Bitter Unmarried Women Win It For Obama

I read this over at the Corner:

Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg says unmarried women made the difference for Obama. Back in 1994, when white male voters were said to be responsible for the GOP’s takeover of Congress, the media came up with a label for them: “angry white men.” Will the media now refer to Greenberg’s voting bloc as “bitter unmarried women”?

Hilarious and true. The more women get pumped and dumped along their journeys to find the elusive alpha male who will swoon for their fading looks, the more likely they are to vote Democrat.

Obama represents that fantasy alpha male figure they wish would marry them. His leftist policies represent the beta provider largesse they want in lieu of an actual beta husband they secretly loathe.

Maxim #2008: Socialists gain when single women who refuse to settle vote. They lose when single women forget to vote on their way to the mall.

Solution for a stronger America: Distract single women with game and shiny things so they forget to vote.





Comments


  1. on November 6, 2008 at 7:32 pm Days of Broken Arrows

    “Solution for a stronger America: Distract single women with game and shiny things so they forget to vote.”

    Funny, Roissy, but I think a solution for a better America would be the Republicans not to nominate fossils like Bob Dole and John McCain and expect them to win against younger, more articulate and more attractive candidates.

    A better ticket would have been the ticket.

    Like


  2. In this age of Obama, if a woman likes being fucked with a black condom, what does that mean?

    Like


  3. I totally agree with #1. The Republicans had better nominate someone young and attractive next time — someone that will cause stir up some emotions in these unmarried, mid-career, childless, and soulless women. They can transfer all their knight in shining armor dreams onto him, much like they did with Obama.

    Let’s face it, the average American voter is an idiot, and what is scary is that 50% are dumber than the average one. Just get someone that looks good and sounds smart when answering questions, no matter how much of a total lie and obfuscation the answer is. Read: Palin answers honestly and looks dumb, Biden bullshits his way through and tells massive lies but looks smart.

    Also, what about Obama’s race card in a different light? How likely was it that that single women were attracted to him precisely for his being black: i.e. (1) for presumed Black male sexual prowess and (2) being sexually taboo?

    Like


  4. I totally agree with #1. The Republicans had better nominate someone young and attractive next time — someone that will cause stir up some emotions in these unmarried, mid-career, childless, and soulless women. They can transfer all their knight in shining armor dreams onto him, much like they did with Obama.

    Doesn’t have to be young, just has to be charismatic and able to communicate and convey strong principles. Youth is important for women in conveying sexual attraction, not so much for men. Being older and more experienced actually helps. Reagan was old and fucking KILLER in charisma. He didn’t have to even sell himself as a watered-down conservative, he would just shoot from the hip with straight up conservative rhetoric and kick ass. Even his opponents would end up liking him or laughing at his jokes:

    Case in point, look at this clip:

    Great deflection, wonderful timing, only complaint is the clip cuts short and you miss the pause where he drinks from his cup of water for optimum comic effect, then turns to smirk at the cameras. McCain’s debate jokes by comparison just made him look like a cornball.

    Like


  5. 2 Montgomery:

    In this age of Obama, if a woman likes being fucked with a black condom, what does that mean?

    That you are about to be “outsourced”

    Like


  6. on November 6, 2008 at 8:09 pm Seeking_Alpha

    Speaking of the Republican ticket in 2012, how does everyone feel about Jindal?

    Like


  7. Is Obama hate the next 4 years of this blog?

    Like


  8. on November 6, 2008 at 8:19 pm Maxwell Demon

    The real socialists are 1) Bush, for handing out “Economic Stimulus” checks to the poorest taxpayers earlier this year (which is probably why the economy is so stimulated) and 2) Palin, for taxing corporations and giving the proceeds–equally–to all Alaskans, while still hitting up the Federal government for funding. So there.

    Jindal is an exorcist:
    http://www.kulo.org/NewOxfordReview.BobbyJindalsDemon/NewOxfordReview.BobbyJindalsDemon.html

    Like


  9. T, do you think Bush’s legacy will magically turn into gold once a couple decades have gone by? Just curious, as you seem to be a big fan of Reagan, and the whole Fox News set seem to think its common knowledge that Reagan was basically perfect. I’m no expert on him, but my take on him is that on a certain level, he worked for the time we were in, but for all his successes he had just as many shortcomings, most prominently Iran-Contra. Depends on your worldview I guess.

    Like


  10. Palin/DeLay 2012, come on you guys!!!

    Like


  11. on November 6, 2008 at 8:27 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @9 – I do think Bush will be viewed much better thirty or forty years from now. Reagan built the foundations of our modern economy and was the driving force behind the defeat of the Soviet Union. He set up the basis for our economic and militaristic dominance of the world.

    Like


  12. on November 6, 2008 at 8:35 pm Maxwell Demon

    @11–I’m not fan of Reagan, but it seems a little cold to blame him for our economy.

