Boycott Pfizer

June 29, 2005 | Itsasquak

[Itsasquak]

Pfizer Brands

Prescription
Aricept® (donepezil hydrochloride tablets)
Bextra® (valdecoxib)
Celebrex® (celecoxib)
Lipitor® (atorvastatin calcium) tablets
Relpax® (eletriptan HBr)
Viagra® (sildenafil citrate) tablets
Viracept® (nelfinavir mesylate)
Xalatan® (latanoprost ophthalmic solution)
Zoloft® (sertraline HCl)
Zyrtec® (cetirizine HCl)

Over-the-Counter Brands
Benadryl
Listerine Mouthwash
Listerine PocketPaks
Neosporin
Purell
Rogaine
Rolaids
Sudafed
Visine
Zantac

Lets face it, if Pfizer had not wanted the land, then the SC never would have made the ruling. Hit Pfizer where it hurts, in the pocketbook.

[Fierce Allegiance]

Should I go & pull the 4 crews I have working up there right now for a decision by someone else, namely the town of New London & SCOTUS?

[Dashing Dasher]

I wanted the land too - (but didn't get it).
Will you boycott me too?


BTW... do you like cheese?

[phasma proeliator]

and your profile says that you have been a freeper since Feb 1998...

your point is well taken though - just because somebody is new doesn't mean they don't have anything good or valid to say.

BUT - there are a hell of a lot of trolls around too.

[Born Conservative]

Boycotts are SO liberal.

[John Will]

Legal or not?, The DU drugs.

[cripplecreek]

The DUmmies mostly admit to using an alphabet list of legal mood altering drugs. It's kind of amusing to see them talk about how screwed up conservatives are and then explain that they need drugs to keep their rage in check or to prevent themselves from committing suicide.

Also amusing is watching them complain about how George Bush has made it hard for them to buy cheap drugs from the evil pharmaceutical companies.

[Ambrianna]

There's a difference between just wanting the land and taking this all the way to the Supreme Court to force unwilling people out of their homes and ensure the erosion of one of our most sacred rights. It is the Supreme Court ultimately responsible and at fault, but that doesn't make Pfizer any less responsible for their own shortsightedness, not to mention appalling selfishness and greed.

[LizPower]

Contrary to some recent media reports, eminent domain has played no part in the development by Pfizer of its Global Research and Development Headquarters in New London CT. In fact, our offices, completed in 2001, were built on an industrial "brown field". Pfizer cleaned up pollution on the site from an abandoned mill and a scrap yard located there.

The recent Supreme Court ruling concerned an appeal by homeowners of property, located in a nearby neighborhood. They objected to the use of eminent domain by the City as part of its redevelopment plan.

Pfizer was not a party to that litigation, had no stake in the outcome of the case and has no requirements nor interest in the development of the land that is the subject of the case. Pfizer will not acquire any property in Ft. Trumbull.