Coca-Cola caves to progressive boycott threat over indirect support for voter ID laws

posted at 10:30 am on April 5, 2012 by Tina Korbe

It’s a perennial clash between conservatives and progressives: Do voter ID laws represent a legitimate attempt to curb voter fraud or do they represent a sinister attempt to disenfranchise minority voters?

Progressives strongly maintain the latter — and they stand ready to mobilize against any attempts to institute voter ID laws. The American Legislative Exchange Council supports such laws, and companies like Coca-Cola, Inc., and Walmart Stores, Inc., are affiliated with ALEC. The progressive group Color for Change threatened to boycott Coca-Cola over its support for ALEC — and, within five hours, Coke had withdrawn its support for the conservative legislators’ group.

The Center for American Progress blog ThinkProgress touted the victory. It’s only a victory, though, if their arguments against voter ID laws are sound. CAP maintains that voter fraud is actually quite rare — and research from the Brennan Center for Justice appears to back up that claim. According to Brennan, it is more likely that an individual will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls. James O’Keefe’s video to support voter ID laws proves that election officials probably wouldn’t catch such impersonations — but it doesn’t prove that those impersonations are frequent.

When conservatives speak of “voter fraud,” though, we’re talking about more than just outright impersonation attempts. It would probably be more accurate of us to use the term “election fraud” because we’re also talking about forged signatures on primary ballots, faked absentee ballots, voter intimidation efforts and, yes, the sort of ignorance that leads ineligible voters — convicted felons, for example, or illegal immigrants — to think themselves eligible, cast votes and have their votes counted. Election fraud is still widespread — and still affecting the outcome of votes in unfair ways. Would voter ID laws correct all of the problems in the system? No, but that’s why reformers usually wish to combine voter ID laws with other measures to ensure the fairest possible elections for all.

Yes, voter ID laws would make it more difficult for eligible voters without a government ID to vote — but shouldn’t we work to correct the problem that some eligible voters somehow don’t have any form of government identification rather than attack the ID laws themselves? Nobody wants to disenfranchise anybody — except maybe the dead.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

goflyers on April 5, 2012 at 11:05 AM

I had to show ID the other day to buy allergy medicine at the drug store.

……there is no other logical reason for democrats to fight Voter ID laws than the fact they want to help with voter fraud.

….a few cases in point:


Democratic plot to rig MI elections prompts nine felony charges

posted at 10:55 am on March 17, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

If you can’t beat ‘em … fake ‘em out? Two Democratic Party leaders in Michigan face nine felony counts after prosecutors allege that they forged documents to put fake Tea Party candidates on the ballot. Unlike other schemes where Democrats allegedly recruited candidates to run on ersatz Tea Party organization identities, these “candidates” had no idea they were on the ballot at all, some of them only discovering it after receiving delinquency notices on filings. Fox News in Detroit reports that the grand jury is still probing the matter and that there may be more indictments coming:

April 5, 2012
“Voter fraud” on The Daily Caller

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/buzz/voter-fraud/#ixzz1rBASHNpc

Democrat says Democratic Party bosses use voter fraud
[VIDEO]
November 21st, 2011

Top Democrats are aggressively pushing the claim that Republicans’ worries about voter fraud are an insincere excuse to suppress voting by African-Americans and Hispanics


4 Indiana Dems Charged With Election Fraud – Forged Petitions For Obama

Posted by Jim Hoft on Monday, April 2, 2012, 8:21 PM

Among those charged is the former long-time chairman of the St. Joseph County Democratic Party, Butch Morgan, who allegedly ordered the forgeries.


2008 Election Fraud Case: Democrat Officials Face Felony Charges

Police allege that Morgan told all the participants that they would falsify votes on behalf of the three Democratic candidates that year (Obama, Clinton, Edwards), and that he would assign which candidate they would fake votes for. Now isn’t that taking the cake? Being asked to fake votes is one thing; being asked to fake votes for the candidate that might not have been one of your choosing is quite another.


Democrats Charged in ‘Massive’ Voter Fraud Case

Two Democratic politicians in an upstate New York city have been charged in a “massive” voter fraud case first reported a year ago on Fox News.

A 59-page, 116-count indictment charges Troy Democratic City Councilman Michael LoPorto and Edward McDonough, Democratic Commissioner of the Rensselaer County Board of Elections, with forgery and criminal possession of a forged instrument. The two men arrive in court in handcuffs on Friday and pleaded not guilty.


The Left’s voter fraud whitewash

By Michelle Malkin • October 27, 2010 09:14 AM

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/27/62680/

Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt. It’s the Democrats’ coping mechanism for midterm election voter fraud. Faced with multiple reports of early voting irregularities and election shenanigans across the country, left-wing groups are playing dumb, deaf and blind. Voter fraud? What voter fraud?


….Corruption….lying…cheating…stealing….it’s how liberals roll.

Baxter Greene on April 5, 2012 at 11:23 AM

“I’m saying here publicly, if you’re a liberal and don’t want to do business with my company — MSCO — please don’t. Don’t .”

- Mark Stevens, CEO, MSCO

Mark Stevens: A Profile in Courage

Resist We Much on April 5, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I think those of us that are conservative should bite the bullet and just quit drinking Cokes. Two can play the game of boycotting.

