Black Rifle Coffee Kerfluffle

I’m sure everyone’s heard by now about the Interview that Black Rifle Coffee’s CEO gave with the New York Times.

“I hate racist, Proud-Boyish people. Like, I’ll pay them to leave my customer base. I would gladly chop all of those people out of my f**king customer database and pay them to get the f**k out.”

Well, the attempted damage control has begun:

Hafer quickly debunked the notion that he made derogatory remarks about BRCC’s customers or conservatives and then proceeded to explain how the New York Times deliberately twisted his words and took them out of context. According to Hafer, his conversation with the NYT Magazine reporter was in the context of racism and anti-Semitism in America in light of Hafer being the target of an organized attack last year because of “my last name and my heritage.”

“We were purely discussing that,” Hafer says, and he was not conflating those groups with conservatives.

Note what’s not in Hafer’s lame attempt at damage control: It’s missing the words “I didn’t say that”. Basically, his excuse is: “Yes, I called the Proud Boys racist, threw Kyle Rittenhouse under the bus, and implied that everyone who supports them is repugnant and I don’t want them as a customer, but I didn’t mean it in a bad way”.

Sorry, not cutting it for me. If he said those things, I don’t care what the context was, he threw most of his target customer demographic under the bus.

He doesn’t want me as a customer? Fine with me. Plenty of other coffee companies out there to give my money to.

Share

When Seconds Count…

Police are only 3 hours and 57 minutes away.

According to the incident report, officers were dispatched to Gamble’s crash at 4:30 p.m. They arrived at the scene at 4:35 p.m., three hours and 57 minutes after Gamble placed her first call to 911.

Granted, this wasn’t an active shooting or anything like that, it was a hit and run, but the people who hit and ran came back to the scene later to threaten the hittees who were still waiting for the police to show up…it could have turned out a lot worse.

Liberals who think the police can and will protect them are idiots.

Your safety and protection is your job. The constables are just there to mark where the bodies ended up.
–Phil of Random Nuclear Strikes (blog no longer active)

Hat tip to .357 Magnum.

Share

Vaccination doubts

I was already skeptical of the vaccination. First I don’t think it’s necessary for a virus with a 98+% survival rate in my demographic group and a 99+% survival rate when the proper treatment regimens are applied.

Secondly, the “vaccinations” being pushed did not even meet the medical definition of “vaccination” a few months ago and only do now because they changed the definition to match it. The mRNA techniques are new, have never been used on this scale and the long term effects of tricking your own body into producing the proteins that then stimulate your immune system into attack mode are completely unknown.

Thirdly, the rate of serious side effects from these “vaccines” is significantly higher than would have been tolerated in a vaccine just a few years ago…not to mention that the CDC keeps downplaying and soft-pedaling these side effects, even while acknowledging that they’re happening.

Fourthly, while possibly more contagious, all indications that the “Delta” variant that has become the most prevalent strain of the virus at the moment, is much less virulent than previous iterations and has a mortality rate virtually identical with common influenza (look at the case fatality table on page 8).

This is what viruses do. Viruses persist by spreading from host to host. In order for a host to spread the virus to another host, it has to be alive. As viruses mutate, the more deadly strains die out because they don’t proliferate. The strains that do survive are the ones that don’t make the hosts sick enough to die (or even to go into isolation for that matter, when you get sick enough to go to a hospital, you’ll be isolated, hence not spreading the virus, even if you survive).

They’re claiming that the Delta variant is more transmissible than previous variants and that may be true, but the only evidence they have is a marginal uptick in total cases and the percentage of that total that is of the Delta variant is increasing rapidly.

Yes, that could mean that Delta is more transmissible, but it also could simply be a function of it being less virulent (which has already been demonstrated). If people are getting less sick from it, fewer will seek medical treatment, will remain in public longer and will spread it to more people.

But all of that is just to lead up to my final point via “The Last Refuge”:

The government push to promote vaccinations for COVID-19 has gone well beyond reasonable advancement for the public health. Now, we are entering a phase where the ongoing demand is becoming problematic, propaganda.

I am a cynic by nature. When someone starts trying to push me into doing something, my first reaction is to question their motives. What business is it of theirs anyway? Why should they care if I choose to make different decisions than they do? If there is a reasonable explanation for it, and their argument is convincing, I can be persuaded. But the harder I’m pushed to just blindly accept that their prescription for me is “for my own good”, especially when the facts right in front of my face bring that contention into question, the less likely I am to bend to their will.

