SUIGENEROUSLA's Comments (290)

“What's your idea? No rights for gay couples at all?”

“"no sure who is who" they don't play role like that. no gay couple is playing husband and wife......­.....that'­s a stone age attitude. if you saw them as people you wouldn't think that, but they are gay first, people second to you.......­.......my 86 year old parents knew better than that......­.”

“Do you feel those gay family memebers are actually equal to you? Sounds like you'd rather not have them in your family.”

“Mixner is using the wroing term yes, but where is your anger? See Langbehn, Janice a woman who though she had a valid medical power of atty was kept from her partner of 18 years -- she died alone. The social worker in th Miami hospital explained it by saying "You're in an anti-gay state". The Fed Courts dismissed her suit against the hospital saying there was no law forbidding this.

I am a cancer survivor, and I feel there are states in my own country i cannot go too -- because situtaitons like this. It's not apartheid, but then what is it?! You have a responsibility to answer that, since you fault Mixner for being overzealous or inaccurate in his word choice.

To ignore situations like mine is to be irresponsible at best.”

“That is the system in Mexico and France and has been for a very long time. And Mexico is a very religious country.”

“Take it to the Maine Supreme Court. I can't believe they would allow legislativ­ely-enacte­d civil rights laws to be voted on anyway -- isn't there something in the Maine Constitution to forbid that?”

“No one is voting on your existing civil rights -- that's the key. Imagine if they did. Do you think 50.1% of your state would approve of you?”

“You are very presumptuous and unChristlike of you to tell this man how to relate to his parents.

Tend to your own family business.”

“Absolutely. When I make this case to GOP reps when in calling on bills, my pay offline is "There's no George Wallace or Orville Faubus Fan Club, is there?"

Far from "maintaining marriage for their kids", these people will become family embarrassments in future generations. Do Faubus' grandchildren tell the story at work or parties about how their granddad blocked the doors to Little Rock Central High? How many dates before his great-grandchildren cuold admit being related to him?”

“I don't think you'r a Nazi -- but your attack is on me personally. I am [personally effected by your desire to deny me equal protection under the law.

You endorse voting on my rights, yet no one is voting on yours.....­...”

“Quite right All. My partner and I are going to spend some money in Maine when this referendum is voted down!”

“The largest gay rights demostration (200,000 people) happens and equality is on the ballot in three states in two weeks and you cover "ballon boy". Epic fail Matt Miller -- but oh right you're one of those Clinton guys who threw gay people under the bus.”

“Maybe you haven't heard AZ, but procreation has been decoupled from sex for over 30 years. My partner and I can become parents through a donated egg and surrogacy -- just as any infertile couple straight could.

Your position isn't going to change the types of families that kids are being raised in. I think kids need male and female role models too -- but they don't have to be their parents nessecarily.

BTW, should single straight people be allowed to adopt?”

“Interesting post. There is a real question here of couples that regard themselves as "married", on the basis of 1) a civil ceremony, 2) a religious but not legally binding ceremony, 3) a "commitment ceremony" or 4) what used to called "common law marriage" -- just a de facto relationship. or 5) a contractual relationship outside of a legal marriage ceremony or 6) a civil union or domestic partnership legal in their state or a state they entered into it in.

Complicated, huh?”

“How can we do that? I'd love that more than ice cream.”

“......why does anyone do most anything? to further their image. better retake psych 101 gs.”

“Of course Whole Foods will be around -- that's not the issue. Instead of Boycott Whole Foods the group should be called "Doesn't this make you feel queasy, do you still want to shop there?". Mackey managed to turn off, with a piece he had to know would have this effect, an important segment of his customers, in a climate where WF is experiencing declining market share. It is fundamently contrary to his fudiciary duty to shareholders.

There already is a backlash -- it's not one that will sink the company (nor should it) but it is a huge (totally avoidable) PR black eye that will make them spend a lot money and resources to fix.

Zach, are you arguing, as it seems in your title that this good management? Please answer that.

