RWNJ's NCP Calls Activists "radical race agitators" and "loons"

Yesterday the extremist right-wing organization “National Center Policy Experts” crashed the J&J stockholders meeting to complain about the fact that J&J had dumped ALEC.

Here’s their press release after the stockholder’s meeting.

National Center Policy Experts Quiz Pfizer CEO Ian Read and Johnson & Johnson CEO Alex Gorsky

Johnson & Johnson Issue 2: Justin Danhof noted that he had thanked then-Johnson & Johnson CEO William Weldon at last year's shareholder meeting for not caving in to the left-wing demands of the Color of Change organization to drop membership in the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), only to see Johnson & Johnson cave in to the left about a month later. He expressed his disappointment with that decision and asked why it occurred.

Mr. Gorsky 's response was brief: "Regarding ALEC, we as a leadership team and frankly I made the decision that ALEC is no longer consistent with the principles in our credo and overall stakeholders."

SNIP

Following the meeting, Danhof was critical of Johnson & Johnson's decision regarding ALEC, saying, in part, "Bending to the will of radical race agitators is an incomprehensible corporate strategy that will lead to more loons from the radical left demanding the company adopt ever more extreme policy positions."

"radical race agitators"

Color of Change and everyone who supports their efforts are “radical race agitators”

This kind of inflaming rhetoric can not be allowed in our society.

People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

I would doubt if J&J could have taken "more extreme policy positions" than belonging to ALEC.  ALEC is the the epitome' of "extreme policy positions".

Amy Ridenour, chairman of the National Center, said, "It's not immediately apparent what in Johnson & Johnson's credo is at odds with membership in a mainstream conservative/free-market organization. So although this is a response, and it was a polite response, it is pretty close to a non-response. It may be that the left made ALEC controversial, and that Johnson & Johnson, like a number of other corporations, just didn't want to deal with anyone controversial, even if they do good work. The bad news is that the left can make anyone controversial, but the good news is that this is a game both sides can - if forced to - play. It doesn't lead us to a very civil society, but neither should the right just sit back and take it."

“Johnson & Johnson's credo is at odds with membership in a mainstream conservative/free-market organization”

The conclusion of the "National Center' then becoming - If you don’t fund ALEC – you are no longer part of the " mainstream conservative/free-market" movement.

“it is pretty close to a non-response”  

"incomprehensible corporate strategy"

NO – he was clear …..

Voter ID and Kill at Will

“ALEC is no longer consistent with the principles in our credo and overall stakeholders."

"will lead to more loons from the radical left demanding the company adopt ever more extreme policy positions"

Well - I guess it depends on which side of the extremist aisle you are looking at this from.

I tend to think of ALEC as "loons from the radical right demanding the company adopt ever more extreme policy positions".

“The bad news is that the left can make anyone controversial, but the good news is that this is a game both sides can - if forced to – play’

Is that a threat – bring it on baby.

The one thing that these right-wing extremiost doesn't realize is that the actions of the citizens who supported the acitons of Color fo Change are "free-market" actions.

The actions of ALEC are to manipulate the market through lesgilation introduced by ALEC state legisaltors.

I guess I would tend to side on the activist citizens manipulation of the "free market" as it represents the general public and not ALEC Corporate Sector members - who are the only "people" who benefit from the legislation introduced by ALEC legislators.

In reality the National Center Policy Experts and other right wing extremist organizations can be viewed as the issue.

The American Legislative Exchange Council “doesn't lead us to a very civil society,” and “is at odds” with the American people’s belief in a representative government of, for and by the people and it would be fair to say that many American’s would question this reference to ALEC - “even if they do good work” – which appears to be an right-wing extremist evaluation of ALEC.