How To Reframe Against Leftists (And Women)

A commenter at Mangan’s linked to a recent 60 Minutes segment which discussed study findings that babies are born with a moral compass and innate biases against people (or things) not like themselves. In short, it would appear that in-groupism, and hostility to the Other, is inborn in all of us.

Favoritism for one’s own kind and racism are, not to put too fine a point on it, a property of human nature and not something “taught” or constructed out of whole cloth by mean parents, the KKK, or afrocentric studies professors. This property can certainly be amplified or dampened by cultural intervention, but it cannot be eradicated or wished away.

In-groupism has evolved for a reason, and that reason likely led to an increase in reproductive fitness for those humans who had the gene(s) for in-groupism. In-groupism is, from the gene’s point of view, a GOOD THING. Now whether in-groupism is still as fitness maximizing today as it necessarily has been throughout human history is another question, but no one can seriously argue that it’s a pointless emotional reflex only designated “bad people” (read: working class white men) possess. If you need the dots connected, tribal favoritism is as natural as love.

As I am a person who generally prefers to not make life miserable for the mediocre masses who are just trundling by trying to eke out a slice of joy without stepping on my toes, I instinctively recoil at those self-righteous social engineers who would attempt to reprogram certain classes of people (read: working class white men) to betray their essence as human beings in order to more properly mouth the hypocritical bleatings of the gated-community pompous elite. So, inevitably, when some malevolent leftists seize on these studies and deliberately misconstrue the message they should be taking from them to further their anti-human status whoring agenda, I draw my sword and level it at their throats.

Since beheading of one’s ideological enemies is not yet (again) in fashion, we must settle for the weapon of our words, and no verbal artillery is more powerful in today’s snark-soaked society than the insouciant reframe. A successful reframe will win friends and influence people, and, best of all, it will drive your foes insane with impotent rage.

To wit: the commenter at Mangan’s worried that our leftist overlords would misuse this study for their nefarious ends, instead of taking the proper lesson from it that their unpracticed worldview is a mile high pile of horseshit.

Babies are born to be biased against the other. And to listen to these PC Marxist Professors going ‘Oh no, we have to train these people out of this’. Instead of saying wait a minute–maybe I’m wrong about political correctness.

How would your typical ankle-grabbing rightie like, oh, say, Rich Lowry, reply to a ruling class leftist who asserted that any proof of hard-wired racism meant that emotionally torturous reeducation must continue until morale improves? Likely, he would comply that steps must be taken to reduce the chance that inborn racism would lead to immigration restrictions, but that we must also be careful not to place any blame on [white men] for their regressive views because, after all, they were born with this original sin, blah fucking blah.

No doubt the mass of mainstream “””conservatives””” would fall right in step with their leftie tormentors’ frames, presenting their chafed rumps for yet another humiliating ramming.

Now how would this conversation go if the ruling class leftie had to confront an aloof asshole like yours truly who didn’t give a shit about clinking glasses with rancid anti-white leftoids at stiffly polite cocktail parties?

Leftoid: “Oh no, we have to train [white men] out of this.”

Demon’s Herald: “Sure, and while we’re at it, what do you think of training gays out of their homosexuality? It’ll cut down on the AIDS if the studies are to be believed.”

The masterful reframe uses the momentum of your enemy’s thrusting knife against him. Your goal with any reframe should be to either divert the withering mockery of the audience toward your opponent, or to ensnare your opponent in a logic trap which forces him to defend whatever blithe inanity he intones to lubricate his limbic folds.

It is similar in function to seductive reframes with women: you either redirect a woman’s alpha probing into self-conscious insecurity where she will revert to defending her attitude and become psychologically conditioned to perceive you as higher value than herself, or you make her feel the burn of mockery that is the undercurrent of teasing foreplay leading to sexual relinquishment to your obvious dominating presence.

Here’s another example. A commenter at Larry Auster’s accurately imagines what a typical anti-white leftoid (in this case, John Podhoretz) would say to a realist schooled in the facts of intransigent human nature and the evolved preference for tribalism:

You [Auster] wrote:

“But humanity does not consist of universal individuals. It consists of various cultures, ethnicities, and races all of which have particular identities, characteristics, ability levels, values, and agendas which are different from those of the host society. As a result, the mass presence of those different groups in the host society, far from advancing right-liberal equal freedom, empowers their unassimilable identities, characteristics, ability levels, values, and agendas, and thus changes the host country from a right-liberal society into a multicultural, left-liberal, racial-socialist society whose ruling principle is equality of outcome for all groups.”

To which Podhoretz pere et fils would surely reply, “Why do you hate freedom?”

How does a weak-willed, supplicating, betaboy “””conservative””” like, oh, say, Jim Geraghty, respond to this all-too-realistic, imagined Podhoretz coercive frame? Probably something like this: “I don’t hate freedom! Really, I don’t! Look, some of my best friends are freedom lovers. And I promise never again to use the word slut, no matter how applicable it is. Be kind to me?”

Lame. Podhoretz owns the frame, and Geraghty is just playing within its bounds.

Now how would this imagined yet highly probable conversation go if Podhoretz were trying to box in a mischief maker like yours sincerely?

Pod: “Why do you hate freedom?”

Demon’s Padawan: “Why do you fellate goats?”

Leftoid’s frame destroyed, razed by brutal and vicious ridicule, and, should the demonic horde so choose, seamlessly replaced with a frame of their comfortable choosing.

Some GOP operatives who shall remain unnamed have written here asking for ideas about reframing against the media-dominated leftism that rules the airwaves and the shit channels. Well, here are some ideas. I could give more, but I don’t feel much like it, mostly because I have my suspicions that the lot of the mainstream right isn’t really interested in LISTENING and WAKING THE FUCK UP, but instead would prefer the glass-clinking route until either the whole thing goes down in flames or they can grab the coattails of a truly brave leader and say “See, I was right there with you all along!”

Fucking puling waterboys. Ass-lapping company men.

Anyhow, I leave you with this final thought: Mockery.

Mockery.

And more mockery.

This is the age of superficiality, of winning through intimidation, and the only way the right is ever going to defeat the left in any meaningful manner is to mock them relentlessly, mercilessly, sadistically. You cannot defeat snark — the leftoid’s debate tactic of choice — with logical exposition or appeals to civility. You only kill it by turning it on itself. If you think this is a sorry turn of events… well, it is, but it’s the world we live in. Abide reality, or abort. The reality is that three huge branches of mind massaging — the media, academia, and government — are in control of the discourse, and it is blatantly against your interests as a realist thinker and lover of truth and beauty.

Appeasement is a luxury of winners.

Even then, even if the right took all my advice and gamed the shit out of their media cockblocks and the LJBF electorate, there may be no saving this sinking ship. Even the tightest game is no match for a demographic tsunami that is constitutionally wedded to the idea of Big Daddy State and Bad, Beta White Man.

As always,

yours in poolside.





Comments


  1. The point of argument is never to convince your opponent, the point is to convince the audience. Once you understand and internalize that it becomes very easy

    Like


    • Sadly, the long-term use of relentless mockery to achieve a political end tends to warp one’s soul, so count the cost before committing to that strategy. It might be worth it to society in the long run, but it will have a negative effect on you.

      Like


      • Perhaps that is true, but there simply is no other option I can see. Like it or not, we must roll up our sleeves and get our hands dirty.

        Like


      • And mockery is divisive in a time when white people need — somehow, some way — to unify. We are not going to win playing their game. They are more practiced and infinitely better at low-born, sniveling sabotage. Prey is clever, the sheep can outsmart the predator, their survival depends on it.

        “… so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.”

        We don’t need to change. The rules need to change. Sarcasm and irony are only effective because we are decadent enough to allow its effectiveness. They are the yawp of the castrated.

        Mocking Hipster vs. Earnest US Marine. Who ya got? In a chat room, Hipster wins. In the street, Hipster dies. The first rule of battle strategy is pick the place of battle to your advantage. We can’t win by becoming them. We don’t need a right wing Jon Stewart, for fucksake. We just need to shift the war onto our turf. Our complacency has allowed the strategy to get away from us.

        Enough pontificating from the poolside: your musings do not apply to the coming struggle. In fear you have purposefully degraded your instinct for the kill, preferring zingers to blood. We beg for a William Tecumseh Sherman, you give us Oscar Wilde. Take your pork sword and joust away with Rich Lowry then. I’m sure an uproarious romp will be had. The rest of us have work to do.

        Matt

        Like


      • “Sadly, the long-term use of relentless mockery to achieve a political end tends to warp one’s soul” — Just look at Jon Stewart.

        Like


    • I use this to AMOG guys to take their girls, and to avoid getting my ass kicked. Very very very few people won’t cave under the right amount and type of social pressure. Even guys that think they won’t, will.

      Like


    • on November 22, 2012 at 12:04 am Demarcated Value

      Best Truth.

      Pallid as it may be.

      Like


    • actually, if you can just get people to think for themselves instead of copying or memorizing; its a great achievement.

      Like


  2. Perfect…the reframe has been one of the best things I ever found out. Instead of defending yourself against either truthful or more likely false accusations…reframe it to make the agressor go on the defense.

    It takes a lot more energy to defend than it does to go on the attack. With women and liberals…they don’t want to defend because that would require using that organ in their skull. That’s why their token resistance is you are an intolerant (fill in the blank-ophobe-ist). Then when you reframe their numerous insults along with an aloof attitude that you don’t care what they think of you…they go silent.

    Like


  3. You are confused,…
    a) John Podhoretz is a conservative
    b) In the Auster quote it is Podhoretz who is reframing the preceding paragraph by saying “why do you hate freedom?” — this is directed *back* at the imagined speaker of the previous paragraph

    Like


    • John Podhoretz is a fiscal conservative, defense hawk, socially liberal, and extremely pro-immigration. In other words, a neocon, which is same as liberal.

      His father wrote a classic essay on race in which he acknowledged racial difference-based problems and proposed a mass-intermarriage as the solution, beginning with his sister.

      Like


      • Speaking of tribalism, John PodWHOREtz belongs to the jewish tribe. His allegiance is to israel, not the Republic. Jewish conservative/Neocon=Redcoat

        Like


    • a) Yes indeed, like Ted Haggard is a straight guy.
      b) Yes, we know that.

      Like


    • a) John Podhoretz is a neoconservative

      Fixed.

      Like


  4. on November 21, 2012 at 11:47 am RappaccinisDaughter

    Great post re: reframing political discourse.

    Very slightly off-topic, but still somewhat relevant: “In-groupism has evolved for a reason, and that reason likely led to an increase in reproductive fitness for those humans who had the gene(s) for in-groupism. In-groupism is, from the gene’s point of view, a GOOD THING.”

    In-groupism isn’t necessarily a good thing from a genetic standpoint. Hybrid vigor applies to human beings as much as it does to the lower mammals. Since so many serious genetic flaws are recessive, the occasional influx of a fresh genotype can boost the genetic fitness of the herd.

    Interestingly, we seem to understand this at the hardware level. I wish I could find the study (I’m sure you’ve seen it) indicating that women who are ovulating tend to prefer the pheromone scent of men whose genes are vastly different from their own. Women who are either pregnant or whose bodies have been fooled into thinking they’re pregnant by the Pill, on the other hand, tend to prefer the scent of men who are similar to them genetically. The theory was, let’s get knocked up by someone who can guarantee the baby won’t have Tay-Sachs or malaria, then run home to our tribe to be taken care of during the pregnancy.

    Like


    • “In-groupism isn’t necessarily a good thing from a genetic standpoint.”

      There is enough genetic variance in most populations to ensure that genetic flaws do not manifest, but here are exceptions, like the Ashkenazi Jews who have a higher chance of getting something like Tay-Sachs.

      Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 12:11 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        Crap, I wrote “malaria” when what I meant was sickle-cell anemia. The reason why was that I was thinking of another study I read indicating that the gene that causes sickle-cell also offers protection against malaria.

        Like


      • also, don’t forget about the coronal mass ejaculations:

        Like


      • There is enough genetic variance in most populations to ensure that genetic flaws do not manifest, but here are exceptions, like the Ashkenazi Jews who have a higher chance of getting something like Tay-Sachs.
        ———–

        or “western Europeans” who have a higher chance of Huntington’s disease (Huntington’s Chorea) ; which Woody Guthrie died from. Keep in mind that unless they outright kill you, many genetic flaws are subjective, like skin color…, or they may not be noticed at all.

        Like


      • Leave it to thwack to want to make Huntington’s Chorea as popular a term as sickle-cell or Tay-Sachs.

        Like


      • But thats the white supremacy system. Any disease that affects white people is a disease that will be promoted as important to cure; even if it only affect a few white people.

        As I said before, White supremacy is not a numbers game.

        Like


      • You’ve got it backwards, as usual…

        Ask the average person on the street about Tay-Sachs and sickle cell and they’ve all heard about either or both… probably even seen the commercials that run periodically over the past two generations…

        You won’t find one in one hundred that knows Huntington’s Chorea.

        Like


      • You don’t need a bunch of people to serve as an interest group when a disease only affects mostly white people.

        Thats one of the benefits of being a white person.

        Even white babies benefit from the system of white supremacy; and they don’t even practice racism (pay their union dues)

        I grow weary of your truculence, please leave.

        Like


      • MY truculence?

        Man, is that rich!

        Like


    • I’ve always found men who are different from me, genetically, more sexually attractive, and yet I am able to empathize more with men who are similar to me.

      Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 1:09 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        It wasn’t ever like that for me before…until I got sterilized and was able to go off the Pill. Now it’s exactly as you describe. I’m a WASP of northern European heritage, and all of a sudden I now find Italians unbearably sexy.

        Really it’s been quite a revelation, the extent to which that artificial hormonal control altered me at such a basic level.

        Like


      • Translation: given absolute security, you won’t starve to death nor need protection from other men, guys with high testosterone and low cooperativeness are unbearably sexy. Of course at age 65, you’ll be nothing but, what’s the word I’m looking for? Oh yes. PREY. And won’t have anything more than pump-and-dump spawn with low investment around you to protect you. The State is far more fragile, failing, and incompetent than you expect. It will do an excellent job caring for and providing fantastic wealth to Obama’s daughters. You? Not so much.

        Like


      • Differences make you feel sexual excitement, similarities make you feel empathy, a combination of the two is best.

        Like


      • Opposites attract! Like negative and positive polarities on magnets! It’s science!

        I have never had any inclination to breed with someone outside of my ethnicity, much less my race. This on-again-off-again attraction to miscegenation is your hypergamy spiking, nothing more.

        Asiatics and swarthy races do nothing for me, at any time. The most one can say for differences is a curiosity for or fascination with the exotic, but it takes a fetish to bridge the gap all the way to sexual excitement. Men want their children to be visually similar to them for biological reasons women do not have to worry about, as the distaff carry the offspring.

        “A combination of the two is best.” A gallon of ice cream mixed with a pint of shit tastes more like the latter than the former.

        Matt

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 7:20 pm Demarcated Values

        “A woman moved, is like a fountain troubled,—
        Muddy, ill-seeming, thick, bereft of beauty.
        And while it is so, none so dry or thirsty
        Will deign to sip or touch one drop of it.”

        I think Greg Eliot will get this.

        Like


      • Men want their children to be visually similar to them for biological reasons women do not have to worry about, as the distaff carry the offspring.
        ————-

        So your wife should only cheat with a man who looks like you?

        Maybe you should surround her with blk guys, that way you will know if she cheats on you.

        Like


      • Maybe you should surround her with blk guys, that way you will know if she cheats on you.

        Doesn’t always work, especially if hubby is a manboob leftist and clueless.

        Like


      • “A woman moved, is like a fountain troubled,—
        Muddy, ill-seeming, thick, bereft of beauty.
        And while it is so, none so dry or thirsty
        Will deign to sip or touch one drop of it.”

        I think Greg Eliot will get this.

        +1 on the Bard

        Most a propos.. especially for the Harpies Bizarre crew and their lickspittle fellow travelers who flap around the chateau, sullying the food of men.

        There lances are but straws.

        Like


      • Hell, their

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 2:53 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        I know full well how badly the State is failing. That’s why I’m stockpiling ammunition and gold. And don’t worry, darlin’. I’ll still be able to squeeze a trigger just fine at 65.

        Like


      • If the state fails your gold will be as worthless as paper money. You can’t eat it, and it sucks as a material for making tools or weapons.

        Like


      • In addition, your dildo won’t pull your hair or smack your ass…

        Like


      • The only two precious metals for the downfall are brass and lead… and, like gold, they’re a bitch to have to carry around in good quantities.

        Like


      • on November 22, 2012 at 9:16 am Hugh G. Rection

        So how do you look into a man’s genes, my dear?

        Like


      • These findings are consistent with the notion that women may be endowed with a psychological system that generates intergroup bias via mechanisms that rely on categorization heuristics and perceptions of the physical formidability of out-group men, particularly when the costs of sexual coercion are high.”
        ————————-

        This is very similar to what that senator said about women being able to prevent fertilization when they are raped (if its a legitimate rape).

        But since he didn’t quote a “study”, he lost his job.

        Like


      • way to split that cunt hair Lara.

        Like


    • In-groupism isn’t necessarily a good thing from a genetic standpoint. Hybrid vigor applies to human beings as much as it does to the lower mammals. Since so many serious genetic flaws are recessive, the occasional influx of a fresh genotype can boost the genetic fitness of the herd.

      see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outbreeding_depression

      Interestingly, we seem to understand this at the hardware level. I wish I could find the study (I’m sure you’ve seen it) indicating that women who are ovulating tend to prefer the pheromone scent of men whose genes are vastly different from their own.

      Not all genes, just the genes involved in the Major histocompatibility complex.

      see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_histocompatibility_complex#MHC_in_sexual_mate_selection

      Women who are either pregnant or whose bodies have been fooled into thinking they’re pregnant by the Pill, on the other hand, tend to prefer the scent of men who are similar to them genetically. The theory was, let’s get knocked up by someone who can guarantee the baby won’t have Tay-Sachs or malaria, then run home to our tribe to be taken care of during the pregnancy.

      There is more than enough variation in the MHC genes within ethnic groups for reproduction of diverse MHC’s in offspring.

      and your assumption that ovulation makes women more attracted to men from the outgroup is blatantly false. Nice try at propaganda though.

      see
      Prejudice linked to women’s menstrual cycle
      http://news.msu.edu/story/9510/&topic_id=10

      “The researchers conducted scientific studies with two groups of women that investigated how women’s implicit attitudes toward men change across the menstrual cycle. They found that fertile women were more biased against men of different races and men of different social groups than men of their own group.”

      and

      Fertility and Intergroup Bias in Racial and Minimal-Group Contexts
      http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/06/02/0956797611410985

      “Abstract

      Recent research has shown that White women’s bias against Black men increases with elevated fertility across the menstrual cycle. We demonstrate that the association between fertility and intergroup bias is not limited to groups defined by race, but extends to group categories that are minimally defined, and may depend on the extent to which women associate out-group men with physical formidability. In Study 1, Black and White women with strong associations between the racial out-group and physical formidability displayed greater bias against out-group men as conception risk increased. Study 2 replicated these results in a minimal-group paradigm. These findings are consistent with the notion that women may be endowed with a psychological system that generates intergroup bias via mechanisms that rely on categorization heuristics and perceptions of the physical formidability of out-group men, particularly when the costs of sexual coercion are high.”

      Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 4:35 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        Seriously, not trying to spread propaganda. I was remembering a number of recent studies I’d read about. I’ve never read any of these. (And I wonder why!)
        Thank you for providing them. Sincerely.

        Like


      • During evolution it was important for kids to be able to recognise they own group for their own safety. Venture outside your group you had the high risk of getting killed.

        Same paper goes to say: In accordance with this, research suggests
        that fertile women prefer the scent of men that have
        major histocompatibility complexes (which play an
        important role in immune function [70]) that differ
        optimally from their own….
        THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN INTERGROUP
        CONFLICT: AVOIDING SEXUAL COERCION

        Women often only met outside males who were about to rape after they had just conquered their group. To maintain their sexual selectiveness (which is important to women) they developed a fear/hide from them gene, which is activated especially at their most fertile.
        However they still find them sexually attractive (because they are Alphas who just conquered the group)
        Women will always be attracted to the scent of an Alpha.
        Hence games trumps EVERYTHING

        The paper also says: punitive allocation task shows that men are willing to
        endure greater sacrifices by their own group in order
        to exact a greater punishment on an outgroup,…

        Most people are not racist, but these HBD articles are further alienating the very target you are trying to reach, young white men.

        Like


      • punitive allocation task shows that men are willing to
        endure greater sacrifices by their own group in order
        to exact a greater punishment on an outgroup,…
        ———————
        OK, but the question you guys keep tip toeing around is: who DECIDES the dimesions of the so called ingroup?

        This is the 800 pound white gorilla in the room. Personally, I reserve the right to decide for myself who IS and who ISN”T qualified to be in MY INGROUP.

        I can’t trust nobody elses criteria but my own.

        Like


      • That’s why people generally gather in small groups called families and by extension, clans. Big nations are only really necessary for economic leverage and overall growth potential.

        Like


      • This is the 800 pound white gorilla in the room. Personally, I reserve the right to decide for myself who IS and who ISN”T qualified to be in MY INGROUP.

        I can’t trust nobody elses criteria but my own.

        I fully understand your dilemma… Father’s Day gets awfully confusing in your neighborhood.

        Like


      • That is true, for now

        Like


    • 98% of hybrid vigor comes from not fucking your cousin. The other 1.5% comes from mating with someone of complementary body/personality type.

      The flip side to hybrid vigor is outbreeding depression.

      Like


    • 98% of hybrid vigor comes from not fucking your cousin. The next 1.5% comes from mating with someone of complementary personality and body type. Straying too far from your own gene pool causes outbreeding depression.

      Like


      • Thanks for bringing some knowledge, the bitch’s comment above is completely ignorant.

        Like


      • “98% of hybrid vigor comes from not fucking your cousin.”

        Yes but 98% of inbred vigor comes from fucking your cousin.

        As for a complementary mate, read this: http://anthonymludovici.com/cm_1-2.htm

        Like


      • Fascinating (and shocking-to-modern-audiences) information, Laconophile, but I don’t think that more than 3 people (including myself) are going to read it. Everyone is so convinced that inbreeding = retardation/deleterious genetic mutation that they’ll never notice the fact that the highest IQs (and arguably greatest civilizations) in the world stem from closely-related tribes.

        Like


      • Another great by ludovici. Inbreeding is the primary method through which superior bloodlines are developed. Of course it is all depended on what you inbreed, if you mate garbage with closely related garbage you get greater garbage. If you mate genius with closely related genius you get uber genius. The fastest race horses in the world today are a product of mating closely related bloodlines, the same can be said of any other working animal that excels in its field. Man is as much a product of nature as any other creature, the same rules apply to us.

        Like


      • The fastest race horses in the world today are a product of mating closely related bloodlines,
        —–
        Yeah, but they are all black or brown; how come a white horse never wins the triple crown?

        Like


      • Horse privilege.

        Like


      • Ok I am NO expert on horse but I think I read somewhere white horses are almost as rare as albinos and have some fragile features or a fragile health or something and harder to train.

        they are not good at racing ( If i’m not mistaken, which I can be, hey! I never claimed I was perfect and knew everything!)

        Like


      • when I was in middle school, they tried to make us read some gay ass book about a white girl with a black horse; 100% gay

        Like


      • ’cause whitey can’t run.

        Like


      • Yeah, but they are all black or brown; how come a white horse never wins the triple crown?

        Heh… if wishes were horses, you beggars would ride.

        We save the white ones for weightier tasks:

        Up through an empty house of stars,
        Being what heart you are,
        Up the inhuman steeps of space
        As on a staircase go in grace,
        Carrying the firelight on your face
        Beyond the loneliest star.

        Ballad of the White Horse

        And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.
        Revelation 6:8

        Like


      • Greg Eliot

        And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.
        Revelation 6:8
        ———–

        Hmmm… so does this mean the white man is the devil like Louis Farrakhan said?

        Like


      • We’re one helluva race, I’ll tell ya!

        Farrakhan has a lot of solid ideas for his people, many of which involve keeping themselves separate… now, if he would only truly practice what he preaches without the safety net of YT’s society.

        Like


      • It’s common knowledge among dog owners that if a breed becomes too pure it’ll show a great deal of health problems…the way a breed stays healthy and strong is by keeping the gene pool large and diverse, which means not being afraid of mixing. Most breeds are the result of a particular mix anyway.

        Like


      • Again, thank you Captain Obvious… the point is/was/remains that mixing Swedes with Irish with Czechs with Italians with Germans is a healthy diversity… mixing totally disparate races, such as negro with any of the above, is destruction of the white counterpart for all intents and purposes.

        Your continued shabbos goy and “useful idiot” stances are tiresome.

        Like


      • Greg Eliot
        mixing totally disparate races, such as negro with any of the above, is destruction of the white counterpart for all intents and purposes.
        —————
        But if the mixing occurs, WTFAY to say thats not evolution? Since when is does the pinnacle of evolution stop at Greg fucking Eliot?

        Or so called white people?

        I guess if it was up to you, dinosaurs would still be roaming the Earth?

        They had their time. Their time is up. Time for something new, something BETTER.

        Get over it

        nigger.

        Like


      • [Whites] had their time. Their time is up. Time for something new, something BETTER.

        Like the mulatos in Haiti after the French left?

        Like


      • on November 25, 2012 at 1:52 pm Hopeless Romantic

        Greg Elliot,
        “mixing totally disparate races, such as negro with any of the above, is destruction of the white counterpart for all intents and purposes.”

        Nobody is preventing white people from getting married, staying married and having babies with each other. Plenty are still doing it.

        The problem with Farrakhan and alot of Black Americans is there fascination with silly religions like Islam and Christianity.

        Like


      • I guess if it was up to you, dinosaurs would still be roaming the Earth?

        Welcome to intellectual Jurassic Park, folks.

        They had their time. Their time is up. Time for something new, something BETTER.

        Get over it

        nigger.

        So, you think whites have had their time? If you’re right, then I’d prefer it to be God’s Will, not the Haitian nightmare of your ilk.

        Besides, it may have missed your notice, but there has ample evidence of whites mixing with other races in both Africa and South America and the Caribbean for the past two or three centuries.

        It is indisputably neither new, nor better.

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 2:33 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        What’s outbreeding depression? Got anything I can read on the subject?

        Like


      • What’s outbreeding depression?

        It’s the malaise one feels when people like Heidi Klum and Seal get married.

        Like


      • Greg, whats with the malaise?

        its not like she married a crack head or wino… theres only eight good black men in the whole world and she got one of em.

