Boycott The Boycotters?

As far as I know, these are the advertisers who have “paused” their presence on Twatter since Elon Musk took over:

  • Audi — can’t afford their overpriced cars anyway
  • General Mills — so much for that weekly box of Cheerios in the cart
  • General Motors — never on my list because crap cars and trucks
  • Mondelez International (formerly Kraft [Snack] Foods)– never cared for Oreos, Triscuits, Ritz and TUC either.  As for their chocolate brands, I can only see a problem with Cadbury (hello Lindt)  and Fry’s — massive concern from New Wife, who loves their Turkish Delight
  • Pfizer — pfuckem, not going to get another ‘Rona jab anyway
  • Volkswagen — well, that’s a real stinker.  As a lifetime buyer of VW cars, wagons and vans (7 or 8 so far), I guess I’ll just have to break the VW habit and look elsewhere for a replacement for the Tiguan when the time comes, as long as it’s not Chev or Audi (hello… Mazda?).


Advertising companies Interpublic Group—with clients like CVS and Nintendo—and Havas Media—whose clients include O2, Hyundai, and Domino’s Pizza—have recommended to their clients to pause paid advertising on Twitter, Forbes reported.

No more Rx from CVS, then (hello Wal-Mart or Kroger), and I’ve never been a user / consumer of the others.

One person (Yer Humble Narrator) can’t do much, it seems, when it comes to making these assholes pay for their wokedom.  Let’s hope there are a lot more people who think the way I do.

And remember:  not being a Twatter adherent myself, I actually care little about whatever happens to them.  What gets up my nose is the Leftist reaction (note the players) to Musk’s avowed intent to make the company less stridently Left-wing and fervently anti-conservative.  Maybe he should just fire more Twatter employees as a result of lowered ad revenue.

Not Applicable

(This post first created on Friday 10/7)

From the Wokistas at PayPal, telling me about the changes to their conditions of business:

You may not use the PayPal service for activities that:
1. violate any law, statute, ordinance or regulation.
2. relate to transactions involving (a) narcotics, steroids, certain controlled substances or other products that present a risk to consumer safety, (b) drug paraphernalia, (c) cigarettes, (d) items that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity, (e) stolen goods including digital and virtual goods, (f) the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory or the financial exploitation of a crime, (g) items that are considered obscene, (h) items that infringe or violate any copyright, trademark, right of publicity or privacy or any other proprietary right under the laws of any jurisdiction, (i) certain sexually oriented materials or services, (j) ammunition, firearms, or certain firearm parts or accessories, or (k) certain weapons or knives regulated under applicable law.

Before anyone gets all upset (on my behalf), let me just say that I have never ever purchased any of the above highlighted items using PayPal.

Nope;  I first transfer the PayPal funds into my bank account, and then I go off and buy guns, ammo, MAGA hats, knives/bayonets, and sex toys that have the word “nigger” printed on them.

Just wanted to clear that all up.

Update (10/8):  Oh looky here:  PayPal has revoked part of their policy, saying:

PayPal has backtracked on a published policy that would have fined users $2,500 for spreading “misinformation,” claiming the update had gone out “in error.”  [Yeah, I bet it did.  Fuckers. — Kim]

“An AUP notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. Our teams are working to correct our policy pages. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused,” a spokesperson told National Review in a written statement.

The course reversal comes after the policy changes had started to attract media scrutiny as well as criticism on Twitter. Former PayPal president David Marcus even blasted the company over the implication that it could seize customers’ money for finding their views objectionable.

I wonder if they’d find this “objectionable”:

You pathetic little banker-wannabes are a bunch of lousy, wokist motherfuckers, and I hope states like Texas stop doing business with you altogether, and millions of your account-holders close their accounts rather than be subject to your pissy little regulations.

I’m taking a different tack.

Try and “fine” me by stealing money from my account without my written permission.  I fucking dare you.

‘nother Update (10/9):

I just closed my account.  Fuck ’em.