Right wing nuts boycotting Ford Motor Co

[TOVisitor]

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/afa/312005a.asp

Probably will be as effective as Bill O'Reilly's boycott of things from France, or even the boycott by the American Family Association of Disney (started when Disney stock was $18 per share, and was ended several years later when Disney stock had plummeted to $27 per share).

 

[onthebottom]

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/afa/312005a.asp

Probably will be as effective as Bill O'Reilly's boycott of things from France, or even the boycott by the American Family Association of Disney (started when Disney stock was $18 per share, and was ended several years later when Disney stock had plummeted to $27 per share).

One would think sh*tty cars would be a good enough reason, although I kind of like how the new Mustang looks.

I'd say the French aren’t doing that well, just got back over their 2001 imports in 04 - not terribly impressive given the US drives most economic growth in the world. http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/enduse/imports/c4279.html

OTB

 

[K Douglas]

I'm a right winger but I certainly don't agree with the extremist actions of the religious right in this case. I see nothing wrong in giving same sex spousal benefits nor with the sensitivity training. If you are a worker and object, go find another job.
Personally I boycott Ford because their product doesn't appeal to me...............they are light years behind the Japanese and Korean automakers in value for money.

 

[onthebottom]

I'm a right winger but I certainly don't agree with the extremist actions of the religious right in this case. I see nothing wrong in giving same sex spousal benefits nor with the sensitivity training. If you are a worker and object, go find another job.
Personally I boycott Ford because their product doesn't appeal to me...............they are light years behind the Japanese and Korean automakers in value for money.

I agree, I'm pro Gay Marriage but yet TO still calls me a Wingnut - simple minds come to simple conclusions.

OTB

 

[TOVisitor]

I agree, I'm pro Gay Marriage but yet TO still calls me a Wingnut - simple minds come to simple conclusions.

OTB

Hmmm. So when WILL you be volunteering, OTB?

The courage of one's convictions? Indeed.

 

[Truncador]

The State should categorically, preferably by means of Constitutional amendment, refuse to recognize gay religious marriages. Doing so would affirm, as opposed to compromise, separation of Church and State. The State ought then to proceed to allow civil union for any two people who want to enter into one, no matter what the family-values brigade says.

 

[onthebottom]

Hmmm. So when WILL you be volunteering, OTB?

The courage of one's convictions? Indeed.

And they say pot has no lasting effects.

How exactly is this relevant to this thread?

OTB

 

[langeweile]

And they say pot has no lasting effects.

How exactly is this relevant to this thread?

OTB

OTB, don't waste your batteries on your blackberry. TO is an antagonist, that get's his kicks out of insulting people.
Unfortunatley, there is very little substance to waht he has to say.
he usually finds some articles on his fav blogsites, cuts and pate's them, sits back and watches.]
Very little personal or original thought. Like I said...a waste of time.

the only thing he does, he helps you wtih increasing your post counts..if that is important to you.

 

[onthebottom]

OTB, don't waste your batteries on your blackberry. TO is an antagonist, that get's his kicks out of insulting people.
Unfortunatley, there is very little substance to waht he has to say.
he usually finds some articles on his fav blogsites, cuts and pate's them, sits back and watches.]
Very little personal or original thought. Like I said...a waste of time.

the only thing he does, he helps you wtih increasing your post counts..if that is important to you.

Good point, I'm now in the top 10 - one has to wonder if that's a good thing.

OTB

 

[langeweile]

Good point, I'm now in the top 10 - one has to wonder if that's a good thing.

OTB

yeah...maybe we all just have too much time on our hands...

 

[happygrump]

Hey... this is an easy problem to solve, Supply Siders! Just give Ford some more billions in tax breaks! That means that, though they won't be able to sell any cars cuz of various reasons, their Board of Directors will still be able to pocket gazillions of dollars AND throw lots of people out of work!

