People are fools if they do not grasp this.

[Anti Federalist]

Remember When it was Just Baseball, Hot Dogs, Apple Pie & Chevrolet?

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2021...pie-chevrolet/

By
eric -
September 28, 2021

If you oppose forcing people to submit to medical procedures that may injure or even kill them – or simply oppose forcing anyone to submit to any medical procedure, period – then you might want to consider not buying any vehicle made by General Motors.

This once-upon-a-time car company seems to believe it is become a hospital ward – and we are all patients. That it has the right to make employment conditional upon acceptance of company policies requiring all employees to submit to any medical procedure the corporation’s muckety-mucks decree they must submit to.

Mark the italics.

If it is accepted that GM – if any company – can make employment conditional upon submitting to a “vaccination” it will have set the precedent for requiring employees to submit to medical procedures, generally.

If the justification is accepted for mandatory submission to “vaccinations” then the justification has already been accepted for mandatory submission to health checkups, psychiatric evaluations, the mandatory answering of probing questions into one’s personal affairs – as any such thing can be asserted by control freaks to present a potential risk to the “health” of employees and thus, GM – any employer – is entitled to know and to impose whatever it decides to be necessary as regards such things.

As the condition of being allowed to work.

It will no longer be – ask your doctor. It will be – go see the doctor. And – do as the doctor says. Period.

Take whatever meds he says you must take. Submit to any procedure he says is “necessary.” Answer all of his questions. These to inevitably include questions regarding whether you own any firearms – which the same Leftists pushing the Jab also have already defined as a matter of . . . “public health.”

Else find another job.

People are fools if they do not grasp this.

They were fools for not grasping – decades ago – that submitting to pee tests as a condition of employment would inevitably lead to this.

Many people thought it no big deal. They didn’t use arbitrarily illegal “drugs” – so what’s the trouble? The trouble, fool, is the acceptance of the premise that it is something other than despicably degrading to presume everyone who happens to work at a given company (especially companies where employees don’t handle dangerous machinery or fly airplanes) is a dangerous Dope Fiend absent any cause to suspect the individual worker of such.

Very few people would object to an employer with legitimate reason to suspect that an employee has some kind of drug (or alcohol) problem that could result in problems for the employer asking that employee to establish that he hasn’t got a problem with drugs or alcohol. The problem – the incandescent danger – is the imbecilic insouciance toward a general presumption of guilt, of whatever the assertion happens to be.

Because here’s where it leads.

We’re all presumptive sickness spreaders – and that presumption will never end, if this stands. First as regards this sickness. Then the next one.

Forever.

You’re a fool, if you don’t see it.

Healthy employees faced with the choice – submit, or find another job. And that job may be very difficult to find – without submitting, somewhere else.

If GM and the other companies making the Jab a job requirement are not backed down. Because if not, expect the Jab to become universally required – by all employers. Even the self-employed won’t be safe – because these Freaks will proceed to make any financial transaction conditional on Proof of Jab. Banks won’t deal with you – which means you won’t be able to receive payments or make them, except via cash – which you can also expect the Freaks to try to outlaw, too.

Their intent is not to treat you. It is to cure you of any semblance of personal liberty – to make choices for yourself – that may still enjoy. For you to have one choice: Compliance – with everything.

Or have (and own) nothing.

And be very unhappy.

Do not expect the government – this government, at any rate – to do the backing down. It will double down, using the risible argument that “private companies” have the right to impose such indecencies. It is risible, in part, because corporations like GM are “private” to the same degree that you are a “customer” of the DMV’s. Corporations are by definition government-created entities, favored by government with special status that limits their liability, including liability for damages caused by the corporation.

As for example the corporations using the government to force people to roll up their sleeves, who used the government to shield them from liability for the crippling injuries and deaths their products cause – while making billions in extorted profits in the process.

It is also risible, in the second part, because corporations are beholden to government. The flip side of their government-granted favoritism is the threat always hanging over them that the very same government may rescind its favoritism. The incestuous bedfellows screw each other as they work to screw us.

There is a cure for this.

Stop buying what these corporations sell. They can fire us – but we can fire them. We don’t have to buy their products. Let’s don’t.

GM would be unable to force its employees to submit to the Jab if enough of GM’s customers made it crystal clear that they will never buy another GM product until GM stops tyrannizing the people who work for it – which threatens the tyrannization of everyone.