SgtRed on April 5, 2012 at 11:23 AM

S N O R T….. ! ! ! ! ! !

KOOLAID2 on April 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM

No Snorting Coke.

Bad Koolaid2. Bad.

portlandon on April 5, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I guess we can now say that Coke supports The Color of Change, a radical, left wing organization. Sounds like grounds to boycott Coke and any other company that caves to these extortionists.

Liquor stores, the issuing of food stamps by the government, banks,and any other venue that requires an ID should now be considered racist based on the left’s thinking.

iamsaved on April 5, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Let’s boycott Coke! Force them to make a decision!

jeffn21 on April 5, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Wasn’t there a recent article about someone checking the actual addresses of folks who had VOTED in an election and they flagged suspect addresses: empty lots and more than 4 people at a single address? I vaguely recall that given the the large number of places to look, they chose places where there were more votes than registered voters. The results varied but something like 18% to 25% of the voters were “suspect”. I know when I read that it seemed like a smoking gun for voter fraud. I just wish I could remember where I read all that stuff. Having a bad GoogleFoo day.

Bear on April 5, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Tina, I think the bigger story on coca cola and food products in general are their prices. How about an inflation story? Bernanke and Bozo, “The inflation Team”, could be your headline.

DDay on April 5, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Give me a Pepsi please!

lhuffman34 on April 5, 2012 at 10:32 AM

They support a company that uses aborted humans to research flavor enhancers.

Gatekeeper on April 5, 2012 at 11:28 AM

The Coca-Cola Company has elected to discontinue its membership with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Our involvement with ALEC was focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business. We have a long-standing policy of only taking positions on issues that impact our Company and industry.

Heh. I had my last Coke yesterday. Nevermore. If liberals can do this crap, then we conservatives can too. I’m not going to whine at Coke for caving, but the fact that they did cave is a sign that they don’t understand that when they’re already standing on the third rail, reaching over to either of the other two rails is going to kill them far worse than just staying where they are.

Wonder how Komen’s doing?

unclesmrgol on April 5, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Few people — and fewer corporations — have the stomach to withstand the professional left’s full assault. They go scorched earth — attack their children, their parents, their neighbors, anything and everything — Coco-Cola’s management knows this, and so do the SC justices.

And where are the efforts from Republicans, Conservatives, and the Right in general to counter the Left’s never ending attacks, lies, and misinformation? Why won’t the Right go on the offense? How long — how many more years — must this and the rest of the Democrats’ and the Left’s attacks and tactics continue before the Right wakes up, says enough is enough, and mounts an effective and ongoing offensive of our own?

What good is the Right’s message if they can’t get it across to the voters? The Right needs a “Director of Marketing” to provide leadership, to develop strategy and tactics, to provide guidance and direction, and to coordinate the efforts of all the Right leaning and anti-Liberal organizations and groups.

AAR

AAR on April 5, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Clearly, voter ID laws are a right-wing scheme to disenfranchise key Democratic constituencies, including felons, illegal immigrants, and the deceased.

Mr. Prodigy on April 5, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Who knew that Jimmy Carter wanted to disenfranchise voters?

He co-chaired the 21-member bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform that advocated voted identification laws in 2005.

The commission called voter identification one of “five pillars” that would “build confidence” in the integrity of federal elections.

The NAACP, Voter ID Laws, the UN, and Jimmy Carter

And, while we are on the subject of disenfranchisement…

Every Vote Counts, But Some Votes Count More Than Others…Especially If They Are Cast For Democrats

PS: The Supreme Court upheld voter id laws in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board in 2008 in a 6-3 decision. Oh, snap!

Resist We Much on April 5, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Yes, voter ID laws would make it more difficult for eligible voters without a government ID to vote

Doesn’t one have to show an ID in order to REGISTER TO VOTE?

iurockhead on April 5, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Like Tina, I thank Dr Pepper …. and I drink it!!

Bitter Clinger on April 5, 2012 at 11:31 AM

There’s a more important reason than the new logo not to support Pepsi. They have a contract with Senomyx. This explains why that’s bad:

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/06/01/explaining-the-science-behind-the-pro-life-boycott-of-pepsi/

T.D.D. on April 5, 2012 at 11:20 AM

The use of those cells does not increase the number of abortions. Is not our calling from God to do as much as we can with the tools we have? We use the organs of the deceased to prolong the life of the living. But those organs belong to a dead person, and God never gave his blessing to allow transplants. While the abortion is evil, is allowing that tissue to die circumventing the will of God? Is allowing a heart to beat 30 years longer than the person who it originally gave life circumventing God’s will? You really need to ask yourself some questions.

Is the use of those cells increasing the number of abortions?
Is the use of those cells, and keeping them alive, prevent God from working with the soul of that individual?

If you answered yes to these, then I have more questions.
Is the use of donor organs increasing the number of murders?
Is the use of donor organs, and keeping them alive, prevent God from working with the soul of that individual?

astonerii on April 5, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Actually, my wife ran a local tea party group a couple of years ago. She invited a guy who runs a coal-mining operation to speak to the group about the “Cap and Trade” legislation which was a hot topic at the time. He had a slide show presentation and one slide showed a consortium of businesses that were in the tank for “Cap and Trade”. Both Coca-Cola and Pepsi were in the consortium (another I remember was The North Face company).

