 2: 12:47

Now Pat say Jack is the, is the hope, was the host of the show. He is he. You know he has the interchange, he has the exchange with the guests. You know he does every, you know he does everything. He helps him spend the wheel. He goes through the prizes.

Speaker 2: 13:01

Vanna turns the letters. So Vanna wants to be paid. I Like she's Pat Sajak. That's a little crazy. You, for whatever since 1982, I think it is have been turning the letters on this show. Now Sajak evidently made like $400,000 a episode. I think it's something crazy like that. And I believe Vanna White makes like a hundred grand episode.

Speaker 2: 13:28

Now this woman's making over $100,000 an episode to turn numbers, to turn letters. That's your job. To wear a dress, walk back and forward and turn the letter. You could probably I mean I think I could probably get anyone to do that. You know the light and it's not like she has to look at it and figure out where the letter is, because the light beings the light, I mean, the letter lights up. You're like, oh my God, there's the letter, I'll just walk over there and turn it. I walk to the left, I turn to the letter, I stand to the right. I wait. I go from the right, I go to the left, I turn to the letter, I stand to the left. Yeah, to me that's worth a hundred grand. Again, it's what is your worth? What is your worth at this point in time? Your worth is, of course, what someone will pay for it. But you also have to understand the importance of this world and where you fit in this world. And turning the letter is not worth $400,000 an episode.

Speaker 2: 14:28

People don't turn in if they replace Vanna White with, let's say, I don't know another actress or someone. I don't think the world is gonna shut down. I don't think too many people are gonna be like, oh no, vanna White's gone. What are we gonna do? Ow, sorry, hit the mic Now.

Speaker 2: 14:48

The Biden administration. We talked about this. They're really trying to control everything that we have in our lives. And once again now their administration is cracking down on another appliance. Before we went after air conditioning, we're going after hot water heaters. We are now going down to crack down.

Speaker 2: 15:08

The Department of Energy has said is now proposing excuse me, also guest-oves an accelerated deployment of electric heat pumps, water heaters, to save Americans billions of dollars and vastly reduce the carbon emissions If finalized. Proposed standards would force less efficient and less energy efficient but cheaper water heaters off the market. You know, because everyone has millions of dollars, you know everyone's a millionaire Now they have been cracking down on anything that has been powered by natural gas. They are powered by propane because the fact that they are going to reduce carbon emissions, even though we have drastically reduced carbon emissions in this country. But you have countries such as India and China, which are the largest producers of these toxins, of these carbon emissions, and they're not doing anything. China is building a new coal plant every 14 days While we are putting standards on coal plants that are not sustainable or attainable. That's because it's all part of the Bidenomics. It's all part of the Bidenomics. We're going to make everything better by making everything worse for everybody. Now the Department of Energy projected the regulations, which are slated to go in effect in 2029, would save the Americans about 1.9 billion while curving carbon emissions by 501 million metric tons over the next three decades. So that's roughly the same carbon footprint as 63 million homes, or half of all the homes worldwide. Okay, that sounds good. Now, under the rule of the federal government, will require higher efficiency for heaters using heat pumps technology or, in the case of gas-fired water heaters, to achieve efficiency to gain through condensing technology.

Speaker 2: 16:55

Of course, I love it because these guys are scientists too. Have you ever seen the energy secretary? She doesn't look like she's a scientist. She's a scientist. Now. We don't know anything scientific, just like Twitter's lawyer. I love Twitter.

Speaker 2: 17:08

I love the woman that was the lawyer for Twitter during the COVID and she would be in charge of determining whether a tweet in reference to COVID was false information. And there'd be all these doctors from like John Hopkins and all these other places that would tweet these things and they would take it down because it was false information. And during the Senate hearing, they asked you, do you have a medical degree? And she's like, well, no, and she goes. Well, they're like how are you censoring some of these people that are well-known in their field in reference to eminology and everything else, and you're censoring it by saying no, what? No, no, no, no, no, no, no, this is false information.

Speaker 2: 17:46

So we're gonna have these new standards. I love these new standards because it's gonna be more expensive for people that get a hot water heater now and it's gonna rise. It's gonna cost about an additional 13% of energy consumption on the electric grid. Now, of course, the DOE has also unveiled new standards of a variety of appliances, including gas stoves, clothes washers, refrigerators and air conditions. It's great and I love it because the age I mean again these people are actually they're always about the middle class. We're about the middle class, we're full of the middle class, but the only problem is the only problem is people you're hurting is the middle class. These are the only people that you are hurting and you could say it's gonna save Americans and reduce greenhouse emissions, but the problem is it's gonna cost you more electricity, which is at its peak. You're gonna tax the energy grid, the electrical grid that already can't handle some areas what we're having right now and you're going to limit any type of choice in reference to the American people to go out and purchase a hot water heater or an air conditioner or something such as that. So you're limiting choices, but that's all right, we don't care and I love it because this all.

Speaker 2: 19:08

Also I laugh because the LA Times had an article that basically said that floating occasional blackouts are for the greater good Because of the fact that you know they're going through the heat wave, they're going through the stretch. And this guy basically came out. Sam Roth questions keep me in the lights on 24 hours a day, 365 days a year are solving the climate crisis. So we should all just sit in the dark. And I always love it because they always talk about climate change and you had scientists that have come out and said the climate change is every year, so it's not really a term you should be using because every year the climate does change. So this guy is arguing is urged the power plants to basically just have rolling blackouts so we could have for the greater good and we could sit there and it's an okay thing because you could just deal with it.

Speaker 2: 20:05

And California for years has been facing potential blackouts. California for all. There, we need to. We're gonna be energy independent. We're gonna go out and we know what we're gonna do. We're gonna do renewable energy, but we're gonna take like 40% of our energy and we're gonna bring it in from outside the state. It makes your head hurt. You talk about one thing and then you do another thing. So it's okay if we have rolling blackouts, because we need to deal with it, because we need to save the environment from climate change, which happens every year. We got a lot of fun shows coming up this week, so make sure you stay tuned. We're gonna talk about Joe Biden in China. We're gonna talk more about the zero emission of policies. We're just gonna talk about everything in general, because you know what the truth, joe, that we set you free. This is Tim. This is Get Up my Lawn the Mad Remlings of a Gen Xer and I'm out.

Speaker 1: 21:00

All right, we'll see you next week. Ny are watching Jesse.