Stacey Abrams Changes Her Tune on Georgia Boycotts: Now calls for businesses not to boycott Georgia.

After initially supporting corporate boycotts against Georgia, activist and failed gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams seems to have done an about-face. After the state’s Republican leadership enacted voting laws, several corporations including Major League Baseball and Delta Airlines have responded by engaging in the usual empty virtue-signaling to pander to Democrats who are pretending the legislation is a return to Jim Crow.

Last week, the voting rights activist argued against boycotts in a released statement.

“I respect boycotts,” she said, “although I don’t want to see Georgia families hurt by lost events and jobs. Georgians targeted by voter suppression will be hurt as opportunities go to other states. We should not abandon the victims of [Republican] malice and lies – we must stand together.”

In the statement, Abrams urged other businesses not to patronize the Peach State. “As other events, productions and businesses weigh whether to patronize Georgia, I urge those who can to come and speak out, and I urge those who are here to stay and fight, to stay and vote. We need you. Please go to stopjimcrow2.com to find out how you can join the fight for voting rights in Georgia and around the country,” she wrote.

“Black, Latino, AAPI and Native American voters that are the most suppressed over [the new law] are the most likely to be hurt by potential boycotts of Georgia. To our friends, please do not boycott us. To my fellow Georgians, stay and fight, stay and vote,” she said.

Abrams has come under fire for her apparent flip-flop. Republican Gov. Brian Kemp blasted the activist for profiting off progressives’ lies about the state’s voting laws.

During an appearance on Fox News, Kemp fired back at Abrams and Rob Manfred, the commissioner of Major League Baseball. He said Manfred “doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about” when it comes to the supposed racist aspects of the law.

“You know, they’re referencing no specific points in the legislation. I’m glad to talk through any of those [CEO’s], by the way. You know, it’s the biggest lie that has been out there,” Kemp insisted. He continued:

The governor alleged that Abrams is “profiting millions off of this” and speculated as to her true motivations behind pushing the Jim Crow narrative.

“People need to follow the money and see why they’re doing this and so effective and, quite honestly why they’re working so hard at this. It has nothing to do with the merits of the bill. It’s political pressure from a minority group of people, the cancel culture. They’re shaking people down for a long time,” he said.

MLB was one of several corporations pretending to care about black people amid debate over Georgia’s new voting laws. The organization recently declared it would not be hosting its All-Star game in Atlanta as originally planned. As I wrote previously, the company is showing how much they love African Americans by depriving black-owned businesses of the tens of millions of dollars in revenue that the All-Star game brings to communities. (See: Major League Baseball Responds To Georgia Voting Laws by Punishing Black Businesses)

RedState’s Jennifer Van Laar noted that MLB decided that it would move the event to Denver, Colorado, a place that has many of the same voting laws that Georgia passed last month. Moreover, the company’s leadership seems to believe that the white-owned businesses in Denver were far more deserving than black-owned companies in Atlanta because of course they did. This is how so-called progressive thinking works, folks. (See: MLB Moving All-Star Game to Colorado, Where Supposedly “Racist” Voting Restrictions Are Already in Place)

Stacey Abrams may be having a sort of buyer’s remorse when it comes to the boycotting, but she should have already figured out what others can already see: None of these companies, nor the white progressives they pander to, give a rip about what she or any other black person thinks. If they were genuine in their views on this matter, they would have been speaking out before Georgia’s legislation was passed.

Instead, they waited until after the law was enacted, and then they took the opportunity to engage in what I call “virtue signaling for dollars.” These people are exploiting black people to further their interests, proving they are just as racist as the hard left political operatives with whom they align.

Seems appropriate right now. This was in response to "The Stamp Act."

