Joe Rogan/Spotify Take Down Attempt

LOL "so gay it should come with free AIDS" :D

Rogan has two options:
1) Stop apologizing, or
2) Keep apologizing, constantly, for the rest of his life

Neither option will satisfy Olbermann & Co. or get them to stop their petulant whinging.

But the first option would be much more entertaining (for everyone except Olbermann & Co.).
 
Lies.
Just one of the easier examples I can point to:

12-02-2016



I did not support Trump until after he started doing good things in office.

You and the other trolls need to quit telling easily disproven lies as part of your character assassination campaign to distract from the facts.



That's rich coming from a guy whose response to a post containg relevant facts and a warning not to blindly trust Rogan was to announce I was an enemy.

First, I'm not in the least suggesting to "blindly trust Rogan". I stated previously in this thread that when he apologized, he blew it. It was shortly after that Kahless spouted off with how naive I was being for stating that Tim Pool is now (after the Rogan apology) our only trustworthy source of information now, based on all of his "insider knowledge".

I admit that I went off too hard about that, but as I've said, his schtick is not only tiresome, but incredibly condescending - as though we're all stupid peasants and he's clued in to what's really happening, yet never substantiates it. That said, and fully recognizing that he doesn't care, I do apologize for my harsh words, [MENTION=3352]kahless[/MENTION].

Second, I'm curious as to where you unearthed that post? In fairness to your claim, I tried searching your posting history but I could only pull up 80 pages of results, which only produced posts from no earlier than September 2020.

IF what you're claiming is accurate, I'll apologize to you for misrepresenting you here. I will still object to in incessant pro-Trump history, and still question your ability to post in the volume that you did, and though it doesn't jibe with my recollections, right is right.

Finally, just because I disagree with you does not mean I'm "trolling", or on a "character assassination campaign" (LOL). It is precisely this sort of thing that makes you so intolerably frustrating. You're famous for saying "you can't debate the facts so you attack the source", yet that is EXACTLY what you do. So I'll admit that I have at times allowed that frustration to boil over, but you're not helping anything either.
 
You're famous for saying "you can't debate the facts so you attack the source", yet that is EXACTLY what you do. So I'll admit that I have at times allowed that frustration to boil over, but you're not helping anything either.

Yes, he's famous for that bit of projection. But he more commonly does exactly what he's doing to Rogan here--guilt by association.

Follow the money is a good tactic. To say this money could taint that recipient is wise. But to say this money tainted that recipient, even if that recipient used bad money only to do good things until the flow of bad money was cut off, is to take weapons out of the hands of our brethren.

It's a divide and conquer strategy that he has been relentlessly using on us for seven years.

By the way, I looked up his early posting history while it was still possible. His first fifty or so posts were all links to cooked MSM polls that showed Trump leading and Rand doing poorly, mostly posted without comment.
 
Last edited:
If Rogan has guests like Dave Smith, Michael Malice, Scott Horton, et al., while also getting paid by the assholes at Black Rifle Coffee, then I say GOOD! He should keep right on taking money from BRC. The joke is on them.

(Although now that I think of it, Smith and Malice are Jews ... hmmmmm ...)
 
By the way, I looked up his early posting history while it was still possible. His first fifty or so posts were all links to cooked MSM polls that showed Trump leading and Rand doing poorly, mostly posted without comment.

iu


If Rogan has guests like Dave Smith, Michael Malice, Scott Horton, et al., while also getting paid by the $#@!s at Black Rifle Coffee, then I say GOOD! He should keep right on taking money from BRC. The joke is on them.

(Although now that I think of it, Smith and Malice are Jews ... hmmmmm ...)

So, somehow I missed the whole BRCC controversy... what is it exactly that they're accused of? From what I've seen of Mat Best, he seems like a good dude. Other than that, I really don't know much about them...
 
So, somehow I missed the whole BRCC controversy... what is it exactly that they're accused of? From what I've seen of Mat Best, he seems like a good dude. Other than that, I really don't know much about them...

I don't really know (or care) much about them, one way or the other.

But based on what admittedly little I have heard, they kinda come across as jerks.

There was that Kyle Rittenhouse thing: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...-rittenhouse-silent-after-not-guilty-verdict/
(They certainly handled that poorly, and at best, they managed to stuff their foot in their mouth, and alienated a lot of their customers.)

And much more recently, there have been allegations of sexual improprieties ...
... and supporting Democrats ...
... (I'll leave it to others to decide which of those is worse).
 
Last edited:
iu




So, somehow I missed the whole BRCC controversy... what is it exactly that they're accused of? From what I've seen of Mat Best, he seems like a good dude. Other than that, I really don't know much about them...

Basically they don't stand for conservative issues or even gun rights. They distance themselves from anything remotely controversial (Maga, Rittenhouse), are definitively "Not Racist" (TM), and so on.

