BuyBlue.org

[cls12vg30]

A lot of you may have heard of this site. At least I hope you have. It's hosted by a bunch of Leftist morons in (surprise) San Fran, and they rank companies according to how "blue" or "red" they are, judging by their political contributions.
Of course their purpose was to help liberal morons support companies which support their candidates, but fortunately for us their research and hard work can be used against them as well. They not only list the "bluest" companies, but also the reddest. So they're helping us determine where to spend our hard-earned dollars as well. And since it seems we outnumber them, I'd say this site can benefit red companies more than blue. Thus my purpose for spreading the word amongst the right-thinking (as in correct-thinking) people on this forum.

 

[Bear Gulch]

Thanks in the intel.

 

[Nitram68]

Cool!

 

[Black Snowman]

Thanks! Just like using the Brady Bunch's site to figure out who not to vote for.

 

[S Roper]

Yeah, I find that site useful, but not in the way they intended it.

 

[dasmi]

http://buyblue.org/detail.php?corpId=26

Excellent.
I love Outback, and it's as red as they come

 

[mbs357]

lol.
Guys in an old forum I used to post at loved this site.
They made huge lifestyle changes over it's info.
Of course, they're motly blue.
Edit: It's missing a few companies...
Food Lion and Papa John's comes to mind.
Suprisingly, most of the companies I support are red.
Lowe's, Ace Hardware, Wal-Mart.
rox. ^.^

 

[nico]

http://www.buyblue.org/archives/2005/03/more_companies.html#more

Among the corporate donors to the defense fund is Bacardi U.S.A., the Florida-based rum maker

Daquiris for everyone!

 

[Bridger]

I don't know if I'd call them "morons"...over that. After all, there are plenty of right-wing websites with a similar theme. There was some whining from the anti-gunners over an NRA site that had a similar sort of list.

 

[cls12vg30]

I'm not calling them morons over the site. It's very well put together and thought out. They're morons because they're Leftists.

I think the misunderstanding branches from that extra little space between "Leftist" and "moron". I consider them to be one word, so the space really isn't necessary. Sort of like "LiberalIdiot".

 

[garyk/nm]

Frederick's of Hollywood is 100% blue! Dang, now where am I going to get my lacy, frilly...............never mind

 

[Ivy Mike]

I don't think calling a left-leaning person a moron is a very intelligent response.

Not all liberals are stupid. You'd be surprised at some of the more liberal folk on this board. In fact, you can check out the War on Drugs thread and see exactly what I mean. While some folks won't admit to using drugs in the past (and some blatantly deny it) the fact is that many of them have and will probably continue to do so.

I would admit to it, but I have been warned before about posting something like that...exactly like that.

What I'm saying is that being liberal or conservative has VERY little to do with inteligence. Choosing to stay liberal or conservative does.
I personally think that people who vote Republican or Democrat rank a little low, but I'd never call them stupid, just under-informed or slightly deluded.

 

[bogie]

Just something to think of - Conservative people tend to have disposable income.

 

[auschip]

I think how they decide rankings is BS. Take LL Bean for instance. LL Bean is ranked dark blue 97%. The sole reason they are blue is Monetary contributions by one person who sits on the board of directors (who together with his wife gave 14K to Kerry). It would be ridiculous to hold a company (with almost 4000 employees) as supporting one candidate or the other based on the actions of one person.

Then again, why take the logical approach ... :banghead:

 

[Augustwest]

'course I don't particularly want to support the "Red" cos either.

 

[Silver Bullet]

It would be ridiculous to hold a company (with almost 4000 employees) as supporting one candidate or the other based on the actions of one person.

The issue is where does part of your money go when you buy from a company. We’re not boycotting a company to punish the “one personâ€; we’re boycotting if that one person (or the whole company) is financing the socialists much more than the good guys.

 

[auschip]

The issue is where does part of your money go when you buy from a company. We’re not boycotting a company to punish the “one personâ€; we’re boycotting if that one person (or the whole company) is financing the socialists much more than the good guys.

So if 1 person in a company gives money from their private account we hold the public company accountable for that? Sorry, I just don't follow the logic.

 

[Silver Bullet]

No, not necessarily if it is coming from their "private account". If you reread my post, you'll see that my emphasis is on where does the money I spend wind up going. The object is to not empower the socialists.

 

[auschip]

No, not necessarily if it is coming from their "private account". If you reread my post, you'll see that my emphasis is on where does the money I spend wind up going. The object is to not empower the socialists.

So then you agree that the example I picked (LL Bean) wouldn't be "boycotted" because it was one person who gave money privately. I agree we don't want to "empower the socialists", but my question is, what makes up support. I personally think the site is stretching their definition of support.

 

[homeka45]

I was cordial and thanked them for guiding my purchasing, to the companies they considered deep red.