“Your logic befuddles me. That is, unless you’re a tool of the MSM and the liberal establishment.”
Pretty sure we’ve interacted on FR before and you’re welcome to search my posts. I think you’ll find I’m not a tool of the MSM/establishment, otherwise why would I have been here since 2000. I’d recommend you read the article and your questions will be answered as well as remove your befuddlement about my comment.
Right now, however, I’m going to assume you don’t care to give the Herald the click so I’ll be as clear as I can in relating the story. The husband and wife (Laurans) co-founded SimpliSafe. It was discovered by the group bringing pressure on companies doing business with the NRA that the wife, Elanor Laurans, is the CFO of Boston Public Schools. This created leverage to push SimpliSafe to no longer offer a discount to NRA members through their affinity program. The leverage exists because of the perception that the wife should be all about school safety, i.e. hate the NRA.
I encourage you to do the click thru and read. I hope the above is clear on how the conflict exists in the minds of the anti-NRA activists because of the NRA business relationship, not because of the burglar alarm business per se. The SimpliSafe owners were getting their bread buttered on both sides because of the increased sales from the NRA affinity program while the wife collected a nice check from Boston Public Schools as the CFO which the liberal anti-NRA activists have staked out as a location where all must be pure from any evil NRA association.
The implications of your post are libelous. You are maintaining that there is some sort of ethical conflict between being being CFO of a government entity and owning an interest in an unrelated private security company that happens to advertise in conjunction with El Rushbo and the reviled NRA. In short, you imply that SimpliSafe's moonbat critics have a case! In that, you are profoundly misguided!