From George Washington to George Mason, 5 April 1769
To George Mason
Mount Vernon 5th April 1769.
Dear sir,
Herewith you will receive a letter and sundry papers which were forwarded to me a day or two ago by Doctor Ross of Bladensburg. I transmit them with the greater pleasure, as my own desire of knowing your sentiments upon a matter of this importance exactly coincides with the Doctrs inclinations.
At a time when our lordly Masters in Great Britain will be satisfied with nothing less than the deprivation of American freedom, it seems highly necessary that something shou’d be done to avert the stroke and maintain the liberty which we have derived from our Ancestors; but the manner of doing it to answer the purpose effectually is the point in question.
That no man shou’d scruple, or hesitate a moment to use a—ms in defence of so valuable a blessing, on which all the good and evil of life depends; is clearly my opinion; Yet A—ms I wou’d beg leave to add, should be the last resource; the de[r]nier resort. Addresses to the Throne, and remonstrances to parliament, we have already, it is said, proved the inefficacy of; how far then their attention to our rights & priviledges is to be awakened or alarmed by starving their Trade & manufactures, remains to be tryed.
The northern Colonies, it appears, are endeavouring to adopt this scheme—In my opinion it is a good one; & must be attended with salutary effects, provided it can be carried pretty generally into execution; but how far it is practicable to do so, I will not take upon me to determine. That there will be difficulties attending the execution of it every where, from clashing interests, & selfish designing men (ever attentive to their own gain, & watchful of every turn that can assist their lucrative views, in preference to any other consideration) cannot be denied; but in the Tobacco Colonies where the Trade is so diffused, and in a manner wholly conducted by Factors for their principals at home, these difficulties are certainly enhanced, but I think not insurmountably increased, if the Gentlemen in their several counties wou’d be at some pains to explain matters to the people, & stimulate them to a cordial agreement to purchase none but certain innumerated articles out of any of the Stores after such a period, nor import nor purchase any themselves. This, if it did not effectually withdraw the Factors from their Importations, wou’d at least make them extremely cautious in doing it, as the prohibited Goods could be vended to none but the non-associater, or those who wou’d pay no regard to their association; both of whom ought to be stigmatized, and made the objects of publick reproach.
The more I consider a Scheme of this sort, the more ardently I wish success to it, because I think there are private, as well as public advantages to result from it—the former certain, however precarious the other may prove; for in respect to the latter I have always thought that by virtue of the same power (for here alone the authority derives) which assume’s the right of Taxation, they may attempt at least to restrain our manufactories; especially those of a public nature; the same equity & justice prevailing in the one case as the other, it being no greater hardship to forbid my manufacturing, than it is to order me to buy Goods of them loaded with Duties, for the express purpose of raising a revenue. But as a measure of this sort will be an additional exertion of arbitrary power, we cannot be worsted I think in putting it to the Test. On the other hand, that the Colonies are considerably indebted to Great Britain, is a truth universally acknowledged. That many families are reduced, almost, if not quite, to penury & want, from the low ebb of their fortunes, and Estates daily selling for the discharge of Debts, the public papers furnish but too many melancholy proofs of. And that a scheme of this sort will contribute more effectually than any other I can devise to immerge the Country from the distress it at present labours under, I do most firmly believe, if it can be generally adopted. And I can see but one set of people (the Merchants excepted) who will not, or ought not, to wish well to the Scheme; and that is those who live genteely & hospitably, on clear Estates. Such as these were they, not to consider the valuable object in view, & the good of others, might think it hard to be curtail’d in their living & enjoyments; for as to the penurious man, he saves his money, & he saves his credit; having the best plea for doing that, which before perhaps he had the most violent struggles to refrain from doing. The extravagant & expensive man has the same good plea to retrench his Expences—He is thereby furnished with a pretext to live within bounds, and embraces it—prudence dictated œconomy to him before, but his resolution was too weak to put it in practice; for how can I, says he, who have lived in such & such a manner change my method? I am ashamed to do it: and besides, such an alteration in the System of my living, will create suspicions of a decay in my fortune, & such a thought the world must not harbour; I will e’en continue my course: till at last the course discontinues the Estate, a sale of it being the consequence of his perseverance in error. This I am satisfied is the way that many who have set out in the wrong tract, have reasoned, till ruin stares them in the face. And in respect to the poor & needy man, he is only left in the same situation he was found; better I might say, because as he judges from comparison, his condition is amended in proportion as it approaches nearer to those above him.
Upon the whole therefore, I think the Scheme a good one, and that it ought to be tryed here, with such alterations as the exigency of our circumstances render absolutely necessary; but how, & in what manner to begin the work, is a matter worthy of consideration; and whether it can be attempted with propriety, or efficacy (further than a communication of sentiments to one another) before May, when the Court & Assembly will meet together in Williamsburg, and a uniform plan can be concerted, and sent into the different counties to operate at the same time, & in the same manner every where, is a thing I am somewhat in doubt upon, & shou’d be glad to know your opinion of. I am Dr Sir Your most Obt humble Servant
G: Washington

This was what followed from some further correspondence with George Mason.

GW was in Williamsburg for the opening of the session on 8 May. On 16 May he joined the other burgesses in adopting a series of resolutions reasserting their sole right to lay taxes on their fellow colonists and denouncing the British move to have colonists accused of treason taken to Britain for trial. When at about noon on the next day the new governor, Lord Botetourt, having “heard of your Resolves, and augur ill of their Effect,” dissolved the House of Burgesses, GW and most of the other members walked down the Duke of Gloucester Street and met in the Apollo Room of Anthony Hay’s Raleigh Tavern (JHB, 1766–1769, 214–18). The moderator of the meeting, Speaker Peyton Randolph, made GW a member of a committee to present on the next day a plan for forming a nonimportation association in Virginia. GW recorded in his diary for 17 May only that he “Dined at the Treasurers and was upon a Committee at Hays till 10 oclock” (Diaries, 2:152). The plan of association that the committee submitted to the burgesses after they had assembled in the Apollo Room on the morning of 18 May, which ninety-six of the burgesses voted to adopt, was essentially the plan of George Mason given to the committee by GW

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.