What they do claim to stand for, is veterans and veteran rights.

People assume that because they have "black rifle" in their name they are somehow a conservative or gun rights company but they seem to make every effort to ensure everyone that they are in fact none of those things.

They are a coffee company. That supports veterans. No more, no less
 
Thanks OB.

I don't really know (or care) much about them, one way or the other.

But based on what admittedly little I have heard, they kinda come across as jerks.

There was that Kyle Rittenhouse thing: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...-rittenhouse-silent-after-not-guilty-verdict/
(They certainly handled that poorly, and at best, they managed to stuff their foot in their mouth, and alienated a lot of their customers.)

And much more recently, there have been allegations of sexual improprieties ...
... and supporting Democrats ...
... (I'll leave it to others to decide which of those is worse).

Regarding Rittenhouse, I can't blame a company for wanting to avoid taking political positions. In fact, that's what I want most companies to do. One may justifiably argue that the Rittenhouse case wasn't political, but in times like these, yes it is, as is everything.

I take all accusations of "sexual improprieties" with a grain of salt...

As to them giving money to Democrats... well... that's no worse than giving money to Republicans, in my book.

So while these things don't paint them in the best light, it also doesn't really paint them in the worst light, either. Not sure it rises to the level of "enemy", but I guess YMMV.
 
Regarding Rittenhouse, I can't blame a company for wanting to avoid taking political positions

I agree - but I also can't really blame anyone for being insulted by how they came across, because ... well, it was insulting.

I take all accusations of "sexual improprieties" with a grain of salt...

Same here. But she has receipts - and while it may not amount to anything actionable, it does make them look like creeps.

As to them giving money to Democrats... well... that's no worse than giving money to Republicans, in my book.

So while these things don't paint them in the best light, it also doesn't really paint them in the worst light, either. Not sure it rises to the level of "enemy", but I guess YMMV.

Also agreed. Absent something else I haven't heard about, "assholes" is about the worst I can come up with.

By way of comparison, I'm much more bothered by the shenanigans going on at YAL, for example.

At least BRCC has never claimed or pretended to be libertarian, as far as I know.
 
I agree - but I also can't really blame anyone for being insulted by how they came across, because ... well, it was insulting.

Gotcha. I just read through the article you posted and didn't dig any deeper.

It's a shame, but I personally don't expect companies to fall on their sword every time a story comes out that "the right" is up in arms about. We need less of that, not more.

Same here. But she has receipts - and while it may not amount to anything actionable, it does make them look like creeps.

:nauseated:

Also agreed. Absent something else I haven't heard about, "$#@!s" is about the worst I can come up with.

By way of comparison, I'm much more bothered by the shenanigans going on at YAL, for example.

At least BRCC has never claimed or pretended to be libertarian, as far as I know.

We're so neck deep into the culture war that if a company doesn't take a political stance, they're actually taking a political stance. That's not good.
 
We're so neck deep into the culture war that if a company doesn't take a political stance, they're actually taking a political stance. That's not good.

And what's-his-name wonders why he pisses me off. Don't make allies! Hearts and minds can't be won! Divide! Divide and be conquered!
[MENTION=65299]Swordsmyth[/MENTION] there's a group of Canadian truckers calling bull on your shit.
 
We're so neck deep into the culture war that if a company doesn't take a political stance, they're actually taking a political stance.

Activist "wokeness" is infecting everything.

Lots of companies are taking political stances.

And as for the ones that don't (or try not to) - well, "silence is violence", don'cha know ...

That's not good.

No, it isn't. And the way things are going, we'll end up mighty nostalgic for those halcyon days of yore, when "taking a political stance" simply referred to relatively pure and wholesome things like influence-peddling lobbyists, special-interest cronyism, and the buying and selling of politicians and political favors.
 
No, it isn't. And the way things are going, we'll end up mighty nostalgic for those halcyon days of yore, when "taking a political stance" simply referred to relatively pure and wholesome things like influence-peddling lobbyists, special-interest cronyism, and the buying and selling of politicians and political favors.

You mean, back when such things were clumsy and local, and didn't fill every newscast with paid advertisements for jabs and stuff.
 
Second, I'm curious as to where you unearthed that post? In fairness to your claim, I tried searching your posting history but I could only pull up 80 pages of results, which only produced posts from no earlier than September 2020.

It's in the thread about Trump, Pence and the Carrier deal.
You can find many more by searching for Swordsmyth and Dump.
 
By the way, I looked up his early posting history while it was still possible. His first fifty or so posts were all links to cooked MSM polls that showed Trump leading and Rand doing poorly, mostly posted without comment.
You've been telling that lie for a long time but you never produce the posts because they don't exist.
 