Bitter Clinger on April 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Damn! I was already boycotting Pepsi due to their support of The Won in 2008.

Second look at tap water?

RedNewEnglander on April 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Something no one talks about is the fact that fake or illegal votes disenfranchise people. democrats are so hell-bound to “count every vote”- even if it’s fraudulent. If illegal votes are cast, they nullify legal, legitimate votes. Every false vote cast cancels out a vote the other way. This is de facto disenfranchisement, and conservatives would do well to frame it as such. You could certainly take the wind out of leftists sails by throwing the “voter dilution” right back at them.

babygiraffe on April 5, 2012 at 11:36 AM

don’t know anything about ALEC except for what rockmom just wrote (thanks), and for what I read in lefty comments. The Huffers think it’s a Koch-run spawn of the devil, responsible for every law they see as bad, like the Stand Your Ground laws. And…Koch! Also, skittles.

juliesa on April 5, 2012 at 11:02 AM

You’re welcome. I worked with ALEC on the 1990s on a few things and have attended their meetings. It was founded in the 1980s to counteract a perception that the existing National Conference of State Legislatures was liberal and tended to promote big-government solutions to everything. (As an example, NCSL has an “affordable housing and community development” committee, ALEC has a “Real Estate and Commerce” committee. Just a different orientation.) ALEC invites corporate sponsorship and it is a way for companies to get a policy message to a lot of conservative state legislators. Companies can also pay for policy studies that ALEC circulates to its members. It is only moderately infuential as an organization in terms of promoting specific state laws. That is why I see this effort by the Left as really grasping at straws.

rockmom on April 5, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Doesn’t one have to have an ID to drive an Obama Dolt?

Resist We Much on April 5, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Water is the real “real thing”.

Straight from the tap into a glass. So easy, even a liberal could do it.

reaganaut on April 5, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Simple, drink more water.

DDay on April 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM

I’ve never liked soft drinks anyway, even as a kid. Nothing quenches my thirst better than a nice tall glass of ice water. Beyond that, it’s coffee, either hot or iced, or tea, hot or iced. Oh, and the tea is not Lipton. There’s a Chinese grocery that I shop on occasion which has the best selection of imported teas I’ve seen, and at a much more reasonable price than most so-called premium brand teas are at U.S. grocery stores.

Unfortunately, the hubby is the soda freak, although he’s trying to wean himself off it. Telling him about this might hasten the process.

PatriotGal2257 on April 5, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I buy Royal Crown Cherry @Wal~Mart. Cheaper , Better, No Political affiliations.

Things DON’T go Better with Coke.

DevilsPrinciple on April 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Aw man, tough morning here…

Being a Diet Coke addict, I was disheartened to know, I would have to make the choice to switch to drinking Pepsi…then I read Bitter Clinger’s post, that Pepsi is on the Bad List too!

Looks like Beefeater’s Gin with 3 Blue Cheese stuffed olives. will be on the menu for breakfast, lunch and dinner instead!

Is gin on the bad list too?

Typicalwhitewoman on April 5, 2012 at 11:43 AM

This post exhibits some very sloppy thinking. You can similarly say that armed robbery is rare, therefore we don’t need laws directed towards its prevention anymore. Then publicize that you removed the laws and see what happens.

A good segment of the left will be trying to win the coming elections (and not just the Presidential election) BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. It’s prudent to prepare for fraud on a massive scale.

Pumaman on April 5, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Bitter Clinger on April 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM

I’m not at all surprised that The North Face was on the list. But I find their stand utterly hypocritical, since most of their products have some synthetic (i.e. petroleum based) content.

UltimateBob on April 5, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Some Republican needs to author a bill called “The American ID Procurement Act” that would assist people in getting a photo ID. Even if they aren’t going to use it to vote, at least they can carry on with other aspects of life with more ease.

Seriously, fund it with a few million for social workers, lawyers, whatever to help people get copies of their BC’s or other needed docs and transpo to the ID offices. Enough with this bull it would be worth the money just to shut these people up.

mrsmwp on April 5, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Bitter Clinger on April 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM

RedNewEnglander on April 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM

The problem quickly becomes that when you sit down and write down what you are pricipally against and thus wish to not buy products from companies who support or take part in ideologies and actions that run counter to your principals, you’re almost left eating cardboard and water… or at least trying to go off grid as possible.

Nestle, PepsiCo, Solae, Coca Cola. These are some of the largest food producing companies in the world and they all take part in various things many of us do not like – if not find counter to our values and principles. Same goes for many of the auto manufacturers and as noted, clothing manufacturers. Heck, even companies that we may not directly buy from but are affected by do things we don’t like, such as Boeing. Boeing has some insurance and business practices that a friend of mine doesn’t like, but he feels that he cannot afford to resign.

Choosing to boycott any company becomes a balancing act, more so when you realize that more often than not you’re partaking of products which you’d stated that you’d boycott without even knowing it. How about that bag of Doritos or stick of Trident gum? You’ve just broken your boycott. Or how about when a gift is given to you or your’re at a friend or family member’s home and a Pepsi or Coke is offered at dinner? Sure, you can decline it.

We have to figure out what battles are worth fighting and how to fight them effectively. Boycotts aren’t always effective…

unless evidently you’re a dirty liberal. Most companies don’t seem to mind caving to them.

