Back in June, 2005, Seth did a post about Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbuck’s. The post was quite favorable, as Schultz, a supporter of Israel, put his money where his mouth was in that support via monetary largesse.

For some reason I can’t get the link to stick, so I’ll have to do some work on that when I have more time. The post was pretty in depth as are the majority of Seth’s older posts (and once he’s back, hopefully that won’t change), so to move along for now…

It was quite disappointing to read that Schultz is a vociferous supporter of same sex marriage, something we at Hard Astarboard are totally opposed to.

We have absolutely nothing against a couple of consenting adults of the same gender doing whatever it is they want to do behind closed doors, nor of their living together if that’s what makes them happy, but…

…when it comes to making a mockery of traditional marriage by making it legal for a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be married, well, that’s a problem for us, as is allowing a same sex couple to adopt a child.

There is, after all, a limit to the amount of tolerance we, and like minded persons, can come up with.

Howard Schultz, it seems, also has issues with tolerance, in fact, he has zero tolerance for people who support traditional marriage.

From Examiner.com

At the Starbucks annual shareholders meeting on Wednesday, CEO Howard Schultz sent a clear message to anyone who supports traditional marriage over gay marriage: we don’t want your business. After saying Starbucks wants to “embrace diversity of all kinds,” he told a shareholder who supports traditional marriage that he should sell his shares and invest in some other company.

According to a report by Forbes, Schultz seemed a bit intolerant of any Starbucks shareholders who embrace opposed gay marriage for moral or religious reasons. During the meeting, shareholder Tom Strobhar (who founded the Corporate Morality Action Center) pointed out that after the company voiced its support for a referendum backing gay marriage in Washington state, a boycott by traditional marriage supporters caused a drop in sales revenue. Schultz told him “You can sell your shares in Starbucks and buy shares in another company” if he did not agree with the company’s pro-gay marriage stand.

So, if Mr. Schultz wants to make his belief in gay marriage part of what his business is about, he’s just lost our business as well…

I had wanted to share a great Renaissance song, and wasn’t sure I had before. I looked back in the archives and couldn’t find any indication that I had.

The only video of this particular version was sort of screwed up as it appeared on some British TV show called DAVE, who is evidently a tacky “bloke” who specializes in stupid, uninformed comments.

Luckily, I found the same video without Dave’s commentary near the end. It’s lip synched, a TV production, but excellent nonetheless and is called Northern Lights.

This is it.

What a deal, what a deal!

We import illegal aliens from Mexico,while we spend the taxpayer’s money to export manufacturing jobs to….Mexico!

From CNS News

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has granted uniform contracts to VF Imagewear, Inc., an apparel company that relies on manufacturing sites in Mexico for a “significant percentage” of its occupational garments.

The latest contract with the company was awarded on Dec. 20, 2012, to make “uniform and insignia items” for the CBP at an estimated cost of $6,157,997.57, and a ceiling of $8 million.

The CBP, which is responsible for protecting America’s borders, told CNSNews.com that items from VF Imagewear, a subsidiary of VF Corporation, are manufactured in a number of locations, “including Mexico.”

So let’s get this straight: The tax payer funded Border Patrol, one of whom’s main jobs is to prevent illegals coming up here from Mexico, a country whose government has been singularly uncooperative in helping us staunch the flow of criminal aliens both through and from their sovereign soil, allows Mexico to profit from the manufacture of their uniforms, and the taxpayer who pays for this is essentially compensating employees in the country south of the border rather than providing work for Americans in a time of obscenely high unemployment.

Meanwhile, the same illegals whom the Border Patrol is tasked to stop (while hampered by the party in power in Washington at the moment) come into the United States and take jobs cheaply at the cost of taxpaying Americans working.

What a deal, what a deal!

From the Washington Times

Mockery and scorn for New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s bid to ban big sodas came swiftly, and now conservatives are pouring it on: Freshman Sen. Ted Cruz proposed a “Big Gulp Amendment” Friday to prohibit the federal government from following Mr. Bloomberg’s lead.

senate-bill-opposing-limits-soda-size-article-1.1296427” target=”_blank”>The Daily News reported that the Texas lawmaker and tea party favorite submitted the resolution as part of the Senate’s debate over a new budget, and calls for “prohibiting federal regulation of food and beverage size and quantity.”

The legislature is largely symbolic. Even if it was passed by a Democrat controlled Senate, it would not be binding on federal agencies. The federal government has no plans for such restrictions.

Mr. Cruz’s resolution is the latest in a string of recent public excoriations from conservatives of Mr. Bloomberg’s attempted ban, which was invalidated earlier this month by a state judge.

