Why Obama Doesn’t Matter

In a recent comment thread, I asked a reader a very simple question, which remains, predictably, unanswered.

A very simple question for the Obamanauts who think their savior deserves the presidency: if he had been white, would he have been elected President? Reaction time in your answer will go toward your final score.

There is only one correct answer: no. There ‘s not a chance in hell Obama would have gotten anywhere near the White House had he been a white community organizer, aka shiftless bum. The beauty of asking leftoids this oh so innocent question with such an oh so obvious answer is that I get to enjoy a spectacle of self-debasement no matter how they answer. If they answer, “Yes, he would have been elected as a white man”, they must betray any belief in their personal virtue to lie so blatantly. If they answer, “No”, they betray their professed ideology and the true motives for electing Obama.

Obama doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of America’s future, because Obama was elected as a fighting symbol for the various warring groups that presently comprise the riven nation; groups who are ultimately driving the cultural and economic trajectory. He was always, and remains so, a totemic symbol with zero substance. Nothing more than a herald for malignant tumult already set in motion by the time he was bounced aloft by the vaporous politics of feels.

– SWPL coastal whites (Yankees in hereditary vernacular) voted for Obama so they could experience a full body orgasm from furiously stroking their tumescent egos for their enlightened attitude. Obama symbolized validation of their belief in their innate goodness.
– Hispanics voted for Obama so they could enjoy the blessings of government largesse. Obama symbolized leverage against more productive and smarter people.
– Blacks voted for Obama because he is (half) black. Obama symbolized the ascendancy of their tribe. (Temperamentally, Obama is about as black as Christian Lander.)
– Native Americans voted for Obama because they were drunk. Obama symbolized another round.
– Asians voted for Obama because he isn’t conspicuously Christian. Obama symbolized the opposite of those antediluvian religious whites who built America from scratch.
– Single white women voted for Obama because he’s the soulful sugar daddy who justifies their lifestyle and stifling conformism. Obama symbolized rebuke of boring beta white men.
– Other voted for Obama because, deep in their hearts, they know he is one of them. Obama symbolized the normalization of deviancy.
– The Top voted for Obama because he symbolized suppression of the Middle. The Bottom voted for Obama because he symbolized ingestion of the Middle.

Obama the Symbol. Obama the Shell Entity. Obama the Therapeutic Cipher. As diversity, both of the elite and commoner varieties, within a nation expands, so too does the need for ever more powerful yet increasingly empty symbols of each tribe’s worth.

What about those whites (aka Cavaliers) who didn’t vote for Obama? Romney did, after all, garner a majority of the total white vote, at levels unseen since the Reagan presidencies. (But, unlike the Reagan years when whites were still a ways from electoral diminishment, Romney couldn’t win with those substantial white tallies against the unstoppable force of demographic shift.)

To those whites not with the program, their vote was a blow against a terrible symbol of antagonism. They saw the bloody banner flapping in the wind as enemy tribes crested the horizon and slowly surrounded them. And they reacted with a swiftness, cleaving to their own symbol, even one as ineffectual and emotionally disconnected as Romney. But their numbers were just too few, and getting fewer by the day.

All you will ever need to know about the imprint that the Obama Presidency will leave on the psyche of this segregating nation was shrieked by delirious followers in the streets on election night in 2008:

Hope and Change!

Like the buffoonish, thin-skinned meathead who loudly proclaims his prowess to a doubtful crowd, the chorus of cultists repetitively singing the Hope and Change anthem till tears welled in their eyes betrayed a deep disillusion with the substance of their yearning. The lesson is unmissable: the more insistent the emotional incantations declaring universalistic hope and change, the more likely the chanters have base, tribal motives. Emotionalism is a hallmark of a people that no longer believe in anything but egocentric validation, and rationalizing by whatever sophistry necessary their will to self-endorsement.

In totally unrelated news, a “group of teens” is at it again! The Cathedral has become such a rank parody that the time is right to tactically step aside and let the enemy discredit itself. Why waste energy fighting a foe at full strength when you can just jeer at him as he punches himself in the nads?





Comments


  1. the only hope isn’t so much that we (cavaliers in your post) can positively change anything, but that the coalition of antagonists are going to eat each other in the scramble to ingest the corpse of america. after that we might have a chance to clean things up again. otherwise just make sure you have transportable wealth and somewhere to go.

    Like


    • Enjoy the muthafuckin’ Decline, even if it gets you banned by Denninger lol

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 12:28 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

        zlzozooz

        zlzozoozzoo

        Like


      • Very odd that Heartiste omits the YKWs from his list.

        Very, very, very odd…

        Unless maybe this vague evasive bullshit is supposed to include the YKWs:

        “- Other voted for Obama because, deep in their hearts, they know he is one of them. Obama symbolized the normalization of deviancy.
        – The Top voted for Obama because he symbolized suppression of the Middle…”

        And then everyone just magically understands that – wink, wink, nudge, nudge – the YKWs are the Other, the Deviants, the Top.

        But it could just as well be describing the Sodomites and the Sapphistes.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 2:54 pm Carlos Danger

        I think he included them in the top.

        Like


      • He probably doesn’t want a Mossad hitman opening his neck in a dark alley for “subversive speech”.

        Like


      • This.

        I feel like a lot of us need to be keeping this in the back of our minds as a not-entirely-ridiculous possibility.

        What would it cost the Mossad to knock off, say, a GBFM?

        To silence GBFM’s voice once and for all?

        I mean, once the NSA gave them GBFM’s identity, I can’t imagine that it would cost the Mossad much more than $1000 to arrange for the hit.

        They probably have all of the infrastructure in place already, and they just need the go-ahead from The Man in Tel Aviv [whoever “The Man” actually is].

        How much did it cost them to knock off Donald Young?

        How much did it cost them to knock off Lt Quarles Harris Jr?

        Whatever they spent on those hits, the return on their investment was damned near infinite.

        Like


      • Dude, the Mossad doesn’t care about some Internet commenter. You have to seriously mess with the state of Israel or kill Jewish athletes at the Olympics to get Mossad after you, not write blog posts on how to get laid and occasionally toss in a little oblique anti-Semitism. They haven’t knocked off David Duke, Pat Buchanan, Kevin MacDonald, or any of the rest of them. They may have bumped off Robert Maxwell, but he was a big cheese.

        I figured my relatives were in the Top, Yankees, or maybe the Other. It’s funny he doesn’t specifically call them out.

        Like


      • > “Dude, the Mossad doesn’t care about some Internet commenter”

        Like hell they don’t.

        Half the damned YKWs in positions of influence in this country are already screaming for internet censorship.

        From the point of view of the YKWs, this little wildfire of our can’t be allowed to smolder.

        It must be extinguished.

        PS: Who assassinated Donald Young?

        PPS: Who assassinated Lt Quarles Harris Jr?

        Like


      • Looking through my Google attempts, looks like they were people who had the possibility to embarass Obama. I’m fond of conspiracy theories, so I won’t rule out their assassination, but why the hell would Mossad want that? If anything they want a Republican in office, they’re more pro-Israel. You think all your enemies are on the same side just because they’re your enemies? As an American, I can perfectly well understand that Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia hated each other just as they both wanted to wipe out the USA. We used Soviet Russia to wipe out the Nazis, then spent the Soviets into oblivion.

        I have to say, apart from the braying of the SPLC and 20/20, I haven’t seen any actual attempts at Internet crackdowns yet. The First Amendment is kind of a block to any government action in this regard. Still, I wouldn’t put it past them. But nobody’s made it illegal to attack feminism on an Internet site yet.

        Like


      • @SFG
        Excellent two comments. I appreciate commonsense when I encounter it, especially on these threads where the zombie of frankfurter and his little wieners reside.
        .

        “Dude, the Mossad doesn’t care about some Internet commenter. You have to seriously mess with the state of Israel or kill Jewish athletes at the Olympics to get Mossad after you, not write blog posts on how to get laid and occasionally toss in a little oblique anti-Semitism. “

        Very true. But we’re not dealing with rational blokes, are we? More like, Paranoid R Us!

        Like


      • Da Mossad and da GBFM(TM) may have crossed paths before . . .

        lolzlzolz next time da GBFM strikes back!

        Like


      • Jews are Yankees. And most Yankees, don’t live debauched lives. They dutifully recycle, act as Soccer Moms, listen to NPR, go to bed at 9 pm, rise at 5 AM, remain (mostly) faithful to their spouse, and status monger like crazy. We are talking Puritans here, and what is sad and pathetic about most Jews is how easily they were absorbed into Puritan Yankeedom SWPL.

        Most Jews never go to Temple or whatever its called, don’t observe dietary or other religious restrictions, don’t even act like Sandy Koufax did in observing the Sabbath (Saturday for Jews). This is also true btw of SWPL. Who are very much NOT debauched, save for non-stop NPR-driven, Whole Foods shopping, status mongering which they do like crazy.

        Like


      • No, not really. You’re correct that Jews have successfully turned into upper-middle-class Northeasterners, but there’s a serious multicultural, diversity-ish bent to Jewish liberalism that never showed up in the Yankee Progressive movement, for example.

        Kevin MacDonald says it’s a ‘divide and conquer’ group evolutionary strategy. He may be partially correct. But I lived near, if not among, those people for 22 years. They swallow their own bullshit, and outmarry.

        Like


      • Eh, no. This multiculti crap was much more Jewish than it ever was Yankee. The two are blending now in the Northeast, but they were originally separate strains.

        Like


      • My entire family was wiped out in the Holocaust! My brother barely escaped Germany! I spent 5 years at Auschwitz! They brought me before Dr Mengele himself! He was about to begin his experiments when I jumped out a window and hid in the bushes. I can still hear the screams! And the smell of the bodies burned in the gas ovens,10,000 a day! The story must be told. I was rescued by wolves! Hidden by a righteous gentile in his farmhouse for 7 years. My dear little sister was lost in the camps,or so I thought. I saw her at a deli in Brooklyn many years later. “Sadie? Is that you?” Never again! Tolerance!!

        Like


      • Sfg has a surprising (and appreciated) take on all this. Measured is a good look, gents.

        Like


      • @yeahokcool: Most commenters on a political site get really confused when someone sometimes agrees with them and sometimes doesn’t. Politics is part of the whole tribal conflict module within our brains: there’s an ‘us’ and a ‘them’.

        Like


      • “Very odd that Heartiste omits the YKWs from his list.”

        LOL! Couldn’t stop laughing. I detect strong disappointment from the pathetic and paranoid. Hell, maybe it’s good that ya are pathetic and paranoid. Mossad doesn’t waste time with frankfurter zombies.

        Like


      • Theyve got so many others to murder that it may take them a while to get to internet comenters.

        Like


      • Eh, feminists have been able to embarrass men living in America–look at the way Adria Richards got two guys fired for making dirty jokes in public.

        But I really doubt the Mossad is going after Internet commenters. You’d have to be leaking Israeli secrets online a la Edward Snowden or something. You’re talking about the covert operations arm of a foreign government–they don’t care about GBFM.

        Like


      • @SFG

        “they don’t care about GBFM.”

        LOL! Our internet conspiracy theorists can’t fathom the thought that GBFM isn’t that important. They have an inflated sense of self.

        @OralC

        Unfortunately, they don’t kill much in self-defense. They do a lousy job protecting themselves, which is why they are a target of terrorism 24/7, 364.26 days a year, all over the globe. If they put some of their enemies out of their misery, they, as well as this world, would be a lot safer. Just be glad they don’t bother with the likes of you. But, I think they need to start, mind you. Regrettably, they have too much respect for human life, even for your miserable one. Regrettably!

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 12:14 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      lzozozozozozolzozoz!!!

      hey heratietestez! hearsietesz!!! THEY ASKED ME ALOMST THE SAME QUESTION DURING MY ABC 20/20 (69/69) INTEVIEW interview about teh MANOPSHERES!!!

      dey asked da GBFM “A very simple question for the GBFManauts who think their savior deserves all da pussy: if da GBFM’s cockasz had been white, would he have been elected President of da Pussyizizizieisiz? Reaction time in your answer will go toward your final score.”

      zlozozozzozo

      GBFM MANOSHERE INTERVIEWWSZ !!! ABC 20/20 interveiews da GBFM about da MANOSPHERE ZZlzozozozoz

      lzlozozozozoz

      someebeody calleedz and said dey was from ABC 20/20 TV Show or somebody and asked da GBFM if he wwnwtased to 2 do an inetevreiwsz about da MANOSPHERES!!!

      so da GBFM said yes i wann help you udneretdtsnad da MAONSPEHEREZ!

      so igetz da addressz studio addresszz and i put on my sunday best which is a semi-clean t-rshsit dat passed da smaell ytes tetszt as it had been sitting under my playstationz and i did not see it for a ocuple monthsz so it had a chance to air out lzlzlzozoz

      and when i get teheree tehy put hair and makeup on mez, and den someone pointsz out dat as da MANOPSEHERE is a WANTED group tdat dey would coencela my idientyytztz zlziz concel my identiety and disguiuse my voiceszz zlzoziilzozo

      so dey hooked me up to a vocie synthesizer where all my “zlzlzozoozz lzozozozozlozoozolzlzlzes” became “tee-hee tee-heee-hee hah hahahahah ha hah” so datnobody would know dat it was da GBFM! lzlzozozozoozoz – tee heee ha ahahahhahaha

      den i went on da set and i swaer it did not feel like ABC 20/20 but more like ABC 69/69 zlzozo so maybe i got da message wrongz!!

      anywho da pretty hot hot reproetretette says, “SO TELL me GBFM about da manospheres. what is it and why should we carez?” loozlzlooozz (teee hee hahahah tee heee)

      so da GBFM leansz back in his chair and says:

      “DA FIRST THING DAT U MUST KNOW about da MANOSPHERE is dat there are TWO MANOSPHEREZ.”

      she goes, “yah ayah yah, and they are?”

      “DER ARE TWO MANOPSHERES, and den der is da ONE ENTITY TO LEAD THEM ALL.”

      she goes, “yah yah yah and so? please do tell!” She wanted da GBFM so babsda loozlzlooozz (teee hee hahahah tee heee)

      DA GBFM SAY, “DA FIRST MANOPHERE IS DA GBFM’S LEFT NUT,” And i shows her, “DA SECOND MANOPHERE IS DA GBFM’S RIHT NUT, and da TITULAR HEAD OF IT ALL IS DA GBFM’S LOTSAS COCKAS so let me put my head in yout titulars NOW zlzozlzozozoozozozozoz! lzozozlz loozlzlooozz (hahaha hha ha teee hee hahahah tee heeeteee hee hahahah tee heeeteee hee hahahah tee heee teee hee hahahah tee heee)”

      zlzlzozozozolzlzo

      and da GBFM was escorted out by two big unifomred menz,

      but later dat nightz she texted mez of coursez

      for she had seen da size and scope of

      da GBFM MANOSPHEREZ zlziz

      lzzuzkzlziuzlzlzzlzoozoz

      as da two big uniformed men escorte dme out, da GBFM yelled,
      “MEGAN KELLY! I WANNA SEE MEGAN KEELLY I WANNNA EET MEGGAN KELLY I THOUGHT I WAS GONNA GETSZ @ MEET MEGAN KELLYZ!: :” as dey threw me on tda pavementz zlzozozozo

      but mark my workddz megan keelysz gonna etxt da GBFM soson zlzlozizzlzizlz

      Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 12:28 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      lzozozolzo

      zlzozozlzo

      Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:16 pm Mike S. Puppet

      Who is “we”? How much purity is required? I ask because almost all Americans are mixed with a little darkness. Some are mostly mixed with sugar and spice; others, not so much.

      Is this “we” delineated by HBDness? May I join?

      Of the Europeans, are the Spaniards “we” enough? How about the Italians (Sicilians)? Of Spanish speakers from Latin America, which ones count in “we”?

      Are “we” going to administer an IQ test? What’s the cut-off? Will “we” put it to a vote?

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:39 pm Mr.magNIFicent1

        Self-identification is probably sufficient, but thanks for your concern. We’ll keep chiseling away at the details until the platform is validated by you and yours.

        Like


      • Mr.magNIFicent1

        Self-identification is probably sufficient, but thanks for your concern.
        —————————————————————————————————-

        Nobody is choosing anything.

        You’re Mr. Pink cause, you’re a faggot.

        Like


      • for me i’m actually talking about freedom-loving producers as opposed to a particular race (happens to overlap quite a bit but…) anyway you’re right, ‘we’ means nothing.

        Like


      • > “about freedom-loving producers as opposed to a particular race (happens to overlap quite a bit but…)”

        I am a staunch Romantic, firmly wedded to a belief in [or at least a very strong covetousness for] the existence of Freedom of the Will.

        But!

        But there are an enormous number of undeniable truths to be gleaned from Darwinian Nihilism.

        And one such terrible possiblity, which is probably going to prove to be more truth than fiction, is the possiblity that our political desires, for stuff like “freedom of worship”, “freedom of speech”, “limited goverment”, “rule of law”, “right to keep & bear”, and “trial by a jury of one’s peers”, are desires which are strongly [if not entirely] emanating from our genes.

        If you study history, there are only a precious few isolated instances of free men living under the rule of law in a nation with limited government: Several hundreds years in ancient Athens, several hundred years in Republican Rome, and maybe not even 150 years in North America.

        And if you look at the folks involved – ancient Greeks, pre-Imperial Romans, Northwest European Protestants [Englishmen, Scots, Dutchmen, certain of the Germans] – they don’t even amount to a statistical hill of beans compared to the great mass of humanity over the entire course of human existence.

        I’m becoming very, very worried that when the final history of the Human Race is written, there just won’t have been very many tribes which were ever interested in the same ideals which we hold dear.

        Whatever “it” is, the White Papists don’t have it [by and large].

        The YKWs certainly don’t have it.

        The Pacific Rim Orientals [Japanese, Chinamen, Koreans] don’t have it.

        The Hindus don’t have it.

        And the rest of the world is such a bunch of God-damned morons that terms like “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects” are gibberish to them.

        Like


      • > “Scots, Dutchmen, certain of the Germans”

        And French Huguenots and Swiss Calvinists and Czech Hussites & Anabaptists.

        But precious few people in total.

        A very precious few.

        Like


      • And the rest of the world is such a bunch of God-damned morons that terms like “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects” are gibberish to them.
        ———————————————————————————————–

        If you want to be “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects” you can always go join the Eskimos or the !kung tribes in the desert.

        how do you think they ended up there?

        Like


      • While maybe not cut from the same cloth as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, I woudn’t chuck white Catholics into the same category as Hindus and pacific rim orientals. While small in number, white Catholics did sign our founding documents and have been part of the history of this country all along the way. The other groups you mentioned were not. As I’m sure you’re aware, a good chunk of the great explorers of the new world were Catholic which lead to the possibility of a country like the United States. And at the end of the day, wouldn’t all the English Anglicans/Episcopalians who dominated the foundation of the US be Catholics if it weren’t for Henry VIII’s whole annulment fiasco? Would someone totally unfamiliar with Christianity have been able to tell the difference between a 1776 Catholic mass and an Anglican one? Also, don’t forget that Catholics in Maryland were the first to establish religious freedom for all Christians, which is a huge part of the first amendment. Just saying, Catholics aren’t the same classification in history as the others you mentioned. Apparently the do have some of the “it.”

        Like


      • “Would someone totally unfamiliar with Christianity have been able to tell the difference between a 1776 Catholic mass and an Anglican one?”

        Given that one would have been in Latin, and the other in English, I think even one who had never heard of Christianity would be able to tell the difference.

        Like


      • Me: “Whatever “it” is, the White Papists don’t have it [by and large].”

        You: “Apparently the do have some of the “it.””

        I don’t think we’re in disagreement.

        A small minority of White Papists “get it”.

        But the majority* simply DO NOT.

        There is no empirical evidence anywhere in the historical record to indicate that limited government and the rule of law can persist in the presence of Roman Popery.

        *And the really pernicious thing about the majority of White Papists is that they are like silly putty in the hands of The Frankfurt School propagandists.

        All it takes is one or two Frankfurt School Fifth Columnists worming their way into the local union, and it won’t be more than a few weeks before the entire union hall switches from singing “God Bless America” to singing “The Internationale”.

        On average, White Papists just completely lack any familiarity whatsoever with “Common Sense”.

        It just doesn’t seem to be in their genes.

        Like


      • So. After you point out just how rare a political circumstance is in human history …

        If you study history, there are only a precious few isolated instances of free men living under the rule of law in a nation with limited government…

        … you point out redundantly that it is also a rare circumstance in Catholic history:

        There is no empirical evidence anywhere in the historical record to indicate that limited government and the rule of law can persist in the presence of Roman Popery.

        And from this you conclude “the majority of White Papists … are like silly putty in the hands of The Frankfurt School propagandists”? Because a couple South Americans read liberation theology into doctrine and used Second Vatican as license for their Marxist dreams?

        Like scripture itself, the church is all things to all people. The devil can quote it, the Kingdom of This World can manipulate it into power. It is the source of all power; the smart megalomaniacs know where the fons et origo is, and always will be. The very “gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

        The church is, after Joyce, “Here comes everybody.” It is as traditionally centralized (solidarity) as it is devolved (subsidiary). All of life is a pendulum swing in search of the golden mean between security and liberty.

        Israel invented “the rule of law.” The New Israel invented the concept of individual dignity and personal freedom (or liberalism): “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (John 1:17). The church is the fusion of those two tensions, which was made politically real only ever in the Anglosphere: Liberty under law.

        Liberal republicanism is a hot house flower, as you mentioned. The majority of men craves, and therefore the majority of human history reflects, mastery. Fukayaman democratic “End of History” boasts notwithstanding, republics can only thrive in isolated places during relative blips on the timeline. The protection of two oceans allowed us geographically to become the preeminent example of the possibility of large republics and individual sovereignty, if they remain devolved and federalist, and religious (i.e., morally self-policing).

        In all other cases, the church stands as the institutional, internal bulwark against political tyranny — the first resort, the first best hope, the first line of defense. She provides a separate power base (which derives from a “kingdom not of this world”) to keep the state in check. She was born as an alien in the middle of the most centralized and successful empire in history at its peak — and crushed it utterly. Cf. the presence of Augustus vs. Peter today, two millennia after their showdown. The monuments of political Rome have been relegated to museums. The monuments of Peter still fill with hundreds of thousands every year and spiritually direct a billion souls.

        We can debate about where the purest strains of Liberty under Law are found and how they came to be. But the church is the permanent and eternal defense for freedom found everywhere — today in China, Egypt, black Africa; yesterday in Wojtyla’s Poland; originally among her martyr-founders in ancient Rome itself.

        We teach that it is proper to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s. But when Caesar sits himself on the altar, we respond curtly: he may not.

        — Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, 1953

        Liberty cannot occur in the state of individual moral chaos. Indiscipline leads to slavery to the passions. Relativism — each man believing he is a law unto himself — leads to nihilism. We cannot put the Ten Commandments up to a vote with each generation. We civilize savages (children) by force-feeding them these eternal rubrics of discipline — The Gods of the Copybook Headings. The fundamentals require a magisterium, not a democracy of savages voting their n*gger passions into the U.S. Code.

        You misunderstand the church as politically authoritarian because you contemplate her from an already civilized (if rapidly degenerating) perch. But civilization is impossible without the church clear-cutting the jungle and building the first fences to keep the spiritual animals away from our easily manipulated souls. First come missionaries to “make straight the paths.” Then the colonists — and civilization — may follow.

        Matt

        Like


      • MK, I will just repeat what I said above: “There is no empirical evidence anywhere in the historical record to indicate that limited government and the rule of law can persist in the presence of Roman Popery.”

        Again, the empirical evidence simply DOES NOT EXIST.

        You can count angels dancing on the head of a pin from now until the cows come home, but it isn’t going to change the historical record.

        PS: Unless maybe you want to point out that England was still Papist when Magna Carta was signed in 1215, not quite two centuries before the Papists tried to murder The Morning Star in 1384.

        Like


      • MK, I will just repeat what I said above: “There is no empirical evidence anywhere in the historical record to indicate that limited government and the rule of law can persist in the presence of Roman Popery.”

        Again, the empirical evidence simply DOES NOT EXIST.

        Let me put it differently then.

        “Roman Popery” is “limited government” (Render Unto Caesar: a separate political power base independent of every state) and “the rule of law” (God’s Law > Man’s Whim: the first separation of power from will, which trained us to accept rules that did not issue from the worldly king and allows us to even conceptualize Rule of Law over Rule of Man).

        Further, the church is liberalism (Magna Carta). Its “angels dancing on the head of a pin” theology provided the foundation for individual rights.

        Finally, the Anglosphere is the fusion of the Roman res publica (people are sovereign), the Rule of Law (King John), and liberalism (charter of rights).

        All of these derive directly from Christianity. Only under a Christian understanding can they be fused.

        So your obsession with “popery” misses the point. The Anglican clerics and royal head of the church in England is indistinguishable from “popery,” except by scope. King Henry VIII essentially declared himself a pope.

        But you are spot on in your observation about how rare liberal republican rule of law is. It has only been achieved in the Anglosphere. And it was only achieved through the duplication/imitation of popery (monarchical church authority over spiritual issues) after the way was cleared by the church in its original, ancient, and permanent opposition to potentates, “princes, and principalities.”

        So stop looking for instances of modern Catholic nation-states (themselves only of recent vintage, not even a hundred years old) spontaneously developing a tradition of robust republicanism. There is only one instance of it ever occurring anywhere — the Anglosphere — and the church was instrumental in its coming to be.

        Matt

        [CH: liberal republican rule of law and the raw genetics of anglospherians are nearly inextricable. this will be the ur-lesson that western elites will, by necessity, (re)learn this century.]

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 4:58 am Carlos Danger

        Whatever your attitudes about Papists is, remember this. Papist places are often more chaotic but have a lot more fun. Carnival actually lasts from 11 November at 11 PM until Ash Wednesday. In a lot of places, that means they party much of that time. Protestants just work a lot. Fox faced shopkeepers indeed.

        Like


  2. You did a lot of talking … but sadly, you did not really express anything but a random opinion.

    Like


    • An opinion that happens to be shared by a vast majority of readers here.

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:05 pm Mike S. Puppet

        So, a “community organizer” was able to rout The Chosen One (Romney). Society’s “rejects” were able to run circles around the Cathedral of Old. What?!? Say it ain’t so.

        The inferiors are getting mighty uppity and upstaging their betters.

        HBD, HBD, wherefore art thou? Please rescue us from the lesser beings. Send us more truckloads of RealTalk (TM), it’s sure to convince the superior majority.

        Like


      • > “Please rescue us from the lesser beings.”

        One of the most fascinating new theories in the Dark Enlightenment is being circulated now by Wayne Allyn Root, one of Obama’s ostensible classmates at Columbia:

        http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/obama-is-100-red-white-blue-american-born/

        Root thinks that Obama’s grades in high school at Punahou, and his SAT scores at Punahou, and his grades at Occidental, were all so horrible that he couldn’t get into the Ivy League even on a racial quota, and so Obama needed some little extra “oomph” to get him over the top with an Ivy League admissions officer.

        And Root thinks that it was Obama himself who invented the “Born in Kenya, Raised in Indonesia” myth, so that Obama could finally get accepted into an Ivy League school.

        Then according to that theory, Obama probably never surrendered his Indonesian passport, and he probably attended Columbia [and Harvard] as a FOREIGN STUDENT from Indonesia.

        And it was only about 25 years later, when Obama decided to run for President, that his people needed to go back and whitewash all of the old evidence of Obama’s very own “Born in Kenya, Raised in Indonesia” ruse.

        In particular, John Brennan’s people were called into action to cleanse Obama’s State Department file:

        http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/22/passport.files/

        And then poor Lt Quarles Harris Jr had to be assassinated for nothing more than having been in the wrong place at the wrong time:

        http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/19/key-witness-in-passport-fraud-case-fatally-shot/

        Like


      • “All it takes is one or two Frankfurt School Fifth Columnists worming their way into the local union, and it won’t be more than a few weeks before the entire union hall switches from singing “God Bless America” to singing “The Internationale”.”

