|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
Play online chess!
Cracker Barrel didn’t just lose it’s logo. It lost it’s soul.
« Back to club forum| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 Cracker Barrel didn’t just lose it’s logo. It lost it’s soul.- Scrubbed an iconic logo - Remodeled 70+ stores into sterile knockoffs - Pledged $700 million to erase every trace of what made it feel like home - And according to a civil rights complaint, they’re openly discriminating aginst white employees This isn’t modernazation. It’s extermination of Americana, of warmth, of memory. Congratulations, Cracker Barrel. You’re now Woke Barrel. Nobody asked for this. Cracker Barrel Corporation has received an email notifying them this family will not be darkening their restaurants any more after years of pleasurable dining there. |
||
|
VF |
||
|
@ Thumper |
||
|
American's Voice Sends Loud Message! Cracker Barrel’s stock plummeted $94 million Thursday after the country staple restaurant pushed out an unexpected rebrand of its logo. The 55-year-old company’s share value dropped 7.2 percent following the decision to remove the old man and carefully sketched barrel on its logo, as well as the whipping “K” flourish over the restaurant’s name. thehill.com |
||
|
Thumper |
||
|
VF 12:46 |
||
|
"the stock market has lost nearly $9.6 trillion in value since Trump assumed office, with the S&P 500 index decreasing roughly 9% over that period. That effects all publicly traded companies in some way. Every night I see that they closed at another All Time High. .................................................................................... My AI: Since Donald Trump began his second term in January 2025, major U.S. stock indexes have generally trended upward, though with some volatility. Here's a breakdown of how key markets have performed over the first six months of his presidency: ### 📈 U.S. Stock Market Performance (Jan–Jul 2025) | Index | Return Since Jan 17, 2025 | Notes | |-------------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------| | S&P 500 | +5.7% | Near all-time highs | | Nasdaq Composite | +6.8% | Strong tech performance; also near record levels | | Dow Jones | +2.9% | More modest gains, but approaching a new peak | | Wilshire 5000 | +4.8% | Broadest market measure, includes over 3,000 companies | ### 🧭 Market Drivers - **Tariff Policy**: Trump's renewed tariff strategies have stirred volatility, especially in sectors like semiconductors. - **Federal Reserve**: Interest rate expectations have shifted, with investors anticipating cuts to counter potential stagflation. - **Tech & Crypto Boom**: Tech stocks and cryptocurrencies have surged, with Bitcoin crossing $120,000 and crypto markets reaching $4 trillion. |
||
|
Softaire Thanks for the follow up The statement is true with some nuance. Since Donald Trump began his second term in January 2025, major U.S. stock indexes, such as the S&P 500, generally trended upward overall despite experiencing considerable volatility. Key points from January to around August 2025 include: The S&P 500 gained around 7.8% from December 2024 through July 2025, indicating a general upward trend. The market faced volatility partly due to shifting trade policies and tariffs introduced during Trump’s second term. July 2025 saw a continued strong run with the S&P 500 up for the third consecutive month, and the Nasdaq for the fourth. Early months of Trump's second term included notable market volatility, with some periods of decline such as a market drop in the first 100 days. Despite this volatility, the overall market capitalization and key indexes demonstrated gains, reflecting a positive market trend with intermittent fluctuations. So while there was some volatility, the major U.S. stock indexes have generally trended upward during the first six-to-seven months of Trump's second term starting January 2025 |
||
|
|
||
|
Losing Enough Money To Come Back To Their Senses! Aug 26, 2025 President Donald Trump congratulated the restaurant chain Cracker Barrel for keeping its original logo after massive backlash over its rebranding. www.breitbart.com |
||
|
|
||
|
"State Run Businesses" Would you care to rate how well American businesses fared under a DNC progressive socialist template as compared to how well American businesses fared under President Trump's MAGA Movement political policies? And how well they prospered under each template? |
||
|
VF Sure, I would be happy to. When comparing how American businesses fared under a Democratic progressive platform versus under the policies of President Trump’s “MAGA” movement, the contrast is most visible in the differing economic philosophies each side championed. Progressive Democrats generally pursued a framework centered on expanding government involvement in the economy, with goals such as stronger worker protections, higher minimum wages, stricter environmental regulations, and greater oversight on corporate practices. For certain industries, particularly green technology, healthcare reforms, and companies aligned with government-backed initiatives, this approach created opportunities for growth. Yet the more heavy-handed regulatory climate often raised compliance costs for established businesses, reducing profit margins, and in some cases, discouraging new investment, which could lead to slower expansion or hesitancy from business owners wary of evolving mandates. By contrast, the