    Like


  13. Why Jindal? The whole problem with the Republicans is that they were trying to be democrat lite. Now they’re going to get a non-white guy just because the dems have one?

    If they got a charismatic guy who was graded A+ on pro-life, NRA and border security, and wanted to bring manufacturing back to the US, cut spending and get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, I’m pretty sure they’d win.

    Like


  14. on November 6, 2008 at 8:51 pm Days of Broken Arrows

    Unrelated topic, but good idea for a subject:

    I just heard on a news radio station that former NY governor Elliott Spitzer would NOT be indicted for his role in the prostitution scandal. Then I heard lawmakers are “cracking down”* on Internet erotic ads, requiring the women to post phone numbers and the men to pay by credit cards.

    Didn’t one of us (maybe Roissy hisself) say that not only do Alphas only take care of their own, but they go out of their way to prevent Betas from getting ANY sex? Well, this is a perfect example of that.

    * As I’ve previously stated, this is what white people started to specialize in after the culture degenerated into stupidity and paranoia, and the Asians and Indians became the new innovators. A good depiction of the Average White Guy is that cop on “South Park.” This may be the real reason Obama won.

    Like


  15. on November 6, 2008 at 8:55 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @ASDF, I’m pretty sure Jindal is A+ on pro-life and NRA. I only mentioned him because he’s young, charismatic, and staunchly conservative. I’d be happy with a white guy too, although I don’t know of any young ones that fit the bill. Telling though, that your first problem with him is skin color.

    Like


  16. on November 6, 2008 at 8:55 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @12 – That’s a cute lib comment, but we both know it’s not true.

    Like


  17. on November 6, 2008 at 9:44 pm Maxwell Demon

    @17–which part isn’t true? You mean I actually *am* a Reagan fan?

    Like


  18. Your extrapolations of what women “must” be thinking are endlessly fascinating.

    Of COURSE. Women voted for Obama in larger numbers, and it completely logically follows that all the women who did so were dumped by you and your cohorts. (Are you claiming to have dumped half the population here?) Quaking at the prospect of never being able to sleep with you again, they then rushed to the polls to vote for someone hot? That makes sense? It seem to have never occurred to you that maybe a woman just liked Obama, or his policies, and that preference for him has nothing to do with her indifference to you.

    Some days you pretend to make sense, and some day it’s like you don’t feel you should have to put out the effort.

    Like


  19. on November 6, 2008 at 9:57 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @18 – Your implication that the foundation Reagan built was a bad one.

    Like


  20. Whats with all the Ayn Rand worship these days? Did I miss an episode of Law & Order where they talked about her or something? I know being a Republican isn’t cool right now, but come on guys, just admit that you were raised Republican and you’ve been brainwashed that way since you were a baby. The whole Rand thing probably helps with cold DC lawyer chicks though, because if they aren’t liberal they are likely big fans of Rand and secretly like getting raped.

    Like


  21. @ 21 – Personally, my parents voted for Kerry and were apolitical my whole life. Some of us discovered our politics on our own. We actually believe the tenets of objectivism, libertarianism, Friedman-ism, etc. and their philosophical underpinnings as well as their consequences in the real world.

    And as much as I love Rand’s work (it’s better on tape though… she uses twelve words where two would suffice) never, ever date a girl who likes Rand. Taggert was a whore. All of her female protagonists are.

    Like


  22. agreed on that. i went out with a girl a few times who was into Rand and i just thought it was novel at the time. little did i know what a mistake that was. i would actually suggest incorporating that as part of the early screening process.

    Like


  23. “Politics and religion are conversational buzzkills” — Roissy, sweetie, listen to your own advice. Get back to the douchebag dating tips that you’re so good at, cuz this political ish is zZZZZZZzzzzzzZZZZZZ

    Like


  24. No, the solution to unmarried women giving Obama the Presidency (they backed him 70% – 29%, versus something like 68% for married women backing McCain) is simple.

    Socialism extended.

    What’s wealth? Is it just money?

    No, it’s also SEX.

    The natural extension of sharing wealth is sharing SEX. Demand that as part of a socialist economy, pretty young women are REQUIRED to give it up to ugly old guys. Or ugly young guys. None of whom are Alpha.

    In fact, demand this at all occasions. Part of Obama’s “spread the Wealth” campaign.

    Soon, no unmarried woman will be anything BUT a small government Republican.

    Like


  25. Whiskey, actually, sexual socialism is a logical extension to socialism, but so unapproachable as to never be mentioned. A fundamental of socialism is to provide basic needs like housing and food. But sex is a basic mental need. How many times have you known someone where you thought: “He/she just needs to get laid.”? People without emotional and physical intimacy suffer. It’s no small coincidence that terrorists are almost always unmarried and virgins. In fact, it’s easy to say that the primary impetus of wealth building is sexual fulfillment. If Capitalism is a corrupt greed, then lust is it’s beating heart. Afterall, why else do all these now busted Wall Street types gravitate towards gold diggers, strippers and hookers? But this topic is taboo. Alas, I’m glad though. If there had been welfare pussy, I probably would have stayed a chump.