        PURE GENIUS. Here we have the hands-down Subway Masturbator Conspiracy Nut winner of the day. And why, why you may ask as you shield your PIN number at the ATM, wondering if that guy with a hat might be Franfurter You-KNow-Who?

        Because he has FOUR, Four!, 4 ENEMEEZ to watch for in one thread:
        1) The Frankfurters. It’s the Frankfurters!!
        2) Unions. I Hate my weekends! Commie Plot!
        3) Papists! And the new one is even more insidious, preaching love for gays!
        4) And the Jooz! The Jews! The You-Know-Whos!!

        Zombie Shane for the big, three-layer tin-foil hat WIN!!!!

        Congratulations!

        This prize include wins a free sample pack of the anti-psychotic Olanzapine, and if that fails, the fallback for true intractable paranoids, Clozapine!!

        Like


      • Hey faggot: you can try your pathetic appeal to ridicule bullshit until the cows come home, you won’t change the fact that kikes are fucking you in the ass as we speak. Not to mention that the Frankfurt School and kikes are one and the same thing in this context.

        Like


      • Right…..but your Muslim brethren aren’t fucking him in the ass with terrorists attacks and peen jihad, eh?

        STFU already, you mule.

        Like


      • I doubt you’ll find much love for Romney here. But the man is far more competent a leader and doer than the sad, sad man in the Whitehouse.

        But neither would amount to much because single women, blacks and mexicans will cause America to collapse as sure as the barbarians of yore torched Rome.

        Like


      • “Dat_Truth” — at least the sad sad man can spell.

        Like


    • Try working on your reading comprehension skills.

      Like


    • Verbal Seduction:

      Do blacks consider themselves Western Men, or westernized simulacra?

      Thank you in advance for your time and response.

      Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 12:25 pm Hugh G. Rection

      So did you just now.

      Like


    • Postmodernist idiot.

      Like


    • Unless it’s investigative journalism, it is an opinion.

      [CH: or backed up by links to actual studies, which are included in this post but which certain offended readers can’t be bothered to read.]

      Like


    • And what is your opinion,

      oh you King of verbal seduction?

      Like


    • Here is a question. Remove any mention of color of skin, no audio, just a transcript of his CV. Would YOU vote for him, considering it would be like hiring as a helicopter pilot someone who just happened to stay at the Holiday Inn the previous night?

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:23 pm Mike S. Puppet

        We voted for an actor. Would you vote for someone who reads lines real good? BTW, the actor bested the peanut farmer and the community organizer bested the awesome chosen one of Bain.

        Like


      • Was the actor’s previous experience, in your opinion, commensurate with the down-low mulatto’s previous experience?

        Like


      • Obama did not “best” anyone

        The media did it for him.

        and you know it.

        Like


      • An actor who also served a couple of terms as governor of California first, the largest single state economy in the country. He had a track record of legislation and decision making. Carter, like him or not, graduated from the Naval Academy, served as an officer in the military and governor of the state of Georgia. Both were older and had plenty of substance. Both in there own ways contributed to the downward spiral of the country. Me, I supported Ron Paul. Feet of clay abound in the political world, but Obama’s are closer to cardboard.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 8:46 am betterthantheoriginalwally

        Heck, we voted twice for GWB, who was an err, umm, well, he was an umm, well he was a kinda business, something, umm – help!

        Like


    • “http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/009/684/thats-just-like-your-opinion-man[1].gifLink textYeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.” — The Dude

      (Where’s Mr. Eliot when you need him?)

      Like


    • Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.” — The Dude

      (Where’s my html editor when you need him?)

      Like


    • Get a load of this butthurt negro.

      Like


  3. Since women have the right to vote, not to mention immigrants, afros, hispanics, etc…. it’s no wonder Obama got elected. I’d be very surprised if he didn’t. He, as very rightly pointed out, is a symbol. A symbol of everything that does everything except creating a strong and prosperous community.

    Like


  4. So Obama was an excellent candidate for the Democrats because he appeals to many voters for many (bad) reasons. How qualified was the last batch of Republican challengers? If a guy like Santorum even has a remote chance of floating to the top the GOP was really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

    How long d you think it’ll be before the GOP starts employing token minority candidates?

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 11:37 am Hugh G. Rection

      What was Sarah Palin but a token character? The field of candidates for the most part was a joke, it’s almost comical that one of the guys behind Obamacare ended up being the nominee.

      Like


      • The GOP limits itself by only fielding white hardcore christians. Anyone else doesn’t even stand a chance of being nominated, regardless of their actual qualifications. The democrats can’t be blamed for happily exploiting that conservative constraint

        Like


      • They could’ve won with Ron Paul, but he was verboten to the GOP Establishment, which is why the GOP always gets stuck with milquetoast elitists as candidates.

        Like


      • I think if Mao Obama continues doing what he is doing and assuming there is even a 2016 election before the LibStasi simply seize power, you could see Rand Paul on an independent and/or TP ticket with an actual chance in hell to win.

        Like


      • people will see libstasi and think you’re nuts, but look around just this last week at people clamoring for the arrest of house members over completely legit political maneuvering. the libs _are_ authoritarians and _will_ become violent. they don’t have an argument that makes sense, so they substitute an angry screaming mob.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 1:24 pm Hugh G. Rection

        I don’t think Romney or Ryan fit that mold. But by putting up guys like Santorum they pretty much deliver all the sound bites the Dems need to put young people off from voting Republican.

        Like


      • This. What drives me bonkers is talking to friends/family who have neatly pigeonholed me as a ‘white, evangelical Christian wing-nut’, despite the fact that only the ‘white’ label is accurate.

        Like


      • Rather than getting the vapors (“bonkers”), own the stereotype and push back twice as hard, you validation-hungry victim.

        Like


      • Why would I want to ‘own’ something I’m not? Just to piss them off? They aren’t random strangers, they are friends&family. It’s frustrating to explain your position/beliefs to people in two-syllable words and have them map that to something that fits their preconceptions. Dunno who pissed in your Cheerios – I’m not interested in being validated by you or anyone else here – just throwing out a negative experience with lefties. Geesh…

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 5:06 am Carlos Danger

        You have to gently mock their positions and one way to do so is to take on their stereotypes with you as the subject because it exposes them for the foolish media created 2 dimensional notions that they are.

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 12:48 pm The Burninator

      Great observation Dr. The GOP seems to be self-relegating itself to useless status. They KNOW that the Left Coast Liberalism is anathema to their base, but insist on putting up progressive-RINO’s and expecting others to dutifully fall in line. They’re a joke, and not a funny one.

      Like


      • If 2016 is a repeat of the last two national elections, conservatives will abandon the GOP officially and a Constitution (read: white/Tea/male) party will rise up neatly in its place around a single acid-test of an issue, like slavery was between Whigs and Republicans when the latter switched places altogether with the former.

        This is how you jettison an apparatchik-collaborator establishment and get back to what your constituency demands: You court eunuchs want the Elephant Brand? Keep it. Here is ours: μολὼν λαβέ.

        If the ejection of the DC Vichy does not occur, there will be disobedience (evidenced in the last election where eight million whites stayed home), cultural separation, physical estrangement, faction, regionalism, secession, then war. We have a decade or so to test out the reform capabilities of the existing institutions — including the Constitution itself — before this progression begins. But when it becomes clear that a rump “elite” minority + general complacency is reneging the bourgeoisie’s social compact, the reaction will be Pearl-Harbor-to-Hiroshima swift.

        That’s why there is much wisdom in saying “enjoy the decline” or “The End is Near and It’s Going To Be Awesome” … if and only if you simultaneously prepare for contingency. This is where the white man’s autism comes in handy — to “Be Prepared” like a Boy Scout for every possibility imaginable: reform, war, and all gradations between.

        Matt

        http://www.amazon.com/The-End-Near-Going-Awesome-ebook/dp/B009NF6CGY

        Like


      • Mr King today you speak well, even better than that other dude Martin Luther JR. Maybe it’s because I’m autistic but I like what you just did there.

        Like


      • So the Republican party will fracture and North America will split in the United States of Canada and Jesus Land? That doesn’t sound bad. Hopefully, I’ll be watching that soap opera unfold at a safe distance, in Australia

        Like


      • Yes watch it unfold you Aussie cunt. My TRUE hope is that your liberal parties also accept mass immigration of Asians into your country. Browns of all stripe and species flooding your shores like they are now in America whilst your liberal self destructive government smiles with glee.

        What do YOU do to prevent this Dr. Caveman? Do you prevent in ANY active way Australia from becoming the UK or US? Of course not because you are a sissy white male with a working cunt. Wishing you Diversity… from across the pond.

        Like


      • Cease your mouth frothing dudebro. Australia has had a very sensible immigration policy for a long time. First it was whites-only, now they only import people who can demonstrate their positive effect on the country by having a desired skill set. All others, except some token refugees, are shipped back to Indonesia. Now that Australia elected a conservative government again, the number of illegal immigrants is likely to plummet again to near zero.

        So I’m doing nothing to prevent that. Rather, I’ll move back there in a few years, after watching your US government fuck things up and watching my own Dutch government fuck things up with mass importing unskilled backward people.

        Like


      • Applause^

        Like


      • I loved this book.

        Like


    • Well, the Rs fielded a candidate that had a pretty solid reputation for taking financially-troubled companies and turning them around. Then the leftists convinced everyone that he’d ban tampons or something like that. The under-informed are so easily led.

      Like


      • Both sides exploit their opponents perceived weaknesses, and being part of some weird christian sect means you give your opponents a big stick to whack you over the head with. Would Romney have even made it to the shortlist if he was less religious? I don’t think he would, because the GOP is held hostage by the rabid ideologues on their right flank, and every GOP candidate has to be considered halal by the Tea Party crew

        Until they resolve that problem, the democrats can easily outmaneuver them by presenting blank slate candidates on who voters can project their wildest dreams. Maybe they are not terribly qualified, but as long as they appeal to large segments of voters this is a huge advantage.

        Like


      • I can guarantee you that Romney’s religious faith hurt him with Republicans. Mormons are the weird other.

        Romney was also a northeastern moderate, not an ideologue.

        Kindly take the HuffPo talking points somewhere else.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:28 pm Mike S. Puppet

        “I can guarantee you that Romney’s religious faith hurt him with Republicans. Mormons are the weird other.”

        Thanks for the “guarantee.”

        So, you’re saying that superior beings on the Right could not bring themselves to choose a Mormon and proven turnaround pro over a “mooslum” community organizer? What happened to the superior IQ we hear so much about?

        Like


      • Jeezus how many usernames you got mr seduction king / caveman / mike puppet? Maybe this is how obama wins his elections?

        Like


      • “What happened to the superior IQ we hear so much about?”

        You honestly deserve a beating, you know that?

        Like


      • That is objectively not true. As a Mormon, Romney was a weak candidate and McCain beat him in 2008, because most Christians and particularly Evangelicals don’t consider Mormons to be true Christians, given the add-on of the Book of Mormon to the Bible and the question of Apostolic Succession (which means a lot to Christians, basically who is Christ’s successor on Earth).

        The problem with Republicans is that their base’s interests, no mass immigration, kick the illegals out, end AA, stop the Welfare State, etc. are in direct conflict with the money-men: mass open borders immigration, H1-Bs up the wazoo, massive Welfare-Corporate state, etc. This is why a Tancredo always fails (not enough money) and passionless corporate drones or establishment figures like Romney or McCain or Bob Dole generate no enthusiasm. If you want Big Government Open Borders AA, Dems will give that straight up and Establishment Republicans will water it down a bit with some social conservative rhetoric like “don’t be a slut.”

        Like


      • I agree with nearly all of what you said except the insinuation that Apostolic Succession matters to anyone except Catholic or Orthodox. That is why any intellectually honest person realizes it has to be one of those two or nothing at all.

        Like


      • Why did these dumb ass christians act so happy about that vicious little ortho-jew Joe Leiberman being McCains VP? This guy wasnt Christian,he was of the guys that killed Jesus.

        Like


      • You fucking idiot. Lieberman was Gore’s running mate. You are such a fucking idiot. Put your computer in the trash and never post anything again.

        Like


      • LOL! I stand corrected. Yes I know Joe the Jew was a Democrat. Its just that he is such an asshole buddy with McCain I wrote that w/o thinking. Sorry! Gee,your hostility reminds me of Dr. Mengele,when he looked into my eyes. The hatred! Fortunately he had eaten a very bad Haddekuche and had to hit the bathroom quickly,lest he go in his pants! I was spared. But I heard the screams….

        Like


      • No, the real problem with Romney that people are forgetting is his rep as the waffle king. The idiot was on every side of every issue, never taking a firm stand on anything. Apostolic Succession is something I have never even heard reference to in church in the past forty years and I’d have doubts that the average person gives it much thought ever in their life (I have simply because of my background in college). As a christian myself, if I think about it twice a year I’ve wasted time on it.

        Like


      • That “weird christian sect” has the most stable, prosperous, and traditional family structure of all subgroups throughout the US. I find it fascinating that you think being stable, prosperous, and strong on traditional family is “weird”.

        You shall know the tree by its fruit. The fruits of that “weird christian sect” are pretty much what anyone with a brain would consider pretty sweet.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 6:33 pm Hugh G. Rection

        That’s not the weird part.

        Like


      • Interesting point and I agree with what you said that it is admirable how most mormons conduct themselves and live their lives if only most self described Christians did the same.

        No Mormo

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 2:44 am Hilary Clinton

        under-informed is spelt women

        Like


      • liberal is another correct spelling for under-informed

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 2:59 pm Carlos Danger

      The real problem is the Democrats have a very solid floor of people on the dole. There was a post a few months ago that linked to an analysis of illiteracy rates in key voting districts. It concluded the Democrats could never win an election if we had literacy tests for voting.

      Like


  5. Hearts.. 🙂 How are you?

    Like


  6. “To those whites not with the program, their vote was a blow against a terrible symbol of antagonism.”

    should have read:

    “To those whites not with the POGROM, their vote was a blow against a terrible symbol of antagonism.”

    Like


  7. I ain’t raciss. Some of my best friend’s are the same race as Obama on his mother’s side . . . .

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:29 pm Mike S. Puppet

      Aw, so cute, you made a funny. Another, please!

      Like


    • The reason Obama is such an awesome president is because RAAAACCCCIIIIIISSSTTTTT!!!!!!!!

      Thanks for your thoughtful comment. FYI, blacks are the most racist people in America, as well as the most violent.

      Like


      • A couple weeks ago on Yahoo news they published the results of a survey; blacks are indeed more racist than whites.

        No I do not have a link as I can not possibly save links to the hundreds of things I read per week

        As far as crime rates, the FBI has interesting numbers that show, blacks have the highest crime rates of all races

        Like


      • Read “Erectus Walks Among Us”, and you need never be confused about black pathology.

        Like


  8. I live in New Zealand, and when I heard about Obama running for the American Presidency on the radio I thought: “You guys should just vote him cos he’s black. Get it out of your system.”

    This is probably why I shouldn’t go into politics.

    Like


    • Mudz

      I live in New Zealand, and when I heard about Obama running for the American Presidency on the radio I thought: “You guys should just vote him cos he’s black. Get it out of your system.”

      This is probably why I shouldn’t go into politics.
      ——————————————————————————————————

      No Mudz, you got it absolutly right.

      A first black president is something WHITE PEOPLE really needed to do.

      Most white people won’t admit they voted for him because he is black, but its entirely understandable given the history of this country.

      I ain’t mad atcha.

      But it is interesting the way you guys handed the keys to the Titanic over to a black man (with no experience) AFTER you rammed the iceberg?

      Like


      • But it is interesting the way your women handed the keys to the Titanic… FTFY. Guys had little to do with it.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:30 pm Mike S. Puppet

        Your women lead you around by the nose? What?!?

        Like


      • Yes they do… under threat of force by Big Daddy Mc’Kane nig-nog AKA The GUBMINT. You see in 1965 it went down like this— “Ohhhh laaaawdy laaaawwwwdyyy, dem whities be machin wif us thru da streets!! Ooooooh laaaawwwwdy dey gonna be suppohtin us mino ah tees now! Thank you Jeebus! We gotz to get deese cracka men behind us like Satan… We dont nose how to build dem nashuns or succh say atees. But we know dat oppreshunz.

        Fast forward— 40 years of J E W destruction. Dumb nigger women haven’t changed much. White women have been changed ultimately. They are the harbingers of doom. Desired by all races, and still uplifted to the highest pedestal for the same reason. After 40 years of poison they are primed and pumped to destroy the very race and platform that allowed them to destroy the very race and platform.

        If I wasn’t so invested in my DNA I’d find it comical too, but sadly I am so… you’ll find me in any place I can curb destruction of host nations by parasites.

        Like


      • “If I wasn’t so invested in my DNA I’d find it comical too”

        LOL. I love your hypocrisy. If you really loved the white race, you’d have kids. Having children is a sure way to stop any destruction of a race.

        No. You want to have your cake and eat it too. You want to complain about some imaginary parasites ruining it all for you, but you’re not willing to do anything that isn’t comfortable to help the situation. Let’s face it, you don’t want the responsibility of having children.

        If anyone ruined this culture, is whites for whites. Deal with the facts and stop looking for someone else to blame. Your croc tears are so transparent.

        Like


      • To LILY:You CLAIM you are both a woman and a White Christian. Why havent you gotten knocked up and brought another saved soul into this world of misery?? When I was among the wolves as the Nazis searched for me I always hoped I could one day tell the story!

        Like


      • “Jay in DC”, either put a sock in it or go back to VNN from whence you came.

        Mods, you appear to be ok with this…

        Like


      • Guys had little to do with it.
        ——————————————

        Da fuck?

        It wasn’t neegros and white women full steaming through dark iceberg infested waters trying to set a record?

        Like


      • To be fair, Jay, ‘you guys’ can be used as a unisex expression.

        Like


      • I’m quite fond of the Southern ‘y’all’. Every other major European language has a second-person plural pronoun.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 5:51 am The Burninator

        English isn’t missing a second person plural, “You” is actually that, we just don’t remember traditional use of it very often. What we’re missing, and really should reintroduce if it didn’t sound so silly to the modern ear, is a second person familiar e.g. – Thou. That’s what we’re actually missing (except in the archaic), pronoun wise, compared to other Indo European languages.

        Like


    • In several cases (big city mayorships, governors, etc.), they did just that and it indeed “got out of their system” — unless the city itself became majority black, they never elected a black again.

      Like


    • I live in New Zealand also, Mudz. I saw him running for president and knew he’d be in for the next 8 years.

      Most of the American white men voted for him just ’cause they were afraid of appearing to be racist bastards. We all know its true, he knew its true, and so fuckin’ what. Mad as shit lol

      Like


  9. on October 21, 2013 at 11:52 am Brilliant Pseudonym

    I’d like to humbly suggest that you stick to posts about sexual science and the wisdom of game. You’re a realist and I admire your writing skills and your balls, but politics aren’t your shining point.

    With that said this is your place, and I wouldn’t be right criticizing your politics without again complimenting you on your main topic of choice. Some of your views appear to be a bit exaggerated but much of your emphasis is golden, you’re saying things about relationships that – admittedly – the average liberal writer can’t touch without being eviscerated.

    Let it be known that this very liberal reader of your site is an honest and open minded thinker, and a big fan of your game-logic. I’m married and don’t need much of the dating advice, but I routinely leverage your principals in my relationship to help keep things sliding along with passion and gusto.

    Despite my initial criticism, please accept a few words of solidarity, from this Obama voter. Keep up the good work.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 12:15 pm Hugh G. Rection

      So why did you vote for Obama? Because he was the Democratic candidate?

      Also, if you don’t like it, why read it and why comment?

      Like


      • >I’m married and don’t need much of the dating advice
        >
        >Despite my initial criticism, please accept a few words of solidarity,
        >from this Obama voter. Keep up the good work.

        I think we know why he voted for Barry. His wife wears the pants AND the strap-on, much like Michelle Hussein Obama Sotero.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:01 am Brilliant Pseudonym

        Try not to let your sexual fantasies creep into the political debate.

        Like


      • Try to pull your head out of your cunt. “Intelligent centrist???” Morons like you are why democracy is the worship of jackals by jackasses.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 7:47 am Brilliant Pseudonym

        I voted for Obama because he’s an intelligent centrist.

        I read the blog often because it contains some great truths and is entertaining, but for the most part I disagree with the author’s political alignments. I commented because that’s what the comments section is for, otherwise WordPress would name it the “brown nose me” section by default.

        Like


      • Typical left-wing blather “I am only slightly left, so if you don’t at least concede some of my points, YOU are a right-wing extremist”. A man whose ghost writer should be in jail as a member of a terrorist group and is unable to articulate any thoughts without a queue card qualifies as neither centrist or intelligent. Missing an underlying component of the blog, which is examining WHY there is a decline in society encouraging many to sit poolside leaves considerable doubt regarding you brilliance… other than maybe being a “bright”.

        Like


      • When Bill Ayers walked of court he said; ” guilty as hell, free as a bird”

        Can anyone imagine if Bush or McCain or Romney had had ties to domestic terrorists what would have happened?

        Yet leftists can not see how Obama is always treated differently ( read; better ) because of the color of his skin.

        Like


      • Concern trolls gunna concern.

        Like


    • Let it be known that this very liberal reader of your site is an honest and open minded thinker. Please stop writing things I disagree with. Thanks.

      Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:12 pm Life at Calhoun's Lake

      Answer the damn question.

      Would Obama be Predident if he was (fully) white? If so, why?

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:32 pm Mike S. Puppet

        Yes! Because he’s a better actor than Reagan.

        Next question, genius.

        Like


      • But was he a better governor than the son of the town drunk?

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 7:54 am Brilliant Pseudonym

        It depends on who he was running against. If the right wing had advanced a Christian minority candidate to run on the anti-war platform, centrist immigration reform, and health care, he/she may have become popular enough to win versus a white Obama.

        Like


    • Let it be known that this very liberal reader of your site is an honest and open minded thinker

      Oxymoron- (with emphasis on the latter part of the word)
      [ok-si-mawr-on, -mohr-] NOUN, rhetorical
      “a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness” or “to make haste slowly.”

      Like


    • You’re such an honest and open minded thinker you couldn’t even be bothered with answering the simple question the post revolved around. Obama voters are quite simply scum, as are the “very liberal”, which you should know is a group of people who have perverted the word liberal into meaning totalitarian and tyrannical. The entire point of the (anti) liberal left is to use governmental police force to coerce people into political conformity.

      Like


      • Exactly.

        an example; people who will not buy Obama’s health “deal” will have to pay a fine.

        that is called coercion

        Like


      • Why is “open-minded” seen as a good thing? I freely admit to being close-minded. If I am right, and you are wrong, surely it profits me nothing to agree with you, just out of some misguided sense of bonhomie.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 8:58 am Brilliant Pseudonym

        I agree that at some point it becomes advantageous to define your beliefs and choose sides, but an open minded thinker will still give credence and concede to a meritorious counter-argument.

        Like


      • And just how many hundreds of counter arguments do you need to see that CH is right about more than game and women?

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 7:59 am Brilliant Pseudonym

        Tough crowd. Anyway…

        The entire point of government and taxation is to coerce people into conformity, ostensibly for their benefit. The basic premise is that anarchy makes for a poor society. I suspect that you’re in denial with regard to the very beneficial role government plays in your life, but I understand that perspective has become quite fashionable since ~2008.

        Like


      • A limited government is definitely beneficial to the people

        but a government that grows in size and that becomes more like big brother everyday? not so much

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 8:07 am The Burninator

        Oh please “Brilliant”. The choice isn’t Overbearing Totalitarian Government OR Anarchy. Small, limited and restricted government with a defined set of individual and protected rights works just fine, thank you. But you folks always resort to “My way or anarchy!” the moment people start to question your 200,000th new law this week, as if somehow, without your tender guidance, we’d all fall into total chaos because we rejected the notion of disallowing wearing the color purple inside an automobile (or whatever).

        The fallacy you have constructed is called a False Dilemma. It is rejected as such.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 8:33 am Brilliant Pseudonym

        We don’t have anything near an “Overbearing Totalitarian Government.” Your suggestion that we do is partisan hyperbole.

        I don’t make the laws, Congress does. It’s a democracy, remember?

        Regarding the “Small, limited and restricted government” panacea that you’re championing, can you cite another country that might serve as a model for us to emulate?

        America arguably hasn’t employed this sort of “restricted” government since 1913, and since then we’ve become the dominant world power, the envy of nearly every other culture that we aren’t currently bombing into submission.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 8:41 am The Burninator

        The current government fills that role in most respects actually. And the option you presented was “What we have today, or anarchy”. Your fallacy is still wrong, champ.

        I can’t cite another country, because we were the first, and likely last, to follow that model, which for the record, is what made us the envy of the world. You collectivists have taken over of course and now it’s War And Welfare 24/7/365 as you dance in blood and cheer our demise.

        Frankly I ain’t got time for that kind of thing. Present a logical argument and not another boilerplate fallacy and we’ll talk.

        Slainte

        Like


  10. This post rambles a fair amount without saying much, but the gist seems to be true: Obama won (both the nomination against Hillary and the general election) becuase he was a blank slate, upon which the various Democratic and demographic tribes could project their fondest wishes. (To say nothing of the Nobel committee, a bit later.) His very lack of experience on the national stage facilitated this (as did the empty slogans: Yes We Can… what exactly?) Never mind the bullshit job of community organizer: this is a guy whose greatest achievement before being elected U.S. Senator was writing two books about .. himself. I have GOP friends who swear he was a put-up by, a creation of, the Black Panthers- they raised money for his Harvard education (there are apparently videos on YouTube from that time) and that Bill Ayers ghosted one of his bios. But this seems a little Fox-Newsish, a little implausible. It’s his exotic biography and lefty kind of eloquence, MLK-black-preacher-cadence meets Harvard law School, which got the Chicago establishment and plutocracy (see: current Secretary of Commerce) to back him.

    I saw it asserted this week that Obamacare should really be called Pelosicare, which is probably true, and diminishes his “signature achievement” substantially if so. On foreign policy he is exceedingly weak and indecisive. Best commentary on that is this:

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-throws-up-right-there-during-syria-meeting,33685/

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 12:17 pm Hugh G. Rection

      Wasn’t his autobiography more a work of fiction anyways?

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:16 pm Life at Calhoun's Lake

        It was a ‘memoir’. AKA he bullshitted half of it (some of the events he claimed to witness were verified to have occurred prior to his birth) but can get away with it ’cause artistic discretion or something.

        Like


    • One thing I found morbidly fascinating when it was shaping up as Hillary vs Obama in the primaries. I turned to my wife and said “well, I guess we will find out if male guilt trumps white guilt”.

      Like


    • He was a creation of the YKW,like Sonya Sotomeier(sp);both dumb coloreds let into high class schools where the YKW had taken over abd not letting white guys in. He might well have lost the nomination,but for the fact that the submissive(to the alpha,the wealthy and YKW)Hillary Clinton had not the balls to question the Iraq War. Obama voted agin it and it made him look good. The economy took center stage later on after O had accumulated a lot of votes and momentum.

      Like


      • I agree, both Obama and Sonya Sotomeier are dumb, but so are you. You couldn’t make it into these schools and since you’re not a woman, or of color, no one feels sorry for you. I don’t agree with this. I don’t think anyone should be getting in because they are felt sorry for. It lowers standards. However, if guys like you really have what it takes, you’d get in. It’s just that WNs are no better than Obama a or Sonya. They’re dumb as a rock and full of resentment.

