Some people think freedom is less important than a feeling of "safety." Some people would be more comfortable living under a more statist, controlling, autocratic government.
Don't be "some people." https://t.co/8Km0jbmCyn
— The Truth About Guns (@guntruth) November 28, 2022
Category: Observation O’ The Day
Maybe the World Economic Forum globalists are behind it, maybe not. What is certain is the just-released “Died Suddenly” documentary presents abundant data and disturbing testimony from doctors, journalists, military figures, funeral directors and embalmers that lots of vaccinated people are dying suddenly and with strange fibrous blockages in their arteries and veins. What the hell is going on?- Mark Tapscott
Observation O’ The Day
Hi 97 Percent Team,
Thank you for putting on yesterday’s conference. I am a gun owner and member of the firearm community based in Chicago. I share your desire to decrease gun deaths and find common ground. As a sign of my good faith intentions, I recently put on a Safe Storage presentation with a Moms Demand Action representative for our school community despite vehemently disagreeing with their public policy platform.
I feel that the strongest part of yesterday’s presentation was the Hot Button Topics discussion between Amy Swearer and Fred Guttenberg. I am still shocked that Fred wold be willing to sit down with Amy. More conversations like that need to happen where each side sits down with one another to try and have good faith conversations.
I am writing after watching the entirety of yesterday’s presentation. I watched because I was interested in what the panel, which included elected officials and other policy makers, would put forward as give and take compromises to get the gun community onboard. Unfortunately I feel as if it was a hugely blown opportunity on the whole as zero policy compromises were put forward by any of the speakers except Dr. Seigel.
Many members of the gun community showed up to watch in the hopes that we may have found a partner where we could work together. Instead we were shown a parade of speakers who have all publically asked for or voted recently for assault weapons bans. Governor Roy Cooper, Rep Moulton, Rep Dean, are all elected officials who have publicly pushed for bans and made clear yesterday that not only are they unwilling to remove these bans (despite the organization’s stated policy as presented by Michael Seigel) but rather they said explicitly that they are just waiting for the opportunity to have the votes to pass it in Congress. Congressman Moulton even threw in the usual talking point about shooting deer with AR-15s and needing better aim. Is insulting comments REALLY how you intend to find common ground with the majority of responsible gun owners who train to use their firearms not for hunting, but to defend themselves and family? Our supposed “voice at the table” Former Rep Walsh put forward no push back but rather spent most of the panel virtue signaling his hatred of the NRA (who we all hate too btw). There was not one word, not one proposal that was put forward as a give-and-take compromise with the gun community. That first panel lost many of us but I continued watching.
Former Schumer aid Emily Amick’s social media is full of video clips demonizing gun owners who own AR-15s, calling for an end to the filibuster to push gun ban proposals, and glowing videos of Congressman Cellini saying “spare me the constiutional right bull sh*t.” How was including her, who again has shown no sign of willing to compromise on any policy, intended on getting buy in from the gun community?
What was the point of allowing WH Assistant Stefanie Feldman to read a 5 minute speech about Biden’s domestic policy, including once again her emphasizing that he wants to ban assault weapons and if you don’t agree with the ban then you don’t actually care about crime? Again not one word about compromises that the administration is willing to make with the gun community.
The gun community has a huge amount of respect for Stephen Guttowski and I am glad you included him in the discussion. Stephen’s method and podcasts, calmly discussing the DETAILS of firearm policy and law should be how 97 Percent moves forward in discussions with the gun community.
Unfortunately I’m not sure your organization will get the chance after yesterday’s conference as much credibility was lost. You simply cannot parade out a bunch of speakers, many of whom are board members, who have publically been strong advocates of gun bans and then ask us to trust your organization because…… your official platform says you don’t want an assault weapons ban? We all remember Conor Lamb campaigning with video of him shooting an AR-15 and then voting to ban them this year.
Richard Aborn (instrumental proponent of 94 AWB), Rep Steve Israel (proponent of AWB and on recent 97% podcast spoke favorable of NY’s Bruen-response bill and explained his idea of compromise as “getting 60% rather than 100%” of gun control policies he wants), and Rep Moulton (who’s service I respect yet again just voted for an AWB), are all prominent members of your board. Why should the gun community trust you???
So when will the gun community trust you? When you come forward with REAL policy compromises as well as fight to overturn abusive laws. We want to stand shoulder to shoulder with you in calling out California’s Handgun Roster or New York’s post-Bruen concealed carry restrictions. We are willing to discuss federal Universal background checks in exchange for national concealed carry reciprocity. A federal license (with training perhaps!) in exchange for not needing FFL NICS checks for transfers. These were the types of discussions we were expecting when we showed up to watch yesterday. The ONLY person who in good faith touched on any of this was Dr. Siegel.