    Like


  26. on November 7, 2008 at 1:38 am Days of Broken Arrows

    Animus said: “Alas, I’m glad though. If there had been welfare pussy, I probably would have stayed a chump.”

    There is welfare pussy. It’s called fat chicks. Or really ugly women. Or much older women.

    Most men, though, have pride and do not want welfare pussy. They want to earn it, on some level — be in smarts, game, whatever. How many of us have had opportunities with less-than-desirable women during dry spells and thought “Err, I may be desperate but I’m not that desperate.”

    Like


  27. Saying you can bang fat chicks is like saying poor people can just eat McDonalds. It belies the soul of the equality ethos of socialism.

    Like


  28. @Whiskey – A better name for the program would be “Spread the Wealth, Spread the Legs”. It might work.

    Like


  29. DoBA

    Something I’ve never understood, except that perhaps the ego need is more important than the physical need. OTOH, I’ve been all over the scale, or rather the women have been, and parts is parts. Of course I also come from an ethnicity that tends to produce ahem big ahem women.

    Like


  30. A standard feature of utopian literature. In Zamyatin’s _We_, the powers that be set you up with one of your equals (caste, intelligence, etc) with whom you must have regularly scheduled sex. (Although the narrator whines that O-157 is really NOT his intellectual equal, nor is she all that great-looking. There will be unsatisfied nerd boys in Utopia.) In _Brave New World_ casual consensual sex was freely available, and the (male) character portrayed as “not getting any” did so out of an objection to treating women as “meat”, i.e. the implication was that as Alpha Minus (roissy would love BNW’s terminology) he was not taking the sex he could have, although Lenina was an Alpha babe.

    Like


  31. when does a woman become fat?
    beyonce
    america ferrera
    rosie o’donnel

    Like


  32. Dynamo Kiev
    I totally agree with #1. The Republicans had better nominate someone young and attractive next time — someone that will cause stir up some emotions in these unmarried, mid-career, childless, and soulless women.

    Romney was that candidate. He has pimp blood in his genes. His grand farther or great grand father had 9 wives. That’s one for everyday of the week and two alternates.

    Like


  33. Dynamo Kiev saidAlso, what about Obama’s race card in a different light? How likely was it that that single women were attracted to him precisely for his being black: i.e. (1) for presumed Black male sexual prowess and (2) being sexually taboo?

    Highly likely. that’s why white men should stop making a big deal out of blk male pE.nis. I also think it has become a trend. Human beings really follow the “monkey see monkey do”

    Like


  34. Eurosaba, but if I remember correctly in Brave New World the guy goes nuts at the end and I always interpreted it as an orgy, although this is more implied.

    when does a woman become fat?
    beyonce
    america ferrera
    rosie o’donnel

    Rosie. The middle woman I’d never heard of. Google shows she’s not to my taste, and she could stand to be thinner, but she’s not fat.

    Like


  35. 1. ASDF
    Why Jindal? The whole problem with the Republicans is that they were trying to be democrat lite. Now they’re going to get a non-white guy just because the dems have one?

    Bobby Jindal is too brown. If they called Obama a muslim terroist, imagine what they will do to Jindal. If I’m not mistaken, Jindal is a Catholic convert.

    Like


  36. Animus-gottcha.

    I see more American girls who are built along the lines of beyonce and america versus rosie.

    Like


  37. The middle woman I’d never heard of. Google shows she’s not to my taste, and she could stand to be thinner, but she’s not fat.

    She’s perfect!

    I see more American girls who are built along the lines of beyonce and america versus rosie.

    Which is a bonus for beta weirdos like me! 🙂

    Like


  38. Obama represents that fantasy alpha male figure they wish would marry them.

    I suspect much of the unmarried single female vote is probably composed of single black women. Interestingly, for many of them, they’d kill to marry Obama, but they’re stuck with men with earnings that are no better or lower than their own.

    Like


  39. “I suspect much of the unmarried single female vote is probably composed of single black women. Interestingly, for many of them, they’d kill to marry Obama, but they’re stuck with men with earnings that are no better or lower than their own.”

    Just because he’s President. I think many black women, esp. uneducated ones would otherwise think an egghead like Obama wasn’t black enough.

    Like


  40. @ Seeking_Alpha:

    Telling of what? That I would prefer to see my race and culture represented in the highest political office in the country? Duh! Plus, Jindal obviously won’t be against ending legal immigration, which is as much a problem as illegal immigration.

    Like


  41. on November 7, 2008 at 3:13 am Seeking_Alpha

    Beyonce, it’s tough to tell. All the pictures online look really photoshopped.

    America is definitely too big. She looks ‘voluptuous’ in clothes, but you can tell that once they came off, her stomach would be pretty flabby.

