You're a Mean One, Grinch Alert

[paft.livejournal.com]

Robert Jeffress:

Well, you know every year people bemoan the War on Christmas and I thought, “Let’s do something positive about it,” so we created this website, Grinchalert.com, it allows people to go on our website and, uh, if they’ve encountered a business that shuns Christmas they can talk about it and put that business on the naughty list but if they find a business that celebrates Christmas, they can put that business on the nice list. It’s just a fun way to say to businesses and organizations, “You don’t have to bow to political correctness. It’s okay to say, “Merry Christmas…”

John Roberts: What if businesses who are on the naughty list lose customers?... Would it be a good idea to affect people’s business at this season, which can be make or break for some people, and in this economic climate?

Jeffress: John, let me make it clear, we have never even hinted at a boycott…

"Never even hinted at a boycott?" Really? Here’s what Jeffress said on Fox:

Jeffress: One great example in the Dallas area, there was a bank that took down a Christmas tree because they said it would offend customers. Well, there was another bank that got put on our nice list, the Providence Bank, because they put up a nativity scene. The CEO told me yesterday that there were customers changing from the bank that removed the Christmas tree, and they’re flocking to his bank.

Gretchen Carlson: You are not calling for a boycott of any of these businesses….

Jeffress: Oh, not at all, not in any way! You know, there’s a Mexican restaurant you mentioned that was saying Happy Holidays, but our family still goes there every week…

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

So it’s all about reassuring businesses. Honest! It’s all about making them feel nice and safe. He’s not advocating a boycott.

But he’s delighted to share as an example that little story of a bank losing customers because they took down a Christmas tree.

See, here's what mystifies me about this... Jeffress likes the idea of forcing other people and businesses to utter "Merry Christmas" and post signs saying "Merry Christmas" who are uncomfortable doing it. Do the people at "Grinch Alert" really imagine that businesses and retailers intimidated into towing Grinch Alert's line are acting in the spirit of the season?

And here's one more video, especially for the Reverend Mr. Jeffress:

Thanx to Juliebogen

Crossposted at Thoughtcrimes

Comments

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Just read it. After reading the comments, I am more clear that its a boycott list.

Consider this comment:

"Employees will not say "Merry Christmas" because they have been instructed to say, "happy holidays". This has been going on for years and I quit buying from them"

Gee. They quit buying from them. That's a boycott. Plain as day.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

You have anything of substance to add to that personal attack?

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Perhaps people hung bits of flesh and stuff from trees to hunt critters in the winter and that's where it all started.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

The party is called The Firm's Christmas Party.

In America, it is not only a tradition, but it is a secular holiday as well as a religious one. You won't find a lot of mentions of Christmas elves and Santa Clause in the Bible.

[new-wave-witch.livejournal.com]

Oh no I understand that. What I meant to say was, I've heard of a few cases but it's nothing that says to me that it's a large, far-stretching problem, that people are demanding Christmas be stricken from the December line-up far and wide; from my perspective, it's more like a handful of jerks being jerks and those few instances are propped up as glaring examples of a greater problem. Like I remember hearing about a school whose pageant included every December holiday except Christmas. That's shitty, but that isolated incident doesn't make it an example of a problem the magnitude of which a lot of people think it is.

How does that make it a political correctness issue? Maybe it's a problem you or I can't make that judgement on, assuming you've also never been in a Phillipines airport. Honestly, knowing how passionate a lot of sects of Filipino Christians and how much it relates to their whole culture, I find that take on the policy to be pretty far-fetched.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Agreed. Now, as a consumer, I can take that information and choose to spend my money with people who are saying "Merry Xmas" and avoid businesses that are not doing so, ie boycotting them.

That's your choice. By posting a complaint, no one on that board is telling anyone they can't purchase anything from that company. Honestly, why is that so hard for you to understand.

Why is admitting they are attempting to get people to patronize businesses that do say "Merry Xmas", and to avoid ones that don't, such an offensive admission?

Cause that's specifically not what they're doing, and you even admitted that.

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

Just had a thought:

Where were you when there was the boycott of Whole Foods in response to an op-ed the CEO wrote revealing he was free-market inclined?

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's someone personally choosing not to buy from a company. Notice it doesn't say "...and I don't think anyone else should buy anything from them, either."

[mijopo.livejournal.com]

People get offended by the stupidest things.

Right, that's my only point. It's the height of stupidity to concern oneself with something like this.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

I'm not 'denying' anything. Your knight in shining armor jk_fabiani already pointed out that the website doesn't call for a boycott of the businesses mentioned in the posts.

And no, I don't claim to know how a business is going to react at ANY point.

And Pamela, it's ALWAYS a pleasure to watch you resort to your true form when your lack of depth is thrown back in your face.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

Since you believe an act of aggression is being committed here, what legal prescriptions do you propose for remedy?

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I may even use such a list to choose, but I'll admit that is what I am doing.

You're a hypocrite. You clearly stated there's nothing on the website from the group who created it telling people to boycott the businesses mentioned. So why would you expect them to admit it when they've already stated verbally several times that's not their intention?