I will end with a humorous fictional story written about someone attending the conference in-person that is circulating among the gun community.
https://hwfo.substack.com/p/ninety-seven-percent
I hope your organization will take this criticism to heart and revamp how you plan on engaging in good faith with the firearm community. Many of us are still willing to talk, but not just about how much we are willing to give up in exchange for nothing.
Best,
David Rice
Chicago
An friend terms posts like this übërpösts™ (in other words: It’s looong)
I’ll append commentary and observations from around the net.
Observation O’ The Day
It’s a look into the smartest minds of the enemy. Joe Huffman
The Ad Industry’s Plan to Fix America’s Gun Crisis
If you want a crude sketch of the biggest corporate players in a given year of TV, look no further than the Emmy Award for best commercial. Twenty-five years of winners form an ensemble cast of petty bourgeois preoccupations: Nike, Chrysler, Bud Light. This year’s nominees included a commercial for Meta (the artist formerly known as Facebook), one for Chevy (repping the still-muscular auto spend), two for Apple (a perennial contender), and two for the prevention of school shootings—one of which won the Emmy.
It’s apparent now that he’s considered expendable.
Observation O’ The Day
The media bail on Biden:
All polling points to Biden’s majorities in the House and Senate being wiped out come the November midterm elections. When that happens, and I mean the very next day, these innuendos and grumblings for Biden to step aside will become full-bore primal screams, and he won’t be able to survive them.
-Stephen L. Miller
CNN Crushes President Joe Biden With Fact Check.
It may not be something that CNN watchers are used to seeing, but President Joe Biden got hammered by a fact check from the network.
“Gas prices weren’t over $5 when Biden took office. The Social Security hike isn’t a Biden achievement. The Trump tax cut didn’t ‘only’ go to the top 1%. Biden didn’t cut the debt in half. Biden didn’t get Congress to pass a law to forgive student debt,” CNN fact checker Daniel Dale said.
“The unemployment rate. Biden said at the Florida rally on Tuesday: ‘Unemployment is down from 6.5 to 3.5%, the lowest in 50 years.’ He said at the New Mexico rally on Thursday: ‘Unemployment rate is 3.5% – the lowest it’s been in 50 years.
“But Biden didn’t acknowledge that September’s 3.5% unemployment rate was actually a tie for the lowest in 50 years – a tie, specifically, with three months of Trump’s administration, in late 2019 and early 2020,” the fact checker said.
“Since Biden uses these campaign speeches to favorably compare his own record to Trump’s record, that omission is significant.
“The unemployment rate rose to 3.7% in October; that number was revealed on Friday, after these Biden comments. The rate was 6.4% in January 2021, the month Biden took office,” he said.
Biden’s student debt policy
“During an on-camera discussion conducted by progressive organization NowThis News and published online in late October, Biden told young activists that they ‘probably are aware, I just signed a law’ on student debt forgiveness that is being challenged by Republicans.
“He added: ‘It’s passed. I got it passed by a vote or two, and it’s in effect.’
“Biden’s claims are false,” he said.
“He created his student debt forgiveness initiative through executive action, not through legislation, so he didn’t sign a law and didn’t get it passed by any margin.
“Since Republicans opposed to the initiative, including those challenging the initiative in court, have called it unlawful precisely because it wasn’t passed by Congress, the distinction between a law and an executive action is a highly pertinent fact here,” the fact checker said.
“A White House official told CNN that Biden was referring to the Inflation Reduction Act, the law narrowly passed by the Senate in August; the official said the Inflation Reduction Act created “room for other crucial programs” by bringing down the deficit. But Biden certainly did not make it clear that he was talking about anything other than the student debt initiative” he said.
Gas prices
“Biden correctly noted on various occasions in October that gas prices have declined substantially since their June 2022 peak – though, as always, it’s important to note that presidents have a limited impact on gas prices.
“But in an economic speech in New York last week, Biden said, ‘Today, the most common price of gas in America is $3.39 – down from over $5 when I took office.’
“Biden’s claim that the most common gas price when he took office was more than $5 is not even close to accurate,” the fact checker said.
“The most common price for a gallon of regular gas on the day he was inaugurated, January 20, 2021, was $2.39, according to data provided to CNN by Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy.
“In other words, Biden made it sound like gas prices had fallen significantly during his presidency when they had actually increased significantly,” he said.
“In other recent remarks, Biden has discussed the state of gas prices in relation to the summer peak of more than $5 per gallon, not in relation to when he took office.
“Regardless, the comment last week was the second this fall in which Biden inaccurately described the price of gas – both times in a way that made it sound more impressive,” he said.
