Why I Canceled My Order From L.L. Bean: The Toxic Tweets Of Donald Trump

[Ringel05]

The NRA is the biggest enemy of the commie left...which is why the commies constantly attack them. You see, the commies want and crave a disarmed citizenry.........one that can have no hope of defending themselves. 250 million people have died under communism because they had no means to resist and that is exactly what those like you want.....not gonna happen....at least in my lifetime. The "state" is your god.....and anyone that resists must be dealt with. That is how those like you "roll".......

The NRA was once a great outfit and I was a faithful member for many years - until it was hijacked by radicals in 1977.

How NRA’s true believers converted a marksmanship group into a mighty gun lobby

Hijacked? You mean grew out of a need (felt by many) to defend against those who wanted (and still want) to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment. Got it.

You mean the 2nd Musket Amendment?

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

Is that example of the first quill amendment??

Example of the misguided myopic, simplistic interpretation that Lackabraina it espousing.

 

[Lakhota]

The NRA was once a great outfit and I was a faithful member for many years - until it was hijacked by radicals in 1977.

How NRA’s true believers converted a marksmanship group into a mighty gun lobby

Hijacked? You mean grew out of a need (felt by many) to defend against those who wanted (and still want) to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment. Got it.

You mean the 2nd Musket Amendment?

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

The Constitution doesn't address "parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage" - but it does address arms (muskets) of the period. The 2nd Amendment is confusing and obsolete.

It does address freedom of speech based on that era's communication technology, it's what they knew..........., which is your argument for the 2nd Amendment...... What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Oops.......

How has "speech" changed since the 1st Amendment was ratified?

Speech - Wikipedia

 

[Papageorgio]

Ain't capitalism great.

It is great. And Trump is a capitalist.

Going to boycott capitalism now?

Capitalism depends on supply and demand. I'm helping to decrease demand.

I'll gladly take your place. I am helping increase demand.

 

[Moonglow]

The NRA was once a great outfit and I was a faithful member for many years - until it was hijacked by radicals in 1977.

How NRA’s true believers converted a marksmanship group into a mighty gun lobby

Hijacked? You mean grew out of a need (felt by many) to defend against those who wanted (and still want) to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment. Got it.

You mean the 2nd Musket Amendment?

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

Is that example of the first quill amendment??

Example of the misguided myopic, simplistic interpretation that Lackabraina it espousing.

My third wife is anti gun, even though she wants a gun......

 

[Ringel05]

Hijacked? You mean grew out of a need (felt by many) to defend against those who wanted (and still want) to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment. Got it.

You mean the 2nd Musket Amendment?

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

The Constitution doesn't address "parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage" - but it does address arms (muskets) of the period. The 2nd Amendment is confusing and obsolete.

It does address freedom of speech based on that era's communication technology, it's what they knew..........., which is your argument for the 2nd Amendment...... What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Oops.......

How has "speech" changed since the 1st Amendment was ratified?

Speech - Wikipedia

Missed the "communication technology" didn'tcha....... Or is it your penchant for selective reading/interpretation?

 

[Ringel05]

Hijacked? You mean grew out of a need (felt by many) to defend against those who wanted (and still want) to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment. Got it.

You mean the 2nd Musket Amendment?

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

Is that example of the first quill amendment??

Example of the misguided myopic, simplistic interpretation that Lackabraina it espousing.

My third wife is anti gun, even though she wants a gun......

Get her a Queen Anne's, make Lackoneiota happy........

 

[Lakhota]

You mean the 2nd Musket Amendment?

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

The Constitution doesn't address "parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage" - but it does address arms (muskets) of the period. The 2nd Amendment is confusing and obsolete.

It does address freedom of speech based on that era's communication technology, it's what they knew..........., which is your argument for the 2nd Amendment...... What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Oops.......

How has "speech" changed since the 1st Amendment was ratified?

Speech - Wikipedia

Missed the "communication technology" didn'tcha....... Or is it your penchant for selective reading/interpretation?

Speech is speech - whether written on a tree or computer.

 

[Staidhup]

Ever notice how a thread is started and when their pathetic position is disclosed as false or stupid they immediately redirect the discussion?