I agree - but I also can't really blame anyone for being insulted by how they came across, because ... well, it was insulting.



Same here. But she has receipts - and while it may not amount to anything actionable, it does make them look like creeps.



Also agreed. Absent something else I haven't heard about, "$#@!s" is about the worst I can come up with.

By way of comparison, I'm much more bothered by the shenanigans going on at YAL, for example.

At least BRCC has never claimed or pretended to be libertarian, as far as I know.

Black Rifle actually hates populists and conservatives. In fact, it’s willing to pay you to never be their customer again. That’s the takeaway from the company’s 7,000-word profile in The New York Times last week.
Sometime in the last few months, The New York Times asked Black Rifle if they’d be interested in an interview. As a proud MAGA-backing coffee company, Black Rifle could have responded in several different ways:
-Ignore them
-Deliver a terse statement
-Ask for a list of questions and give brief, accurate answers
-“The Times is the enemy of the American people. F off.”
Black Rifle did none of those things. Instead, founder Evan Hafer sat down for a wide-ranging in-person interview. The company posed for a photo shoot. They gave the Times’ Jason Zengerle everything he needed for a massive story making it absolutely clear how the company really feels about its most enthusiastic supporters.
The Rittenhouse episode may have cost the company thousands of customers, but, Hafer believed, it also allowed Black Rifle to draw a line in the sand. “It’s such a repugnant group of people,” Hafer said. “It’s like the worst of American society, and I got to flush the toilet of some of those people that kind of hijacked portions of the brand.” Then again, what Hafer insisted was a “superclear delineation” was not too clear to everyone, as Munchel’s choice of headgear vividly demonstrated.
“The racism [expletive] really pisses me off,” Hafer said. “I hate racist, Proud Boy-ish people. Like, I’ll pay them to leave my customer base. I would gladly chop all of those people out of my [expletive] customer database and pay them to get the [expletive] out.” [NY Times]
Hafer’s choice of epithet is revealing. One doesn’t even have to like the Proud Boys to know that calling them racist is ridiculous. The group’s leader is sometime FBI-informant Enrique Tarrio, an Afro-Cuban. It famously attracts Hispanics, Asians, and Polynesians. The Proud Boys are all-male and proud “Western chauvinists.” Hafer could have called them violent, or stupid, or a potential federal op. But instead, he chose to call them racists, the one slur against them that is completely indefensible.
In other words, Hafer doesn’t actually know anything about the Proud Boys. He’s just repeating nonsense talking points fed to him by the Right’s enemies, whom he evidently views as a reliable information source.
That pattern recurs throughout the article. The damning revelation of the interview is that, whatever his superficial signaling towards American nationalists, Hafer has thoroughly submitted to the moral imperialism of the left. He accepts their core premises about reality and allows them to define the limits of his worldview.
Hafer and Best were talking in a glorified supply closet in the Salt Lake City offices, where potential designs for new coffee bags were hanging on the wall. One of them featured a Renaissance-style rendering of St. Michael the Archangel, a patron saint of military personnel, shooting a short-barreled rifle. In Afghanistan and Iraq, Hafer knew a number of squad mates who had a St. Michael tattoo; for a time, he wore into battle a St. Michael pendant that a Catholic friend gave him. But while the St. Michael design was being mocked up, Hafer said he learned from a friend at the Pentagon that an image of St. Michael trampling on Satan had been embraced by white supremacists because it was reminiscent of the murder of George Floyd. Now any plans for the coffee bag had been scrapped. “This won’t see the light of day,” Hafer said. [NY Times]
St. Michael the Archangel has been essential to the Christian religion for two thousand years. Millions of Catholics say a prayer to St. Michael after after Mass. As Hafer himself knows, St. Michael is popular with soldiers, veterans, and religious Americans of all stripes. But rather than letting a classic symbol stand on its own terms, Hafer has allowed the hegemonic left to define what it means. A “friend at the Pentagon” warned him that a two-thousand-year-old iconic symbol was not okay, because a few alleged “white supremacists” “embraced” it, whatever that means. So, too bad, no more iconic Christian saint allowed anymore. What other symbols Hafer could be browbeaten into opposing. The Gadsden flag? The American one? It appears the only limit is the Pentagon’s shame, and given the Pentagon at this moment is paying to surgically mutilate its own soldiers, it’s not clear any such limit exists.

More at: https://liberalsarenuts.com/2021/07/22/the-truth-about-black-rifle-coffee-company/



[h=4]Black Rifle Coffee has a number of high profile employees who donated to Democrats, including their social media manager, and their magazine’s editor who gave money to Biden.[/h]https://nationalfile.com/busted-black-rifle-coffee-magazines-editor-donated-to-biden-high-profile-employees-gave-to-democrats/


The owner has CIA connections.
 
Back
Top