    Like


  42. on November 7, 2008 at 3:15 am Seeking_Alpha

    @ ASDF – Duh for you maybe, but not for me. I’d rather see my ideology and beliefs represented in the highest political office in the country. An end to all immigration would lead to a demographic crisis and the inevitable and permanent decline of our economy. That’s not opinion, that’s economic certainty.

    Like


  43. Chic — men ALWAYS fight over women, unless constrained. A lot of the KKK stuff was aimed at keeping Black guys away from the limited amount of White women. Much of the brutality enacted on the Black men was really, all about a message. Think Emmet Till.

    Now, the only way keep that fighting among men about women minimized is to make sure everyone gets an equal shot at a woman. Or at least enough of everyone so that there is a not a big amount of losers. THAT condition, you are quite right about the terrorists being loner virgins, ala Atta or Cho, is very dangerous widespread. Or the threat of it.

    There is ALWAYS a lot of violence bubbling around under the surface of human beings and particularly men. This should not surprise anyone — humans are hypercharged with both sex drives and emotions and also intelligence and tool-making. It’s why we are the dominant species and oh-so dangerous in groups. I think it is a dangerous mistake to assume violence is constrained in modern society because we’ve “evolved” past it or that somehow a lot of men priced out of the market one way or another by preference, loss of status, higher status of women, whatever, won’t make lots, and lots of trouble.

    “Spread the Wealth, Spread the Legs?” I like it. Make single women into bedrock Conservatives dang quick. Just scare em.

    Probably a good pick-up routine in a bar. Come to think of it.

    Like


  44. Now, the only way keep that fighting among men about women minimized is to make sure everyone gets an equal shot at a woman.

    David has 0% chance of a woman, especially one who appeals to his fetishes. So why am I not running around acting like a violent maniac and fighting men for women or picking off alpha males with a scope and rifle?

    Like


  45. chic noir,
    I really liked Romney and I hope he runs again

    Like


  46. roissy,
    If women vote for Obama because he’s sexy, how is that different from men voting for Bush because they want to have a beer with him?

    Like


  47. 45 David Alexander:

    David has 0% chance of a woman, especially one who appeals to his fetishes. So why am I not running around acting like a violent maniac and fighting men for women or picking off alpha males with a scope and rifle?

    Cuz you a punk ass bitch.

    Like


  48. Cuz you a punk ass bitch.

    Which one of us was in the most dangerous cities in America taking photos of trains or standing at a corner at 3AM in the morning talking to a family member?

    Like


  49. When did we give women the right to vote?! Hell, the country was doomed the day that happened!

    Like


  50. skeptic,
    What about all the conservative men rhapsodizing about Sarah Palin?

    Like


  51. @Seeking Alpha:

    Demographic crisis? The US has over 300 million people. It could definitely stand to lose some and it would be no problem. When people say demographic crisis they really mean that there won’t be enough people to take care of the elderly. Well, maybe that generation should have reproduced. But even if you don’t feel like punishing them for it, you could have a more responsible policy. Something like a guest worker program that actually gets enforced.

    As far as permanent decline of the economy, it’s already here. The US has gutted its manufacturing sector and instead promoted a fraudulent, consumption-based economy. How will immigration fix that? All immigrants do is compete for the few decent jobs left, driving down wages and soaking up state benefits in the process.

    Like


  52. Sorry, that last post was me, if you didn’t already guess.

    Like


  53. @ 52, and i guess 53

    america did neither ‘gutted its manufacturing sector’ nor did it promote a fradulent anything. american workers and american business have correctly chosen to move up the value chain and produce more high-tech good and information based services. that’s where the future lies. you complaining about the loss of manufacturing makes about as much sense as complaining about the loss of agriculture. at one point most americans were farmers. do you think it would be a good idea if it were still that way?

    jobs are not a natural resource to be doled out to citizens or immigrants. they are the by-product of a productive economy. you want more jobs? that’s really easy to do. put a ban on technological improvements. you’ll have all the jobs you can handle, but we’ll all be poorer for it. google the idea of creative destruction, and learn how economies work.

    Like


  54. 14 ASDF:

    If they got a charismatic guy who was graded A+ on pro-life, NRA and border security, and wanted to bring manufacturing back to the US, cut spending and get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, I’m pretty sure they’d win.

    They do… his name is Ron Paul. And he tanked in the primaries… Which is a shame, since he was one of the more interesting Republican candidates lately.

    Like


  55. on November 7, 2008 at 3:26 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @ ASDF – It isn’t what they ‘really mean’, it’s the only meaning of the phrase ‘demographic crisis’. It’s not about ‘taking care’ of the elderly, like who’s going to change their diapers, it’s about when the ratio of people who are net payers into the welfare state to the people who are net collectors gets too low.