But the president may be getting desperate as on Saturday, polling analysis publication FiveThirtyEight changed its Senate forecast from a “toss-up” to leaning Republican, Newsmax reported.
At president, the analyst firm lists Republican chances of winning the Senate at 55 in 100 versus Democrats retaining control at 45 in 100.
The new predictions come after the outlet reported on Monday: “Herschel Walker’s scandals may hurt his chances against Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock. Meanwhile, Democrats are hoping to pick up a seat in Pennsylvania, but that race has gotten a lot tighter recently.”
“Other Senate races are competitive but have identifiable favorites. For instance, strong Democratic incumbents currently have an edge in Arizona and New Hampshire. And the Senate races in North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin are also close but will likely result in Republican winners,” the outlet also added.
"Contrary to our expectations, our data suggest that it is liberal—not conservative—men who engage in increased political aggression after experiencing threats to their masculinity." https://t.co/c49tkINU2b pic.twitter.com/O2wIEGqQ4j
— Rolf Degen (@DegenRolf) October 22, 2022
Observation O’ The Day:
Interesting!
This appears to be applicable to Markley’s Law. Liberals attack the masculinity of their political opponents because they view that as an extremely potent attack—as it would be against themselves. They are insecure about their manhood and they imagine the same of their political opponents.
As frequently suspected, projection is strong with these people.—Joe
His brain is acting like a computer with defective RAM.
Observation O’ The Day
Given how much editing NBC and its sister networks must do to get usable footage of Biden, that they allowed this to air could be a preview of how the networks will start treating him post-midterms. –Ed Driscoll
BIDEN: "It's my intention to run again."
Q: "Dr. Biden is for it?"
BIDEN: *silence*
Q: "Mr. President?"
BIDEN: "Dr. Biden thinks that uh, my wife thinks that uh, that I uh, that, that we're, that we're doing something very important."
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) October 21, 2022
Stacey Abrams is a 48-year-old unmarried, childless woman who chose being a failed political candidate over having a family and thinks the solution to Democrats making life more expensive is just to kill more unborn babies. People like that should never have power over anything.
— Michael Seifert (@realmichaelseif) October 19, 2022
I wonder if there’s anyone in the world that doesn’t see our country as an absolute joke at this point.
21st Century planned scarcity.
As in, "let's not expand into space for energy and resource acquisition, or take the actions on earth necessary in the short term (nuclear power), because scarcity induced totalitarianism is much safer, just, and deserved."
— John Robb (@johnrobb) August 28, 2022
It’s the ongoing conflict between centrally planned and free markets. Or the zero-sum versus non zero-sum mindset. There exist people who crave and even insist on control. These people believe there MUST be someone, organization, or something in control. They are certain they and the world are a better place if control is exerted over a wide set of peoples action.
Some people believe the world would be a better place if most property and (possibly “or” instead of “and”, but this would be rare when you get down to the details) economic decisions are controlled by some supposedly superior being. This superior being is typically a government controlled by a committee and/or a dictator. These people fall in a spectrum that can generally be considered socialist to communist.
Some people believe the world would be a better place if social position and activity decisions (particularly sexual behaviors) are controlled by some supposedly superior being. This superior being is typically a government controlled or at least guided by a set of religious leaders. These people fall in a spectrum that can generally be considered democratic theists, many monarchists, to theocrats.
In the more general case people can be classified as being on a scale from anarchist to authoritarian. Here I am referring to the somewhat less common definition of anarchist as the organization of society on the basis of voluntary cooperation, without political institutions or hierarchical government rather than a state of disorder and chaos.
All social organizations have tradeoff. And under various situations some organizational types are vastly superior to others. For example an anarchist society does not do well against a communist society in search of hosts to satisfy their parasitic requirements. Yet, not too far up the spectrum from anarchist a society with government formed for the protection can economically and technologically, hence militarily defeat a similarly sized society near the authoritarian end of the spectrum.
I find our current political climate annoying because, as Robb indirectly points out above, a frightening number of people are demanding “progress” toward authoritarian government. There is actually a “sweet spot”, by many measures of societal “health”, which lies far closer to the anarchist end of the scale. This is an old, and mostly ignored, observation. History appears to be nearing another catastrophic rhyme.— Joe Huffman
Observation O’ The Day
There is a new trend, and it is battlespace prep. In both the US and Canada there is now a coordinated effort by the political/MSM class to portray every kind of dissent from secular progressive authoritarianism as nothing less than violent insurrection and terrorism. In the Canadian media, people who object to vaccine mandates have been promoted from Nazis to a vast network of violent insurrectionists. In the US, we are told that people angry about the Mar-A-Lago raid are about to commence terrorist actions against civilians, even using dirty bombs.
