Howard Schultz Could Use a Little Caffeine

Howard Stern has the same likelihood of being elected president in 2020 as Howard Schultz, but the Stern campaign would be much more interesting. And Stern already has nationwide name identification that ‘Starbucks’ Schultz lacks.

Kevin Siers, The Charlotte Observer, NC

Outside the business pages, the only major coverage Schultz has received in the recent past has been negative. Howard’s news coverage includes the hilarious ‘Race Together’ effort where Starbucks’ baristas were instructed to grill customers about America’s ‘systemic race problems’, while America’s first black president observed from the Oval Office.

Followed by his decision to have Starbucks become a concessionaire for the homeless by opening restrooms to everyone after a former Philadelphia store manager called the cops on two black non–customers.

Both indicate Howard doesn’t function well in the spotlight.

Then there is the personality deficit. Schultz may be the life of the party in private but in public he exhibits a combination of earnestness and tentativeness that reminds one of Jimmy Carter. Only Howard has a lackey carrying his bags.

After Schultz announced he was considering a run the left immediately attacked him. He was found guilty of giving the race to Trump if he ran as an independent. A conclusion I’m not sure is correct.

Previously Howard’s political home was identical to pre–president Trump. His decision to vote and contribute to Democrats is probably similar. It’s the party all the cool people in their social circle favor. Plus, Schultz is one of those snobs who judges a city’s sophistication by whether or not one can buy a copy of the Sunday New York Times.

Schultz is fluent in the liturgy of the Church of Diversity. He supports “choice” and all its attendant evils. He is proud of the fact same–sex marriage is part of Starbucks’ “corporate DNA.” But don’t interpret “same–sex” to mean it applies to individuals. Employees can shift sexes with the seasons and the company health insurance will cover the surgery.

Mr. Coffee believes in Global Warming, supports “sustainability”, is an enthusiastic supporter of coddling the homeless and says Viva la amnesty for illegals.

Even with social policies supported by our elite overlords, Schultz knows he doesn’t stand a chance in a Democrat presidential primary because he embraces some issues that adults support.

He’s concerned about the growing national debt. During an interview on “Morning Joe” (no pun intended) he insulted two bird brains with one comment when he said Sen. Fauxcahontas’ net worth confiscation plan will lead to socialism.

Cost is one of the reasons he’s against Sen. Kamala Harris’ (D–Inquisition) “Medicare for All” giveaway and that goes double for free college tuition. Schultz fears the assorted leftist pie–in–the–sky programs will add $40 trillion in debt, at a time Democrats are now the cost–is–no–object party.

Howard even had the temerity to claim the federal government needs to be “interrupted” because it isn’t working. When any leftist knows the government runs like clockwork. It employs hundreds of thousands of reliable Democrat voters who — when they aren’t resisting President Trump — always vote to expand government. Add to that the fact Schultz is a rich white guy who is not afraid to say the American Dream worked for him and the result isn’t a presidential candidate; it’s a candidate for the Ocasio–Cortez Re–Education Camp.

Schultz’ positions mean he is neither fish nor fowl. Instead he appears to be a Libertarian. Libertarianism is a hybrid political philosophy based on a faulty premise. The Libertarian contends it’s possible to build a fiscally sound and individually responsible society on a foundation of capitalists, drug users and sexual reprobates.

Libertarians support all the social pathologies currently facilitating our cultural decline. Their policy on drug use, abortion, alternate lifestyles, immigration and amnesty is let it all hang out — just keep your cotton pickin’ hands off my money.

Libertarians believe that it’s possible to have a country where the personal lives of its citizens are a riot of dissolution, yet somehow their fiscal life is supposed to be positively Swiss in its probity.

Unfortunately, in actual practice just as the personal becomes the political; the personal also undermines the fiscal, which is why Libertarianism can never succeed.

It’s true the Schultz combination of social libertinism and fiscal caution (a relative term with leftists) may attract swing Democrats that reluctantly voted for Hillary because they were appalled by Trump. But Schultz will also attract Never–Trumpers and reluctant Trump supporters suffering from voter’s remorse.

That combination of nominally GOP voters, along with disillusioned Trumpistas who stay home, could be enough to guarantee whatever Commissar gets the Democrat nodwill be our next president.