        My suggestion, instead of crying over the white race 1) have kids 2) excel in academics, instead of flunking out of school and ending in a blue-collar job. Not that I don’t respect blue-collar, mind you, it’s just not the type of job that influences the politics of the country. Oh, and 3) stop spewing antisemetic rhetoric, or you’ll end up on the fringes of society like K MacDonald and David duke.

        Like


      • Actually, you’re the dumb on. Sotomayor and Comrade Obama were admitted because they were relatively smarter than their respective demographics. Neither one of them comes close to having the intellectual horsepower to surpass the standards required for white guys to gain admittance at these schools. Furthermore, their degrees are in bullshit majors. As a graduate of one of those schools with multiple STEM degrees, I can assure that there aren’t any of the despotic malcontent minority types in the real degree programs. Probably because these programs require more than strong rationalization skills and a victim mentality to complete.

        Also, do the rest of us a favor and DO NOT propagate the species. We don’t need any more dumb shit solipsistic fem-spawn fucking up this place.

        Like


      • Do you know how many contradictions you have made in one post? You need to reread.

        Like


      • You should check out allrecipes.com. Its more your speed….

        Like


      • Oh, I get it. They let you in because someone felt sorry for you, eh? It’s got to be it, since your intellectual capacity seems really low. I wouldn’t even employ you as my doorman, let alone admit you into an Ivy League.

        Now reared your stupid comment and see how contradictory it is, as well as how you even repeat some of what I said. Fucking crockpot!

        Like


    • I agree with CH. Obama was the perfect candidate for envious children living out the fantasy that government can do all the things they refuse to do and give them everything they think they deserve.

      Gotta say, the producers of the Obama show really know their audience.

      The USA could have survived Obama. It will not survive the plurality of envious, deluded children who voted for him.

      finit lux

      Like


  11. Obama was ALLOWED to be elected by the power elite for one reason and one reason only: to put a kinder, gentler face on the brutal American Empire. The reasoning is that all of the constituents (both international and domestic) being screwed over by the relentless war + capitalist machine would take it in the ass at least a little longer as long as the ass-fucking was being delivered wearing a mask of “hope” and “kindness” as represented by Obama.

    Like


    • Boom!

      There it is!

      Keep the plantation running by “electing” a slave to be master.

      And you thought the Apollo moon landing was the biggest hoax.

      Like


    • Again, wrong on all counts. The global, transnational elite that forms Obama’s core rejects military force AS DOES OBAMA, unless it is very cheap, easy, and riskless. This is why America is hurried retreat in the Persian Gulf having handed over Iraq to Iran under Obama. The BEST America can do is riskless drone strikes against Yemen and rely on the Press to suppress civilian casualties. While mass spying on the world and the US is “OK because he’s Black.”

      But real, direct, US interests (domination of the Persian Gulf, a navy that discourages all other powers from even thinking of challenges because of size, scope, and power) are abandoned: Obama wants to unilaterally disarm wrt nukes, missile defense, and has cut the Navy to less than 250 ships, the size of the Navy is SMALLER than 1914. Obama has let Iran’s challenge to US Hegemony in the Gulf pass unchallenged, to the point where the Saudis threw back the seat on the UN Security Council and are desperately looking for new protectors.

      US/Western prosperity rests on cheap oil. That means Gulf oil, which costs around $10 a barrel to get out of the ground. Under Clinton, the cost of a barrel of oil was mostly under $20 a barrel. Even with fracking, we are looking at $100 a barrel, because fracked oil is expensive and un-economical to extract under $100. However the global elite don’t like transferring power to the military (which is treated poorly or disbanded in all Western nations) because they are jealous of power and spending. You don’t have a military empire when military expenditures constantly decline in both real dollars and percentage of spending.

      Like


      • For how much longer is a big navy even relevant? You need a few carriers and to rule the skies that is it. Space the final frontier..

        Like


      • I like how he criticizes Obama for not acting like a schoolyard bully. “We like oil and you have oil. Therefore it’s ours.”

        Hey, you can go that route. But then, never again complain if they “disarm” your citizens during a Boston marathon.

        Like


      • All of those things are happening because that is what Obama and his handlers want to happen.

        It is all part of the plan.

        From forcing the USA to pay more for oil, to increasing the debt to reducing military presence, all of this is part of the plan, but the plan is not to destroy the USA, no what they want they want is to force the USA to become a much smaller player on the world stage.

        It is somewhat like when the US governement forced Standard Oil ( about a 100 years ago roughly ) to split into many smaller companies, except that in the case of Standard Oil it made sense, it was a monopoly.

        The USA is far from being a monopoly.

        A lot of leftist feel guilty for living in such abundance and feel guilty for being white and for imagined past sins so they agree with this.

        Europe can not compete so of course they want to see the USA become a smaller player

        and the middle east for its own “dark” reasons is also happy to see the USA losing some of its “power” in the world

        Leftists believe that breaking the USA’s back and bringing it to its knees and forcing it to become a smaller player will make the world a better place.

        They are wrong.

        so wrong.

        Just as punishing the rich does not help the poor, punishing the USA will not help anyone.

        Like


      • @Canadian Friend

        Exactly right on all counts.

        “A lot of leftist feel guilty for living in such abundance and feel guilty for being white and for imagined past sins so they agree with this.”

        Their white guilt is why they want policy that threatens the sovereignty of the USA. Like everything else, USA sovereignty is another social experiment, but this time on the world’s stage, instead of inside American society. Never mind the consequences if America is humbled in clear view of the world, so long as the equality and “leveling the playing field” bullshit are installed.
        .

        “the middle east for its own “dark” reasons is also happy to see the USA losing some of its “power” in the world”

        Some of its power? It’s entire power.

        And not just the Middle East, most countries are so jealous of the USA and its special position on the world stage, they are dancing in the streets at the thought of the USA stripped of its power. Every single country in the world wanted Obama to win, except Israel.

        That’s some irony food-for-thought stuff for the regular Israel bashers in the comment section, who also hate, hate, hate Obama. Israel knows exactly what Obama is all about. They have his type to deal with on regular basis. His type are a threat to world peace by virtue of their stupidity, if not evilness.
        .

        “Leftists believe that breaking the USA’s back and bringing it to its knees and forcing it to become a smaller player will make the world a better place.
        They are wrong.”

        Such a simple observation, yet so right on the money.

        Liberals have white guilt. They deeply believe Western countries, especially America, made it on the back of the 3rd world. They think it’s time America gave back to the 3rd world. One way to do this, they think, is to actively reduce its power and influence. This mental sickness called self-hate is exactly why liberals voted for Obama.

        Like


      • whiskey – I hope you are doing well and I miss your writing. You have not put up anything up on the blog since March 😦 😦 😦

        Like


      • He has been busily memorizing the Talmud line by line. It is a ponderous tome but… a necessary evil for 6200 pages of YHW control over the world.

        Give a Yid a break homey….

        Like


      • I don’t think whiskeysplace is Jewish.

        Either way, the Talmud has a lot of wisdom, and a lot of Western Civilization is based on it, especially common law jurisprudence. Many non-Jews studied it over the centuries – catholic clergy, as well as Supreme Court justices.

        Henry VIII sanctioned Hebrew studies at Cambridge University in the 1540s. Talmudic studies were at its core. He was trying to find justification to divorce his 1st wife, which he couldn’t get from Christian dogma. However, he knew he could get it from Jewish law, since in Jewish law a husband has complete ownership of his wife, including divorce powers. He asked the Jews for help. The Jews, afraid of the Pope at the time, told him they don’t want to get involved. Nevertheless, he had Hebrew inscriptions on his crown and his coins.

        Cambridge has one of the vastest collection of Jewish manuscripts in the world. Isaac Newton did much of his research on the Old Testament at the Cambridge Jewish Center. He was looking for the “rumor” in the Talmud that the OT has many mathematical codes. He wasn’t able to find much, but at least one spectacular code has been found when fast enough computers were introduced in the late 1990s. Newton’s OT research and manuscripts were transferred by Cambridge to Jerusalem University with the declaration that Newton would have been proud to see his Biblical research held in Israel, the land of the Bible.

        The Constitution has many Talmudic ideas, as many of the first pilgrims, as well as the Founding Fathers were fluent in Hebrew. In short, don’t knock the Talmud until you understand it.

        Therefore, for those delusional that the culture has been Judaized by the YKW, it has been a very long process in the making (and not by the YKW, as some of you believe). Most of Jewish influence on the West wasn’t directed by Jews. Most of it was directed at the behest of Christians because they thought the Jews had much wisdom. This includes the great undertaking of the King James Bible and the many Hebrew linguists commissioned for this great work. Judaism influence on the West started at the dawn of Christianity through the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, till today. 2,000 years of Gentile Whites studying the OT and its related Jewish manuscripts, is how Western culture has been shaped. For example, common law has doctrines directly lifted from the Talmud – double jeopardy, and compensatory and punitive damages doctrine just to name a few.

        The following article has a synopsis on Judaism influencing the West, especially this excerpt on America, so when I say America is founded on many Jewish ideas, I am not fibbing:

        “On the Mayflower there were two Hebraists of competence, William Bradford and William Brewster. The Puritans of New England were avid students of the Hebrew Bible, and the most famous of their scholars, Cotton Mather, used many Hebrew words and phrases in his prolific writings. This enthusiasm led to the inclusion of the language in the curricula of the ten American Colleges founded before 1776. At Harvard, where the first two presidents, Dunster and Chauncey were scholars of Hebrew, all students had to study the language ever since its foundation in 1636. A converted Jew, Judah Monis, appointed lecturer of Hebrew in 1722, published in Boston in 1735 a Grammar of the Hebrew Tongue , considered the first of its kind meant for instruction at an American university.”

        http://www.academia.edu/1073602/Hebrew_in_the_Universities

        Like


      • Dude, my relatives don’t (disproportionately) own the world because they memorized one word of those archaic tomes. You think Larry Summers knows how to kill a calf in the kosher fashion? They’re powerful because they’re smart, hardworking, and they help each other out, while discouraging others from doing so in an ethnic fashion.

        Like


      • You remind me of the Woody Allen joke,about speed reading.”I took the course then read War & Peace. It was something about Russia.” You’re description of your kind is accurate but not exactly the whole story!

        Like


      • I didn’t rule out double-dealing and manipulation…but everyone else does that too. My relatives are just better at it. (And that does theoretically include cultural Marxism, though I think they were more seeing themselves as tribunes of the worker rather than Jews at that point.)

        Deception is a pretty rational strategy when you have inferior numbers and (average) superior intelligence, if you think about it. If Israel tried Chinese-style human wave attacks, they’d all get killed.

        Like


      • I have a theory that the real whiskey is dead. Larry Auster was,I believe,the real whiskey. He of course died last spring. Thats when whiskey stopped writing. whiskeys comments just dont have the same zing they used to,and his weird obsession with BM/WF sex seems to have gone by the boards. Just a theory.

        Like


      • There is some merit to this argument, but conspiracy theories abound on the interwebs as we know. CH also died around 2007 or so and is simply written by a secretive cabal of various authors now. Who am I to judge? NASA lost the fucking telemetry tapes from the 1st moon landing. Anything is possible. (see tinfoil hat wearing token black dude farther down thread for reference)

        Like


  12. I don’t agree with the premise. Obama matters, his color matters, and a white liberal in the same position would not have been as effective getting signature policies like Obamacare passed.

    I feel that if you had a white liberal in the white house they would be getting more scrutiny and review then Obama is getting. A white candidate would also have been more fully vetted. Evidence of this is how quickly the “Race Card” is played as soon as Obama is attacked.

    So, he does provide an extra layer of insulation against criticism of his policies because of his race.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:45 pm Mr.magNIFicent1

      And the Nobel prize?

      Like


      • The Nobel came because Europeans really hate George W. Bush. They gave it to Gore because he tried to unseat him, and they gave it to Obama for doing so. Look at the Nobel literature prizes–they’re the multicultural post-colonialist crap European liberals get excited about, instead of the GLBTQWTF stuff American liberals wet their panties about.

        Liberals have actually been fairly critical of Obama for not standing up to the GOP more, if you read liberal blogs etc. They want single-payer.

        Like


    • Look at Obama’s poll numbers, recently as low as 37% approval. Round off the black population at 14%. They would support Obama if he did just about anything. So among the general public, Obama is already Nixon, he has a 23% approval rating among the 86% of Americans who are not black.

      Like


  13. I agree that Obama is without much personal substance as he is not an idiosyncratic leader. He follows the standard democratic party platform entirely.

    However, as for him being elected if he were not white, why not? I don’t see a difference in competency between Obama and Kerry, and I think Kerry could have won if he had run in 2008 when republicans were at an extreme low in approval. I think that Obama would have had to wait many years longer to be a front runner if he had been white. He couldn’t have done it as a very new senator. But if he were a 6th term senator, why not? Again, what exactly about Kerry was better than Obama? Or even Gore? They made it as front runners.

    Like


    • Gore comes from a political family and Kerry has a rich wife. Other than those two things, I agree with you, I don’t see much of a difference between them and Obama.

      Like


      • Lara,

        My buttox have ballooned with gas, and when the gas is released, it will be dense and creamy.

        At that time, it will be your privilege and delight to….

        Detox my Buttox

        -GB

        Like


      • Kerry, Gore, JFK all understood how Washington works at the most basic level of talking to the other side and also your own side (!) in order to build support for legislation.

        Obama is just a figurehead, the empty suit I and many others knew he was in 2008 (he said absolutely nothing of substance in his speeches). But if you are a right-winger, you couldn’t pick a better figurehead. This guy is literally not interested in being president, he puts in very little work except for the occasional campaign speech attacking Republicans. Even his signature legislation, the ACA, was put together and passed by Reid and Pelosi. If you’re going to have a leftist in power, might as well pick an unqualified AA. I mean, as long as you are looking to enjoy the decline and want more comedy.

        Like


      • I remember in 2008 when the only people vetting Obama were right wing bloggers, it turned out that when Obama was at the senate he almost always voted “present”

        Had Bush done that it would have been front page news and made into a big scandal.

        Since Obama almost always voted “present”, no one knew where he stood on issues, yet liberals were all in love with Obama

        ain’t that weird?…

        Like


    • Voter percentages apparently don’t figure into your logic fallacy. Had Obama been some beta herb white guy the feckless minority victimology groups would never had turned out en masse and as a monolithic voting bloc at the polls as they did for the black messiah. And then you could quite possibly have a cut-throat corporate raider in the White House right now attempting to extract funds from the middle class for his corporate cronies instead of to low IQ cretins.

      One coin, two sides. Heads you lose, tails you really lose.

      Like


      • This:

        And then you could quite possibly have a cut-throat corporate raider in the White House right now attempting to extract funds from the middle class for his corporate cronies instead of to low IQ cretins.

        Ummm, I have some bad news for you Jay in DC……..

        Under the non-corporate raider, liberal Obama, we are seeing the greatest transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich, IN HISTORY.

        What exactly do you think the point of 85 Billion in QE per month is?

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:34 pm Life at Calhoun's Lake

      Three reasons

      1) Obama would never enrolled at Columbia were it not for affirmative action. His academics were nothing special and he didn’t come from a legacy family. Ditto for Harvard Law.

      2) He would never have won election to a Southside based State Senate seat were he not black. Those seats are diligently crafted to ensure minorities are elected in order to comply with VRA Sections 2 and 4.

      3) He was a lowkey backbencher in the Senate. He did nothing. What would you say if I told you Sen. Moran or Sen. Schatz were running for President. That’s right, “who the fuck are they?” You’d think I was mad if I told you they had a chance of taking down political juggaurnauts like Hillary Clinton or Chris Christie. Non entities in the Senate simply don’t run for and win the Presidency. Unless of course they have the convenient ‘first black President’ mantra to wrap themselves around.

      Like


      • > Obama would never enrolled at Columbia were it not for affirmative action.

        Possibly, but elite schools like to admit students with ‘interesting’ backgrounds and he certain fit the bill. His mother may have had friends in high places as well, so I wouldn’t discard the influence factor.

        Like


      • “Interesting” = Not white

        Like


      • “interesting’ backgrounds”

        Is another term for affirmative action. They need to justify why certain student who don’t have the academic achievement are accepted, while others more worthy (and white) candidates didn’t. It’s reverse prejudice with a nice imprimatur.

        Diversified background is what they use. Same as affirmative action, but sounds more respectable like someone had achieved something by virtue of being interesting, as opposed to just being black or brown.

        You have to decipher lefty jargon.

        Like


      • ^^^ This!

        Like


    • Minus the war hero status and attractive wife how much difference is there really between JFK? Not a lot. Good speakers, democrats, young and short on experience.

      Like


      • JFK was an almost textbook example of an alpha male. Outside of Steve McQueen, who in the 1960s was more alpha than JFK?

        BHO on the other hand…

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:38 am The Spirit Within

        JFK and BHO both benefitted from a fawning media. Both were young and good-looking. Both have successfully maneuvered through some tense int’l relations moments. Both have been intensely hated. Both were highly intellectual. Both had little experience upon election. Both electrified the public.

        Lots of similarities.

        Like


      • And both were plowing Marilyn Monroe

        oh wait.

        Like


      • If you think either BHO or JFK “successfully maneuvered through some tense int’l relations moments”, you are either a) a moron, or b) have no idea what the English word for “botched” is.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:44 am The Spirit Within

        I suppose that Cuba and killing OBL count as just another day at the office in your book.

        Like


      • Obama didn’t kill anyone. Besides, OBL isn’t a big deal. He is a figurehead and nothing else. After OBL died, there was another attack on Boston. Heckuva job Barry.

        Like


      • Maybe Sinatra. I agree JFK was an alpha but besides that there are a lot of similarities.

        Like


  14. 1. the president is America’s version of a king. everyone wants a king, not a “chief executive” … that is why there is such an intense focus on their personal life, even in biographies of presidents 50+ years ago. viz. Clinton v. Jones.

    2. I think white male Obama would have beaten a white male H. Clinton, & probably McCain in ’08.

    Like


    • “2. I think white male Obama would have beaten a white male H. Clinton, & probably McCain in ’08.”

      Maybe, but would a white Obama have gotten the nomination in the first place? Of course not. Take away his race and there’s no reason to vote for him.

      Like


      • “Maybe, but would a white Obama have gotten the nomination in the first place? Of course not. Take away his race and there’s no reason to vote for him.”

        This is the credited response. Yes, the dems could have nominated almost any candidate this side of Dennis Kucinich in ’08 and won the election. But a white BHO would’ve had exactly 0% chance to defeat Hilary in the primary.

        Like


  15. on October 21, 2013 at 12:17 pm Lucky White Male

    Four million potential Romney voters – whites – stayed home. This would have tipped election towards Romney to win

    But traditional sensible whites don’t even care anymore

    They realize both left and right will vote for the same thing: destruction of our culture and country

    So why even vote?

    Everyone with half brain knows ship is sinking. Bail out: poolside or blissful ignorance in white exurbs

    Like


  16. Obama got elected because lunatics have hijacked the GOP. That’s all. These political posts are boring and off-topic.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 12:42 pm Asian red pill

      Just what about McCain and Romney made them “lunatics”? Both were politically moderate with impeccable credentials. Romney, especially, struck me as intelligent – significantly more intelligent than Obama – and highly qualified to be President. For that matter, Bush graded out as a moderate with liberal tendencies.

      Like


      • Romney is a Mormon, which is one shade this side of Scientology. You have to be mentally defective to believe that crap.

        McCain chose Palin, which revealed him to be soft in the head.

        But at the end of the day, it isn’t the candidates that are on the lunatic fringe as much as the constituents are. And these constituents keep the most electable candidates from getting the nomination. It’s really that simple.

        Jon Huntsman would be a great candidate. Much better than Romney. But he’s not “Christian” enough and is far too rational, so he’ll never get the nomination. The person who does will lose to Hillary.

        Like


      • It is an interesting question indeed; what if Obama had been white,

        but here is another,

        what if Palin had been a Democrat?

        Would the main stream media have “savaged” her the way they did?

        ( we all know the answer…that liberals will refuse to give )

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 1:53 pm Hugh G. Rection

        Just look at Maxine Waters for example…

        Like


      • ouch. truth hurts.

        Like


      • The media actually worshipped her until she opened her mouth and all the dumb came out.

        She’s a moron, and a pork-loving hypocrite who sucked my tax dollars to her state and who oversaw a town driving itself needlessly into useless debt.

        Like


      • Unlike Obama who is sucking your tax dollar and driving the USA into useless debt…

        yeah she was SO much worse than Obama…

        Like


      • Canadian Friend simply doesn’t get it. You don’t field candidates that can’t tell a reporter what periodicals they read. You don’t field a candidate that say Paul Revere fired warning shots. You don’t hire a high functioning moron to be your President. You can hate Obama’s policies, but you can’t call him a Palin-grade simpleton. He’s smart. That’s why he keeps kicking the fucking snot out of the GOP.

        FYI, Palin has admitted that her family deliberately used Canada’s healthcare system.

        The GOP could have won in 2008 if they fielded a good ticket. They will keep losing.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 6:23 pm Modern Primitive

        “You have to be mentally defective to believe that crap.”

        Does that not go for all religions?

        Like


      • Shut up fedora

        Like


      • “Romney is a Mormon, which is one shade this side of Scientology. You have to be mentally defective to believe that crap.”

        You are a literal retard. You completely ignored a mans obvious qualifications because you don’t like his religion. You are worse than GOP voting “Barrack Hussein Obongo” losers because at least I could see why they would be opposed to Islam. Mormons are some of the best people in the US.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:41 am The Spirit Within

        Sure, if you think wearing magic underpants and hating gay people and falling for fraud time and time again makes you good people.

        Like


      • Seems to work out okay, actually. Keep hatin, hater.

        Like


      • Hating gay people is normal. I mean, how fucking brainwashed do you have to be to consider that a negative. Besides, hate isn’t even the correct word. They “hate” faggots as much as men who cheat on their wives. (and only if we consider “gay” somebody who fucks other men, not someone who could theoretically get aroused by men)

        The kikes have taught you well.

        Like


      • “Romney is a Mormon, which is one shade this side of Scientology. You have to be mentally defective to believe that crap. … Jon Huntsman [also a mormon] would be a great candidate. Much better than Romney. But he’s not “Christian” enough and is far too rational, so he’ll never get the nomination.”

        Lol you’re not a big fan of consistency, are you? Here, have some beer nuts and dance

        Like


      • “Romney is a Mormon, which is one shade this side of Scientology. You have to be mentally defective to believe that crap.”

        Rev Wright, on the other hand, is a decent, reasonable fellow. Trololololzz, buddy.

        Like


      • Those first two sentences were just so exquisitely stupid they could be mocked twice.

        Like


      • Rev Wright was a radical anti-white, anti-USA and anti-semite

        we have the videos and we have seen the publications so we know this is true

        and we have seen the list of anti white, anti-USA and anti-semite guest speakers Rev Wright welcomed to his church

        and we know Obama was part of that church for a couple of decades, was a close friend of Rev Wright, got married in that church got his children baptized there

        and this is the short list

        and then Obama – without blinking – threw Rev Wright under the bus

        yet the media and liberal voters gave Obama a pass

        such tolerance, such leniency has never been afforded to a white candidate

        Like


      • Mccain is a war monger that’s what he is the other side of the evil equation. Rand Paul is about the only one I’d actually find worth voting for although I do vote either way.

        Like


      • yeah, a warmonger who got shot down and captured; and who got treated with kid gloves because his dad was a admiral.

        Like


      • I used to naively like Mccain too but the crap he tried to pull starting a war with Syria opposing Assad was just the nail in the coffin. He learned nothing from Iraq and wants another unstable terrorist supporting regime there. Glad Putin flanked him and Obama from going down that rat hole.

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 1:27 pm Hugh G. Rection

      What is on- or off-topic is for the author to decide.

      Like


    • Why is there always so much faggotry and butt-hurt here when a topic isn’t confined to the narrow scope of game? Mystifying…

      Like


    • Complete wrong brainwashed liberal. Put down your Starbucks faggot.

      Like


    • “Maybe, but would a white Obama have gotten the nomination in the first place? Of course not. Take away his race and there’s no reason to vote for him.”

      If by “lunatics” you mean “moderates” then you are correct. Since the end of WWII the GOP has nominated 1 conservative and 1 libertarian for President (Reagan and Goldwater). The rest have ranged from moderates like Romney and McCain to statists and liberals like Nixon and Eisenhower.

      Like


  17. The Cathedral has become such a rank parody that the time is right to tactically step aside and let the enemy discredit itself. Why waste energy fighting a foe at full strength when you can just jeer at him as he punches himself in the nads?

    So… how about that 0bamacare website, huh?

    Like


    • From CNN/Money today: “Complaint #3: The costs are too high: … One North Carolina reader was upset to learn her current $267 a month plan was being canceled and the cheapest option on the exchange would cost her family $750 a month. They don’t qualify for a subsidy. “Obamacare is a nightmare for my family,” she wrote.”

      A lot of people who were fat dumb and happy thinking they would be on the free gummit gimmedat bandwagon are now finding out they are the ones to be gouged to pay for bariatric surgery for the food stamp recipients. What, this surprises them? Stupid libs.

      Like


      • Did you see the Kos kids reacting to the news of their premiums doubling?
        http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/30/1242660/-Obamacare-will-double-my-monthly-premium

        They’re talking about not paying the fine too. Thanks to Obama, you’ve got left wing liberals talking and behaving like the far right.

        You know the Orwell image of a boot stamping on a face forever? Well, I’m imagining how these lefties are in total shock when they see the Obamacare disaster hit them right in the nads (that’s what their face looks like). And then I think about how that’s going to happen to them over and over for the next 20 to 30 years, depending on how long the collapse takes. It’s like Ow! My Balls! for reactionaries.

        Like


      • They helped passed the bill, and now they’re getting to see what’s inside it. You’d need a heart of stone not to laugh.

        Like


      • You’d need a heart of stone not to laugh.

        Or to laugh, rather. Being a red-piller gives one a heart of stone.

        Like


  18. on October 21, 2013 at 12:37 pm Asian red pill

    “Asians voted for Obama because he isn’t conspicuously Christian. Obama symbolized the opposite of those antediluvian religious whites who built America from scratch.”

    This doesn’t sound right. As recently as 20 years ago (Clinton v Dole), a solid majority of Asians voted Republican. We haven’t changed that much since then. Religion is not generally a strong motivation for Asian voters either way. Asians are certainly not anti-Christian. For the Asians that religion matters, they’re pro-Christian – ie, the sizeable set of Jeremy Lin type devout Christians. Based on Asian American social-economic values, the majority of Asians should be voting GOP.

    If Obama was Asian (childhood years in Indonesia and Hawaii doesn’t make him an honorary member), I’d accept the tribal vote theory, but otherwise, a black candidate with affirmative action symbolism gives him no tribal loyalty points for Asians over a white candidate. Moreover, Romney’s background should have appealed strongly to Asian voters.

    So, the Asian cross-over from GOP to Dem over the last 20 years is a mystery to me. My theory for the crossover is two-fold. One, upwardly mobile young Asians aspirationally model themselves after SWPL whites, and if SWPL whites support Obama, so will they. Two, Asians in America, despite the popular stereotype, don’t have large family and community networks to fall back on, excepting those who have joined traditional religious – usually Christian – communities. While Asians don’t depend on welfare and affirmative action like other groups, they do care about the social safety net, and if they perceive the GOP is threatening it, that could sway their vote.

    Like


    • I am glad you noted this. Yes, Asians voted republican till the mid nighties. We have no reason to be voting for democrats. We don’t need welfare, we have conservative family structures, our parents hate NAMs and aren’t afraid to make that known etc.

      The republicans decided to make their campaign strategy to go for “the base”, who were the real americans. The small town voters, not the coastal city types. The repubs did everything they could to alienate their brand from the demographic Asians are. Asians are not small town voters and a significant portion is not Christian. It’s their own stupid fault.

      [CH: yes it is our own stupid fault for letting you ingrate fucks in here in the first place.]

