Skip to comments.FReep this poll: Saturday surveys: The Whole Foods - health care debacle
Posted on 08/30/2009 10:19:15 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative
Currently the No's are 69%. Let's see if we can break 90%.
Here's an easy to click on link.
So, if the purpose of a company is to make money; how much money is generated when the company takes a political side?
Well the boycott seems to have backfired.
FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)
Now @ 85% no.
75% no, but ya can’t fix stupid:
“In case you missed it, Whole Foods CEO John Mackey wrote a ridiculous editorial in the Wall Street Journal against Obamas health care reform effort. Mackey basically says health care and even food and shelter are commodities people shouldnt feel they have a right to”
“Let’s see if we can break 90%.”
Getting close, 87% NO when I voted
Fox News Sunday reported this morning that the Tea Party groups are organizing the boycott of Whole Foods!
I never shopped there anyway
I don’t know 1%
Who are these don’t know?
89% just now, 11:27 AM Mountain time!
No, they're organizing buycotts.
Nah, don’t think it backfired so much as amounted to free advertizing for Whole Earth Foods. I think the store got some Conservative shoppers going there, just to check it out.
Liberals are cowards, typically uninformed and without a will. To ask them to give up a whole-food breakfast cereal to defend a liberal cause is asking too much. They have no problem demanding you give up meat ... but to ask them to shop elsewhere - that is just too much effort.
The liberals I know, are so self-centered, that the mere idea of self-sacrifice in order to help someone else is as alien to them as asking them to respect the country that enables them to enjoy the freedoms they so love to abuse. Liberals have no problem using the law, or courts to order you to give money to those who are too lazy to work; but are ‘above’ giving to charity, be it a church, or other fundraiser.
That’s why the boycott didn’t work. IMHO.
It’s a BUYcott Fox ~ get it right!
Thanks La Lydia ~ I can’t believe they’d get it so wrong.
I wish these poll answers would be phrased like “will you be shopping more at Whole Foods” or “will you be shopping less at Whole Foods” my answer would definitely be MORE!!! Anybody else notice how Whole Foods Stock price has been going UP?
This is great! Thanks.. have already reposted. Looks like she’s going to be awfully disappointed in the results now isn’t she.
I LOVE Whole Foods for my fruits and veggies. They are a bit more expensive but they are worth it! Go Whole Foods!
You got your wish. 91% right now.
72% now. Remember, vote early and often.
92% now. Remember, vote early and often.
I know that, but Fox News doesn’t know that!
NO - 93%
I wish there were a Whole Foods near me. I’d shop there.
I think 95% is about as high as we can expect to go.
Still at 93 percent
Will you boycott Whole Foods?
I never shopped there anyway 4%
I don’t know <1%
Whole Foods CEO John Mackey wrote a brilliant factual editorial in the Wall Street Journal elaborating on a simple fix to 'cure' most of the ills of America's Healthcare industry. Fixes that mostly had been implemented at WF, saving the company millions. Union thugs and ACORN now are boycotting WFMI! So sales have increased recently, now that the riff-raff no longer shop there.
“Who are these dont know?”
Those who are completely oblivious to the world around them.
THe company didn’t issue the op-ed, the CEO did. He did so not to attack Obama, but to offer a better plan, one he truly thought would provide health care for everybody and save money in the process.
But because that plan obviously isn’t Obama’s, the left believes he has committed treason and wants to punish him.
And frankly, I don’t really care — he’s a liberal, and he should understand the people he gives money to are ready to stab him in the back at a moment’s notice.
I actually drive 40 miles round trip to get to the closest one to me. Now I will do so more often JUST because of THIS!
Its 94% NO now!
And leave a nice comment explaining why she is wrong.
“No” is at 94% 1:28 pm cdt
I loved the way she labeled the CEO’s editorial as “ridiculous” but never gave any reasons why nor had anything constructive to offer of her own.
I wish Whole Foods wasn’t so expensive or I’d shop there more often. When is the buyout? I’ll make a point of going there that day, at least.