        Heidi Klum had mad cock coming at her from every direction and she chose Seal. This is the problem with you Greg. You make up the fucking rules of “game” and then cry like a bitch when the black guy ocassionally wins.

        WTF?

        Can’t you see son?

        Thats the game; white girls do that all the time. Its the way they filter out beta white guys. Go in the club and sit down at the bar next to the biggest blackest gorilla they can find.

        Why?

        Cause they know that what ever white guy approaches her is gonna have some mad skillz in some area.

        Now if none of ya’ll approach her, its not her fault if she goes home with the gorilla.

        Greg, if you want someone to blame, just look in the mirror; its your fault for not taking singing lessons… did you make your sons take singing lessons?

        Do your job and quit hating on niggers.

        Thats my job.

        Like


      • “Now if none of ya’ll approach her, its not her fault if she goes home with the gorilla.”

        No, it’s because all the white guys she dated didn’t want to get married, so much more after she had a child already with one of her hookups. Let’s face it; Heidi is a slut. Seal was the only one who agreed to adopt her child from her first impregnating hookup and overlook her indiscretion. He’s a black moor, and she is a white ho with mediocre looks. That’s what happens when you are a known ho – only black men overlook your whorishness cause you’re a white woman. She is hooking up with her white bodyguard now, who’s probably after something else; still not after marriage

        Like


      • thwack, you just took an awful lot of whiny sentences to counter my one ironic observation… who exactly, then, is “crying like a bitch”?

        Like


      • Greg, your game is wack. you blame niggers for your own malaise; but the question remains, which came first; the out of control white woman or the slack white man.

        Seal married a famous attractive white woman; and it was an excellent career move.

        My advice is, if you are gonna marry a white woman, marry a famous attractive one.

        Heidi Klum was a Nazi wet dream; you gotta aim high son.

        (cue for stuck up, pithy white man response in 3,2,1)

        Like


      • you blame niggers for your own malaise

        The blame was hers, as you well know… like you said, a “Nazi wet dream”… can you IMAGINE the daddy issues and/or guilt-complex she must have experienced as child… one shudders.

        Like


      • LOL

        Like


      • I’m not surprised. I guess you should try to find someone with good enough genes, who is not your first cousin, and who you can get along with well enough to give your son or daughter a decent upbringing. Everything else is irrelevant.

        Like


      • I think they made a movie about that called “A Gene Too Far”.

        Like


    • Like most people who throw the phrase around you have no understanding of hybrid vigour. Many negative traits are recessive, yes, but so are many positive traits. Hybridization is rarely invigorating, and is only necessary or beneficial under special circumstances of extensive inbreeding, and the outbreeding must be with a high quality and compatible stock. Animal and plant breeders know this, but nobody who utters the phrase “hybrid vigor” seems to understand.

      Like


    • Non scientists invariably misunderstand hybrid vigor. You are clearly not a scientist.

      Like


    • To an average internet commenter, “hybrid vigor” is another way of saying “whe’ da white wommin at”

      Like


    • “In-groupism”

      more-strongularism

      LOL!

      Like


    • You are spot on. Groupism is innate because cavemen who grouped together survived, and we are a product of that group ism gene. Go to any prison yard and you will see this gene fully expressed. If you don’t a group, you will be tortured in prison. At the same time inbred genes have devasting effects. I have seen this firsthand in certain tribes in the Middle East where it is common to marry with cousins. Cavemen avoided this dilemma by possessing an aggressive gene of possession. Look at any toddler play with a new toy. Watch the other two year olds grab for it immediately. When cavemen saw the next tribe over the hill, they attacked for their resources, ie. beautiful women and land. Thus war ensured the mixing of the gene to avoid inbred recessive genes being expressed. War, aggression and groupism is in all of us because the cavemen ancestors who possessed these traits are the ones that made us.

      Like


  5. My comments won’t show up.

    Like


  6. From the sound of it, these tactics would be more effective if used against the “conservative…waterboys” than leftists. Too many middle class whites still buy what these sell-outs are saying. No clearer examples than Hannitty coming out supporting amnesty recently and Rush saying “I’m tired of carrying the water for these guys” after McCain’s loss. And what’s the use of GOP victories if we have Quislings like Boehner in charge? That guy is far more dangerous than Pelosi or Reid, at least they are known, insane, quantities.

    Like


  7. Excellent post heartiste
    I’m happy I stumbled across this blog it is so interesting.

    Off topic, but I have have two pieces of advice for white men (I know that there are pro-whites here):

    1. Have many children
    2. Homeschool your many children

    Like


  8. Two pieces of advice for white men (I know that there are pro-whites here):

    1. Have many children
    2. Homeschool your many children

    Like


  9. “Why is it men only want supermodels?”

    ….

    “Why is it women only want bad boy billionaire hunks?”

    Like


    • on November 21, 2012 at 12:14 pm RappaccinisDaughter

      Seriously, why do chicks say that? I’ve heard that so many times that I can’t even be bothered to counter it anymore. Most men don’t “only” want supermodels. They’d take one if they could get one, of course, but most of them seem to be capable of finding satisfaction with a woman who a) isn’t fat, b) doesn’t have a face like an elbow, and c) has a pleasant personality.

      Like


      • You forgot

        d) she likes to have sex often enough

        Like


      • d) is sexually faithful.

        Like


      • Doesnt have kids.Of mixed race.

        Like


      • Doesnt have kids.Of mixed race.

        Fixed it for you.

        Like


      • “Doesnt have kids. ESPECIALLY of mixed race.”

        Now stfu.

        Like


      • “mixed race” = mixed with what?

        Nonrace?

        Like


      • Because that particular chick’s man tells her to lose a little bit of that 50-100 pounds she packed on since meeting him.

        Odd enough I’ve never heard a skinny or pretty gal utter those words.

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 1:11 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        Exactly. That’s what annoys me about hearing that out of women. They’re using the fact that men are very visually focused, and that (oh noes!) they do have a physical ideal that most women cannot realistically achieve, as an excuse to not do the things that ARE under their control. No, honey, it’s not in the cards for you to be Alessandra Ambrosio. But you could lose 20 pounds and get a more flattering haircut and not be such a bitch all the time.

        But that would be work, wouldn’t it? So instead let’s sit around and whine about how men are cads while we pound down a pint of Ben & Jerry’s.

        Like


      • Men are visually focused and women are alpha male-monetarily-physically focused. It would be easier for her to lose weight and look less like a man than for me to do a radical personality change, come into a ton of cash, and turn into Brad Pitt’s look-a-like. (I’m still going to try though)

        Men see supermodels as the “billionaires” of women. Women see alphas as the “billionaires” of men.

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 2:36 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        I don’t know; maybe it’s the LDR thing, but I really don’t give a crap how much money a man makes. The only thing I ask is that he be financially solvent–e.g., isn’t going to come to me for a “loan” every time his rent’s due.

        p.s., I want to know where you got that bear. I’m looking at booking a hunt for next April.

        Like


      • That’s actually Jared Allen…a NFL player. He bagged it in Montana.

        And in my opinion an alpha.

        http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2008-06-13/jared-allen-craves-thrill-hunt

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 3:59 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        Oo, I love Montana. I’d always thought British Columbia for spring bear hunts, but I’ll check it out.

        Like


      • A polar bear is more powerful and strongular but white people won’t let you kill them because they are white.

        This is what white supremacy means.

        Like


      • A polar bear is more powerful and strongular but white people won’t let you kill them because they are white.

        This is what white supremacy means.

        That’s some strongular reasoning there… probably why we send horses to the glue factory, but leave zebras alone.

        Like


      • Most men think (actual) supermodels look freaky. ‘Supermodels’ being the high fashion runway variety. You need to be at least 5’8 to become one, and you also need to look like a teenage crack addict. See 1990’s Calvin Klein ads. Body fat percentages below 10%, which isn’t very healthy for a woman and might compromise her ability to function as a normal female.
        What most men REALLY like are Playboy bunnies and swimsuit models, in other words, the so-called ‘Beach Body’. Slim without being skinny, curvy in all the right places, muscular without going into body builder extremes. Body fat percentages around 15-20%. Brooke Burke. Pam Anderson.
        You get the idea.
        The only people complaining about men ‘only liking supermodels’ are fat cows (body fat %’s of 30%+) who do not have the willpower to lose weight.

        Like


      • Right wolfie, I never found the “supermodel” as sexually attractive as everybody acted like they were. Later I realized its a genetic formula you are being sold. The long legs, arms, neck… are all “higher” human physical attributes. For example, short legs, no neck… = “peasant stock”

        To sum up, to the extent woman looks like an “alien from outer space”, the more she can function as a supermodel on planet Earth.

        Long spindly limbs and neck, eyes wide apart, small mouth and nose, long neck…

        tits and ass need not apply

        Like


      • +1… and may we be truly thankful, this Thanksgiving, that there’s always common ground upon which otherwise disparate men can meet.

        Like


      • on November 22, 2012 at 2:47 pm Demarcated Value

        haha

        Like


      • on November 23, 2012 at 10:16 am Hugh G. Rection

        They also get picked predominately by gay men. Go figure why they look so boyish…

        Like


  10. My first post and a question: How do you gaming women in the office?

    A “big boss” woman, always working with the big boys; polite to me, says “hi” but that’s about it. I see her as a woman, and like her, but have no clue how to game her. She’s very conservative and I presume wouldn’t want to be seen socially with someone like me (lower level).

    Like


    • I faced a similar situation with my lady boss. Heres what I did: I made sure to be in the break room just as she was coming in. I sat there reading a book called’How To Increase The Size Of your Penis.” She saw that and the mischievous smirk on her face betrayed the fact that she saw me as a guy who takes sexuality seriously. Now whenever I pass her she giggles and points at me surreptitiously. I know what she’s thinking. Soon I am gonna close the deal. Its gonna be hot!

      Like


    • on November 21, 2012 at 4:38 pm Hugh G. Rection

      Do you value your job? In any case, it’s probably a good idea to try to isolate her from judging eyes first.

      Like


      • Yes, I agree – isolate her. Any ideas? Once she was getting off the eleveator, holding stuff and I asked if I can get the door for her. She replied “No, that’s ok”.

        I seems that some game is needed, after all this is the core message of this blog, but how?

        Like


    • A “big boss” woman, always working with the big boys; polite to me, says “hi” but that’s about it. I see her as a woman, and like her, but have no clue how to game her. She’s very conservative and I presume wouldn’t want to be seen socially with someone like me (lower level).

      What’s your IQ relative to hers?

      If she’s an IQ-120 Art History major, and you’re an IQ-135 Chemical Engineering major, then, with a toned body, a mischievous grin, and some good conversational skills, you’ll have her in the sack in five minutes.

      But if you’re an IQ-115 Community College attendee with an Associates Degree, and she’s an IQ-130 MBA with a CPA, then it’s gonna be a tough sell.

      PS: ALCOHOL IS YOUR FRIEND.

      Champagne and other bubblies (like Prosecco) are always best.

      But you can also go with Chardonnay (Chablis if she’s a Europhile, Buttery Napa if she’s more All-American Girl-Next-Door).

      And of course Riesling – everyone loves Riesling.

      Like


  11. I wish CH would elaborate on the similarities between the leftism and women

    I have absolutely no talent for writing and I mean NO talent at ALL
    but here are a few of those striking similarities,

    they both shamelessly re-write history

    -the woman will always re-write history – to make you look much worse – when she mentions a fight you and her had a few months ago or something you may have said or done that was not nice.
    Of course anything she said or did is also re-written to make her look much more nice and innocent than she really is

    -the left is famous for re-writing history to make the right or white males look much MUCH worse than they are.
    And anything the left did that was bad is also re-written to make them look much better than they are ( a few examples; despite what is commonly believed, it was democrats and not conservatives who had ties with the KKK and Martin Luther King was a conservative…Obama pronounced Corps men ” corpse men” as in dead body, this was quickly swept under the carpet while anything Bush may have mispronounced was front page news )

    They both use a bazooka to shoot down a mosquitoe,

    -Calling men jerks, weirdos and stalkers simply for showing interest in them ( if she is not interested )

    -the left calling us haters and racists simply for stating facts about culture or demographics that makes them feel uncomfortable

    They both do things because it feels nice and not because it is the logical rational thing to do,

    ( amnesty for illegals is one thing they both agree on because it is “such a nice thing to do for those poor immigrants!” but they can not see the dire consequences on the economy etc etc )

    They both consider it fair when they make rules that favor them and are totally unfair to us.

    They both think it is perfectly fine to ask probing questions that we must answer, but feel insulted when we do the same and expect answers

    -We must tell women what we do and how much we earn but they are insulted if we ask their age or their weight or how many men they have slept with

    -Romney was supposedly a horrible horrible man for refusing to release his tax return papers, but us wanting Obama to un-seal his record was supposedly hate and racism

    They both fight like, well… like girls

    and so on and so forth

    The more I analyze them, the more I find similarities between women and leftism

    but my writing is so dull that I am not doing justice to this idea and it makes this topic seem dull

    I wish CH would tackle this someday and give it the proper treatment it deserves

    Like


    • …He just wrote an entire article on how arguing them point for point is completely pointless.
      Romney would have been better off asking what “Obama most enjoyed about his Muslim elementary school” than showing how Obama is ruining this country by using logic and facts.

      When you talk to a mob, you must communicate in the language of a mob: Images.

      Leftoid: “I think its time Romney release his tax records.”
      Asshole: “I think you walk funny with a 12″ dildo up your ass.”

      Like


    • I think you’re on to something.

