Skip to comments.
Costco to conservatives: Get lost
http://www.michaelmbates.com ^
| 2/26/04
| Michael M. Bates
Posted on 02/24/2004 12:09:55 PM PST by Mike Bates
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-147 next last
If they had to depend only on Democrats as customers, they'd be out of business pronto.
To: Mike Bates
My membership expires next month. I will go to Sam's Club.
Thank you.
To: Mike Bates
If you're going to boycott based upon, not contributions made from company coffers, but private contributions made by executives working for the company, then you're going to doing to boycotting a whole lot of products.
3
posted on
02/24/2004 12:15:45 PM PST
by
BCrago66
To: international american
I will go to Sam's Club Ditto.
4
posted on
02/24/2004 12:16:30 PM PST
by
Dataman
To: Mike Bates
Maybe Tehr-RAYYY-Sahhh Heinz Kerry will buy 16 millions hams and help them out.
5
posted on
02/24/2004 12:16:57 PM PST
by
xzins
(Retired Army and Proud of it!!)
To: Mike Bates
I guess I'll just have to keep shopping at BJ's and SAM's.
6
posted on
02/24/2004 12:17:20 PM PST
by
rllngrk33
(Liberals are guilty of everything they accuse Conservatives of.)
To: Mike Bates
Say no to Costco bump.
To: CyberCowboy777
Ping
To: Mike Bates
Already let mine expire.
9
posted on
02/24/2004 12:21:10 PM PST
by
MNlurker
To: Mike Bates
Big bummer.
10
posted on
02/24/2004 12:21:13 PM PST
by
King Black Robe
(With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
To: BCrago66
If you're going to boycott based upon, not contributions made from company coffers, but private contributions made by executives working for the company, then you're going to doing to boycotting a whole lot of products. I'm willing to bet that every major company has at least one corporate officer who has donated money to a cause or political candidate that conservatives would find objectional.
What should be done here? The company certainly cannot fire these guys since doing so would probably constitute illegal discrimination. I don't get what this writer wants.
11
posted on
02/24/2004 12:21:56 PM PST
by
Modernman
("The strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must." - Thucydides)
To: Mike Bates
Bloomberg News reported earlier this month that Costco chairman Jeffrey Brotman gave $95,000 in December to the Joint Victory Campaign 2004 fund. The purpose of the fund is to "change the course of the country away from the Bush administration's radical agenda." This will be done by electing as many "progressive" (read Leftist) candidates as possible. Also in December, Costco CEO James Sinegal gave $95,000 to the Joint Victory Campaign 2004 fund. He says he contributed because of job losses during the Bush administration, the invasion of Iraq and cuts in social spending.
Democrats - the party of the "little" people...
I just love how the left lives up to the "spirit" campaign finance reform that they pushed so hard for...
12
posted on
02/24/2004 12:22:00 PM PST
by
2banana
To: Mike Bates; xsmommy; Conspiracy Guy; Gabz; NicknamedBob; Dan from Michigan
Ping
To: BCrago66
On the other hand, this life-long New York Giants fan shedded all his hatred of the New York Jets when it was learned that Jets team owner Robert Wood Johnson IV (heir of the Johnson & Johnson fortune) was one of the major players in George W. Bush's rise to the top of the GOP in the late 1990s.
14
posted on
02/24/2004 12:24:02 PM PST
by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
To: BCrago66
The difference is that these contributions were well publicized, not private actions, and the executives' names are strongly linked with their companies, and so they have (foolishly) used the prestige associated with the Costco name to further their political agenda with their "in your face" attitude and public posturing, and so it's perfectly reasonable to take action against Costco in response. I am planning to do likewise.
To: Mike Bates
Mr. Sinegal calls our action in Iraq an invasion. It was an invasion. That is what it was. "Invasion" is a neutral term, which has a definition. What our armed forces did one year ago was to invade Iraq. That is the term for what they did.
Don't get me wrong. I was in favor of it.
But let's not shy away from calling things by their real names. The US invaded Iraq.
(And in case this comes up too: yes, currently the US is occupying Iraq. We are occupiers. Again, with my full approval.)
Many people view it as the liberation of a country from a brutal, genocidal maniac bent on exporting terrorism.
It was that too.
This is not mutually exclusive with "invasion". The invasion was precisely what was necessary to effect this liberation you describe.
To: Mike Bates
I only boycott Levi's where it's corporate policy to mock the Boy Scouts.
17
posted on
02/24/2004 12:25:39 PM PST
by
Wheee The People
(If this post doesn't make any sense, then it also doubles as a bump.)
To: Mike Bates
As much as I hate to say it, I think it's wrong to boycott Costco on this issue. We have this thing called the First Ammendment, which is at the heart of the fight over campaign finance reform, which tells people (and businesses) they can only dedicate a certain amount of money to political campaigns. As much as I dislike the fact that Costco's chief gives a lot of money to Democrats, to turn around and financially "punish" him is a little too "Jesse Jackson" for my taste. It hurts the economy and it hurts the right of people to freely do what they want with their money.
That said. If I were to find out that Costco was directly contributing money to an organization I found immoral in its very substance (Planned Parenthood, for example), I would stop giving my money to Costco in a heartbeat. The Democratic Party, however,is not an immoral institution. The people IN IT may be immoral, but it is an important functioning part of our government, whether we like it or not. In its essence, it's an extremely moral component of our two-party republic.
I guess it's a tough issue for everyone, but you couldnt walk out your front door since the guy who manufactured your aluminum siding probably voted for a Democrat.
Regards.
To: BCrago66
I think I'm with you on this.
The man is a private individual, making individual contributions and the company can't fire him over this.
If another CxO were contributing to Rep causes, would it be a problem? Would it balance out?
19
posted on
02/24/2004 12:25:51 PM PST
by
MrB
To: Modernman
Any corporation that is involved in the sale of consumer products would do well to prohibit its officers from contributing to political campaigns . . . For one simple reason: you are always going to be p!ssng off half your potential customers.
20
posted on
02/24/2004 12:25:53 PM PST
by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-147 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson