He didn't say anything about liberals, conservatives or Chick-fil-a's noxious gay marriage positions. Who's biased?

The article mentions chick-fil-a by name 3 times in the text and at the bottom, it's one of 3 terms that you can sign up for email alerts about. This is right after they had a run of bad publicity (yes, caused by politics, but that's irrelevant). Seems to fit in the PR-created article category to me.

Actually he did refer to how Chick-fil-a "stepped in deep shit".

I took that as a statement of fact (akin to "Chick-fil-a faced a public relations disaster ...") rather than a value judgement.

It's a fact? I heard Chick-fil-a stores had record sales after your so-called "deep shit PR disaster."

Agreed, but I think it's indicative of a liberal bias, or at least living in a liberal bubble, to place so much weight on something that most people have long forgotten about (especially the kind of person who eats there).

And the post I was responding to claimed that these things weren't even mentioned by the top poster, which they clearly were.

You mention "chick fil-a PR", and that's going to be the first thing that comes to mind. Total self-inflicted wound on their part, whatever your personal politics.

I specifically address this point when I say that it's only a minority of people who would even remember that controversy. Would you care to address this line of argument?

I just did. You remembered it, and with passion. You knew exactly what the parenthetical (they stepped in it) was talking about. So did everyone else on the thread.

You disprove your own argument.

There may be hundreds of stories about various companies, but they aren't like this one. It seemed to be about generosity, and only tangentially about Chick-Fil-A, but I couldn't help (1) imagining myself being generous in my local Chick-Fil-A drive-through and (2) imagining myself feeling the warmth of someone else's generosity at my local Chick-Fil-A drive-through (which I've never experienced in real life).