      I would add a 3rd party to women and leftist: children. Women, leftists and children are alike in many ways.

      Like


    • Excellent comparison.

      Most women are brainwashed by the left and are left supporters, so it’s no surprise that many of their complaints and arguments, as well as their fighting words and tactics aginst men are left-inspired.

      Many women see men as the enemy, just like the left sees time-tested values as the enemy to “progress” (and that’s even when they have irrefutable proof that their progressive notions are the ones eroding society and not what has already been tested and scrutinized).

      In short, both lack common sense.

      Like


    • Solipsism: black, gay, or whatever your group is the prism thru which u view everything.

      Like


  12. One of the best ways to counter a frame is to simply address it, and then apply some mockery, of course.

    For example, when GQ asked Marco Rubio how old he thought the world is, he should have replied, “That question has nothing to do with anything. If I answer “6,000 years”, you’ll allow the left to mock me as a Neanderthal. If I answer 6 billion years, you’ll pit me against the religious right. This is a trap and only a trap. When’s the last time your rag asked a Democrat a trap question like this one?”

    Interviewer: “Uh, I don’t know.”

    Rubio: “Exactly. Never. Now ask me a question that has some sort of relevance to something else or I’m going to leave to bang my hot wife.”

    Gingrich sucked at most other stuff, but he had this down to a T. Instead, the GOP is the media’s beta in every way. Pretend they’re fair, and maybe some century if we’re lucky they will be.

    Anyone read any of those articles about how Obama treats reporters like shit? How he never has press conferences and restricts access? Alpha all the way.

    And he won. Dumbass GOP.

    Like


    • Rubio is leading the charge to arrest men for paying for sex and to criminalize and ban backpage.com. That’s a mangina position. I’ve never been to that site because I have too many regular dates to choose from but I can imagine lots of men in less male-friendly regions consider it a first amendment right to have it.

      The fact that he felt the need to grovel to the religjous right on that question only reminds me that Rubio is definitely not the man to lead the GOP toward 2016. He should have answered “About 5 billion years. Next question”.

      Like


    • Yes exactly. It never ceases to amaze me how many pointless questions the media will ask.

      Sure let’s talk about how old the world is…that’ll really get the unemployment numbers down. I’m sure the Jews and Muslims will quit fighting once we can come to an agreement on how old a bunch of dirt is.

      I also want to dig into the whole evolution thing too…because that will make a family living paycheck to paycheck feel well once they know my stance.

      Like


    • on November 21, 2012 at 4:42 pm RappaccinisDaughter

      Have you ever seen that picture of Obama riding the girl’s bike with his mom jeans on and his helmet? Or the one where he’s on The View with his legs crossed over the knee AND at the ankle? I have polled a number of male friends and they assure me that it is not possible to sit that way unless you don’t have any balls.
      Obama is such a vagina, it makes my vagina embarrassed and envious because it can’t ever vag so hardcore.

      Like


      • when I see a man do that I think two things

        1 – Doesn’t that crush his “package”?

        2 – That looks effeminate

        I can not sit with my legs crossed like women do; it crushes my “package”

        and even if it didn’t I would not do it as it looks effeminate

        Like


      • Might interest you to know that statistically, Black men have smaller, perkier testicles because African women are generally less hypergamous and prone to infidelity. There are various speculations as to why, but my guess is a combination of culture and high masculinity in African men making it very difficult to find a guy who’s more manly than a dude who hunts crocodiles with a spear or something.

        So our shafts are longer, but your balls are longer.

        Like


      • He was raised by a single mother…hung out with cultural Marxists…and is married to a cunt of a wife. That’s like the trifecta of losing your balls as a male.

        Like


      • He also won two presidential elections and gave the order that killed the biggest enemy of the Western world.

        What have you done lately?

        Like


      • When did Obama kill feminism?

        Like


      • ba-dump CHING

        Like


      • Thread over… we have a winner.

        Like


      • Bush won two presidential elections ( without the help of the media as opposed to Obama ) and gave the order that killed Saddam Hussein

        but he raised the debt much less than Obama despite having to deal with the recovery after the events of 9/11

        Bush got more votes than Obama ( if memory serves )

        Bush wins.

        Like


      • Bush got the help of the Supreme Court, moron. He lost the popular vote.

        He raised the debt substantially.

        Bush left office despised by both parties.

        You lose.

        Like


      • @ Jason

        Not so fast, you’re attempting to change history in typical leftists fashion my friend.

        1) We had to get the Supreme Court to rule on the dispute since Gore refused to a recount of just the FL counties which had voter discrepancies; he wanted a recount in the whole state. There was no good basis for it according to Bush, and the Supreme Court agreed with him. That’s not the same as saying the Supreme Court made Bush president, as you’re implying.

        2) Then Bush won a second time to the chagrin of leftist, what’s your explanation for that? And he won without the shills of the media helping him out, exactly as CF pointed out.

        3) Bush raised the debt because he had to. We got hit by terrorists, didn’t we? It costs money to fight them. Now what’s Obama’s excuse for raising the debt even more? Entitlement programs, perhaps, for people who don’t deserve jack shit??? Transferring wealth from the people who earned it and giving it to illegals, single hos, and deadbeats of all types. Is that good policy in your eyes? Maybe it’s Obama getting even with white people and rich people for being investors, producers, talented people. Democrat voters tend to be venomous and jealous of the achievers and the earners. No wonder they are looking to suck and milk the system, never mind if the country goes to hell in the process. With citizens like this who needs enemies? The enemy is alive and kicking and living within.

        4) And as far as leaving office despised, history hasn’t spoken yet. He will be viewed much more favorably one day. He wasn’t perfect and he made some mistakes as most presidents do, but many in his party are still in his corner and grasp how hard his job was. They realized he did the best he could with the hand he was dealt. And let’s not forget that Clinton left him with a recession, as well as with many of the motions in place that created 9/11 and the economic collapse. Hate on him all you like, but he is 100 times the man Obama is.

        Like


      • un employment numbers are higher under Obama

        The number of people on food stamps is MUCH higher under Obama

        there are now more conflicts in the Middle-east than there were under Bush

        yep

        Obama is doing a fine job

        we could go on all night

        Like


      • Bush didn’t help the deficit any by getting his tax cuts put into law. The mideast is in change. After decades of dictactorial rule, Middle East countries are getting their first taste of democracy. Israel have flareups with Lebanon or Gaza is nothing new. Iraq was better served one could argue though under Hussein – at least the tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis might agree with that statement. And what makes Obama’s wife ” a cunt of a wife-other than she is black that is

        Like


      • The official unemployment percentage is around 8, but that’s a lie. Somehow, they have accounting rules that makes it possible not to count everyone. I believe it’s more between 21-25%. I don’t know a person that doesn’t know at least 3 or more people who are currently unemployed. If everyone knows a few people who had a job but now are unemployed, it means it’s a lot more prevalent than what’s reported by the government.

        People on food stamps doubled under Obama, from 7 M to 14 M. And the number of people who are getting government help also doubled from 50 M to 100 M. So that means 100 M people are getting benefits on the taxpayer back.

        Middle East conflicts????

        There isn’t an Arab country yet that’s not involved in the erosion of the Middle East. It’s not about democracy when you get the Muslim brotherhood taking over in the place of the former governments. It’s 1979 Iran repeating itself, and Obama is encouraging it. The extremist in Iran hated the shah, called him a dictator because he wanted to make Iran resemble western society and leave autocratic Islam behind, so they convinced the people to overthrow him. Once the people fell for that ploy by the religious extremists, who did they replace the shah with? Radicals of the worst kind. The same thing happened in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and soon Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon. They are all Muslim brotherhood places now or about to be, hardly a taste of democracy.

        And as far as tens of thousands of Iraqis dyeing, how many did Saddam kill? Some say 2, 000,000, maybe more. Not that I think “freeing” Iraq was a good move. Democracy is not for everyone, and the new leader who we put in place is as anti-America and anti-democracy as they come. So in this case I would have left them Saddam. Many societies can’t handle democracy and we need to accept that. At this rate, I rather they stay with their dictators who keep law and order, than replace them with terrorists like the Muslim brotherhood or Hezbollah.

        Bottom line, you can’t say Obama has done much good. He wasn’t re-elected based on the merits. He was elected because the country is racing left and to many people gay “rights’ (as if they have no rights), birth control availability and abortion (as well as other female issues), amnesty to illegals (especially lax immigration rules), entitlement programs (especially Obama care), and affirmative action for minorities are the reasons they vote Democrat, and they will always vote Democrat, even if a worthless idiot is to occupy the white house. Unfortunately, such people are the majority and that’s why conservative or libertarians will never win again. They are delusional if they think they are.

        Like


      • NiteLily

        are you really a woman?

        how come you know so much about those facts?

        and how come you have what are typically male opinions?

        you are really a woman? REALLY???

        are you good looking?

        are you short, tall, fat, skinny, blond, brunette, red head, blue eyes, brown eyes,

        can you cook? sew?

        How long have you been married?
        do you have kids?

        are you a stay at home wife/mother?

        do you have a job?

        how old are you?

        do you have a sister?

        Does she look and think like you ?

        Is she too young for me ?

        Kidding!!! I am too old and live too far away AND last but not least went back to the girlfriend I left back in July after having dated for 8 months,
        we have been back together about a month, she is a little hottie,( a 8.3 on hotornot ) blond hair, striking blue eyes, cute face, killer smile, sexy body, superb breasts, loves me , is crazy about me, calls me 7 times a day, loves to have sex with me ( she is not unfaithfull ) she has a bad temper but with some advice taken here at CH I am better coping with her ” bitchiness” and keeping it to a low tolerable level

        Like


      • @Canadian Friend
        Ha Ha…….She sounds like a winner. Definitely a keeper. At the very least, she is worth the effort trying to make it work, especially now that you have some help from Heartiste. If she fits you so well and satisfies so many of your needs, what else could you ask for? And….if you can handle her bitchiness, that’s even more fun.

        With your permission, I will skip some of your personal questions in the interest of privacy. 🙂

        “how come you have what are typically male opinions?”

        I don’t think they are male opinions; they are opinions based on reality and not on delusions, which plague most of the Left. I have noticed that the truth doesn’t matter to the Left. They’ll change it, misrepresent it, omit it, hide it, lie about it, refuse to accept it, pretend it doesn’t exist – take your pick – all in the interest of either furthering their agenda or in the interest of feeling good. I’m not interested in lying to myself solely so I could feel good about some delusions. Also, I refuse to be sympathetic to people that don’t deserve sympathy. Having sympathy for the undeserving is equivalent to being cruel to the good. Unfortunately, most women do fall into the Leftist trap because they are not conscientious and self-aware enough; they let their emotions rule them. I’m not saying I never fall trap to my emotions, I do sometimes, just not as often.

        Like


      • This conversation sounds like:

        “My mom beat me every day of the week.”
        “So what? So did my mom.”
        “Yeah, but your mom beat you with a red extension cord. That is so much worse.”
        “What do you mean? Your mom beat you with a pink extension cord. You think that’s better?”
        “Of course it’s better. Red extension cords leave nastier welts.”
        “No they don’t. Pink extension cords leave nastier welts.”

        Like


      • I don’t know how guys sit like that, but I’m not sure there’s a correlation lol

        Like


  13. Good points. Also, that people’s preference for in-groupism may be innate and therefore universal is a feature for the white totalitarian group that hates the “wrong kind of white people” because duh the goal is to make everything a crime. When everything is a crime and the crime is universal, selective enforcement will lead being able to pick off your enemies at your leisure. On the other hand, the right kind of white people can ignore black nationalism or LaCasa or LaRaza meso-militant groups. Good thing for the wrong kind of white people that newest immigrant groups like Indians and various asians don’t yet have nationalistic hate towards their new country. But, they’ve been smugged and snarked into voting democrat anyway against the wrong kind of white people.

    Like


  14. I call this post: Verbal Aikido

    Like


  15. Heartiste, you and Mark Levin is a ticket I’d vote for. Love what you’re doing with the Game/Political intersection. Hammer this more often and make sure you include the big media dogs in your tweets.

    Like


  16. In the election cycle, it was Eastwood who came the closest to ridiculing Obama with the (rather tame) chair bit. The left’s reaction was hysterics, which means it left a mark. Sadly, the GOP never got back to even gently poking fun at Obama. Very beta.

    Like


    • You want merciless anti-media mockery and scorn? The crew over at Breitbart.com are getting there.

      Like


      • It seems that Breitbart has just tackled the subject of reframing: the Democrats had a similar problem with its pacifist, anti-gun stance, which the Republicans mercilessly used to their advantage in the early 2000s. That the Republicans have not yet internalized that abortion is here to stay and thus give up on talking their rhetoric (like the Democrats eventually did with gun control) is amazing. That the Republicans haven’t also taken the stance that American college graduates are encumbered with too much debt and thus should be allowed to discharge said debt in personal bankruptcy (thereby beginning the eventual defunding of the extremely left-biased university system), is also incredible. These two issues alone would draw in a huge amount of support that is currently siding with the very fragmented Democratic Party.
        Unfortunately I don’t think the Republicans have quite gotten the message yet even though they’ve taken a beating in the Senate and Executive branches.

        Like


      • Except for your abortion strategy, your comment is right.

        That the Republicans haven’t also taken the stance that American college graduates are encumbered with too much debt and thus should be allowed to discharge said debt in personal bankruptcy (thereby beginning the eventual defunding of the extremely left-biased university system), is also incredible.