If John Mackey writes to the editor, as 'John Mackey'; that's fine and good. But, he didn't do that. No, John Mackey signed off on the letter as the CEO of Whole Earth Foods, so instead of representing a personal opinion, he used his title, wealth and property to set forth the opinion of his company (which he is free to do).
If John Mackey had written the letter, it wouldn't have gathered any movement. However, when John invoked the power, name and position of Whole Earth Foods into his editorial piece, well then the company is now a politically active enterprise. And, as such, is the target for boycotts and all kinds of press (positive and negative).
Again, if the purpose of a company is to generate a profit; how much money is generated when a company chooses to politicize itself?
It’s back down to 94%.
I don’t know if the expense is due to the relatively low volume, or the very typical higher quality of their produce - probably a mixture of each, I would suppose.
Like anything else, you get what you pay for. Want pretty, but bland and tasteless fruits and veggies? Wal-Mart has them in abundance.
Want veggies and fruits bursting with flavor? Well, that is going to cost you, and Whole Earth Foods has those in limited supplies.
Obama has often said, when talking about his plans to "fix" health care, "anyone else have a better idea, I'd like to hear it."
Mr. Markey simply answered Obama's request.
Back to 95% again.
Just voted! Only 2% are Voting for a Boycott and they are no doubt the Crazy Taliban Sympathizers that make up OBOZO’S White House Staff with Baghdad Bob Gibbs as their Turban Head Deputy in Chief! :-) A full 95% have said NO WAY will they boycott ‘WHOLE FOODS!” In fact, they are more inclined to shop at WHOLE FOODS because of the Leadership of the CEO!:-)
I never shopped there anyway 3%
I don’t know <1%
He is right.
That means that health care providers have no individual rights. The collective right of the people to receive health care would supersede the provider's individual right to set their fees, their hours or change their occupational status or even decide how to apply their skills and knowledge. A collective right, by practical definition, is a state right because it is a right that is provided by the government to all not protected by the government as something possessed by each person. It is also a state right because it supersedes the individual rights of others when the two come into conflict.
It isn't stated in any of the bills that a patient's rights to care supersedes a provider's right to set fees and hours etc, but it doesn't need to. Rights are always adjudicated in the courts. The legislation simply establishes the foundation for the courts to rule in favor of the patient's collective right to health care.
Weiners view is collectivist, fascist and totalitarian. Collectivist because it is superior to an individual right. Fascist because it is overseen by one entity the Federal government. Totalitarian because the Federal government is the true possessor of this collective right and the administrator and enforcer of it as well.
Congressman Weiner's view is the underlying philosophy of the entire Health Care Reform legislation the House and Senate have put forth. Consider the setting up of community watch dogs to monitor various health parameters of citizens in the Senate version of the bill. Look at pages 382 - 393.
Even the citizens themselves will be subject to state set regulations on their behavior in order to fulfill the human right of universal health care. It isn't the individual's liberty that is being protected by that it is the state's control over its health care system that is being guarded. How much clearer can it be that these bills abrogate the concept of individual rights?
Health Care is a Liberty Issue Conservative Underground - 18 August 2009 - Tim Dunkin
Second Bill of Rights aka FDR's economic bill of rights (An early attempt to embed collective rights into American politics and society.)
Collective rights, such as a right to health care, is Marxist communism to its core.
Hey AZ, thought you might want to ping your list to this one.
All the best—GGG
You have just described many members of my ungenerous, self-centered, liberal family. Everything is "all about them." Curiously, I'm the black sheep/scapegoat of my family, but always called upon in desperation whenever there is trouble and they need someone to "fix" it.
Oh, and when you do fix it, they don't even bother to say thanks, but blame you that things didn't go exactly the way they wanted it to!
Liberals are ungrateful, spoiled brats, plain and simple. Why don't they just take over Cuba and run their country, instead of ours.
Thanks for the tip, GGG.
Dynachrome holds the FReep a Poll ping list. I was just helping out while he took some time away from computers.
I haven’t hit the poll yet because I can’t see it on my phone.