Posted on 10/09/2006 11:52:27 AM PDT by 300magnum
For Kitty Green of St. Helena Island, the NAACP’s call for an economic boycott of the state seven years ago was a “slap in the face.”
While the teacher-turned-entrepreneur supports the civil rights organization’s effort to remove the Confederate flag from the State House grounds, the sanctions hit her business hard.
Now some members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People are questioning whether it’s good policy to continue the boycott. In 2000, the flag was moved from atop the State House dome to a monument in front of the capitol, and there’s no plan to move it again.
(Excerpt) Read more at thestate.com ...
I kinda of doubt it really hit that hard.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Boycott the NAACP, they use the phrase "Colored People" and that is not politically correct these days.
Better boycott the United Negro College Fund too, Kinky Friedman got slammed this year while running for governor and using the word "Negro".
< / HEAVY SARCASM >
The Dems follow the path of least resistance regardless of right or wrong.
Yeah, that sounds more like the reaction you would get if it wasn't working. If it was hitting hard, you'd think that would argue in favor of keeping it in place.
If their supposed reason for cancelling it is that it's hurting black business people, why don't they just change it to a boycott of WHITE owned businesses in SC?
BOYCOTT???
When?
SC?
And to think I just got back from dropping 2 grand at the Myrtle Beach Bikectober Fest last weekend.
If I had only known they were boycotting, I would have stayed home...............NOT!
But that would be discriminating. LOL
The NAACP DID GET what they initially wanted--the flag taken off the Statehouse and out of the Statehouse chambers. After that, THEN they decided that having an Army of Northern Virginia battleflag flying at a monument to the Confederate war dead on the Statehouse grounds was "not acceptable." Rightfully, the vast majority of the state (both white and black) yawned at them and told them to find something else to do.
This is how you handle blowhard professional victims and race pimps like the NAALCP. You stand up to them.
}:-)4
Tourism increased, actually.
Kept the "bad element" away.
So? IMO, discrimination should be legal so long as it's not the government doing it. Government dollars come from the public in general, so it wouldn't be fair to favor one segment over another.
But in the case at hand, it's none of anyone's business where people who value the opinion of the NAACP shop with their own dollars. If they want to shop only at black merchants, that's up to them.
Dixie Ping
RUSH says that DIMS look backward, not forward. So true.
We have been told forever it seems how the black people are not able to make money, and they are all poor and oppressed, so what good would a boycot do if they had no money to spend any way.....
oops...I should have added a /s
Good point.
I think it was implicit.
The tone of my #13 wasn't directed at you so much as my frustration with what I consider to be the stupid state of the law. Sellers and buyers alike should be able to transact business with whomever they choose to do so. I understood your post was sarcastic.
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.