        Unfortunately I don’t think the Republicans have quite gotten the message yet even though they’ve taken a beating in the Senate and Executive branches.

        The Democrats are the Evil Party. The GOP is the Stupid Party.

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 4:51 pm Hugh G. Rection

        If the students discharge the debt, it should be their university that has to pick up the tab. Right now it’s insured by the Federal Government. It’s them who got a huge chunk the money in the first place. If the university would have to co-sign or insure part of the loan they wouldn’t bloat up the fluff departments so much.

        Agree with you on the abortion, that ship has sailed and it’s actually a blessing given that it means less future criminals.

        Like


    • “The left’s reaction was hysterics, which means it left a mark. Sadly, the GOP never got back to even gently poking fun at Obama. Very beta.”

      I have had many debates and arguments with the Left. I’ve noticed this exact exercise play out time and again.

      When you mock the left, when you prove their stupidity and show them to be the simpletons they are, when you use against them the same hateful labels they use against us, they retreat in fear and confusion. They can’t handle anyone disagreeing with them or their own insults hurled back at them. They are not used to it, and they don’t know or can’t cope with it.

      The reason for it is that no one ever told them that there are other points of views, so they feel no other points of view are valid and if you don’t think like them then you’re stupid and evil, and that’s coming from people who don’t believe in the concept of good and evil, so you see how unstable their thinking is. That’s why they lash out using hateful labels against us like racist and homophobe, BUT when the same medicine is used against them, they are totally clueless about how to handle it. They are incredulous that you think they are stupid and evil, and that’s when they hypocritically tell you, you are a religious zealot or a hateful racist if you’re calling them evil. All you have to do is continue to pound them with the same hateful labels they use against us and they start recoiling and unable to speak.

      That’s why Clint Eastwood was absolutely ingenious. Too bad the GOP was too fearful of the Left’s hypocritical collective disgust, and they caved in and denounced him, as well as halted any continuation of his line of action. The GOP are nothing but pussies. If we leave our salvation to them, in 10 years the country will look like South Africa.

      Like


  17. In regards to unnamed GOP operatives wondering how to reframe: I was a GOP operative a few years back, and every suggestion I had was rejected because it would make us seem mean (kinda reminds me of betas not wanting to be too aggressive with women). Hell, everybody’s going to call us mean and uncaring no matter what we say or do (Romney gives zillions to charity), so might as well go with it. What have we got to loose?

    Like


    • The GOP likely has poll numbers that show women disapproving of ridicule or reframing. However, we all know what women say and what they actually do are different things. The GOP is giving women the type of politician that women say they want to vote for. The GOP needs to give women the type of politician that women actually do vote for.

      Like


      • Bingo. I’m sick and tired of hearing the right parrot the polls (lies) that say, for instance, women won’t vote for confrontational men. Just one of the litany of shit tests conservatives keep failing.

        Like


      • Bingo. Of course, the GOP will not do that. They’re known as “The Stupid Party” for a reason.

        Like


      • They should be called “The Beta Party”.

        Like


      • The GOP fails the shit test every election.

        Like


      • A defining moment from the recent campaign comes to mind.

        In the second debate an attractive young feminist asked Romney what he would do about the “fact” that women only earn 77 cents on the dollar.

        He could have said “There’s good news for you here. All statistics confirm that women under 30 are making more than their same age counterparts.” There’s plenty he could have said to gainsay her bullshit presumption.

        Instead, he groveled. He accepted her premise.

        Then he tried to say “But I hired binders full of women”.

        We all know how that turned out.

        Beta extraordinaire.

        Except his wife is still hot and must have been mind-blowing in her prime.

        He played it too safe and he couldn’t afford to throw the second and third debates. Advisors who told him “just coast and look presidential” were dead wrong.

        Like


      • “Work harder, and in more DDD jobs. Next question.”

        Like


      • I’d tell women to get a real job that involves a useful skill…and not relying on Pa Government’s jobs of pushing papers and setting appointments. Your toilet paper liberal arts degree means you wasted a lot of money and time to ride the cock carousal.

        The first job I would suggest is being a housewife. That is the most rewarding and fulfilling job she could ever find.

        I would be rejected by both the GOP and the Dems. But I would definitely rule the airwaves at debates.

        Like


      • true that, he may have lost the election in that question and in the other question about not being terrible like W Bush (as in wtf is the half-black guy with big ears going to brag about?).

        Destroy the premise, don’t grovel and insult your base.

        Like


      • “Except his wife is still hot and must have been mind-blowing in her prime.”

        She was. Did you see pix of her when she was in her early 20s? Hot is an understatement. And the fact she had sex only with him her whole life, I’d say has a lot to do with her longevity and preserved good looks. How they chose the Obamas over them, is proof positive that the country’s standards are slip slipping away.

        Like


      • Except a presidential campaign is not a beauty pageant

        Like


      • “Except a presidential campaign is not a beauty pageant”

        Except, leave it to a Liberal to pick something out of context and make IT the issue. What we mean is that Obama is not fit to be president because his policies are leftist/communist trash that don’t help society, only drag it down and make it useless. Then add to this his background – he’s a child born out of wedlock to a white mother and a black father, back in a day and age only sluts engaged in such activity – and you have the son of a ho. Then to add more insult to injury, the Black thug of a father left his mother to bed other hos. She couldn’t even keep the Black thug around in the US, the land of plenty, and he ran back to his hut in Kenya. Can his loser mother get any lower? To this add the fact that his whole life he got ahead because of affirmative action, not because he was brilliant, and that’s how he ended up at Harvard. Yet to this, you have also have to add that his whole life he lived off social programs and social organizing like community agitation and race baiting, and you have the son of a ho who got educated because some white people felt sorry for him then he turned against them and used their kindness to agitate and race bait against them, but he finally managed to fool them and made them feel sorry for him enough they elected him president.

        In contrast, Romney comes from a good family, raised by both a mother and a father, whose father was faithful to his mother and didn’t leave her to raise their children on her own while he chased after other women. He went to Harvard based on his merits, not the result of affirmative action, and then he became a self-made man. He wasn’t a community agitator, a race baiter, or a man that lived his whole life off social programs like Obama.

        Then, at the very end, add to all of this the fact he has a gorgeous wife (the cherry on the top) and it means the Romney’s are quality and the Obamas are below mediocre.

        Like


      • Ask the people affected by the work Obama did and then ask the people affected by the work Romney did-I have a feeling their opinions will be in polar opposite of yours. But seriously, the election has been over 2 weeks ago. The people have spoken. The people made a decision on the man they wanted to lead this country, not the man’s mother or father. And regarding the wives, interesting concept: Would a woman rather be conventional better looking and have a horrible disease like MS or be less than conventional looks and be extremely healthy

        Like


      • @ Rick

        “Ask the people affected by the work Obama did and then ask the people affected by the work Romney did-I have a feeling their opinions will be in polar opposite of yours.”

        Sure, the people who voted for Obama are happy with him, no one is denying that. And why should they not be happy with him? He’s offering money he’s forcing out from the other group and giving it to them. That hardly means someone is doing a good job. It simply means people’s judgment has been corrupted by greed and hence their opinions should be disregarded.

        “The people have spoken. The people made a decision on the man they wanted to lead this country, not the man’s mother or father.”

        Again, the people who have spoken wouldn’t have been given the time of day a couple of decades ago because they are not Americans. They have been brought here by the lying cheating Democratic party so that it would end up with a majority and usurp the power of the American government. The Democratic party is a de facto government.

        The rest of your comment is irrelevant to this discussion, in typical liberal fashion.

        Like


      • You would have fit right in ripping on the Irish in the 19th century Maybe there is a very good reason the Norwegians and the Swedes and the Irish and the Germans are coming to America in great numbers anymore.

        Like


      • Look at the GOP response to their most recent defeat, trying to move even more centrally, backing amnesty, thinking that the people arriving would vote out of gratefulness for past deeds instead of looking for their next hit of gimmiedats.

        Like


      • “Look at the GOP response to their most recent defeat, trying to move even more centrally, backing amnesty, thinking that the people arriving would vote out of gratefulness for past deeds instead of looking for their next hit of gimmiedats.”

        The day after the elections, I said the GOP are delusional, and we will never win another election again because the country has moved to the abyss of the Left, from which there is no coming back. We lost the White House and the Senate. In 4 years will lose the House too. If not in 4, then in 8. But it’s coming because it’s not a White country anymore, and soon it will be a gay country too, to add insult to injury. The country is finished.

        Like


      • GOP has always been pro immigrant and pro illegal immigrant and pro amnesty and pro big gov. See Ann Hauser Bush and Reagan. Reagan took Nixon’s “war on drugs” to a whole new level and taxed Americans out of the bazooka for his dream of a mass prison industrial complex (the reason why Nixon’s prototype war on drugs was affirmed and amplified – a pua tactic, heh).

        I don’t know where this recent meme of GOP being the “party of small gubmint” got started but its blatantly false.

        The entire US agro and animal slaughter industry would collapse if it weren’t for cheap labor from undocumented peoples.

        Talk to farmers and slaughter house owners to learn more.

        Like


    • It’s LOSE not LOOSE!!!!!!!!!!!!AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

      Carry on.

      Like


    • “Hell, everybody’s going to call us mean and uncaring no matter what we say or do (Romney gives zillions to charity), so might as well go with it. What have we got to loose?”

      Exactly, they are going to call us mean and uncaring no matter what we say, that’s why we need to put them on the defensive and watch them retreat in fear. Always be the aggressors and catch them by surprise. It’s better than waiting to be attacked by them and having to defend ourselves.

      Like


  18. The flaw in your argument is assuming that in-group/out-group is defined primarily by visible racial characteristics. While the first reaction might be to be scared of someone very different looking (btw this could be anything, skin color, facial hair, very different dress-code, some kind of physical deformity) in practice we tend to accept as in-group people who are treated by the rest of our tribe as a member of the tribe; this is genetic. You can see this very clearly in extended mix-race families in cases where the family is close, the young kids will still love their uncle who looks totally different without any need for indoctrinating them to be politically correct.

    Like


  19. Egregious failure to interpret data. Your ability to justify your own thoughts through “science” is amazing.

    Like


    • +1

      This site demolishes pretty little lies, but it’s building equally heinous new ones.

      [heartiste: is it? or is it just demolising pretty lies you happen to like, like your friend greenhouse?]

      Like


      • H, most of the lies you demolish (nasty third-wave feminists, hamster rationalization, white knighting, etc) are ones that should’ve been swept out long ago. Keep in mind that I was raised on a fairly steady diet of red pills — all boys’ schools, strong athletics, lots of classic books, etc.

        But new lies seem to be forming here. Lies that we are utter slaves to our biology, that we will never be anything but hostile to members of out-groups, that pigmentation explains all human behavior, and that the best course of action is to succumb to our most vicious, brutal natures.

        These are just as bad as the feminists’ lies.

        Like


      • “we will never be anything but hostile to members of out-groups,”
        Nobody says this.

        “that pigmentation explains all human behavior”
        Dont even know where you got this one.

        ” that the best course of action is to succumb to our most vicious, brutal natures. ”
        Thats actually just the opposite of what this blog has been saying, ie what is good for one self is not necessarily good for society.

        Do you even read the articles or are you intentionally trying to misinterpret opinions that clash with yours?

        Like


      • Congratulations, alphie, yet another feather in your motley cap… the heartmeister seldom deigns to reply, and rightfully so, except to the most inane of inanities.

        Like


    • If nothing else, it puts him in the esteemed company of climate scientists and Keynesian macroeconomists.

      Like


  20. Mockery: It’s why Ann Coulter is so successful at what she does (basically, getting under the skin of the left). She’s got it down to an art form. Too bad it takes an evolution-denying woman to do the dirty work, while so many “men” on the right continue to suck up, give in, and fail every single shit test liberals throw their way.

    Like


    • Mockery has its place as a countermeasure, and Breitbart had his finger on that pulse. Yes, use Alinsky against them. Yes, fight effectively according to the landscape.

      But while cynicism is an effective unifier for the out-parties and extreme/permanent minorities (like readers of this site), it collapses upon gaining power, leaving the newly ascendent vulnerable to another quick regime change. The only way cynical strategies maintain unity in the face of centrifugal forces is the adoption of a power-for-power’s-sake agenda to effect spoils distribution. And what would be the point of fighting for that? We already have that. If you just want your piece of the ever-shrinking pie, then align with the unions, apparatchiks, mandarins, victims, and lawyers that make up the Democratic party and claw yourself a handful.

      There must be a decisive vision to fight for, indeed to die for. Manliness is large enough to fill that vision. We used to simply call it “honor” and “liberty.” You call it “alpha.” Whatever the term, spread the word. Most men are ready, they just need to know they won’t be the only fool who stands up and risks his “life, fortune, and sacred honor” when they hear the sound of the drum.

      Right now we permit ourselves to be cowed and intimidated by shrews, in-your-face minorities, and their white eunuch quisling-servants. They will wither at first contact, having never had to fight for their privileges. We just need the balls to “philosophize with a hammer.”

      Matt

      Like


      • Well said. And while the restoration of honor and liberty could be framed through a few different spectra–the preservation of Judeo-Christian values and a return to economic freedom come to mind as being the likeliest two visions of most conservatives, if we were able to actually pin any down–neither of those can be achieved without the return of manliness in men and the synchronous femininity in women that would follow. Traditional Western values depend on patriarchal dominance and leadership; economic freedom depends on matriarchal deference to husbands rather than government (noting the voting patterns of married vs. single women).