    Our manufacturing is not gutted. We have word class manufacturers here. That’s just a protectionist platitude with no basis in economic fact. Manufacturing is the easiest, least value-added part of the economic process. In thirty years it will be 100% automated. Just because you (incorrectly) put the word ‘fraudulent’ before consumption-based economy (service-based economy is a more accurate description) it doesn’t make it true.

    Any student of economics can tell you that your opinions are all wrong and based in hyperbole and nativist fear rather than having any basis in fact. There is nothing you can point to that suggests a permanent decline in our economy. We are in a crisis now, and I’d even hazard a guess that we may have a few more in the next couple decades. I’d also guess that in each decade from now (assuming we keep our free-market ways) our economy and our country will be wealthier, larger, stronger, and our living standard will be higher than it is now.

    Like


  56. on November 7, 2008 at 3:27 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @ Lance – Everything he said. Hehe, especially google the idea of creative destruction, and learn how economies work.

    Like


  57. Lance is quite right. I will be amused by the disaster that Obama will be.

    Like


  58. @Seeking Alpha:
    If you’re worried about the ratio of net taxpayers to net consumers, why are you supporting massive immigration again? Do you really think 150 million third world immigrants are going to become net taxpayers? What planet do you live on?

    Providing people with real jobs producing goods to export as well as selling them locally is a far smarter idea, as well as better for society, than forcing people to live on starbucks wages while paying for China to develop its working class. But assuming that you are correct, and a combination of a high tech/service industry economy is the way to go, massive immigration is still not necessary, and is in fact detrimental to most Americans’ standard of living.

    Like


  59. @ ASDF

    after you’ve looked up creative destruction, then try checking out import substitution. the strategy you’re proposing is the same one that all the developed countries tried in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. it worked out real well for them.

    Like


  60. agree with Lance @54.
    Many more manufacturing jobs are lost to technology than to movement to China. I base this on conversations with local manufacturers.

    Like


  61. on November 7, 2008 at 6:09 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @ ASDF – Actually yes, immigrants are net taxpayers. That’s just a fact. Many illegal immigrants get a fake SS card and pay into the program even though they can’t collect. Immigrants don’t come here for the welfare benefits, they come here for the opportunity to work and send money to their families back home.

    I would also point out that if we abolished the welfare state, then you argument against immigration would fall on its face.

    But again, it’s clear that you don’t understand economics at all. Your arguments are some weird hybrid of nativist and Democratic talking points and false platitudes designed to assuage the backward parts of the country that their failure is not their fault (when it most certainly is).

    Like


  62. Pro-immigrationists are the lowest of scum.

    Like


  63. on November 7, 2008 at 6:16 pm Seeking_Alpha

    Yea seriously! Jingoism rocks! There is absolutely no correlation between our being a nation of immigrants and our being the most powerful, wealthy nation… that’s a coincidence.

    Like


  64. on November 7, 2008 at 6:19 pm Ba1anced-A Beta with Alpha Tendencies

    Lance and Seeking Alpha,

    If that’s the case, then why are we not producing more than we are buying, like when we were a true superpower? Ever growing trade deficit anyone? 8.5 trillion and counting. I thought the definition of a growing economy was that we were suposed to be GROWING!!! No, we have a concentration of power by BIG Conservative Government and their speculative gambling brokerage houses that will force the people to pay back losses on the money they invested with the brokerages in the first place!

    Ron Paul was probably the most honest candidate that ran, however, he lost the popularity contest with the sleep masses.
    He and the awakening masses know that this economy is unstable and we are running on fumes and the dwindling faith of creditor nations.When the IOU’s (bonds) stop trading back and forth. Game OVER.

    The point is this, why base your economy on only a few sectors? why didn’t we take what we already had (strong manufacturing base) and build upon it. Have the steel mills in one sector, mining in another, automotive production in another, farming in another, service spread throughout, and technologial R&D to back it all up with more innovation. Why does it have to be either/ or all the time? I know why………GREED. Everyone wants all the power…all the time. America is losing it’s power because it forgot it’s power base……the people. the masters took the servants for granted, and the servants are doing the best they can with the information they have. The masters know this and are puttin up a front of power knowing that they are not as powerful as they once were. In my opinion, America can only pull so many more strings with their economic leverage over other nations before those other nations find ways to sever the strings and exist without us. Keep playing the currency /trade leverage game, keep diluting the value of the currency with FED majic, keep making our debt to other nations virtually cheaper with said currency supply, keep refusing to invest in the people who are the backbone of the nation, and we will see how “prosperous” this nation is going to be….in my opinion.

    Is an 8.5 trillion dollar national debt SENSATIONALISM? The numbers don’t lie. Diversify the economy. Damn the ideolgies and the theories of what’s supposed to happen under a certain system.

    Like


  65. on November 7, 2008 at 6:22 pm Seeking_Alpha

    Okay, okay I get it. You want a soapbox, not a discussion. You could have just said so.

