Toys R Us Disqualifies First Baby Of 07 - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-06-2007, 09:16 PM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 06:39 AM
I'm glad all of the babies got their scholarships, it's not the Chinese baby's fault that her mother isn't legal.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 01-06-2007, 09:34 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 01:39 AM
Way to go Toys R Us - the next time I don't win a contest I'm going to raise a huge stink until I get my prize.
__________________

__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 01-07-2007, 08:21 AM   #18
Refugee
 
BostonAnne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 2,052
Local Time: 02:39 AM
I think Toys R Us did the right thing. The contest was designed to be positive publicity and it turned into negative publicity. This was, it has the best chance to be positive again.

I think the rule was black and white - but the interpretation of it is gray since the child is born American.
__________________
BostonAnne is offline  
Old 01-07-2007, 09:10 AM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 01:39 AM
They had to do that because of the publicity, and rules are rules but that doesn't make it right

Let's face it, it looks mean spirited to disqualify a baby Babies are all-American, right?

I remember when there were all sorts of contests for the millenium babies. I assume these contests also have rules against inducing.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-07-2007, 10:12 AM   #20
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 06:39 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
The contest rules state that the mothers have to be legal residents. I don't see that there's any issue to this at all.
I agree with you. The mother has no case in this instance.
__________________
AchtungBono is offline  
Old 01-07-2007, 10:29 AM   #21
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 02:39 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BostonAnne
I think Toys R Us did the right thing. The contest was designed to be positive publicity and it turned into negative publicity. This was, it has the best chance to be positive again.
Bingo.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 01-07-2007, 02:55 PM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Sorry, but, the rulz is the rulz. Speaking of rulz, is Mom eligible to satay here?
An interesting question, indeed.





Quote:
Satay

From Wikipedia,


Satay (also written saté) is a dish that may have originated in Sumatra or Java, Indonesia, but also popular in many other Southeast Asian countries such as Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, and Thailand.
Hard to say from the inofmation provided,
isn't she Chinese?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 01-07-2007, 07:34 PM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
BluRmGrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leather Heaven
Posts: 7,808
Local Time: 02:39 AM
Just another example of why the US has serious issues now with illegal residents - there is no respect for our laws and requirements of citizenship. And why should there be when every time someone cries 'US/Toys-R-Us/Insert-whatever-entity-here is unfair to Hispanics/Asians/Hindus/Insert-whatever-nationality or creed-here!!' and we cave?

Trust me, I am not zenophobic and I don't begrudge anyone who wants to LEGALLY enter this country and become a productive citizen, but why should we go out of our way to appease folks who won't even respect the basic rules laid out for them?

I readily admit that the status of the Chinese parents in this case was never mentioned in the article that I read, i.e. they are in the process of applying for citizenship, etc. so I don't automatically intend my comments to them in particular. I'm just speaking in general about the big picture.
__________________
BluRmGrl is offline  
Old 01-07-2007, 07:44 PM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 01:39 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BluRmGrl
Just another example of why the US has serious issues now with illegal residents - there is no respect for our laws and requirements of citizenship. And why should there be when every time someone cries 'US/Toys-R-Us/Insert-whatever-entity-here is unfair to Hispanics/Asians/Hindus/Insert-whatever-nationality or creed-here!!' and we cave?

Trust me, I am not zenophobic and I don't begrudge anyone who wants to LEGALLY enter this country and become a productive citizen, but why should we go out of our way to appease folks who won't even respect the basic rules laid out for them?

I readily admit that the status of the Chinese parents in this case was never mentioned in the article that I read, i.e. they are in the process of applying for citizenship, etc. so I don't automatically intend my comments to them in particular. I'm just speaking in general about the big picture.
"We cave"? Toys-R-US is a corporation, so only their shareholders should care about the additional expense. As mentioned earlier, at this point the publicity had turned negative for Toys-R-Us, and $50k was the cheapest way to turn the negative into a positive.
__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 01-10-2007, 02:43 AM   #25
Refugee
 
fly so high!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Andrews NSW Australia
Posts: 1,835
Local Time: 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonosSaint


PR nightmare. Your disqualifications should be as prominent as your come-ons. I suspect Toys R Us didn't want to create the PR nightmare that would have ensued in a prominent ad and ended up creating a worse mess for itself.

They are legally covered though.

They created this nightmare themselves they have only themselves to blame if their sales go down.Why put that in the fine print anyway....does it honestly frickkin' matter...the child was the first to be born on american soil in 07!
__________________
fly so high! is offline  
Old 01-10-2007, 02:46 AM   #26
Refugee
 
fly so high!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Andrews NSW Australia
Posts: 1,835
Local Time: 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by trevster2k
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/06/fir....ap/index.html


All over now, everyone got their money.
Good!
__________________
fly so high! is offline  
Old 01-13-2007, 12:01 AM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
BluRmGrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leather Heaven
Posts: 7,808
Local Time: 02:39 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


"We cave"? Toys-R-US is a corporation, so only their shareholders should care about the additional expense. As mentioned earlier, at this point the publicity had turned negative for Toys-R-Us, and $50k was the cheapest way to turn the negative into a positive.

Yes, 'we'... as in America as a whole.

Here's the comparison I was attempting to make between corporate America & the government in general: Someone with no legal right to a benefit or prize steps forward to claim it. They're told, 'no - you don't meet the requirements'. What to do? Get yourself a lawyer, put on your best 'victim face' and scream to any media outlet that'll listen how you've been discriminated against & demand restitution. TRU & the government have shown that rather stand their ground, they'll bend rather than lose a few dollars (or votes, if you're a politician).

So the question remains: what's the point of making rules when all it takes to get them changed, bent, or outright ignored is a few cries of "Opression! Opression!" and fear of some bad press??? And how should anyone that easy to manipulate expect to be taken seriously?
__________________
BluRmGrl is offline  
Old 01-13-2007, 12:17 AM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Mr. BAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Life's too short to drink cheap wine!
Posts: 12,336
Local Time: 11:39 PM
I've learned that my fourfathers and fourmothers are illegal...we're going back...




This is not part of my farewell tour...!
__________________
Mr. BAW is offline  
Old 01-13-2007, 12:46 AM   #29
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Re: Toys R Us Disqualifies First Baby Of 07

Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
NY Times

January 6, 2007
First-Baby Sweepstakes Fuels Immigration Debate
By NINA BERNSTEIN

The parents could not be reached for comment
Did the parents get lawyers and scream, or did others on their behalf?
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 01-13-2007, 12:46 AM   #30
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. BAW
I've learned that my fourfathers and fourmothers are illegal...we're going back...
My greatgrandpa was illegal!
__________________

__________________
martha is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com