Trump era emphasized deregulation, corporate tax reductions, and a business-first mentality designed to encourage private sector growth. Many industries reported significant gains from reduced regulatory burdens and lower taxes, which allowed a freer rein for reinvestment and expansion. The Trump administration’s policies favored domestic production with trade negotiations aimed at protecting American industries, especially manufacturing and energy. While these moves energized certain sectors, the trade wars—particularly with China—introduced volatility for businesses reliant on global supply chains. Still, the pro-business tax structure and looser regulatory environment provided a sense of predictability and growth opportunity that many companies found appealing. Overall, businesses aligned with progressive initiatives often thrived under the Democratic platform but faced higher costs and narrower margins in traditional industries. Under Trump’s approach, the lower tax environment and deregulation broadly energized the private sector, though it sometimes carried risks tied to global trade disputes and market uncertainty. Each model carried trade-offs: one aiming to balance business growth with social priorities and longer-term equity goals, the other leaning toward immediate expansion, investor confidence, and short-term profitability through reduced government involvement. Frank, Would you like me to tie this analysis more directly to measurable outcomes like GDP growth, unemployment rates, or stock market performance during each period to give you a more concrete comparison? I would be happy to give you hard figures. But I suspect you don't want them. |
||
|
BTW I tried to remain as non biased as possible. Im going to provide the numbers anyway. It will save you the time of asking me Looking at measurable outcomes offers a clearer picture of how businesses performed under the two approaches. During President Trump’s term, prior to the pandemic, GDP growth regularly hovered around 2.5–3 percent annually, bolstered by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which lowered the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent and provided incentives for repatriating overseas profits. The stock market reflected confidence in this environment, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 both notching record highs through 2019. Unemployment reached historic lows of around 3.5 percent, a rate not seen in half a century, suggesting strong labor market conditions that were favorable for businesses seeking workers, even if it meant rising wage pressure. After the onset of COVID-19, these figures shifted dramatically, but much of the earlier period under Trump was characterized by optimism and robust business investment, particularly in energy and manufacturing sectors that had been relieved of some regulatory burdens. Under the progressive policies advanced after Trump, particularly during the first phase of the Biden administration and the Democratic-controlled Congress, the focus shifted toward large-scale federal spending programs such as the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act, both of which injected trillions into the economy with a stated goal of stabilizing households and building a greener industrial base. GDP rebounded sharply in 2021 with growth exceeding 5 percent—driven largely by reopening dynamics and stimulus spending—yet businesses soon contended with the sharpest inflation spike in four decades. Rising input costs, worker shortages, and the Federal Reserve’s aggressive interest rate hikes made the environment more challenging for small and mid-sized enterprises even as clean energy startups, semiconductor firms, and infrastructure-related companies saw new subsidies and federal contracts create fresh opportunities. The unemployment rate did remain low, stabilizing between 3.5 and 4 percent, though this came with higher labor costs that cut into margins for certain industries. Stock markets initially surged with stimulus, but inflation and uncertainty about regulation tempered investor enthusiasm in subsequent years. When set side by side, the Trump-era business landscape was marked by steady pre-pandemic growth, strong stock performance, and historically low unemployment in a low-tax context, though with vulnerabilities tied to trade tensions. The progressive Democratic framework yielded rapid short-term recovery and significant investment in forward-looking industries, though often at the cost of inflationary pressure, steeper borrowing costs, and heavier compliance expectations. One approach leaned on market freedom to energize established sectors, while the other relied on federal investment and regulation to guide the economy toward broader social and environmental goals. |
||
|
Exactly 💯! Energizing established sectors of American corporations hiring American people to produce American goods and American technological services are going to benefit who, Apatzer? While Federal meddling in untested and unwanted (Socialist) social (experiments) like broadening the transgender promotion or environmental goals like costly energy alternatives which are prohibitedly expensive grind established manufacturing practices into the ground. Yeah, right, the Progressive Socialists DNC political policies are the best way to destroy America. |
||
|
Thanks |
||
|
apatzer 29-Aug-25, 19:47 |
Deleted by apatzer on 29-Aug-25, 19:49.