    Like


  66. There is a correlation between the pre-1965 immigrant population coming largely from Europe and America’s dominance. There is no correlation between the current massive third world immigration contributing to America’s dominance. Decline, maybe.

    Where are your facts that say immigrants are net taxpayers? These two links say otherwise.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33783-2004Aug25.html

    http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters87d3

    Like


  67. on November 7, 2008 at 6:42 pm Seeking_Alpha

    or its report, the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based group that advocates tougher immigration policies and Federation for American Immigration Reform

    Two groups with absolutely no bias or agenda whatsoever.

    Like


  68. on November 7, 2008 at 6:44 pm Seeking_Alpha

    Also a plurality, if not a majority, of Silicon Valley, the fastest growing and most dynamic sector of our economy, is made up of Indian-American or Asian-American immigrants.

    Like


  69. @64: there is a room in Hell for open-borders Republicans, where you’ll get to spend eternity hanging with Jack Kemp, Larry Kudlow, and John Podhoretz.

    Like


  70. on November 7, 2008 at 7:07 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @PA – And I guess your family was on the Mayflower?

    Like


  71. You’re a moron.

    Like


  72. Remember kids, it’s only open borders if you’re white. No pesky coloured folks, and don’t worry, Asians folks don’t get to play either. 🙂

    Like


  73. on November 7, 2008 at 7:40 pm Seeking_Alpha

    The further and further you push these guys, the clearer and clearer it becomes that theirs is an ideology without any intellectual underpinning. It is an ideology of fear and anger until it finally ends in the basest possible response: a (clearly false) ad hominem attack without any refutation of the opposing sides points.

    I wish you luck PA. You will need it.

    Like


  74. I think I’ll immigrate to Haiti and advocate that they let a million Chinese and a million Arabs move in.

    Like


  75. “Two groups with absolutely no bias or agenda whatsoever.”

    It doesn’t matter their point of view, so long as they have facts to back it up. Maybe they came to the opinion that immigration is bad for America based on facts, and started a group because of it.

    I am still waiting to see the studies commissioned by La Raza that you are presumably reading, stating that 20 million ditch diggers and janitors have somehow moved into the middle class.

    Like


  76. No, immigration-restrictionism has very sound intellectual underpinnings. They’re all over the internet if you are curious, and they have been presented here a million times as well, including by me.

    It’s Friday, I am tired, and I don’t feel like engaging in the same argument all over again.

    It’s your side that lacks them. For your kind it’s all about raving “the economy!” or sputtering “xenophobe!”

    You as an individual may or may not be a moron, but the ideology you represent is based on arrogance and near-austisitc monomania.

    Like


  77. The only ideology here without any intellectual underpinning is the pro-immigration side. They have yet to come up with a coherent argument to explain how letting America fill up with third worlders will result in anything but it becoming a third world country.

    Like


  78. on November 7, 2008 at 7:52 pm Ba1anced-A Beta with Alpha Tendencies

    Seeking Alpha said:

    “Okay, okay I get it. You want a soapbox, not a discussion. You could have just said so.”

    You know what is written is true. Starry Eyed “Just wait and see” idealism is what has our nation in a mess in the first place. Nothing wrong with a little cynicism in the mix. Too much cynicism is pessimism. So are you saying that high end technological “services” will be our bread and butter and will lead us back to the promised land of American Superiority? America….the unilateral power soley my the might of “intellectual property and capitol”. We’ll see.

    Like


  79. I think I’ll immigrate to Haiti and advocate that they let a million Chinese and a million Arabs move in.

    I have no qualms with that as the immigration of two million foreigners does not make Haiti less Haitian.

    I would simply prefer that your make your preferences for immigrants clearer. Are you simply for pro high-IQ immigration into the United States, or do you simply want only white immigration into the United States, and does this apply to other settler nations and native-white nations in the Western world?

    Like


  80. on November 7, 2008 at 8:13 pm Seeking_Alpha

    @ 79 – I guess that’s the difference then. I don’t see the need to lead us ‘back’ to anything. I think we’re at the height of our power. We may have experienced relative decline, but only because other countries are learning to successfully emulate us. Certainly we’re not perfect. We need to dismantle the welfare state. But we are out the pinnacle of our power.

    Like


  81. on November 7, 2008 at 8:40 pm Ba1anced-A Beta with Alpha Tendencies

    Seeking Alpha said:

    “We need to dismantle the welfare state.”

    If you mean by Welfare state as in lazy poor that won’t get off their asses and be productive who soak up BILLIONS per year……. AS WELL AS the government whores of unscrupulous big businesses (not all big business mind you) that feel entitled to TRILLIONS in “government assistance” to reward it’s failures at the taxpayer’s expense…then I would tend to agree. But we both know the odds of that happening.

    What’s the difference in the one that climbs through your window at night and robs you at gunpoint…or the one that promises you a prosperous future if you believe in “the plan” or the “dream” and invest. One just wears a suit and smiles more often.

