Consider this: A person (Brian Sullivan) runs for a high political office and runs a campaign that you believe is so far off base and whose positions on some major issues is, in your opinion, appalling, poorly thought out, and genuinely harmful to the people of Minnesota.
That same person claims to have spent most of his career "building businesses, successful businesses like Simon Delivers that contribute real wealth and create real jobs . . ." (quote from a speech by Brian Sullivan at Bearpath Golf Club, April 2002.) I have a choice to patronize his company or to use another. In my opinion, his public views on key issues are extreme, his solutions to problems are badly conceived, unfair and hostile, and his style of campaigning is offensive. Why should I ignore all of that in choosing who I will buy products from? Admittedly, I haven't a clue about the political leanings of most of the companies I do business with or the products/services I buy! Mr. Sullivan chose to make his views very public when he decided he wanted to be governor. There are companies who have been led by prominent local republicans like Rudy Boschwitz, Bill Cooper, George Pillsbury to name a few, that I patronize regularly. I may disagree with all or some of their very public political views but they are not necessarily (in my opinion) extreme, unfair, hostile, offensive, or harmful. We all make choices (thankfully, we still have some) about what products/services to buy and where we buy them. It may be price, service, convenience, value, quality, which typically dictate that decision but in some cases, I reserve the right as a consumer to exercise another level of judgment: to not buy products from a company whose leader or leadership (Sullivan was on their Board)who expresses views that I find very distasteful. The polarization in American politics is largely due to the Sean Hannity, Anne Coulter, Laura Ingram, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh style of demonize and ridicule your opponents, ignore other facts or perceptions that don't fit your views, never allow a doubt about what you believe, and lie/misrepresent whenever you need to. But that's outside the scope of Minneapolis Issues list! Jim Bernstein Fulton -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anderson, Mark (GESM) Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 3:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Mpls] Doing business with those who disagree with you Jim Bernstein wrote: Point of interest: Simon Delivers is the creation of Brian Sullivan, the candidate who made Gov. Tim Pawlenty look like a moderate. Mr. Sullivan is the darling of ultra-conservatives. When he was running against Mr. Pawlenty for the republican nomination, he made it pretty clear that he believes government is bad, taxes are bad, liberals are bad, and opposing republicans is bad because only republicans know what is right and good for you! Simon Delivers may provide a useful service, is probably a good company. I for one, will never give Brian Sullivan and his politics of poison one penny! Mark Anderson replies: I do not understand why people would refuse to do business with someone because of their politics. I would never in a million years consider driving far out of my way to do business at Wal-Mart just because shopping at Target enriches our left-wing Senator, who in my opinion is doing lots of bad things in Washington. I'd be cutting off my nose to spite my face. I can understand boycotting a business if the business itself is doing things that you consider unethical. If I found out some company was enslaving workers in a foreign country, I wouldn't buy from the company even if they had the best value, because then I'd be benefiting from the slavery. But I certainly don't worry about agreeing with the company owner's beliefs, or even necessarily respect how they act in their personal lives. The attitude that results in personally boycotting a business because you disagree with them is the sort of thing that has caused so much polarization in politics these days. Apparently the theory is that the right wing is so evil that allowing a member thereof to gain wealth is bad, even if a left wing member also gains? And I think there are a bunch of people on the right who also feel this way about the left. If government wasn't bad before these polarizing politics started, it certainly will be if the two sides find more value in punishing the other side than in trying to improve the "commonweal." Mark V Anderson Bancroft REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