Once upon a time, there was baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet.

Wouldn’t it be great if those times make a comeback?

They can. All it will take is enough of us to say No.

GM isn’t the only car company. There are other car companies that haven’t become the adjuncts of the coercive state, which together seek to reduce us to a status worse than that of the cows in the field.

We are not their livestock.

Let’s make that clear to them.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

They were fools for not grasping – decades ago – that submitting to pee tests as a condition of employment would inevitably lead to this.

I once interviewed for a job in publishing that required a whizz test. They flew me from New Jersey to Michigan and interviewed me for almost the entire day.

I was surprised to learn of this idiotic whizz requirement after the interview. I told them no. We went back & forth for a couple days on this. I was surprised when HR contacted me and said they'd waive the test if I'd sign a statement saying I didn't do drugs. By that time, I figured I'd be starting out on bad footing with them, so I declined altogether. The funny thing is I soon got promoted in my job with a 67% increase in pay. It all worked out.

But I still couldn't resist sticking it to those bastards in Michigan. I typed up postal letters and sent them to all the departments in that Michigan publishing company. I told them how they were willing to waive a whizz requirement for me while all the other suckers had to urinate in a bottle with someone standing over their shoulder. My only regret is I never got to see their reaction to my letters. I should have called and asked them about it.

[acptulsa]

It isn't just that GM is incorporated. It has been in bed with government in a big way since before Charlie What's Good For GM Is Good For America Wilson. GM and the DoD have had an incestuous relationship, complete with revolving door, since it got government funding to develop the inferior Allison V-1610 before WWII (little Packard got no seed money to greatly improve the British Merlin and provide American pilots with parity in combat). And I'm pretty sure the government has owned enough stock in it to make it pure, official fascism since the buyou--er, I mean bailout of 2008.

Government Motors doesn't even qualify as a "private company" with quotation marks. It may not have been created by the CIA like Fedbook and Twit. But the CIA is so beyond government control that GM may be more of a government entity than it is.

[Sonny Tufts]

Do not expect the government – this government, at any rate – to do the backing down. It will double down, using the risible argument that “private companies” have the right to impose such indecencies. It is risible, in part, because corporations like GM are “private” to the same degree that you are a “customer” of the DMV’s. Corporations are by definition government-created entities, favored by government with special status that limits their liability, including liability for damages caused by the corporation.

This is a very slippery slope. Taken to its logical conclusion, it would mean that since the government created the corporation it has the authority to determine the company's policies and to punish it if it does something that the bureaucrats don't like (e.g., Trump's DOJ should have censored all of the corporate media that said ugly things about him). The view of corporations as the instrumentalities of government is very problematic, but it's a very convenient way to apply legal restrictions on goverment to private actions.

[acptulsa]

This is a very slippery slope. Taken to its logical conclusion, it would mean that since the government created the corporation it has the authority to determine the company's policies and to punish it if it does something that the bureaucrats don't like (e.g., Trump's DOJ should have censored all of the corporate media that said ugly things about him). The view of corporations as the instrumentalities of government is very problematic, but it's a very convenient way to apply legal restrictions on goverment to private actions.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the farce of "private companies" is turning out to be a very convenient way for government to violate the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, among others.

By the way, the "one man" Griswold was quoting in your sig was Will Rogers.

[TheTexan]

Not to mention the fact that the Fed has added Corporate Bonds to its massive balance sheet.

[Invisible Man]

If it is accepted that GM – if any company – can make employment conditional upon submitting to a “vaccination” it will have set the precedent for requiring employees to submit to medical procedures, generally.

Why does he say "if" as though this precedent hasn't already been set for a many years, with certain employers being able to make employment conditional on vaccination?

[Sonny Tufts]

By the way, the "one man" Griswold was quoting in your sig was Will Rogers.

I'm not surprised. He once asked, "If pro is the opposite of con, what is the opposite of Congress?"

[Brian4Liberty]

They were fools for not grasping – decades ago – that submitting to pee tests as a condition of employment would inevitably lead to this.

Many people thought it no big deal.

Yeah, most people didn't grasp it. On the other hand, my raising hell with HR underlings about it never changed the policy.

[pcosmar]

Had a pretty good grasp of this on Parole..

Making all of you like me,, on the Main Yard.