    America currently lives on the reputation of it’s former power, not the power within itself. It’s the collective psycology of the world that keeps us where we are.

    Like


  82. on November 7, 2008 at 8:44 pm Seeking_Alpha

    I agree that it’s Friday afternoon and this argument is getting boring. I thought I’d post a snippet from an article, another article, and a blog post. If you want to continue on Monday, at least give this stuff a read and try and offer some counter-points to the argument they lay out rather than just keep typing ‘America is in decline’ as fast as you can.

    Snippet:
    Yet the evidence of American decline is weak. Yes, as Zakaria notes, the world’s largest Ferris wheel is in Singapore and the largest casino in Macau. But by more serious measures of power, the United States is not in decline, not even relative to other powers. Its share of the global economy last year was about 21 percent, compared with about 23 percent in 1990, 22 percent in 1980 and 24 percent in 1960. Although the United States is suffering through a financial crisis, so is every other major economy. If the past is any guide, the adaptable American economy will be the first to come out of recession and may actually find its position in the global economy enhanced.

    Blog Post: http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/InformationDissemination/~3/444138482/arbiter-enforcer-hegemon.html

    Article: (which I haven’t gotten to yet, but the snippet above is from it)
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/29/AR2008102903202.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

    Like


  83. on November 7, 2008 at 8:45 pm Seeking_Alpha

    Sorry and one more thing. @ 82 – Saying ‘if you mean by welfare state’ shows that you’re uninformed. It has a very specific meaning. You should try and be more informed about things you’re apparently so passionate about.

    Have a good weekend.

    Like


  84. on November 7, 2008 at 8:54 pm Ba1anced-A Beta with Alpha Tendencies

    Nationalize is another word for socialize people and corporate welfare and socail welfarehave the same dynamics….taking from some to give to others……socialism in different forms. Words are subjective. They can be used to express the same or different ideas.

    Like


  85. on November 7, 2008 at 9:00 pm Ba1anced-A Beta with Alpha Tendencies

    Will do.

    Like


  86. on November 7, 2008 at 9:03 pm Seeking_Alpha

    Well if you’d like to hijack a symbol everyone else uses and replace it with your own meaning, I guess that is your prerogative. My point was simply that the welfare state refers to a government with entitlement programs such as welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. Personally I would lump public education in there as another area the state has no business in, but that’s not part of the formal definition.

    Like


  87. on November 7, 2008 at 9:17 pm Ba1anced-A Beta with Alpha Tendencies

    Thought you were gone for the weekend. I’ll give those blogs and articles a read.

    Like


  88. hello
    chic noir,
    I really liked Romney and I hope he runs again

    Many are now saying the same thing. They had him but they let him get away. I found it intresting that I’ve never seen or heard his wife speak. Romney is a very old school cat, religion aside. Romney’s wife makes Barbara& Laura Bush look like Gloria Steinman. I would really like to hear what he has to say about his religion & his personal beliefs.

    2. on November 7, 2008 at 5:22 am47 hello
    roissy,
    If women vote for Obama because he’s sexy, how is that different from men voting for Bush because they want to have a beer with him

    Excellent point hello. I vote on issues or my bottom line.

    Like


  89. David A — I am talking groups not individuals. An individual does not matter. Create 20 million American men priced out of the relationship market — guarantee chaos.

    That’s what I’m saying.

    Like


  90. whiskey – I’m sure more than 20 million young men, far more, are already priced out of the market

    Nothing. Is. Happening.

    I’m waiting for the revolt but I think most guys are clueless.

    Like


  91. Jack–

    Outside of certain oppositional sub-cultures (White Power, Black Panthers, Anarchists, ANSWER) the idea of organized revolt or chaos has little traction. What IS happening is a withdrawal into “Guyland” (also the title of a book) a toy-driven opiate-of-the-masses of porn, playstation, and beer. Take those away and turn young perenially-single American men into Algerian-style “hittistes”–“those who lean on walls”, i.e. the joke was that their “job” was to hold up the walls in the streets–with no distractions whatsoever and you’ll have bloody chaos.

    Serious cultural critics are looking at the Guyland phenomenon (see hugoschwyzer.net) and some of them ARE making the “never getting any” connection, but of those–due to feminism–they argue that modern American male adulthood means responsibility without relationships.

    Like


  92. Eurosabra, I guess I have more of a fighting, vengeful mentality than most guys. I want the people responsible for the current situation punished and humiliated, and I’d like to see some changes, which means some kind of drastic action to spur the discussion.

    Like


  93. It’s kind of a fall-out from globalization and modernity, and frankly since the people in power benefit from the current system, it’s VERY hard to fight. I belong to one of the communities in which the pricing-out is truly explicit and the only proposed solutions have been personal, not political. Also, one continually gets accused of projecting an internal psychological problem onto a macro-social level.