Logus on April 5, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Aw man, tough morning here…

Being a Diet Coke addict, I was disheartened to know, I would have to make the choice to switch to drinking Pepsi…then I read Bitter Clinger’s post, that Pepsi is on the Bad List too!

Looks like Beefeater’s Gin with 3 Blue Cheese stuffed olives. will be on the menu for breakfast, lunch and dinner instead!

Is gin on the bad list too?

Typicalwhitewoman on April 5, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I think Beefeater’s is British. But, no, I haven’t seen any alcoholic bevarage makers in the political spotlight, for good or bad. So you should be good to go.

(I personally couldn’t do gin for breakfast, but that’s just me, LOL)

Bitter Clinger on April 5, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Logus on April 5, 2012 at 11:48 AM

You’re very right on this. In truth, the only brand I have steadfastly personally boycotted is Citgo gas because it’s owned by Hugo Chavez.

Bitter Clinger on April 5, 2012 at 11:51 AM

babygiraffe on April 5, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Read my post above. It addresses the disenfranchisement of having your vote nullified by an illegal vote. It also talks about how having fair elections is the only thing that allows us to all live under one government peacefully.

astonerii on April 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM

7% UP it is…!

:)

Seven Percent Solution on April 5, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Wasn’t there a recent article about someone checking the actual addresses of folks who had VOTED in an election and they flagged suspect addresses: empty lots and more than 4 people at a single address?

Bear on April 5, 2012 at 11:27 AM

There is video of dead people voting in New Hampshire and Vermont. No, they weren’t zombies….

https://www.theprojectveritas.com/civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=90

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/13/OKeefe%20Video%20Exposes%20Voter%20Fraud-Friendly%20Policies%20in%20Vermont

dogsoldier on April 5, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Companies like Coke best observe what happened with Rush Limbaugh’s advertisers.

Right now there is Coke being poured down someones drain because of their decision. I am guessing people who support conservatives and voter ID laws far outnumber some gadfly group.

Marcus Traianus on April 5, 2012 at 12:02 PM

NO Pepsy, NO Coke.

Boycott them, for different reasons, but boycott. They are both moronic.

Schadenfreude on April 5, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Hope I did the link correctly… but you can email coke here.

https://secure.thecoca-colacompany.com/ssldocs/mail/eQuery_product.shtml

unaffiliated on April 5, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Coca-Cola’s line of products is extensive and include popular brands such as Minute Maid, Seagrams, Nestea, Bacardi, Dannon, Dasani, Sprite, A&W, Barq’s, Schwepp’s, Dr. Pepper, Powerade, Odwalla, and much more. They have more than 3,500 beverages in their product mix.

For a complete list of their products you can check out their website.

kbTexan on April 5, 2012 at 12:08 PM

According to Brennan, it is more likely that an individual will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.

So?!? It’s probably more likely to get hit by lightning than to die in an airliner crashed by a terrorist, but that doesn’t stop the gubmint from instituting hoards of Draconian security procedures.

KS Rex on April 5, 2012 at 12:09 PM

How about a boycott of companies that donate to the Tide Foundation?

agmartin on April 5, 2012 at 12:15 PM

No matter what she, the CEO of Pepsy says, never forget this

Discretion being the better part of valor…I think I’ll pass.

What is most crucial to my analogy of the five fingers as the five major continents, is that each of us in the U.S. — the long middle finger — must be careful that when we extend our arm in either a business or political sense, we take pains to assure we are giving a hand…not the finger. Sometimes this is very difficult. Because the U.S. — the middle finger — sticks out so much, we can send the wrong message unintentionally.

Unfortunately, I think this is how the rest of the world looks at the U.S. right now. Not as part of the hand — giving strength and purpose to the rest of the fingers — but, instead, scratching our nose and sending a far different signal.

Schadenfreude on April 5, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Pepsi

Schadenfreude on April 5, 2012 at 12:18 PM

How many government IDs would the “green” money flushed down the toilet with Solyndra, etc., have bought?

Here’s a solution: put pictures on Social Security cards. EVERYONE (legal) has one.

Dexter_Alarius on April 5, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Just happy that the cojone-challenged GOP majority in the Minny legislature passed the Voter ID Amendment last night.

Hysteria ensues at MPR, StarTribune, and the rest of the usual suspects.

Smile.

Bruno Strozek on April 5, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Let’s boycott Coke! Force them to make a decision!

jeffn21 on April 5, 2012 at 11:27 AM

From MM’s Twitchy site:

Coke, Arby’s take stands, tick off conservative consumers

Also, Color of Change is targeting Walmart too. So far they’re not caving. Be sure to let them know you appreciate it.

On Twitter: @Walmart

Flora Duh on April 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM

or do they represent a sinister attempt to disenfranchise minority voters?

I think that is the dumbest conspiracy theory that the lib/dems have cooked up. What honest, fair person would feel disenfranchised by making sure you are who you say you are when voting?!
Unless of course they are also illegal aliens. Then yeah, I can see how THEY might feel “disenfranchised” by not being able to vote for the democrat who will help them leech off of the American system.

Sterling Holobyte on April 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM

and suppress minority voting

urban elitist on April 5, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Didn’t take long for my post to be confirmed. Tell us, why is it you don’t think blacks are civilized enough to get an ID? What is it that makes blacks unique, in your small little world?

