RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Why Chick-fil-Aís Surrender Matters - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Why Chick-fil-Aís Surrender Matters Rate Topic: -----

#61 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,958
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:49 AM

View Postcorporal_little, on 21 November 2019 - 01:18 PM, said:

I would agree if that's what happened lol.

I made a 1 yr commitment to support two charities - signed a pledge and everything. One was 6 Stones CPR and the other was my church's building fund. Once the funds were provided that I had agreed to provide, I chose other charities to support this year.

Does that mean I diverted funds? Or caved to the pressure I get constantly because I have a Bible verse in my logo?

No, I fulfilled my commitment and have moved on to new ones.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Yeah but the stakes and optics go way up when itís someone nationally recognizable. The stakes go up because people can twist the truth towards their own benefit. This is what the question is about, not about fulfillment of a commitment, like it is in your case.

Maybe if you were Toll Bros youíd have a different perspective. Itís not fair but thatís how society works. CFA should have done it differently, maybe cut the SA portion in half and roll that half into the two new ones. But they chose a path that sure makes it easy for the left to claim they won and CFA caved in. It sure looks intentionally done by CFA to give people that message, indirectly and perhaps deniably, but done to suggest that caving in was a rather possible reason.
0

#62 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 05:25 AM

View Postzurg, on 22 November 2019 - 04:49 AM, said:

Yeah but the stakes and optics go way up when itís someone nationally recognizable. The stakes go up because people can twist the truth towards their own benefit. This is what the question is about, not about fulfillment of a commitment, like it is in your case.

Maybe if you were Toll Bros youíd have a different perspective. Itís not fair but thatís how society works. CFA should have done it differently, maybe cut the SA portion in half and roll that half into the two new ones. But they chose a path that sure makes it easy for the left to claim they won and CFA caved in. It sure looks intentionally done by CFA to give people that message, indirectly and perhaps deniably, but done to suggest that caving in was a rather possible reason.


Iím not trying to compare my small company to anyone. Iím just telling you guys how this stuff works.

The whole ďoptics, looks like, gives the impression ofĒ crap is what drives me nuts. If youíre going to attack/disparage, shouldnít you do it based on reality and not perception? On logic and not emotion? I thought thatís what separated the right from the left?
0

#63 User is offline   Dutch13 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 16,465
  • Joined: 02-May 06

Posted 22 November 2019 - 08:10 AM

View Postcorporal_little, on 22 November 2019 - 05:25 AM, said:

I'm not trying to compare my small company to anyone. I'm just telling you guys how this stuff works.

The whole "optics, looks like, gives the impression of" crap is what drives me nuts. If you're going to attack/disparage, shouldn't you do it based on reality and not perception? On logic and not emotion? I thought that's what separated the right from the left?


Optics matter because all that 90% of people know about this story is that Chick fil A caved to the pressure exerted by militant homosexuals.

Other industries and businesses are going to look at this and say, "If a successful company like Chick fil A, with all the support that the Christian community provided it, can't handle the push from the militant homosexual community, then we had better not even try to stand up to them".

That may not be what happened at all, but morale on the right just took a major hit and morale amongst the militant homosexuals just got a major boost.



0

#64 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 08:39 AM

View PostDutch13, on 22 November 2019 - 08:10 AM, said:

Optics matter because all that 90% of people know about this story is that Chick fil A caved to the pressure exerted by militant homosexuals.

Other industries and businesses are going to look at this and say, "If a successful company like Chick fil A, with all the support that the Christian community provided it, can't handle the push from the militant homosexual community, then we had better not even try to stand up to them".

That may not be what happened at all, but morale on the right just took a major hit and morale amongst the militant homosexuals just got a major boost.


It doesn't bother you that the morale on the right took a hit because of an untruth? Instead of bashing CFA for optics, shouldn't we instead point out how this is a false narrative?
0

#65 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,958
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 22 November 2019 - 08:49 AM

View Postcorporal_little, on 22 November 2019 - 05:25 AM, said:

Iím not trying to compare my small company to anyone. Iím just telling you guys how this stuff works.

The whole ďoptics, looks like, gives the impression ofĒ crap is what drives me nuts. If youíre going to attack/disparage, shouldnít you do it based on reality and not perception? On logic and not emotion? I thought thatís what separated the right from the left?