        Like


      • King A,

        1. Do you think me and Heartiste would make a nice couple? If so, could you give me some advice on how to seduce him?

        3. Are men turned off by women who are obsessed with anti-aging cosmetics and procedures? I’m so young, not even thirty years old and my butt (and everything else) is sagging! I can’t believe that just three years ago I had a perfect butt, with minimal exercise. Today I use lots of cosmetics and exercise a lot more and my butt looks really flat and full of cellulite!

        Like


      • your butt and everything is sagging?
        and you have cellulite?

        I suppose you would have to pay CH a lot of money for him to date you?…

        If you are a multi millionaire and were to buy me lots of stuff such as houses , fast cars and boats,
        oh yeah
        and a grand piano

        I would date you

        Like


      • Many if not most women my age have cellulite and saggy breasts or butt. Even CH had a tweet about how girls’ butts change when we approach our thirties! And I’m not interested in dating misogynist retards like you. (I used to have a crush on CH till last week but I’m dating a really cool guy now so I managed to stop fantasizing about a stranger on the internet who lives on the other side of the globe and is probably made from more than one person)

        Like


      • And I’m not interested in dating misogynist retards like you.

        I’m not misogynist, I am a gender realist

        I play a retard online, but I am a genius in real life ! 🙂

        Like


      • “but I’m dating a really cool guy now so I managed to stop fantasizing about a stranger on the internet who lives on the other side of the globe and is probably made from more than one person”

        Is that why you sent him your picture???

        Like


    • Does she name the Jew?

      If not she’s just another in a long line of white diversions…

      Like


      • Why would Ann Coulter name the Jew? She married a Jew.

        Like


      • “She will not understand until a military boot crashes her fat bottom, THEN she will understand”

        LOL!

        Like


      • Hey, feel better, there’s been no shortage at all of Jew-naming. Those heroic Nazis kept very good records of the millions of murders.

        If you don’t like them, Austria still allows swastikas etc, you can go and help finish the job of killing, killing, killing! You’ll feel ever so much better.

        Like


      • Typical that you keep harping on the long-dead Third Reich… which hasn’t killed anyone in over 65 years now… but continue to give a pass to your fellow tribesmen, who continue their butchery and nation-killing to this very day, and whose past murderous exploits make the Nazis look like rank amateurs.

        Keep tap dancing to the heebie-jeebies, Schlomo… all accounts will be settled.

        Like


      • “but continue to give a pass to your fellow tribesmen, who continue their butchery and nation-killing to this very day, and whose past murderous exploits make the Nazis look like rank amateurs.”

        And who are exactly his tribesmen who butcher and nation kill and who make the Nazis look like rank amateurs?

        Cause there hasn’t been a more efficient killing machine since the Nazis in all of history, not even the Muslims are as good at killing, although they kill thousands of their own people daily, and the occasional westerners when they get a chance???? Surly, you don’t mean us, the USA, kills millions of people, do you?

        Like


      • “Cause there hasn’t been a more efficient killing machine since the Nazis in all of history”

        Stalin and Mao both (separately) killed more people than even the Nazis did.

        Like


      • Thank you, Iain Johnston… apparently the harpy needs to brush up both her history and her math… not surprising… the smallest dog often barks the most and the loudest.

        Like


      • “Stalin and Mao both (separately) killed more people than even the Nazis did.”

        First, I said killing machine, which means the efficiency and the quality of the killing. No one beats the Nazi’s in their organizational and methodical way of murder. It was systematic.

        Second, even if Mau or Stalin killed more people, directly or indirectly, that doesn’t absolve the Germans from killing their 60-70 million people directly or indirectly.

        Did you hear that Greg? You’re a fucking weasel. You’re still NOT absolved. And your stupid insults don’t do anything but show you the idiot ignoramus you are. You have yet to preset a good argument on any of these threads. I guess, when someone is an imbecile, the only thing left at their disposal is mediocre comments.

        Like


      • Did you hear that Greg? You’re a fucking weasel. You’re still NOT absolved. And your stupid insults don’t do anything but show you the idiot ignoramus you are. You have yet to preset a good argument on any of these threads. I guess, when someone is an imbecile, the only thing left at their disposal is mediocre comments.

        Hey, folks, it’s that time again! Let’s play…

        CAN YOU SPOT THE IRONY!

        (raucous cheers from the studio audience)

        Like


      • According to Wikipedia, she was involved with a Jew for a couple of years, but they have since broken up.

        Like


      • He was a Liberal idiot, I don’t know what she was doing with him. She must have been desperate to take up with a Liberal knowing full well how much she dislikes them.

        Like


    • Ann Cutler is a powerful woman who puts most men from both parties to shame. They are all weak betas in comparisons to her. She knows how to stand up to the Left and shame them. Too bad she backed Romney who put Paul Ryan as vice. Maybe if he had picked Rand Paul, he would have won, maybe. Remember the country is racing left, so Obama might have won anyway, but at least the race would have been closer and maybe we would have edged the Democrats this time around, at least.

      Here is an example of Ann Cutler in action.
      http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ann-coulter-explains-to-sexist-misogynist-pig-piers-morgan-why-men-shouldnt-tell-women-to-calm-down/

      “After watching the new “Voting Is Like Doing It” Obama advertisement, Coulter said the clip is a perfect illustration of why we should consider raising the voting age, and repealing the 19th Amendment.
      “It’s going to be my exhibit henceforth for both of the groups I want to take the vote away from– young people and women, all in one combo platter,” she joked. “It was a rash experiment and we should reconsider the 19th Amendment.”

      Yep! She is right.

      Like


  21. The betaness is terminal with the GOP. Remember, they all want to be relentlessly happy-go-lucky like their idol Ronald Reagan (forgetting that Reagan frequently mocked his opponents.) They understand that the media, academia, and the legions of angry, alienated minorities and perverts hate their guts. Their instinct is to win their approval. Because only icky untouchables like Pat Buchanan and Steve Sailer care about white voters.

    Me, I would run ads that showed the ethnic and social breakdown of the exit polls and say “The more you have your shit together, the more likely it is you’re Republican. The more fucked up your life is, the more likely you vote Democrat.”

    Like


  22. Xenophobia isn’t going anywhere, that much should be obvious (think Exodus). As you conclude, all you can really do is remain poolside and watch it unravel while working to get what you want behind the scenes.

    Like


  23. In retrospect, this is one of the few things that i’ve done right, comes naturally, and produced rewards. A snooty late 80s party comes to mind (sadly i was an orbiter). Leftoid: ‘So what do you do in the Army…just whatever?’ BFL: (pause and take a drink) ‘Kill people.’ To which my date came to my giddy defense, ‘Oh hes a journalist’…which normally she wouldnt have been proud of the whole duty, honor country thing.

    Like


  24. that babies are born with a moral compass and innate biases against people (or things) not like themselves

    Or, reframing your own text, reality is….. real!

    Since reality goes against liberalism, it is therefore evil

    Given that reality is evil, good people should abandon her in favor of Ivory Tower utopianism

    Since Ivory is white and comes from elephants, that are cute, the Ivory Tower is now renamed Ebony Tower

    Like


  25. The GOP needs to give women the type of politician that women actually do vote for

    Romney lost because he was accurately portraied by Obama’s team as a job exporter, and that sunk him with Northern Whites. Southern White, a bunch of fanatics who had never found a war they wouldn’t fight, ignored that

    Romney also lost because the pack of bloodthirsty neocon scu.m around him frightened much more reasonable northern whites. Southern Whites, a bunch of fanatics that would nuke Teheran so that the Lord would rapture them, found that a plus. If Romney won, the fireworks wouldn’t be in Massachussets or Florida, but in Teheran and Moscow.

    Women as women didn’t matter for Romeny’s loss. IF he sent the neocons packing and adopt more populist economic policies, he would improve with both men and women in the Midwest and carry the election

    Like


    • Unfortunately, neoconism defines the Republican Establishment. They’d rather have their neoconism than sensible people like Ron Paul.

      Like


  26. If some lefty loon brought up this study to vindicate his ethnic self-hatred and ideology, I know exactly how to respond.

    I would say sarcastically and condescendingly, “A study showing group bias, huh? Sorta reminds me of a similar study showing how liberal professors would openly discriminate against conservatives in hiring and job promotions. And to think all that hate was behind us!”

    (For those who don’t know which study I’m talking about, you can read about it here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/1/liberal-majority-on-campus-yes-were-biased/?page=all )

    Then I’d give him a patronizing smirk as I watch him descend into whatever sort of coping mechanisms he uses for his cognitive dissonance, and anticipate the humor I’d experience at hearing his desperate reply where he would try to reverse the situation.

    Liberals are emotionally driven, and it isn’t possible to discuss political subjects rationally with them. Like this blog post says, mockery is the best way to deal with them.

    Like


    • “Liberals are emotionally driven, and it isn’t possible to discuss political subjects rationally with them.”

      ALL people are emotionally driven, and it isn’t possible to discuss political subjects rationally with MOST people.

      I suppose you think that the Tea Party are composed of nothing but Rhodes Scholars — instead of the elderly hypocrites who grouse about government support of social programs while they gasp and suck from Medicare-supplied oxygen tanks. (I’m not making that up.)

      Cognitive dissonance is found everywhere, in all people.

      Like


      • English isn’t your first language, is it? Perhaps you don’t have a first becase you so badly misread my post.

        I never said anything whatsoever about the Tea Party movement. Your strawman fallacy is a clear sign that you are trying to compensate for your lack of substance by manufacturing views that I don’t have.

        Poor ole’ unenlightened me! I must be so stupid that I actually believe all liberals are a bunch of meanies and all conservatives are the pinnacle of goodness!

        Don’t kid yourself.

        When I said that liberals are emotionally driven, I was obviously referring to a distinguishing psychological profile that appears in liberals to various extents, sometimes strongly and sometimes not so strongly, that everyone has noticed about them.

        Like


      • “When I said that liberals are emotionally driven, I was obviously referring to a distinguishing psychological profile that appears in liberals to various extents…”

        Ah, so it’s excessive EMOTIONALITY that defines modern liberalism — not a drive for equality.

        I’d like to hear more. Please proceed, Governor.

        Like


      • I don’t know which is more pathetic: your latest attempt at a very bad strawman fallacy, or your delusion that anyone could take your emotionally labile attitude seriously. Either way, you’re not worthy of a meaningful response.

        Like


      • That dweeb-who-loves-to-type has an excruciatingly annoying habit of ignoring the gist of someone’s point… in this case, the study you mention about how über-lib academia discriminates unashamedly, in a manner that far-surpasses one of their favorite bete noirs, McCarthy-era blacklisting… and instead grasping at the high-horse reins of a phrase or sentence and attempting to ride it into his self-styled moral high ground.

        As you say, hard to take… seriously or otherwise.

        Like


      • women and gays think emotion is reason as jason has demonstrated.

        Like


      • Which means Jason is either a woman or gay!

        all kidding aside…

        of course all people are emotionally driven left and right, but the issues of the left tend to be ” sold” as emotional things

        for example the USA’s debt is now larger than the GDP and some cuts in expenses would be necessary but this would mean some minorities would get less ” free stuff”

        the left presents this as an “unfair” thing to do minorities and is framing it as an emotional thing —as if being nice to minorities is more important than preventing the country from going bankrupt— that is not rational it is emotional

        and because emotions cloud our judgement, people fail to see that eventually once the country is bankrupt, it will not be able to give all that free stuff to minorities so in the end the minorities will be in trouble anyway.

        while the right presents the cuts as something logical, rational and devoid of emotions, and as a necessary thing to save the country from going bankrupt and not as something done to be mean to minorities.

        it is not so much the voters that are different on the left or right ( although to an extent they are ) but how the issues are presented or framed.

        Using emotions is the most efficient way for manipulating people and making them forget how irrational something is.

        Don’t agree?

        ok forget politics

        just look at how advertisment manages to sell billions of useless things to people who do not need them nor can afford them; through emotions

        and the left is doing it far more than the right

        everytime we present facts and figure they resort to calling us haters and racists; they turn any issue into an emotional thing.

        Like


      • Those elderly people already PAID for everything they get, and then some. They’re angry because they were CHEATED. They were promised they’d get back what they paid IN. And its being gutted to pay for Illegal Mexicans health care.

        They’re right. THEY PAID FOR IT. And they’re being told to go off and die because some Mexican who crossed the border yesterday needs a kidney transplant. Yeah I know: value judgment — Mexican illegals are worth more to Liberals than Old White people born here. Typical inter-White hatred, of the NE post-Christian post-Puritan kind.

        No one has anything but contempt for those who don’t even value their own kind. And choose alien interlopers. Vichy. Quisling. Traitor. Those are the words that generally come to mind. Its a groveling, abasing approach to some jumped up alien conqueror. Never manly. Always effeminate in practice.

        Advice: never follow the approach of a French woman in WWII. No one respects a prostitute.

        Like


      • Traitor is exactly what I call those white liberals who did this to us.

        we were never asked if we agreed with handing our civilization to third world immigrants,

        had we been told back in the 1960s that this was what liberalism was all about , would have white people voted for that? really?

        how many black people in Africa and how many Mexicans would vote to have their people replaced with Chinese people?

        yes exactly; ZERO

        the left deceived us, fooled us, robbed us

        had we known their real agenda the left would have not won an election from 1960 on

        Like


      • They weren’t prostitutes, they were just sleeping with the winners, as women normally do.

