By now you have definitely heard at least something about this Chick-Fil-A stuff, right? You’re on Facebook. Everything’s happenin’ on Facebook these days! Anyway, this chain restaurant that sells hamburgers made out of chicken has openly supported conservative Christian politics for years, but recently became aggressively vocal in their disparagement of gay marriage. This has made the gay community (and lots of non-gay people) angry. The problem seemed at first to be in the conflict between hot-button politics and delicious, delicious sandwiches. (For those of us who do not shove our faces full of garbage on a daily basis, it was a little less cut and dry, although we all still agree that gay people should be allowed to get married because WHAT WORLD EVEN IS THIS ANYMORE, right?) OK, so, about a week ago, I touched on the Chick-Fil-A thing in a post about Antoine Dodson, OBVIOUSLY, Antoine Dodson being the fulcrum for all things important. My point at the time was basically that some portion of pretty much every dollar you spend every single day goes to support something that you whole-heartedly disagree with and maybe even abhor. So, while the political statement of refusing to patronize a particular business is totally valid and I support anyone who choses to voice their opinion through their purchasing power (however weak this statement often feels), I felt that people could eat Chick-Fil-A sandwiches without being demonized as hate-filled bigotry-mongers. You should take some care in how you spend your money and be as aware as possible of what you are “saying” with your purchases, but if someone wanted a chicken sandwich for lunch and they bought a Chick-Fil-A Chicken Whopper, that maybe this wasn’t the most devious of anti-gay political statements. I am now here to say fuck this, the game done changed, boycott Chick-Fil-A.

Here’s what happened:

Some assholes went on the television and turned this into an actual all-out political event! First, Mike Huckabee declared yesterday “Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day,” which resulted in long lines in a bunch of the restaurants. Really, Mike Huckabee? Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day? Don’t you have guitar practice? (Actually, the first thing that happened was some mayors said they hated Chick-Fil-A, but we will get back to that in a minute.) In order to spread the word of this national holiday, Sarah Palin went on FOX News and did what she does worst, opened her mouth and tried to string English words together into complete sentences:

Oh brother. Classic. And to think that she’s only 250 million heartbeats away from the presidency! The framing of this as a first amendment issue is insane. It’s kind of like claiming that a comedian should be allowed to say whatever he wants. Yes, of course? No one on either side of this issue is saying someone shouldn’t be allowed to say what they want. No one is even saying that the COO of a major corporation shouldn’t be allowed to say what he/she wants. In private. Everyone gets to do that all the time, and guess what, we often take WAY TOO MUCH ADVANTAGE of that liberty. If anything, while I agree that everyone SHOULD be able to say what they want, I wish there was a part of the Constitution that at least SUGGESTED that sometimes people DON’T say what they want. Say it silently in your head first, and then again, and then again, and then don’t say it out loud and go to bed, because your thoughts suck. BUT OK, SO ANYWAY: if this is a first amendment right as Sarah Palin is saying, which it isn’t, it is a first amendment rights issue the way that Citizens United is a first amendment right. If you believe that corporations have an equal right with non-multinational-billionaire-human-beings to express their “beliefs,” then yes, totally, this is SOOOOOO a first amendment issue. (And the Supreme Court agrees with you, so what the hell do I even know?!) The problem with this kind of first amendment right is that multi-national-billionaire corporations have much more “money” and “power” than normal people, and therefore their “opinions” have a much louder voice and a much greater effect on the public lives of other people. Yikes! The reason we don’t mind people being allowed to say whatever they want is that for the most part, people’s words don’t have that much effect. (And guess what, when they do have a big effect, there are slander and libel laws to keep them in check.) When corporations do the same thing, it is disconcerting at the very least, and a populist boycott is literally the mildest of possible reactions. The idea that people not buying Chick-Fil-A sandwiches or mayors making politically-advantageous-but-ultimately-toothless-statements of support (we will get to this, I told you, just one second) is somehow going to revoke our constitutional right to make rape jokes is not even a remote possibility. But this isn’t a first amendment right issue anyways, so let’s just move on.

We’re going to skip right over the weirdly condescending and completely nonsensical sing-song thing she does about how marriage should be a boy and a girl holding hands or whatever the hell she says there. Whatever. Let’s pick our battles.

Sarah Palin then pulls out the old “intolerance” chestnut. This one comes out whenever someone is criticized for their clearly hateful beliefs. Because let’s be honest: if you do not agree that all people deserve equal treatment in this world, then you hold hateful beliefs. The end! There just is no wiggle room on this, which I know I have said before like some kind of broken record, but broken records for a broken world, I guess. The intolerance argument is a favorite among racists and homophobes and bigots of all stripes! “By telling me that I’m a bigot, you are being intolerant of my hatred.” Well, maybe so! I definitely have a very low “tolerance” for horribleness! What she’s specifically talking about here is a trio of American mayors (Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco) saying that Chick-Fil-A wouldn’t be welcome in their cities. Sure. Whatever. This is just a politically advantageous position to take. A mayor can’t single-handedly stop a business from setting up shop in their city. That’s not how being a mayor works. I don’t think?

This actually would have been a great opportunity for the anti-gay supporters of Chick-Fil-A to save some face and lodge a legitimate complaint. It was these mayors who injected actual for-real-politics-like-with-actual-politicians into the controversy. People like Palin could have gotten off scott free (almost) by saying “we shouldn’t be politicizing this,” and then taken a big, greasy, grinning bite of a Big Chicken Mac and given the thumbs up. Ultimately, people not buying Chick-Fil-A is a good, boots on the ground protest against corporate-sponsored bigotry. Mixing legitimate politics into it DOES get messy. Maybe the mayors should have stayed out of it. But this is hardly an issue of INTOLERANCE towards the business leaders of Chick-Fil-A. That just is not an argument that holds any dipping sauce. (Good one, Gabe.)

But while Palin is the bigger splash, I actually find this clip of Bill O’Reilly even more problematic if only because at this point it’s almost painful to watch Palin try to express one thought clearly, whereas Bill O’Reilly can definitely say what he means, even if what he means is usually a disingenuous lie used to support the earnest Larry the Cable Guy character he has created and made millions performing:

Oh God. Everything about this clip. Bill O’Reilly claiming that the three aforementioned mayors taking politically advantageous (but also morally correct) positions on the Chick-Fil-A thing is somehow akin to MAO ZEDONG and JOSEPH STALIN is just straight up HORRIFIC. I know that this is a standard rhetorical flourish that is not restricted in any way to conservative voices and is actually a popular mainstay of BLOGS, but to make these kinds of sweeping comparisons between something you mildly disagree with and MURDEROUS DESPOTS THROUGHOUT HISTORY is such a crushingly disrespectful insult to the memories of every actual human being who had to suffer and/or die under their miserable rule. Not to mention the very simple fact that the mayors in question could simply be voted out of office if their constituents love chicken and hate faggots more than these elected officials, we’re also still talking about a MINOR FLARE UP OVER A FAST FOOD CHAIN AND PEOPLE’S LEGISLATED INABILITY TO LOVE EACH OTHER. Please leave Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s nuclear hatred of the Jews OUT OF IT. One thing at a time, dude!

Here’s a question: does George Soros even exist? At this point I’m starting to think he was made up by Roger Ailes so that his anchors would always have at least one thing to yell about every night.