      Maybe they should have noticed that a good chunk of urban/coastal voters are net tax payers and accounted for that in their branding.

      For the republicans, you know, mine is an easy vote to get, and they haven’t got it yet.

      [getting your vote would require a betrayal of most of their principles. but that’s the point, isn’t it?]

      Like


      • It would require the betrayal of only one principle, technically (abortion).

        [CH: not if your words here are any indication.]

        Though I suppose abandoning that one principle involves a radical change of mind set. Even when some republicans made the simple concession to support OTC birth control that made me feel more favorable towards them.

        [people don’t vote on “issues”. people vote with whomever is sympatico with their preferred emotionally-channeled worldview. most non-white immigrants have a reflexive hatred for the native religious white stock of america. and what really galls your ilk is that it was the very people you hate that made america the powerhouse that can afford the luxury to bend over and take it up the keister by hordes of ingrate fucks like yourself. at least, for now. but that will soon change.]

        Apart from that, I don’t know anything about global warming and I don’t care to learn either, so I’m simple there. I don’t care about health insurance one way or the other, and I won’t complain if a giant electrified fence is build on the border of Mexico.

        [you’re here because your homeland is a shithole. but i’ve got news for you. the shittiness of your home country is not white americans’ moral crisis. get on your knees and thank those jesus freak white americans with all your heart for not tossing you out with extreme prejudice. because i would. with pleasure.]

        Like


      • “[CH: not if your words here are any indication.]”

        No really, I only need abortion to vote republican. Most Asians need even less than that. They just need the republican party to stop appearing to think everyone else is the enemy of white American heartland jesus freaks. They decided there was a culture war, and they put Asians on the wrong side of that. In reality, there is no culture war to anyone except the extreme fringe of the SWPLs and republicans. No one hates midwesteners. Everyone thinks they are nice.

        I am not aware of Asians having any inherent bias against Jesus freaks either. There is almost no animosity between Christians and Hindus in most of India. We do not have this concept of “woah. Those Bible thumpers are so intolerant. They are scary.” That’s a very western secular concept of Christians. I don’t think Asian Bhuddists have negative feelings towards Christians either. Any reservations Asians have against the religious right is probably developed here.

        “get on your knees and thank those jesus freak white americans with all your heart for not tossing you out with extreme prejudice. because i would. with pleasure.]”

        nya nya nya nya nya.

        Hey look at the glass half full. You can’t kick us out, but you are adept at getting us on our knees at least.

        Like


      • Hey look at the glass half full. You can’t kick us out, but you are adept at getting us on our knees at least.

        You do have a point there, I suppose.

        Like


      • “No really, I only need abortion to vote republican.”

        Feministx, for every one of you, who “only needs abortion to vote republican” there are thousands of lower-middle class white catholics who only vote republican because of abortion. Switching positions on abortion would be such a net loss of votes for the Republican party, it would likely render them unable to participate meaningfully in American politics.

        Really, demanding that Republicans “only” change their position on abortion to earn your vote is like me insisting that Olive Garden “only” eliminate the carbohydrates from their menu to earn my patronage.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:53 am BioCulturalBeamDelta

        So you’re saying that you “deserve” the right to kill your unborn child. Progressives always say they need “one last thing” to vote Republican. It is ALWAYS a lie, just as you are lying right now. Then you have the audacity to claim that Asians have “no inherent bias” against Christians out one side of your mouth, while calling them “Jesus freaks” and “Bible thumpers” from the other side of your mouth. You hate Christians because they have standards, not because their standards are “mean” or “bigoted.” Take your shit tests elsewhere

        Like


      • Of course it’s bullshit. Abortion is not an issue on the table for a vote last I checked.

        Like


      • I think the explanation is much simpler: asian minorities are apolitical and vote for the strong horse.

        What’s more interesting is that the Indians now are dipping their toes in the racial grievance pool. Interesting times ahead for Silicon Valley? Chuckle.

        Like


      • Abortion is already the law of the land, and the GOP isn’t going to change that; so, really you don’t have an excuse.

        Like


      • CH: ”get on your knees and thank those jesus freak white americans with all your heart for not tossing you out with extreme prejudice. because i would. with pleasure.”

        OMG, is this still the same CH here? I can’t believe you talk like that. Aren’t you happy that femx lives in your country? She’s giving you much more than she’s taking from you. Can’t the original Heartiste come back? I liked him more..

        Like


      • Who are you again? Wait, don’t bother.

        Like


      • Your emotional response is missing her valid point.

        [CH: passionless interlocution is for spergs. what sperg ever led a people to victory?]

        The Repubs took the short view and played the country music, pickup truck, church goin’, huntin’ culture angle in 2000 and 2004.

        [and these are bad things… why?]

        Asians and other white collar people aren’t necessarily at odds with this culture, but they don’t identify with it.

        [scratch a non-identification and you quickly find an antagonism underneath.]

        Hell, I think anyone with a college education that voted for W probably had to hold their nose while doing it.

        [i wonder if the swpls who voted for O had to stifle the gnawing feeling that the whole charade was racial in scope?]

        Watching the repub convention in 2012 was uncomfortable.

        [another unbiased third party heard from.]

        Those guys just do not get it. The future of the right is on blogs like this and other manosphere HBD blogs, not in the republican party. I think they’re toast.

        [there is no right as it’s come to be known. not anymore. the future now belongs to new blood.]

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 4:00 pm Asian red pill

        “Asians and other white collar people aren’t necessarily at odds with this culture, but they don’t identify with it.”

        Good point. I think living/lifestyle context matters more for Asian Americans than ethnic solidarity. Asians assimilate and we’re mostly urban, and voting patterns reflect that. I wouldn’t be surprised if rural Asian voters were polled and their vote more closely aligned with local political preferences.

        “The future of the right is on blogs like this and other manosphere HBD blogs, not in the republican party.”

        I’d vote for the party that champions the red pill. I’m not surprised CH is anti-Dems and anti-Obama. I am surprised he’s sticking up so hard for the GOP since he’s anti-establishment and the GOP and Dems are both establishment.

        [CH: i’m not sticking up for the GOP, i’m sticking up for the shat-upon native stock.]

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 4:19 pm Asian red pill

        We’re not the problem, but we can be part of the solution.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 4:34 pm Mike S. Puppet

        native stock… the Cherokees, I presume.

        As for the rest of the non-native stock, what are we going to do? I mean, they’re here already. Perhaps a large fleet of ships to send them back to Europe, etc.

        Get the boat-building stuff, I can be part of the solution.

        Like


      • native stock… the Cherokees, I presume.

        As for the rest of the non-native stock, what are we going to do? I mean, they’re here already. Perhaps a large fleet of ships to send them back to Europe, etc.

        Get the boat-building stuff, I can be part of the solution.

        Go to it, libtard.

        Like


      • Y’all aren’t really disagreeing with each other. CH, you clearly were profoundly changed by The Redneck Manifesto. Your writing and base motivation has been refined since you read it. About 9 months ago, I’d bet.

        Like


      • You are not a native if you can’t thrive without the infrastructure on the land where you sit. This includes the ability to defend yourself/your tribe from predators.

        Your European Ancestors could do this, but genocides aside, their primary failure was in creating a cultural frame with progeny who could, except for a few relatively small groups. The pussification of your males was not the only consequence of feminism. Along with it came an entitlement to comfort without service that no other women in the world ever dreamed or even desired until their cultures were destroyed.

        Your main problem is that now, due to human laziness, and your promoting your over dependent and yet selfish lifestyle to others as superior, others want a piece of the poison pie, but you understand that there isn’t enough to go around. If the whole world lived as you do, its surface would be rendered uninhabitable within a generation.

        So you are worried about immigration.

        We are just trying not to die from your “progress”. It does not matter to us what color or nation “white” people come from.

        Like


      • Actually, Asians ARE at odds with suburban, nominally Christian Whites. Who btw if you believe Charles Murray, don’t go to Church much. Asians voted for the party of BIGGER government, because all the cool/hip media people told them to, and because they are ensconced in Law, Media, Education, and NGO-istan, heavily dependent on obliterating Whites out of their own country.

        And that last is important. The GLOBAL (this is part of every Western White nation) elites want to obliterate by mass non-White immigration the native White populations, the better to get all sorts of goodies out native Whites, tax farm them, and get all sorts of corrupt nasty deals for global elite (Whites) with the understanding that non-Whites get scraps off the table and native Whites without money and power are basically groveling serfs.

        Asians are anti-White, for two reasons: the are not White but Asian, and they want to turn Whites into serfs and servants. As Asians grew in size and power, they realized their best bet was to join the anti-White party, Dems and seize everything they could from ordinary Whites before it was all gone. Just more looters.

        Like


      • That’s why I’m opposed to all immigration. Close the fucking gates. Even Europeans are not welcome at this point. Thy come from socialist countries and try to mirror their own governments by voting democrat, not so much because they are looking for handouts, but because they believe in egalitarian and equality bullshit.

        Some more food for thought – if America is to be like all other countries on earth, what justified its founding? Nothing. It was founded to be like no place one earth. The moment clueless immigrants turn it like their familiar habitat, it will be destroyed.

        Like


      • This is the SINGLE most salient thing I’ve seen you post in 6 months. Seriously… scary how smart you can be when you aren’t chanting the party line.

        Like


      • Asians receive massive amounts of government welfare in the form of Minority Disadvantaged Business loans. Their “model minority” status is entirely funded by the white taxpayer.

        They are parasites.

        They need to be removed from America.

        Like


      • Thanks to white liberals almost everyone who is not a white male is a parasite to white males.

        Yet white males are the recipient of an insane amount of ingratitude from all those groups.

        We are forced to pay and we get a “fuck you” instead of a “thank you”

        and people wonder why we white males aren’t happy with the present situation…

        Like


      • @Jay: everyone’s smart when they agree with you. (That’s a universal human behavior, not a personal criticism, though I’m sure you can take the heat.)

        As for the borders, I’m in favor of cutting down immigration severely (except for brain-draining the best and brightest if they still want to come here) to allow the new arrivals time to assimilate. We did it with every prior wave, after all. (I know: they were white.) But this is the only time we’ve believed in ‘multiculturalism’ and refused to even try.

        @map: A lot of them do, but they do at least manage to hold down jobs and send their kids to school. I’d probably keep the East Asian quotas at a low level, maybe for scientists, etc.

        Like


      • “and what really galls your ilk is that it was the very people you hate that made america the powerhouse that can afford the luxury to bend over and take it up the keister by hordes of ingrate fucks like yourself. at least, for now. but that will soon change.]”

        BTW, what does this mean? That your ilk is going to smash my horde or that my horde is going to destroy the powerhouse that is America?

        And out of curiosity, how did you come to believe that I hate jesus freaks or whoever it is you think I hate?

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 1:01 pm BioCulturalBeamDelta

        I couldn’t possibly imagine why people here think that you hate Christians. Maybe it’s because you pathologically refer to them as “Jesus Freaks” over and over again.

        Like


      • “It would require the betrayal of only one principle, technically (abortion).”

        The idea that the Republican Party could become openly pro-abortion and remain a functioning, viable, political party is absolutely risible.

        There is a large swath of religious, white, lower and lower-middle class voters who would naturally align with the Democratic party if it wasn’t for the abortion issue.

        For every 10 feministxs that the GOP could gain by becoming pro-choice, they would lose tens of thousands of middle class catholic votes.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 1:12 pm BioCulturalBeamDelta

        [There is a large swath of religious, white, lower and lower-middle class voters who would naturally align with the Democratic party if it wasn’t for the abortion issue.]

        Even the FDR, the socialist, didn’t hate America enough to have mass immigration during the depression that he prolonged

        Like


      • That is why people–but not enough people–so hate the YKW,despite Lily’s catcalling.

        Like


      • No. They hate the YKW because they are jealous of them. They think they have too much power, too much money, too much IQ, too much good careers, too much camaraderie for their own kind, so they are jealous of their excellence. It’s natural to be jealous. Just be honest about it. Stop looking for imaginary unrealistic and untruthful reasons why you’re jealous and have an inferiority complex. Instead, try to emulate the YKW’s excellence and compete with them. When people compete with each other, humanity advances.

        I love competition; it forces you to be better than what you would have been otherwise. Even for women – when they compete with each other for male attention they look hotter.

        Human advancement is about competition, not about depressing someone who is supposedly better than you.

        Like


      • on October 27, 2013 at 12:19 am BioCulturalBeamDelta

        You misunderstand, OralC. I’m not praising FDR for turning away the Jews fleeing Europe. I’m praising him for continuing Calvin Cooldige’s shut down of the immigration spigot from the 1920s. Most Democrats would not have shown that self-restraint today. Also the socialist Harry Truman and the Liberal Eisenhower had no problem deporting illegal Mexicans. I agree with Lily. The terror that white nationalists have for the Joooooos is ridiculous.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 1:31 pm Asian red pill

        “ingrate fucks”

        Being grateful for being Americans – which we are – doesn’t imply automatic loyalty to the GOP.

        [CH: if the GOP represents traditional religious whites, then antagonism to the GOP, particularly by immigrant non-whites, represents ingrate fuckedness. the health of religious whites and the success of empire america are inextricable.]

        “getting your vote would require a betrayal of most of their principles. but that’s the point, isn’t it?”

        No. The point is the opposite – that winning back the Asian vote could be done by grounding in traditional GOP principles.

        [when have we heard this refrain before? oh yeah, just before every election when the GOP gets its ass handed to it.]

        As minority voters, we’re low-hanging fruit for the GOP, yet we’re being ignored by the GOP while they go hat in hand begging for Hispanic votes.

        [you seem to be grasping for solutions. there is only one solution. self-determination.]

        Like


      • White atheists vote for the Dumbocrats by a margin similar to Asians.

        And, Asian Christians (mainly Filipinos) also vote for the Dumbs, probably for the same reasons Hispanics do.

        It looks like low-IQ Christians, and atheists of any IQ, vote for the Dumbdumbs, and most Asians fall into one or the other group.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:13 pm Carlos Danger

        My Vietnamese in laws are all Republican voters. Much depends on the culture the Asians in question came from. They think the US is the promised land and have all done well here. Asian is a huge misnomer because you’re talking about a 1000 cultures or more and some 30% or more of the world’s surface area. India alone has over 100 subethnicities and languages.

        Like


      • When speaking about Asians though technically that includes “dot” Indians I think most people including CH are typically talking about Far East Asians.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 4:12 pm Asian red pill

        East Asians differ a lot, too. Never mind even the big splits like Korean, Japanese, and Chinese. Just within the Chinese, there are big splits among Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwanese, and mainland Chinese.

        Like


      • Can we just resurrect “oriental” already?

        Like


      • We know they’re two different races. But neither are Christian, and neither identify with Europeans.

        Like


      • These are Asian party leanings by ethnicity-

        http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/why-romney-lost-asian-vote_663839.html?page=2

        As it turns out, the Vietnamese are one of the more Republican-leaning Asian subgroups, along with Filipinos. But poll data show most other Asian groups vote differently. Here’s Pew’s Democrat-to-Republican breakdown: Vietnamese, 36 percent to 35 percent; Filipinos, 43 percent to 40 percent; Koreans, 48 percent to 32 percent; Chinese, 49 percent to 26 percent; Japanese, 54 percent to 29 percent; and Indians, 65 percent to 18 percent. (The rest were unaffiliated or third party.)

        Indians are the highest earning Asian minority and most left leaning minority. I am not sure why that is. Could be a factor of living only in blue state areas. Really not sure. I guess we vote like Jews, who are similarly left leaning and high earning.

        Like


      • This

        Like


      • These are Asian party leanings by ethnicity-

        As I suspected. The more Christian an Asian group is, the more likely it is to vote Republican. (Viet Catholics loathe commies, so they are solidly GOP.) Chinese, Japanese and Indians being solidly Dumbdumbs makes complete sense.

        Like


      • My Vietnamese in laws are all Republican voters.

        The Vietnamese (in the U.S.) are largely Catholics, and higher IQ like whites. Korean Christians, same deal. But they’re exceptions to the Asians-as-Dumbocrats rule.

        Like


      • Vietnamese and Cubans understand the absolute insanity of having a large government and of course side with the R’s, even though the differences don’t seem to be all that much anymore, save for the Tea Party types.

        Like


      • Vietnamese and Cubans understand the absolute insanity of having a large government and of course side with the R’s, even though the differences don’t seem to be all that much anymore, save for the Tea Party types.

        Yeah, but the Cubans (hello Rubio) are still complete idiots when it comes to immigration.

        Like


      • “Yeah, but the Cubans (hello Rubio) are still complete idiots when it comes to immigration.”

        Not just that, but the new generation, the one going to American universities, is liberal. That’s why 45% of Cubans voted Obama. It was shocking. The tide is changing in the Cuban community, since the only reason it was voting Republican in the first place was because of the Bay Of Pigs, which is a weak reason to refrain from the Democrats for 60 years. People who don’t like the Democrats for ideological reasons would be much harder to brainwash in the culture wars. At least with Russian immigrants, they know how horrible communism is, and they’re less likely to vote Democrat. In any case, I don’t think we need more immigration from any country. Once a community has enough clout, no one knows how it will vote. Most of the time, it votes Democrat since it gets seduced with liberal handouts and specialty promises. No one ever panders to white men, just to everyone else.

        Like


      • That’s why 45% of Cubans voted Obama. It was shocking.

        The Cubans are turning liberal simply because we give out 20,000 free visas every year due to some agreement with the Cuban government in the 1990s. While the “old” Cubans from the 1950s were middle-class white Spanish types, the “new” ones are run-of-the-mill Marxist mulattos like 0bama himself.

        Like


      • Oh, yes! The visas is another factor.

        Nonetheless, you can’t overlook the fact that the grandchildren of those that came here in the 1950s and the children of those that came here in the late 1970s are becoming liberal, as they grew up here and have been assimilated into the liberal culture. There is no denying that a liberal metamorphoses is taking place in the Cuban community.

        Like


      • “My Vietnamese in laws “

        Oh how lovely! Your Vietnamese in laws, eh? So you like immigration and 3rd wolders, eh? It’s only the YKW that you are so worried about, right? Never mind that 3rd wolders are usually on government handouts, eh? It’s just the Joojooz that we need to care about, not 3rd woldrs fleecing us. Talk about a hypocrite!

        As I aptly pointed out, you only cry or get all bent-out-of-shape when the joojooz are supposedly involved. When there is no Joojoo in sight, you are not worried about the same things that you did when you thought the JooJooz were involved.

        Apparently, I was right on the money when I called you out for the jealous and resentful antisemite you are.

        BTW, between smart educated Jews and parasitic 3rd wolders, I’ll choose the Jews every time, without a second thought. Unlike you, I want to develop culture, not bring it down with stupid people I am supposedly not threatened by, or jealous of. As I pointed out, your ilk doesn’t really care about the white culture, it just has an unhealthy obsession with the Joojooz. You’re consumed by what you think they have, or control. You’re just like the typical stupid redneck. Your standards are shit.

        Glad you stupid WNs are confessing your bullshit, however unintentional those confessions are. LMAO!

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 5:48 pm Carlos Danger

        Why don’t you shut the fuck up Lily. I was really trying to avoid you. You’re stupid and opinionated and need a man badly. They don’t believe in miscegenation either if it makes you happy. They aren’t causing any trouble and have gone from working class to professionals in a generation. They’re here because of a war we lost over there and we owe it to them to pick up the pieces. You really need to stop putting words in my mouth as well you sexually frustrated devil’s spawn. If a cabal of Jws weren’t trying to steal the government and undermine our culture I wouldn’t have any problems with them either. Asians aren’t a hostile elite, Jws are. The two problems are orders of magnitude in difference. These guys were victims of your favorite murderous secular J-wish religion as well. I do have a problem with letting in 12 million to 30 million Mexicans to undermine our proportion of the population. Asians don’t especially bother me either because their women are generally fuckable.

        Like


      • Haha…..such anger. Getting caught red-handed eh?

        You trying to avoid me? You’d die first before that happens.

        So, I am stupid and opinionated and I need a man badly, lol. You argue like a teenage girl.
        .

        “They aren’t causing any trouble and have gone from working class to professionals in a generation. They’re here because of a war we lost over there and we owe it to them to pick up the pieces.”

        We owe it to them? By that rationale we owe it to blacks too. After all, we brought them here as slaves, now we owe it to them.

        Furthermore, maybe they are hardworking, but as a minority they are vulnerable to Democratic pandering, which eventually reaches all minorities, including Asians. Sorry, stop all immigration now, especially for regular folks. I make an exception for scientists, entrepreneurs/investors, athletes, and celebrities. I think we can live without your Vietnamese family.
        .

        “If a cabal of Jws weren’t trying to steal the government and undermine our culture I wouldn’t have any problems with them either. Asians aren’t a hostile elite, Jws are.”

        Hahaha……”a cabal of Jws,” ROTFL! Talks about a paranoid jealous man.

        In other words, as I pointed out, you are afraid of the Jews because they are better than you – the imaginary “hostile elite.” However, you’re not threatened by the Vietnamese because they’re stupider than you. I love having my observations confirmed!!!!!

        .

        “These guys were victims of your favorite murderous secular J-wish religion as well.”

        Oh, more delusions, eh? Now the Vietnamese are victims of the imaginary “murderous secular J-wish religion.” Do you ever run out of delusions?
        .

        “Asians don’t especially bother me either because their women are generally fuckable.”

        Oh, well that’s a great reason to let a minority in. How stupid of me. Not!

        How stupid of you! If you weren’t such an idiot, you wouldn’t be using such a stupid nonsensical excuse, especially when you’re supposedly happily married and the fuckability of certain women shouldn’t be a concern to you.

        BTW, hate to burst your bubble, Vietnamese women are ugly. They are very reminiscent of Mesoamericans, just thinner, and they hardly have good figures. You are blind. But, they are good at marrying foreigners, though, just not their kind, because among other things they are also serious gold diggers. I don’t have anything against gold digging mind you, except when it’s exercised by women of other races trying to intermarry with white men.
        .

        “I do have a problem with letting in 12 million to 30 million Mexicans to undermine our proportion of the population.”

        Well, at least some semblance of rational thinking from you, if that’s to be believed. But, I don’t believe you. You really don’t have a problem with immigration at all, especially since you have foreign wives in your family, and that makes you unable to be a rational judge of immigration.

        Bottom line, you have no real problems with immigration. Your whole beef is the Jews, because you feel threatened of their higher status compared with yours. Sigh…..you’ve just confirmed all my suspicions.

        Like


      • “CH: yes it is our own stupid fault for letting you ingrate fucks in here in the first place.]”

        Fair enough. But that’s not a platform I can vote for.

        It is your fault for letting us in in the first place. However, the real fault is that you’re the ones who made us ingrates. My cousin is 18. She goes to a top tier school and is in her first semester. She was telling me about how she was so angry about the white patriarchy when she had to write her reflection paper about this. Her brother does TFA in some ghetto in DC. He went to an ivy league school. Their parents didn’t teach them any of this. Their parents don’t want to pay money so their kid can learn to hate the white patriarchy. Their parents sure don’t want their son to be a teacher in the ghetto. Your kinfolk are the ones who exploited our desire to do well at school to teach them this. We identify as part of the diversity is our strength rainbow because you made us. This is no value we brought in with us from the Asian continent.

        Like


      • So she’s just furiously stamping her little yellow foot she’s so mad at that horrible, horrible white patriarchy that. . .founded, built, maintained for decades, wrote the canon used in, financially endowed, and still (mostly) runs her “top tier” school?

        Maybe there is something to this ingrate thing after all? Curious.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:08 pm Asian red pill

        Asians are not anti-white. It’s opposite. ‘Model minority’ Asian Americans aspire to white American standards in their assimilation. However, as CH astutely qualifies his argument, young Asians in general are not aspiring to the particular white American type he champions. Instead, they’re adopting the SWPL white American type, which dominates the “top tier” schools that largely define Asian American aspirations.

        Like


      • Asian women certainly aren’t anti white male.

        Like


      • Asian red pill

        Asians are not anti-white.
        ——————————————————————————–

        They are when they get hung from trees.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:28 pm Asian red pill

        Ouch, my groin! Yep. There are reasons I swallowed the red pill.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:31 pm Asian red pill

        Previous comment for Lara. For thwack, anti-Asian animosity doesn’t just come from whites as most any Asian who grew up poor to lower middle class in the big city can tell you.

        Like


      • Asian women certainly aren’t anti white male.

        They actually are, but they despise their own beta/omega men even more.

        Like


      • These days pretty much everyone is anti-white male…even white males on the left are anti-white male

        white males who lean right politically are pretty much the only demographic that is not anti white male

        And some wonder why white males are starting to push back…

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 6:55 am The Burninator

        @Canadian

        Aye friend, true. What’s even more worrisome is why ANYBODY would want white males to start pushing back. Once we get our war footing on we get rather genocide minded and have the gumption and technical smarts to pull it off, along with a long, long streak of (until now) rebelliousness. Why any sane person would want to transform pastel wearing beta schlub suburban guy back into the mindset of Viking Warrior, Gaelic Warrior-Poet, Anglo-Saxon knights or Roman Centurion is beyond me. It is, frankly, nearly suicidal for minorities and feminists to push us back into that way of thinking. Once we get back to that, entire cities will disappear.

        It makes zero sense whatsoever from a tactical standpoint for them to be pushing on us so hard.

        Like


      • “Why any sane person would want to transform pastel wearing beta schlub suburban guy back into the mindset of Viking Warrior, Gaelic Warrior-Poet, Anglo-Saxon knights or Roman Centurion is beyond me. It is, frankly, nearly suicidal for minorities and feminists to push us back into that way of thinking. Once we get back to that, entire cities will disappear.

        It makes zero sense whatsoever from a tactical standpoint for them to be pushing on us so hard.” – Burninator

        True, but you’re forgetting that minorities and feminists don’t exactly major in nuanced historical understanding. As a matter of fact, the notion that European males have ever accomplished anything through merit and work is precisely what they spend their careers debunking. It’s their entire ideology, but it’s going to turn out to be self-defeating. The more white males are squeezed by the New World Order, the more explosive will be the eventual reaction against that Order.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:20 pm Carlos Danger

        Perhaps part of the problem is that your cousin is defining white patriarchy differently from its typical meaning here. I doubt the patriarchy she complains of at Harvard are Republican voters. Tim Wise, for instance doesn’t consider himself white. YKW has taken over the Ivy League and that is why things like HBD are shunned topics, thanks to the influence of Franz Boas on Anthropology in the US. He is the father of multi-culturalism and equalism in this nation in the 20th century. It is also why Asians often get the short end of the stick in the Ivy League.

        Like


      • I find a lot of Asians do not understand America very well. Consider how ill informed native white Americans, particularly your SWPL midwit who gets their information from mainstream media outlets. A lot of Asians grow up in sheltered communities with little contact with whites (so you get weird brouhahas like the Jeremy Lin “chink in the armor” comment, where supposedly English speaking Americans go nuts over a term created by Shakespeare…), but the typical Asian is going to get a steady anti-white diet from birth. I have met Asians who think white Republicans are keeping them out of Harvard, when it is left-wing Jews and whites who run the show. I’ve met Asians who literally on every issue identify with Republicans, but they vote Democrat because they buy the lie that Republicans run America.

        Personally, I expect a lot of Asians will swing back to Republican/white third party as soon as the racial lines are blown out. Asians don’t like blacks and are at best amused by Mexicans (literally, my Chinese friend told me blacks are scary, but Mexicans are just clowns.)

        Like


      • or you could have simply said;

        Whitey is a-l-w-a-y-s to blame

        Like


      • Not always, but you’ll do until Satan returns.

        Like


      • Satan walks the streets of …THE GHETTO!!!

        Like


      • Your vote is easy to get? As easy as your pussy?

