Posted on 10/09/2012 2:00:41 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
The crucial question must be asked of President Obama and Mitt Romney during the live telecast of next week's town hall-style debate at Hofstra University.
Is “sausage or pepperoni” the new “boxers or briefs”?
Pizza Hut is offering free pies for life to the brave voter who asks the White House contenders which of the two favorite toppings they prefer during the next presidential debate.
"We recognize there are a lot of serious issues to be debated, but we also know a lot less serious — but no less important — ones are being discussed every night inside houses across the country," Pizza Hut executive Kurt Kane said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Late 70s and early 80s Pizza Hut was some of the best.
This is big business, a massive corporation, and they are seeding the public hoping that someone is unstable enough to give them this cheap shot, which translates to millions of dollars of advertising to them.
This is an assault on the dignity of the presidential election and of the American nation, done as merely a business decision, it is extremely tacky and exploitative, a profit over anything, business decision.
Since Sausage and Pepperoni are both Sausagae (Eyetalian pronounciation) The answer is ......
MY Pizza is the best pizza I have ever had!
Thanks to 0bama you can't have both.
Obama will have his pizza sprinkled with mush chooms, magic oregano and pixie dust.
I tried it this week myself. I was so impressed that I wrote a letter to them commending the product. I don't order pizza frequently, but this was by far the best pizza that I have had in many years.
The larger question on everyone’s mind: Why can’t the rubes use EBT at Pizza Hut? We could call them ObamaPies.
But...But...I don’t LIKE Pizza Hut pizzas!
(and isn’t pepperoni a sausage?}
That right there is the entire point. This is business in action. As far the dignity of the presidential election...Since that clown Obama is running, there is no dignity anyway.
It may be a somewhat tacky, but like I said, this is business. And if some enterprising citizen wishes to take them up on the offer, so much the better.
And why is everybody ragging on pizza hut's pizza? Its good enough for my simple palate. I like pepperoni, but I'll take sausage too.
It is irresponsible, exploitative business.
They are sending out signals hoping for someone unstable enough to disrupt the nations presidential debate on national television to score profits.
This is an anti-American stunt, for corporate profits.
As a supposed conservative, you know that money isn’t everything, and that patriotism and America matters more, you may even be able to realize that if this had happened in the first debate, it may have diluted the massive political effect of the debate on the public and in changing the polls.
Welcome to freerepublic.
Because this type of debate (at this level) is practically geared towards inane questions.
I’ll boycott a company that tries to disrupt my nation’s presidential debate for a cheap advertising stunt, you can keep praising gold without conscience, as much as you want.
Either way, it appears we are at an impasse. I respect your opinion nonetheless.
Why do we have to choose? You can get both at Pizza Hut right now! (This post brought to you by the Piazza Hut corporation of America)
I think debates themselves are undeniably tacit and the campaign process as a whole deserving of mockery. If you wanna argue the stakes are serious, well, then why are we deciding on the basis of a few hours of dueling soundbites? We can’t be very serious about it. So what’s a little frivolity on top of the unseriousness?
tacit = tacky
For me the spelling challenge was to use the word tacky, instead of cheesy.
I consider this management decision without conscience, I would be taking a closer look at the kind of manager that considered this a respectable, responsible, corporate action.
“Cold blooded”? I don’t get it. They’re not encouraging people to assassinate Obama/Romney and shout “Semper Pizza Hut!”
No, you’re changing your argument. It was about pulling a solemn occasion into the mud if filthy lucre. It was not a coldblooded but a “tacky” move. Well, debates are tacky on their own. I ‘m not saying the audience should start mooning the candidates or every question should be a put-on, but come on. What’s a little frivolity on top of frivolity in a world where we once asked a president about his underwear?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.