$#@!,Fight, or hit the Fence.

[fisharmor]

Ok Eric, if you can name another company that's making a 3/4 ton van with a 6.6L gasoline V8 in it for $10k less than the competition's econoboosterseat powered tin can that doesn't even come with seats installed, I'm all ears.

Until then, I'll keep saving up for the only real van for sale.

[pcosmar]

Ok Eric, if you can name another company that's making a 3/4 ton van with a 6.6L gasoline V8 in it for $10k less than the competition's econoboosterseat powered tin can that doesn't even come with seats installed, I'm all ears.

Until then, I'll keep saving up for the only real van for sale.

Just saw one ,,Winnebago,,dual Fuel,,gas and Propane. and propane is cheaper than Gasoline.
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace...2-3898ef259596

wish I had cash

[sparebulb]

E. Peters is on The David Knight Show right now.

[ClaytonB]

Remember When it was Just Baseball, Hot Dogs, Apple Pie & Chevrolet?

No, I don't. You know why? I was born in the 80's. This is something that the baby boomers don't get. A baby boomer once said to me, "You should have been alive in the 1950's. America was a different country then. It was truly a golden age." And I believe him. But the stark reality is that the vast majority of home-grown Americans have never seen that golden age, or anything like it. There is an ongoing demographic collapse that has been baked into the cake for three or four generations of Americans since the baby boom -- I'm not talking about the invasion of illegals, I'm talking about full-blooded Americans born right here in the US of A. The fact is that the baby boomers want to rest on their laurels and reminisce about "the good ol' days" as if most natural-born Americans should be able to relate. Well, we don't, and we can't beyond the way that we can relate to imagining a fairy-tale world in a movie or novel. I'm not disagreeing with Peters but I think that the tone of these pieces illustrates a profound lack of perspective and that is the very thing that the Left is exploiting to build their Antifa/BLM/Autonomous-Zone nonsense. If you have the money, the American dream is still very much alive today. You can buy property that is out of the urban area. You can build yourself a classic American house. You can invite friends from your circle to enjoy traditional festivities and keep the memory of that Golden Age alive. But it's largely a selfish act and it feeds into the very collapse that we are witnessing around us. I'm not pointing fingers, either. I'm not saying it's the baby boomers' fault that Antifa is out in the streets lighting $#@! on fire. Nobody's putting a gun to their heads and making them do that. But the fact is, they're doing it and they're going to keep doing it for as long as the gray-hairs in our country continue to withdraw into a cocoon of self-gratifying nostalgia, instead of taking the risk of venturing out into the reality of modern America to be leaders and share the cultural heritage they inherited through the privilege of living through the American Golden Age.

</rant>

[Anti Federalist]

No, I don't. You know why? I was born in the 80's. This is something that the baby boomers don't get. A baby boomer once said to me, "You should have been alive in the 1950's. America was a different country then. It was truly a golden age." And I believe him. But the stark reality is that the vast majority of home-grown Americans have never seen that golden age, or anything like it. There is an ongoing demographic collapse that has been baked into the cake for three or four generations of Americans since the baby boom -- I'm not talking about the invasion of illegals, I'm talking about full-blooded Americans born right here in the US of A. The fact is that the baby boomers want to rest on their laurels and reminisce about "the good ol' days" as if most natural-born Americans should be able to relate. Well, we don't, and we can't beyond the way that we can relate to imagining a fairy-tale world in a movie or novel. I'm not disagreeing with Peters but I think that the tone of these pieces illustrates a profound lack of perspective and that is the very thing that the Left is exploiting to build their Antifa/BLM/Autonomous-Zone nonsense. If you have the money, the American dream is still very much alive today. You can buy property that is out of the urban area. You can build yourself a classic American house. You can invite friends from your circle to enjoy traditional festivities and keep the memory of that Golden Age alive. But it's largely a selfish act and it feeds into the very collapse that we are witnessing around us. I'm not pointing fingers, either. I'm not saying it's the baby boomers' fault that Antifa is out in the streets lighting $#@! on fire. Nobody's putting a gun to their heads and making them do that. But the fact is, they're doing it and they're going to keep doing it for as long as the gray-hairs in our country continue to withdraw into a cocoon of self-gratifying nostalgia, instead of taking the risk of venturing out into the reality of modern America to be leaders and share the cultural heritage they inherited through the privilege of living through the American Golden Age.

