So let’s see…
We have shit flinging Trumpanzees boycotting Starbucks, because the company has the unmitigated gall to announce they’re hiring 10,000 refugees. Worldwide. Over the next five years. Never mind Starbucks also hires veterans and as of 2015 gives not only them, but their families college benefits. Outrage first, boys and girls!
We have screeching progtards boycotting Uber, because they’re not boycotting Trump… or something.
Then there were the Democrats boycotting a vote on two Trump cabinet picks. Well, guess what happens when you don’t show up for work? The work goes on without you, but whatever.
And the whining lefties who are encouraging boycotts of companies that dare sell Ivanka Trump’s products – companies such as Nordstrom (which has coincidentally or not stopped carrying her line), Macy’s, Bloomingdale’s, TJ Maxx, and others. Never mind that Ivanka Trump has been nothing but gracious and generous toward the very people her father is accused of hating. Some of the charities she supports are Habitat for Humanity, AIDS Life, and the Children’s Aid Society. And in 2010, Ivanka designed and sold a bracelet specifically to benefit the United Nations Foundation’s Girl Up campaign, which “aims to raise money and awareness to educate and propel adolescent girls in need to the next generation of leadership.” And let’s not forget that these department stores also employ immigrants, but hey… it’s the outrage that matters, right?
I also read yesterday that people were boycotting Audi, because of some spot they did virtue signaling equal pay for women, while showing fat, male rednecks losing a go-kart race to a pretty, obviously rich and privileged girl. I’m not even sure what I should be outraged about with that one. But that’s not the reason I’m not buying an Audi.
Today’s outrageary comes from the Trumpanzees again. Apparently the hashtag #boycottbudweiser is trending on Twitter, which basically means there is a sufficient number of retards using that hashtag to virtue signal their displeasure with Budweiser’s Super Bowl ad.
The ad shows a fresh off the boat Busch encountering hostile anti-immigrant sentiment upon his arrival in America – a sentiment that some say parallels current attitudes toward Muslim refugees.
It couldn’t possibly parallel a respect for the entrepreneurial spirit in the face of adversity of people who come here with nothing and build empires, right? It couldn’t be a tribute to legal immigrants, right, since that’s exactly what Busch was?
Look boycott Budweiser, because it’s a lousy beer. As the old joke goes, it’s much like having sex in a canoe – fucking close to water.
I wouldn’t spend my money on something that tastes like rancid carbonated water.
But it seems like the outrageary is morphing into something more insidious – efforts to destroy the livelihoods of millions of workers, innovators, and yes, many of them include immigrants and refugees, but also U.S. military veterans, common street kids trying to eke out a living, and middle managers – all because we don’t like a commercial, or we don’t like the type of people these companies hire, or we don’t like the political or social points of view of their leadership.
If you don’t toe the line, we will destroy you!
I completely understand voting with your wallet. If you don’t like the product, you shouldn’t spend money on it. If you don’t like the store, you shouldn’t shop there. If you don’t like the music/play/movie, you shouldn’t buy that ticket.
But I find the effort to destroy the livelihoods of thousands of people because you disagree with the policies or political views of these companies’ leadership to be more distasteful than Budweiser beer.
Some friends shared yesterday’s blog entry about immigration. Of course, there was screeching outrageary on both sides. Here’s how the day went.
Friend was debating leftard on some immigration thread. Cites my blog – since I’m an immigrant and all , and I work in national security, so I might know a little about it.
Leftard: that site is BS!
Friend: did you read the article?
Cretin automatically assumed that since my friend did not agree with her refugee stance and cited my blog to support her contention, that the site was bullshit.
Another friend shared my blog on her page. The link previews the first couple of sentences.
As many of you know, I’m an immigrant. My parents and I came here as refugees from the Soviet Union in 1980, so this weekend’s Executive Order “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States” hits close to home.
Trumpanzee: Legally, I assume. Again, I’m all for LEGAL immigration. But why should we continue to look the other way at ILLEGAL immigration?
Me: You obviously haven’t read the piece. It has nothing to do with illegal immigration.
Because my immigration status has anything to do with whether or not the piece has merit, right?
And even later today.
Follower shares blog entry on Twitter.
Retard replies with the following:
— Dave (@Davesbits) January 30, 2017
Another one who obviously hasn’t read the blog, but decided that since I’m an immigrant, I must be a proponent of a flood of radical Islamist illegals coming into our country!
People are idiots.
So as I was trying to figure out what to write about today, I came across this little tidbit from Starbucks – an announcement that Starbucks would hire 10,000 refugees.