MNHawk on April 5, 2012 at 12:28 PM

I don’t trust any institute named after “Justice” Brennan. And I better stop there.

WannabeAnglican on April 5, 2012 at 12:30 PM

I think Beefeater’s is British. But, no, I haven’t seen any alcoholic bevarage makers in the political spotlight, for good or bad. So you should be good to go.

(I personally couldn’t do gin for breakfast, but that’s just me, LOL)

Bitter Clinger on April 5, 2012 at 11:49 AM

“So throw a Cheerio in it….”

Tenwheeler on April 5, 2012 at 12:33 PM

astonerii on April 5, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Nice rationalization to make you feel less “squishy” about abortion.

Organ donors are for the most part, voluntarily giving their organs, and they are giving them to help someone else live or live better. Pepsi is using the cells from the aborted babies to “taste test” their products.
Yep, they are exactly the same.

Sterling Holobyte on April 5, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Oh geez, it ain’t as simple as giving up Coca-Cola soda. They also own Minute Maid, Eight O Clock coffee, Hi-C, Five Alive, Fruitopia, Nestea, Glaceau Vitamin Water, Dasani, Godiva Blends, Bacardi Mixers, Powerade, etc. a whole lot of drink varities including some local brands. They claim over 3500 different brands world wide. Luckily for me I gave up on those products as well as Pepsico owned brands which are even more extensive.

Deanna on April 5, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Well, that tears it.

No more Coke™.