There’s obviously nothing particularly novel about Bill O’Reilly bringing on a guest just in order to shout him down on his own show while constantly moving the goal posts, but it’s still equally awful to see every time it happens. I don’t know who Dave Rubin is, but he makes a good point that Bill O’Reilly’s own stated desire is for politicians to say what they think. His show was called THE NO SPIN ZONE for heaven’s sake. That was never a real thing, as we know, but it was always at least the presentation of the thing. But now Bill O’Reilly DOESN’T want to hear politicians saying what they believe in because what they believe in is “fascism.” Oh good grief. (It isn’t. And he’s a jerk.) Don’t worry, we’re almost done.

Oh, and hey, Michelle Fields, you look great and you make really interesting points and the Daily Caller definitely seems legitimate and real for sure, not the Jukt Micronics of the right.

So here’s the thing: a week ago, I really think you could have supported gay marriage and still eaten at Chick-Fil-A. Maybe you would feel a little guilty about it, as you should, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. (It is terrible for you! Don’t you even want to live?!) But buying a sandwich was not the same overtly politicized statement as NOT buying a sandwich. Those days are over. Sorry! It’s not your fault. You are still a good person who just happens to believe that two people of the same gender should be allowed to love each other because our time on Earth is short and who are we to judge people we don’t even know and whose intimate and meaningful and most importantly private relationship has no bearing or effect on our equally private lives and you also just love Quarter Chickenders With Chicken Cheese. You are not the mayor of a city. You are not a former vice presidential candidate. You are not the host of a nationally syndicated yell show. You did not choose this, but it has been thrust upon you. Now that you have all the facts, and now that you have heard all the opinions, and now that our country has celebrated fucking CHICK-FIL-A APPRECIATION DAY, you do have to make a choice. Your lunch now does say something about you. You have the right to say whatever you want with your lunch, this is still America, but you have to know what you are saying. So please don’t say terrible things.

Boycott Chick-Fil-A.

Comments (184)
  1. I don’t agree with Chick-Fil-A, but I also don’t think there’s any good that can come from a boycott. Best-case scenario, the boycott is successful, and the company goes out of business. That leaves thousands of people without jobs, regardless of whether they agree with the higher-ups or not. And that’s not cool.

    • I thought the boycott was a bit much at first, but then a few million people decided to eat there just to show how much they definitely will take a stand to defend bigotry in all its forms. So now I feel like eating there has become an overt political act, the symbolism of which I wouldn’t want even the strangers at a Chick-Fil-A to think I was ok with. So basically, what Gabe said.*

      *Easy for me to say since I live a very long way from the nearest one, but still.

      • I think it’s way too political, too, and it’s silly to have a Chik-Fil-A appreciation day. That is ridiculous. But it’s possible to work for a company and not agree with the things that the people above you do, which is sort of a bummer, but we all have to put food on the table. And I don’t think that any movement that causes significant life problems for thousands of innocent people just to make a statement is okay, no matter how much the other side has escalated things.

        • It just pushes people away from each other. Boycott the government that is spending your tax dollars to fund billionaires and lobbyists to take away your rights and money. Sure make an ass out of the head of CFA for preaching bigotry but a boycott does almost nothing. I mean, I’d have a hard time going into a CFA (like R2D2 I don’t know where one is) but also I’d feel shitty going into one on principal now that this appreciation day happened, but ultimately it doesn’t do much good. At least not yet, maybe this will change the game.

        • Saying “don’t boycott Chick-Fil-A because it hurts the regular guys working the cashiers,” is kind of a bad argument.

          The employees don’t have a say in corporate policy, but I don’t think it’s the collective responsibility of consumers to make up for that. I mean, I also don’t patronize at Wal-Mart, and the WHOLE PROBLEM there is that the employees don’t dictate how the stores are run. I get that it’s not the “little guy’s” fault that Chick-Fil-A is run by a hateful Executive and donates millions of dollars to homophobic lobbying groups, but it’s not my fault either! And I’m not responsible for the little guy, their CEO however, is.

    • I disagree. Not about people getting laid off, I don’t want that at all. BUT I am not going to support something that I find so abhorrent. If nothing else, the last thing I want after reading their bullshit is a chicken sandwich. Which makes me sad. Chick-Fil-A, you and I have our differences, but leave the sandwiches out of this. They’re innocent.

      • I think boycotts are an important means of political protest. Putting your money where your mouth is is one of the most direct and important ways that we can try to shape the world around us into the world we want to live in.
        Is it victim-less? No. The whole point is to make the recipient of the boycott feel it (or at least sleep soundly knowing that you’ve made ethical purchasing decisions).
        Did the regular people of South Africa suffer from the boycotts of their products? Yes. But you know what they suffered from more? Apartheid.
        (I am not arguing that Chick-Fil-A is worse than apartheid – we’re discussing the ethics of boycotts in general. Some boycotts are obviously more “worth it” than others – I’m looking at you, One Million Moms).

    • The best case scenarios is not that the company goes out of business. The best case scenario is that the company feels the pressure of boycott and that forces people to change their mind about the issue creating the boycott.

      But if they do go out of business, well, people need to eat, and if Chik-Fil-A goes out of business, people will find a different place to eat. Those places will then hire more people due to increased demand at their restaurants. That’s pretty high level, but it’s more or less how the industry works. Restaurants go out of business all the time for non-boycott reasons, and new ones start up all the time. So long as I have a choice of where to buy lunch, there’s nothing wrong with basing part of that choice on the political beliefs of the owners.

      I used to work at a big accounting firm that no longer exists because of the actions of a few stupid people in Houston. All of that company’s former clients still needed to be audited, and have tax work done, so they hired the remaining big accounting firms. Those firms then needed more people to work for them due to the increased work load. We all pretty much got new jobs doing the same thing for someone else. The demand will still exist, it will just get supplied somewhere else.

      Personally, I base my choice not to eat at Chik-Fil-A on the fact that the food isn’t very good. Anything else is just a bonus.

    • nature abhors a chicken vacuum, just means Zaxby’s and KFC gets to extend their turf

    • Actually, best case scenario is that Chick-Fil-A stops actively supporting hate groups with MILLIONS of dollars in donations (over $5 million in the past five years or so.) I give precisely two fucks what the CEO says/thinks, it’s his actions that matter. And my money won’t support those actions.

    • Oh, come on. Chick-Fil-A will be in no danger of going out of business. Just look at how many people turned out to support them. The boycott is for people who want to participate in a symbolic political act, and it will only be meaningful for the short time that there is some symbolic currency to whether or not you eat at Chick-Fil-A. It doesn’t mean you can’t ever eat there again in your life. Just hold off while the choice is part of the current narrative. It’s the actual least you can do if you are in favor of equality.

    • Obviously, no one wants to see thousands of people lose their jobs, but this suggestion creates a false barrier to encouraging actual change in our society. The nature of capitalism requires not thousands but BILLIONS of people to be intertwined in the economically disproportionate system that generates and consolidates capital. It is in the best interest of the corporations and their well-paid management team to imply that it is the thousands of people earning far less than them working jobs they themselves would never deign to do who will ultimately be hurt by any adjustment to the system. Not true! The rich people would also be hurt! (Let’s also remember that a more likely outcome of a boycott is a reduction in profits, and a possible decline in share price at the stock market. Not a full on bankruptcy of the company. In which case the ONLY people being hurt are the wealthy management team, i.e. the ones who can change this system of corporate sponsorship of social practices.) Again: it would be horrible for thousands of people who do not agree with their company to be punished for this thing. At the same time, there are a lot of other companies who don’t engage in this type of behavior. Ultimately, placing all of the burden of the boycott on the minimum wage employees is just as unfair as using them as a human money shield.