</rant>

You are quite right, and you have the right to be angry.

This all started around 1964-1965.

Ted Kennedy and other notable Marxists in the government set about to do a number of things:

1 - Change the demographic, cultural and religious base of the United States.

2 - Institute a massive welfare state.

3 - Hand over the nation's economy, manufacturing, currency and world standing to Chairman Mao and the communist Chinese.

4 - Begin a "long march" through every cultural institution in the nation to poison and ingrain Marxist teachings and self loathing.

They have been wildly successful on all four major points.

And the "Boomers" wanted all this.

[fisharmor]

No, I don't. You know why? I was born in the 80's. This is something that the baby boomers don't get. A baby boomer once said to me, "You should have been alive in the 1950's. America was a different country then. It was truly a golden age." And I believe him. But the stark reality is that the vast majority of home-grown Americans have never seen that golden age, or anything like it.

You did experience something like it, but you may have been too young to realize it.

I'm convinced the reason the marbleheads all get teary-eyed about the 50s (the white ones, anyway) is because they had just lived through the greatest economic disaster the US ever experienced, then the biggest war the world ever experienced, and had come out on top, and living conditions were objectively better in the US in the 1950s than they ever had been anywhere in the world at any time in history.

I'm also convinced that the Red Scare was hyped to the extent it was because they knew exactly what Smedley knew 30 years prior - that there was a $#@!-ton of panamax ships full of cash to be siphoned off the economy if they could keep everyone agitated.

The older I get, the more nostalgic I get about the 90s, of which you were at least aware.

If you were born in the 80s you probably don't remember that nuclear annihilation was a constant fear up until about 1986. We had this existential threat looming over our heads and nobody let anyone forget it.

Chernobyl happened and it became clear, even if nobody talked about it openly, that the USSR really didn't have its $#@! together as much as anyone thought.

Then the wall came down and our existential threat started crumbling before our eyes. Tyranny had been dealt a serious blow and everyone instinctively knew it.

For the next ten glorious years, we had a strong dollar, the beginning of the digital revolution, Hollywood blockbusters that were well-written and fun, decent $#@!ing music on the radio for the first time in about 15 years, outdoor festivals, plenty of work, and an overall party atmosphere.

Sure, we also had Rodney King, Waco, Ruby Ridge, a president who was $#@!ing his interns, toilets that couldn't flush, the first big push on the environment wack-jobs taking over the planet, the beginning of the media's new job of brainwashing everyone into keeping silent about all of it, football superstars murdering their wives and getting away with it live on TV, and a bunch of other bad stuff. But the upshot to that was we were allowed to know about it all for the first time.

They left us mostly alone for that decade. If there's any veracity to the 'Bush did 911' claim, it's because, just like in the 50's, they couldn't stand to leave us the $#@! alone. There was too much money to be made keeping everyone in a state of agitation.

They got 20 whole years out of it before they had to pivot to a combination of CRT and mild flu-like symptoms as their new end-of-the-world scenario.

People are waking up. Look at the rest of the world where it has been worse.

They've had enough.

You'll experience a decade you'll get nostalgic about on the other side of this. Let's all pray it happens without shooting.

And after that decade, they'll find something else to agitate everyone with.

[ClaytonB]

You did experience something like it, but you may have been too young to realize it.

Sure, I have nostalgia that is all my own, and it is my view that it is ultimately God how keeps alive pockets of freedom in an inherently unfree world. But my point is more that nobody who lived through the 90's suggests "if only we could bring back the 90's". There were some very powerful movements that happened in the 90's completely unique from anything before or after. But my nostalgia in that regard does not lead me to feel the 90's were any kind of golden age and if only we could bring them back, things would be better. Those who lived through (and enjoyed) the 50's are enviable -- I think they really did live through a golden age of the American Dream, and I think they knew it (but did not realize it would not last). I'm all about bringing that back, but I have no illusions that a boomer boycott of GM is going to do the trick, or any of these other "boomers unite! settle for nothing less than our golden heyday!"-schemes. That's not how the 50's golden age of the American dream was lost and that's not how it will be resurrected. The reasons it was lost have a lot more to do with inner moral rot than any government program. Address the inner rot, and everything else will change by itself, as if by magic....