Say Anything Blog

Liberals promoting diversity of ideas?  I think not…

This story makes sense, though, considering Starbuck is 100% Blue

Note of interest: If you look at the above link, the value of the variable corpID is 1

Think starbucks was the first company they profiled (and thus one of the most obviously liberaly managed companies in America)?  Don’t know if it’s true, just food for thought/comment I guess

I think it’s hilarious (in a devious sort of way) that when there’s a left wing protest, Starbucks is one of the first to get the brick through their window.

likwid: Ha! You’re so right, the irony is delicious!

I’m not so sure that I really need Starbuks to have a diversity of thought. Anyone seriously swayed in their worldview by a coffee cup probably was not in the top of their graduating class.

I’d be much more concerned if ‘bucks was discriminating against conservative employees. If the customers are very offended, they can vote with their wallets and take their business elsewhere. Starbucks doesn’t have a monopoly after all.

They are trying to create the atmosphere of the coffee shops that were.
Not realizing you could sell coffee for $4 a cup they went out of business.
Coffee shops/lunchonetes were places of community where people spoke to those they recognized and strangers.

A caffinated Cheers (which was nothing like a bar).

I’d never sell of my firearm collection for Miles Davis…

;-D

Wingnuttery at its finest.

I probably go to Starbuck’s 3 times a week; probably more when I’m on travel.  Been that way for 5-6 years.

This is the first time I’ve heard that Starbucks puts little sayings on their cups.

Of course, I can understand why the rightwing is so upset; after all, the ones that can read mostly develop their worldview from bumpersticker slogans.  So, if they were to read a 1-2 sentence quote from, say, Quincy Jones---they’d surely run out and sell off their firearm collection in order to buy the complete works of Miles Davis.

I was blogging when I should’a been working.

Jadegold says:

I probably go to Starbuck’s 3 times a week; probably more when I’m on travel. Been that way for 5-6 years.

This is the first time I’ve heard that Starbucks puts little sayings on their cups

I’m afraid about the only time I go to Starbucks is when I don’t have time to make my own coffee (generally my own is more to my liking).  And I don’t even own a gun, so go figure.

Other than that, I have to agree with JG (loud sound of lightning crashing).... I have never heard of this before.  Can’t say it would offend me, unless they were really trying to offend me of course. ;->

They just started this “The Way I See It” Campain as far as I can tell from the article, so it’d be no surprise you haven’t seen it yet…

Aaron:  Yeah, I was aware it was a new program.  I just was remarking that I finally one thing that I could agree with JadeGold on… even if it is profoundly easy to explain why neither of us had seen this yet.  That and an attempt at feeble humor.

This raises the question as to whether JadeGold could have easily verified why he hadn’t seen the sayings yet… no wait.  Don’t want to go down that road again!

I should point out that my post doesn’t really indicate that I’m offended by this.  In fact, I clearly stated that I liked the idea and only made one small criticism: That it’d be nice if they allowed for a little more diversity in thought.

I certainly don’t see where I deserve the “Wingnuttery at its finest” remark from Jadegold.

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

:-D I was tempted myself, but restrained…

It used to seem like most businesses liked to stay out of politics, but more and more companies shove their political views in your face nowdays (both on the right and left).  Its their decision, they get to reap the rewards I suppose.  Like someone said above, customers can vote with their wallet. 

I dont think this will adversely affect Starbucks, most of their customers look like they’d be left leaning anyway (even in Dallas-where I’m from).  They may be a liberal company, but they aren’t stupid.  I bet they did their market research before they did this. 

Besides, I get a distinct feeling that people are beginning to get sick of being mad about politics all the time.

Starbucks is just using good business judgement. It sells lattes, so it has to keep the latte-drinking liberals happy. 

"Do not kiss your children so they will kiss you back but so they will kiss their children”

“Everywhere, unthinking mobs of ‘independent thinkers’ wield tired cliches like cudgles.”

“Zeroes are important. A million seconds ago was last week...”

These are some of the quotes from the cups (pulled from starbucks.com).

Not quite sure these are that political.

It would seem more that when philosophers, thinkers, and authors get together the right feels threatened. God forbid thinking be allowed.

john john spits out, “It would seem more that when philosophers, thinkers, and authors get together the right feels threatened. God forbid thinking be allowed.”

Did you need to throw that in there?

Grow up.

No one ever said they were all political statements, but that there was a tilt in the political leanings of the quotees they used to the left.

WOOF, you said: “A caffinated Cheers (which was nothing like a bar).”

What kind of bar do you go to? At least where I come from, Cheers was everything like a bar (I come from near Boston, by the way). They’re not ALL dives you know.