      Oh, also, @bradofarrell just sent me this:

      • IT’S HARD to say to what extent THE FAMILY Research COUNCIL WAS being truthful BUT THEY claim to have been lobbing to CHANGE WORDING in the bill, not outright AGAINST IT:

        SO THEY’RE still stupid fucks, just not SO BLATANTLY HOMOCIDAL stupid fucks.

      • Gabe is right; a boycott of a major corporation very rarely results in bankruptcy or store closings. Usually they take years to have any effect at all. For instance, it took nearly ten years of a consumer boycott to get Taco Bell to pay migrant workers a penny more a pound for the tomatoes they pick. A decade! For a penny! During that time the boycott really didn’t stop Taco Bell from making a profit, but it did raise the issue of the plight of migrant workers in the South enough that Taco Bell eventually caved and decided to pay a penny a pound more. Keep in mind that workers can lug up to 2 pounds of tomatoes a day, which means a penny more a pound can mean the difference between making 10k and 17k a year.

        So any boycott of Chick-Fil-A might hurt their bottom line a little (probably not) but what it will do is bring to light the $2 million they have spent on ant-same-sex marriage initiatives. If a boycott were organized well it could be directed at the inclusion of corporate money in politics (and the Citizens United decision) besides putting pressure on Chick-Fil-A to end their donations to bigoted hate groups.

    • The wonderful (terrible) thing about corporations is that they love money. So even if Chick-Fil-A boycott was effective enough to threaten the company, which it most likely wont be, the board of trustees or the share holders or however would force the CEO to apologize way before it ever went under.


    • Or, the middleground, where they lose money, not enough to end up with a ton of shut downs, but enough of a loss that they don’t have a bunch of money they can reinvest by giving to superPACs and other political groups that will make them more money in the long run by lowering their taxes, keeping the minimum wage low, reducing union power, etc, etc, etc.

      It’s not really a binary position where “I don’t want people losing their jobs so I have to keep buying these gay marriage hating sandwiches”. Boycotts, especially of something like a fast food chain which has so much competition there are probably millions of people “boycotting” Chick-Fil-A by virtue of never eating their with any frequency anyway.

  2. 1) I am slow clapping this so hard right now.

    2) For anyone who wants to stuff their faces with garbage, there are oreos to consider! I am not going to make the claim that oreos are socially progressive or pro-GLBT rights, but they at least see us as a valid group for marketing purposes, which is sadly a score. WE EXIST. Chestbumps all around.

    3) I am not sure that the people in these videos know what free speech is. We…we’re capitalist, right? We’re not beholden to but hate-chicken, right? Did I misinterpret the first amendment? Is it actually saying that we have the right to free speech unless we insult that bastion of america, chick-fil-a?

    4) But what does Herman Claim think?

  3. All of this just makes me hungry. Hungry and all-around sad about American political discourse.

  4. So I just moved like 10 days ago, right before all this came out (no pun intended Chick-Fil-A, calm down) and there’s literally a Chick-Fil-A like 2 blocks from me and I’ve never lived near one before. So now every time I drive buy it I think to myself “Screw you, I’m boycotting you, you bigots” but then if I ever pause to think about it, I realize that I’ve been to a Chick-Fil-A MAYBE once in my life, so I don’t know how much of an impact I’m making to their wallets. Still, solidarity! I’ll continue stayin the course

    • Honestly, me boycotting Chick Fil-A and me not boycotting Chick Fil-A results in the same thing, me not eating Chick Fil-A.

      • yeah, i’ve boycotted them for years because i knew that they were run by fundamentalist christians, and i figured they were up to shit that i wouldn’t like. same with forever 21 and all the urban outfitter companies- super christian pro-life assholes. i can buy cheap clothes somewhere else.

        • Goodwill? (not Salvation Army)

          They usually have a lot of those same clothes– even better ones, too– for, like, five bucks a clothe. Someone else already bought them, you’re just saving them from a landfill. And if someone says “nice [clothe]” you can say you got it used and you’d never buy it new because of how awful those companies are and how great you are and also you got a really good deal so you are smart too!

          (I’m fun at parties)

  5. My people (teh gays) are the last safe haven for the bigots. I mean, this is not really about the gays, its’s about whether you identify as liberal or conservative and whose side you want to take. It just further pushes everyone in this country away form each other. And I’m not saying you SHOULDN’T boycott Chick-Fil-A but it’s really not about that. Not really.

    If that head of CFA said anything about black people not being welcome or some racist shit he’d be over. But somehow it’s still OK to say crap about gay people. I’m pretty sure he’d be too scared to say anything about any racial/ethnic minority for a number of reasons…most of which, he’d lose business but he’d probably also be scared that someone would hurt him. Physically cause him harm. I don’t know that this threat exits for gay bigotry.

    Anyway, this seems to be really important to people and my biggest issue is not that people won’t accept that they’re bigoted because they don’t believe in equality for all, although that’s up there, my biggest issue is that they keep quoting the stupid bible. Why do these people put faith in an iron age document that constantly contradicts itself. It’s entirely illogical. I mean, I can understand bigotry more because you’re just an asshole, but to pick and choose crap from thousands of years ago to base your belief system on is just pure insanity. And then to defend choices you make citing the bible? I mean how do you even reconcile this with your brain? It’s unpossible.

    • Not the LAST safe haven, just the current one. After gay people get equal rights, it’ll probably be the furries or something. And in 50 years, we’ll all be ranting about how we can’t believe they’re letting that furry run for President, and our grandkids will all be SO EMBARASSED.

      • I actually once had a serious debate with my brother-in-law about whether or not it’s ok to mock furries. So you’re probably right.

        • I don’t know what a furry is (a plushie?), but you’re right. It’ll probably just be some other group. Also these people are hardly Christian. Can a Christian who opposes universal health care tell me how that measures up to the teachings of Christ? Or how supporting hate speech by giving money to a bigot is a Christian or “godly” thing to do?

          • I’m guessing most of those Christians have their money in a bank, so I don’t have to listen to their opinions about Leviticus or whatever.

      • Also on this topic, I can’t wait to hear what the Bible says about furries! Are they just going to pull out all of that Leviticus nonsense about decapitating people and setting them on fire if they “lie with” animals? (Everything I know about Leviticus I learned from The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo)

      • NOT TOTALLY similar but PEOPLE often make the FUCKIN “SLIPPERY slope” argument which HONESTLY is a giant fucking load OF shit. LIKE WE’RE GONNA let bestiality or pedophilia BECOME THE norm because bigots CAN’T UNDERSTAND the concept of FUCKIN consent apparently.

        AND furries petitioning FOR RIGHTS would make ME LOL. What rights do THEY NOT have? It’s A FETISH, not an orientation, gender, OR RACE.

        AND THE haven thing IS ONLY KIND of correct. IT’S THE ONLY direct public forum left. PEOPLE ARE still racist and sexist AS FUCK. They just FIND OTHER ways around being so direct about it. EVERYONE GETS up in arms over the church refusing to LET BLACK PEOPLE marry in it as IF RACISM DIED with the fucking CIVIL Rights act or something.

        THE HAVENS never get demolished, THEY JUST GET refitted with DIFFERENT tools.

      • I hope that happens, because the way things are now… it’s just saddening to see the world the way it is.