My comment about optics was aimed at what weíre dealing with in society, not my personal opinion. I understand your position, itís rational, and I donít quibble with it that much, EXCEPT the part about CFA making the contribution shift in stages rather than all at once. They opened themselves up to people taking advantage of the situation, because OBVIOUSLY thereís a significant amount of difference of opinion regarding what they intended. If theyíd managed it differently, they could have kept the optics narrower and not opened a crack for the militant left to declare victory.

If you expect the left to be reasonable, I canít help you further.
0

#66 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 08:59 AM

View Postzurg, on 22 November 2019 - 08:49 AM, said:

My comment about optics was aimed at what weíre dealing with in society, not my personal opinion. I understand your position, itís rational, and I donít quibble with it that much, EXCEPT the part about CFA making the contribution shift in stages rather than all at once. They opened themselves up to people taking advantage of the situation, because OBVIOUSLY thereís a significant amount of difference of opinion regarding what they intended. If theyíd managed it differently, they could have kept the optics narrower and not opened a crack for the militant left to declare victory.

If you expect the left to be reasonable, I canít help you further.


I don't expect the left to be. I expect us to be.
0

#67 User is online   Kilmerfan 

  • Ah hell I still like Mel.
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 26,028
  • Joined: 29-May 03

Posted 22 November 2019 - 09:48 AM

View PostMontyPython, on 21 November 2019 - 01:11 PM, said:

Point A: I agree with those who say this was nothing more than a business decision aimed at expansion into previously unlikely markets. NOT the result of "caving" to "pressure" from the "queers".

However - Point B: I also agree with those who say it sure looks like caving to pressure (and all for more dollars when you're already one of the most successful fast-food businesses in the country.) Bad business decision IMO, even if perfectly "justifiable" or "understandable" or whatever.

So here I sit directly on the fence, LOL.

B)

A definite maybe.
0

#68 User is offline   Dutch13 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 16,465
  • Joined: 02-May 06

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:00 AM

View Postcorporal_little, on 22 November 2019 - 08:39 AM, said:

It doesn't bother you that the morale on the right took a hit because of an untruth? Instead of bashing CFA for optics, shouldn't we instead point out how this is a false narrative?


Whether it bothers me or not doesn't matter. Lots of things bother me about the direction society is going......but it is going that way regardless of my feelings.

You have pointed out that the narrative is wrong. We have almost all acknowledged that. What impact has that had on how society views this situation?



0

#69 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,958
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:06 AM

View Postcorporal_little, on 22 November 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

I don't expect the left to be. I expect us to be.

I think youíre missing my point since youíre picking on the least important part of my post.

The optics are certainly wrong.
0

#70 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:39 AM

View PostDutch13, on 22 November 2019 - 10:00 AM, said:

Whether it bothers me or not doesn't matter. Lots of things bother me about the direction society is going......but it is going that way regardless of my feelings.

You have pointed out that the narrative is wrong. We have almost all acknowledged that. What impact has that had on how society views this situation?


As a person who's jumping on CFA here, your opinion matters to me. I'm trying to understand.
0

#71 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:42 AM

View Postzurg, on 22 November 2019 - 10:06 AM, said:

I think youíre missing my point since youíre picking on the least important part of my post.

The optics are certainly wrong.

I'm not missing your point. I was only commenting on the one thing you posted that we haven't already went back and forth on.
0

#72 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,958
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 22 November 2019 - 11:17 AM

View Postcorporal_little, on 22 November 2019 - 10:42 AM, said:

I'm not missing your point. I was only commenting on the one thing you posted that we haven't already went back and forth on.

Okay, but I think you havenít specifically commented on whether you think CFA handled it just fine or whether my suggestion that they should have eased out of the SA contributions over a year or two would be better. After all, thatís exactly where the optics come from. The optics arenít important to me, but they apparently are important to a lot of other people on both sides. Are you saying all those people have no point?
0

#73 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 12:38 PM

View Postzurg, on 22 November 2019 - 11:17 AM, said:

Okay, but I think you havenít specifically commented on whether you think CFA handled it just fine or whether my suggestion that they should have eased out of the SA contributions over a year or two would be better. After all, thatís exactly where the optics come from. The optics arenít important to me, but they apparently are important to a lot of other people on both sides. Are you saying all those people have no point?

