They are. Have done so many times.Well:
Here we are. another post far afield from where it began .
I congratulate the makers of "MY Pillow for staying with a show they chose to advertise on.
The advertiser chose that show for a reason. They surmised that show would bring them sales.
The person who called for the boycott had a reason. He wanted to hurt Laura Ingraham, because Laura made a twitter comment.
A comment saying that he was refused acceptance at 4 colleges. By the way it was true at the time.
Seems a pretty mild comment to me, but Hogg is a boy,not a man, so he couldn't take it like a man.
He took it like a child and lashed out.
Which to me is even more reason to ignore a boycott. Do these companies really drop their ads because of a comment by a boy?
I guess they do --some of them.
They were frightened by the response of the liberals and just lost the Conservative sales.
Actually a lot of stupidity on the part of a lot of people.
Cmpanies like celebrities should be smart enough not to piss off half of their audience or customers.
Anyway, IMO the Companies who dropped Laura Ingraham were chicken sh1ts.
I am personally glad the "My Pillow" folks showed some courage.
If I were buying pillows I would buy two . one for my wife and one for myself.
Being 75 years old I have gone through a lot of pillows.
I know they all go flat over time become dirty, nasty and need replacement, and despite other manufacturers claiming the My Pillow is not honest in their ads, it is probably just as good as theirs. Maybe better especially if it is truly washable.
Now someone commented about Friends in the forum.
I have been here awhile and while I do not know any forumite personally ( at least I don't think I do.
I can say with certainty IF YOU ARE LOOKING IN THE FORUM FOR A FRIEND, BUY A DOG.
Someone else commented about name calling.
I think I have been called every name in the book in here, and Yes I have called some names.
I cannot help it I respond to ignorance and hypocrites, by calling them as I see them.
So bad mouth me and expect to get it back.
Well, by all means, then. I mean, you are a complete stranger on the internet. I've only known him in person for the last 20+- years. Certainly you are the expert and I defer to your superior knowledge.You are viewing him through the eyes of already liking him. I have only seen his posts.
It's funny when people say or think your mad on the internet, they truly don't know how much we laugh all day with a few forums being discussed while working.I love that!
I have a absolutely zero anger. I spend my time laughing at this crap.
I like your post, and your sig, too. Perfect!Jesus H. Christ.
What strawman am I throwing up? Please, point it out.
Thus far, I've seen you (falsely) claim I'm part of this boycott, without an apology. You've (falsely) claimed that this is a free speech/press issue. You've (falsely) implied that libertarians should be mad at the "Orwellian" practice of advertising in private business. And now you've (falsely) claimed I'm throwing up a strawman.
None of this is real and you can't even see it. You can't see when you;re wrong. You won't admit the #### you make up. Then, when all else fails, just make up something wild and crazy and run with it.
Now, tell me that it's not worth your time and you're surely not going over the last few posts you've made see how ridiculous you look and sound.
Even AFTER you admit the government isn't forcing a company to do anything, and even AFTER I explain to you that libertarians are against governmental intervention in businesses, you still don't budge. Is this because your "own emotional state" dictates that?
Once again for those of you reading and that have ciritical thinking and observation skills (and reading helps); libertarians don't believe in governmental intervention. If a private business decides to pull advertising for whatevcer reason, that's their choise. Notice that Vrai was not as vocal when the peanut gallery here was crying for a NFL boycott. Being the so-called freeodm lover she is, she wasn't claiming a NFL boycott is a free speech issue, or a free press issue, or that it reaked of Orwellian, 1984-style......something. No, because it's completely ridiculous to believe that. And as someone who loves to point out the advertisers of this very site, you'd think Vrai would have at least a basic understanding of this.
Instead, she doubles down and (falsely, again) assumes that me defending a position in a discussion/debate is akin to tossing up a strawman. That's tough to do given the QUOTES, by Vrai, used to back up my position. Then again, she doesn't understand libertarianism, so I shouldn't expect her to understand what a strawman is.