      • Am I going to let my daughter marry a robot. Probably not? I dunno. (not to say that this is the same thing because obviously it’s not: people are people and robots are robots. However, I just watched Blade Runner for the billionth time and this is were my head was and I am unconsolably worried that I am going to be a bigot towards robots. and also space aliens.)

    • Some Muslims in America (specifically in Tennessee) would disagree with you about being the last group to be hated.

      • Fair point. Very true – there’s a lot of hate going around. And yet another example of un-Christian behavior by “Christians”.

    • the threat of physical harm/retribution really is never present when it’s gay bigotry. I remember when prop 8 in cali came down, a couple of gays broke into known buisnesses that supported prop 8 and vandalized them. I know it’s petty, but i was a little proud of that because you can cry and protest all you want to but i don’t see them really listening to us because we aren’t viewed as a physical (might retaliate and get militant) threat.

    • It’s mostly that they’ve found a ‘loophole’. Most of the ‘new’ hatred is couched in “It’s part of our faith”. So, it’s ok to hate gay people, and to make women second class citizens, and to brand Muslims as terrorists, and to basically hate on non-judeo-christian religions, and especially athetists, etc, etc, etc. Because if they ‘claim’ the intollerance is religious in nature, and you challenge it, now YOU are the one being intollerant of their religion. It’s not about women getting health care, it’s about “forcing” someone to go agaisnt their religious beliefs by making them allow their employees, EVEN THOSE THAT AREN’T OF THE SAME FAITH, to have the OPTION to use contraception. “My money might go to allowing someone to make a moral decision that I personally would not have made? The bible says I can’t do that …” Which is why pacifists get a big refund check every year saying “here is the money you didn’t want going to the military”.

    • The only group of people it’s more widely acceptable to hate than homosexuals is Spanish-speaking immigrants. I live on Long Island, and most of my friends are self-identified leftists, but man, get them going on MEXICANS (most of the immigrants living in my community are from Ecuador and El Salvador, but same difference, amirite?) and they’ll show some good old-fashioned unadulterated HATE. It’s really quite terrifying.

    • heimaey: “My people (teh gays) are the last safe haven for the bigots.”

      You forgot about Muslims.

  6. I agree with the majority of this, but both the Boston and Chicago mayors have made moves to actually outlaw Chick-Fil-A from their cities. That’s wrong, no matter what your politics are. It’s effectively the Ground Zero mosque of shitty fast-food, you guys.

    • it wasn’t Chicago’s mayor. it was one alderman saying he wasn’t going to approve on zoning grounds. yes, it’s still wrong, but just to clarify.

      Rahm simply said Chick fil a wasn’t displaying “Chicago values”

    • Wait, why is it wrong? Cities outlaw strip clubs, casinos, why not shitty fast food chains with bad political agendas? Let your city vote on it and put it to rest.

      • What if I established a restaurant chain called “Express Your Hate of Islam Through Sandwiches”? Or “Keep Gays Second-Class Via Waffles”? And all our profits went to those causes? Would it be wrong of cities to deny me permits?

        What if I used the same business model but just called my restaurants “Sandwich House” and “Waffle Queen”? Is it okay now?

        • I think you should have really good sides of tabouli and hummus and babaganoush at the sandwich place. Not just because they are delicious but then it will confuse your customer base and once you become popular and everyone is loving your vegan sides, you can come out as a bigot and then everyone will say “but what about the tabouli???” Also I think you should call it Sandwich Mosque to further confuse everyone. And everything should cost $9.11 and tout it as the meal you will never forget. Just have a ton of mixed messages up in that and when your political beliefs come out, you’ll get a new customer base.

          • We’ll have happy meals which contain action figures of the major prophets, but the week we announce we’re giving out Mohammad, there will be no action figure. Our waitstaff will wear hats that match our table cloths. And we’ll be famous for our pulled pork shawarma and our nonalcoholic beer, Halale.

      • I have these same questions. Liquor laws in my part of the country (CFA country, mind you) keep all sorts of businesses out of this town or that, in addition to the gambling and stripping establishments you mentioned.

        Another thing I’ve always wondered that is vaguely related (in my mind at least): how come churches are always being built in residential neighborhoods. Are here not any zoning laws or anything?

      • CITIES CAN outlaw FAST FOOD and shit, I believe. I think TARGETING IT to a single business due TO NON-BUSINESS PRACTICE beliefs is what MAKES IT SO dubious, but I’M NOT a lawyer, you HOTDOG loving BIRD SO DON’T fucking quote me.

    • The liberals applauding Chicago/San Fran/Boston/etc. for wanting to stop CFA from expanding into their towns need to think beyond their knee jerk reaction. Like it says in the post, these are largely pointless political statements and they don’t have much authority to actually enforce a ban for the most part, but if they could, it would be a hugely dangerous and undemocratic precedent. Such a position is unequivocally wrong and un-American.

      Since most of us believe gay marriage is one of the most important issues of our generation, it’s tempting to give those politicians kudos for their stance, but it’s absolutely fundamentally wrong.

      Let’s say Rick Perry decided to keep all them liberal elite Jew movie studios from releasing any films in Texas, or prohibited any businessman that believes in fighting climate change from operating in Texas, how would you feel then? You can’t stop a business from operating just because you disagree with their politics, no matter how hateful their politics are. In fact, their politics/beliefs are totally irrelevant!

      And it’s different than a ban on gambling, liquor laws, etc. Those are businesses that have a measurable and negative effect on public health and safety, which the government then incurs costs combatting, so they have a right to prohibit them. Yes, homophobic views are dangerous in their own way, but it’s a completely different issue.

      It sucks, but business with hateful and bigoted religious beliefs have the same rights to operate as any other. It’s like freedom of speech—we let Nazi’s spew their ignorant hate speech as much as they want, because freedom of speech means freedom of speech for everyone, not matter how despicable that speech is.

  7. Perhaps we should consider merely goading the biggots into eating Chick-fil-A for every meal. In the long con sense, super-clogging the arteries of thousands of reactionary half-wits can’t be a bad plan for America.

    Meanwhile the rest of us will continue to plug our arteries at Bojangles. Win-win.

  8. While we’re dumping on Chick-Fil-A, can I also just point out what a shitty and un-clever abomination of spelling and pronunciation they chose for their restaurant? For years I had no idea how that was pronounced, and then I heard someone say it out loud. What the hell kind of illiterate jackanapes do you need as your customer base to make that remotely intelligible?

  9. The whole thing makes me want a Hammburger

  10. The most important question is – why rhyme the name your fast food chain with gay? Me thinks the chicken doth protest too much.

  11. i am so fucking sick of all of this bullshit. it is a manufactured “controversy” that does nothing but boost ratings and distract people from real issues. and by the way, everything is a political act now. it’s an inescapable fact of life that we all must deal with. in fact, Chick-fil-a being against gay marriage is like the least worst thing a major corporation is doing right now.

    do they make Soma yet? can I get some?

    • Actually, yes!

      That is also known as soma. It freaked me out so much when I found that out.

    • the owner of this juice brand not only supports anti-marriage equality measures, but also directed profits to fund the Blackwater Group [remember those mercenaries in Iraq? that killed all those people?]

      so much for trying to buy fucking juice.

