Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
Transgender people existed (and were celebrated) in ancient Greece and Rome, indigenous cultures throughout the world, and almost every civilized society in human history. Transgenders predate liberalism by thousands of years.
Millerscum is such an ignorant fuck, wallowing in his bigotry.
Kevin is correct that there have always been mentally ill people.
Originally posted by: Boilerman
They should have fired their top marketing execs, but they did not. I was with a buddy of mine the past two nights while visting the Chicago NW suburbs. He's a national accounts executive for Inbev (owner is Anheiser Busch) and has two very direct large customers, plus he handling some of their distributors. He said that their distributors are pissed at the marketing blunder. He was in a meeting last week with be the topic being how best to address the damage control issues. The company is going to do their best to say nothing on the stupid commercials, as they believe that this will minimize the press moving forward.
My friend was involved in a different meeting when they watched these ads before they ever aired. He kept his mouth shut, even thought he believed the advertisements were a stupid mistake. He worried about being labeled and "ist" by the woke crowd at Inbev, so he kept his mouth shut.
Very senior management now understands that Bud distributors are very upset, and these distributors don't want to see this crap in the future.
Another Boilertale about a discussion with one of his imaginary friends, who of course is an "executive" for the company he wants to bitch about. If Millerscum's rant had been about, say, nuclear power, Boiler's "friend" would have been a nuclear plant operator.
Boiler loves to make shit up. "Friend." LOL.
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Kevin is correct that there have always been mentally ill people.
There have always been bigots and hypocrites, and discrimination and hatred of others have always been part of the human condition.
This is one of the more entertaining argumentative chats in the forum recently. Lol. A couple of things - 1. These culture wars between hard core demagogues are hilariously silly when you think about how much energy is wasted on stuff that has no chance of being helpful in solving complex problems. 2. Calling for boycotts of products, companies, etc. as a way to "punish" those who espouse different opinions ignores certain things - like 80% of the public is about evenly split between being center-left and center-right, while the remaining 20% are about evenly split between hard-left and hard-right. That distribution is pretty similarly represented in the companies and communities. The skew more to right is older and the skew more to left is younger. Therefore, any attempt to punish opposing viewpoints through boycotts of companies and/or products, if effective, is just as likely to punish those with similar views who's livelihood is tied to the company than those with opposing views. 3. Bud Light is urine. Why would you need an incentive to not drink that stuff? God bless you if that's your drink of choice. 4. As Boilerman pointed out, InBev is the parent company of Bud Light. InBev might be the largest worldwide beer company. So, a real boycott might require refraining from drinking half the beers sold in all the bars and stores in the world.
Happy Easter.
Originally posted by: Sean Lowery
This is one of the more entertaining argumentative chats in the forum recently. Lol. A couple of things - 1. These culture wars between hard core demagogues are hilariously silly when you think about how much energy is wasted on stuff that has no chance of being helpful in solving complex problems. 2. Calling for boycotts of products, companies, etc. as a way to "punish" those who espouse different opinions ignores certain things - like 80% of the public is about evenly split between being center-left and center-right, while the remaining 20% are about evenly split between hard-left and hard-right. That distribution is pretty similarly represented in the companies and communities. The skew more to right is older and the skew more to left is younger. Therefore, any attempt to punish opposing viewpoints through boycotts of companies and/or products, if effective, is just as likely to punish those with similar views who's livelihood is tied to the company than those with opposing views. 3. Bud Light is urine. Why would you need an incentive to not drink that stuff? God bless you if that's your drink of choice. 4. As Boilerman pointed out, InBev is the parent company of Bud Light. InBev might be the largest worldwide beer company. So, a real boycott might require refraining from drinking half the beers sold in all the bars and stores in the world.
Happy Easter.
It's more fundamental than who drinks what beer. It's about bigotry and hatred. Really, what kind of horrible, mentally constipated person gets all worked up about how other people live their lives--especially if they aren't affected in any way?
The originator of this thread is a lonely, nasty, bitter old man who posts dozens of rants on this and that every week. He'll scream at you and call you a liar if you dare to disagree with him.
So the only relevant message here is: don't be like David Miller.
Oh, and yes, Bud Light is like carbonated bat urine.
Originally posted by: Sean Lowery
This is one of the more entertaining argumentative chats in the forum recently. Lol. A couple of things - 1. These culture wars between hard core demagogues are hilariously silly when you think about how much energy is wasted on stuff that has no chance of being helpful in solving complex problems. 2. Calling for boycotts of products, companies, etc. as a way to "punish" those who espouse different opinions ignores certain things - like 80% of the public is about evenly split between being center-left and center-right, while the remaining 20% are about evenly split between hard-left and hard-right. That distribution is pretty similarly represented in the companies and communities. The skew more to right is older and the skew more to left is younger. Therefore, any attempt to punish opposing viewpoints through boycotts of companies and/or products, if effective, is just as likely to punish those with similar views who's livelihood is tied to the company than those with opposing views. 3. Bud Light is urine. Why would you need an incentive to not drink that stuff? God bless you if that's your drink of choice. 4. As Boilerman pointed out, InBev is the parent company of Bud Light. InBev might be the largest worldwide beer company. So, a real boycott might require refraining from drinking half the beers sold in all the bars and stores in the world.
Happy Easter.
It seems that everything I read about the taste of Bud Light there is a concensus of opinion that it tastes like piss and/or urine. I just want to know how everyone who says this knows this? Have everyone of you tasted piss and/or urine? If so, why would you?
It's a metaphor, David. Have a good night.
Originally posted by: Sean Lowery
It's a metaphor, David. Have a good night.
Maybe so, it does seem strange that seemingly everyone uses the same metaphor...
For the "I don't get it" morons here, explained so even a 1st grader could understand -- https://www.facebook.com/reel/549446010673085