Well, I guess it’s more beer for the hillbilly.

~~~~sigh~~~~

hillbillyjim on April 5, 2012 at 12:39 PM

What honest, fair person would feel disenfranchised by making sure you are who you say you are when voting?!

Sterling Holobyte on April 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM

None. So here is the problem: All Democrats realize that they belong to a Party that is in favor of voter fraud. At one point there may have been a case to be made that we can convert some Democrats by making them see the error of their ways, but all of those prospects have been converted by now. Ain’t nothing left over there but liars and criminals.

Buddahpundit on April 5, 2012 at 12:43 PM

I’m sipping on a Fresca. I have a 12 pack that I’ll finish, then I move to Pepsi products.

How exactly do I let Coka Cola know they’ve offended and two can play this game? Where’s that article again about Media Matters and their phoney threats against Rush?

If this is the wave of the future for the left, we’d better get in the game on the other side. Boycott is a nasty and unfair business, but without a movement, I’ve stopped using products where their owners are politically active or on the take (like GM).

Maybe we’d best get organized. Buy Brawny paper towels and not the Johnson and Johnson variety; Pepsi instead of Coke; I HATE shopping at WalMart, but I like Sam’s clubs. These businesses had best learn that if they bend to the forces that want to put them out of business, then we’ll help them along. Does Coke honestly believe Bill Ayers et al have their best interests in mind? Soda tax anyone?

Portia46 on April 5, 2012 at 12:47 PM

The least they could do is stop supporting all political action and lower the price of their product to reflect the savings. That’s something I could get behind. Make a free market choice.

Cindy Munford on April 5, 2012 at 12:50 PM

We have to figure out what battles are worth fighting and how to fight them effectively. Boycotts aren’t always effective…

unless evidently you’re a dirty liberal. Most companies don’t seem to mind caving to them.

Logus on April 5, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Some are easier than others. For example, Coca Cola is easier because they restrict themselves to beverages. While Pepsico is much more diverisifed owning Quaker for example. Still it is possible to do a personal boycott which will make you feel more responsible even though it may have little effect on the compay. And that is really what this is about, standing by your own principles. Putting your money where your mouth is, so to speak.

Deanna on April 5, 2012 at 12:51 PM

RC Cola is incredibly underrated.

MadisonConservative on April 5, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Good stuff.
Evidently North Dakotans don’t know what it is.
Never seen it here.

Badger40 on April 5, 2012 at 12:54 PM

This is not official until lib4life approves it.

timberline on April 5, 2012 at 12:56 PM

We’re already boycotting Pepsi products, because they use “fetal material”–aborted baby cells–to test their sodas.

From now on, it’s only RC products or store brands sodas for us.

itsnotaboutme on April 5, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Now one begrudges their membership in the extremely conservative Chamber of Commerce, but when they start cutting checks fro groups that want to gut the EPA, fight for “no retreat” laws and suppress minority voting, they’ve crossed a line.

urban elitist on April 5, 2012 at 11:20 AM

See Baxter Green’s cites of Democrat Vote Fraud.

What do you have against Honest Elections? Obviously it’s because your side can’t get votes based on what you believe, so you have to Cheat to get elected.

F-

PS, were the 9-0 and 7-2 SCOTUS votes against Gore in 2000 “Judicial Activism”?

Del Dolemonte on April 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM

I firmly support voter ID laws. It only makes sense to be certain that the people who are voting are doing so legally in order to assure that our elections are clean and our results are valid and reflect the will of the legitimate, legal, electorate. We have the right to expect our elections to be fair and free of voter intimidation and voter fraud and the results to be valid.

I note that Democrats have no qualms about spending any amount of tax dollars, time, and effort, required for recounts and recalls when they think that the election hasn’t gone the way they wished or that any given legislator hasn’t performed the way they wished. Why is it then, that they would object to spending the time, effort, and funds to see that everyone in the nation has a valid photo ID, thus insuring that the individual casing a ballot is doing so legally and legitimately?

Personally, I’d welcome seeing my tax dollars go toward seeing that every person who is eligible to vote has a valid photo ID and a valid voter registration card to present at the polling station before casing their ballot.

thatsafactjack on April 5, 2012 at 1:07 PM

I will no longer drink a Coke product!!!

The Colonel on April 5, 2012 at 1:25 PM

and I shall now withdraw my support for coke. sh|t s#cks for
you anyway.

FineasFinn on April 5, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Seriously, folks, why don’t we encourage them to take the free market route? They can still get tax deductions from doing non political charity donations and lower the price of their product.

Cindy Munford on April 5, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Coke supports the agw theory, too. Seems as if our fav has been infiltrated by a bunch of PC loons. Drink more Two If By Tea.

Kissmygrits on April 5, 2012 at 1:48 PM

This is one of the best postings on this issue that I have seen on a conservative blog in a long time. I feel like so many of the folks who support voter ID laws simply ignore the potential to disenfranchise people, or the fact that in-person voter fraud is rare, or that other more likely forms of voter fraud wouldn’t be touched by these laws. Ms. Korbe acknowledges these issues, but says, “with that said, what can we do to address those issues and make these laws work”?

I think having a dialogue on these terms would be much more productive, and would be more likely to lead to laws that both protect the integrity of the voting system without disenfranchising people.

Well done.

Chunktronic on April 5, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Damn! I was already boycotting Pepsi due to their support of The Won in 2008.

Second look at tap water?

RedNewEnglander on April 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Doesn’t one of the Won’s czars want to put sterilization drugs in that? Scotch might be our only hope (I was going to buy Pepsi. Now, not so much.)

Portia46 on April 5, 2012 at 2:00 PM

Buy Rush’s tea! Yeah!

tinkerthinker on April 5, 2012 at 2:08 PM

FYI: One of the largest shareholders in Coke is lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist crony capitalist and OBOZO-suck-up warren buffett. Now you can understand why Coke has stopping doing what’s good for America and good for democracy and will let the d-cRAT socialist extremists proceed with their plans for massive voting fraud in the Nov. election.

TeaPartyNation on April 5, 2012 at 2:09 PM

RC Cola is incredibly underrated.

MadisonConservative on April 5, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Good stuff.
Evidently North Dakotans don’t know what it is.
Never seen it here.

Badger40 on April 5, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Vernors, baby!!!!!

Not too many people outside of the midwest have probably even heard of it.

Safe to consume since it’s part of the Dr. Pepper / Snapple group.

UltimateBob on April 5, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Resist We Much on April 5, 2012 at 12:42 PM

That topic seems off-limits at HA, too controversial.

slickwillie2001 on April 5, 2012 at 2:12 PM

If having to show an ID to vote is so “disenfranchising”, why isn’t the left fighting to have other “mandatory ID” laws changed?