      Apple, Nike, Ford, General Motors, Gap, and Walmart are a sliver of brands that have been linked to slave labor. It’s so prevalent, did you know you can go calculate how many slaves have done work for you?

      bought gas for your car ever? what about a can of Coke? Ever considered the oppressive economics of migrant workers when you eat a piece of fruit? paid taxes? watched a Roman Polanski movie?

      we’re fucked, people.

      • That’s very true, but are you suggesting that we stop trying? That’s an even more depressing thought, in my opinion.

        • well, no. my point was to show that there things out there worse than a privately owned company donating money to anti-gay marriage groups, in fact Chick-fil-a looks downright innocent in comparison, yet no one ever gets upset about that.

          why aren’t people out boycotting the Cub Scouts and 80% of religious places of worship? they are tax exempt!

          but to your question, what alternative do we have?

          • I don’t know. I have no idea. Aside from trying to be as ethical as one can with one’s money, and trying to keep these conversations going, I have no idea what to do. Honestly, its this or just drowning in the swamp of sadness, Artax style.

          • my thoughts exactly. well said.

          • I think that’s the right stance, lbt.

            Humans, for good reasons, are highly tuned to see hypocrisy in other people and call them out on it. Too often, though, this gets used as an excuse to criticize people who are doing good things. Just because they aren’t capable of doing ALL the good things doesn’t make them a hypocrite for doing a few. Think about the criticisms leveled at Al Gore for having heavy energy consumption at his house or whatever, as though that invalidated his trying at all to make an impact on climate change.

            Ideally (and realistically) it’s a process; you make small changes in how you live your life and continue to evaluate other areas where you could improve in. Some human rights activists wear Nike. Some vegetarians wear leather. Some Occupy protestors have BoA bank accounts. It’s a lazy/cynical form of criticism to attack those “hypocrisies” while ignoring the root issues.

          • I don’t go to church, and I’m a certain aged male with no kids. I’m not eligible for the boy scouts, nor do I have an eligible child, so I can’t really boycott them. And I suppose I’m already boycotting church by not going. There’s a difference between “boycotting” and “protesting”.

      • i don’t think we’re fucked! i think we just need more transparency in the political donations and activities of corporations!

        let’s say i was a lifelong chick-fil-a patron, giving them thousands of dollars over my lifetime – i have a social conscience and thus would feel betrayed/guilty and generally shitty that i unwittingly supported really terrible, hateful groups that lobby my government for really terrible, hateful policies.

        but imagine we actually had LAWS that made it impossible for corporations to hide their political activities! imagine if when you went to buy a chicken sandwich/pair of sneakers/computer/etc. you were already fully INFORMED about where that company stood on critical issues – and even better, imagine if corporations were BANNED from using their significant assets to influence policy decisions.

        with the system the way it is, it’s not likely that the last scenarios is happening anytime soon, but it should not be out of the question for consumers/voters (they’re called DOLLAR VOTES) to have easy, constant access to the political donations of the corporations they are considering giving their money to.

        • what i’m saying is that, if i loved eating at chick-fil-a, the only thing worse than chick-fil-a donating millions of dollars to family research council is that i’m only finding out about it now.

      • Wasn’t there a time when Celestial Seasonings had a big anti-gay agenda? I don’t know if they still do or not because I only drink organic locally-grown peppermint teas harvested by volunteer hippies that get paid in (also locally-grown) weed.

        • Celestial Seasonings?!?

          I heard that every for every $10 saved on gas by a Prius, Honda clubs a baby seal.

          • Vaguely related: Subaru is a HUGE supporter of all sorts of great environmental movements and gay rights and animal rescue stuff… but the gas mileage on their cars is terrible (21/28 AT BEST) and they haven’t made strides to change it AT ALL bc their liberal support group is massive. And because of their super loud PR, they still get the support of people that would otherwise get a Toyota or Honda or Leaf or Volt or whatever. I have a lot of mixed feelings about this, not just because every single one of my neighbors drives a Suburu (though to be fair, they are really good for transporting your bike around, and most of my neighbors that have cars really do bike A LOT and go to the mountains so maybe the all-wheel drive makes sense or at least evens out?). But I can fit my bike in my Corolla and that little guy goes up and down mountains just fine, too.

      • I’m just copying and pasting my previous comment (which I believe is further down the thread), which is itself a PFT quote, but man, Paul F. Tompkins really said it the best:

        “No one is asking you to investigate Coca-Cola, or AT&T, or anything. No one’s asking you to carry a sign in front of Chick-Fil-A. They’re just saying, ‘Now that you know this shit, don’t eat that fucking sandwich anymore!’”

        The same sentiment can be made toward any company discovered to have a reprehensible agenda or practice, and the recourse is simply that there are alternatives for consumers. It’s not easy, for sure. It’s a huge pain in the ass.

        In this specific case of Chick-Fil-A, PFT put it succinctly and made the decision very cut and dry.

    • okay i’ve actually been thinking about something similar. i really do, deep down, think that these issues (even if they’re not MEANT to 100% of the time) do serve to distract people from actual gay rights issues, i.e. the prevalence of hate crimes and violence and how trans people have been getting the short end of the lgbt-rights stick for a while now. BUT THEN i get home to my small southern baptist town from studying abroad and check facebook and i realized that that sort of dialogue would just never ever ever reach people from my town who are openly advocating for chikfila. as in my friends from high school, who know that i’m gay, are posting pro-chikfila shit all over social media. so it’s honestly something that i’m really conflicted about because on one hand i think that it’s really just something for the media to focus on instead of real-er issues. but on the other hand i think that some of these people could potentially be reached in conversation about chikfila-level issues because they’re so prevalent, and even attempting to discuss this on a higher level of how it’s distracting from bigger lgbt or corporate-interest issues would absolutely just be falling on deaf ears for most people.

  12. FUCK this whole THING.

    HOTBUTTON issues SPONSERED by Pepsi. FUCKERS USED TO argue political AND SOCIAL BELIEFS through the LIKES OF LOCKE, HUMES, or Marx. NOW WE TAKE our hate and hate FUCK OUR shitty fast-food CHICKEN LIKE it makes OUR UGLY ASS hatred mean some KIND OF political BULLSHIT.



  13. I agree wholeheartedly. You are a gentleman and a scholar, Gabe.

  14. It frustrates me to no end when people assume that their First Amendment rights (or Canadian Charter rights) to “free speech” means that they can’t be criticized for what they say.
    The US 1st amendment says that the government can’t pass a law that keeps you from expressing your opinions, keeps newspapers from printing what they want, keeps you from building a church or going to that church, keeps you from being able to protest in public spaces, or keeps you from hanging out with your friends.
    That is basically it.
    It does not say that you won’t face consequences to what you say by other free people. If you act like a total asshole, you are going to get called on your shit!!!! Deal with it!
    (Sarah Palin reads my videogum comments, right?)

    • This is exactly what I kept trying to explain to my ‘persecuted’ conservative Christian parents who totally watch Bill O’Reilly like it’s normal. No one (including the government) is stopping any CEO from saying asshole things. You can say any asshole thing you want all day long, but we can also not like you for being that asshole. It’s pretty simple.

      • Boycotts are capitalism in action. The way you behave as a business can reduce or increase demand, and affect your bottom line.
        Chick-Fil-A is getting slapped by the invisible hand. Unfortunately, on CFA Appreciation Day, they were also given an invisible handjob. By other assholes.

  15. Battle of the Bigots 2012: Which Side Bigots the Biggest?

    Someone kill me. Someone go back in time and kill me before Bill O’Reilly sarcastically calls for a boycott of all African-Americans.

