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

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

(WTH, 3rd person?)

Personally I think it's in your replies, not your opinions.
Why do YOU think even people who might tend to agree with you seem to feel free to "snark" at you? (which is the subject of this little side thread by the way)

[paft.livejournal.com]

Because I tend to debate issues rather than resorting to personal attack and funny pictures. Debating issues is a bit demanding. Some people aren't used to it, and that frustrates them.

Your theory?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Assuming this is a serious query, I will try to explain my theory (which as stated above...."Personally I think it's in your replies, not your opinions."

Ground rules and disclaimer: Anything I say from here on out is based solely on my perceptions from T_P mostly from personal interactions but also reading what you write to other people here. This can seriously limit the accuracy of perceptions at times due to a lack of tone an expression in the written word.
(side note I try to use my "funny pictures" (icons) to set a tone)

Saying you do not resort to personal attacks, which in a sense is true, does not hold up when you do attack or insult groups; since right or wrong, people belonging to those groups do take those attacks personally. I would also suggest that when you reply to someone with condescending sarcasm (even if it is deserved) that is a personal attack IMO.

You truly do seem to APPEAR to lack a sense of humor. Who knows about in RL? But here, I haven't seen it, and that may be my failing.

An example from this thread: I made a comment to *Fizzyland*, actually typical of many comments we have made back and forth over almost 2 years. I didn't tongue in cheek tag it, because I knew he would get it. I no where in the overall thread said I thought Christians were oppressed, in fact, I'm pretty sure I never actually commented directly to your OP. In fact I implied I think the idea is a bit silly in several of my comments. I will even go so far as to say (I guess I should have) that that type of thing almost embarrasses me to see such a big deal made out of political correctness run amok. Oh and I agree it is an implied boycott, and I think it should have just come out like that. On the other hand I don't think boycotts are bad, I either support them or not.

[paft.livejournal.com]

My attacks on groups tend to be considerably more measured than the attacks on groups (which are an inevitable part of political debate) I've seen from others here. I don't as a rule paint all conservatives as racists, or as stupid, or as malicious -- though that has been ascribed to me. I might say that of some conservatives, or even many, but I try to avoid blanket statements about groups.

Yes, I dislike the Tea Party movement, I think the Republican party is pandering to extremists, and I consider Glenn Beck and others like him dangerously irresponsible. You may take issue with these things. Fine. That's why we're here. But these opinions of mine hardly make me a "radical" or wacky, or insane, or a troll. Nor do they warrant personal attacks on me as a poster.

[sealwhiskers.livejournal.com]

After studied this a little bit (but admittedly not too closely) I'm inclined to conclude that paft is no better no worse than some people on the right wing side that I've had exchanges with, such as mrbogie or reality_hammer for instance. (to mark two obvious names that take any opportunity to snark at her personally, even when she hasn't responded to or posted anything.