        Like


  19. Obama won the presidential election in 2008 because any democrat would. He won the primary because democrats liked him better than hillary (maybe because he was black-but he also was against the Iraq war unlike hillary). He became a famous politician because he was the first black editor of Harvard Law Review. He became editor of Harvard Law Review because he was a compromise candidate that the conservatives liked better than the more strident liberal who was otherwise the leading candidate (and maybe because he was black). He got into harvard law because he was smart and was black.

    He pretty clearly would not have been president if he was not black. But, Bush II would not be president if he was not Bush I’s son. And Hillary would not be a viable candidate if she wasn’t married to bill. And John McCain would not have been a candiate if he was a better pilot. And Romney would not be a candidate if he was not born into money. There are plenty of contingent factors involved in being president.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 1:12 pm Asian red pill

      Obama’s position – as a State Senator, not in Congress – against the Iraq enforcement was as vapid as the rest of his politics.

      Obama fully agreed with all the premises of the strong case against Saddam, but his jaw-dropping alternative to the prescribed enforcement of the Gulf War ceasefire and UNSC resolutions – the process for which had been inherited by Bush from Clinton – was that the Saddam problem would just “fade away” if left alone. He vaguely referred to a non-existent historical precedent for that happening. Obama’s opposition was based purely on domestic partisanship, not on any substantive international political grounds.

      I agree Obama was elected largely based on his position on Iraq, but his position on Iraq was indicative of his very weak grasp of international affairs. Obama was rewarded for being wrong.

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 1:32 pm Hugh G. Rection

        So you think the Iraq war was a good idea?

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 2:28 pm Asian red pill

        That’s like asking if surgery and chemotherapy for a cancer sufferer is a good idea. The Iraq enforcement was justified and the best remaining of a limited set of bad options.

        By the close of the Clinton administration, we only had 3 choices left with Saddam: the indefinite, harmful, deteriorating ‘containment’ status quo with no solution (except, I guess, Obama’s claim that the Saddam problem would fade away on its own), unilaterally freeing a non-compliant Saddam which was not a real option, or giving Saddam a final chance to comply under credible threat of regime change. 1998’s Op Desert Fox, which Clinton had labeled a last chance for Saddam to comply, had used up the penultimate military enforcement measure. After 1998, with every other means to pressure Saddam to comply exhausted, credible threat of regime change was the only card we had left to play. We were fully entangled with Iraq, and we were going to crash land with Saddam one way or the other. Either we would allow Saddam to control the crash landing or we would control it.

        Clinton had clarified the procedure for the Iraq enforcement and Bush faithfully followed it. In 1998, Clinton bombed Iraq based on a 3 week compliance test applied by UNSCOM. In 2002-2003, Bush gave Saddam 4 months to pass the compliance test applied by UNMOVIC. At the same time, Saddam was also equally responsible for complying with strict humanitarian and terrorism resolutions, not just weapons resolutions. As with Op Desert Fox, Op Iraqi Freedom was triggered by Saddam’s failure to take advantage of his (2nd) last chance to comply with the Gulf War ceasefire and UNSC resolutions. Of course, Saddam should have complied in 1991 and taken himself and Iraq off the hook immediately, let alone in 1998 or 2002-2003.

        In the end, the Iraq enforcement successfully achieved the standard set by Clinton for resolving the Iraq problem: Iraq in compliance, Iraq no longer a threat to her neighbors and the international community, and regime change.

        Keep in mind that the Iraq war of 2003 was brief and relatively surgical. Some argue Bush should have installed a hasty government, left Iraq after CIA’s post-war survey was completed, and skipped out on the cost of the post-war. But we didn’t skip out on Asia and Europe after WW2. Winning a war for the putative leader of the free world means winning the peace, and that’s what we stayed in Iraq to do after the war. With Iraq, Bush followed inTruman, Ike, and JFK’s liberal path. The bulk of the controversy that elevated Obama to the presidency was based on the post-war stage, which was characterized by US-led peace operations in partnership with Iraqis, defending the Iraqi people and post-Saddam Iraq against invasive and brutal illiberal forces.

        The 2003 war with Saddam’s Iraq was justified and long in the developing. The post-war build-up and defense of post-Saddam Iraq by the leader of the free world was honorable and necessary for building the peace. Of course, by electing Obama twice, it would seem America is on the verge of rejecting our WW2 mantle of leader of the free world, which does cast our Iraq enforcement in a different light.

        Like


      • You are crazy dude. Please go see a psychiatrist.

        No, attacking a random country for having “WMDs” (which they didn’t have) and killing 100.000 people in the process isn’t justified. Neither is Saddam’s dictatorhood. The Saudi king isn’t an elected leader either.

        You aren’t “the leader of the free world”. You were an international, dishonest bully and you deserve pain for actually being stupid enough to believe that crap.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 12:37 am Asian red pill

        The difference is I researched the Iraq enforcement while writing on it as a law student and before that as a political science major.

        We did not “[attack] a random country”. See UNSC resolution 1441 and US Public Law 107-243. The legally documented background for our 2002-2003 Iraq enforcement action is long and deep. Saddam was guilty on many counts not limited to weapons. In fact, Saddam was established and presumed guilty on WMD and other issues as the foundational basis of the Gulf War ceasefire of 1991 and subsequent UNSC resolutions. From the beginning, the US and UN held zero burden of proof to demonstrate Iraqi weapons. UNSCOM and UNMOVIC were not investigators tasked to find anything in Iraq. Their role was to apply the compliance test in order to verify Iraq’s compliance. By established procedure, the entire burden of proof was on Saddam to prove Iraq’s rehabilitation by complying fully on the weapons, humanitarian, and terrorism resolutions to the mandated standard. Saddam failed to do so in 1991, in 2002-2003, and every moment in between – and belligerently so. As long as Saddam failed to comply, Iraq’s foundational established guilt governed and the presumption of Iraq’s guilt controlled.

        With his track record, the world could afford no less than to be sure Iraq was rehabilitated. Saddam failed to provide that assurance despite Clinton and then Bush giving Saddam ample opportunity to forestall military enforcement simply by complying to the mandated standard Iraq should have met in 1991. Saddam refused to comply and thus triggered the miltary response in 2003 just as he triggered it in 1998. Saddam was guilty beginning to end, including on the weapons resolutions.

        Saddam didn’t even try to pretend to comply with the humanitarian resolutions that were also triggers. Saddam set off many triggers.

        Our status quo with Iraq that Bush inherited from Clinton was untenable and deteriorating with no solution. Sooner or later, either we were going to unilaterally free a noncompliant, victorious Saddam (which no US President was going to do) or we were going to give Saddam a last chance to comply under credible threat of regime change. Those were our choices on Iraq.

        Bush entered the White House kicking the can on the Saddam problem just as Clinton did after 1998, notwithstanding that Clinton kept bombing Iraq after Op Desert Fox. But 9/11 forced our hand on Iraq, as Clinton explained in 2004:

        “Noting that Bush had to be “reeling” in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, Clinton said Bush’s first priority was to keep al Qaeda and other terrorist networks from obtaining “chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material.”

        “That’s why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for,” Clinton said in reference to Iraq and the fact that U.N. weapons inspectors left the country in 1998.

        “So I thought the president had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, ‘Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process.’ You couldn’t responsibly ignore [the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks,” Clinton said.”

        Only Iraq’s compliance could cure “[the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks” and Saddam was noncompliant to the end.

        You do know the vast majority of the casualties in Iraq were – and still are – caused by Saddam loyalists, Sadrists, and Islamic terrorist invaders, right? The US-led war was designed to minimize casualties and from the moment that Saddam’s regime fell, the US military role in Iraq was defending the Iraqi people and building up a reformed post-Saddam Iraq. That mission culminated in the Counterinsurgency “Surge” where Americans and Iraqis fought side by side for the life of Iraq against the Islamic terrorist invaders.

        Like


      • DOn’t you just like these educated fools who think their useless information entitles them to support bullies on the international stage?

        9/11 had nothing to do with Saddam you dumbfuck. Neocons saw that there was a great opportunity to increase their sphere of influence after the world and the US had seen that attack on WTC. Nothing more nothing less. Your diatribe is a hamsterbation session on roids to justify the neocon cycle jerk.

        You don’t attack countries if they don’t attack you first. They didn’t attack anyone. Therefore, the invasion was unjustified.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 11:06 pm Asian red pill

        The US has “attacked” with our military for a variety of reasons since WW2 in our role as enforcer within our capacity as leader of the free world. Our “attacks” have not been limited to reacting to a direct attack on the US – that ship sailed when Truman intervened in Korea in 1950 – nor even a cross-border attack on an ally. As the Russians have protested, and correctly so, the US intervention in the Balkans that closely preceded the Iraq enforcement was less justified than our Iraq enforcement. The Libya intervention that closely followed the Iraq enforcement was also less justified. The Russians can’t understand the passionate opposition in the West to the Iraq enforcement against a deserving Saddam when the same West cheered on attacks against the Serbs on far shakier grounds.

        More to the point, our state of war with Iraq from the Gulf War never ended. It carried over to our active enforcement of the Gulf War ceasefire and UNSC resolutions under Bush Senior, Clinton, then Bush. The 2002-2003 Iraq enforcement was not a new military engagement with Iraq; rather, it was the culminating point of a continuous military engagement with Iraq. Indeed, Clinton cited to the resolutions and laws from the Gulf War for his military “attacks” on Iraq.

        You are correct that the substantive grounds for the Iraq enforcement were not based on 9/11. Bush didn’t claim Saddam was the culprit for 9/11. In fact, the decade-plus Saddam problem was mature, and the procedure to resolve the Saddam problem and our 3 choices with Iraq were set by the close of the Clinton administration. Before 9/11, a large number of UNSC resolutions and US laws were operative on Iraq and enforced by the US-led effort. Clinton’s statement explaining the relation of 9/11 to the Iraq enforcement doesn’t blame Saddam for 9/11, either. Rather, Clinton is saying that the new terrorist threat paradigm in the wake of 9/11 heightened the urgency to resolve the Saddam problem as soon as possible.

        Keep in mind that in response to the escalating terrorist attacks in the 1990s, Clinton had established the preemption doctrine which held that waiting for a terrorist threat to manifest clearly in order to react to it was not viable, especially with WMD as a factor. 9/11 only magnified Clinton’s preemption doctrine and proved its necessity.

        Saddam had refused to account for his WMD to the mandated standard, he supported terrorists, the US and Iraq were in an active state of conflict, Saddam threatened the US, and his extraordinarily aggressive track record meant his threats were not idle. Saddam also had known contacts with al Qaeda, although it was not known how operational their relationship was. At the same time, Saddam didn’t need al Qaeda to attack the US unconventionally since he had other terrorist avenues, including his own clandestine means, to act. With Saddam, we simply could not afford to give him the benefit of the doubt – not before and certainly not after 9/11.

        In any case, Saddam’s terrorist threat was already included in the UNSC resolutions on Iraq before 9/11. It was not necessary to add a charge of terrorism against Iraq due to 9/11. But, as Clinton explained, 9/11 did provide a new political urgency to resolve the Saddam problem as soon as possible.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 11:24 pm Asian red pill

        As far as the bully charge, any police or enforcement authority is only effective insofar it can compel compliance. Given Saddam’s defiant refusal to comply until the end, even under the threat of regime change – remember, Saddam didn’t even try to pretend to comply with the humanitarian resolutions – shows that we weren’t harsh enough with Saddam. If Bush Senior and/or Clinton had been more of a ‘bully’ with Saddam earlier on and thereby successfully compelled Saddam to comply, then Bush wouldn’t have been put in the position to have to go to such a far extent to clean up the mess in Iraq.

        Like


      • That’s 100, 000 less potential Virgins in Paradise fueled self detonations at a supermarket near you…
        You’re welcome.

        Like


      • No, the Iraq War was completely unjustified. It was a complete Establishment GOP / neocon circle jerk, and nicely explains how we got stuck with 0bama.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 11:56 pm Asian red pill

        It was justified: Operation Iraqi Freedom was based on some of the best developed law, policy, and precedent grounds in American (military) history. Most of the law, policy, and precedent for the Iraq enforcement was developed by the Clinton administration – Bush really only concluded the course on Iraq set by Clinton.

        I agree the Iraq mission was founded on neoconservative principles. Neoconservativism really is just a relabeling of the muscular Wilsonian liberalism established by FDR, Truman, Ike, and JFK that guided our 20th century foreign policy. Our intervention in Iraq in 1990-1991 was based on liberal internationalist principles. Bush followed that tradition faithfully in Iraq by following the course on Iraq established by Clinton based on those principles.

        We got stuck with Obama because the Left and Democrats lied flagrantly about the Iraq enforcement and most people bought the lie.

        Like


      • Hey faggot, no matter how many buzzwords you state, you will never bullshit us about the US, LITERALLY attacking a country that didn’t and wasn’t going to do a damned thing.

        Wars aren’t things that you can justify through bureaucratic gymnastics.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 11:09 pm Asian red pill

        Saddam had already done plenty and was in an ongoing active state of breach when his regime was overthrown.

        Like


      • I am going to hit a bees nest of angry comments with this one but here I go anyway,

        along the years I have read at least 4 or 5 articles in which they say that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

        Would you anti-Bush people – who would not believe Fox news if it said the sky is blue and the grass is green – believe the Associated Press? ( which is definitely not a right wing source of information in case you were wondering)

        here , have fun denying these facts, and denying Bush was right about WMD,

        http://news.yahoo.com/uk-experts-help-iraq-destroy-chemical-residues-144204378.html

        And don’t forget the hundreds and hundreds of trucks – caught on satellite, and shown on CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC etc etc – that quickly moved who knows what out or Iraq, I am sure they were carrying Gatorade and Nike jogging shoes and old copies of Playboy magazine, those trucks could not have possibly been carrying weapons of mass destruction… right ?

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 11:15 pm Asian red pill

        Saddam could and should have prevented the war simply by complying with the Gulf War ceasefire and UNSC resolutions to the mandated standard, which he should have done in 1991, let alone 2002-2003.

        Like


      • Asian red pill is right,

        I can’t remember the exact number ( feel free to correct me ) but the United Nations, Bush-father , Clinton, and Bush-son all warned Saddam at least 20 times and offered him many deals which he refused.

        If memory serves the only deal he took was the millions ( or was it billions ) in food aid that was supposed to help poor people in Iraq but that Saddam used to buy himself about 14 new Palaces ( and probably also bought himself a few weapons with that money )

        Yes the 14 or so new palaces were built during that time that the world was being insanely generous with Saddam in the hope they could appease him

        Only a liberal or a fool would say this is coincidence

        Like


      • on October 24, 2013 at 1:13 pm Asian red pill

        Canadian Friend: The eye-opening realization during my school research on the Iraq enforcement was that Clinton’s intelligence on Iraq’s WMD was *no more reliable* than Bush’s intelligence. That was the key to understanding the compliance procedure on Iraq that Bush inherited and followed. Clinton’s case for bombing Iraq was centered on Saddam’s behavior and *unaccounted for* Iraqi weapons – not a positive demonstration of Iraqi weapons. Iraq’s possession of WMD was established as foundational fact from the start. From there, we held no burden to prove Iraq possessed WMD. Clinton did not cite intelligence on Iraqi WMD as the reason for punitively bombing Iraq while also establishing regime change as the solution for the Saddam problem.

        Rather, Clinton cited the fact of not knowing the current state of Iraq’s weapons as dangerous because it was fully Saddam’s responsibility to make us know with total certainty that Iraq was disarmed. Short of that certainty, Saddam’s presumption of guilt held and classified Iraq, according to Clinton, as a “clear and present danger”. In 2002-2003, Bush applied the strict standard and compliance procedure for Iraq that Clinton had applied in 1998.

        From the standpoint of the compliance procedure for Iraq started under Bush Senior and clarified under Clinton, US and UN demonstration of WMD possession by Iraq was irrelevant. The entire burden of proof was entirely on Saddam out of respect to Saddam’s proven ability to hide his weapons programs. The notion, which is implied in your comment, that we held a responsibility to demonstrate Iraq possession of WMD was purely a propaganda invention that conflicts with the actual formative background and established compliance procedure. It was established at the outset that Saddam possessed WMD programs. It was Saddam’s responsibility to account for Iraq’s disarmament to a strict mandated standard in order to cure Iraq’s presumption of guilt and prove Iraq’s rehabilitation.

        That didn’t happen. UNMOVIC’s reports show that Iraq failed the weapons compliance test – again – in 2002-2003. After the fact, the post-war CIA survey (the Duelfer Report) showed that Iraq was in breach, but the CIA’s post-war survey isn’t really relevant to the compliance procedure, either. What was relevant to triggering the regime change was Saddam’s behavior and failure to comply, including Iraq’s failure to account for proscribed weapons to the mandated standard.

        Something most people completely outlook is that even if Saddam had complied with the weapons resolutions to the mandated standard, he was still in breach. It had been made clear to Saddam that he needed to comply with all the resolutions in order to avoid regime change. That’s what last chance to comply under credible threat of regime change meant. How serious were the non-weapons resolutions on Iraq? Our most costly, provocative, invasively sovereign-breaching pre-Op Iraqi Freedom military engagement with Iraq – the no-fly zones that included on-going bombing – enforced humanitarian resolutions, not weapons resolutions.

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:21 pm Customer Service

      I still think the powers at be were trying to throw the election by having the Dems serve up a black man and a female candidate after 8 years of GWB. To their surprise, the black man won. So the powers changed sides and now are Democrat, whereas in the GWB years they were GOP.

      Like


    • Sfer, you are missing the point. Nobody was writing hagiographies about Bush or McCain as brilliant men, unlike the constant fawning over Obama’s genius we hear from the media. Everyone accepts that W became president because of his father. No one accepts that Obama is president because he is black.

      That’s the point.

      Like


      • map,

        You are being logical and you are being honest about the facts, that very rarely works with liberals…

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:58 am The Burninator

        Yeah, logic and facts bounce off of their marshmallow like exterior. They are immune to reality, as is evidenced every single day by simply observing how they act and interact with the world. If reality ever showed up in their view in a way that they could see they’d wither and die like the Wicked Witch jumping into a public pool.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 10:01 am The Spirit Within

        Here’s a liberal, and I agree with you — Obama got elected partly because he was black.

        And partly because he played the game juuusssst right. A prez election is a torturous little dance, and he proved himself to be an excellent dancer.

        Fortunately he’s also a good thinker, perhaps too logical. Apparently his family has nicknamed him “Spock”.

        Like


      • McCain was ranked 894 out of 899 when he graduated from the Naval Academy. He was not that dumb. He slacked off in college because he could as an Admiral’s son. But, he is not a brilliant man by any stretch.

        Bush II is smarter, but his vow never to be out Texan-ed again after losing in his first congressional election meant that he actively avoiding coming across as smart.

        Obama emphasizes his book smarts because it makes him more electable since he is black. He still is a smart guy. Hard to attack a guy as being dumb when he was head of harvard law review. It would be like attacking McCain for being a coward; it does not make much sense given his history.

        Like


      • Then why is it impossible to find any article Obama published while he was at Harvard?

        Like


      • Hard to attack a guy as being dumb when he was head of harvard law review.

        He was made head of Harvard Law Review for the same reason he was made POTUS: because of his mixed-race sexiness to leftoids. He’s an empty suit, and a beta to boot.

        Like


  20. on October 21, 2013 at 12:45 pm The Burninator

    Our numbers, as whites, are unassaultable and not really diminishing as fast as the Left keeps telling us…if we could manage to get women to vote with something other than vapid feelings. This isn’t to say that there weren’t numerous exceptions, but it’s no big secret that the “women vote” went overwhelmingly to this “midnight drunk girl club cruising” predator.

    I also strongly suspect that the vote was entirely fabricated in many areas. I know friends, friends from decades of friendship even, who live in some of the “100% Obama!” districts. They voted for Romney. Their complaints have fallen on indifferent ears. Clearly, if they (and they intimate others) didn’t vote Obama, the best that could be claimed is 99.x%. Nobody rounds up to 100, unless it’s 100. Too easy to see fraud then. But there they did it.

    Then they turned around and convinced you, and others (white males and some white women) that it was a “demographics change! You outta power, fools!”. Yeah, demographics, as in “electronic voting booths” and “easily hacked/thwarted”.

    No proof of course, outside of direct knowledge of Romney voters in “100% Obama counties!”. But yeah, what’s going on probably isn’t what we assume.

    Like


    • As I said when I first saw evidence of a lot of voter fraud in 2008 (and then 2012 and about 99% of it in favor of Obama);

      is it any surprise that the demographic with the highest crime rate is the demographic that committed so much voter fraud ?

      And if they are not worried that 100% votes for one candidate – of their demographic group – is impossible and obviously a fraud, it is because they know they have been made “untouchable” thanks to decades liberalism.

      Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:24 pm Carlos Danger

      If I see another fat white chick with tattoos driving a beat up car with a kiddie seat and an Obama bumper sticker, I’m gonna scream!

      Like


      • You had better not visit Austin. I probably saw three of those today.

        When the shit hits the fan the libtard whites in this city are really going to be fucked.

        Like


      • But I thought you lived in the deep south???? Therefore, either you’re lying about seeing such a sticker in your area, or it means that even in your backyard they like Obamas since the white trash are also living in the hopes of getting government handouts. Doesn’t bode well, either way, eh?

        Call me a bullshit detector.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 5:52 pm Carlos Danger

        I was in DC recently. I’ve lived all over the world but Like the South. You really need a man.

        Like


      • LOL! You make me laugh when you’re annoyed.

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:31 pm Carlos Danger

      I’m of the opinion that the entire 2008 financial crisis was orchestrated and planned from the beginning and if not planned from the start, spotted as an opportunity early along the way as a serendipitous byproduct of the Dems usual Tammany Hall style corruption . The Dems needed to discredit 20+ years of economic expansion or they were never going to get their welfare state. Opie is a Manchurian candidate and has been groomed for this for some time. His ties to the CPUSA are too deep and too extensive for this not to be the case. Being a closet homo makes him easy to control too. “We’ll just have to run that Larry Sinclair story on 60 minutes. So Opie is an empty suit and a symbol of our tarnished and hostile future.

      Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 4:53 pm BioCulturalBeamDelta

        Go read some Vox Day or Karl Denninger or Murray Rothbard’s essay on Reaganomics (Reagan was a great man and president, but he never shrank government like he promised to and morally should have). The economic expansion was an illusion all along due to faux-conseratives like Bush 41 and 43 who disguised Keyensian deficit spending as being some sort of “conservative reform.” Why do you think Bill Clinton was so eager to join in? The Democrats ironically didn’t need to do anything, because faux-Conservatives rightfully cut taxes, but kept spending as much as Democrats.

        Like


  21. I beg to differ; Obama matters a lot. A house that took a year to build can burn down in an hour. We’ll be a long, long time reparing the damage he has done. If we do at all.

    Like


    • Oh, you silly conservative, you. You think it took a lot of effort to get where we are? That our institutions are balanced and tested by years of trial and error? That small, incremental changes to the current system have the best chance of producing the best results? Ha! No! All dials to 11! We can predict the consequences! “Control is an illusion” … for other people! Civilization balances itself naturally! Everyone’s always on their best behavior! Try anything! Shame is for schmucks!

      Like


    • I agree, but this wasn’t due to Obama being any kind of especially effective socialist or what have you. The same damage would have occurred had any democrat been elected. And honestly, after this latest surrender, I have to wonder if our financial situation would be any different had McCain or Romney won.

      Like


  22. Do you know that the electorial college VOTES for the president,not the people.

    Like


    • But they vote the people’s vote and if I’m not mistaken there have been few times in history where they did not vote the popular majority.

      Like


  23. If you look at all the groups you listed, they have very little in common. As the remaining boring beta white men decide to just “enjoy the decline” and tax revenues for the welfare state dry up, it’s going to be fun watching the competing parasites fall to fighting each other over the shrinking pie.

    Like


  24. Asians go with a winner. When they look at institutions in the US, the high profile institutions they see are 90% liberal (e.g. higher education, media, Hollywood), while conservative institutions aren’t nearly as conservative-dominated. If you arrived here from another planet, you’d think the liberals ran things, which in large part, they do, at least the high profile stuff. And you’d wonder what the heck Duck Dynasty was all about and why anybody pays attention to it.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:23 pm Asian red pill

      Good point. Asians are like a litmus test in that regard. We want to be and try to be good Americans. That hasn’t changed since young West Coast Japanese American men responded to the citizenship challenge of WW2 by fighting valiantly and dying for America at the same time their families were dispossessed and imprisoned by America.

      What has changed since then, however, is the culturally dominant definition of ‘good American’.

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:34 pm Carlos Danger

        What has changed since then, however, is the culturally dominant definition of ‘good American’.

        And this is exactly how the country is stolen out from underneath us.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 4:17 pm Mike S. Puppet

        Who is “us”? It sure wasn’t stolen from under me.

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 5:45 pm Carlos Danger

        Those antediluvian White Christians that built the country from scratch that everyone is kicking in the teeth right now in preparation for far greater looting and dispossession to come.

        Like


      • How were white americans who happened to be in Japan treated by the japanese after the attack on Pearl Harbor? Were they placed in internment camps or treated to random beheadings and endless torture? To me, the intenment camps have always been a non-issue, written on Frankfurt school stationary.

        Like


      • Internment camps in the USA and Canada were not horrible places at all, people were treated nicely, well fed, had clean clothes, there was absolutely no bad treatment of “prisoners”

        We can not say as much on how Allies were treated in Japan and Germany ( or Vietnam for that matter )

        Like


      • I didn’t mean to say that the camps in America were horrible, just that Americans in Japan during the same period were tortured and beheaded, etc. That’s why I’m sick of hearing about how poorly the japanese were treated in american internment camps. Hope that clarifies my point.

        Like


  25. The analysis of HBD and intersexual relations in this blog is unchallenged and almost every single post is inspirational. Not so much the political analysis here, which sometimes is -admittedly – truth spoken boldly, but sometimes rather conspiracy theory.
    In the above topic, explanation might be much more simple: After 8 horrible years of George W. Bush, even a cat with one brain hemisphere surgically removed would have been elected for president – just to make a change from GOP to democrats.

    Like


    • What was so bad about Bush?

      Unemployment was lower, the economy was in better shape, the debt was half what it is now, there were less conflicts in the middle east than there are now, there were less of those drone attacks in which innocent civilians are killed, and I could go on

      oh yeah and don’t forget, Bush is the President who provided more aid to Africa than any president including Obama in USA history

      so what was so “horrible” about Bush?

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 2:58 pm Asian red pill

        Bush is a genuine liberal (as any conservative or libertarian can explain) who threatened to reveal the Democrats as false liberals and liars. So ‘liberal’ Democrats had a choice: be true to liberal principles and support Bush or double down on the Democrats’ lies and demonize Bush.

        Most Democrats chose the tribal route rather than the principled route.

        Like


      • You idiot the world economy completely collapsed in August 2008 after years of Bush you stupid 90 IQ do-gooder have good intentions we are not educated guy

        Like


      • It is grounhog day again…

        Every few weeks since 2008 I have to educate some libtard about the 2008 subprime collapse which was caused by Democrats

        I know …I know!!!… the main stream media has been saying – and is still saying to this day – it was all Bush’s fault but that is a whole made up story.

        but for you to understand you would have to do about half an hour of reading, which I would bet money you will not do or are incapable of doing

        your whole argument will probably be ; ” it is faux news!!!”

        Anyway here is a video that gives you a taste of what you would learn if you took the time to read about the facts behind the subprime crisis of 2008

        and here are some things you could read,

        The Real Culprits In This Meltdown

        By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, September 15, 2008 4:20 PM PT

        Big Government: Barack Obama and Democrats blame the historic financial turmoil on the market. But if it’s dysfunctional, Democrats during the Clinton years are a prime reason for it.

        Read More: Business & Regulation

        Obama in a statement yesterday blamed the shocking new round of subprime-related bankruptcies on the free-market system, and specifically the “trickle-down” economics of the Bush administration, which he tried to gig opponent John McCain for wanting to extend.