Starbucks Seeking Volunteers for Sociology Experiment

Previously Starbucks’ customer base had its own individual criteria for choosing a favorite coffee spot among the company’s many outlets. It might be a comely barista, the pastry selection or the free Wi–Fi signal’s clarity.

For the immediate future, however, I suggest abandoning all criteria but one: The strength of the cellphone connection, because chances are you’re going to need it.

Since two trespassers were arrested in a downtown Philadelphia Starbucks in April, the corporate has been doing the Social Justice Limbo where management sees just how far it can bend over backwards and still maintain a functioning business.

Now that headquarters has decreed it’s ‘Come One, Come All’, everyone is welcome to use the bathroom, occupy furniture and log on to the Internet. If they happen to buy something, so much the better, but it’s no longer required.

It’s a brave new business model that’s a combination of temporary office suite and homeless day shelter.

This week saw the company issue new guidelines for employees who might want to tempt fate and call 911. It’s a bureaucrat’s dream. The decision–making process includes observation, self–doubt, second–guessing, second opinions, re–checking the manual, calling corporate and then hoping the problem went away while the staff was negotiating with itself.

Incidents that qualify for an immediate 911 include: Fire, robbery, selling drugs, destruction of store property or a gas leak (although God help the employee if the leak was simply Venti bean burrito exhaust).

Other incidents are a judgment call and require a corporate–choreographed decision–making process. First the ‘partner,’ as Starbucks laughingly calls its employees, is to “assess” the ‘guest’s’ behavior. Is it culturally appropriate or is it cultural appropriation? It’s important for the partner to separate the behavior from the individual. The process resembles Evangelicals and homosexuality — hate the sin, while loving the sinner.

Behaviors that are currently held in corporate disrepute include “being unreasonably noisy, viewing inappropriate media, verbally abusing people, making unwanted sexual advances and indecent exposure
.”

Step three of the pre–emergency call journey is the partner “[considering] how any decision will affect the customer’s experience.” Will not cursing out the person who tripped over his shopping cart mean the guest suffers increased stress? Will he/she/zir experience heightened sexual tension if they’re prevented from groping an adjacent guest? And could the partner be judgmentally assuming “indecent exposure” when the guest was only trying to increase air circulation?

Assuming the incident hasn’t been resolved by customers acting on their own initiative, the partner will then ponder “whether the customer or situation is safe to approach and whether an employee’s chosen response would be the same for any customer in the same circumstance.
”

Before this glacial minuet brings the partner within hailing distance of the disruptive guest, another partner must be asked to “observe and verify” the behavior. Only then is management to approach and introduce themselves and ask for the person’s name.

In no time at all I predict Starbucks will be home to the type of colorful human–interest stories — often featuring bodycam footage — that are commonly associated with Waffle House and Walmart parking lots. As one observer commented to CBS, the new Starbucks “will be a homeless camp. But at least we won’t have to deal with them on the street.”

That’s the current action plan, but savvy Starbucks employees know corporate policy can change on a dime. The Philly manager was following store policy when she called the cops, but that didn’t stop her from being fired when the media called corporate.

The real partner policy will be a series of informal questions designed to insure they keep their job. The first will be: Is the unruly guest a minority or passing as one? If the answer is ‘yes,’ the call decision is ‘no.’

If the guest isn’t a minority, but is also not wearing a MAGA hat, the partner must investigate further. Is the guest part of a protected group that may include whites? This normally involves something of a sexual nature and may require the use of intuition, Gaydar or checking for wallets attached to pants with a chain.

If the answer is even a remotely possible ‘yes’ the call is still a ‘no.’

The truth is no Starbucks employee was ever fired for the customer calling 911, and since under new policy the customer is always right, let them make the call.

And all this is before the May 29th shutdown of all Starbucks’ outlets for ‘Re–Education Day’ where highly paid trainers will hector the white partners in an attempt to stamp out “unconscious bias.” My last prediction is once that’s complete, all 175,000 Starbucks employees will be easy to spot: They’re the people not on the phone when all hell breaks loose.

