In an interview with Sunday's New York Times, Bruce Springsteen says he shouldn't have made a deal with Wal-Mart. This month, the store started exclusively selling a Springsteen greatest hits CD.
Some fans were critical because Springsteen has been a longtime supporter of worker's rights, and Wal-Mart has faced criticism for its labor practices.
Springsteen told the Times that his team didn't vet the issue as closely as he should have, and that he "dropped the ball on it."
Yeah the working man is great and all, but all that filthy WalMart lucre is really just hard too resist.
I have had it in for Springsteen since I paid $200 for two tickets for a concert only to be subjected to a non stop rant about how GWB is the anti-Christ, a chimp and worse than Hitler.
2 comments:
Trillian (the other half) figures the non-union house Walmart saves her about $1200 a year. (She used to be very anti-Walmart!)
Meanwhile GM, the quintessential union shop, not only can't turn a profit but they want me to help subsidize their union workers (who make several times what I make per hour) via a government bailout. And unions also make the public sector cost way more than it should causing my taxes to be way higher than they should be.
Springsteen's a tool. If he really did take the time to vet the issue as closely as he should, he would praise Walmart and condemn the unions. Unions are no friend of mine. Walmart is.
By the way, I was underwhelmed with his performance last night. He looked like he was out of breath halfway through the first song.
Post a Comment