There was immediate outrage from my conservative friends that ranged from scoffing and ridicule to promises never to buy Starbucks again. Why?
They obviously didn’t read the release.
Hiring Refugees: We have a long history of hiring young people looking for opportunities and a pathway to a new life around the world. This is why we are doubling down on this commitment by working with our equity market employees as well as joint venture and licensed market partners in a concerted effort to welcome and seek opportunities for those fleeing war, violence, persecution and discrimination. There are more than 65 million citizens of the world recognized as refugees by the United Nations, and we are developing plans to hire 10,000 of them over five years in the 75 countries around the world where Starbucks does business. And we will start this effort here in the U.S. by making the initial focus of our hiring efforts on those individuals who have served with U.S. troops as interpreters and support personnel in the various countries where our military has asked for such support.
They’re not defying the law. They’re not hiring refugees, while discriminating against others. Ten thousand over five years in 75 countries is not all that many. And here in the United States, they’re focusing on deserving people who are here legally, and who have helped the U.S. military during our missions worldwide.
This is what you’re protesting?
This is what you’re condemning?
This is why you’re boycotting the company?
Because they dared to say they will be providing opportunities to people who have escaped death and destruction, who have been granted refugee status, and who have provided support to our troops?
What the fuck is wrong with some people? I guess they’d rather have these people, who in many cases have helped our service members, sitting around their apartments, sucking on the government’s teat, and getting bennies at taxpayer expense, than see them get decent pay in exchange for providing a service?
This is not a reason to boycott Starbucks.
Do I agree with all their policies? It doesn’t matter. Yes, they provide health care to their employees. Yes, they support ObamaCare. Yes, they plan on continuing doing business in Mexico, where they have a ton of business. Yes, they support illegal immigrants who were brought here as young kids by reimbursing them for the biennial fee they must pay to stay in the program.
It doesn’t matter if I agree with them or not. It’s their business and they obviously do well with it. Their business is none of mine.
Am I going to get upset or boycott them because they have stated that they will work to hire people here legally who have helped American service members? Sorry, I’m just not that much of an asshole.
But I guess some people will get outraged at anything, even a stupid cup.
So apparently, as the holiday season approaches, so does the new Starbucks cup, as well as the accompanying outrage from overly-sensitive dipshits.
Last year, Starbucks introduced its holiday cup in a solid red. That’s it. Nothing there. Just red.
That caused some Special Snowflakes to get butthurt, because somehow Starbucks took away Christmas or some shit.
#StarbucksRedCup reeks of political correctness. Count me in on ones avoiding that operation.
— Tim (@TimOdell) November 9, 2015
Now, we all know Twitter is stupid. It is a magnet for the world’s biggest fuckwits, who band together to produce megatons of shitgittery. The idiots who consider their 140-character thoughts oh-so-deep somehow think their profound brain droppings will prompt social change.
We all know how effective hashtag foreign policy is, don’t we?
I will also readily admit that probably a good portion of Twitter idiots who experienced chafed labia about the plain red cup last year were probably trolls – 4chan or otherwise. (This is for the commenter who will immediately screech that I’m ignoring the possibility that some groups out there are out to make right wingers look bad!)
But it looks like the morons are at it again this year.
Whether they’re protesting in earnest, or merely trying to get some attention with their stupid, it seems like tis the season for abject dumbassery.
Starbucks just introduced a green cup – IN TIME FOR THE ELECTION – that tries to promote some unity at a time when we are incredibly divided as a country. The green cup has friends, baristas, and customers drawn in one continuous line, symbolizing unity.
Some people apparently did not like this. At. All.
who has seen the new starbucks holiday cups? NOT RED BUT THEY ARE GREEN???? who are all of these ppl on my cup and noone is santa or Jesus?!
— Shelby Bordelon (@shelbybordelon2) November 2, 2016
Some people were confused by the concept of unity.
— John Rubinetti (@morethan2words) November 2, 2016
Yet others thought it was a Muslim plot to destroy the free world through brainwashing or some shit.
— Elina Beauchamp (@ElinaBeauchamp) November 2, 2016
— Elina Beauchamp (@ElinaBeauchamp) November 2, 2016
I don’t know what Barstool Sports is, but I think they’re confused.
— Barstool Sports (@barstoolsports) November 2, 2016
This twatmold is apparently confused about what, exactly, our shared values are.
— Take America Back! (@LeftCoastMAGA) November 1, 2016
This one was upset. Not for any political reason, apparently, but because they don’t like green or something?