I agree with you by the way, Starbucks probably is trying to create a community meeting place of sorts. That’s just good business, although I don’t know if they’re doing a good job at it or not, since I don’t really frequent Starbucks much at all.

QNetter offers, “A tilt to the left in the population of the quoted? Perhaps they just chose to follow the wit.”

Ha.  You said two sentences and managed to work in an insult.  Congrats.  Also noted is that you lacked “wit” in your own comment.

A tilt to the left in the population of the quoted?  Perhaps they just chose to follow the wit.

fyi, they have the profiles of all those who contributed quotes to their little extra… personally I like quotes to stimulate my mind in the morning… coffee to wake up, quotes to think… I think it’s a nice idea, stimulated the above discussion didn’t it…

and as for calling it a campaign, it is definitely not trying to promote any kind of view, it is not propaganda to buy their coffee… what would they be campaigning?  it is just a few quotes, some right wing, some left wing, some neutral… if you actually list them all out, they are completely equal between right and left wing personalities, although there are significantly less neutral…

then again, who is going to volunteer a quote with the purpose of starting discussion, and have it be neutral? that defeats the whole idea of a discussion… people talk about controversy, not the color of the sky or something as boring and mundane
okay, done… felt like this screamed for a comment

For your information, cowboy, all corporations contribute to both parties so that no matter who wins they are in good with the administration. But the owners of Starbucks are openly Zionist Neocons. READ DUMBASS

To the idiot that said Starbucks is 100% blue….
Ummm, get a clue. The owners of Starbucks are Neoconservative Zionists.

Proof?  And do you want to address this?

Maybe more people that are “liberal” have said more enlightening things than conservatives and that is why you find more quotes on the coffee cups.

Yeah dude...that like...*inhale*...totally makes sense dude.

Turn off Fox and tune into REALITY.

Wow. Your whole argument was based on 1. an insult 2. an unsubstantiated claim 3. three more insults.

Count me out of wanting to “tune into REALITY” if that is what “REALITY” includes.

http://www.boycottusa.org/usa_goods_starbucks.htm

To the idiot that said Starbucks is 100% blue....
Ummm, get a clue. The owners of Starbucks are Neoconservative Zionists. Maybe more people that are “liberal” have said more enlightening things than conservatives and that is why you find more quotes on the coffee cups. I mean, seriously, Starbucks could have a whole Fox News series....

“Shut up!” - Bill O’Reilly

Turn off Fox and tune into REALITY.

Ivy

http://batr.net/neoconwatch/2004/10/starbucks-spending-bucks-on-israel.html

And wow Ivy!  Nice website there bro.  You really have some priorities, don’t you?

Dude...get a life.

For your information, cowboy, all corporations contribute to both parties so that no matter who wins they are in good with the administration.

Really?  Well, also for your information “cowboy”, corporations have to declare candidate contributions.  And the records show that Starbucks hasn’t given a dime to Republicans or the much hated “neo-conservatives”. It has all gone to Democrats.

But the owners of Starbucks are openly Zionist Neocons. READ DUMBASS

Egh whatever.  You aren’t winning me over with that attitude.  It’s obvious that you’re just a bit unhinged and so I’m done with you.  Go bug somebody else and good luck on your little boycott of Starbucks.

IVY = DUMBASS

Got it.

You guys are just a bunch of ignorant backwater fools. Just do a little research. I mean, shit, go do a search in Google or if you’re too dense go look at some of the links on my site. Schultz, the CEO of Starbucks IS OPENLY ZIONIST. I have the impression that you folks don’t read too much ‘round here. lol READ THIS:

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=103311

Here are just a couple excerpts:

“Starbucks CEO and majority shareholder, Howard Schultz (pictured), has announced that the retail coffee giant is planning to reenter markets in Israel after a failed venture there once before. Schultz, an observant Jew, declared that a love for Zionism was the central factor in his business decision.

...

Internationally, Schultz has been the subject of much criticism for his public acknowledgement and support for Zionism. But, Israel has benefited from his business investments and continue to praise him for his Zionist allegiance.”

Zionist?  What have you got against Jews Ivy?

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

YEAH DOWN WITH STARBUCKS THOSE “LIBERAL” BASTARDS! STOP THEM!

Ah.  Just those uppity Jews then.  The ones who, you know, stand up to terrorism and stuff.

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Nothin against jews. Just Sharon and the IDF

If you call blockading Palestinian refugee camps in lebanon and then opening the gates when the christian militia arrives and allow them to slaughter all the wormen and children left inside fighting terrorism.. then yeah I guess i do hate those terror hating bastards.