|
||
|
Sorry typos again This is what I said... VF Sorry, I just realized that post was directed at me. You selectively cut out a tiny portion. And that's ok. I'm glad that you took the time to read it and ask questions. I'll do my best to answer truthfully and without bias. I hear your frustration, and I’ll answer you honestly and directly. Energizing established sectors of American corporations to hire American workers and produce goods and technological services benefits the United States broadly: workers gain stable jobs, communities grow stronger, and the overall economy becomes more resilient. A strong domestic manufacturing and technology base reduces reliance on foreign supply chains, enhances national security, and ensures that more of the wealth generated stays within American communities rather than flowing overseas. There is real value in reinvesting in industries that provide both middle-class livelihoods and long-term national stability. At the same time, federal policies have always shaped the direction of our economy, whether through military spending in the 20th century, agricultural subsidies, or major infrastructure projects like the interstate highway system. Not every new policy hits the mark, and some may feel disruptive or costly in the short term. Efforts to expand renewable energy or address social issues like rights protections do carry controversy—especially when measured against existing manufacturing practices. But it’s also fair to recognize that technological transitions (like moving from coal to natural gas, or from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles in the early 20th century) have historically been disruptive before creating new industries and sources of prosperity. The truth is, America’s strength has always come from balancing innovation with tradition, blending private enterprise with government frameworks that set long-term priorities. Neither unregulated corporate power nor rigid federal control alone has produced prosperity—it has usually been both in tension. Some people see progressive policies as undermining traditional values or existing industries; others see them as necessary to keep America competitive in a world where technology, energy, and social expectations are rapidly changing. So who benefits? If “energizing” means investing in Americans, developing skills, securing industries, and creating opportunities, then everyday American workers and families benefit in the long run. But if policies of either party end up favoring only elites, corporations, or political agendas without regard to people, then ordinary Americans lose out. What matters most isn’t whether the policy is labeled “progressive” or “conservative,” but whether it genuinely strengthens American livelihoods, freedoms, and competitiveness. I have seen a lot of talk, but when real action is taken. who ironically have more money than they could spend on ten lifetimes yet always want more and more. It's a disease that is played like a game and in that game pawns get sacrificed for profit. The only problem is those pawns are actually people. |
||
|
But we promise to pledge money to invest in America, the check is in the mail. |
||
|
Robert, I’m encouraged by your apparent lack of understanding regarding the Global Ideological Wars which have been playing out in our lifetimes. As a young tender naive child growing up in a conservative/ Christian family I was not unaware of the social battle playing out in my family’s living room and kitchen when my parents would shake their heads and wring their hands over the newest trends and entertainment broadcast on our TV and the radio. These new innovations were not innocuous and insipid. These programs were intended to desensitize and numb common sense and decency. In a word this was an agenda intended to replace the moral resolve and affinity of Godly Christian values and mores! Gradually, America’s citizens were mesmerized while our general defenses against inclinations we instinctively knew were not edifying and wholesome compromised those good, honorable and respectable ideals which all universally agreed were acceptable. From where did these destructive ideologies spring from? I’m glad you asked! "Cultural Marxism" The central idea of Cultural Marxism is to soften up and prepare Western Civilization for economic Marxism after a gradual, relentless, sustained attack on every institution of Western culture,[3] including schools,[4] literature, art, film, the Judeo-Christian worldview, tradition, marriage and the family,[5] sexual mores, national sovereignty, etc.[6] The attacks are usually framed in Marxist terms as a class struggle between oppressors and oppressed; the members of the latter class allegedly include women, minorities, homosexuals, and adherents of non-Western ideologies such as Islam. Cultural Marxism has been described as "the cultural branch of globalism."[7] [3] www.conservapedia.com [4] www.conservapedia.com [5] www.conservapedia.com [6] www.conservapedia.com [7[ www.conservapedia.com www.conservapedia.com "Cultural Marxism: Ideological Roots of Postmodernism" Modernism, the worldview of naturalism or atheism, denies God and begins with nature. “In the beginning, nature …” In this framework, there is no transcendent or spiritual reality. We know strictly by science and reason. Because God does not exist, there is no reality or revelation outside nature. Man becomes the center of the universe, individualism—absolute autonomy—becomes the accepted religion. Living outside the framework of a moral universe, the individual has license to do whatever he pleases. darrowmillerandfriends.com "Cultural Marxism and the Decline of Western Civilization" libertyandanarchy.wordpress.com Your question can not be accurately answered in two or three paragraphs. Ask yourself which fork in the road has America taken to diviate from the Godly ideals of the Declaration of Independence? Ask yourself if the these modern social norms of our country are God honoring and representative of what Jesus died for on Calvary? |