I distinctly feel like I’m being pushed right now in a direction, I’m not sure I want to go. Until I make up my mind that I want to go that way, I’m going to keep pushing back.

If I eventually have to get a vaccine to function in the world, I’d be much more likely to accept the upcoming and as-yet unapproved Novavax vaccine.

The Novavax vaccine does not trick our own cells into creating the protein that activates the immune response, the Novavax vaccine uses the more traditional approach of injecting inactivated virus particles to trigger the response. This is tried and true technology that has been in use for years in vaccines such as the Hepatitis B vaccine.

Even under an emergency use authorization, I’d be much more willing to try a vaccine created using longstanding and proven techniques rather than a relatively new technology with unknown long term side effects.

But the bottom line is that I feel that the risks of accepting a vaccine released under emergency authorization and using relatively new and untried technology outweigh the benefits of defeating a virus with a high survival rate and the harder they push me to accept their position over my own, the harder I’m going to resist.

Share

Are Democrats planning a Coup?

Seems a bit silly to ask that question right now since the democrats have control of the white house plus slim majorities in both houses of congress, but this story over at gunfreezone.net raises the question:

The top US military officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley, was so shaken that then-President Donald Trump and his allies might attempt a coup or take other dangerous or illegal measures after the November election that Milley and other top officials informally planned for different ways to stop Trump, according to excerpts of an upcoming book obtained by CNN.

In my experience, projection is a hallmark characteristic of the left. In virtually everything they do, they ascribe their bad behavior and motives to the other side. Anti-gunners constantly spew vitriol and hatred at their opponents and then claim that gun rights supporters are hateful and violent. Democrats demand defunding of the police and then claim that it’s the Republicans trying to defund the police by failing to pass their pork barrel spending bills that have nothing to do with police. The left spends all summer burning cities, looting businesses, disrupting the lives of innocent citizens and violently attacking anyone who doesn’t agree with them, then they claim that “right wing extremism” is the most serious threat the country faces. They insist that minorities, especially blacks, are incapable of succeeding in a modern society without the assistance of whites and then claim that those who believe everyone should be treated equally regardless of race are “white supremacists”.

I could go on.

The point is, the worrying question about the story linked above to me is this: Did they truly believe that Trump was planning to attempt to use the military to stay in office after the election – or was this just another case of leftist projection?

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, the plan all along has been for Biden to serve 2 years and 1 day…even if they have to prop him up and work his mouth like a puppet at the end…and for Harris to take over on January 21, 2022. At the same time, they plan to steal enough congressional seats in the 2022 midterm so that they’ll simultaneously have a “true believer” that’s beholden to them for her ascendency in the White House, and firm majorities in both houses of Congress. Under the Constitution, Harris will be able to serve two additional full terms in addition to the 2 years minus one day of Biden’s term (assuming they can keep stealing elections). 10 years is plenty of time to consolidate and complete their control over all of the federal law enforcement agencies and the military, pack the supreme court and pass every unconstitutional “law” they ever wanted to ensure their power forever.

If, however, the states are able to clean up the election procedures to the point where we have a relatively honest election in enough states in 2024, Harris will lose.
In that event the left will be apoplectic that their plans are going awry. The fact that they were ascribing the possibility of a coup to Trump, and their penchant for projection, leads me to suspect that the reason a coup was on their minds is because…well…it’s on their minds.

Food for thought. Keep your powder dry.

Share

The State of the Navy

Many people have been talking recently about a new report commissioned by several veteran congresspeople including Tom Cotton and my personal favorite vet in office, Dan Crenshaw:

Concern within the Navy runs so high that, when asked whether incidents such as the two destroyer collisions in the Pacific, the surrender of a small craft to the IRGC in the Arabian Gulf, the burning of the Bonhomme Richard and other incidents were part of a broader cultural or leadership problem in the Navy, 94% of interviewees responded “yes,” 3% said “no,” and 3% said “unsure.” And when asked if the incidents were directly connected, 55% said “yes,” 16% said “no,” and 29% said “unsure.” This sentiment, that the Navy is dangerously off course, was overwhelming.