I actually did comment on that. I said they had a 3 year commitment to these folks, which they met, 100%. Even gave the example of my experience with this kind of situation.

They have zero obligations other than the ones that they made. SA knows this, which makes their statements on this even more saddening.

And, the entire point of what I've been posting is that we are all getting up in arms about what CFA did, even though they did absolutely nothing wrong. We are saying the screwed SA and FCA over, that they are destroying these organizations and that they are siding with the radical, militant gay lobby now. All completely untrue.

Optics are one thing, making sh*t up is something else.
0

#74 User is online   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 22,121
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 12:43 PM

View Postzurg, on 22 November 2019 - 04:49 AM, said:

Yeah but the stakes and optics go way up when it’s someone nationally recognizable. The stakes go up because people can twist the truth towards their own benefit. This is what the question is about, not about fulfillment of a commitment, like it is in your case.

Maybe if you were Toll Bros you’d have a different perspective. It’s not fair but that’s how society works. CFA should have done it differently, maybe cut the SA portion in half and roll that half into the two new ones. But they chose a path that sure makes it easy for the left to claim they won and CFA caved in. It sure looks intentionally done by CFA to give people that message, indirectly and perhaps deniably, but done to suggest that caving in was a rather possible reason.


Would it have helped? I think ANY cut to The Sally would have been claimed as a victory by the left. But I don't believe CFA would have done this anyway; I am convinced that CFA wanted the 'optics' to be exactly what they are.

View Postcorporal_little, on 22 November 2019 - 05:25 AM, said:

I’m not trying to compare my small company to anyone. I’m just telling you guys how this stuff works.

The whole “optics, looks like, gives the impression of” crap is what drives me nuts. If you’re going to attack/disparage, shouldn’t you do it based on reality and not perception? On logic and not emotion? I thought that’s what separated the right from the left?


The "reality" is that CFA's CEO has come out and pointedly SAID they did it exactly for the 'optics':

“There’s no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are,”
- CEO Tim Tassopoulos, in an interview with Bisnow, original source HERE


BEFORE reading the original source article, I was willing to give CFA the benefit of the doubt: They'd apparently been planning this for over a year, maybe it was just part of an innocent restructuring of their giving that just happened to make the news at an incredibly bad time in terms of 'optics'.

BUT... Having read this quote and the full accompanying article, I just don't see any room for interpretation.

Besides, we're not talking that much money, relatively speaking. The Bisnow article says that CFA gave $111,000 to the Sally in '18. Okay, I'm sure it was appreciated, but in the "Big Picture" of CFA's $10+ Billion annual revenue and The Sally's $3.7 Billion operating budget (2018), that's chump change, little more than a rounding error. If they didn't want a big deal to be made of this, then why not just do it quietly and who'd have noticed? Why mention it at all? But it was CFA themselves who made sure it got into the media via Tassopoulis's interview with Bisnow.

I just don't see any room for interpreting this as generously as I'd have liked to.

This post has been edited by Dean Adam Smithee: 22 November 2019 - 12:46 PM

0

#75 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:25 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 22 November 2019 - 12:43 PM, said:


The "reality" is that CFA's CEO has come out and pointedly SAID they did it exactly for the 'optics':

ďThereís no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are,Ē
- CEO Tim Tassopoulos, in an interview with Bisnow, original source HERE


BEFORE reading the original source article, I was willing to give CFA the benefit of the doubt: They'd apparently been planning this for over a year, maybe it was just part of an innocent restructuring of their giving that just happened to make the news at an incredibly bad time in terms of 'optics'.

BUT... Having read this quote and the full accompanying article, I just don't see any room for interpretation.

Besides, we're not talking that much money, relatively speaking. The Bisnow article says that CFA gave $111,000 to the Sally in '18. Okay, I'm sure it was appreciated, but in the "Big Picture" of CFA's $10+ Billion annual revenue and The Sally's $3.7 Billion operating budget (2018), that's chump change, little more than a rounding error. If they didn't want a big deal to be made of this, then why not just do it quietly and who'd have noticed? Why mention it at all? But it was CFA themselves who made sure it got into the media via Tassopoulis's interview with Bisnow.