How Extremist Gun Culture Is Trying to Co-Opt the Rosary
Why are sacramental beads suddenly showing up next to AR-15s online?
Just as the AR-15 rifle has become a sacred object for Christian nationalists in general, the rosary has acquired a militaristic meaning for radical-traditional (or “rad trad”) Catholics. On this extremist fringe, rosary beads have been woven into a conspiratorial politics and absolutist gun culture. These armed radical traditionalists have taken up a spiritual notion that the rosary can be a weapon in the fight against evil and turned it into something dangerously literal.
Their social-media pages are saturated with images of rosaries draped over firearms, warriors in prayer, Deus Vult (“God wills it”) crusader memes, and exhortations for men to rise up and become Church Militants. Influencers on platforms such as Instagram share posts referencing “everyday carry” and “gat check” (gat is slang for “firearm”) that include soldiers’ “battle beads,” handguns, and assault rifles. One artist posts illustrations of his favorite Catholic saints, clergy, and influencers toting AR-15-style rifles labeled SANCTUM ROSARIUM alongside violently homophobic screeds that are celebrated by social-media accounts with thousands of followers.
There are 2 very different types of people in this Country:
1. The kind of person who accepts anything greater society dictates for the perceived good even at the cost of their own liberty. These people also love to weaponize Government against people they hate.
2. Those that understand that society is compromised of individuals. People with different views, temperaments, etc. These people generally want the most freedom for the individual, with the understanding that society will be better for it. They want smaller Government.
-Iraqveteran8888
The World Economic Forum says that the average car is “only being used 4% of the time” so most people shouldn’t be permitted to own a car. Doing the math, this means that the average person drives their car an hour a day.
Most people have a computer and a cell phone, even though they are given one by their employer. This increases your carbon footprint, they say.
If people only replace their phone every five years instead of every three, they would reduce their carbon footprint, they say.
So the World Economic Forum thinks that we, the peasants, should not own cars. We shouldn’t own phones or computers. No, if we need one, it will be issued to us. Once every five years.
Who determines what you need? Why they do, of course. Not you.
This is nothing more than Soviet style communism.
Andrew Wilkow has coined a phrase called the “everyman king.” It is the idea that the American dream turns every property owner into royalty. You own land, a home, and most of the same luxuries owned by the elites. This means that the everyman has the same access to the same luxuries that the elites have. This cannot be permitted to stand. What good is it being an elite, if any member of the public can get the same stuff that you can?
This is the essence of communism- it is sold to the public as a plan to make everyone equal, but it of course does nothing of the sort, and never has. All communism is good at doing is making those in charge of the communist party into elites who have access to those luxuries that have been denied the everyman.
You cannot coexist with people who want to kill you
Maximus Decimus Meridius
Observation O’ The Day
SloJoe starts babbling about some “International Flat Tax™” that he got 140 nations to sign onto (?) and his daughter and granddaughter shuffle him off stage ASAP.
They know all too well that Daddy has senile dementia
Remind me again, what’s his day job?
— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) June 20, 2022
Scalise: We’re Not Having the Tough Conversations We Need to Have About School Shootings
House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) pointed to a lack of school prayer when talking about gun violence.
“We had AR-15s in the 1960s. We didn’t have those mass school shootings,” Scalise said during a press conference Wednesday.
“Now, I know it’s something that some people don’t want to talk about. We actually had prayer in school during those days,” Scalise continued. “We had other things going on in our society where we took a different approach to our young kids. And let’s look at that. These are tough conversations we should be having that we’re not having about why we’re seeing more young kids go astray.”…………..
Observation O’ The Day
Until the early 20th century ‘enlightened govt’ meant limited govt. Then the Bolshevik dream of a new Soviet man challenged the idea of God with a vision of man made socially engineered universal order, and at a stroke aristocracy became cool again.
The reason I think the new aristocracy will fail has nothing to do with conservatives or Republicans but rather the belief that no top down system of control has enough computing power and sufficiently low latency to deal with complex reality. –Richard Fernandez
Observation O’ The Day
You ever notice that no ecoterrorists ever target private jets?
🤡 🌎#Davos #Davos2022 pic.twitter.com/u5XST4QKPa
— Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) May 27, 2022
If the left wrote The Emperor’s New Clothes, the kid who correctly pointed out that the Emperor was naked would be the bad guy.
If they wrote The Grasshopper and the Ants, the ants would be the bad guys.
If they wrote The Three Little Pigs, the pig who worked hard and built the sturdy brick house would be the bad guy.
If they wrote The Little Red Hen, the hen would be the villain.
Added from a Twitter response :
If the left wrote Chicken Little, Chicken Little would be lauded as a scientist.