I have serious doubts as to the veracity of this “study” for two reasons:

Polls are notorious for being easily manipulated. Pollsters can handily get the answers they’re looking for by wording the questions in the right way.

For example, a poll that asks:

“Do you support the loophole that allows criminals to purchase firearms from unlicensed dealers without undergoing a background check?”

Will get entirely different results from a poll asking the exact same people:

“Should private citizens be required to seek permission from the government before being permitted to sell their personally owned property to other private citizens?”

The questions are asking the same thing, just in dramatically different ways and will result in completely different data.

The second issue I have with the “study” is the number of personnel interviewed.

77 unique and formal interviews were conducted with Navy personnel via an extensive hour-long process to establish a common controlled approach to the questions at hand.

Seriously? 77 people to represent the outlook of the entire US Navy? There are many different “communities” within the Navy, and although they all fall under the basic framework of the UCMJ and Naval Regulations, the different communities have vastly different cultures. The surface navy vs submarine navy. Black shoes (ship’s company) vs Brown shoes (aviation community). Small boys (destroyers, frigates, cruisers) vs flattops (aircraft carriers). Then there are the specialties that have unique roles like the Seabees, the SEALs, EOD, etc. There are even cultural difference between the East Coast Navy and the West Coast Navy, between the individual fleets and between different ships, even different ships of the same class.

I wouldn’t trust a poll of 77 people to be representative of the crew of a fully manned aircraft carrier (approx 5,000 people), let alone the entire Navy of 330,000+.

So, I don’t think this “study” should be touted as the definitive statement of the attitude of all Sailors. This is very likely just another exercise in confirmation bias. Conducting interviews with too small a sample to be truly representative and wording interview questions in such a way as to receive a desired response.

With that said…

Just because the “study” framework and execution raises questions in my mind, doesn’t mean the attitude they were trying to confirm isn’t real. Whether the majority of sailors are aware of it, or will admit it, the Navy of today is in a very sad state.

This started well before I retired. The members of any military unit’s very survival depends on the skills and abilities of each of those members in their assigned duties. When such an organization begins to place more emphasis on retaining and promoting individuals based on any criteria other than merit, that organization’s effectiveness is going to suffer. Those policies were in place long before I joined the Navy in the early ’80’s and did nothing but get worse throughout my tenure. Those policies have done nothing but escalate in the 18 years since my retirement.

Additional policies include the softening of standards and requirements, the dumbing down of training and qualification standards, the elimination of longstanding trust building and team building traditions, the overt rewarding of timidity and risk aversion over boldness and warfighting ability, the incessant harping and “training” on social issues leaving little time for training designed to enhance mission capability. I could go on.

The result of decades of senior leadership promoted on the basis of their political acumen and ability to avoid controversy rather than any leadership or warfighting skills has ultimately resulted in a Navy where ships crash into civilian freighters, small boat crews who instantly surrender to third world rabble when challenged, ships in the shipyard burning to the waterline because the crew is unequipped and unable to perform the single most important function for the survival of any Navy vessel: damage control.

Not to mention an entire new class of highly technological, extremely expensive ships that serve no practical purpose, a new generation of Aircraft Carriers that can’t effectively launch or recover aircraft due to the incorporation of unproven, unreliable (also extremely expensive) technology, and a remaining fleet of overtasked, undermaintained ships that the crews struggle to keep marginally operational.

We may still have the largest, most technologically advanced Navy in the world (for now, China is rapidly gaining and will soon overtake us), and the most highly motivated, creative and dedicated sailors in history, but our Naval capability has been hamstrung by multiple generations of poor leadership and misplaced priorities, with no signs of improvement on the horizon.

And I don’t need a weak “study” of the attitudes of sailors to tell me that.

Share

Another case of Black Privilege?

Unclear at this time, but I have my suspicions.

You may remember the story of the Philadelphia Dunkin’ Donuts murder. The one that proves the lie of the liberal anti-self-defense shibboleth “just give them what they want and you’ll be ok”:

Once inside, the suspect demanded she hand over money from the store office. After taking the money, the suspect shot Lugo in the head. She was pronounced dead at the scene.

Well, it turns out that, as has happened so many times in the past, the suspect should have been in prison.

There was no need for Judge Medinilla to let Mr Gibson loose. He was already guilty of violating his probation, and she could have ordered him back to jail without the state having to prove anything else; no trial was required. With the Philly police already pointing to him as a murder suspect, why would any judge in his right mind turn him loose when it was not necessary?