Your idea that conversatives will shop is silly. The ones who would agree don't live in/near the very blue zip codes where WF has located their stores. This article, like some of your previous pieces, don't seem well thought out -- let alone focused toward the audience you are addressing. Glibness and passive aggressiveeness from the right generally don't play on Huff Po.

If you've worked in retail managment then you must understand people's emotional connection to a brand. It takes time and resources to build. It is a corporate asset of all the shareholders and not to squandered.”

“Of course this won't "do in" WF. But don't we as consumers have the right to share this info and say to each other "Bleh, this makes me queasy, I'm not shopping there anymore"? That's the point, as a CEO, you should be doing whatever you can to invoke the exact of opposite feeling -- esp in existing customers.

WF is losing market share, and it's a deriliction of duty by Mackey to have made WF's problems worse. See the business reporting in the Baltimore Sun on this.”

“Turning off customers already has had it's effect. Not in a "boycott" pre se (follow me here) but in the loss of good will for the corporation. "Good "will is a quantifible asset on the balance sheets of every company. It is the essence of value for every consumer brand. A left/right boycott is not the issue, the issue is you never make your customers feel badly about your store -- are Walgreen's and CVS weighing in, no, and there's a reason.

Shopping is essentially an entertainment experience. That's the langage the industry uses: entertainment, emotion -- psychology. Publically opposing something many customers think is fundemental and calling their guy, Obama, a socialist is hurting WF -- several management people I know there are disspirited about this.

Of course this won't sink Whole Foods, that's not the point, but it gives them a major, completely self-inflicted, black eye at a time when they are struggling relative to their peers in the industry.

You can't badger people into feeling good about shopping in your store. Mackey, on one day, has undermined the relationships his company has spent years and billions developing. It'll be a long time replacing them.

Zach, respectfully, you don't understand how the retail business works and neither does Megan McArdle at the Atlantic. (She mentions that Google says WF has more doors in Houston than in NYC without taking into account population density and sales volumes of those doors. That was fairly laughable as an economic analysis point.)”

“Zach -- you miss the point. It's not really a "boycott" per se. It's a large segment of WF customers being repelled by the actions of the guy who runs it, while using the brand name of the company to do it.

Those customer relationships are assets of the corporation. They took many years, along with much money, effort and many resources to build.

It is very very poor judgement of Mackey to have squandered them. In fact , my conservative friends, his actions are about as far from conservative as you can get.”

“Zach -- you miss the point. It's not really a "boycott" per se. It's a large segment of WF customers being repelled by the actions of the guy who runs it. Those customer relationships are assets of the corporation and it is very very poor judgement of Mackey to have squandered them. In fact his actions are about as far from conservative as you can get.”

“So now I'm not allowed to change where I shop? I can't shop there because the idea of the company makes me ill now. Mackey squandered the brand equity he spent years building -- his choice, my choice.

The man chased his customers away. It's against business marketing 101.

He also went against his cardinal duty -- his fiduciary duty to his shareholders. There's nothing more conservative than that.

You don't see Walgreen's or CVS weighing in on either way this do you? They certainly have a larger stake in it.”

“Or...make your customers feel unwelcome and they won't want to shop at your store is more like it. Retailers are in the hospitality business as much as any other. If I were heading a grocery chain in Oklahoma I wouldn't publish liberal op-eds either. It's very poor business management and a deriliciton of Mackey's duty to his shreholders. Any pro-business conservative would tell you that.”

“No, you're right and that's just it, I don't want a discussion with my grocery store. No one does. It's unwelcoming -- look at what they call you at the register -- client? guest?

Would you expect Starbucks to hit you with liberal propaganda when you are getting your Grande? Neither would I.”

“I don't trust the institution any longer -- it will cost them quite a bit in money and resources -- each new customer costs money to acquire and WF spends higher than most players in the industry per head (it's a metric that retailers are judged on) to replace the $3,000 a year my partner and I spent there.”