Wear Levi's jeans, pioneer global 'gun control'

National Gun Rights Examiner ^ | February 6, 2010 | David Codrea

[Still Thinking]

The Brady Campaign trying to drag Starbucks Coffee into the anti-open carry debate is, like the core mission of the gungrabbers, senseless, punitive of the innocent and fundamentally unfair. The coffee giant just wants to sell its wares, and is reluctant to alienate a large market segment simply because anti-rights bluenoses get all hissy when they see anyone pushing beyond social norms they deem acceptable.

Here's a company that's not innocent--in fact, they are willful leading collaborators in the global citizen disarmament movement: "American icon," Levi Strauss.

Some of us have been waving that denim flag for years--here's an early warning from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership:

Levi Strauss, the makers of the jeans we are so fond of buying, is taking your money and contributing heavily to PAX. PAX is an organization circulating a petition to broaden the reach of the federal government to disarm America.

And here's a letter from our friends at Montana Shooting Sports Association:

That you would so clearly favor the criminal class is a mystery to me, but until you recant your uncivilized ways, I will have to recommend that Montana gun owners and members of the Montana Shooting Sports Association to no longer buy your products. After a lifetime of wearing Levi's, I'm switching to something else.

OK, but that was years ago. Perhaps public pressure has made them see the light? After all, they're airing a commercial with a Walt Whitman poem narration:

Pioneers! O Pioneers!

COME, my tan-faced children,
Follow well in order, get your weapons ready;
Have you your pistols? Have you your sharp edged axes? Pioneers! O pioneers!

Inspiring words paying tribute to the American spirit, paradoxically written by a poet who socialists consider an icon, then cynically and commercially exploited here by social engineering globalist profiteers using a beautifully read voice-over by a communist actor.

Ah well--back to the point: Where does Levis Strauss & Co. stand today on your right to keep and bear arms?

Reader "Barney B" sent me copies of his email correspondence with the clothing giant. I'll give you the CliffsNotes version, from their corporate "consumer relations" reply:

Levi Strauss & Co. believes deeply in the importance of equality, social justice, community involvement and corporate citizenship.

Here's one of the ways they manifest their deep beliefs:

In this time of need, we encourage you to give what you can at www.oxfamamerica.org.

OXFAM? Where have I heard about them before?

Oh, yeah--they're the international citizen disarmament zealots who are conjoined with IANSA to stump for a global gun grab.

I won't waste your time asking you to send these creatures an email. I'll simply observe that giving them your business, especially when so many alternatives exist, is giving aid and comfort to a proven enemy of your right to keep and bear arms. Consider that when making your clothing purchases--and next time you see gun owners wearing Levis, let them know.

[gigster]

Walter, not Water.

[CholeraJoe]

Carhartt or Wrangler jeans are better. My last remaining pair of Levis are getting pretty worn anyway.

[raybbr]

CARHARTTS!

None of their stuff fits me. I am tall and skinny and they don't make it to fit me.

[raybbr]

(Obligatory due diligent Examiner Copyright Post:) With all due respect, this column has not been excerpted as per due diligent fair use copyright.

Then you should notify the moderator.

[MilicaBee]

And Levi’s is a long time supporter of Planned Parenthood.

[Who is John Galt?]

"Each of us has a capacity to make business not only a source for economic wealth, but also a force for social and economic justice."

With that in mind, I won't do "business" with Levi Strauss - ever again...

[Copernicus]

Then you should notify the moderator.

A. It does not necessarily rise to the level of moderation.

B. Moderation on Free Republic is quirky at best.

My experiences on both ends(reported, reporter) have been wildly inconsistent. There is no Internet ISO standard for moderation.

The problem has been resolved. No moderation necessary.

Best regards,

[raybbr]

A. It does not necessarily rise to the level of moderation.

Then why bother making the point?

[Fitzy_888]

“The coffee giant just wants to sell its wares, and is reluctant to alienate a large market segment simply because anti-rights bluenoses get all hissy when they see anyone pushing beyond social norms they deem acceptable.”

/There is something to be said for being concise.

[Copernicus]

Then why bother making the point?

To produce a wholesome and beneficial outcome for all without the intervention of "the authorities"

You know, the American Way of self reliance and good will?