Was this a case of Black Privilege? It’s impossible to really know unless this particular judge had handled a case under similar circumstances but with a white suspect. I’d say the odds of finding such a case are low so we’ll never really know.

But based on the left’s penchant for portraying black criminals as misunderstood and mistreated by the system, I’d have to say my suspicions are strong on this one. I mean, this is hardly a choir boy:

Gibson’s “extensive history of violence’’ and “documented anger issues,” including 64 previous criminal charges, with nine convictions for felonies and 15 for misdemeanors. Besides the manslaughter/weapons conviction, which had been pleaded down from a first-degree murder count, his other offenses included assault and terroristic threatening.

He had also violated probation 14 times over the years.

If ever there was a poster boy for a “three strikes” law, this guy was it. Maybe people shouldn’t be sent to prison for life after three felony convictions, maybe it should be four, or five or some other number, but in my humble opinion, 9 felony convictions including a manslaughter conviction that was plead down from murder one (I wonder how many of his misdemeanor convictions were plead down from felonies?) and 14 probation violations pretty thoroughly demonstrates to me that this guy has no desire or capacity to live peaceably in a civilized society.

But as a result of the lax treatment of criminals associated with the privilege of being black in a country that affords blacks numerous indulgences, a productive, contributing, hard working member of society was brutally murdered AFTER giving the criminal what he asked for.

And then the cities with policies that enable these predators to roam the streets try to blame lawful gun owners and gun manufacturers for their own failures.

And unless the people in charge can get the lax enforcement of our election laws and regulations straightened out before next year’s mid-terms (something I sincerely doubt they’re capable of) it’s only going to get worse from here.

Share

Unexpectedly…

Cutting off the “enhanced” payments results in people suddenly finding employment.

The number of unemployment-benefit recipients is falling at a faster rate in Missouri and 21 other states canceling enhanced and extended payments this month, suggesting that ending the aid could push more people to take jobs.

The full article is behind a paywall, but the headline really says it all.

The scary thing is that this result really was unexpected to a large number of supposedly very educated people.

Hat tip to From the Barrel of a Gun.

Share

Filibuster Prediction

The Dems are not happy that their ability to cheat in elections is under threat.

I really loved this quote from Senator Menendez:

“So, if I invite you to do things, whether it’s on infrastructure or voting rights and you basically say no, then it creates the impetus for some to consider what is necessary to be done to change the rules to permit maybe at least a democracy exception, because this is the very core of our government and how we proceed. And it affects all other things.”

Um…those huge foundational things are exactly what the filibuster was designed to defend. When something is both controversial and of such large import, a 51 % majority should not be able to force it onto the other 49%…this is also, by the way, why our form of government is NOT a Democracy.

“Fifty-one percent of a nation can establish a totalitarian regime, suppress minorities and still remain democratic.”
–Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

That’s also the reason why Constitutional Amendments require a 2/3 majority of Congress and must be ratified by 3/4 of the states before it passes. Things of foundational import should not be taken lightly nor passed by a party-line simple majority. That’s why the filibuster was introduced in the Senate in the first place.

But Democrats see their opportunity slipping away. They know that they lost the Presidential election last year…bigly. They know that we know it. They know that we are pissed about it and that they’re going to get slaughtered in the mid-terms if they aren’t allowed to cheat.

As a result, I’m going to make a prediction: The Dems will end the filibuster sometime early next year. They will convince, threaten or bribe the two Democrat hold outs to vote their way eventually.

The Arizona audit is getting a lot of attention and other states are considering starting their own…at least in some “suspicious” counties. AND States are starting to pass vote integrity laws that will make it much harder for the Dems to steal elections in those states.

This scares the crap out of the Democrats. They’ve worked too hard to get here, they’re not just going to let it all slip away. That means they MUST pass legislation at the federal level that outlaws the provisions states are trying to pass to stop them from cheating. And it has to be done in time for the 2022 mid term elections.

So, my prediction is that the filibuster will be nuked sometime in early 2022 and HR1 will be “passed” on a party line vote with Harris casting the tie breaker within days thereafter.

The next step will be packing the Supreme Court as quickly as possible to prevent them from ruling the law unconstitutional.

And then that’s all she wrote.

Share