No. It doesn't matter...

Then clearly, you have no place discussing this issue when you admit you have no knowledge of reading the complaints on the website. Nice try!

you are trolling again I see....

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

no one on that board is telling anyone they can't purchase anything from that company


You are trying hard to move the goalposts. Sorry, I am not going to allow it.

You cannot force a boycott on anyone, everyone knows that.

Again: the OP is about them denying the list is being used to punish businesses during Christmas (a boycott). It clearly is doing just that per the comments on the site, "I'm not shopping there again".


Cause that's specifically not what they're doing, and you even admitted that.

They are listing businesses that they perceive to be naughty, without ANY verification, and letting the consumer decide if they want to boycott them.

you even admitted that

Pardon?

[light-over-me.livejournal.com]

I don't know. I just know that with such widespread pressure in our society to be politically correct, and to exclude Christmas, it was only a matter of time until some resentment and counter protest became to emerge.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

The english language does not allow for subtlety or multiple levels of argument. Everything is either one way completely or the other way to the same degree. Someone is either advocating a boycott or not advocating anything. There can be no other argument given otherwise.

You ever notice how "shades of gray" makes for a better... what's the word. It means it's just become a slogan devoid of any real meaning and is just bandied about by people. Damn, I'm drawing a blank.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

You clearly stated there's nothing on the website from the group who created it telling people to boycott the businesses mentioned

Actually you stated that, I didn't. I did read some of the comments stating people were going to "never do business", etc.


So why would you expect them to admit it when they've already stated verbally several times that's not their intention?

The only possible use for the list is to steer people towards the nice and away from the naughty. From the comments, that is clearly what people are doing with the information.

Then clearly, you have no place discussing this issue when you admit you have no knowledge of reading the complaints on the website. Nice try!

The comment content has no bearing on my point That said, I have now read much of the cover page. It doesn't change my argument on iota, however it did provide evidence the list is being used by people to boycott businesses and publicly spread the word about which ones are bad and which are good.

Re: you are trolling again I see....

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

And you're being obtuse.

Yes, everyone knows that you can't force a boycott on someone. But again, NO ONE IS SPECIFICALLY CALLING FOR A BOYCOTT. If someone chooses not to take their money to one of the businesses mentioned, they're not required to. So why are you and paft treating this issue as if it's some horrible crime?

They are listing businesses that they perceive to be naughty, without ANY verification, and letting the consumer decide if they want to boycott them.

You just proved my point. THEY are letting the consumer decide. The OP was an attack on the website and the leader of the group who said it up. It's plain to see that.

Pardon?

Oh, you need to be reminded of your own words? Here ya go! (http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/815027.html?thread=61114291#t61114291)

Its not being explicitly stated, that's the issue.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

The only possible use for the list is to steer people towards the nice and away from the naughty. From the comments, that is clearly what people are doing with the information.

Oh no! You mean it gives people a CHOICE as to where they can spend their money?!? Oh horrors! People might start thinking for themselves!!! This is TERRIBLE!

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Why is the list is only sortable by naughty or nice?

Its not sortable by business, by votes, by reviewer. No. Just sortable by NAUGHTY (boycott) or NICE (patronize). Its also not vetted in any way.

If it were a balanced list of businesses, you'd be able to sort on who votes for and against a specific business. You'd be able to see some other data.

Nope. The data is being presented as a BAD list and Good list.

Standard Boycott/Patronize list, by definition.

They can deny it all they want, but its obviously a coy lie for the reasons stated above.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

I mean the information is being used to boycott certain businesses, just as it is intended and organized to be.

The choice issue is your strawman again. Of course no one can force a boycott, but you can make a good/bad list and encourage people to choose from it.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Keep crying 'strawman'. It's funny!

Of course no one can force a boycott, but you can make a good/bad list and encourage people to choose from it.

And the problem with making a list of recommended businesses is...what?

Ever been to bad_service? How about good_service? Do you see a problem with those?

I'm truly curious as to what your grand point is. As I said, paft made a point to attack the website and the leader for allegedly calling for boycotts when they in fact aren't. You seem to be making the point that no one should be allowed to complain about a business if they don't like something that's being done.

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but not particularly offensive to the senses. I do like it when someone wishes me a Merry Christmas more than a "Happy Hollidays", but it's pretty low on my 'things I need to blog about on LJ because I'm so flustered' list.

[nikoel.livejournal.com]

Except that saying "Happy Holidays" in lieu of "Merry Christmas" is hardly bigotry. How can being more inclusive be an anti-Christian sentiment?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I'm not necessarily saying it's logical. But, much like how many people cry "racism" at the drop of a hat, this kind of brings up the same concepts. That we actively tolerate anti-Christian bigotry in a way we don't tolerate racist bigotry is why it's more sensitive.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Planet Feedback does the same thing. They sort their letters by complaint, compliment, suggestion, or question. However, the website says nothing about boycotts, just as Grinch Alert doesn't.

Really, I think you and paft are trying to make an issue out of something that isn't an issue. If you have a problem with the website, neither one of you has to even look at it.