I just don't see any room for interpreting this as generously as I'd have liked to.


Yeah, as they said in their other statements, they are switching from multi-year commitments with large national charities to single year commitments with smaller, local charities that focus on the markets where they have stores. That makes perfect sense to me. As you said, $180k would go a whole lot further at 6 Stones in DFW that it will at Salvation Army with their $10Billion worldwide budget.
0

#76 User is offline   MTP Reggie 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 37,197
  • Joined: 13-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 06:13 PM

Chick-Fil-A Trades Adoring Christian Fans For Outraged Mob That Won't Be Appeased Until Their Every Demand Is Met
0

#77 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 06:33 PM

View PostMTP Reggie, on 22 November 2019 - 06:13 PM, said:


Lol.

More like "CFA trades outraged mob for another outraged mob"
0

#78 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,958
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:38 PM

View Postcorporal_little, on 22 November 2019 - 12:38 PM, said:

I actually did comment on that. I said they had a 3 year commitment to these folks, which they met, 100%. Even gave the example of my experience with this kind of situation.

They have zero obligations other than the ones that they made. SA knows this, which makes their statements on this even more saddening.

And, the entire point of what I've been posting is that we are all getting up in arms about what CFA did, even though they did absolutely nothing wrong. We are saying the screwed SA and FCA over, that they are destroying these organizations and that they are siding with the radical, militant gay lobby now. All completely untrue.

Optics are one thing, making sh*t up is something else.

I was trying to explain why your entire point ought to be modified, but I know I canít do that for you so thereís not much else to say.

Except that you havenít convinced me of the way youíre looking at the problem as being a good way.
0

#79 User is offline   Wag-a-Muffin (D) 

  • Still clinging bitterly. . .
  • View blog
  • Group: Blog Moderator
  • Posts: 20,101
  • Joined: 03-November 04

Posted 22 November 2019 - 08:29 PM

I posted Chick-fil-A's official statement.
And I posted The Salvation Army's official statement.

Now I'll just watch and see what happens. I can see where people who supported Chick-fil-A--who drove long distances and waited in long lines, not just for the food, but to make a point, to put their money where their convictions lay, would feel betrayed.

I don't think they are making a knee jerk reaction. I don't think they are "eating their own." I think they are disappointed. And they have a right to be.

I repeat Chick-fil-A's Chief Operating Officer's quote: ďThereís no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are,Ē Chick-fil-A President and Chief Operating Officer Tim Tassopoulos said in an interview with Bisnow. ďThere are lots of articles and newscasts about Chick-fil-A, and we thought we needed to be clear about our message.Ē

Chick-fil-A has been kicked out of airports and schools. Evidently they think this will make them more "mainstream" while still keeping their values.

But to their loyal fans--it's caving.

Loyal fans who are not acting irrationally. Loyal fans who want to see their loyalty reciprocated. Loyal fans who feel betrayed.
0

#80 User is offline   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 23 November 2019 - 08:03 AM

View PostWag-a-Muffin (D), on 22 November 2019 - 08:29 PM, said:

I posted Chick-fil-A's official statement.
And I posted The Salvation Army's official statement.

Now I'll just watch and see what happens. I can see where people who supported Chick-fil-A--who drove long distances and waited in long lines, not just for the food, but to make a point, to put their money where their convictions lay, would feel betrayed.

I don't think they are making a knee jerk reaction. I don't think they are "eating their own." I think they are disappointed. And they have a right to be.

I repeat Chick-fil-A's Chief Operating Officer's quote: ďThereís no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are,Ē Chick-fil-A President and Chief Operating Officer Tim Tassopoulos said in an interview with Bisnow. ďThere are lots of articles and newscasts about Chick-fil-A, and we thought we needed to be clear about our message.Ē

Chick-fil-A has been kicked out of airports and schools. Evidently they think this will make them more "mainstream" while still keeping their values.

But to their loyal fans--it's caving.

Loyal fans who are not acting irrationally. Loyal fans who want to see their loyalty reciprocated. Loyal fans who feel betrayed.


Good post. Fact is, I donít even care much for their food. There are much better places to eat, however, no one duplicates their service, their culture or their management. They are a well run business.

And Jeffery Epstein didnít kill himself.
0

Share this topic:


  • 5 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users