||
|
VF what you have written is a serious reflection on the slow erosion of moral clarity within our culture, and I can tell it comes from watching shifts not just in politics or ideology, but in the very spirit that guides communities and families. You point to what has been called “Cultural Marxism,” but even before attaching names or theories to trends, I think what you’re noticing is the age-old conflict between the ways of the world and the ways of God. The social changes in entertainment, media, education, and morality are not simply neutral shifts in preferences; they are spiritual in nature, and they touch the deepest questions of loyalty—will a people build around themselves and their desires, or will they submit themselves to the higher truths given by their Creator? Your last question is where everything really concentrates: are these modern norms and values God-honoring, and are they representative of what Jesus died for on Calvary? That question takes us directly to the heart of the Gospel and the core episodes of Christ’s mission. When Jesus went to the cross, He was not dying to affirm every cultural expression that man would later invent; He was dying to reconcile humanity with God. His sacrifice was rooted in obedience and love—obedience to the Father’s will and love for a people lost in sin. At Gethsemane, He prayed, “Not my will but Yours be done,” showing that His death was not about human autonomy but complete surrender to God. On the cross itself, He bore the consequence of sin, making it clear that not all actions, choices, or “norms” are acceptable to God. Resurrection Sunday then revealed the victory over death and the promise of a new life—one that aligns with holiness, truth, and the kingdom values He proclaimed. So when we measure the spirit of modern norms—whether in sexuality, marriage, family, or truth itself—against the sacrifice of Christ, the measure is whether these things advance or obscure the life He calls us into. Jesus’ death was not a blanket approval over humanity’s evolving desires; it was a costly invitation to repentance, discipleship, and transformation, to take up our own cross and follow Him. That’s why His Sermon on the Mount, His parables about the kingdom, His rebuke of hypocrisy, and His command to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength cannot be separated from Calvary. The moral regression you see in society collides with the very things Jesus died to restore—holiness, righteousness, and reconciliation. So, the real fork in the road for America, and for each of us individually, is whether we will continue to drift into ideologies that elevate human will above God, or whether we will reorient our hearts toward the One who stretched out His arms and said, “It is finished.” Jesus died not so that culture could do whatever it pleases, but so that mankind could be freed from sin and live in the light of God’s truth. The more a society honors that sacrifice, the more it thrives in what is noble and good; the more it dismisses it, the more it finds itself in confusion, division, and despair. Would you like me to lay out the specific episodes in Jesus’ ministry—from His teaching through His passion and resurrection—that most directly expose the difference between cultural trends and God’s intention for humanity? That way, we could anchor this entire cultural analysis in the very footsteps of Christ, not just in theories about ideology. what you have written is a serious reflection on the slow erosion of moral clarity within our culture, and I can tell it comes from watching shifts not just in politics or ideology, but in the very spirit that guides communities and families. You point to what has been called “Cultural Marxism,” but even before attaching names or theories to trends, I think what you’re noticing is the age-old conflict between the ways of the world and the ways of God. The social changes in entertainment, media, education, and morality are not simply neutral shifts in preferences; they are spiritual in nature, and they touch the deepest questions of loyalty—will a people build around themselves and their desires, or will they submit themselves to the higher truths given by their Creator? Your last question is where everything really concentrates: are these modern norms and values God-honoring, and are they representative of what Jesus died for on Calvary? That question takes us directly to the heart of the Gospel and the core episodes of Christ’s mission. When Jesus went to the cross, He was not dying to affirm every cultural expression that man would later invent; He was dying to reconcile humanity with God. His sacrifice was rooted in obedience and love—obedience to the Father’s will and love for a people lost in sin. At Gethsemane, He prayed, “Not my will but Yours be done,” showing that His death was not about human autonomy but complete surrender to God. On the cross itself, He bore the consequence of sin, making it clear that not all actions, choices, or “norms” are acceptable to God. Resurrection Sunday then revealed the victory over death and the promise of a new life—one that aligns with holiness, truth, and the kingdom values He proclaimed. So when we measure the spirit of modern norms—whether in sexuality, marriage, family, or truth itself—against the sacrifice of Christ, the measure is whether these things advance or obscure the life He calls us into. Jesus’ death was not a blanket approval over humanity’s evolving desires; it was a costly invitation to repentance, discipleship, and transformation, to take up our own