Scott Kills said, If you call blockading Palestinian refugee camps in lebanon and then opening the gates when the christian militia arrives and allow them to slaughter all the wormen and children left inside fighting terrorism..

What are you talking about?

When a bus is bombed in tel aviv it’s usually because some resident of Rafah is sick of Israeli tanks chasing his or her kids home from school every day and being cut off from their village’s food crops and having their water wells bombed or shelled by the IDF.

Is that so?

I understand there’s no right side in a conflict..

Then your understanding is muddled.  There is often a right side and a wrong side in a conflict.

...but come on… There are overwhelmingly more Palestinian casualties a year than there are Israeli.

Would that be innocent casualties you are talking about?  No...of course not.  Because there are more innocent Israeli casualties.

I mean hey buddy. I have friends on both sides of the conflict. Some in the Israeli army and some fresh out of refugee camps. I just sort of drew the conclusion that Palestinians are kind of being treated unfairly. When a bus is bombed in tel aviv it’s usually because some resident of Rafah is sick of Israeli tanks chasing his or her kids home from school every day and being cut off from their village’s food crops and having their water wells bombed or shelled by the IDF. I understand there’s no right side in a conflict.. but come on… There are overwhelmingly more Palestinian casualties a year than there are Israeli.

AHAHA! Are you sure you have your sources straight? what education do you have on the matter? Becaus eI’ve been studying it since I was sixteen with plans to actually go into Palestine to do volunteer work.

So first of all I was referring to when at first Palestinains were forced out of the country and into neighboring countries. One of which was Lebanon. A teacher at my last highschool was an arab boy there durring a time of a lot of trouble between the muzlims of the country and the christians who were supported by the government. A christian militia known for their brutality would stop busses carrying palestinians and systematically shoot each arab passenger. In one case a refugee camp was blockaded after the PLO had taken all the men able to fight out of the camp and ran off with them to train them. The IDF blocked the gates and planned to interogate the remaining people inside mostly women and children. The Christian militia arrived and Sharon (a general in the IDF at the time) ordered the tanks to be moved and the gates to be opened.

second of all yes that is so. Contrary to popular conservative belief Many (not all) of the palestinian fighters are fighting a defensive war or a war out of anger for how they are being treated. No different than Americans would act if say Iraq invaded us and occupied our countries and ruled them with military force.

Also… How is my understanding muddled? Is it ever right to take a human life besides in self defense? Both sides figure they are defending themselves, their land, and their people. The IDF shoot innocent young boys because they’re scared they might have bombs strapped to their chests (or because they’re trigger happy kids). The Palestinian insurgents gun down or stone IDF troops because they occupy their neighborhoods with tanks and are a constant threat to their lives and the lives of their families and loved ones (or because they’re trigger happy bastards). The fact is whenever you arm young boys out of highschool with guns.. kids who have grown up on war stories and action movies and racial hatred for the other side.. you can expect some trigger happy bastards in the mix.

And last but not least hte casualties… In 2003 a report was given. The intifadah had killed 800 israelis since the start of the conflict. The Israelis had killed 2579 Palestinians. And innocent Israelis? ALL Israeli citizens are REQUIRED to spend time in the Israeli armed forces.. so they aren’t innocent per say. They either have already or will participate in the killing. It’s still not right I agree… No side is RIGHT in a conflict.. killing is killing… But the armored division that rolled into Jenin in the 1990s and slaughtered every person that got in their way, weapon or none… and then the bulldozers came to bury the bodies in the rubble of their own houses. Somewhere between 300 and 900 were killed. no exact reports can be given due to the strict coverup. It’s VERY COMMON practice for ambulences to be crushed by merkava tanks or shot up by IDF rifle fire. A dead palestinian is less of a threat no matter what age or background i guess… Other countries in the UN have repeatedly tried to press charges on Sharon as a war criminal but all attempts are vetoed by America. I think that’s funny because the only weapons in the IDF actually made by in Israel are the Galil assault rifle, the Uzi SMG, the Jericho and Desert Eagle pistoles, and the merkava tanks. All other weapons and equipment in their diverse and advanced selection of weapons are American made besides a few old mirages from back in the day and some old british jeeps. So we make a pretty penny off of selling weapons to them and in return we get access to their airfields and cover up for their missdeeds. It’s gotta make you wonder why every other country besides Israel and America hate Israel. Even some Israelis jump the checkpoint walls to protest the atrocities. A group called JATO (Jews against the occupation) are one of the bigger ones.. another is rabbis against the occupation and so fourth.. so it’s not a racial matter.. the facts are it’s a war.. and all wars are usually over dollar bills, hurt feelings, and blue balls. Either way there ARE NO RIGHT SIDES.

