A challenge to ALL of you whining about P. Dean's firing

[Katzndogz]

Whatever Paula Deen said, she said it 30 years ago. That was a time when it wasn't a bad word, it was a word of ordinary use.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Companies fire people like Paula Deen due to political pressure. People like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have been holding up companies for years using political pressure instead of a gun. Free will, my ass.

Even Al Sharpton knows this is bullshit.

 

[DiamondDave]

Does her employer have the right to terminate her?? Yes

Do I support them terminating her? I think without all the facts, it is jumping the gun.. But I support their right to do so...

Do I think she should be shunned for life?? No... and I hope she finds success somewhere else.. best of luck to her

Do I think the left are hypocrites for jumping all over this when they do not jump all over their own when they do it?? Yes

 

[AmyNation]

So? 1 million moms does the same thing.

The company is free to fire her or not. Individuals are free to whine, and protest and boycott whatever decision the company makes.

 

[PredFan]

I wonder if the "they can fire anyone they want" crowd was OK with McCarthy era blacklists in Hollywood? Shouldn't freedom of expression mean something?

There's a difference. McCarthy was a politician, not a company. The actual companies involved back then should have been allowed to fire or not fire anyone they chose to.

Not even the same.

Wrong. The companies were Hollywood entertainment companies that abided by the blacklist and refused to hire anyone on it, due to presumed communist sympathies.
They are exactly alike.

Then I stand exactly by what i said: "The actual companies involved back then should have been allowed to fire or not fire anyone they chose to." and i'll add, hire or not hire.

What is hypocritical about that?

 

[Papageorgio]

Employers have a right to terminate as they see fit.

I have no issue that the Food Network excerpted their right. I think it was a stupid thing to do but they can do what they need to do.

 

[PredFan]

Except if they declined to renew it if she was black, or if it was because she was a woman, or because she was gay, or even because she was a man.

You want to add foul lanaguage to the protected list?

No, I want to remove everyone from the protected list when it comes to private buisinesses, and let the market decide who sinks or swims.

If it involves government, then the government is consiutionally barred from discriminating. Anyone else can do what they want. Of course in today's environment a company that doesnt hire blacks may not do so well.

It is EXACTLY the market that is deciding. The Food Network decided that if they didn't get rid of her it could hurt their bottom line. No one but the potential loss of customers was deciding for them.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

So? 1 million moms does the same thing.

The company is free to fire her or not. Individuals are free to whine, and protest and boycott whatever decision the company makes.

You really do need to look up the phrase tyranny of the majority.

I expect you can incite a mob to do just about anything if you bother to learn how. And that's exactly what they do.

Oh, and MADD and One Million Moms can go screw themselves.

 

[martybegan]

You want to add foul lanaguage to the protected list?

No, I want to remove everyone from the protected list when it comes to private buisinesses, and let the market decide who sinks or swims.

If it involves government, then the government is consiutionally barred from discriminating. Anyone else can do what they want. Of course in today's environment a company that doesnt hire blacks may not do so well.

It is EXACTLY the market that is deciding. The Food Network decided that if they didn't get rid of her it could hurt their bottom line. No one but the potential loss of customers was deciding for them.

The market doesnt work that quick. Its people afraid of the POTENTIAL of a loss of buisiness that causes them to do this. Legal, but gutless nonetheless.

But you cant fire someone for being gay, even if your market is made up of 1000 evangelical chrisitans.

 

[PredFan]

So? 1 million moms does the same thing.

The company is free to fire her or not. Individuals are free to whine, and protest and boycott whatever decision the company makes.

You really do need to look up the phrase tyranny of the majority.

I expect you can incite a mob to do just about anything if you bother to learn how. And that's exactly what they do.

Oh, and MADD and One Million Moms can go screw themselves.

I understand what you are saying, however, it would not have been a majority. I'll wager that the majority don't give a rat's ass. It's just enough of a minority to cause the Food Network to think that it was a potential probme and needed to be dealt with.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

You want to add foul lanaguage to the protected list?

No, I want to remove everyone from the protected list when it comes to private buisinesses, and let the market decide who sinks or swims.

If it involves government, then the government is consiutionally barred from discriminating. Anyone else can do what they want. Of course in today's environment a company that doesnt hire blacks may not do so well.

It is EXACTLY the market that is deciding. The Food Network decided that if they didn't get rid of her it could hurt their bottom line. No one but the potential loss of customers was deciding for them.

No, it is a gross manipulation of the market by special interest groups. Liberals wouldn't know a free market if it crawled up their legs and bit them in the crotch.

 

[AmyNation]

So? 1 million moms does the same thing.

The company is free to fire her or not. Individuals are free to whine, and protest and boycott whatever decision the company makes.

You really do need to look up the phrase tyranny of the majority.

I expect you can incite a mob to do just about anything if you bother to learn how. And that's exactly what they do.