    • Look if I’m going to use my time machine at all, I’m going to go back and stop Bill O’Reilly, or stop the Lake House from being made. Something that would be useful

  16. SHEESH bill ! YIKES Sarah!

    I just LOVE the point she made that Chick-fil-A was just defending a marriage of a man and a women.. I mean maybe I’m being ridiculous here but when he said that gay marriage would ” BRING DOWN GODS WRATH..” I feel like maybe, i mean just a little, a smidge really that he’d crossed the border from saying he prefers and believes that marriage is between people with opposite genitals to FULL ON MAJOR LEAGUE ASTOUNDING HATEFUL BIGGORTY.

  17. Sarah Palin for the head of the ACLU.

  18. I am thrilled the O’Reilly segment got around to the concept of economic coercion at the end, and that the guest/comedian understood the concept and made a completely accurate counterargument to the other two badgering harpies.

    It’s not economic coercion when it’s private citizens spending their money. The boycott is precisely the same kind of ‘speech’ that Citizens United dealt with. People have a right to spend their money however they want, and because corporations are citizens THEY have that right.

    The one aspect of this where the concept of coercion MAY be applicable is where the mayors stated a reluctance to allow Chick-Fil-A to build in their cities… I know that through zoning and blah blah blah town and cities CAN prevent stores from opening up. If they’re doing so because of a political belief held by the owner, that actually might be constitutionally problematic… I look forward to following those stories if/as they develop.


    Shut up, Tim Thomas. I really really love you, but its best to keep quiet behind those pipes. That is all.

  20. Chris Wei  |   Posted on Aug 2nd, 2012 -28

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see

    • “Nothing is connected.” – I Heart Huckabees 2: Cynical Version

    • How nice for you, Chris, to be able to eat your goddamn waffle fries and not have to know that there are literally millions of people out there who think you’re an abomination.

      How nice for you to never have to worry about a corporation publicly attacking your basic human rights.

      How nice for you to never have to be on the receiving end of homophobic hatred from total strangers.

      Enjoy your fries.

    • This is categorically false. When you give someone money for a good and/or service with a clear knowledge that your money will be spent on something that you dislike (or like) then you are absolutely engaging in the “political” action of providing money to that thing. That doesn’t mean you have to care about it! But just because you’re disinterested and would rather eat waffle fries in ignorant bliss doesn’t change the reality of it one little bit.

      • More importantly, though, because of yesterday’s outpouring of “customer support” for the company’s social position, it’s particularly impossible to ignore what your purchasing power says in this particular instance.

      • That’s ridiculous. It’s a simple business transaction. This for that. If your boss knows you like to play poker and continues to pay your salary to do your job he is not endorsing gambling.

    • I like the way you think.

    • everyone that disagrees with you should probably never buy weed ever again.

      • I think that probably depends on where/who you buy from, but could you explain what you mean?

        • well, there is a pretty direct line from smoker to dealer to distributor to smuggler to grower/supplier to cartel

          and then an even more direct one from cartel to corruption. or cartel to violence.

          so, unless you have a nice little growing operation, its virtually impossible to say the money you pay for pot doesn’t contribute to terrorism, corruption, and violence.

          • I guess living in the NW has its advantages then, medical and grow-ops abound!

            I do see your point more for hard drugs, your buddy’s buddy’s buddy probably doesn’t harvest his own coca plants.

          • “so, unless you have a nice little growing operation, its virtually impossible to say the money you pay for pot doesn’t contribute to terrorism, corruption, and violence.”

            Yeah, this simply isn’t true and is also a HUGE oversimplification. I don’t really smoke anymore, but I used to quite a bit (read: too much), and more often than not, I knew exactly where it came from. The times I didn’t, I generally knew who grew it and if I didn’t know the person, I knew the person who knew the person. It’s once you go down that ladder a few degrees where the ugliness starts to settle. Mine is not an uncommon experience. Sure, there are people who just know a guy who knows a guy and “who the fuck knows that guy?”, and it’s sadly common.

            But don’t denounce an entire substance based on a not insignificant amount of that market funding assholes. If that was the case, I would never buy shoes or clothes, or fucking anything ever again.

          • “But don’t denounce an entire substance based on a not insignificant amount of that market funding assholes”

            exactly, which is why its still perfectly ok to go eat at Chick-fil-a, which was my point.

          • Your metaphor would work if because of what Dan Cathy/Chick-fil-a did, people were boycotting all chicken everywhere. That’s not the case.

          • Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see

          • Of course, the laws that outlaw the sale, distribution and possession of marijuana ALSO contribute to all those things. Thus, everyone that pays taxes that go to local, state and federal law enforcement and their war on drugs are creating the environment where a black market is able to thrive.

            Prohibition is a huge part of why organized crime was able to become so huge. So, while the individual purchasing drugs will be, in a small part, feeding into a black market system that involves all the negative aspects of organized crime … so does nearly everyone who is not involved directly in the drug trade. Since the tax money isn’t really something anyone can ‘boycott’ succesfully, the only real solution is trying to someone convince politicians to scale back the war on drugs.

            Someone like the President. Like Bill Clinton, who smoked pot before becoming president. Like W. Bush, who probably did cocaine at some point. Like Barack, who admited to both pot use AND cocaine use. If any of them had been cought, thanks to the war on drugs, they’d have had criminal records and never would have been president. People’s lives are ruined because of posession charges, and sent to jail for a very long time. If they are ‘unlucky’ enough to get caught. And, interestingly enough, your luck is based a lot on where you live, which also happens to corralate greatly with ethnicity.

            The drug thing is much more nuanced … and considering that fuel has terrorist ties as well, and basically buying ANYTHING is going to have an associated fuel cost (things have to be shipped places), it does become very hard to have a completely clear concience on what you buy. However, the ‘money trail’ for Chick-Fil-A is very easy. Company gets money, they spend it talking about how bad gay marriage is. No money trail needed. It’s a pretty simple cause and effect, and there is a VERY easy alternative, go to any OTHER chicken place and get the same product without the same baggage.

          • Don’t understand the dislikes here? Very very good point. It’s well established that the Mexican based cartels fund their operations (mostly cocaine and crystal meth, but increasingly heroin) with marijuana, grown both here and south of the border. Sure lots of weed gets grown by Americans, especially here in Cali, but most weed comes from the cartels in some way. Those chicken sandwiches aren’t looking so bad now, huh?

          • i’m not arguing the merits or contributing factors of the drug war.

            i simply used the same direct logic that buying drugs causes a demand for more of them, so therefore your money that buys drugs goes down the line back to people doing horrible things with it.

          • and also furthers my point that people will go to VERY FAR LENGTHS to justify why it’s perfectly ok to do one thing that is very much the same thing as another that they think is vile and unacceptable.

            “oh not me i know EXACTLY where my pot comes from!”…”well it’s not my fault, it’s all of the other factors in the drug war….” ok. do or say whatever helps you sleep at night. we all have to one way or another. i am ALL FOR THAT. but don’t vilify me for buying a chicken sandwich.

          • There is a difference though, in that you know know where your money goes when you buy Chick-Fil-A. They take the money you buy a chicken sandwich with and use it to fund anti-gay causes.

            I would hope if you found out your friendly neighborhood pot dealer was down-chain from a violent Mexican cartel you’d stop buying from him too.