 

[onthebottom]

Hey... this is an easy problem to solve, Supply Siders! Just give Ford some more billions in tax breaks! That means that, though they won't be able to sell any cars cuz of various reasons, their Board of Directors will still be able to pocket gazillions of dollars AND throw lots of people out of work!

That's both off point and ill thought out, congratulations.

OTB

 

[langeweile]

That's both off point and ill thought out, congratulations.

OTB

The big issue forgotten in all of this, is a couple of facts.

1) Other than their trucks, well maybe the Focus, Ford in general makes lousy cars.

2) They were so focused on their truck division, that they failed to invest and focus on new technology i.e. Hybrids. If not for Mazda Ford would have nothing.
Anyone remember the Excursion?? i was scratching my head when they came out with that one.
BTW this is true for GM amd Chrysler as well.

3) Like all manufacturing, they will become a victim of globalisation.

Instead of crying and whining. Be innovative and start building good cars that are fuel efficent and reliable.

Build it and they will come.

 

[happygrump]

Instead of crying and whining. Be innovative and start building good cars that are fuel efficent and reliable.

Build it and they will come.

Bingo. Which goes precisely to my point about the futility of supply-side solutions to marketing problems.

 

[TOVisitor]

Driftglass has an interesting take on this ...

.. directed at MODERATE Republicans:

From: http://driftglass.blogspot.com/

<snip>

... [Moderate Republicans] absolutely hypnotized themselves in fear of the Straw Boogieman – the Evil Liberal Press/Hollywood/Democrats – and forgot the fact that they themselves had invented this fantasy to scare the rubes. So while they hunkered down and screamed for help against the Terrible Liberal Onslaught (by which I guess they mean balanced budgets, peace, prosperity, compromise, tax reform, welfare reform, GATT, NAFTA, and all the rest of the eternal conservative wish-list that they were handed by Arch Liberal Fiend William Jefferson Clinton...who, for his trouble, was hunted like a wounded animal and impeached by the banshee-shrieking Zealoti GOP) that never came, the scum of the Ultra Right walked in through their unguarded front door and took their party away from them.

They let devils into their beds, and now they’re fucked.

To admit even to themselves what they have allowed to happen – to admit that Bush may have lied even a little bit – is to put their entire self at risk of implosion. Like the Fundamentalists they mock behind closed doors, and prostrate themselves before in public, they have trapped themselves into a corner from which the can’t escape without coming to terms with fact that they were wrong – horribly, monstrously wrong – and their political ideology does not allow for that possibility.

To face the fact that Bush lied to them, even in the smallest particular, is to begin to ask questions about how Presidents should be treated when they lie – based on standards that they themselves established six years ago. To admit error of any kind is to start down a road that they themselves plowed and paved; a road that inexorably leads to impeachment and humiliation.

These people could take their Party back from scum like Wildmon and Falwell, Robertson and Dobson, but to do that means confronting the Truth and taking Action base on an honest assessment of Reality. Until then, Truth, Honest Action and Reality itself are their implacable enemies. Until then, they are forced to contort themselves ever more into postures that would make professional autofellators blush with envy, to hide from the ever louder, ever bloodier and ever more terrifying consequences of their complicity.

Until then, they are slaves.

 

[onthebottom]

.. directed at MODERATE Republicans:

From: http://driftglass.blogspot.com/

<snip>

... [Moderate Republicans] absolutely hypnotized themselves in fear of the Straw Boogieman – the Evil Liberal Press/Hollywood/Democrats – and forgot the fact that they themselves had invented this fantasy to scare the rubes. So while they hunkered down and screamed for help against the Terrible Liberal Onslaught (by which I guess they mean balanced budgets, peace, prosperity, compromise, tax reform, welfare reform, GATT, NAFTA, and all the rest of the eternal conservative wish-list that they were handed by Arch Liberal Fiend William Jefferson Clinton...who, for his trouble, was hunted like a wounded animal and impeached by the banshee-shrieking Zealoti GOP) that never came, the scum of the Ultra Right walked in through their unguarded front door and took their party away from them.