Oh, and MADD and One Million Moms can go screw themselves.

That is the nature of the market. Companies want to make money and they base these type of decisions on potential profit loss vs profit gain.

What do you want to do? Demand no one get mad at the food network and outlaw boycotts?

 

[The Rabbi]

There's a difference. McCarthy was a politician, not a company. The actual companies involved back then should have been allowed to fire or not fire anyone they chose to.

Not even the same.

Wrong. The companies were Hollywood entertainment companies that abided by the blacklist and refused to hire anyone on it, due to presumed communist sympathies.
They are exactly alike.

Then I stand exactly by what i said: "The actual companies involved back then should have been allowed to fire or not fire anyone they chose to." and i'll add, hire or not hire.

What is hypocritical about that?

Nothing hypocritical about it. BUt it is wrong. The blacklist was wrong. Punishing someone economically becayse they hold a view you disagree with is wrong.

 

[PredFan]

No, I want to remove everyone from the protected list when it comes to private buisinesses, and let the market decide who sinks or swims.

If it involves government, then the government is consiutionally barred from discriminating. Anyone else can do what they want. Of course in today's environment a company that doesnt hire blacks may not do so well.

It is EXACTLY the market that is deciding. The Food Network decided that if they didn't get rid of her it could hurt their bottom line. No one but the potential loss of customers was deciding for them.

The market doesnt work that quick. Its people afraid of the POTENTIAL of a loss of buisiness that causes them to do this. Legal, but gutless nonetheless.

But you cant fire someone for being gay, even if your market is made up of 1000 evangelical chrisitans.

That IS the market working. You expect a company to wait until after the losses to take action? Smart companies don't work that way.

Firing someone for being gay is different. (Supposedly) you cannot help being gay, you can help being a racist, or being dumb enough to not keep your mouth shut. The thing about firing someone for being gay is that you could end up losing more by doing that than by losing the evangelicals.

 

[PredFan]

No, I want to remove everyone from the protected list when it comes to private buisinesses, and let the market decide who sinks or swims.

If it involves government, then the government is consiutionally barred from discriminating. Anyone else can do what they want. Of course in today's environment a company that doesnt hire blacks may not do so well.

It is EXACTLY the market that is deciding. The Food Network decided that if they didn't get rid of her it could hurt their bottom line. No one but the potential loss of customers was deciding for them.

No, it is a gross manipulation of the market by special interest groups. Liberals wouldn't know a free market if it crawled up their legs and bit them in the crotch.

Sorry man, that is how the market works. The market consists of sellers and buyers. The sellers want the buyers to buy, and when they threaten to stop buying, for whatever reason, the buyer has to listen.

 

[PredFan]

So? 1 million moms does the same thing.

The company is free to fire her or not. Individuals are free to whine, and protest and boycott whatever decision the company makes.

You really do need to look up the phrase tyranny of the majority.

I expect you can incite a mob to do just about anything if you bother to learn how. And that's exactly what they do.

Oh, and MADD and One Million Moms can go screw themselves.

That is the nature of the market. Companies want to make money and they base these type of decisions on potential profit loss vs profit gain.

What do you want to do? Demand no one get mad at the food network and outlaw boycotts?

Exactly.

 

[PredFan]

Wrong. The companies were Hollywood entertainment companies that abided by the blacklist and refused to hire anyone on it, due to presumed communist sympathies.
They are exactly alike.

Then I stand exactly by what i said: "The actual companies involved back then should have been allowed to fire or not fire anyone they chose to." and i'll add, hire or not hire.

What is hypocritical about that?

Nothing hypocritical about it. BUt it is wrong. The blacklist was wrong. Punishing someone economically becayse they hold a view you disagree with is wrong.

Morally wrong yes, but you cannot put morals into a free capitalist economy.

 

[blackhawk]

Bill Mahr called Palin a slut and we all, including me, bitched about it being over the top.

I'm pretty sure the term ****** is just as bad.

How bout we STOP being hypocrites eh?

Actually he called her bitch, whore, and **** it was Rush Limbaugh who used slut about Sandra Fluke. The question is did what the person said justify firing them? Usually you get a warning,suspension,and then firing I can't help but notice none of that happened to Maher or Limbaugh yet for Deen it went straight do fired make of that what you will.

 

[AmyNation]

Bill Maher and Paula Deen are apples and oranges. They work for different networks and their money making potential is based on polar opposite images.

 

[PredFan]

Bill Mahr called Palin a slut and we all, including me, bitched about it being over the top.

I'm pretty sure the term ****** is just as bad.

How bout we STOP being hypocrites eh?

Actually he called her bitch, whore, and **** it was Rush Limbaugh who used slut about Sandra Fluke. The question is did what the person said justify firing them? Usually you get a warning,suspension,and then firing I can't help but notice none of that happened to Maher or Limbaugh yet for Deen it went straight do fired make of that what you will.

Technically, they aren't renewing her contract.