        Like


      • It makes sense that women sleep with the winners if one believes in evo-psychology , and I do.

        but since liberals are handing our civilization to third world immigrants, which is not something winners do, it is very much a submissive behavior, why do women sleep with liberals ?

        and what about self loathing? this is not something winners do, it is beyond beta to be full of self hatred, then why are some women sleeping with self loathing liberals?

        Like


      • “Those elderly people already PAID for everything they get, and then some. They’re angry because they were CHEATED. They were promised they’d get back what they paid IN. And its being gutted to pay for Illegal Mexicans health care.”

        Many of these elderly people voted for Obama. Either they belonged to a union once, or their kids are in a union, or they are typical useful idiot Liberals that feel bad for everyone. No, they still want to get what they’re owed, as well as want the government to take care of illegals, how? Tax the younger generation, tax businesses, tax the rich, tax all the “powerful” in order to protect the “weak.” I’ll be rejoicing when they end up getting nothing and all the resources that were coming to them get moved to the immigrants and nothing left for them or their children. What does the Left always says? Karma is a bitch. GOOD cause it is.

        Like


      • NiteLily
        “Those elderly people already PAID for everything they get, and then some. They’re angry because they were CHEATED. They were promised they’d get back what they paid IN. And its being gutted to pay for Illegal Mexicans health care.”
        ————-
        You got it backwards Lily, the boomers brought the Mexicans in to cook, clean, and wipe the asses of all these old white people… they don’t want to pay decent wages to white people.

        Like


      • I served with plenty of active duty military people from the southwest. For all of their hatred of mexicans, they never did the math.

        Hire illegals to garden and harvest, illegals will hang around.
        Hire the wives of illegals to raise your kids and clean your homes, they’ll tell their relatives to come across the border as well.
        If they’d cleaned their own damned houses and stuck with hiring teenagers to do the lawn care and pool cleaning, we wouldn’t be in this situation. But nooooo, they thought that it was better to pay $5/hour and escort illegals to the local ER than to pay a neighbour’s son $10/hour and let their parents do the rest.

        Like


      • “You got it backwards Lily, the boomers brought the Mexicans in to cook, clean, and wipe the asses of all these old white people… they don’t want to pay decent wages to white people.”

        That too. The boomers did allow them to come here and now they are paying the piper. You know there is nothing free, if you didn’t pay for it in the beginning, you’ll pay for it later. Somehow you always pay.

        BUT, and that’s a big BUT, at some point the country didn’t need more Mexicans so they took it upon themselves to come here illegally. Instead of throwing them all in jail like sheriff Arpaio is doing, they let them stay in sanctuary cites, taking away jobs from citizens, getting free healthcare, education, meals, and other benefits, or their teenagers get involved in gangs, and driving recklessly killing citizens.

        Like


      • on November 23, 2012 at 11:28 am Hugh G. Rection

        Actually the generation retiring now is the first generation that will get out more in benefits than they paid in.

        Like


      • Yes, because they will live the longest, but they are still complaining about cuts to their benefits. Many of them were hippie liberals and now they are lefties, so why don’t they ask their party to stop entitlements and illegal immigration? Because they are hoping us, the younger generation will foot the bill. Never mind, if we’re stuck with all this debt. So when it’s our time to retire we’ll have nothing, not that I’m ever going to rely on government at any stage of my life. Just saying that those that will, will have nothing to look forward to. They better start saving now.

        Like


    • Liberals are emotionally driven, but the conservatives who believe that we’re in the end times and that Jesus is going to return any day now are the logical ones.

      Like


      • This shows the importance of mockery. Because of the left’s hold on the main cultural control institutions, the right is defined by presenting its fringe weirdos while the left is defined by presenting its centrists with token appearances by scripted, sanitized avatars of its victim groups.

        More mockery by the right should focus on taking repulsive goons, man-jawed castration advocates, corrupt political hustlers and dumpy girls obsessed with their own vaginas, and rubbing those people into the faces of the squishy middle.

        Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 10:00 pm Demarcated Values

        Why is it that Transparency is what’s always avoided & Secrecy is always promoted, when it’s such hidden factor’s that one becomes aware of that predictably result in revolt against such privatization that’s prompted by the very transparency that’s desired?

        Ne’er a solution for what’s ere been a problem not being one.

        Like


      • Contrary to popular belief a lot of liberals believe in God, and attend church ( which in itself does not make a leftist nor a conservative a religious nut )

        Only a small percentage of right wing voters are religious fanatics who believe in silly stuff such as “the earth is 4000 years old”

        and just as many leftists – a small percentage – believe in stuff that is just as silly such as re-incarnation ( somehow they were all princes and princesses in their previous lives ), talking to the dead, the power of crystals , ” the Secret” ( simply believe you will be a zillionaire and it will happen; voila! ) homeopathy ( the less you have something the more it is potent???) etc etc

        both sides have their irrational believers but they simply believe in different silly things.

        Like


  27. FDR was very good at the sort of amused contempt and mockery against opponents you describe in your essay – see his famous Fala speech, for instance, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqt7b9veFo8, or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUZGkNAUSvY&feature=related . Reagan was very good at it as well. Needless to say though, it requires a certain talent and skill that most conservatives don’t have (Romney certainly didn’t have it).

    Like


  28. Yes, humans are born with a need for an in-group.

    But we do not have to be *limited* to these in-groups. Our cerebral cortexes are proof of that. They’re big, they’re developed, they’re hungry to synthesize new input.

    This is my biggest beef with this site. One of the authors (and several commenters) frequently veer into outright atavism. We can do better than that.

    Like


    • They’ll put y’all back in chains, you know.

      Like


    • Your brain didn’t develop for limitless in-groupism, and the brains of the people you invite into your in-group especially didn’t evolve to be part of your “brotherhood of man”. Your brain evolved expecting your in-group loyalty to be reciprocated. Liberals are fooling their brains into believing their loyalty to Cosmic America can ever be reciprocated.

      Like


    • Actually, we do. The UN has classified as acts of genocide, sexual assault intended to impregnate women with children from another group/race/etc. You would not tell, say, Aborigines their culture, traditions, ethnography, and race are worthless, and they should all inter-breed with say, Chinese.

      You are making a value judgment that White European culture is value-less and has to go, that it does not bear preserving. No Shakespeare, instead lets have Kanye West and Jay-Z. That sort of thing. Yes we HAVE to be limited to in-groups, because otherwise we don’t cooperate, advance technology, or do anything but fight all day like “diverse” (see Afghanistan) peoples do.

      Like


      • You are making a value judgment that White European culture is value-less and has to go,

        Unfortunately, that is the not so subtle message that is embedded into every tv show, tv ad, Hollywood movie and thought in every school, college and university and repeated by the main stream media and the political left

        which is why it is repeated in the comment section of blogs by people who are either brainwashed ( mostly white liberals )
        or happen to be non whites who enjoy celebrating the demise of the white race and enjoy saying racists things because they get a free pass from the leftist establishment

        it is open season on whitey

        and we are supposed to like it and say please and thank you

        I say,

        fuck you liberals!

        Like


      • Good for the UN. Rape to force interbreeding happens, and it’s wrong.

        Who said anything about White European culture being value-less? I value it highly, but you’re speaking of too large an in-group. No, I was referring to the famous “150 people” statistic — i.e. we can only contain about 150 people, maximum, in our networks.

        BTW, one of the reasons that Middle Eastern cultures such as the Afghans have been degenerating for the past century is that the seeds of distrust have been purposefully sown by foreign occupiers. “Keep the tribes squabbling” has been the modus operandi among many European powers. Using in-groups in this way limits humanity.

        Like


    • Your progressivism is gonna lead us back to the paleolithic, Einstein.

      Like


  29. Chicks dig jerks #121232152
    Jesse James woos Alexis DeJoria, a drag racer and multi-billionaire heiress to the Paul Mitchell hair company. Game Recognized!
    http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/relationships/jesse-james-reportedly-engaged-paul-mitchell-heiress-she-194223596.html

    Like


  30. These are the silliest, most childish statements I have read in a long while. Complete and utter bullshit.

    Like


  31. OT: but worth a peek
    http://www.aol.com/video/woman-has-affair-with-best-friends-husband-then-has-son-kill-best-friend/517545597/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing9%7Cdl18%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D237037

    Hypergamy doesn’t care if you murder your best friend and end up imprisoning your son and yourself.

    Like


  32. If you ever get to talk to a journalist, congratulations, consider it to be the jumbotron test edited by your ex-wife. Arguing or logic gotchas are mostly useless because the journo controls the presentation.

    Your mistakes, if any, will be put front and center and possibly put on repeat. You will be misrepresented to whatever extent is useful. If you score any points, they will be spun or edited out if at all possible. If your points can’t be immediately dropped or spun, a tag team of opinion makers will redirect the conversation appropriately, for instance to various meta issues like the hostility, perhaps rage, of your side. If nothing else, you will be concern trolled by attaching various unsettling adjectives to your name.

    Like


  33. Meanwhile, in Bluepill World, Cuckold hubby proudly stands by his wife’s side

    “That appears to have been very much Scott’s approach to marriage. He may have been able to restrain himself from answering betrayal with blind fury because he appears to consider himself not a king but a partner with his own human failings.”

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/21/scott-broadwell-proves-to-be-a-class-act-in-the-wake-of-his-wife-s-affair.html

    Partner = Eunuch.

    Like


    • He says:

      “To have a better marriage, I’ve decided to let my wife be who she wants to be, not what I want to make her into.”

      What a woman hears…”I can ride another cock again and get away with it.”

      Like


      • What a woman hears…”I can ride another cock again and get away with it.”

        That’s also when she loses complete respect for her husband and eventually leaves him for a man who wouldn’t stand for it, because deep inside the the recesses of her mind she knows her husband doesn’t mind her sleeping with other men means he doesn’t really love her enough. That’s the end of a marriage. Beta husbands destroy their own marriages.

        Like


      • “To have a better marriage, I’ve decided to let my wife be who she wants to be, not what I want to make her into.”

        In order for a marriage to survive, one has to let one’s spouse “be who they are”… and then pretend they’re someone else.

        Like


    • And, as the chalked message in the driveway seems to attest, he also understands that they are no longer just Scott and Paula, but Mom and Dad.

      (snicker…)

      Like


  34. Rush Limbaugh definitely knows game. What initially got him on the map was that he refused to answer any female caller’s question unless she sent in a photo first. No look requirements, just a photo. Femmis went ballistic, only hotties sent in their pics, and his ratings went through the roof.

    Like


    • He married a woman almost 30 years younger. That’s another indication. However, some would say his money allowed it, but how many rich men do you know let themselves feel entitled to use their money in such a blatant way? Most men today, rich or not, cave in to feminists and their caustic criticism. Obviously, he didn’t give a hoot what anyone might say about him and he went for it. Now that’s the best way to fight feminists – fire with fire; do exactly what they hate.

      Like


  35. Heartiste, I’ve not always agreed with everything you write (though I mostly agree). I’ve even clashed with you once or twice in this very comments section.

    But still, at the end of the day, there’s absolutely no other site like this one. Thank you for spreading the truth. You’re doing the Lord’s work.

    Like


  36. “Salon” publishes anti-white screeds daily, to which I ask “What predominantly Black community do you live in?”. They never respond.

    Like


    • Pretty much all white liberals who are in love with the black community do not live in a neighborhood where there is a lot of blacks.

      Just like everybody else they avoid those neighborhoods for obvious reasons;

      high rates of crimes

      Like


      • It’s not just the whiteness of their peaceful swpl-topias, but also their elite nature that fuels the illusions. The token nonwhites in the area have earned their way in by (even under AA) being the cream of their particular crop – namely, by best conforming to emulating the culture and values key to prosperity (guess what those are!) and possessing an outlier-level intellect that outstrips their group. So what little exposure they do have to diversity reinforces their mistaken “just like us” perception, because they do see a little bit of color, just that at the rightmost end of the intellectual spectrum.

        Like


      • So true and well said.

        and that type of non-whites that are not representative of the average non-white is what the media is showing us day in day out in TV shows and in Hollywood movies

        the brainwashing is relentless

        A few weeks ago my girlfriend dragged me to the movie ” Cloud Atlas”, in that movie most white people are bad unless they are gay, or they do something nice for a black person, and the black people are noble

        last night I took a peak at a new tv show ” the new normal” the older white woman is a mean evil racist, the white husband is so stupid that he does not know the index finger is called the index finger, something the noble black guy knew, and the only white people who are decent are two gays and one white woman who is secretly in love with the noble black guy

        this not so subtle message is everywhere in every movie, every tv show, every tv ad

        this brainwashing is everywhere 24/7

        the pretty lies are coming from all sides

        the pretty lies should perish

        the pretty lies MUST perish

        Like


      • “the pretty lies MUST perish”

        Well, there’s always book-burning. ( Look at the bright side!)

        Like


      • A well known insurance company is airing commercials showing white women who invoke their genie “black insurance agent”, who is well-dressed but not too flashy, giving a confident, trustful appearance. She addresses him as “Hi George”. Such a contrast to the competitor’s creepy, slovenly dressed white genie, who’s practically pissing on himself.

        Sometimes there will be half a dozen of these scenarios for different products running back to back during commercial break. Like the white couple in the woods suffering from mosquitos only to be counseled on the best insecticide by a handsome black man who appears out of the bushes. Scene ends with her sleeping blissfully, post-orgasm while her wretched husband squirms in misery on a cot a few feet away.