          • he is and they all are, because there is a demand in the market for pot, therefore putting a street value on it that cartels are profiting from.

            to say that’s the government’s fault for making pot illegal? well, gay marriage is also still illegal in most states.

            spending money on political causes is also a protected right under the first amendment. Chick fil a is a franchised chain, with locally owned and operated stores, like the one here in Chicago and the owner said she’s donated money to GLBT causes, well before all this bullshit blew up.

            my argument this whole time has been that you don’t know where your money is getting funneled to once it leaves your control. and i think that’s what the guy who started this thread was pointing out as well. once your transaction is complete, the control of that money is gone, so it’s hard to be liable for where it ends up.

          • Except, if the person you are giving the money to TELLS YOU what they are spending the money on, you now know. You can’t continue to claim you don’t know where the money is going after they have made it clear.

            And, the analogy breaks down. If you don’t want to support Chik-Fil-A, you can just buy chicken somewhere else. And a boycott of chicken sandwiches won’t reduce the price of chicken sandwiches. Buying it somewhere else won’t increase the price (or maintain the price) because you are still buying the chicken from someone else. The drug market, as a black market, is shrouded in secrecy by its very nature, and it’s possible that buying from one guy may have the money end up going to something you didn’t expect.

            You can’t exactly shop around and find a meth dealer you approve of ethically … but you can very easily go to Popeyes or Wendy’s or KFC or any other place that serves Chicken sandwiches and get BASICALLY the same product and know you are not giving money to the company that has come out against gay marriage. It’s not a black market company.

          • “There is a difference though, in that you know know where your money goes when you buy Chick-Fil-A. They take the money you buy a chicken sandwich with and use it to fund anti-gay causes.”

            And how much do they give to these causes? And how much are they giving relative to their total income? I’m going to guess that’s much less that $0.01 per transaction. I can guarantee you a whole hell of a lot more than that is going to fund violence in Mexico per pot transaction you make – even if you factor in a lower % based on occasionally buying from a non-cartell connected source.

            “And, the analogy breaks down. If you don’t want to support Chik-Fil-A, you can just buy chicken somewhere else. And a boycott of chicken sandwiches won’t reduce the price of chicken sandwiches. Buying it somewhere else won’t increase the price (or maintain the price) because you are still buying the chicken from someone else. The drug market, as a black market, is shrouded in secrecy by its very nature, and it’s possible that buying from one guy may have the money end up going to something you didn’t expect.

            You can’t exactly shop around and find a meth dealer you approve of ethically…”

            The analogy doesn’t break down, this is just where you justification comes in. If giving money in a transaction that is likely (in part) to go to pay for something abhorrent then they are the same thing. Your justification is that there is no seal of approval that your drugs aren’t coming from a violent group. Then don’t buy them. The only place his analogy breaks down is the apparent implication that if someone wants pot they MUST get some. Not if the thought of possibly paying for machetes for gangsters to cut the heads off of policemen and their families is disturbing enough to you.

            The same would go for chicken. If it were nearly impossible to obtain a piece of chicken without a promise that some of the money wasn’t going to anti-gay groups, would you be defending poultry eaters because of the murkiness of the industry or telling them to find something else to eat because it isn’t worth risking the funding of hate?

    • I like to think of this guy as an active member of the gay community and a passionate defender of civil rights who JUST FUCKING LOVES CHICKEN SANDWICHES.

      • And hates chickens and thinks they should all die in horrible factory farm scenarios because of God’s Plan.

        Seriously… no one is talking about their horrific factory farming issues as another reason to boycott their garbage product?? THERE ARE SO MANY REASONS TO NOT EAT AT CHICK FIL A.

        Also, move to California or Colorado or Michigan or any state with a decent medical pot law if you want a good workaround for smoking and not contributing to cartel violence. And stay the fuck away from cocaine.

        • Yeah, none of this applies at all if you live in CA. In most cases you can probably shake hands with the grower and have a convo about how they came up with the strain and what kind of nutrients they use. The idea of cartels and gangs being involved seems totally quaint and like something out of a bad ’80s movie. It must really suck to have to still deal with shady dealers and weird friends of friends of friends in this day and age.

          Of course the geniuses on the LA City Council are trying as hard as humanly possible to send it directly back into the black market in this city and turn everything back into a criminal enterprise, so I might soon be eating my delicious words.

          • I would honestly like to know what is going on with that — and why it’s also happening in the Bay. My friends in the news don’t even know what the motivations are. Even my token Republican friend is pro-medical coops because literally everyone knows someone this has honestly helped. Plus it really does cut back on crime.

            (I have a theory that it’s all backed / SuperPac’d by Mexican cartels, but I’m not caffeinated enough to explain it right now.)

          • No one here seems to know either. There are actually at least a couple of guys on the city council who admit that they are ‘patients’ and that it really helps them, but they still voted 14-0 to shut them down. Basically everyone in the entire city thinks it’s a terrible idea except for like a few vocal ‘save the children’ neighborhood watch-type groups. It kind of seems like they were bumbling around for years half-assed trying to figure out how to regulate the shops and just gave up and said ‘fuck it let’s just shut them all down and sweep it under the rug’. Our mayor and city government are all known fucktards.

            My theory is that there is serious secret money and/or political pressure involved. It definitely has something to do with the police chief and asshole DA, who must be benefiting from this somehow. I’m thinking it might go up to the federal level.

          • I don’t disagree. It’s weird to watch it from afar and then ask friends in the middle of it — my old neighbors, news colleagues, etc. — and no one can give me a real answer. My friend w/small ones watches a lot of local news bc she’s w/small humans most of the day and said it’s not covered AT ALL and even her mommy groups think it is insane and will backfire… but even the “think of the children types” seem to be not against it bc someone will always be that one cancer patient who actually needs it over clinical drugs example + actual noticeable reduction on local gang violence.

            I seriously think something bigger is amiss and it’s really frustrating to be not in a place where I can suss it out (within reason, I don’t want my head found in Griffith Park by a dog on a walk, though that was something totally different).

          • have you paid ANY attention to what’s going on in Mexico? it’s pretty much Gotham City in the Dark Knight Rises and there are a dozen or so Banes running around controlling entire cities and states. headless bodies being dumped by the truckload.

            “totally quaint and like something out of a bad 80s movie” could not be more ignorant. i urge you to read more international news.

          • Jesus, dude – I’m well aware of what’s going on in Mexico, it’s right near here. But it has much more to do with the CIA and cocaine and the ‘war on drugs’ than some stoner buying an 1/8th of indoor that was grown by hippies in Humboldt County. Hell, the entire world heroin market is probably run by Blackwater now because Afghanistan.

            All I’m saying is that in this particular state (and a couple of others), pot (specifically) is not associated with shady people or criminal enterprises and you most definitely know that your money is going to a nice person/business. Coke and meth and everything else may be a different story, for sure. And actually what I’m talking about re: the LA City Council is just that very thing. They are practically handing the business back over to the Mexican druglords with a bow on top.

    • I downvoted because their waffle fries are an abomination. A soggy and saltless abomination.

  21. Josh Duggar has come out in support of Chick-Fil-A. ‘Nuff said.

    • Aaron Fechter, the creator of Showbiz Pizza came out in support of Chick a Fil A yesterday. Funny that the “sanctity of marriage” doesn’t apply to him and his girlfriend who is 25 years younger than him.
      I kind of hate to bring his personal shit out in the open but since it was on a documentary where he disclosed it , I figure it’s fair game. I am hereby dropping all my plans regarding the Steve Winwood statue (not really, I dropped them before because I just didn’t want to do all the work but let’s just say it was this.)