        But it was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street’s most revered institutions.

        … … …


        noquarterusa.net

        Barack’s Wall Street Problem is Now America’s

        By Larry JohnsongravatarcloseAuthor: Larry Johnson Name: Larry Johnson
        Email: [email protected]
        Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
        About: Larry C. Johnson is CEO and co-founder of BERG Associates, LLC, an international business-consulting firm with expertise combating terrorism and investigating money laundering. Mr. Johnson works with US military commands in scripting terrorism exercises, briefs on terrorist trends, and conducts undercover investigations on counterfeiting, smuggling and money laundering. Mr. Johnson, who worked previously with the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism, is a recognized expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, crisis and risk management. Mr. Johnson has analyzed terrorist incidents for a variety of media including the Jim Lehrer News Hour, National Public Radio, ABC’s Nightline, NBC’s Today Show, the New York Times, CNN, Fox News, and the BBC. Mr. Johnson has authored several articles for publications, including Security Management Magazine, the New York Times, and The Los Angeles Times. He has lectured on terrorism and aviation security around the world, including the Center for Research and Strategic Studies at the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, France. He represented the U.S. Government at the July 1996 OSCE Terrorism Conference in Vienna, Austria. From 1989 until October 1993, Larry Johnson served as a Deputy Director in the U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. He managed crisis response operations for terrorist incidents throughout the world and he helped organize and direct the US Government’s debriefing of US citizens held in Kuwait and Iraq, which provided vital intelligence on Iraqi operations following the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. Mr. Johnson also participated in the investigation of the terrorist bombing of Pan Am 103. Under Mr. Johnson’s leadership the U.S. airlines and pilots agreed to match the US Government’s two million-dollar reward. From 1985 through September 1989 Mr. Johnson worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. During his distinguished career, he received training in paramilitary operations, worked in the Directorate of Operations, served in the CIA’s Operation’s Center, and established himself as a prolific analyst in the Directorate of Intelligence. In his final year with the CIA he received two Exceptional Performance Awards. Mr. Johnson is a member of the American Society for Industrial Security. He taught at The American University’s School of International Service (1979-1983) while working on a Ph.D. in political science. He has a M.S. degree in Community Development from the University of Missouri (1978), where he also received his B.S. degree in Sociology, graduating Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa in 1976.See Authors

        Posts (797) on September 21, 2008 at 8:56 AM in Current Affairs

        (bumped up by SusanUnPC)

        Barack Obama has a major Wall Street and Washington problem that the media so far is refusing to acknowledge or explore. He is in the pocket of the Wall Street firms and mortgage security companies that are at the center of the collapse of the real estate bubble. He is closely tied to at least two of the Fannie Mae principals. As Ricky Ricardo would say, “Barack, you got some splaining to do.”

        Let’s start with the numbers. Why is a first term Senator pulling down almost $300,000 a year from Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Countrywide Financial, and Washington Mutual? He has not even completed his fourth year in the Senate and received a total of $1,093,329.00 from these eight companies and their employees. (all data from OpenSecrets.org). John McCain’s numbers, according to OpenSecrets.org for the period 1990-2008 (i.e., 18 years worth of data) only collected $549,584.00. In other words, Barack is receiving $273,582.25 (and 2008 is not over) per year while McCain raised a paltry $30,532.44.

        Want another shocker? Barack Obama has received more from one source–Goldman Sachs $542,252.00–than McCain has from all of the companies combined. Who the hell is more beholden to lobbyists? And why does a junior Senator from Illinois rate this kind of dough?

        Why are these firms and their employees showering Barack with their cash? Although the conventional wisdom wants to pin the Wall Street debacle on Republican greed, the reality is that the real estate market and the big players on Wall Street have been a Democratic game. McCain’s hands are clean when it comes to this mess. That is not spin, that is a fact. He proposed legislation back in 2006 to start addressing the abuses of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but the Democrats would have none of it.

        … … …

        I have more , much more , where that came from

        but you will probably refuse to believe your own two eyes and will resort to throwing insults

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:48 am The Spirit Within

        Please stop commenting. Your ignorance is so enormous that it literally hurts to read your words.

        Seriously.

        Like


      • Show me where I am wrong

        or shut the fuck up

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 10:09 am The Spirit Within

        Okay, “Canadian Friend”, you asked for it.

        Here are the things that Bush did wrong. Ready?

        Took more vacation time than any other President
        Invaded Iraq to get rid of WMDs which didn’t exist
        Implemented protectionist steel tariffs
        Outed a CIA agent for political purposes
        Fired prosecutors who refused to abuse their positions for political purposes
        Disregarded FISA laws and wiretappd Americans without warrants
        Never caught Osama Bin Laden
        Failed to plan for Iraq occupation after Saddam’s government fell and the subsequent occupation has killed 150,000 Iraqi civilians.
        Created a vague “enemy combatant” status in order to indefinitely hold foreigners and even US citizens without trying or charging them with a crime.
        Used torture to interrogate prisoners despite evidence that says information acquired through unreliable
        Prematurely said the mission in Iraq had been accomplished.
        Approved budgets that outspent our tax revenue by hundreds of billions of dollars.
        Poor leadership on response to Hurricane Katrina
        Little or no policy changes on our changing climate
        Didn’t veto a single bill for six years and when he finally did it was to shoot down the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.
        Passed the Military Commissions Act, which removes the right to Habeus Corpus, one of the most fundamental safe guards against tyrannical governments.
        Pulled out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
        Issues illegal “signing statements” when passing bills, saying which portions of the bill he will or won’t enforce. This essentially allows him to rewrite legislation.
        Pushed for elections in Palestine that lead to a Hamas victory, and then tried to overthrow them.
        Allowed Don Rumsfeld to outsource much of the Iraq war to security contractors which are not subject to Iraqi or American military laws or standards.
        Tried to appoint his personal attorney, Harriet Myers, to the Supreme Court.
        Dangerous diplomatic philosophy that discourages peaceful negotiations with certain nations.
        Appointed John Bolton, a man who said “there is no such thing as the United Nations“, as the UN Ambassador.
        Consistent intellectual disinterest in his job.
        Failed to act on warning signs of the September 11th attacks.
        Was dishonest with the American people about his National Guard service.
        Lied about giving up golf in a time of war.
        Dissolving the Iraqi army right after the war, putting thousands of trained soldiers into the insurgency.
        Believing Paul Wolfowitz that the war and subsequent reconstruction would pay for itself with Iraqi oil revenue.
        His policies contributed to a quadrupling of the price of oil.
        Lied to the American people that Saddam Hussein was working with Al-Qaeda

        To be fair, I’ll also list all the things he’s done right:

        Negotiated a deal with North Korea to end their nuclear program
        Negotiated a deal with Libya to end their WMD program
        Created underwater marine sanctuary near Hawaii
        Tripled HIV funding to Africa

        [CH: bush believed two wrong ideas that served as the premise for his worst decisions: one, he believed the iraqi people would take to democracy. two, he believed that mexicans would become americans. bush failed because he is, in his heart, just like the leftoids: a dumbfuck equalist. bush and obama will go down as two of america’s most loathsomely incompetent and malevolent presidents. will there be a trifecta of bad presidents? history says yes.]

        Like


      • Very impressive copy and paste ability you have there

        that’s cute

        even though some of the items in your googled list are not even true or Obama has done the same or worse

        I could copy and paste a list as long or longer of all the bad things Obama has done, even a few that are shameful such as throwing under the bus reverend Wright who was his mentor for what? 25 years?

        and we could do that all night

        but you have not showed me where I am wrong.

        Most of those “bad ” things can not be measured or quantified, but those that can are where Obama is doing worse than Bush

        and those are the ones I mentioned above that you still have not disproved ,

        — employment numbers up ( people on food stamps up, Mexicans on welfare up etc )

        — economy down ( USA has lost its AAA credit rating, the US Dollar has lost value etc etc…)

        — the debt is higher than it has ever been, is growing faster than under Bush and shows no signs of slowing down

        — there were less conflicts in the middle east than there are now

        — there were less of those drone attacks in which innocent civilians are killed

        — Bush is the President who provided more aid to Africa than any president including Obama in USA history, ( actually he did far more than that and even hard left leftists such as Bono of U2 and Bob Geldof of band Aid concerts have admitted Bush his a good man who did great things and they even said the media just was not interested in the great things Bush did…)

        none of that is bad and none of that was disproved by your copy pasted googled list

        any more fish you want me to shoot in a barrel?

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 12:52 am The Spirit Within

        You asked “So what was so horrible about Bush?” I gave you a long list of answers.

        None of this is about the current president, so your pathetic reframe (Bush v Obama) is soundly rejected. You never took high school debate, did you?

        Losing the AAA rating WAS A RESULT OF A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS REFUSING TO END BUSH-ERA TAX CUTS. Analysts aren’t dumb. They can see obstreperousness and punish it accordingly.

        Again, please stop commenting. Your ignorance is astounding and your attempt at creating a spin chamber is ludicrous.

        Like


      • “bush and obama will go down as two of america’s most loathsomely incompetent and malevolent presidents.”

        No. Even though Bush made mistakes and he has a liberal mindset on some issues, history will be kind to him.

        He’s a 100 times better than what we have now, and probably what we will have from now on. I don’t see any Republican winning, as all Republicans on the scene now are just centrists. Centrists don’t have a stand and they usually don’t win elections. That’s why from now on, all we’ll ever have is a horrible Democrat perpetuating the same horrible culture-killing polices. I’d take Bush/Cheney in a heartbeat if I could.

        Like


      • “Losing the AAA rating WAS A RESULT OF A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS REFUSING TO END BUSH-ERA TAX CUTS.”

        You’re wrong, but … you advocate raising taxes in a recession, huh? Does the WH take your calls?

        Like


      • With liberals every bad thing that happens under Obama is always the fault of Bush/Republicans.

        Part of the reason the USA lost its AAA rating was that the debt started increasing at a higher pace under Obama, and his solutions to fix this were unsatisfactory; thus the credit downgrade.

        funny thing about this

        Bush was hated by the left and the mains stream media, yet he never complained the media was unfair to him – never – ever.

        but Obama has complained about Fox news quite a few times…which like a kid complaining to his mother ” Fox news will not play nice mommy!”

        and unlike Obama, Bush never blamed the previous administration for the things going wrong under his watch

        Everytime something goes wrong Obama says the equivalent of : “the dog ate my homework! ” by blaming Bush/Republicans or… he “alludes” to his critics being racissss ( or the whole main stream media does it for him )

        the two men are VERY different,

        Bush behaves like a man.

        Obama complains like a bitchy little girl.

        Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 2:37 pm The Other Jim

      No, no, no, no…You couldn’t be more wrong about anyone being elected. In a fit of petulance America rejected its tradition, history, and common sense at a moment the most dangerous man in America since Rev. Jim Jones came along to the public sphere.

      Spengler at Asia Times wrote a piercing and prophetic account of what Americans have done;

      “There is nothing mysterious about Obama’s methods. “A demagogue tries to sound as stupid as his audience so that they will think they are as clever as he is,” wrote Karl Krauss. Americans are the world’s biggest suckers, and laugh at this weakness in their popular culture. Listening to Obama speak, Sinclair Lewis’ cynical tent-revivalist Elmer Gantry comes to mind, or, even better, Tyrone Power’s portrayal of a carnival mentalist in the 1947 film noire Nightmare Alley. The latter is available for instant viewing at Netflix, and highly recommended as an antidote to having felt uplifted by an Obama speech.

      America has the great misfortune to have encountered Obama at the peak of his powers at its worst moment of vulnerability in a generation. With malice aforethought, he has sought out their sore point….

      ….This reversal has provoked a national mood of existential crisis. In Europe, economic downturns do not inspire this kind of soul-searching, for richer are poorer, remain what they always have been. But Americans are what they make of themselves, and the slim makings of 2008 shake their sense of identity. Americans have no institutionalized culture to fall back on. Their national religion has consisted of waves of enthusiasm – “Great Awakenings” – every second generation or so, followed by an interim of apathy. In times of stress they have a baleful susceptibility to hucksters and conmen.

      Be afraid – be very afraid. America is at a low point in its fortunes, and feeling sorry for itself. When Barack utters the word “hope”, they instead hear, “handout”. A cynic might translate the national motto, E pluribus unum, as “something for nothing”. Now that the stock market and the housing market have failed to give Americans something for nothing, they want something for nothing from the government. The trouble is that he who gets something for nothing will earn every penny of it, twice over….”
      Link: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JB26Aa02.html

      We Americans all live in Jonestown and Rev. Jim ‘Obama’ Jones has started passing out the cyanide-laced Flavor-Aid.

      The best any of us can do is hide out in the jungle until what has to occur, occurs.

      Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:39 pm Carlos Danger

      I got a big pay raise every year under Bush and did well. The country ran far better then than it does now. We are screwed now that the country is being looted systematically with QE. We had low unemployment and it was easy to get a job, even though we were flooded with Mexicans then. I never understood this Bush hate at all. I consider him to be a fundamentally good man. It was a creation of the 5th columnist media and people have parroted it.

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 6:53 pm Hugh G. Rection

        Well the good years under Bush were built on rising home prices which were unsustainable due to the bad credit on which they were based. It’s not dissimilar to the tech boom and bust in the Clinton years. If you don’t cash out at a good opportunity any wealth you may have thought you gained turned out to be an illusion.

        Bush wasn’t all that bad. He just made himself a target for ridicule because he acted dumber than he really was, probably to appeal to a certain kind of voter…

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:50 am The Spirit Within

        Bush was profoundly incurious and unempathetic. He also never had to wrestle with a Congress that hated him, which undoubtedly made him seem “stronger” than he was, since he destroyed every private organization he ever led prior to 2000.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 2:19 pm Carlos Danger

        According to Karl Rove, Bush reads a book per month. How many do you read? Bush is nonetheless, inarticulate and that allowed his enemies to define him. The press went after him with everything it had to smear him.

        Like


      • How do you know Bush was incurious and “unempathetic” ( isn’t it apathetic)?

        Other than that is what the leftist media – that hated him with a passion – told you you should believe about him?

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 2:21 pm Carlos Danger

        Bush also visited wounded soldiers at Walter Reed at least once a week, often unannounced. In the Army, he was and is well regarded as being sympathetic and someone who cared for the troops. Bush liked being around soldiers. I have heard first hand accounts about Opie that say he is impatient and distracted around the military and that he rarely visits wounded soldiers.

        Like


      • uh huh. what bullshit. hate-filled lefties must sit around circle jerking each other’s version of the world in which they make up and reinforce stories about who they hate.

        BTW, Obama is a shitty shitty person who is terrible, lazy president. Talk about incurious, I don’t think he’s learned a thing since he was vetted by Bill Ayers.

        I refuse to dump on W, except for being an open borders nutjob who let the quest for bipartisanship allow the democrats to block his judges and make Valerie Plame into a hero.

        W:
        Yale undergrad (better GPA than Kerry)
        Harvard MBA
        Pilot school
        Texas Rangers
        Governor

        you can say one or two of those things is nepotism, but not the whole pot.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 4:39 am The Burninator

        Um, Spirit, sorry to break it to you, but he did have to wrestle with a Congress unsympathetic to him.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:48 am The Spirit Within

        Really? I’d LOVE to hear your defense of that.

        Rubber stamped his tax cut proposal, rubber stamped his request for sweeping war powers, and from 2002 to 2006 both Houses controlled by his party. He didn’t veto a piece of legislation for the first 3.5 years.

        Not even comparable to what Obama’s facing. Not even close.

        Like


      • Yeah, Bush was a very hated man, everybody knows that, so Spirit’s point is kind of absurd

        Like


      • Just as Obama’s greatness was/is a complete myth invented by the MSM, Bush’s evilness was too .

        Take a look at what a famous leftist ( Bob Geldof ) said of Bush after Bush helped Africa more than anyone else on the planet ever did.

        Most people have never ever heard of the great things Bush did because the media refused to give Bush any credit – ever.

        ” … Bob Geldof has scored an exclusive interview with US president George Bush for Time magazine, in which he describes an unfamiliarly witty and emotional man who has “quadrupled aid to the poorest people on the planet”.

        In a lengthy interview to be published in the next issue of Time, out tomorrow, Bush told Geldof he believes action must be taken to end the conflict in Darfur.

        Geldof also outlined a series of little-reported US initiatives in Africa in the Time piece. These have included funding HIV anti-retroviral drugs for 1.3 million people, a $350m project to stop the spread of tropical diseases and the awarding of $1.2bn in contracts in Tanzania and Ghana through the Millennium Challenge Account.

        Bush told Geldof that the US public does not know about many of these initiatives because the press “weren’t much interested”, and challenges the Live Aid organiser when reminded that he once said Africa “doesn’t fit into the national strategic interests”…. ”

        read the rest here,

        http://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/feb/28/pressandpublishing.georgebush

        … … …

        here is more ,

        ” … It is some story. And I have always wondered why it was never told properly to the American people, who were paying for it. It was, for example, Bush who initiated the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) with cross-party support led by Senators John Kerry and Bill Frist. In 2003, only 50,000 Africans were on HIV antiretroviral drugs — and they had to pay for their own medicine. Today, 1.3 million are receiving medicines free of charge. The U.S. also contributes one-third of the money for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria — which treats another 1.5 million. It contributes 50% of all food aid (though some critics find the mechanism of contribution controversial). On a seven-day trip through Africa, Bush announced a fantastic new $350 million fund for other neglected tropical diseases that can be easily eradicated; a program to distribute 5.2 million mosquito nets to Tanzanian kids; and contracts worth around $1.2 billion in Tanzania and Ghana from the Millennium Challenge Account, another initiative of the Bush Administration…. ”

        read the rest here,

        http://hotair.com/archives/2008/02/28/geldof-bush-smarter-than-people-think/

        … … …

        Now I would like any of you Obama lovers to show me what Obama has done for Africa that is comparable to what the “evil white racisss” Bush has done.

        Obama should give his Nobel Prize to Bush; he is a good man who deserves it.

        Like


      • Nah… hate to sound heartless, but squelching the AIDS epidemic, which was the only thing keeping the African population explosion at bay, was an extremely stupid move. Now, Africa’s population is soaring to the moon.

        Like


      • “Just as Obama’s greatness was/is a complete myth invented by the MSM, Bush’s evilness was too .”
        “Most people have never ever heard of the great things Bush did because the media refused to give Bush any credit – ever.”

        Well said. And you even brought testimony form the liberal horse’s mouth. Love it.

        I love Bush, even though he made some mistakes. All presidents do. We’re all smarter in hindsight.

        Like


      • Yup, I had evidence to back up what I was saying ( as I almost always do )

        and that explains why I hear crickets form Obama lovers/Bush haters

        Like


      • Spirit seems to only vituperative bullshit left. The hate-filled left is still seething over tax cuts? Why not get pissed about Fannie Mae?

        Like


  26. on October 21, 2013 at 1:56 pm DaveDavidDave

    Why this obsession with Barack Obama? He is the POTUS, an outrageously difficult achievement regardless of race. You, and the majority of your ignorant readers are nobody’s.

    Like


    • Thanks for stopping by Dave and straightening us out! Where would we be without Our Betters (aka you) condescending to us?!?!?

      Perhaps the majority of the ignorant readers are nobodies (see how that’s spelled), but the majority of the readers are not ignorant, so there’s that.

      Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 2:03 pm DaveDavidDave

        You’ll be where you have been and are, which is nowhere. What the readers need is perspective, not circle-jerking. Bashing Barack Obama for various reasons serves no purpose whatsoever, and lessens the credibility of this “game” website. Thanks for responding, Wrecked ‘Em!

        Like


      • Your omniscience is impressive, Dave, but primarily in its complete and total failure.

        Bashing Barack Obama is of the utmost importance, as all narcissistic incompetents should be mercilessly mocked as their un-earned air of importance is what allows them to manipulate their flock into doing destructive and dangerously stupid things.

        Like


      • “Bashing Barack Obama for various reasons serves no purpose whatsoever”

        Other than the fact that Heartiste thinks he’s a disaster?

        Now you’ll be telling me that bashing Republicans for various reasons serves no purpose whatsoever. I mean that is your position, right?

        Like


      • on October 21, 2013 at 3:16 pm Customer Service

        Is it better to bash or Obama or bash the readers bashing Obama?

        Like


      • We are not bashing Obama, we are stating facts about Obama.

        But Obama lovers are bashing us for it.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:51 am The Spirit Within

        State some facts, Canadian friend, and we’ll start believing you.

        Like


      • I have provided plenty of facts/links/excerpts and so have many here including CH.

        You liberals are all the same. You are all (consciously or not) playing by the Alinsky rules.

        No matter how much facts we provide you will either deny those are true or you will demand more evidence.

        There is no end to this game, you simply are trying to wear us down so we will give up

        Like


      • Did I mention the whining, overall faggotry, and butt-hurt above on another comment? Ecccchhhoooooo

        Like


      • you dont like it… dont cum

        Like


    • And I’ll bet you said the exact same thing when Bush was in office and liberals were criticizing him. Right? Because once a person becomes president, he’s “somebody”, and therefore beyond criticism?
      For the record, I can’t stand either Bush or Obama. But I hate hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty even more.

      Like


    • It usually is an achievement but this time the media went further than it has ever been to make sure their candidate – Obama – would get elected.

      He was pretty much handed the Presidency. Just as he was handed the Nobel Prize for having accomplished absolutely nothing – and still has done absolutely nothing to deserve it.

      The media did such a great job of campaigning for Obama that he could have stayed home and he still would have won the election.

      I am not even kidding.

      Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:53 am The Spirit Within

        Obama was embarrassed for the Nobel Prize, as he didn’t think he deserved it.

        If you read the transcript of the speech, you’ll see that he noted that he accepted it for future deeds.

        Like


      • The way Obama feels about it does not change the fact he was handed a Nobel Prize for no good reason/no accomplishments at all.

        Just as he was pretty much handed the presidency by the main stream media who campaigned for him.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:50 am The Spirit Within

        Fine — that doesn’t make the Nobel Prize his *fault*. Giving it back would’ve been a PR disaster on his brand-new presidency.

        You can fault the Nobel Prize Committee, but not him.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 4:41 am The Burninator

        Accepted it for future deeds (!)?? That’s a sign of major narcissism right there. An honest man would have politely deferred and not accepted, offering instead to earn it and then accept when he had earned it.

        Don’t piss on our backs and tell us it’s raining, Spirit.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:50 am The Spirit Within

        See above comment. Returning the prize would’ve been inconceivable and a major PR blunder. He said all this in interviews.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:56 am The Burninator

        If that’s what you tell yourself to continue to coast on fumes and sleep at night, hoss.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:58 am The Spirit Within

        Um, no — it’s merely a fact, “hoss”, and I sleep just fine. You?

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 10:04 am The Burninator

        No, it’s your opinion. That you cannot differentiate the two is telling.

        Fallout from not accepting an undeserved reward? Are you shitting me? There would be a whole lot more people admire his honesty and humility for turning it down, than there were in your 13% effete snob club who admire this cardboard cutout of a man. You may not know it, but in most of America, we have a thing about earned respect and hard work. We tend to value things like earning your way over getting “participation trophies”.

        If you think there would have been fallout of a negative sort from most Americans that only informs me of your separation from reality and the rest of the nation.

        You’re here simply to throw rocks at the hornet’s nest, and it’s doubtful you have any other interest in the site otherwise. We all get that you worship the cock of Obama. We get it. Message delivered. Do you have anything else to do then, or is it more Jay Carney emulation for the remainder of the work day from you?

        I sleep fantastic. Thanks for asking.

        Next.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 10:16 am The Spirit Within

        No, it’s a fact. Here’s his quote:

        “I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments but rather an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations,” he said in the White House Rose Garden.

        He didn’t feel he deserved it. Even the Nobel Prize committee admitted it was an aspirational award.

        You can disagree all you’d like, but he WAS NOT in a position to reject it.

        Yeah, I don’t like participation trophies either. But when they gave me one at basketball camp, I didn’t give it back either. I just stowed it away and eventually it got thrown out.

        You want to bust on Obama? Start talking about drones. How he’s extended the national security apparatus. That’s some scary shit.

        Like


  27. on October 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm The Other Jim

    Well, I suppose the good news is that some on the Right have figured out that the wimynz, especially the single wimynz are a serious part of the problem;

    http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Why-Cuccinelli-Is-Going-to-Lose-and-It-s-Not-Because-of-the-Tea-Party

    FYI, this article was written by a woman;

    “…Women favor bigger government; therefore, they opposed the shutdown more than men. This only solidified their support for McAuliffe, but the shutdown did not actually change the trajectory of the race. Cuccinelli has been losing among women because of social issues, and he is continuing to lose….

    ….The GOP needs to get together and come up with a strategy on how to bridge the gender gap. In the midst of a political campaign, most Republicans don’t want to talk about social issues, but we have to find a way to deal with them regardless. The goal is to win, and you can’t win if you’re fighting about things that are not the real problem. While Republicans are beating each other up, Democrats are running sinister ads about abortion and free birth control—and they’re winning.

    Let me repeat. Cuccinelli will lose. I hate to say it. I don’t like it, but he has been losing to McAuliffe for months, and he will continue to lose. The shutdown has made it worse, but it will not be the causal factor in Cuccinelli’s eventual loss. It’s the women, stupid. Republicans need to come up with a strategy to deal with that issue; if they do, maybe they’ll start winning some more elections.”

    While I’m glad more people on the Right are figuring this stuff out, alas, it’s probably too late.

    Like


    • Abolish all welfare programs and replace them with a minimum income. Single mothers will lose in that situation because their costs will rise, but not their income.

      Abolish alimony. Reform the family courts. There are a lot, a lot of ways to do that, but the point is to make divorce most costly for women to bring down the divorce rate.

      Call me when any candidate proposes to do any of that. GOP only gets single female votes when they are afraid of Muslims, or if the liberals get their way and let all those blacks out of prison. But even then, they’ll just want a bigger military police state, not a smaller government. You can’t win women voters, you have to not let them vote in the first place.

      Like


      • The moment you stop the government from forcing men to pay child support, is the moment you stop out-of-wedlock births and divorce.

        Watch ceased child support force women into being extra careful whom they sleep with, and watch them having children only within a marriage.

        If we stop both child support and spousal support, watch divorce plummeting too.

        Like


  28. And Clinton wouldn’t have been elected were he black. And no Republican nominees would have won their primaries were they black.

    And were Obama to act more Alpha toward women, there would be no way he would be elected.

    A so what to all these theoretical ruminations.

    Like


  29. I make sure when I vote…it counts.

    Perot, Nader, Johnson, and I guarantee if he runs…I’m voting Jesse Ventura in 2016.

    Like


  30. From Rhodesia to the good ol US of A; conservative White Christians have done a poor job expanding the party and welcoming nonwhites.. The first blk president should have been a military man and you know it.

    There has never been a shortage of conservative republican black men in the military. You should have been grooming them since at least 1950.

    It is you sorry white men who allowed the democrats to become the party of nonwhites. We were always yours to lose. We never wanted gay marriage, faggotry and abortion… but your own racism kept you from seeing that.

    You have no one to blame but yourself.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 4:22 pm Mike S. Puppet

      Way too much RealTalk, you’re hurting delicate feeelings.

      Republicans showed everyone that race was more important than character and values. Now, they are wailing and gnashing their teeth because blacks, Asians, and Latinos took notice and started voting accordingly.

      Like


      • Geez, guys…. when the Kool-Aid is that strong, its effect (apparently) is more like malt liquor.

        Negroes, Latinos, YKW, etc. showed everyone race was more important than character and values.

        YT, in his good-natured naivete’ is the only one who still hasn’t fully caught on… but as each day goes by, y’all are schoolin’ us on that regard… and pray, hold back the day, that the pupil surpasses his teachers.

