search
top

Interesting Double Standard

You know, Obama supporters came totally unhinged about what happened to Dan Cooper, and said I was all manner of awful things.  All I did was ask people not to buy his product.  If this is their idea of an acceptable boycott, apparently I didn’t go nearly far enough!

11 Responses to “Interesting Double Standard”

  1. Linoge says:

    Wow. I guess we need to try harder to live up to their examples next time…

  2. Matt says:

    if you are not a whtie minorty you can do what every you want..

    You can not disagree with the messiha. If you do you will be punished…

  3. TexasFred says:

    Didn’t go near far enough!!

  4. I have a feeling that, based on the number of votes against prop 8, the business owner will probably get more business from such advertising.

  5. Kathy says:

    I think this is what has started to bother me about this blog. You have very neatly divided the universe into “those that supported Obama” and “those that did not” and that seems to be the only two sets of people that exist for you without any subsets.

    As strange as this may seem to you, there is a subset of people out there that supported Obama; felt that you calling for the boycott of Cooper Arms was a little over the top, but certainly within your rights; and what you linked to is a little over the top as well.

    Although, I would like to know what the difference is between what you did and what he did. Is it the fact that you just posted about it and didn’t contact Dan Cooper directly? We don’t know where the voicemail was left. That detail was conveniently not reported.

  6. Sebastian says:

    Kathy — To some degree, such generalizations can’t be helped, because I can’t spent all my time writing about the spectrum of Obama support. I realize there’s a lot more diversity that can be addressed here, but have no doubt that a lot of the people who sent me hate mail wouldn’t see the double standard.

    The basic difference, though, is I wasn’t out on a personal crusade against Dan Cooper himself, because he was supporting Obama. I would not have encouraged anyone to call his personal phone, and leave him threatening voice messages. I would not have called on people to go through looking for people in the firearms industry, check their campaign donations, and have people try to intimidate them.

    Gun owners acting in their self-interest by not buying a product from a company who’s CEO doesn’t have any issues using the company brand to support a candidate who’s entire career has been spent shitting on the second amendment is not something I find wrong or over the top. Cooper Firearms was who decided to fire Dan Cooper. That was not expected, but I can understand why they thought it was in their interest to do so. In that sense, it speaks of the risks of CEOs dragging their company into political issues. Dan was the one who chose to do an article in USA Today. He didn’t have to. And if he didn’t, no one here would have given a shit who he voted for, or who he donated to.

  7. Sebastian says:

    I should also add that I appreciate your disagreements with me on these matters. I actually do appreciate people letting me know when they think my thinking is flawed.

  8. Claude says:

    In the voicemail Kevin says “I understand you contributed a thousand dollars to take away my rights.” Does that mean that anyone who contributed to the messiah’s campaign is trying to take my constitutional right to own and bear arms? Besides, what constitutional (implied) right do gays have? The last time I checked, the 14th amendment only applied to blacks born in America.

    I’d like to boycott Apple for donating $100K to defeat prop. 8. but it won’t make a difference since the majority of its customers are on the political Left, you know, the artsy fartsy, wine and cheese crowd that elected Barry O.

  9. Tom says:

    The fact is “gays” have ALWAYS had the right to marry, that has never included members of the same sex.

    This is like the Brady bunch using the term “child” to include 18 and 19 year olds. Adding something to a word that is has never included. It’s like the AWB in a way as well.

    Either create a new term like “garriage” for gay marriage or simply define ANY marriage performed by the government a civil union and leave marriage to churches as what it has always been.

    As for the boycott, maybe the yes on 8 crowd need to start playing the same game. Get some names and start boycotting businesses that support radical violent people such as these.

  10. B Smith says:

    Tom:
    Can’t sink to that level, myself. Why should I?
    Also, I am the guy on the way home from work…I don’t have the time to be the guy organizing a big demonstration to block evening rush-hour traffic. I have more productive things to do. I’ll keep going to work, and voting against crap like this at the polls.

top