Strike Hornet on April 5, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Badger40 on April 5, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Shooowee….. I grew up in Tupelo, Mississippi in the 50s and the best things going for an aftrenoon snack were an RoC Cola and a Moonpie.

jb34461 on April 5, 2012 at 2:21 PM

One of the most lucrative Coke markets – is Mexico.

Their growth is in Central/South America…. now you know why they did this.

Odie1941 on April 5, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Hope I did the link correctly… but you can email coke here.

https://secure.thecoca-colacompany.com/ssldocs/mail/eQuery_product.shtml

unaffiliated on April 5, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Response from Coke to email I sent on ALEC:

Thank you for contacting The Coca-Cola Company. We appreciate the opportunity to respond.

The Coca-Cola Company has elected to discontinue its membership with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Our involvement with ALEC was focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business. We have a long-standing policy of only taking positions on issues that impact our Company and industry.

We as a company only take positions on issues and public policies that are directly related to our Company and industry. We have not provided our support or opposition against Voter ID legislation in any forum, including through ALEC. Nevertheless, the Company recognizes the importance of voting rights and actively encourages our U.S. employees to vote in elections.

The Coca-Cola Company has a long-standing tradition of taking positions only on issues and public policies that directly impact the beverage industry. We believe public-private partnerships are important, and that it takes all of us — governments, academia, civil society and business — to find solutions to today’s most pressing public policy issues. We engage with many organizations that reflect a broad spectrum of political and social ideologies and that support our Company and industry.

Your comments are appreciated and will be shared with the appropriate management. If you have additional questions or comments, please feel free to contact us again.

Sarah
Industry and Consumer Affairs
The Coca-Cola Company

I’d call bull…..

unaffiliated on April 5, 2012 at 2:38 PM

I think having a dialogue on these terms would be much more productive, and would be more likely to lead to laws that both protect the integrity of the voting system without disenfranchising people.

Well done.

Chunktronic on April 5, 2012 at 1:57 PM

No one genuninely believes that any voter will be “disenfranchised” by ID requirements. Everyone realizes that legitimate voters have been and will continue to be disenfranchised by having their votes cancelled by your Democrat voter fraud if we don’t insist on voter ID.

Voter ID States must go further and not recognize the electoral votes in states without voter ID requirements because the fraud that goes on there will directly affect the honest folks in the Voter ID States. That would mean not recognizing a president elected by carrying the Fraud States and recognizing as the president the candidate who carried the majority electoral votes in the Honest Elections States. Nor should legislation be recognized in Voter ID States that wouldn’t have passed except for the votes of senators and representatives from the Fraud States.

Buddahpundit on April 5, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Nice rationalization to make you feel less “squishy” about abortion.

Organ donors are for the most part, voluntarily giving their organs, and they are giving them to help someone else live or live better. Pepsi is using the cells from the aborted babies to “taste test” their products.
Yep, they are exactly the same.

Sterling Holobyte on April 5, 2012 at 12:36 PM

I do not approve of abortion. If I had my way about it every last abortion would be made illegal with the exception of provable life threatening to the mother. No exception for rape or incest. I would put women in prison who have abortions. I would put doctors in jail who perform abortion.

But the same rule that applies to donor organs applies to already aborted fetal tissue. If you kill someone for their organs, it is a crime and immoral. If someone dies and you can use their organs for good, it is legal and moral. If you kill a baby, it is apparently not criminal, but it is immoral. If the baby is already dead and you can use their tissue for good it is legal and moral.

astonerii on April 5, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Wasn’t there a recent article about someone checking the actual addresses of folks who had VOTED in an election and they flagged suspect addresses: empty lots and more than 4 people at a single address? I vaguely recall that given the the large number of places to look, they chose places where there were more votes than registered voters. The results varied but something like 18% to 25% of the voters were “suspect”. I know when I read that it seemed like a smoking gun for voter fraud. I just wish I could remember where I read all that stuff. Having a bad GoogleFoo day.

Bear on April 5, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Sheila Jackson-Lee’s district in TX.

herm2416 on April 5, 2012 at 3:48 PM

The Coca-Cola Company has a long-standing tradition of taking positions only on issues and public policies that directly impact the beverage industry.

Okay, so they don’t “support the troops” or anything like that because it doesn’t directly affect their bottom line. But if we were to find an instance where they did claim to “support the troops”, then I guess it would be clear that their apparent opposition to honest elections is genuine opposition to honest elections.

And if there is no instance where they supported the troops or the US after 9/11, is their company worthy of existence in the US? You had to come out against “something” to support the troops or the US after 9/11, and that “something” has its own political cause. Some call them terrorists, some call them freedom fighters.

Buddahpundit on April 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Not surprising. I wonder how much they’ve been extorted for by Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow-PUSH Coalition?

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 5, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Easy fix, people. Forget both Coke and Pepsi and switch to SodaStream. SS has lots of great flavors and it’s far easier than lugging all those heavy bottles home. Easier on the trash “recycling”, too. We made the switch when Coke came out with their phony polar bear campaign, didn’t look back and couldn’t be happier.

By the way, have you noticed the way package sizes are getting smaller while prices are rising? Check out the “new improved” one-liter size of premixed soda. Two quart ice cream cartons shrank to 1.75 quarts and then all of a sudden, like magic, they became 1.5 quarts. The small sacks of sugar were 5 pounds – not any more, now they are 4 pounds. No doubt you can come up with a long list of downsized products yourself.

sleyhook on April 5, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Coke’s getting a bit of a bad rap here, though a bit unfairly so. Voter ID laws don’t affect Coke’s business decisions one bit, and while the vast majority of its senior execs lean to the right, it doesn’t need its name attached to an organization that’s getting assaulted by the left over an unrelated matter.

The Left spins this as a victory, that Coke is ‘pulling out’ due to ALEC’s voter ID support, when in actuality, Coke is really just trying to survive and not continue to antagonize a federal government that is already using millions of our tax dollars to tell consumers not to drink soda. Coke’s CEO has been pretty clear about his disdain for Obama’s overregulation and they’ve certainly been vocal about that – hence their long time support for ALEC. But if ALEC is going to become a battle cry for the Left…there’s just not a whole lot of Coke to gain by sticking with them. Cowardly? Maybe. More like a cold business decision.