        Like


      • No dumbass, nonwhites have proven time and time again that they can’t think themselves out of the Marxist paper bags they have their pea-sized brains stuck inside. Why is that so hard to understand?

        Like


    • The Republicans desperately wanted Colin Powell to run for president. He refused. My theory is he had too many skeletons in his closet.

      Like


      • Lara,

        My buttox have ballooned with gas, and when the gas is released, it will be dense and creamy.

        At that time, it will be your privilege and delight to….

        Detox my Buttox

        -GB

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:54 am The Spirit Within

        I heard it was his wife. She was too mentally and emotionally fragile to withstand the scrutiny.

        Like


    • They needed to find a black man who wasn’t a rampant womanizer. That might be Obama.

      Like


    • thwack— you are normally a house nigger, and that makes me happy for your future. But this post is pure field nigger along with your sycophantic 90th percentile MikeSPuppet.

      Rhodesia, really? Really! We GAVE you back the country, and just like South Africa you knuckledraggers reverted to the mean and managed to FUCK IT UP which is your nature. Are you really going to compare Zimbabwe to Rhodesia???

      MikeSpuppet– RealTalk was spawned by ghetto niggers who aren’t politically correct and at every moment I ever interacted with them knew damn well that the white man created the civilization that allowed for the mad niggerish behavior. I’m guessing you are a middle class brotha that has never been to jail or been beaten into submission by an out of control fascist racist white boy. These are good for you on a personal level, but don’t tell the whole story.

      I came to respect the thugs I had to “discipline” because PC bullshit was no world the ever lived in, they simply understood the truth and always preached it.

      1) White 2) Asian 3) Brown 4) Black

      I don’t know why God decided to fuck you all up, but he did, make the best of it….

      Like


      • Jay,

        what I meant about Rhodesia, and for that matter, most of colonial Africa is that run correctly, the Africans should have been defending white people, not trying to kill them and drive them out…

        You guys fucked that up. Especially in Rhodesia.

        The first thing you guys should have done when you set up shop there was to allow a thriving black middle class to emerge to serve as buffers and managers. But no, as usual the white man is just too greedy and wants everything for himself.

        Its really kinda sad because ya’ll got a lot of potential.

        Why you gotta always fuck it up with racism?

        (((shakin my head)))

        Rhodesia should have been the first colonial country in Africa with a black president; but noooooooooo,

        YOU had to jail and kill the alpha blacks instead of ‘cutting them in” and making them managers and staff…

        White people live good in all those islands of the carribean; sure, they got slaughtered in Haiti, but they brought that on themselves.

        I will think of you this December when im spanking white girls in the Caymans.

        ta ta

        Like


      • You’re a fucking retard, thwack.

        The White Man would’ve been all too happy to employ blacks as administrators, managers and merchants had the savages been remotely capable of functioning as such.

        Instead, in colonial Africa, the British Empire had to import Indians [dot, not feather] to fulfill that role. Brits are pragmatists first, racists second (or maybe the one follows the other, I dunno). The Indians were up to the job on the sub-continent (the British Raj was mostly run by natives under a handful of Whites, after all) but the negroes from the Dark continent weren’t.

        Again, the evidence is stark. Having left the blacks all the infrastructure of a civil society in places like Rhodesia and Uganda, after Whitey bugged out (and in Uganda, after Idi Amin ejected the Indians as well) the places soon reverted to basket-case status. In India, not so much.

        See also: Detroit.

        Like


  31. Jesus.. Yes, he would’ve been president. Because (ta-dah) he’s not Romney and not McCain and he wasn’t involved with likes of Paul Ryan or Sarah Palin. Seriously, you guys.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:55 pm Life at Calhoun's Lake

      If you believe Obama would have had any reasonable chance of winning a US Senate seat, let alone beat HC for the Democratic nomination, had he been white, you’re out of your goddamn mind.

      Like


    • Denialist,

      Hilary Clinton is also not Romney or McCain and she is involved with the likes of Paul Ryan or Sarah Palin.

      Why isn’t she the President right now?

      Like


  32. Clearly, many here haven’t the slightest idea of Obama’s background, how absolutely connected he is to deep CIA and other extreme Leftist channels. Much remains unknown, but start here to even have a clue:

    http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1852/article_detail.asp

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 4:25 pm Mike S. Puppet

      Japanese MGTOW spun to look like a female initiative.

      Like


    • on October 22, 2013 at 2:56 am Hugh G. Rection

      It sounds miserable, but who knows what’s true and what’s not. The Japanese might not be as forthcoming with the truth as the author imagines. Asking a whore about the reproductive state of the nation doesn’t sound like prudent journalism to me. Author reeks of feminism too…

      Like


  33. wow, i can post here again without limitations .. feels good 😛

    Like


  34. so amazing …<3

    Like


  35. […] [Why Obama Doesn’t Matter] […]

    Like


  36. Your description of the modern democratic party is absolutely spot on. Its not a matter of competing ideologies anymore. The democrats are inherently an anti-American party. Again, not based on ideological differences but based on the actual makeup of its constituency. Obama’s presidency has removed any doubt as to this truth.

    However, much of your correct analysis of Obama is only known now in hindsight. A lot of independents voted for him for reasons completely unrelated to his “race” (which is certainly more white than American black) because he did an extremely good job of pretending to be apolitical. He won Iowa by running to the right of Hillary. She was for the individual mandate, he claimed to be against it. She openly ran an identity-based campaign as a woman, he criticized her for it and avoided using race as his calling card.

    In hindsight, it turned out all to be a scam. Conservatives are incorrect when they call Obama a socialist. He is a nothing. He has no coherent ideology whatsoever. Obamacare is in actuality “Reid/Pelosi-care”. Obama plays golf and reads a teleprompter. That is what he does. He is merely the figurehead of the democratic party.

    Like


    • on October 21, 2013 at 3:54 pm Carlos Danger

      Kevin MacDonald refers to this phenomenon as a hostile elite.

      Like


    • on October 22, 2013 at 12:56 am The Spirit Within

      Obamacare is the exact same national health program proposed by Richard Nixon forty years ago. Rejected by Teddy Kennedy.

      Yep.

      The exact same program instituted by Mitt Romney in Massachusetts.

      Yep.

      Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 4:43 am The Burninator

        And we reject all of those.

        Yep.

        That’s one of your many problems, Spirit, you think like a Collectivist and Tribalist. Some people, gasp (!), believe in principles above party. Hard to believe, I know, but your Tribal shrieking doesn’t work on them like you want it to.

        Go back to the jungle, savage.

        Like


  37. Democrats are intellectually dishonest, inherently anti-law and will run over anything and anyone to expand the scope of government. The do all this while saying they “care more”, while actually hurting they very people they claim to protect. Obama gives liberals the salve to make themselves feel better while laws are run over, blacks suffer the most over the past five years of a stagnant economy, the young see the largest transfer of wealth to the old under Obamacare, creditors see their rights being trampled through the GM bankruptcy, the debt exceeds 100% of GDP with no lowering in sight, etc., etc. No one with any logic would call Obama a good president, and who says otherwise is being intellectually dishonest (see first comment).

    Like


  38. I don’t like Obama, did not vote for him, but I think you, our dear CH, seriously underestimate him. The sheer intellectual firepower and superlative emotional intelligence and high level of street smarts……you really cannot overlook that. In Kenya they test everyone (British system). The best of the best get educated the best. His Dad was at the very pinnacle of a whole generation as he was so high up on that intellectual pinnacle that he got to study abroad, and not just study abroad, but at good schools. Barack Obama, love him or hate him (I simply dislike him and his trying to make us more European socialist and his lack of understanding about money and business which can only come from being in business, which he has never been), has lost nothing in the gene transferrence. You don’t get into the schools he went to, become the Editor of the Harvard Law Review, without being at the very pinnacle of intelligence. I would posit that, you could well be wrong. He has game, my dear CH, serious game, no matter what his skin color is. You have to face the fact that someone with those combination of abilities could well have succeeded anyway.

    I should put it this way: I used to play Division III basketball. We went on a little jaunt to Europe to play some European teams. Each European team had 2 Americans on it. Some were NBA rejects that had recently been cut. Playing against those guys was like playing with people from another planet……and they were the NBA REJECTS. Obama, like it or not, like him or not, is not an NBA reject, he’s a hall of famer politician of intelligence and emtional intelligence the likes of which you have probably never encountered in another human being. The only more capable sheer politician in our time would be Clinton or Reagan. yes, he is that good. I don’t believe in his politics or what he wants American to be but he’s that high caliber. I’m glad that the Republicans are standing up to him and that he’s not getting much done. He’s not much in terms of compromising and connecting with the American Public but he will probably go down as a great president for ending 2 wars and passing health care.

    Do not underestimate your enemies

    [CH: i don’t underestaimte obama’s political skill. but that’s not the primary reason why he was boosted to the ultimate position of power.]

    Like


    • I think he would probably have succeeded in winning the presidency anyway. There’s plenty of black politicians around: theres a reason he rose like a rocket. He’s just a cut below Clinton or LBJ in ability (but more ideological). Clinton was a highly intelligent political animal/politician with incredible instincts for the game….Clinton to Politics is basically what Secretariat was to horse racing. Obama is just a cut below him. It’s a tribute to the conservative values at the core of our country that the Republicans have raised their game to stop him in so many ways. Sort of distasteful in one respect because our govt looks like it’s run by the Zambian parliament but impressive in another in that (Obamacare aside) they will not permit him to much of anyting that he wants to do. He is not at LBJ or Clinton’s level but almost…

      Like


      • Obama is many notches below Clinton.

        Many

        Clinton without a teleprompter was a clever genius, Obama without a teleprompter sounds like…a community organizer… at best

        Like


      • Obama is a very good campaigner. He has very little governing ability. So yes, Obama could keep winning campaign after campaign, even though his rule would be ever growing disaster after disaster. His success depends entirely on the people in Congress to do all his work for him. Pelosi and Reid worked magic to get the ACA passed, but as soon as Obama lost the House, he couldn’t rely on Congress anymore and had to do some work himself. America is still waiting for him to get to work.

        Like


    • “Obama, like it or not, like him or not, is not an NBA reject, he’s a hall of famer politician of intelligence and emtional intelligence the likes of which you have probably never encountered in another human being.”

      Lolwut?

      Have you ever met the guy? I’ve talked with him one-on-one. Hell, he helped me obtain my current gig.

      He’s a pleasant guy. Intellectual heavyweight, though? My God no. Political legend? Absolutely not. His oratory ability is his sole defining asset. He’s simply capitalized on supremely favorable situations while surrounding himself with ruthless political operatives,

      Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:59 am The Spirit Within

        Dude, nobody gets into Harvard Law, and becomes the editor of the Harvard Law Review, without being an intellectual heavyweight. Nobody goes into two years of reclusion, studying political philosophy, ages 20 to 22, without becoming an intellectual heavyweight.

        You met the Social Obama. He didn’t reveal the Brain Obama. Presidents compartmentalize.

        Like


      • Affirmative action may have helped with the first two (though of course they’re not going to let the records out) and I can definitely go into two years of seclusion without becoming an intellectual heavyweight.

        I think he’s intellectually above-average, yes, but not some towering intellect. He’s a very good orator. But if he weren’t black, his story wouldn’t be quite so compelling to the general public.

        Like


      • Apparently you have never heard of Affirmative action…

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 9:53 am The Spirit Within

        Affirmative action does not get you elected by your peers as the editor of the Law Review. Only massive respect for one’s good judgment.

        This is a piece of his history that you can’t slough off.

        Like


      • An actual intellectual heavyweight of law, Richard Epstein, seems to disagree.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 1:00 am The Spirit Within

        And for a different perspective, an article by a Harvard Law professor who taught both Obama and John Roberts. He recalls Obama as liberal but carefully pragmatic:

        http://mag.newsweek.com/2012/07/09/my-most-famous-students-president-obama-and-justice-roberts.html

        Like


    • “His Dad was at the very pinnacle of…”

      His “dad” is not his dad.

      http://www.obamasrealfather.com/frank-marshall-davis/

      Like


  39. There are a million little reasons why Obama got elected president, but really only one big reason that matters: most Americans are now low-IQ, mentally lazy, spoiled, selfish, little bitches. The idea that we could have a prosperous and industrious nation as we once had, but this time without the core cultural belief system that made it possible, is just a further testament to the stupidity of the average American, and that goes double for the knuckle-dragging, chin drooling retards who constitute the majority of Democrat voters.

    The extent of modern thought is now limited to the length of bumper stickers. It is not a coincidence that hardcore leftwing nutbags like to decorate their cars with bumper stickers the most – that’s the entirety of what they are capable of, intellectually. That is also why the Democrats love to come up with simple, easily-repeatable slogans, like the brainwashed cult that they are: “Yes, we can! Hope and Change!” You’ll notice that the responses, from leftwing nutbags on this forum, that defend Obama are pretty much limited to simple snark – “Racism! Racism! Racism!” Just seeing the means by which idiots on the left defend the Obama regime’s indefensible actions should tell you everything about why Obama was chosen to run.

    For those of you lefties on here who were too lazy to follow politics even while you were busy shouting slogans and crying about Sarah Palin, here’s a little tidbit: Hillary supporters revolted after the Democrat primary in 2008 because they thought that vote fraud accounted for Obama’s win over Hillary. They actually organized a sub-group called PUMAs (“Party Unity My Ass”) who voted for McCain en masse. Now, if you’ve got a significant portion of YOUR OWN PARTY accusing the frontrunner of vote fraud in the primary, how do you think the general election is going to go?

    Like


    • Very succinct, concise, and true. The genie is now out of the bottle with decade after decade of declining IQ in the States. I can say quite comfortable you will never see another Repub president until either a) the wheels come off or b) they become the hard liners they once were but with a VERY charismatic figurehead to run. Scenario 1 is far more likely.

      Like


    • I remember the PUMAs and how they described the shocking cheating by the Obama camp

      and I remember how the main stream media quickly swept this under the carpet, it must have been a record how fast the MSM made that story disappear from the radar

      I also remember at first it was hard for the media to hide the fact Hillary was very upset, but they managed to make this go away very quickly, and obviously people in higher places than Hillary told her she had to keep a low profile and shut up and then they would reward her with something ( secretary of state ), and then the media created diversions with made up stories about how Obama was great ( a headline even said he had great pecs…this was beyond silly )

      I would bet money 95% of liberals – who trust the MSM or what their liberal friends tell them at the coffee break – have never even heard of the PUMAs and the fraudulent things that were done by the Obama camp to push aside Hillary who as someone above said was a “shoe in”

      Like


  40. obabma thinkin hurts my potato

    Like


  41. on October 21, 2013 at 5:48 pm Carlos Danger

    Opie is president because George Soros backed him over Hillary in 2008.

    Like


  42. If you resample a hypothetical, he would have probably not won it even if he had been a black man. So your argument is spurious.

    In other words, if you ask whether a random given baby might end up president, its equivalent to a lottery. Of course the lottery may be weighted higher for more deserving babies but even the most deserving one would be quite unlikely at the outset. So, if you resample the lottery, even as a black man he would be unlikely to win. The question is how much more unlikely he is in one condition as opposed to another

    Like


  43. on October 21, 2013 at 6:02 pm Greatest Beta

    At a law school library doing research. The women (if u can call them that) are atrociously over weight. The guys too for that matter.

    Was chatting up a new student (hb6) and she was going on about the conflict of family vs career. You could see the biological distress taking place in her mind I told her to find “balance” in her life, to make time for the gym, friends, love life, etc. not to get consumed by the law school terror.

    I said “why don’t you pair up with someone from school” she said “nah they are too old or already taken I’m looking outside of school but where do you meet people nowadays”

    I respond “I meet people all the time..for example I just met you!”

    Lol. Her hamster squeaked for joy I literally felt a Gina tingle generate lolzzlolzzzz

    Like


  44. on October 21, 2013 at 6:03 pm depressed_danny

    “Native Americans voted for Obama because they were drunk.”

    Bahhh hahahaha. Sad but true. In general, Native Americans [INSERT ANYTHING] because they were drunk.

    Like


    • True… but… as you may have posited by my other contributions here. I’m a race realist of the highest order. Right of Association is a divine right which means any people should be able to associate or not, with any other peoples, the world over. The leftist fascists have destroyed this. Now with all that out of the way—

      I lived in Arizona for many years. NO people even kneegrows have any idea about supposed suffering under white privelege as do Native Americans.

      You see, it is quite simple… by the mid 1800s niggers were freed from slavery and in spite of an IQ that more resembles apes than humans, were allowed to flourish. In the 21st century, we are now beholden to our wrong thinking nature as the biological weapon grows into stage 4 cancer.

      American Indians— noble savages. Tribal? Yes, but largely peaceable and tied to the land. Good values, good family structure, good traditions. They were simply steamrolled into submission and it is a black eye on all European settlers. I say this as an alpha racist. Redskins are men, the way yellows (Asians) are also men. Blacks are homo-habilis Africanus. The missing link.

      Like


      • “American Indians— noble savages. Tribal? Yes, but largely peaceable and tied to the land. Good values, good family structure, good traditions. They were simply steamrolled into submission and it is a black eye on all European settlers.”

        Tied to the land? Bullshit!

        This was no man’s land before Europeans came here and made it into the greatest country on God’s green earth. A few nomadic tribes roaming and hunting buffalo on the Great Plains and prairies, doesn’t constitute land ownership. They build nothing here – no civilization. If we weren’t here now, this land would look exactly like it did 400 years ago – no cites or buildings.

        .
        “Good values, good family structure, good traditions”? More delusions.
        .

        “They were simply steamrolled into submission and it is a black eye on all European settlers.”

        I agree, we should have handled them better, like we should have handled blacks better. For one thing, we shouldn’t have brought them here as slaves, and second, after the civil war, we should have just deported them back to Africa or taken them to Liberia. I think it would have been better for them too, as opposed to staying here and “suffering” under our racism.

        Like


      • I believe deporting them back to Africa would have been the best thing to do, but I am sure whites would still be blamed

        whites would be blamed for having sent blacks back to a hell hole… as if we are to blame for the fact it was a hell hole before we ever set foot there and it is still a hell hole despite the Billions of dollars we have given along the decades and despite our best efforts

        We get no credit for the great things we do and we get blamed for things we have no control over

        whitey is always to blame…kind of like Bush…

        Like


      • The best thing to do is ignore their rhetoric and do what’s right for us. If we listen to liberal mambo jumbo and black playing the blame game, we would be feeling guilty forever – a disease already plaguing liberals.

        Fact is, as you say, even before Europeans ever set foot in Africa, the place was a disaster. Those black tribes had no respect or love for their own people, a form of in-tribe cannibalism, which is why they handed each other over to Europeans for a nice ransom. If your own tribes don’t possess respect for personal rights and individualism, and if you see your own people as “free for all,” why do you expect outsiders to treat you better?

        It’s like todays blacks. They call each other niggers, but get angry when whites call them niggers. Sorry, if you treat each other like shit, don’t expect to get better treatment from other races. How you treat your own is a reflection of your values, and has a powerful influence how you get treated by the rest of the world.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 3:40 pm Hugh G. Rection

        There’s one white guy who probably saved millions if not even billions of non-whites from starvation. I always claim credit for that if someone comes at me with guilt by association for being white

        Like


      • Canadian Friend

        We get no credit for the great things we do and we get blamed for things we have no control over
        ————————————————————————————————–

        The more things change…

        Like


      • “we shouldn’t have brought them here as slaves,”
        ————————————————————————————————–

        Who was the first white person to make that statement, and WHEN did they make it?

        Like


    • Better than tolerating getting crapped on for over 1000 years while sober.

      Like


    • on October 22, 2013 at 4:51 am The Burninator

      1000 years? So the Jutes and Visigoths were taking it to the Red Man back in 1013 then? Was William the Conqueror launching massive land campaigns against Massachusetts after he took down the Anglo-Saxon kings?

      Or do you consider the infrequent and sparse attempts at settling L’Anse aux Meadows, Newfoundland, and Labrador, Canada as somehow “oppression” when in fact the Vikings basically went there by accident and didn’t stay fast or long?

      Have you ever bothered to even crack a history book Nicole?

      Like


  45. this was sort of an interesting read, a 98 year-old (thrice married homewrecker) woman’s relationship advice.
    http://www.esquire.com/women/advice-98-year-old

    Like


  46. Had Reagan not been an actor, would he have been elected? Had George Bush, Sr. not been the son of a senator, I think he might have been. Had Clinton been black, he would not have. Had G.W. not been the son of G.W,. he’d likely have been a drunken loser. If Hillary is the next, it will be in large part to the fact that she is a woman and that her husband gave her the stage. Obama, I think, is a lot (politically) smarter (and shrewder) than you, or me, or most anyone out there. Also, Obama’s a conservative.

    Like


    • Obama is not an intelligent man. Otherwise he would have released his transcripts (either that or he really was born outside of the US).

      But he doesn’t need to be smart or accomplished. He only needs to pull emotional strings to get 100% of the black vote and enough single whites to win.

      Like


    • If Obama is a conservative then Oprah is a white supremacist

      Like


      • By accident, you’re starting to catch on.

        Like


      • Obama has a vagina and Oprah has a penis

        The moon is made of Swiss cheese and the earth is flat

        am I still ” catching on” ?

        Like


      • It may be made of Swiss cheese, but Whitey’s on it!

        Like


      • Obama is married, presumably monogamously, with two children.

        Oprah wears a hairweave and promotes conventional weight loss strategies that are definitely not paleo/primal/traditional African.

        If someone says, “I am a ‘black’ militant,” or “pro African” but spreads harmful, anti African messages to Africans through the mass media, they are probably lying.

        Oprah is about the money. That’s it.

        Like


  47. In 2012 exit polling, Republican ideas and Romney’s positions won handily. The economy, foreign policy, the debt… even on leadership.

    The only problem: on asked who would most likely help a person like me, Obama won hands down.

    And guess which factor was most important? You guessed it.

    Now which groups would be swayed by that kind of concern? The kind of people whose votes continually push America over the cliff. Single women.

    Like


  48. on October 21, 2013 at 7:57 pm Chez Cardiaciste

    This post is so 2008. Hope and Change was a punchline in 2010, and everyone knew it. Obama was elected twice because of David Axelrod and mistakes made by his opponents. A political party that has something like 30 governorships and a majority of state legislatures is not destined for failure at the national stage. The GOP candidates were the wrong guy at the right time (pro-war McCain when the country was fatigued from war) and the right guy at the wrong time (out of touch rich man Romney).

    Don’t misunderstand me saying that GOP success is good for the country. I just don’t believe that as of now nothing stands in the way of the Cathedral and its quest for self-immolation. The GOP will do what it always does and step in to keep the Democrats from going full retard and a majority of Americans will see to that.

    Like


  49. on October 21, 2013 at 8:42 pm Eliezer Ben-Yehuda

    another great moment in vaginas-have-tingles-for-killers:

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4443597,00.html

    Like


    • on October 22, 2013 at 4:42 am Yeah you're right

      I think you missed the whole point here… Or maybe it’s where you take your infos from…

      Like


      • He’s partially right. Maybe it’s not a classic case of “vaginas-have-tingles-for-killers.” Instead, it’s an example of vaginas having sympathy for the wrong party, as usual, as in “let’s vote for a black man because we don’t like what our race did to blacks, and we should give back to undue that wrong” type of retarded thinking.

        Like


  50. Obama matters for the same reason the Apollo moon landings matter.

    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice?

    We won’t get fooled again!

    Human space exploration is a great and vast technical achievement. I salute all those who helped make it happen, especially all the guys who got killed in training accidents and actual missions regardless of nationality.

    Thats being said, I stand firm in my conviction that the historical records of the Apollo moon landings, as presented by NASA are inaccurate. Does this mean humans never walked on the moon?

    No.

    Does it mean you may have been given a “sexier” made for tee-vee version of events?

    Probably.

    for example, in 1/6th gravity, I would weigh 30 pounds. Even with a 180 pound suit I would still weigh only 60 pounds. Thats roughly the weight of an average astronaut on the moon. Now, imagine what you could do if you had the muscles of a 180 pound man, but only weighed 60 pounds?

    By Apollo 16, people were starting to ask this question so I suspect NASA was forced to provided examples.

    The clip below is the only NASA example (I’ve found) that is anywhere close to demonstrating what 1/6th gravity will allow an astronaut to do; but notice how the full astronaut images are blocked?

    Isn’t that convenient?

    in addition the audio sounds totally scripted and designed to address skeptics; you don’t have to do this if you are really on the moon?

    As I said before, it is not my intent to in any way diminish the accomplishments, sacrifice and bravery of those involved in space exploration; however far we have come, lots of guys got killed getting there; including the first black astronaut, Major Robert lawrence who died in the crash of an f-104 starfighter in 1967.

    Personally, I suspect none of the Apollo astronauts walked on the moon. Even today, we may not have the technology to do it.

    Were gonna need a bigger boat rocket.

    Like


    • ” … we may not have the technology to do it … “

      It seems you know nothing of technology.

      and you don’t understand a lot of things.

      No wonder you see white supremacists behind every tree

      Like


      • No wonder you see white supremacists behind every tree in the U.S. with a castrated African hanging from it.

        Fixed that for you.

        Like


      • And when was the last time this happened ? 70 or 100 years ago?

        The violence that is happening is black on black and black on white, now that is real and this is happening now and it is a huge problem

        You and Thwack need your head to be checked

        Like


      • Nah, you just need to have your eyes checked. Apparently nobody’s murder exists to you unless it’s a “black” person killing a “white” person.

        Granted, some of the attacks could be false flags, but then that could work the other way as well…

        Like


      • Canadian Friend
        It seems you know nothing of technology.

        and you don’t understand a lot of things.

        ———————————————————

        True; ni66ers are not very smart.

        that is why I ask so many questions. For example:

        1. Why has NASA never released any film or video from inside the Lunar module while it sat on the moon with the astronauts inside?

        All we got to see is fully suited astronauts with their faces shielded hopping around on the moon; what about the eating, drinking and
        talking while inside the LM?

        2. Did the astronauts carefully weigh the moon rocks they collected so they could calculate the total weight of their craft before
        take off for the return trip to the Earth? Seems to me this would be critical in order to determine burn time and thrust for the
        ascent engine on the LM? Not to mention re-entry speed to Earths atmosphere?

        3. How long does it take and how much help is required for an astronaut to correctly don and checkout a space suit before they
        enter thhe hard vacuum of space? On Earth each astronaught has 4 techs helping him…

        Both the ISS and the shuttle, plus all Russian manned space craft use “sea level” cabin pressures (air @ 14.7 PSI) But Apollo used pure oxygen at 3.8 PSI
        in order to make their spacecraft lighter. What are the health effects of pure oxygen at 3.8 PSI for weeks at a time? If its no big deal
        Why deal with the weight and hassle of higher “air’ pressure on the shuttle, ISS and all russian manned space craft?

        Not to mention the hours wasted in pressure chambers before and after every space walk? (the suits are too stiff at 14.7 PSI)

        4. How much fuel is required for the CM (with 3 guys and 200 pounds of moon rocks) to slow down for re-entry to the Earths atmosphere FROM THE MOON?
        At a certain point on the way back from the moon, you are FALLING towards Earth with nothing to slow you down; you can’t come in that “hot?”
        You better slow down; How do you do that?

        There are many question the producers of this event have chosen to leave unaswered, but the point is this:

        whenever someone is trying to fool you, instead of focusing on the things they are willing to show you, instead try to raise questions
        about the things they are not showing you?

        How many guys only see the signs their lover was cheating AFTER they catch them?

        The signs were there right in front of your face the whole time; but because you didn’t want to believe it, you could not see them.

        Many “look” but few ‘see”.

        See what?

        See what they lookin at.

        Like


      • If the USA did not land on the moon, Obama is not a USA citizen.

        Deal?

        Like


      • Deal.

        Besides, nationallity does not trump race when it comes to white people.