    “Punished and humiliated”? Most of the people with power aren’t “priced out”, and they’re going to see that desire, and its flip-side, the quest for affirmation and value, as a purely personal demand driven by psychopathology. Certainly that’s been the response everywhere I’ve tried to articulate even a basic case for cultivating my community’s traditional, family-and-religion-based values.

    Also, don’t neglect the “hamster wheel” effect of capitalism in its current form–a lot of betas are caught in soul-deadening industries (Whiskey talks about “unsexy” professions) and one can lose one’s sexuality over time–the other response (besides hyper-violence) to a single-sex institutional life.

    Like


  94. Age does matter. McCain was an ultra alpha-male when he was young. He was banging models, strippers and beautiful rich heiresses left and right.

    Like


  95. All a man has to do to be alpha is bang hot chicks. So is Pete Doherty alpha?

    Like


  96. 72 PA (to SA)

    You’re a moron.

    He’s a Randroid.

    That might change, he’s still young.

    (as Tupac was during his Randroid phase in college. Mea culpa)

    Like


  97. 82 Ba1anced:

    What’s the difference in the one that climbs through your window at night and robs you at gunpoint…or the one that promises you a prosperous future if you believe in “the plan” or the “dream” and invest. One just wears a suit and smiles more often.

    America currently lives on the reputation of it’s former power, not the power within itself.

    *applause*

    [/chic]

    Like


  98. 91 Jack:

    whiskey – I’m sure more than 20 million young men, far more, are already priced out of the market

    Nothing. Is. Happening.

    Yeah, I do have to question Whiskey’s Armageddon.

    The phenomenon of betas being passed over for alphas has been occurring forever. While the rate of such may be increasing, the fog of delusion used to endure such a fate in times past shows no sign of abating. People will tell themselves all sorts of comforting lies and distract themselves with Xbox and satellite TV.

    I have to wonder: do you, Whiskey, see any sort of evidence that the enlightened consciousness one finds here is spreading to the masses?

    Speak, Oracle.

    Like


  99. Eurosabra, sure lots of betas are in dead-end industries. These are the people who need to hear the message. Their lives are passing them by, and they have nothing to show for it. They should be getting angry at the people who are shutting them out – at least then they’d feel alive.

    Of course the people with power aren’t priced out. But in numbers, even powerless people develop power. To be heard you need to make yourself heard. Do you know when affirmative action started? It started after the urban riots. It didn’t come out of generosity, it came out of fear. Once the people in power knew that blacks were ready to fuck shit up at a moment’s notice, they took their needs into account. I don’t know what the corollary is for beta males, but there has certainly gotta be a point when they realize their situation, organize, and fight back. Oh well, maybe I’m too optimistic.

    Like


  100. Are you by any chance into the 14 words? Doesn’t matter, really. Thing is, the feds come down on independent living by certain people (Waco, Ruby Ridge, FLDS) like a ton of bricks, and a fortiori if you’re talking Black Panther- or Anarchist-style insurrection, it’s an invitation to open up a serious can of [email protected]$$. Our Republic is, after all, supposed to provide a level playing field for people to pursue independent but mutually-beneficial (or at least NOT harmful) visions of the good life. So the main complaint of “Guyland” is that they can’t recruit women for their idea of the good life, and I don’t think going Cho Sung-Hui on the government is the way to do it. There ARE political movements, however limited their influence, designed to restore the place of the individual and the status of men in our society, and ONE of the advantages of the Republic is that people are so diverse, and power so relatively diffuse, that there is always some leverage to be gained somewhere. Unless, I don’t know, you really ARE like the guys in _Office Space_ with a pure top-down situation and no power and no leverage and no inflluence on anything anywhere, but the whole point of Game is that patterns of influence can be learned even when you might not have the economic resources to play society’s game.

    I say that as a man who has been priced out of the market in his own community, and who has the option of returning to traditional religious life in hopes of finding a wife and family, or playing the status game, or learning Game. I don’t have any answer, really, except that (as a survivor of wars and terrorism in my homeland and a legal immigrant foreigner here) tearing things down to solve the problem–especially when we have a Preznit-elect full of compassion and change–doesn’t seem a good start.

    Like


  101. good comment eurosabra.

    Like


  102. on April 15, 2010 at 12:29 pm BlackDiamondStud

    And you wonder why we progressives think “Tea Partiers”(amongst other things such as racist and homophobic)CERTIFIABLE!!!!

    Like


  103. on April 15, 2010 at 12:33 pm BlackDiamondStud

    Not only that,the “Tea Party” dudes I’ve seen are so ugly(though not NEARLY so repulsive as Beck,Limbaugh,O’Reilly,The Savage Weiner,
    etc!!!!)that most SANE women dream of Obama’s studding them!(Or MY
    studding them,for that matter;I’m said to be out of Central Casting for a handsome black cowboy!!!!)

    Like