 

[Ringel05]

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

The Constitution doesn't address "parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage" - but it does address arms (muskets) of the period. The 2nd Amendment is confusing and obsolete.

It does address freedom of speech based on that era's communication technology, it's what they knew..........., which is your argument for the 2nd Amendment...... What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Oops.......

How has "speech" changed since the 1st Amendment was ratified?

Speech - Wikipedia

Missed the "communication technology" didn'tcha....... Or is it your penchant for selective reading/interpretation?

Speech is speech - whether written on a tree or computer.

You're basing your argument on what was available at the time, for firearms it was flintlocks, for written/printed communication it was the quill or the hand printing press. Get it now ditz?

 

[Lakhota]

The Constitution doesn't address "parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage" - but it does address arms (muskets) of the period. The 2nd Amendment is confusing and obsolete.

It does address freedom of speech based on that era's communication technology, it's what they knew..........., which is your argument for the 2nd Amendment...... What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Oops.......

How has "speech" changed since the 1st Amendment was ratified?

Speech - Wikipedia

Missed the "communication technology" didn'tcha....... Or is it your penchant for selective reading/interpretation?

Speech is speech - whether written on a tree or computer.

You're basing your argument on what was available at the time, for firearms it was flintlocks, for written/printed communication it was the quill or the hand printing press. Get it now ditz?

Words are still words. They ain't guns.

 

[gallantwarrior]

It's OK, my orders will counterbalance your ignorance. Why reject quality for political expedience. Ah, well, we both have our rights to freedom of expression, just as Linda Bean has her rights.

Might be time for some shopping. I've never bought there before but might start.

Of course, some entertainers might lose some people, too. And I heard some Hollywood actors were talking about a strike to protest Trump. They can afford it and don't care about all the little people who will lose their paychecks. Typical libs.

And they'll cry when people boycott lib supporting businesses. Remember how they had a fit when Christians were boycotting Starbucks over the red cup shit? They thought it was so wrong.

Might be interesting to see what companies survive.

In the past, companies that supported conservative views saw an increase in business.

Libs think they are hurting businesses by calling for a boycott but sometimes they end up helping them because others step up and support them.

Keep up the good work, libs. Good to know which businesses rub you the wrong way so we know where to spend our money.

It's a shame I already see so few movies. I'd love to boycott Hollyweird BS "entertainment". Sadly, their insistence on re-making TV shows and their sequels to decent movies and TV series has already put me off to the point that I prefer listening to radio talk shows. I like some BBC TV shows, but most PC crap from Hollyweird just bores me.

 

[Ringel05]

It does address freedom of speech based on that era's communication technology, it's what they knew..........., which is your argument for the 2nd Amendment...... What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Oops.......

How has "speech" changed since the 1st Amendment was ratified?

Speech - Wikipedia

Missed the "communication technology" didn'tcha....... Or is it your penchant for selective reading/interpretation?

Speech is speech - whether written on a tree or computer.

You're basing your argument on what was available at the time, for firearms it was flintlocks, for written/printed communication it was the quill or the hand printing press. Get it now ditz?

Words are still words. They ain't guns.

Technology is technology. There's a reason I dubbed you Lackoneiota.......

 

[Lakhota]

How has "speech" changed since the 1st Amendment was ratified?

Speech - Wikipedia

Missed the "communication technology" didn'tcha....... Or is it your penchant for selective reading/interpretation?

Speech is speech - whether written on a tree or computer.

You're basing your argument on what was available at the time, for firearms it was flintlocks, for written/printed communication it was the quill or the hand printing press. Get it now ditz?

Words are still words. They ain't guns.

Technology is technology. There's a reason I dubbed you Lackoneiota.......

Yeah, Gay Sparrow, but words are still words. Goodnight...

 

[Ringel05]

Missed the "communication technology" didn'tcha....... Or is it your penchant for selective reading/interpretation?

Speech is speech - whether written on a tree or computer.

You're basing your argument on what was available at the time, for firearms it was flintlocks, for written/printed communication it was the quill or the hand printing press. Get it now ditz?

Words are still words. They ain't guns.

