The New Yorker Publishes Hate Piece Against Chick-fil-A’s Christian Ethos

The Federalist ^ | April 15, 2018 | Nicole Russell

[fwdude]

Subtitle: Liberals can’t stand the success of a Christian-run company selling folks fried chicken sandwiches successfully with a smile.

Last month, Chick-fil-A opened its fourth franchise in Manhattan. Even though customers seem thrilled and the company appears to be thriving, some on the Left aren’t happy. On Friday, the New Yorker published a story with a headline only they could love: “Chick-fil-A’s Creepy Infiltration of New York City.” Not to be outdone, they tweeted an even worse headline, pulled directly from the article.

[HotHunt]

And why would you think the "intellectually unwary" would believe you versus The New Yorker?

After all, the readership of The New Yorker is made up of the "intellectually unwary" by definition. They are "intellect-challenged" in the vernacular.

Otherwise, why do you think they are reading The New Yorker?

[fwdude]

The NY’er has a much wider readership than just that leftist sh*thole, thanks to the internet.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Disgusting? I thought it was funny, in a Schadenfreudish sort of way.

If this guy and his tribe have to come on miserable about a company that makes good chicken sandwiches and says "God bless you," they're well into the territory of self-parody.

They gotta hate on Chick-fil-A. They just can't help themselves.

Tch. Poor things.

[HotHunt]

Here's another old maxim: "Tell me something new I don't already know."

I'm starting my eighth decade on this earth and I already know who liberals are, how they think and what they want.

I'm don't need another lesson on how liberals "....want us run out of society, imprisoned, impoverished or dead....".

Actually, that's not much different than my wish list for what I want to happen to their hateful arses. Instead, I've chosen to avoid liberals, as another option. Life is good when you don't deal with them.

This story doesn't change that.

BTW, you should have proof-read your "old maxim" because it doesn't make any sense the way it came out. Just sayin'.....

[Albion Wilde]

bump

[HotHunt]

The New Yorker on the internet is not the problem. It's just one magazine directed at intellectually-challenged liberals. Total circulation in 2015 was just over a million copies. Subscriptions go for $70 annually for hardcopy or digital.

This magazine is not read by anyone who is poor or dumb. It's read by liberal elites and wannabes. The magazine not liking Chick-Fil-A because they are Christian will not change any minds about Chick-Fil-A.

The problem in our society, however, is the millions upon millions of people who voluntarily "vomit up" (as Rush Limbaugh described it) all of the personal details of their private lives on to Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat and whatever others there are.

All of these social networks are run by liberals and as evidenced recently with *uckerberg testifying in Congress, they all steal that information, archive it and dispense to the feds, advertisers and whoever else they want to. They censor conservatives and close accounts of the they don't like politically.

It is in this liberal-owned and run social network realm that the Left will mess with the minds of the "intellectually unwary", not The New Yorker magazine.

[jiggyboy]

I saw I botched it as my finger was pressing the button. :-(

[HotHunt]

Happens to me more often than not.

[Company Man]

To a Christian, this is not surprising. We were warned that this time would come.

[joma89]

Liberals are horrible people. I am off to Chick-fil-a to give them more of my money.

JoMa

[NetAddicted]

Really? When are libiots going to demand In and Out burgers close?