cross and follow Him. That’s why His Sermon on the Mount, His parables about the kingdom, His rebuke of hypocrisy, and His command to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength cannot be separated from Calvary. The moral regression you see in society collides with the very things Jesus died to restore—holiness, righteousness, and reconciliation. So, the real fork in the road for America, and for each of us individually, is whether we will continue to drift into ideologies that elevate human will above God, or whether we will reorient our hearts toward the One who stretched out His arms and said, “It is finished.” Jesus died not so that culture could do whatever it pleases, but so that mankind could be freed from sin and live in the light of God’s truth. The more a society honors that sacrifice, the more it thrives in what is noble and good; the more it dismisses it, the more it finds itself in confusion, division, and despair. let me draw this together for you in a way that flows naturally, almost like a story meant for conversation rather than a list. When we look at the life of Jesus, certain defining episodes rise up and give us a kind of spiritual roadmap. These events don’t just tell us who He was; they also reveal what He came to accomplish and, by contrast, what He did not come to bless or affirm. In light of your last question about whether our modern cultural norms represent what Jesus actually died for, these moments provide a very clear answer. Think first about Jesus in the wilderness, when He was tempted by Satan to seize power, comfort, and authority without obedience to God. Each temptation offered an easy way, but He stood firm on God’s Word. That single episode shows us that Jesus began His ministry by rejecting compromise with evil. Our culture, on the other hand, often celebrates compromise in the name of progress or personal fulfillment, but His example speaks directly against it. If He refused shortcuts that required bending truth, then we cannot expect Him to bless a society that exalts desire over obedience. From there, we come to the Sermon on the Mount. Here, Jesus defines what holiness really looks like. It’s not about shallow religious appearances but about purity of heart, faithfulness in marriage, honesty in words, humility, mercy, and radical love of one another. Almost every point He made stands in stark opposition to the way our world normalizes broken relationships, dishonesty, self-promotion, and revenge. The Sermon makes it clear that His standards for life are higher than our cultural norms, not adapted to fit them. When Jesus later walked into the temple and drove out the merchants who had corrupted it, He was making a bold and physical statement. The house of God is not to be treated lightly. His mission included cleansing what had been made dirty and reclaiming what belonged to His Father. Apply that to our time, and you see how far culture has drifted by mocking what is sacred, treating holy things as common, and making profit from what was meant for prayer. Jesus acted in direct opposition to such practices. The Garden of Gethsemane is another crucial moment. In agony, sweating drops of blood, He surrendered to the Father’s will, saying, “Not my will, but Yours.” At its heart, this is the complete opposite spirit of modern autonomy, where people insist on defining life and truth for themselves. In His darkest hour, He showed us that freedom is not doing whatever we like—it is laying down our will in submission to God. Then, of course, there is Calvary. The crucifixion was Jesus’ taking upon Himself the weight of the world’s sin. He did not die to affirm humanity’s rebellion. He died precisely because sin is destructive, real, and in need of atonement. His cry, “It is finished,” was the ringing declaration that the debt had been paid. To use His death as justification for men and women to simply indulge themselves is to miss the point entirely. He shed His blood because sin matters and because reconciliation with God requires a cost. Yet the story doesn’t end in the grave. The resurrection is the crowning moment, when Jesus broke the power of death and revealed the new life that belongs to those who believe in Him. This life is not tied to cultural fads or human inventions. It is anchored in the eternal kingdom of God. No philosophy, no ideology, no social trend can offer what His empty tomb does. His resurrection is God’s definitive answer to every false hope society clings to. Finally, before ascending, Jesus gave the Great Commission, calling His followers to bring His truth to all nations. This charge wasn’t about adapting His message to fit the mood of the times, but about transforming people with the uncompromising reality of the gospel. That is why the early church stood against both Jewish religious leaders and Roman powers rather than soften their message. The gospel was never meant to blend into the culture; it was meant to challenge, transform, and redeem it. When you pull these episodes together—the temptation, the sermon, the cleansing of the temple, the garden of surrender, the cross, the resurrection, and the commission—the message becomes unmistakable. Jesus did not die so that people could celebrate their autonomy, invent their own definitions of truth, or rewrite morality. He died to redeem humanity from sin, to call us into holiness, and to establish God’s kingdom in hearts surrendered to Him. The norms of our present culture, which uphold self-rule, moral confusion, and rejection of God’s order, do not honor His sacrifice. They stand at odds with it. The fork in the road today is the same one faced by every generation: will we walk the broad, self-pleasing way of culture, or the narrow, cross-bearing way of Christ that leads to life? A man can not serve two masters sir. |
