[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
The Establishments war on Donald Trump Title: Should You Let Bygones Be Bygones? Before you decide let me give you my perspective -- and decision. There are plenty of people out of the 59 million or so who voted for Hillary that didn't understand a thing about what she really stood for, or her record. This is properly chargeable against them, as it is utterly necessary before exercising the franchise to perform some sort of diligence, but there is a large difference between negligence and intent. But willful blindness or an intentional act is not negligence. That is especially true when we're talking about corporate actors, who do much more than cast a ballot or cry on social media -- they put the weight of their firms behind their proclamations, whether through huge political donations, public speechifying using their corporations as a means of amplifying their speech or acts that privilege one choice in voting over another. Those who are in the second category must not be forgiven; their acts were not only corrosive to our republic as intentional, leveraged acts they were far more damaging than even those who voted for Hillary for some puerile reason such as "because vagina" even while fully-aware that she broke felony laws on repeated occasions by intentionally mishandling classified information. These corporate actors include Starbucks, Facebook, CNN and many others. Among media outlets, whether social media or mainstream, it's even worse than when a CEO comes out and proclaims support (as was the case for Starbucks); those organizations intentionally slanted their presentation of "news" and censored opinions they did not agree with. Some of them haven't even stopped after the election; CNN, for example, ran a story disparaging Melania Trump on Wednesday long after the election was over. I'm not going to forgive any of them nor rescind my boycotts. When you announce such a thing and decide to do it you either mean it or you don't. The various mainstream press organs and CEOs do what they do in this regard because they're confident that even if you do stop shopping in their stores or you do stop patronizing their advertisers you will forgive them once the election is over and go back to whatever you used to do! The only way we will ever get durable change in behavior is if we do not go back to our previous behavior. To do otherwise is simply to put a price on their "investment" in trying to slant an election -- that is, they simply look at the potential lost sales during the election process and weigh that against whatever sort of "special interest" access, bill, legislative agenda or other item(s) they believe they'll get when their chosen candidate wins. To destroy that business model you have to make your decision durable so that each time they do something like this they***** off and permanently lose some percentage of their customer base. This makes such a strategy on their part always a loser because each time they accumulate more boycotting customers they permanently destroy their business opportunities and there is nothing they can do to get them back, irrespective of the outcome of the contest. Done more than a few times they have no customers, no matter which side of the argument they happen to be on! So no, I won't rescind my decisions that arose during this election season with regard to boycotts and shunning and in my opinion neither should you. "Holding a grudge", particularly when it comes to the corporate actors who inserted themselves into this campaign is the only legal way we can put a stop to that behavior. Take that Zucker****er and Howard Schultz. Now let me add to this, and yes, this is personal and I mean it. If you are in a meltdown because Hillary lost then you're unfit to adult. You're unfit to hold a job. You're unfit to evaluate the cost of credit to buy a car -- or a house. You're unfit to choose what to eat, or to evaluate various options for treatment of a medical condition. You're unfit to carry on the daily requirements of living on your own, independently, making your own decisions and being responsible for them -- including voting. You are in fact an emotional infant, no older than 2. You are throwing a crybully tantrum, exactly as a 2 year old does when their parent refuses to give them the second bite of chocolate they want. And if you are in fact older than 2 by more than a few years the responsibility for your frail emotional state is on you, not someone else. To the extent you stuck that tantrum out in public where others can see it they are perfectly within their rights to deduce that you're unemployable, you're emotionally unstable and thus you're unsafe to be around in any capacity. It is perfectly fine to decide that if an election goes the "wrong" way you are going to alter how you live and decisions you make. I did that after Obama was proved to be a clown car brigade, and went even further after the 2012 elections. Had Hillary won there were even further steps that I was prepared to take in withdrawing from an economic and political system that had no congruence with what I believe in, and had done the preliminary planning to do so. But you didn't see me crying, or whining, or having a full on psychotic break, unable to handle ordinary life and needing an "excuse" from an exam, from work or simply from functioning in an everyday manner. Never mind Obama's "gracious" manner after he was elected. Remember that? I'll help you: "Elections have consequences. I won, they lost." That's a direct quote from Obama himself. Guess what? Those of us who opposed his agenda and didn't like the outcome didn't cry, we didn't whine and we certainly didn't riot. We could have, too -- we do own a lot of guns, you know, and we could have used them, but we didn't. We did the representative republic thing -- we accepted the outcome even though we disagreed with it - - and with what was shortly thereafter announced and followed. You, on the other hand, have done the exact opposite in the face of a man who was both gracious and pleasant to the woman he beat, and you didn't even wait for actual policy to be rolled out. Trump did not say "tough crap; I won, you lost" or anything similar. Yet you have taken to the streets, you have looted, burned and, in at least one known case, assaulted and battered people who you think voted for the other guy. Representative republic? Not so much, right? Just remember before you riot, loot and burn -- we still have our guns, we refine all your gasoline, we produce most of your electricity and we grow all your food too. How many deer can you shoot and eat in the inner city of Chicago? How much wheat can you grow to make bread? How many apple trees are there .vs. how many people? How well does your car run without gas and do your lights work without power? Better think long and hard about all this, because I assure you -- we'll be just fine if you turn your cities into cesspools and smoking craters yet should you try to come do the same thing out here where we have some respect for both the democratic process along with The Rule of Law you're going to get the hardest lessons there are and they will be delivered quickly in lawful self-defense. Snowflake, meet flamethrower. He's called "the real world" and when, not if you melt -- tough crap. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
#3. To: nativist nationalist (#0)
Put them in cages at the zoo.
Put them in cages at the zoo. - aka The inner cities of America are rapidly becoming cages.
There are no replies to Comment # 4. End Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|