Mississippi Republican Gov. Phil Bryant signed into law on Monday an “anti-Bloomberg” measure that prohibits local governments from banning supersize sugary drinks.

And former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin used a 44-oz. Super Big Gulp drink from a 7-11 convenience store as a prop during her speech Saturday at the Conservative Political Action Conference to chide Mr. Bloomberg, to much fanfare.

I still cannot figure out how Nanny Bloomberg managed to be reelected to a previously illegal third term. While we don’t vote in NYC elections where I live (Long Island), I know a lot of people who live in the Five Boroughs and none of them voted for him after his first term, as nobody in their right mind wants a politician in charge who feel’s it’s his job to micromanage what they can eat and drink and what size portions they can have, how much salt they can use or what a restaurant can and can’t serve them.

Pretty soon he’ll be issuing edicts on what colors you can paint your children’s bedrooms and how many hours per week you are permitted to watch television.

I hope he continues to be parodied right up to the day he finally leaves office, that clown in mayor’s clothing….

Speaking of it, it appears that Colorado, because of the state’s anti-Constitution politicians, is about to lose an up-and-coming hundred million dollar company, along with the tax revenues from some 600 jobs.

From Godfather Politics…

In February, firearms company Magpul informed members of the Colorado state legislature that they would leave the state if the anti-gun laws being considered were passed and became law.
Magpul is a relatively new company founded in 1999.

Today they employ 600 people and generate close to $100 million in sales. Their primary business is the manufacture of 30 round clips and other accessories for assault and assault-style weapons, most of which is purchased by the US military.

Doug Smith, COO of Magpul, “If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here. Staying here would hurt our business.”

Luckily, however, not all states are run by these anti-Constitution marxists.

Once word got out that they were looking to relocate out of the state, they began to receive offers from states like Texas and South Carolina to bring their business to these more gun friendly states. Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) sent Smith a letter telling him that South Carolina believes in the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms.

The next state Magpul moves to will only gain what the leftist governor of Colorado is throwing away.

The article is here.

This one is good, before Wayne LaPierre’s appearance, they give fast video clips of various lefties (the usual suspects) calling him crazy and making other, more extreme statements about a man whose life is dedicated to preserving our rights under the Second Amendment, then the NRA’s CEO/Executive Vice President comes out to the podium and gives an excellent, spot-on speech.

From 1975, this is Gentle Giant.

Enjoy…

This is just too funny, and is called Obama’s Rules for Nonviolently Stopping Rape and Murder.

Enjoy.

After all, if those fat, lazy, complacent politicians on the Hill weren’t so anxious to get in their usual slothful weekend, we wouldn’t be seeing this

The Senate has reached a deal that will allow a vote on a measure to keep the government funded and possibly prevent a weekend of work on the budget.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced the deal on amendments to the government-funding measure on Wednesday afternoon, ending a stalemate in the Senate that had thrown off the upper chamber’s schedule.

Votes on several amendments will start at 2:15 p.m. Wednesday, and the Senate is expected to approve the funding measure that afternoon. The Senate will then immediately begin considering the Senate Democratic budget.
A “vote-a-rama” featuring dozens of amendments is expected on the budget, meaning delaying a final vote on the funding measure could have left the Senate scheduled to vote on the budget Saturday or even Sunday. The Senate is scheduled to begin a recess after it concludes work on Friday.

The deal announced Wednesday doesn’t eliminate the possibility of weekend votes, but it does make it more likely that the Senate could complete work on the budget sometime on Friday. The Senate had been set to vote on the funding measure as late as Thursday afternoon. With the deal, a final vote will occur Wednesday afternoon.

Let ‘em start doing what we pay them to do…

Enemy of the Second Amendment Dianne FrankenFeinstein has suffered a setback to her well laid plans, as it were.

From The Hill

Reid guts Senate gun control bill

The gun control bill headed for the Senate floor bears little resemblance to the far-reaching proposal President Obama unveiled after the deadly shooting in Newtown, Conn.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided the federal assault weapons ban will not be a part of the base bill, and warned Tuesday an expansion of background checks to cover private sales might not make the cut either.

Instead, a bipartisan measure cracking down on straw purchasing and illegal trafficking of firearms will serve as the foundation of firearms legislation.
That is a significant blow to Obama, who recently touted that the Senate Judiciary Committee had advanced “three of the most important elements of my proposal to help reduce the epidemic of gun violence in this country.”

Obama’s three pillars have been reduced to one, with the bill facing an uncertain future in the GOP-led House.

Reid (heh heh) it all here.