— Tammy Jorrak🕸 (@LAgypsea) November 2, 2016
Phil here can’t help himself. Apparently, everything is a liberal plot.
Now that beloved diversity has blown up in our faces, the libs @Starbucks have begun shilling for unity. lol,,, how typical
— Philip Bordogna (@BordognaPhilip) November 1, 2016
These two are upset that there’s liberal propaganda in the non-holiday cup, instead of coffee.
Voting with my $$ = no more @Starbucks I’m tired of having my lattes with a side of liberal propaganda. Boo to the non-holiday green cup.
— SickArcher02 (@yellowjacket615) November 1, 2016
— Archie Bunker (@ArchieBunker19) November 1, 2016
Tell ya what, Arch. Stop pushing your “conservative” bullshit, and drink coffee.
As with the Like Cage outrage, it’s possible that trolls have decided once again to paint an enormous “STUPID” sign on the backs of American society, but it is also entirely possible that there people out there who really are this ridiculous.
After all, have you seen the perpetually chapped asses on the part of the social justice howler monkeys over the years? Everything from Mexican food to Halloween costumes chafes their delicate labia! Is it really so difficult to believe that we have screeching hemorrhoids on the right as well?
And by the way, the green cups are not the holiday cups, apparently. Starbucks, trying to be a good neighbor, has decided to put out a special edition election cup as a reminder that we are one country and connected to one another. The actual holiday cups, I hear, are coming out after November 10, and they’re kind of pretty. They’ve got holly and leaves, and are pretty festive.
But don’t let that stop the perpetually offended from taking their money elsewhere! If there wasn’t something out there to get angry about, what the hell would they do with their time?
Do me a favor, morons. Just drink your coffee and shut the fuck up!
A few days ago, I blogged about a group of OCTards (Open Carry Texas) who decided to make a statement at Chipotle by carrying their long guns into the restaurant. My contention, and judging by the vast majority others’ in comments, was that these idiots have once again gone too far. They staged their little drama to shove their rights in other people’s faces – people who were merely there to enjoy a meal – and dragged a business that was completely neutral into their political demonstration.
A tool by the name of William Baker began screeching in comments that this site was anti-gun, and that he’s boycotting the Liberty Zone and telling all his friends to do so instead. (I’ll wait for you to stop laughing)
I’m going to boycott this anti-gun site and inform my friends of it as well. Are you really so stupid you can’t see that attacking others who are pro-gun whether you agree with them or not guarantees that the liberals win on this one? wow, sickening
You can go to the entry and read my reply, and those of others, yourselves. I won’t rehash them here. I will, however, submit the following: if holding the view that lack of decorum and respect on the part of gun owners is now viewed by some extremist reactionaries as being “anti-gun,” I would submit I’m not alone.
A poll started yesterday by the Guns Save Lives (GSL) blog, in the wake of Chipotle’s announcement that it doesn’t want people bringing guns into its restaurants, shows an overwhelmingly negative reaction to what another story called an “outrageous stunt” that apparently frightened other patrons at the Dallas-area eatery.
According to the GSL poll, the image and the idea of openly carrying long guns is drawing nearly 85 percent negative reaction, and the GSL website is not one frequented by Brady Campaign activists. It is popular with firearms rights activists. If gun people think this was a bad idea, that’s not good news for people who push the envelope with rifles.
At the end of the day, reality is that these morons weren’t merely open carrying. The rifles weren’t slung. They were borderline brandishing. They were bragging. They were taking photos, as if to say, “LOOK AT ME! I CAN!” This was not about educating, or promoting mature conversation. This was about showing off. That’s not responsible gun ownership. That’s puerile drama.
And. It. Hurts. Gun. Rights.
So stop. Just stop!
My latest from JPFO explores so-called “civility.”
Have you ever noticed how gun grabbers belittle, vilify and berate those of us who vocally support and defend the Second Amendment as “paranoid,” “irrational” and “extremist,” while hypocritically demanding “civility” when we begin to push back?
We are supposed to bow to their recently-invented, unreasonable “right to feel safe,” (which must be in the Constitution right between the right to a pony and the right to your very own leprechaun with a pot of gold) as justification for relieving us of our fundamental right to defend ourselves against violence. We are supposed to show respect for their hoplophobia, even if it harms us and destroys our freedoms in the long run. We’re supposed to be polite and civil, even as they berate us for merely wishing to freely exercise our rights. We’re supposed to subordinate very real basic freedoms to their irrational whims.