Starbucks to Manage Concessions for Homeless Encampments

Today we live in a society constantly buffeted by waves of hysteria and that’s just what’s coming from corporate America. And the panicked plutocrats are unable to formulate a proportionate response, something that was routine 25 years ago.

In 1993 four children contracted E. coli and died after eating a ‘Monster Burger’ at Jack in the Box. In response, Jack in the Box suspended hamburger sales, but kept the stores open for the rest of its product line while corporate dealt with the emergency.

Milt Priggee, Oak Harbor, WA

In 2018 Starbucks is accused of “racism” after two black men are arrested without incident and later released without charges. This time in a frenzied response, Starbucks’ corporate introduces “Try Our Competitors Day!” on May 29th when all stores will be closed and employees required to attend a one day re–education camp. No word on whether customers will be reimbursed for coffee purchased from Dunkin Donuts on the 29th.

Disbelief was my first reaction upon reading about this latest bigotry brouhaha. I assumed it was a typo. Instead of ‘Cracker Barrel’ someone mistakenly typed ‘Starbucks’ into the Online Racial Incident template. Why Starbucks is more conscious of racism than Rachel Dolezal! Forty percent of its workforce is a minority of some kind.

Accusing Starbucks of racism is like accusing 7/11 of banning turbans inside the store.

This is the first instance of Starbucks joining the system–wide shutdown trend, but not the first time Starbucks has signaled its virtue. Earlier, in a hysterical over–reaction to Ferguson and Black Lives Matter, corporate chairman Howard Schultz wanted a “frank conversation on race” and instructed baristas to write “Race Together” on the customer’s coffee cup. It became such a farce the idea was quickly dropped.

Starbucks will probably pattern its shutdown on the model established by Chipotle. The illegal sanctuary and restaurant shut down for employee training after repeated outbreaks of customer diarrhea. The Chipotle workforce was told that here in the US everyone washes their hands after a bathroom trip. At the Starbuck’s session I’m assuming employees will learn that here in the US everyone is a racist.

Schultz and Starbucks are so fearful of being accused of ‘privilege.’ If it weren’t for the unfortunate social connotations, I wouldn’t have been surprised if Schultz ordered his white employees to wear blackface just to atone.

And make no mistake, atonement for Starbucks is coming and the company may not survive.

After the shutdown session no employee with a rating of IV or higher on the Fitzpatrick skin tone scale will call the cops on a minority ‘customer’ for any offense. Minority managers can see which way the wind blows, too. Soon this will escalate to refusing to call the cops for any ‘customer’ for any offense short of murder. They’ll see what happened to the manager in Philadelphia — fired and scapegoated — listen to the moralizing by Schultz and will conclude Starbucks is now Times Square circa 1988.

I’ve never liked the pretentiousness that permeates Starbucks. I’m secure in my manhood. I don’t require coffee to be extra–strong and extra–bitter to prove my toughness like the beta males and alpha–females that frequent the bistro. I predict their brand commitment will erode quickly as Starbucks goes from an upscale coffee bistro to a San Francisco public library.

Schultz’s stores will now function as the concession stand in a homeless encampment.

Already the American Mirror reports a black man who calls himself “Hotep Jesus” waltzed into a Starbucks and demanded free coffee reparations, “I heard you guys don’t like black people, so I came to get my Starbucks reparations voucher.” And he got it.

KTLA had a story about a Southern California Starbucks. A man reposted a video — made in January — where he contends he was denied the code to the bathroom because he was black. This won’t be a problem when homeless move in, they are very flexible when it comes to bowel movements.

After the staff undergoes Schultz’ “unconscious bias training” store rules will go out the window. I’m sure a handful of customers will cling to their ‘white privilege’ and place an order, assuming they can make their way past the shopping carts, backpacks, discarded syringes and Hefty lawn & leaf bags. Getting their order is something else entirely. Hearing their name called over the random shouts, boom boxes and urgent entreaties from panhandlers may prove quite the challenge.

Conservatives and Christians won’t have to worry about boycotting Starbucks ever again. Corporate will have driven off all the business without our assistance.

I’m going to enjoy watching the feeding frenzy. It’s going to be fun. And God help the clueless employee that puts the brownies on the bottom row of the display case and the corn muffins on top.