    • Weren’t we at “’nuff said” when Westboro Baptist Church supported Chick-Fil-A?

  22. Holla if you didn’t watch the Fox News clips because you didn’t feel like getting really angry right now.

  23. If there’s one think I’m thankful for in this whole debacle, it’s the return of Jukt Micronics references.

  24. One nice thing about the local news coverage of Chick Fil-A Appreciation Day is that we get to see that obese people have heads. Usually the news just shows them from the neck down.
    Glad u have heads, obese people on the news.

  25. This is the kind of post that made Videogum great. anytime Gabe explodes the contents of his thought processes, unfiltered, out onto the interwebs, whether its about this mess or a bad movie, its just an absolute delight.

  26. What if you’re a fervent supporter of marriage equality and a fan of Chick Fil A that only eats it once a year on her way to an August beach vacation, and before you order your Quarter Chickenders With Chicken Cheese, you make a generous donation to Washington United for Marriage?

    (Also, everyone donate to Washington United for Marriage:

  27. I want so badly to be funny or clever about this but I really, really, really can’t and that makes me sad.

    Dammit, homophobes. You killed my funny.

  28. Sarah seems to be getting creepier and more insane looking/sounding every day. And BTW – shouldn’t there be some rule about being able to call her “Governor” at this point since she basically said fuck you to that job? Doesn’t seem like she deserves to have a forever title like that.

  29. This whole thing really kind of fills me with despair. We are no longer able to have civil conversations with people we disagree with in this country–our opinions are now expressed by what we eat or don’t eat or what we click “Like” on on Facebook and there’s wholesale dehumanization of anyone in the opposing camp. And it’s only going to get more polarized.
    I have to go watch some trampoline accidents now, I’m feeling too many scary feelings.

  30. The worst part of all this is that Sarah Palin can keep smiling while she basically tells the world she hates me for what I am like it’s no big deal and everything is okie dokie.

  31. i agree with basically all of this post and have nothing to add to it, but i’d just like to say how happy it makes me whenever gabe drops jukt micronics references: THE MOST happy.

  32. I grew up in the South, and like most people who did, I LOVE CHICK FIL A. Maybe there’s nothing special about it, but I grew up eating it and so it probably tastes much better to me than most people. I’ve lived in Los Angeles for the past six years and have been DYING for them to open a CFA here. In the past year they’ve FINALLY opened up two franchises and I rejoiced, literally. Now, all my liberal friends give me SO SO much crap about eating there. It really sucks. I don’t believe that by not doing something (getting there by 10:30 so I can get the chicken biscuits for breakfast) I’m having any effect on anything. If you do want to boycott, I totally understand and support that, but I choose not to.

    Here’s why I don’t support a boycott. CFA has always been run by Christian nuts, which is why they don’t do business on Sundays. I actually met CEO Dan Cathy when I was very young, and while I don’t remember the conversation, my dad recently told me he asked Cathy why they don’t sponsor Nascar, and he said it’s because they race on Sundays. The point is, think about the hundreds of millions of dollars and business opportunities CFA has lost out on over the years because of their outdated religious beliefs. They’re punishing themselves! Their religious beliefs are their punishment and cost them literally millions of dollars a year (Sunday is a big day for the chicken and biscuits crowd), so don’t tell me that me not eating my chicken biscuits and sweet tea (do you have any idea how hard it is to find good sweet tea in Los Angeles?!?!) twice a month I’m accomplishing anything but making myself feel good by literally DOING NOTHING.

    Here’s the most important point. It makes me FURIOUS when my liberal friends applaud those mayors for trying to keep CFA out of their towns. Like it says above, they can’t really do that, but so many liberals thought this was such a great thing to do. It’s actually a HORRIBLE thing that EVERYONE, liberal or conservative, should oppose vehemently. This is America, and you can’t stop someone from running a business just because you disagree with their politics. Yes, gay marriage is the most important issue of our generation arguably, but that’s totally irrelevant here. Denying someone a business license because you disagree with their politics is a slippery slope. Imagine if Rick Perry said he wouldn’t let any films released by the Jew film companies screen in Texas, or any business that supports gay marriage open in Texas. Same thing. It’s un-American, undemocratic, and a VERY, VERY dangerous precedent to set.

    CFA should be allowed to do business anywhere. If the citizens of that town don’t want to eat there bc of CFA’s political views, they won’t eat there, and the franchise will die. But CFA HAS to be allowed to open.

    And god damn it I like CFA. Maybe it’s not that great, but I love it and it reminds me of my childhood and I’m going to continue eating there and continue supporting marriage equality and that doesn’t make me a hate monster. This whole thing has been blown so far out of proportion.

    A note to West Coast readers: Chick Fil A is to people from the South as In and Out is to people from California. It’s part of our culture, and I didn’t wait five years for them to open a CFA in LA just to let uninformed liberals bully me into supporting a useless boycott.

    Give CFA a chance people. Go before 10:30 and order the breakfast chicken biscuits or the chicken minis. You won’t regret it.

  33. “Because let’s be honest: if you do not agree that all people deserve equal treatment in this world, then you hold hateful beliefs. The end!”

    Yes, this is correct. It’s amazing to me that EQUALITY is a fucking political issue where there’s an actual fence you can sit on and it’s in the fucking middle. That is outrageous! When I started law school (this was in 2007), our dean gave a speech saying the school had no politics and that it welcomed people with all views but that INTOLERANCE of all kinds were absolutely counter to what the school stood for. People thought that was weird and political, but no! How can you even agree that intolerance of any kind is just cool, like that’s what you believe and it’s a normal and acceptable belief to have? I just don’t fucking ugh ugh gross ugh!

    And screw Chik-Fil-A and its many Appreciators. Same scumbags who donate to George Zimmerman, just eat all the heart-stopping sandwiches and get off my planet.

    • INTOLERANCE of all kinds was*, fucking too angry for subject verb agreement.

    • “How can you even agree that intolerance of any kind is just cool” – as you go on to say screw people who eat at a particular restaurant and get off your planet.

      Some people can’t see themselves.

      • Okay, you took “intolerance of any kind” literally, I guess, to encompass intolerance of intolerance and by extension intolerance of slavery, misogyny, etc. etc. Cool.

  34. Very well said!

  35. Chicken cheese? I hope I can buy that from non-bigots, because it sounds fucking delicious.

  36. this makes me want to move to Canada… am i wrong in assuming that Canada is like America except with way more subdued crazy?

  37. Interesting. So you didn’t want to boycott Chick-Fil-A because of the opinion of their President (I agreed with you) but now you justify and encourage a boycott because of opinions about the company from morons like Sarah Palin who have nothing to do with the company? That makes sense.

    By the way is “recently became aggressively vocal in their disparagement of gay marriage” in reference to his recent answer to a question where he never even mentioned gays or gay marriage?

    I don’t care for his opinion or the groups he supports, but he’s been more vocal in the past. His recent interview is pretty benign. This is manufactured. If you disagree with his opinion on gay marriage, that’s cool (I do too) but do it on the merits of the big picture.

  38. We’re all forgetting something here. Taco Bell. Taco Bell doesn’t care who you are, what you believe…its still tasty when drunk…and everyone gets the poos after you eat it. I win. Case closed. Tacos for all.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post, reply to, or rate a comment.