Hostile Gospel on April 5, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Okay, so they don’t “support the troops” or anything like that because it doesn’t directly affect their bottom line. But if we were to find an instance where they did claim to “support the troops”, then I guess it would be clear that their apparent opposition to honest elections is genuine opposition to honest elections.

And if there is no instance where they supported the troops or the US after 9/11, is their company worthy of existence in the US? You had to come out against “something” to support the troops or the US after 9/11, and that “something” has its own political cause. Some call them terrorists, some call them freedom fighters.

Buddahpundit on April 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM

What? Supporting troops isn’t a public policy issue. And companies supporting troops is also good for their PR, let alone the fact that it’s just patriotic.

Unless banning soda sales in an entire state or restricting the age at which people can purchase soda becomes a legitimate referendum, question., why should Coca-Cola support public policy decisions that have no bearing on their company? Let em sell Coke and leave politics to the people.

Hostile Gospel on April 5, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Try to buy Sudafed, an over the counter legal medicine without showing your I.D….so to buy an over the counter decongestant, you need I.D…but to vote you don’t.

right2bright on April 5, 2012 at 5:06 PM

This is what concerns me about the SC and Barack’s threats to the justices. Few people — and fewer corporations — have the stomach to withstand the professional left’s full assault. They go scorched earth — attack their children, their parents, their neighbors, anything and everything — Coco-Cola’s management knows this, and so do the SC justices.

Rational Thought on April 5, 2012 at 10:42 AM

I understand that and please don’t think I’m giving you the gears, but this angers me to no end. Sometimes worthwhile things are worth standing up for and not letting the loud bullies win. This is liberalism in a nutshell: The loudest bully wins.

If everyone caves because it’s easier, then who is left?

Maybe some people (and again PLEASE don’t think this is directed at you, RT) should find some spines and do what’s right. I find this increasingly in my personal life – that backbones and guts are in short supply as well.

Oh well. One less place to spend my money.

kim roy on April 5, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Logus on April 5, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Excellent points. It seems the world is owned by about a dozen companies and to find out exactly who owns what part of the “boycott” is near to impossible.

That’s why the lack of a spine by these companies to cave to the liberals is amazing. It seems that in some ways it’s an excuse for them to behave in ways they’d want to but don’t want to own.

“We were forced to do this by the loud bullies”. Uh huh.

kim roy on April 5, 2012 at 5:47 PM

It should be remembered that in the 2008 election more democrats voted for Obama in Indianapolis than there are eligible voters.

But, move along, nothing to see here.

Thank God we now have voter ID required.

Doesn’t mean it can’t still happen, but at least we are trying.

Awilson on April 5, 2012 at 5:56 PM

It should be remembered that in the 2008 election more democrats voted for Obama in Indianapolis than there are eligible voters.

But, move along, nothing to see here.

Thank God we now have voter ID required.

Doesn’t mean it can’t still happen, but at least we are trying.

Awilson on April 5, 2012 at 5:56 PM

You think you have voter ID, but what the democratics do is lie in wait like snakes until late September-early October of election year, and then go to court. A friendly judge blocks implementation of voter ID and schedules a hearing for January. Repeat as required.

slickwillie2001 on April 5, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Say, “Pepsi, please.”

RandyChandler on April 5, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Don’t buy any of these overpriced brands, buy grocery store generics. Any of the big chains have them, and so does Wal-Mart and Target.

slickwillie2001 on April 5, 2012 at 8:25 PM

CAP maintains that voter fraud is actually quite rare — and research from the Brennan Center for Justice appears to back up that claim.

Tina Korbe

Why on earth would you cite this DNC/Socialist front as a credible source for “research”? Good grief, child…wake the hell up.

Jaibones on April 5, 2012 at 8:45 PM

RC Cola is incredibly underrated.

MadisonConservative on April 5, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Diet A & W root beer. The only way to go.

Jaibones on April 5, 2012 at 8:48 PM

Say, “Pepsi, please.”

RandyChandler on April 5, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Dude, Pepsi’s CEO is an immigrant Indian leftist.

Jaibones on April 5, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Pepsi and RC taste better anyway

AZfederalist on April 5, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Just so ya know, I posted a comment on this to Coca Cola’s Facebook page, and they deleted it…gotta love that commitment to free speech.

EasyEight on April 6, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Wonder how Komen’s doing?

unclesmrgol on April 5, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Not so good.

I’m very upset about Arby’s, though. Now where can I go to get reconstituted beef byproducts and pink slime at premium prices?

Adjoran on April 6, 2012 at 2:16 AM

All of a sudden you guys don’t like capitalism?

plewis on April 6, 2012 at 9:09 AM

The Left’s voter fraud whitewash

By Michelle Malkin • October 27, 2010 09:14 AM

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/27/62680/

Of course an ID requirement would not have made any diference in any of the allegations of election as opposed to voter fraud. So, what is the real reason for ID requirements/ You’re fooling no one.

plewis on April 6, 2012 at 9:36 AM

I note the bitter irony that libtards are doing better at boycotting than conservatives, even in a global economy where such things are usually totally pointless. They’re beating you at your own game of capitalism.

MelonCollie on April 6, 2012 at 12:37 PM

According to Brennan, it is more likely that an individual will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls. James O’Keefe’s video to support voter ID laws proves that election officials probably wouldn’t catch such impersonations — but it doesn’t prove that those impersonations are frequent.

Total number isn’t really the measure that I think matters.

What matters is “are the election results right?”… isn’t it? If there’s some cheating at the margins, but the person with the most “fair” votes wins 99% of the time; people don’t care. If there’s enough cheating that it’s a 50/50 chance that the person with the most fair votes won… you don’t have a democracy; you have a system rigged and cheated that no rational person will trust.

Republicans on the House Administration Committee want to shore up voter registration rules in the wake of a Colorado study that found as many as 5,000 non-citizens in the state took part in last year’s election.

Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), the panel’s chairman, called the study “a disturbing wake-up call” that should cause every state to review its safeguards to prevent illegal voting.

http://usactionnews.com/2011/04/gop-says-5000-non-citizens-voting-in-colorado-a-wake-up-call-for-states/

5,000 in Colorado, just from illegals (not dead/duplicated in other states, or other concerns). However the winner won by about 30,000 votes so we probably don’t have a problem 6 times as big as what we found.

How bad do we let it get before we do something? How close to ending up with a system nobody trusts do you want to push this before we make sure we don’t cross the line?

Because once you lose the trust of the people; you’re never getting it back. Maybe not pushing this further and putting some restrictions in place would be a good idea?

gekkobear on April 6, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3