        When I meet ‘Becky’s’ parents they never say:

        “what country you from?”

        All they see is a handsome brown skinned man with a silver tongue who gave their daughter the golden dick.

        *kiss myself*

        Like


      • you think Obama is not a US citizen? really?

        What happened to solidarity between brotherzz from a diff’rent motha?

        Like


      • Canadian, he’s just not as afflicted as you with the inability to accept truths that are personally or politically inconvenient.

        That is genetic too, by the way.

        Like


      • Canadian Friend

        you think Obama is not a US citizen? really?
        —————————————————————————————–

        Dude, I just explained to you how race trumps nationality in the minds of white people.

        In other words, its irrelevant.

        a ni66er by any other name is still a ni66er.

        I could hold my breath until I turned blue and I would still be a smigger (black smurf).

        What are you asking me?

        Like


      • 1.I knew the guy who designed the moon cameras. (Because I was fucking his daughter). Anyway, remember that all of the pictures were on film, not digital. Very limited.
        2.Yes. Of course they did.
        3.Maybe NASA thought of this. Maybe they designed suits that could be actually used by their intended users. Jus sayin.
        4.NASA abandoned low pressure/ pure O2 after it burned to death 3 of their astronauts in a ground fire. The names of those astronauts are on the walls of many buildings around Houston..
        5.You cannot go to the moon and get back without programmable digital computers. And reserves of energy. Apollo 11 had both.

        When the rocket cleared the ground, one of the wives asked the head NASA guy, “OK, what are the chances? “We think maybe 50,50” “Thanks. That is better than I thought.”

        Not the same country. Keep that in mind.

        Like


      • 4.NASA abandoned low pressure/ pure O2 after it burned to death 3 of their astronauts in a ground fire.
        ——————————————————————————————

        Sorry Rum, but you made a false statement. The fire you reference was during a test where they took Pure O2 up to 16 PSI which is a big no no. The entire purpose for using pure O2 is precisely so you can have a lower cabin pressure such as 3.8, which is much less flammable.

        I think its called the law of partial pressures. This is why if you scuba dive the deeper you go the shorter your dive must be

        ALL Apollo flights used pure O2 at 3.8 PSI as do all current space suits. Low pressure is just that much easier to deal with.

        This is why all space walks must be planned hours in advance so the astronots can spend time in the decomression chamber so they don’t get the bends; just like divers must do.

        A space suit at 14,7 PSI in the hard vacuum of space has poor flexibility; you can’t even make a fist.

        Even at 3.8 its still difficult to work with tools; especially if you are female

        Like


      • Even at 3.8 its still difficult to work with tools; especially if you are female

        Especially if you’re female? I don’t think most females can work with tools under any conditions.

        Like


      • Rum

        1.I knew the guy who designed the moon cameras. (Because I was fucking his daughter).
        ————————————————————————————

        I believe you. The entire space program starting in 1961 produced hundreds of thousands of good paying white jobs for over 40 years.

        So even if we never landed on the moon, the money was spent paying white people who put their children through college, bought houses, cars… the space program was never a waste of money.

        Unfortunately, our future may be more like the 3rd world where their is no place for a college graduate to apply all his “book learnin”. I suspect the current I$$ will not be replaced when its useful life is over.

        ************
        “remember that all of the pictures were on film, not digital. Very limited.”
        *************

        No more limited than any hollywood movie set.

        Like


    • Again… mostly SUPER smart house nigger but with some occasional bursts from the field… the moon landing hoax has quite literally been debunked a dozen times since the 70s. I’d post all the links of the takedowns but then that would require effort. Far better YOU do your own research since you know bout dat readin and rightin… massa gon be soooo mad ib he finmeawt.

      Like


      • Jay, do you consider questioning the moon landing to be “anti white” behavior?

        How about 911?

        Im trying to understand the code for what should be questioned and what shouldn’t?

        If so many people can be fooled by an Obama, why can’t they be fooled with other things?

        Like


      • Not at all, I consider it anti-intellectual and/or tinfoil hat behavior. There were some inconsistencies that anyone who has done a little digging knows about. And the fact that the telemetry tapes of what is arguably the single most important event in human history just sort of uhh, “got recorded over”, is highly suspect.

        But since the 70s a few things have happened. The most important of which is modern advanced probes have been sent back to the moon by various space agencies with highly advanced optics and have PHOTOGRAPHED the damn landers at various sites.

        I question everything, but I think there is a point where you go from rational skepticism to completely irrational incredulity.

        Lastly, I am -well- aware “so many people can be fooled” because the entire historical record has shown this since time immemorial. But again… rational vs. utterly irrational.

        Like


      • anti-intellectual and/or tinfoil hat behavior.
        ————————————————————————–

        The moon landing hoax investigations (which is what I call them) attract the paranoid and attention seekers… but they are also riddled with agent provocateurs who seek to discredit any investigation thru “anti-intellectual and/or tinfoil hat behavior”.

        It reminds me how at some point in the past, Ku Klux Klan meetings became 90% informants, undercover cops and Feds…

        Its really difficult because those most qualified to discuss the issue hafta work in or around the industry and the industry does not tolerate any questioning of the official Apollo historical record as presented by NASA.

        Its like a religion; they can’t even joke about it.

        Like


  51. testing testing

    CH, why can’t I post in the “Fake Gay Game” thread?

    Like


  52. Why Do Women Fall for Bad Boys?

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/head-games/201310/why-do-women-fall-bad-boys

    “In order to investigate this question, Carter and his team presented 128 female undergraduates with the descriptions of two types of male characters: Dark Triads and controls. The high Dark Triad self- description encompassed traits from the “Dirty Dozen” measure, which includes: a desire for attention, admiration, favors, and prestige; the manipulation, exploitation, deceit and flattery of others; a lack of remorse, morality concerns and sensitivity, and cynicism. (The ‘Dirty Dozen’ is a condensed version of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory, Mach-IV, and Psychopathy Scale-III). The control self-description purposefully matched the high Dark Triad description, but it dropped out the dark personality traits.

    After being presented with one of these two characters, the participants answered questions along a six-point scale about the attractiveness of the individual’s personality (they also rated the characters for the Big Five personality traits, which is beyond the scope of this post). In addition, factors known to influence attractiveness ratings, such as wealth and education level, were omitted in order to reduce the possibility of bias. The investigators then ran their analyses.

    What did Carter and his colleagues find? Women found the Dark Triad personality more attractive than the control. This result is in keeping with previous studies in which Dark Triad men reported their increased level of sexual success.”

    Like


  53. My favorite picture of my daughter on Face-book is the one with 2 other very hot hotties in the same frame. They are both of them pissing on themselves in a state of terror.

    Like


    • MY favorite picture of your daughter is the one where she is on all fours gulping my nine incher! Back in the day the frauleins ALL gave it up for me! Then came the evil mr. Hitler! I was hidden with a family of Gentiles and their daugher,a 15 year old blonde haired slut,and I had some amazing times in that attic! If her father had only known about me dropping gallons of kosher jizz down his precious daughters cum-craving throat,I wouldve certainly perished in Hitlers fires,damn his soul!!!!!

      Like


      • What kind of shitty comments are those? You spray this nonsense all over this thread. Enough already!

        Like


      • If yu are a father of a daughter you feel deep joy when she blossums into a 10ish hottie. Because, as a guy, who know without needing it explained why that matters. A lot. It is so cool that her boy-friends worship her even when they are 6 ft 5inch tall Doctors with a trust fund. Fuck yeah!!!

        Like


    • on October 22, 2013 at 2:58 am Hugh G. Rection

      On some pictures I couldn’t shake the notion that they’re men. Very masculine features…

      Like


    • I’m not looking forward to my SO getting old…why is nature so cruel?

      Like


    • Those are some hard lookin lesbos.

      Like


      • I would do the one on the right in 1988

        Like


      • You’re drunk. None of them are great but the petite chick 2nd from left is the only one that seemed to age even remotely well and was bangable even 10 years later.

        Left one was cute when young she reminds me of Amanda Knox (Italian murderer chick) a bit in the face. The others are terrible particularly the lighter haired one, she went tits up after just 4 years. I’m guessing she was a party girl, passed around and around. 4 years of hard livin’ will do that to you. She looks like a strung out crack whore by ’79.

        Like


      • No, that’s just what European women look like offline.

        Like


      • One thing I will say about my chocolate sistas. Face wise, they DO tend to age better than European women overall but not as well as Asian women. I’ve seen black chicks in their 40s who I were sure were in their 30s much moreso than I have white girls. But conversely, I’ve seen Asian women in their 40s who look like they may be late 20s.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 12:34 pm Hugh G. Rection

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 11:36 am Hammer of Love

        Generalizing much Nicole ?

        Like


      • Yes, of course.

        Exceptions don’t negate the rule though. The vast majority of women do not look like made up models, and part of getting past the teens for most women is to become a bit rounder in the body, but more square in the face in the late 20’s-early 30’s.

        Like


      • They remind me of how people looked in those oldstyle photos (Daguerreotype) where you had to hold your pose for 15 minutes or more; ever tried to hold a smile for 15 minutes?

        Like


  54. “Obama doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of America’s future,”

    Nothing matters in the grand scheme of anything, CH. Surprised you don’t realize that. In fact, I don’t understand why you insist on playing this beta life game of trying to “out-alpha” other dudes when it’s clearly a futile pursuit, ultimately. You’d be much more “alpha” if you just said fuck it and gave up on the entire life game. You’re a smart dude, but you haven’t figured the most important point out yet.

    Like


    • on October 22, 2013 at 6:26 am The Burninator

      Nihilism doesn’t fit everybody, don.

      Or were you referencing something else more (or less) lofty?

      Like


    • While you’re being flippant, suicide is a problem for quite a few alpha males. They often feel like they don’t belong here, alienate everyone around them or just find that nothing is enough to give them a sense of purpose and/or belonging.

      We lost one in my social sphere here this year. He was one of the few guys whose parents put him through the proper cold climate folk passages.

      He literally felt no pain…except inside.

      Like


    • Only a coward would try to preserve his life. Lol.

      Like


  55. 11shs to fuck
    11shs as your daughters
    Neanderthal = Why we can even even feed ourselves.

    Like


  56. I was in Chicago, in the Loop, on election night 2008. I saw the rally out in Grant Park (didn’t have a ticket, didn’t want one) and wandered among the barhoppers celebrating in the South Loop. I didn’t even bother to vote. The other choice was sure to lose and anyway, John McCain??

    It was like a religious revival. The black doormen in my building asked me what I thought. I said “Obama is a blank slate.” I didn’t know what the partying was about. I still don’t. But those people, one of the people I worked with included (a foreigner, why did he even care!?) felt “it” very deeply, whatever “it” is.

    Nothing like my historic picture of America. But then, it was new history being made that night. Not especially good, but it was history.

    Like


  57. off topic and old news, aunt giggles seriously sold out. fuck me

    Like


  58. The next big political party is the Anti White Genocide Party.

    Like


    • Just because white people don’t want to have kids, is not genocide.

      Like


      • “eyeslevel”, does someone come over your house and prevent you from impregnating white women? Or are you just unable to get them over there all fertile and willing?

        Like


      • You’re response to White GENOCIDE is “have more babies”?

        If you go to Nigeria and force them to accept tens of millions of Chinese and force-assimilate them, while simultaneously telling Nigerians that are upset by this “it’s your fault, have more babies”, you are still committing GENOCIDE.

        That’s what you anti-Whites are doing to my people, White people.

        It’s genocide.

        Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White.

        Like


      • And imagine if the liberal Nigerians were to put in place a system of ” affirmative action” in which Chinese people are assured a spot in College/University even if they have lower grades than Nigerians because the law says there must be a minimum number of Chinese in College/Universities

        Imagine if they also demanded Chinese people could vote without presenting any ID…

        And Imagine if every movie and tv show made by Nigerians painted Chinese as the good guys and Nigerians as the bad guys

        and Imagine if the Nigerian media was hostile to Nigerians and openly anti-Nigerian

        Imagine if Nigerians risked having their carreer and reputation destroyed simply for saying they are proud to be black/Nigerian, while Chinese would be encouraged to shout from the roof tops – of Nigeria – that they are proud of being yellow/Chinese

        Kind of impossible to imagine right?

        Sounds silly right?

        Well that is the reality – us white – men live in – e-v-e-r-y- day

        Like


      • We COULD breed like rabbits.

        Tibetans COULD breed like rabbit also.

        That does not change the fact that they (like us) are subject to a program of GENOCIDE.

        Genociding people and then saying “Oh, well it’s their fault – they should have bred more.” Does not remove you anti-White’s responsibility from the genocide you’re a perpetrating against my people.

        Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White.

        Like


  59. Voting is for cunts.

    Like


  60. […] Obama doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of America’s future, because Obama was elected as a fig… […]

    Like


  61. Obama may not matter, but Dr. O’s (make that -bama, -prah or -z, as you wish) Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act does.
    They will protect you from your own money by taking it away from you to pay for someone else’s health care and if you can’t afford it, you can go fuck yourself.
    I’m still not entirely sure how this clown puppet of the Chicago union mob, whom no one had ever heard of before, managed to run roughshod over The Hillary, who was pretty much a shoo-in until he showed up.
    Mr. Romney was pretty much unelectable to too many segments of 2013 America, but the Reps seem unable to divorce themselves from their system of appointing whichever disconnected, patrician golf-course senior is ‘next in line’ to be thrown to the wolves, I mean, run for pres.
    And thanks to the fact that Americans in general have a VERY hard time seeing nuances, grey areas, subtleties and instead MUST have everything in black or white, we only get to choose between 2 lying crooks (Dem or Rep), instead of the 3, 4 or more lying crooks most other civilized countries get.

    Like


  62. It’s true that Obama is basically irrelevant. Is he a lying, AA-benefitting, Whitey-hating demagogue? Of course. But Romney was all of the same, minus the AA. (Romney was only nominated because he hails from a wealthy family.) The reason Obama doesn’t matter is because the very office of the Presidency doesn’t matter. The idea that the president is anything OTHER than a puppet of ZOG is itself risible. That’s why it would make way more sense for every man to concentrate on transforming his own life and family for good, rather than imagining that anything can be improved through top-down programming. Yes, some governmental changes need to occur, primarily through simply abolishing all the massive handouts. But shrinking the Leviathan isn’t nearly enough, nor would having a decent president make much substantive difference. Bottom up changes must accompany whatever revolution takes place at the top.

    Like


  63. For those of you silly enough to think Obama making Harvard Law Review editor shows he’s some kind of intellectual powerhouse, might I remind you that he is the only Editor in the history of the Law Review to have never published a signed article in it. In fact, the great “legal scholar” has no published work whatsoever. Yet, somehow, he gets a prime teaching gig at U of C, having never published a line in his life. Try pulling that one off, Mr. White Male, and good luck to ya!

    Like


    • on October 22, 2013 at 9:57 am The Spirit Within

      Naw, he’d probly be the first to admit that he’s no *great legal scholar*. He was an adjunct professor who spent most of his time angling for elected office. It was a day job.

      What his election to the Law Review shows is that he won the respect of his peers — some of whom have presumably become great legal scholars — and that says a lot about his judgment.

      Like


  64. you wouldn’t think an empty suit also has no clothes, but there it is.

    Like


  65. “In fact, the great “legal scholar” has no published work whatsoever.”
    ————————————————————————————————-

    It matters not because high legal field sucess is all politics and theater anyway.

    What did that white senator say about why he likes Obama?

    “he’s light skinned with no visible negro dialect…”

    Ha ha,,, there goes your theory of merit “published signed articles…”

    Like


  66. People voted for Obama because they were sick and disgusted with Bush and Cheney.

    Whites voted for him because he represented that opposite of Bush and Cheney.

    Bush and Cheney confirmed once and for all to the entire world what the true nature of the Anglo Saxon.

    Behind the fancy dark suit, red tie, and flowery language lies:

    absolute war mongering, torturing, raping, plundering, pillaging, barbarians.

    You can change the clothing and grooming, but you can’t change the DNA.

    Bush and Cheney (and Rumsfeld) proved to all the world what Chavez (who was channeling Malcom X) said: the white man is the Devil.

    Even whites were forced to admit this: and hence Obama – and his popularit y around the world.

    You say that ” Obama doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of America’s future”

    I disagree: His election represents two things:
    1. the inexorable decline of global white supremacy (a darkie needed to pursue whitey’s agenda) &

    2. More white ( and other )pussy for Negroes.

    Like


    • I don’t believe that Europeans are devils. I believe that humans are devils, and Europeans simply figured out the best system for the big devils to profit from little devils.

      Like


    • This is why it’s going to come down to bloodshed.

      Like


      • It always does. Humans always find an excuse.

        It is just a shame to see Africans starting to use the same excuses as Europeans. Least we can do is come up with a better excuse.

        Like


      • on October 22, 2013 at 10:39 pm Hammer of Love

        Wait a minute Nicole, you make it sound like the Africans learned violence from watching the Europeans. Or did I misunderstand ?

        Like


      • No, we learned to make excuses by watching Europeans.

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 2:24 pm Hammer of Love

        Every culture. for time immemorial, has made excuses as to why the ” other side ” had to be slaughtered, Africans were no exception.

        Like


      • That’s a very “you’re just as bad as us” thing to say. It is simply not true though. Historically, Africans never needed an excuse, and just honestly approached these things in the context of kin/kindgom/empire.

        We just never needed the excuses to be okay with ourselves. Being in a superior position always felt better to us than some idea of inherent superiority while eating crap.

        Like


  67. I don’t believe that Europeans are devils.
    ———————————————————————-

    Neither do I, but that don’t seem to stop em from trying.

    Like


  68. Which ARMSTRONG got you?

    Neil or Lance?

    LIVE WRONG!

    Like


    • After he won for the third time, I knew Lance Armstrong was cheating

      after 5 times, I knew he was an idiot for thinking he could go on fooling everyone forever

      Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 1:02 am The Spirit Within

        He’s a conservative Republican, too. Idiots flock together.

        Like


      • Oh look he called his opponents “idiots”.

        Lance might be a cheater, but you need balls (no pun intended) to succeed 7 ties even with doping.

        Like


      • I can not reply in the other thread so here are more ” ignorant” facts happening under Obama’s watch,

        57% of Mexicans of welfare

        http://www.examiner.com/article/fifty-seven-percent-of-mexican-immigrants-on-welfare

        Almost 50 million people on food stamps

        http://www.naturalnews.com/042094_food_stamps_widespread_poverty_national_economy.html

        This chart ( 2000 to 2013 ) shows clearly unemployment exploded under Obama

        http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate

        At least FIVE times more drone attacks than under Bush

        http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/06/obama_drone_strikes_the_president_ordered_more_than_george_w_bush.html

        I have to stop now because I feel SOOOO ignorant on what makes Obama WORSE than Bush!!!

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 10:36 am The Spirit Within

        Your ignorance is about to make my head explode.

        Were you alive in September of 2008? Do you remember the 700,000 jobs we were losing monthly at that time? Do you remember the phrase “worst crash since the Great Depression”? Do understand how hard it is to rebuild an economy that cratered so deeply?

        Most importantly, do you realize WHOSE policies caused that? Hint: Obama hadn’t been elected yet when this happened.

        Who was the president before Obama, Canadian Friend? What was his name? (His name was George W. Bush.) What party was he? (Republican.) Which party had controlled Congress for six of the previous eight years? (Republican.)

        Do you know any fucking thing at all?

        STOP COMMENTING. Sorry to namecall, but you are a D student. You can’t debate. All of your opinions seem to have been formed by Fox News spin room. This is an unmoderated site, lucky for you, but you wouldn’t last a half-second in a debate with educated liberals — at least not the ones I know.

        Like


      • Dude, you just got your ass handed to you and this is what you come back with, ranting and name calling? The old Fox news trope?

        Pathetic.

        Like


      • He (she?) is right. You wouldn’t last a half-second in a moderated debate with educated (read: indoctrinated) liberals. Because they would have deleted your comment as soon as it was posted. People who question the narrative are engaging in thought-crime, and must be silenced. Liberals know they can’t debate the facts, so their default position is to name call and shame (see above), and when that doesn’t work, resort to censorship. (STOP COMMENTING)

        Like


      • @The Craven Fool Within
        If anything, it’s your own ignorance that is going to make your head explode.
        When it does, I expect to hear something akin to the popping of a balloon.

        Our Canadian Friend here handily won this debate by throwing out a whole set of facts, which you conveniently sidestepped in favor of more frothy hyperventilation.

        Game. Set. Match.

        Like


      • wow. just wow. Learn your shit. A depression is an ongoing state of economic stagnation. It’s not an event. Every recession or market drop since WWII has recovered except for the one Obama took the reins on. And he took those reins, from his “Stimulus” $800bn boondoggle (which went to his one true allegiance … public sector unions) that has been base lined so as to give us trillion dollar deficits since his first day, to his regulatory and waiver schemes that have knee-capped unconnected businesses. Then there’s his association with the Bernake which, ugh, let’s just say we’re super screwed thanks to massive debt, money printing and super low interest rates.

        blaming bush is odd since in 2006:
        Iraq was tied up
        deficit was $200bn
        UE was under 5%

        And no one really knew the democrat super-bomb of forcing banks to lend to, ah, risky persons (note, I did not say americans) and to securitize that debt would lead to the 2008 meltdown. Not Barney Frank, not the pre-Bernake Fed, not W. But the 2008 was a democrat gift to america.

        Like


      • Just scroll up to some of my previous comments and you will see a video , excerpts and links that will educate you on who caused the 2008 crash ( multicuti obsessed Democrats ) and who tried to stop it at least 7 times ( the Bush administration) and who refused to let the Bush administration do something to stop that train wreck waiting to happen ( Democrats)

        watch the video and tell me those are paid actors or that it was all photoshopped or whatever by Fox news

        wake up and smell the coffee

        I know my facts damn well , I have the evidence

        denying and calling me names will not change the facts.

        Go ahead watch the video and tell me those are paid actors

        the more you get angry, the more I feel good about myself for knowing so much and being so right

        Like


      • on October 23, 2013 at 12:59 pm The Spirit Within

        Miscellaneous responses:

        @111: Did you see my response halfway to Canadian Friend up this page? A list of shit that Bush had committed in office? I called him out on his lack of evidence and provided back up. And no, I don’t use the Fox News trope often, but it’s appropriate here.

        @Travis: No banning, no thoughtcrime here. Just a request to an ignoramus. (Read all his comments — he finally started backing up his words after I called him out on his blathering.)

        @Ollie: See comment to 111.

        @askjoe: Nice comment. Now is not the time to argue Keynesian economics, but I’ll presume you understand the benefits of “deficit spending in a recession” and are merely ignoring these benefits to score Internet points.

        @CanadianFriend: I’m glad I riled you up. You’re actually posting facts instead of drunken rehashes of last night’s Hannity. Also, please install a period key on your keyboard.

        This shall be continued, but I don’t have time right now. This hard-working, self-employed liberal has money to make and responsibilities to keep.

        Like


      • **@askjoe: Nice comment. Now is not the time to argue Keynesian economics, but I’ll presume you understand the benefits of “deficit spending in a recession” and are merely ignoring these benefits to score Internet points.**

        Keynes is dead and buried. oh yeah, how’s that 11%UE6 working for 5 years of budgetless obamanomics

        Like


  69. […] Hope and Change! Like the buffoonish, thin-skinned meathead who loudly proclaims his prowess to a doubtful crowd, the chorus of cultists repetitively singing the Hope and Change anthem till tears welled in their eyes betrayed a deep disillusion with the substance of their yearning. The lesson is unmissable: the more insistent the emotional incantations declaring universalistic hope and change, the more likely the chanters have base, tribal motives. Emotionalism is a hallmark of a people that no longer believe in anything but egocentric validation, and rationalizing by whatever sophistry necessary their will to self-endorsement. https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/10/21/why-obama-doesnt-matter/ […]

    Like


  70. [email protected] I hope they make Election Day a holiday. While you’re standing in line in a high school gymnasium, I’ll be beachside.

    Like


  71. Harvard Law grad= Shiftless bum… yeah, sure. What exactly are YOUR qualifications to so anything at all, besides a snazzy writing style, Mr Anonymous CH?

    Like


  72. I absolutely LOVE it when all the little bitty nobodies try to sound all portentous and important making pronouncements about someone who will always be a historical figure, when they will be remembered by nobody at all.

    Like


  73. CH says:

    bush and obama will go down as two of america’s most loathsomely incompetent and malevolent presidents. will there be a trifecta of bad presidents? history says yes.]

    And you? You will not go down at all.

    Like


  74. […] Why Obama Doesn?t Matter | Chateau Heartiste […]

    Like


  75. I guess I am an Obamanaut, since I voted for him.
    Its an easy question. If he were white, he never would’ve got past (President) Hillary Clinton.
    Think of all the fun you could’ve had with that!

    Like


  76. If there were any doubts that Mr. Obama is an empty suit, the fiasco roll out of the health care exchanges should banish all such doubts.

    This is his signature achievement. And, he let it become a laughing stock, a punch line. He most ardent supporters are in disbelief. He himself takes no responsibility.

    Democrats have essentially female personalities, which accounts for so much of their behavior.

    Like


  77. on October 24, 2013 at 7:12 am Carlos Danger

    http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clintonfriends.htm#.Umka6KEo670

    Interesting web article about all the people near the Clintons who have died, all under mysterious circumstances. I had read about many of these before, but am a bit surprised at the number. I thought over the years it might be half this many. Where was our Gentile dominated press on this one? Only open collusion between the press and the Democrat party could produce these results. And some people still claim the nation isn’t being stolen. Right. before. your. very. eyes.

    Like


  78. on October 24, 2013 at 1:36 pm Asian red pill

    I do want white Americans to be strong and vigorous because I want my country to be strong and vigorous. Because I want me and mine to be part of a strong and vigorous country. Weakened white Americans means a weakened America.

    The difference between CH and me is that he believes a stronger America must mean an ethnically cleansed white America. I believe – granted, I am predisposed to believe – that “a strong, high trust culture that believes in itself” is achievable in a multi-ethnic America. The contest is not zero-sum based on ethnic tribal displacement. The contest is zero-sum based on dominant, assimilative American culture.

    America needs traditional masculine values to dominate our culture again. We need our founding principles to dominate our politics again. We need the spread of Positive Masculinity and the red pill to cure the many-headed Marxist virus that has corrupted our society. We need men of the West to rise, join, and fight, and white men are not the only men of the West.

    Like


    • “that “a strong, high trust culture that believes in itself” is achievable in a multi-ethnic America.”
      I used to believe this but the problem is that multi-ethnicism itself leads to less trust:

      http://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/the-happiest-healthiest-community-in-the-u-s/

      Like


    • on October 26, 2013 at 2:58 pm BioCulturalBeamDelta

      “We need men of the West to rise, join, and fight, and white men are not the only men of the West.”
      You reveal your hypocrisy here, again. I am not a WN, but why are there no white men in the east who need to rise up?

      Listen, unlike some other people here, if you aren’t white, but have chosen the right side I’m going to chase you away. I might even welcome you, but not on your terms. I’m not going to bend over backwards to accommodate you.

      Like


  79. Cavalier leadership isn’t all that hot either. Many are quite complicit in today’s issues. A key trait of the Cavaliers is that they have a thing for exploitation, both of their own people and other peoples (see The Cavaliers | JayMan’s Blog, which is one to the hallmarks of the Deep South (and Tidewater), and one of the reasons the Scotch-Irish of Greater Appalachia chose to side with the Yankees against the Cavaliers.

    See here.

    J.R. Ewing symbolizes the modern Cavalier boss.

    Like


  80. I just read this post. It is the truth. Just one thing: Real Clear Politics reviewed the voting turnout for the 2012 election. Whites turnout was low. Yes, we overwhelmingly held our noses and voted for Romney, but many whites sat this one out. That was the difference.

    Like