They let devils into their beds, and now they’re fucked.

To admit even to themselves what they have allowed to happen – to admit that Bush may have lied even a little bit – is to put their entire self at risk of implosion. Like the Fundamentalists they mock behind closed doors, and prostrate themselves before in public, they have trapped themselves into a corner from which the can’t escape without coming to terms with fact that they were wrong – horribly, monstrously wrong – and their political ideology does not allow for that possibility.

To face the fact that Bush lied to them, even in the smallest particular, is to begin to ask questions about how Presidents should be treated when they lie – based on standards that they themselves established six years ago. To admit error of any kind is to start down a road that they themselves plowed and paved; a road that inexorably leads to impeachment and humiliation.

These people could take their Party back from scum like Wildmon and Falwell, Robertson and Dobson, but to do that means confronting the Truth and taking Action base on an honest assessment of Reality. Until then, Truth, Honest Action and Reality itself are their implacable enemies. Until then, they are forced to contort themselves ever more into postures that would make professional autofellators blush with envy, to hide from the ever louder, ever bloodier and ever more terrifying consequences of their complicity.

Until then, they are slaves.

Dude, you must have smoked a lot of grass to be this out of focus.

This is the Ford and Gay marriage thread.....

Ah, the great white hope of the Ds, convincing someone, anyone that Bush lied. We're all idiots because we just won't believe it because, after all, they just know it has to be so. The party of Kennedy (what girl), Kerry (I'm both for and against it) and Byrd (what sheet) can't conceive of a politician that says what he means and does what he says.

Sad really.

OTB

 

[Vietor]

That's just TO; you know, cut & paste, cut & paste. Never an original thought. To be ignored.

 

[langeweile]

That's just TO; you know, cut & paste, cut & paste. Never an original thought. To be ignored.

i still say he has an alter ego here and is playing both side of the issue..very original...but sadly ...not new.

 

[someone]

The State should categorically, preferably by means of Constitutional amendment, refuse to recognize gay religious marriages. Doing so would affirm, as opposed to compromise, separation of Church and State. The State ought then to proceed to allow civil union for any two people who want to enter into one, no matter what the family-values brigade says.

Given that this is an issue I have not strong feelings about, I’m not sure why I’m responding. However, not recognizing gay religious marriages but recognizing other religious marriage would clearly compromise the separation of Church and State if regular gay marriages were legal. The state’s only business in the marriage market is deciding whether to issue marriage licenses and if so, whether its own employees have to perform civil ceremonies for every couple that they have decide to issue a licences for (whether that be only for heterosexual or both heterosexual and homosexual couples). Once they have decided to issue same sex marriage licenses and allow churches to perform any marriage ceremonies, it is none of their business if a church decides to conduct ceremonies for same sex couples or not. Not recognizing gay religious marriages but recognizing other religious marriages is clearly siding with churches against gay religious marriages against those that have no objections.

 

[Truncador]

In a bitter, divisive social dispute like this, it's important for leaders to give both sides something while simultaneously denying each side something, so that neither side acquires the conceit of thinking it runs the country or can get its way at the other's expense all the time. Not least among the reasons for this is that the loser can become extremely bitter and resort to extremism, while the State suffers the indignity of looking like it's in the pocket of the winners.

The argument for a ban on gay religious marriage in light of Church-State separation is based on an appeal to tradition. Historically, part of the process of this separation involved according certain privileges to the Church, such as tax-exempt status and legal recognition of the sacrament of marriage and baptism. For the State to go around arbitrarily changing the definition of marriage would arguably abrogate the Church's traditional privileges, upsetting the existing understanding between Church and State and conceivably opening it up to re-negotiation. Best to play it conservatively and let sleeping dogs lie in this area.

It's not the greatest argument in many ways- especially with respect to the question of what to do with denominations that do want to perform such marriages- but it should do for political purposes.