If you are willing to die for your cause, then you should be willing and able to take military targets. And don’t try the"you don’t know what you are talking about"nonarguement. 6 years US Army, learning and applying Counter-Insurgency/Insurgency, Artillery Forward observation, and just plain not getting my ass shot off. The Palestinians have been used by everybody. Mostly by the Arabs. Second in that order of assholes, the U.N.. And lets us not be excluding England. Exclude people and you hurt their feelings. They have had their dick in the Mid-East since the 1400’s. And don’t forget France,Italy,Portugal, and Russia. Palestinians were moving towards becoming a functioning society. Then Arafat came to power, and everything turned to shit. I remember. I was an actual, functioning person who paid attention to my world as early as 1973. And I read history and political texts from 1900 thru 1974. Had no choice, I was badly burned and having no 24hour TV, I had to read.

If you don’t want innocent Palis. to be killed, encourage your pals in Hamas to not locate their ammo dumps, firing positions, and command posts inside large concentrations of women&children. Or religious sites. As for the whole Isrealis-Palistinian conflict, they should join forces and attack the UN. That is the progenator of the mightmare they all live in.

Yeah Hamas is not one of my favorites.. I’m not a big fan of religious militants… I’m more for the nationalist cause which is mainly indipendant gunmen who stand watch over their neighborhoods and a few more powerful Palestinian Militias. I don’t really condone bus bombings and such though I understand the motives behind them. There’s always a peaceful solution if you’re smart enough and patient enough to find it… Unfortunately this is a rare case when dealing with westernized countries or wartorn countries where children are often forbidden to go to school by the occupying force.

Scott Kills said, It’s gotta make you wonder why every other country besides Israel and America hate Israel.

Simple: Israel is a Jewish country.

Either way there ARE NO RIGHT SIDES.

You keep on saying that and all you’ve done to bolster your assertion is give some examples of how there are bad things on both sides. Like anything in the world is perfect. I find it telling that you support “Palestine” and say this.

There’s always a peaceful solution if you’re smart enough and patient enough to find it… Unfortunately this is a rare case when dealing with westernized countries or wartorn countries where children are often forbidden to go to school by the occupying force.

Right...because Westernized countries aren’t patient enough to find a “peaceful solution”./sarcasm

I’d agree. The palestinians have been taken advantage of by pretty much everybody. Even we do. As long as there is an intifada there is a call for weapons in Israel. I have to say that the answer “simply because Israel is a Jewish state” sounds a little uneducated on the matter though. Arab countries were trying to sieze it for themselves before the balfour declaration. Then when Israel was an established state war broke out which ended in a flood of American weapons that allowed Israel to take four times what they were legally allowed by force. That’s one reason the Arab nations hate them. They’re also becoming a big symbol of western imperialism in the world. This “the bible says jews and arabs have issues” thing is bullshit. It was never about race. I have friends in the IDF and they get allong with my two friends from Palestinian camps just fine. We even talk about the issue sometimes. It’s not like everybody walks around over there snarling at eachother haha. And there are no right sides… Really… If you could inform me why Israel is so right and Palestine is so wrong I’d really like to hear it. And no Westernized countries are not very patient. We may be intelligent, but we hardly ever show that. And even if we did we’d use it in the most proffitable way.. not in for the good of all people. I mean this is a capitalist society. Money talks while we’ve proven over and over that human life does not. Neither side in this conflict has been chosing military targets. I guess The Palestinians can justify it with the fact that everybody in israel is/will be/ or was in the military. And on the same hand Israel can justify their actions with the fact that militants over there often dress like normal people and you won’t know if they’re aggressive or not untill after they pull the AKSU out from under their coat. so for likwid.. yes if you want to say so they’re both right.... or they’re both wrong because they’ve been killing innocent civilians. I’m not justifying jumping on a bus and blowing up women in children. But I’m not justifying tanks pumping shells into schools to enforce cerfews either. There is no black and white. Except for the Israeli Jewish settlers. I don’t see where they can be right. Their violence brews simply out of racial hatred and is a bit rediculous if you ask me. I think they’re the “accepted” version of Hamas. I haven’t seen anything to justify their violence yet besides the bible and that’s not holding any political standing for me. They really remind me of the Interahamwe (for those familiar with the Rwandan genocides which the UN ALSO turned people’s eyes away from. Especially in the US.). Just incredibly brutal and ignorant in their beatings and killings of Palestinians who did nothing more than lived in those places now known as Palestine. Not saying that the whole conflict isn’t a bit rediculous but you get my point.