Technology is technology. There's a reason I dubbed you Lackoneiota.......

Yeah, Gay Sparrow, but words are still words. Goodnight...

You really are clueless aren't you, the 2nd Amendment has to do with access to and ownership of, it says nothing about it being only be a specific type. Not even a good attempt at interpretation on your part ditz. Concentrate on something that you're good at, getting a manicure and hanging out at the mall........

 

[Spare_change]

Hijacked? You mean grew out of a need (felt by many) to defend against those who wanted (and still want) to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment. Got it.

You mean the 2nd Musket Amendment?

I'll buy that when you start posting on parchment paper hand set in a press and mailed via horseback or carriage.........

Is that example of the first quill amendment??

Example of the misguided myopic, simplistic interpretation that Lackabraina it espousing.

My third wife is anti gun, even though she wants a gun......

Third wife?? Well, there's a shock .... other two get tired of babysitting?

 

[Clementine]

It's OK, my orders will counterbalance your ignorance. Why reject quality for political expedience. Ah, well, we both have our rights to freedom of expression, just as Linda Bean has her rights.

Might be time for some shopping. I've never bought there before but might start.

Of course, some entertainers might lose some people, too. And I heard some Hollywood actors were talking about a strike to protest Trump. They can afford it and don't care about all the little people who will lose their paychecks. Typical libs.

And they'll cry when people boycott lib supporting businesses. Remember how they had a fit when Christians were boycotting Starbucks over the red cup shit? They thought it was so wrong.

Might be interesting to see what companies survive.

In the past, companies that supported conservative views saw an increase in business.

Libs think they are hurting businesses by calling for a boycott but sometimes they end up helping them because others step up and support them.

Keep up the good work, libs. Good to know which businesses rub you the wrong way so we know where to spend our money.

It's a shame I already see so few movies. I'd love to boycott Hollyweird BS "entertainment". Sadly, their insistence on re-making TV shows and their sequels to decent movies and TV series has already put me off to the point that I prefer listening to radio talk shows. I like some BBC TV shows, but most PC crap from Hollyweird just bores me.

I rarely go out to movies and don't rent them. I do have Netflix but they don't always have the best selection. Love the old sitcoms.

If Hollywood actors actually did strike, it wouldn't hurt them or the other wealthy Hollywood people. It would hurt all those lower paid people who work on movie sets and would hurt video stores across the country. In other words, it would hurt the little people. The public would lose nothing and would either find different entertainment or just save money.

I prefer plays, which I attend at least once a month. The liberal actors can stop making movies. Won't miss seeing them plugging their movies. I bet they'd still be on all the late night shows pushing their liberal views.

If they stopped making movies, I guess that would also mean no lovefest, known as Oscar night. The night where participation trophies are not given and only the winners get to spout their liberal crap on stage as they accept their award. I love how all the libs, who lecture about helping the poor, the income gap and green energy dress up in expensive designer clothes, accessorize with pricey diamonds and a single person getting out of each gas guzzling limo lined up for miles. When I see actors wear something modest, not wear jewelry that miners destroyed the planet to get, fly coach and then carpool in some gas saving vehicles, maybe I'll take them seriously when they preach to the little people about the evils of all those things.

I am betting that this latest boycott of LL Bean will backfire, much like previous ones. Libs make me laugh. They tried hurting Chic fil et, too, but ended up increasing their profits.

Love it. They have a right to boycott and others have a right to more than make up for it.

 

[Spare_change]

Placed a $389.71 order (plus shipping) with LL Bean today .... first time, but damn sure not the last.

 

[Snouter]

I am a long time customer of LL Bean and will placing an order with LL Bean later tonight also.

 

[Synthaholic]

Looks like LL Bean just earned my business.

I don't think you are allowed to use your food stamps on rugged outdoor wear.

 

[Synthaholic]

you have three tyrants running for office

tyrant "A" promises to hit people on their heads on a daily basis

tyrant "B" promises to hit people on their heads on a weekly basis

and tyrant "C" promises to hit people on their heads on a monthly basis


Which tyrant would you vote for?

The one who promises to disappear fake libertarians and other Right-Wing retards from political forums.