Hey LIKWIDSHOE and fellow goons, read this, I think you have this affliction since you see the world in black and white, no ambiguity. You ahve a disease and you need to seek treatment:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4732021-110878,00.html

Study of Bush’s psyche touches a nerve

Julian Borger in Washington
Wednesday August 13, 2003

Guardian
A study funded by the US government has concluded that conservatism can be explained psychologically as a set of neuroses rooted in “fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity”.

As if that was not enough to get Republican blood boiling, the report’s four authors linked Hitler, Mussolini, Ronald Reagan and the rightwing talkshow host, Rush Limbaugh, arguing they all suffered from the same affliction.

All of them “preached a return to an idealised past and condoned inequality”.

Republicans are demanding to know why the psychologists behind the report, Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition, received $1.2m in public funds for their research from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health.

The authors also peer into the psyche of President George Bush, who turns out to be a textbook case. The telltale signs are his preference for moral certainty and frequently expressed dislike of nuance.

“This intolerance of ambiguity can lead people to cling to the familiar, to arrive at premature conclusions, and to impose simplistic cliches and stereotypes,” the authors argue in the Psychological Bulletin.

One of the psychologists behind the study, Jack Glaser, said the aversion to shades of grey and the need for “closure” could explain the fact that the Bush administration ignored intelligence that contradicted its beliefs about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.

The authors, presumably aware of the outrage they were likely to trigger, added a disclaimer that their study “does not mean that conservatism is pathological or that conservative beliefs are necessarily false”.

Another author, Arie Kruglanski, of the University of Maryland, said he had received hate mail since the article was published, but he insisted that the study “is not critical of conservatives at all”. “The variables we talk about are general human dimensions,” he said. “These are the same dimensions that contribute to loyalty and commitment to the group. Liberals might be less intolerant of ambiguity, but they may be less decisive, less committed, less loyal.”

But what drives the psychologists? George Will, a Washington Post columnist who has long suffered from ingrained conservatism, noted, tartly: “The professors have ideas; the rest of us have emanations of our psychological needs and neuroses.”
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005

Bravo Ms. Ivy.. Bravo… *glof claps in the name of this goddess*

Ivy spit out, Hey LIKWIDSHOE and fellow goons, read this, I think you have this affliction since you see the world in black and white, no ambiguity. You ahve a disease and you need to seek treatment:

Well that is quite a good start. I will pretty much now be inclined to discount everything you have to say.  You act as if you know me, when in reality you are making “black and white” presuppositions.  Don’t trip over that glaring hypocrisy of yours Ivy.

Anyways...thanks for giving us that ridiculous University of California at Berkeley “study”.  It shows us what your mindset and intellect is when you are so easily swayed by a bunch of liberals with an axe to grind.  “Black and white” huh?  Hahaha… Get a clue.

[...] The newest pitchfork of social reform comes to us in the form of concerns that Starbucks is promoting liberal propoganda on their cups. This was birthed by the Concerned Women for America organization who have posted an article by Meghan Kleppinger who decries Starbucks as supporting socially destructive liberal organizations that promote child abuse and sexual malfeasance. Conservatives are jumping on this with some measure of glee and there appears to be a growing number of concerned persons interested in the political and social implications Starbucks may wield with their The Way I See It campaign. [...]

[...] You find the most unbelievable shit on the internet. I found a site where these deluded fools are boycotting Starbucks because they are 100% Blue (democratic). I let them know that the owners were neoconservative Zionists but they are too dense and don’t believe me. Feel free to add to the convo:  http://sayanythingblog.com/2005/03/25/starbucks-spreading-liberal-propaganda/ [...]

[...] Hat tip to Roth Report for this post from Say Anything about Starbucks’ new “The Way I See It” campaign, which includes quotes from mostly various thinkers, authors, athletes and entertainers (and wannabe politicos) posted on the side of coffee cups.The problem, critics say, is the company’s list of overwhelmingly liberal contributors, including Al Franken, Melissa Etheridge, Quincy Jones, Chuck D. Of the 31 contributors listed on Starbucks’ Web site, only one, National Review editor Jonah Goldberg, offers a conservative viewpoint.I’m not sure how this is any different from the media we see every day. Also, because it’s a public company, I have no problem with the campaign. I’m too cheap to buy Starbucks, but if I did, I would probably stop doing so if the quotes were anything close to liberal politicking. And if they upset enough like-minded people, sales would drop off and the Starbuck’s Management and Board would have to answer for it. Then again, even a truly left-wing political campaign would probably have no effect on buyers; who would ever have thought they could get away with charging over $4 for a cup of coffee? [...]