        Like


      • The overriding theme of virtually commercials is how dumb, lame, inept, men are. The 2 commercials cited are a very rare exception to the rule. Whenever possible ads sure men losing to women

        Like


      • Elmer, regarding the genie thing and the negro who just pops out to help people… many cultures have a folklore or mythology based around little colored guys that just kinda appear and do things; leprechauns are an example, I think the Germans have something like it. Everybody knows about the genie; and even the lawn jockey may be the most recent iteration of this cultural phenomenon.

        My point is, it may be nothing new, so don’t sweat it. Have you heard of the niggler? He’s this little black man who sneeks in your kitchen at night searching for chicken and watermelon

        Like


      • There are so many representations of this in commercials, movies, and popular culture.

        Another example is that ridiculous PC Matic commercial from last year (they dumped this version in favor for a few others that are less anti-male) where the wife explains to the stupid clueless husband how to clean his PC from maleware and boost speed. Then, 30 seconds later, while he still has that stupid idiotic look on his face, she garbs the car keys and tells him it’s “girls’ night out” and speeds off leaving him following her to the driveway with his hands up in the air. That’s how the ad executives on 5th Avenue view men – stupid, clueless, not effective, little boys who need to be directed/controlled by “strong” women. 10-year old boys watch this mockery and think that’s the ideal woman. It’s brainwashing, pure and simple.

        Like


      • Being ‘liberal’ and non-racist is MUCH easier in Iceland (or North Dakota) than it is in Rhodesia or Mississippi.

        Like


      • I used to think racism was due to ignorance. But of course the phrase, ” Seeing is believing ” exists for a very solid reason. That being said, describing any group of people using the words, all, every, everyone, always, is a sign of mental laziness.

        Like


    • when did you stop beating your wife? ANSWER ME.

      Like


  37. I didn’t like Sesame Street as a child. My first experience with forced diversity 10 000 miles away from the USA. However, as a child i had a fascination with Baltic Blondes that continues to this day. Not sure why I was not prejudiced towards those of the Baltic fringe. Me being quite different to that type.

    Like


  38. I believe Rush Limbaugh reads this blog. He’s been getting dangerously close to the truth lately, but stuffs his empty sac back into his panties so as to not shatter the Liberal frame in which he operates.

    Like


    • The half-assed doctor is only allowed to talk about disease in general… he wants to avoid singling out any particular cause, lest he be called a germophobe and removed from his position.

      Like


  39. When feminists if ask if I want women back in the kitchen one could say that my mom didnt want to work and people like us should be able to segregate ourselves from people who want to live differently and whats wrong with that?
    The biggest threat to women is the threat of exclusion.

    Like


  40. Arguing with liberals online is a waste of time because they are emotional, and also because they will cherry pick what they respond to, and run away from any good arguments, just like that pathetic pussy Jason does here. Notice how he picks and chooses when to chime in based on when he can insert some meaningless snarky one-liner, while scrupulously avoiding the more substantive criticisms of his beta beliefs.

    I see liberals do this everywhere they appear online. It would seem they only possess the faculties to engage in three debate tactics:

    1) The “I would totally own you but I don’t feel like it right now”. This is conveyed with such pithy remarks as “wow….just wow.” and “This is so wrong I don’t even know where to begin.”.

    2) The shaming tactics we are all so familiar with – racist, sexist, homophobe, xenophobe, etc. Schoolyard name calling. Except they invented more sophisticated names so they feel more grown-up about it.

    3) Running away – throwing a flame then disappearing, never answering to questions or criticisms, etc. Checking out of the thread so that they can get the last word by default.

    Liberals, women, and children – they are nearly identical mentally, and you should never take any of them seriously. They only win through unified group shaming.

    Like


    • To be fair, they diversify their toolbox with a few other tropes as well, including:

      5) “But the other side did the same thing some other time!” This is akin to little Timmy yelling “but Mommy, Joey left his toys on the floor one time too!”. This allows them to completely avoid discussing the merits of the item, and instead refocusing attention back to the other side.

      6) Calls for censorship. Inevitably, when liberals begin losing the battle of ideas, they will call for censorship. Some of them try to soften it up a bit. “This place should focus more on game because the politics stink.” or “I didn’t know you were having a Stormfront rally here”. Most of the time they are more upfront: “this is hate speech and I can’t believe the owner of this website would allow it to be printed here. I hope he knows there can be severe legal consequences.”.

      Fuck liberals.

      Like


      • on November 21, 2012 at 9:44 pm Demarcated Values

        You’re all more liberal than any Liberal is Conservative that I’ve met.

        In even discussing these things you are automatically classified as a Liberal.

        Conservatives do not condone the discussion of what’s primarily a fallacy.

        Liberal’s indulge in the Game that is pretending they even care about what issues their “opponent’s” complain of: I don’t do this, therefore it is wrong &/or/vs. I can’t do that, therefore I am right + I don’t understand this noise, so I’m going to waste my time doing something else.

        Independent’s recognize the inherent flaw in assuming the position of adhering to either Party’s judgement.

        And typically (after their 20’s) end up becoming Conservative’s who deliberately delegate their unwanted opinions upon the (younger) masses of “Liberal” people. Such as those who are labeled as bearing different opinions by the Right’s whimsy – as is collectively fancied. So the Right provokes the Left in becoming like them, through enlivening those whose opinions trump the lifestyles of the alternative’s who they actively rebel against, in their faith’s virtuous manner. Plus, tend to believe are squandering their ideologie’s legitimacy via their very own conservatory self-indulgent allowance of condoning such behavior through exegetically describing it’s existence in opposition to theirs.

        Like the Rich paying for the poor and complaining about making so much money that they are able to do so, while the poor work for the rich and complain about not earning enough to do what they want.

        The West. Was won over. By Cowboys born to kill and Indians the Explorer’s executed – based on “Conservation” principles according to their Wave of Independence bred from rebelling against the Liberals & Conservatives.

        In other words, obviously things are ways they can be when stuff goes down like it has before.

        Like


      • 5) “But the other side did the same thing some other time!” This is akin to little Timmy yelling “but Mommy, Joey left his toys on the floor one time too!”.

        It’s the Reverse NAWALT (Not All Women [or whatever group you’re criticizing] Are Like That) argument, ergo, “Some Men [White people, etc.] Are Like That Too”

        Like


      • 7) Returning days later to a thread, after it has pretty much petered out, and spewing a salvo that obviously will be unanswered. The equivalent of showing up at an empty stadium and declaring victory.

        Like


    • Arguing with liberals online is a waste of time because they are emotional, and also because they will cherry pick what they respond to, and run away from any good arguments, just like that pathetic pussy Jason does here.

      As well as that Harpy Bizarre Girl With The Dragon Mouth.

      Then again, what else can they do from their weak positions and with their even weaker minds?

      Like


      • Meant to say that the neocons are pretty much the same… but I always suspected they were sheep in wolves clothing, when not outright cognitive dissonant agents attempting to give the appearance of an opposition to the leftist establishment.

        Like


  41. For a feral right-winger you are refreshing in your belief in evolution.

    Like


    • Weasel boy sneaks in yet again for another vapid, snarky jab. I suppose when you cant construct a real argument you get desperate.

      Tell us again about all your liberal buddies who deny science the second it makes a non-PC finding. Many more people subscribe to the Liberal Creationism brand than the religious creationist brand.

      Like


      • So what’s the point of contention here? That you all think Liberals think everyone is the same? Same abilities, same intellect, same potential? I consider myself liberal and I don’t believe that. Sure, blacks were dealt a raw hand-slavery, lack of education, Jim Crow laws – but still there are plenty of resources and role models out there to show them a path to at least a semi-decent life.

        Like


    • Would it dissuade your bias much if I told you I find evolution perfectly reasonable and certainly within the realm of God’s unassailable creativity and awesome conceptual abilities in being able to bring self-propelled and ever-changing life systems to fruition?

      Note, this is not to start a religious/scientific debate on the exact parameters of what evolution entails… it’s merely to show alphie-who-loves-to-snipe that his limited conceptual abilities to discern beliefs and attitudes beyond what the snarky MSM and leftist dweebs tell him is child’s fare, and it’s time for meat in due season… and rather than continue to think and speak like a child, it’s high time for him to put away childish things.

      Like


    • Both Jason and Greg need to take a time out.

      Like


  42. on November 21, 2012 at 9:50 pm Thinkingaboutit

    Great post. Needs to be applied worldwide. America, from being a bastion of right wing thought and capitalism, is now the exporter of leftism around the world. India recently executed the sole captured terrorist from the Mumbai attacks that left 166 dead – and the international liberal media was outraged that India had set a bad example by using the death penalty. The NYBetaTimes wrote a massive article, calling the guy a “gunman”, “attacker” and what not – everything but “terrorist”. The WaPo was outraged. The Economist found it a disappointing outcome.

    Like


  43. Another topic in which you can effectively “re-frame” the issue when debating a liberal-leftist is the reality of group differences. The opponent can initially claim the moral high ground, but you can flip it around by asking “are you a Creationist”?

    Suddenly they have to flounder about to avoid being associated with the dreaded prole world view. Once the issue is framed in terms of creationism vs evolution, they have to accept they believe in evolution. Then it’s simply a matter of whether they accept the possible implications. David Friedman has a nice post discussing the contradictory views of some on this.

    http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.de/2008/08/who-is-against-evolution.html

    Like


  44. If Im not mistaken, they hung him,

    from a tree.

    Like


    • All this talk about hanging from three…

      are you an arborist?

      Like


      • Stop using such big words.

        My tiny negro mind is overloading.

        Like


      • Nah, you alright. Since you can read and you understand most of what’s going on on this board, your IQ must be in the 100+ (no sarcasm).

        Problem is, most niggers are 30 points iq dumber, more grotesque, more sociopathic, more gibsmedat-biatch, more violent etc… If all niggers were like you, I would still be a racist, but a different kind of racist.

        Like


      • Anan, your system REQUIRES niggers in order to prevent your kind from slaughtering each other. So if black people don’t act like niggers, who are you going to use to FUNCTION as niggers?

        Like


      • Is that why 800,000 blacks slaughtered each other in Rwanda a few years ago because they had no one to play that role?

        Like


      • Is that why 800,000 blacks slaughtered each other in Rwanda a few years ago because they had no one to play that role?
        ——————

        You made my point CF; niggers are expendable, they were “playing the role” white people have set up for them. How do I know?

        Because 500 white men could have stopped them just by showing up in a few Black Hawks.

        The fact white people just sat and watched is proof that black people are the designated niggers.

        So back to my point. If its not gonna be us, whos it gonna be?

        Like


      • So it is whitey’s fault for not having intervened in Rwanda?

        I can ” attack ” this in two different ways,

        1 – just like feminists you blame white males for everything – e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g – and just like feminists you refuse to be accountable for anything. How convenient.

        2 – If it takes white males to keep blacks from killing each other, is that not admitting that you need whites more than we need you …and if the only ones who can stop blacks from killing each others are whites, does not that make them – dare I say – superior?

        Like


      • Canadian Friend

        2 – If it takes white males to keep blacks from killing each other, is that not admitting that you need whites more than we need you …and if the only ones who can stop blacks from killing each others are whites, does not that make them – dare I say – superior?
        ———————-

        Do white people collectively excersise superior power among the people of the known universe?

        Yes.

        Let me repeat that for the crackers with wax in they ears:

        YES!!

        But the key is, superior power IN ORDER TO DO WHAT?

        make nonwhite people to kill each other?

        Make nonwhite people worship white people as dieties?

        Make nonwhite people “entertain” white people?

        Make nonwhite people pick cotton for white people?

        My point is regardless of where/how you got your superior power, where the fuck are you going with it?

        Cause that makes all the difference in whether or not Im gonna follow you.

        It has been said that God made white people to serve God, and God made black people to serve white people; there is evidence to indicate such an arrangement.

        But there is also evidence to indicate white people have chosen NOT to serve God and to instead serve themselves;

        and you got the nerve to question black people when they balk at serving you?

        Nigga please.

        I seen better instructions on a book of matches.

        Like


      • The gyrations of Thwack are the existential horror of a black man intuiting a reaization that white men may, in his lifetime, cut him loose, separate from him, let him be on his own, ignored by the world like a villager in Gabon, no longer known or noticed. This is a horror-scram of a creature whose existence is derivative of white man’s validation — positive or negative — of his being.

        Like


      • The gyrations of Thwack are the existential horror of a black man intuiting a reaization that white men may, in his lifetime, cut him loose, separate from him, let him be on his own, ignored by the world like a villager in Gabon, no longer known or noticed. This is a horror-scram of a creature whose existence is derivative of white man’s validation — positive or negative — of his being.

        +1001.

        Nailed it, but good… hence the massive projection of his on how the white man “needs niggers” to keep “the system” going… when in fact, it’s the negroes who need whites to both love and hate ’em.

        Like


      • The gyrations of Thwack are the existential horror of a black man
        ———————-

        “thats one small twist for me; and one giant gyration for all mankind”

        you’re welcome

        Like


      • The cultural contributions of 1960s negroes are indisputable… without the Watusi, we’d never have had….

        Like


    • If I’m not mistaken, they hung him, from a tree.

      Thwack, ‘though your labors be many,
      And your rewards be few,
      Take heart that the mighty oak
      Was once a little nut like you.

      Like


      • It my goal to “rise above racism” without the help of you or the rope.

        Like


      • Heh… how does one rise above the very air he breathes?

        If your posts at the chateau are any indication of “rising above racism”, then all I can say is, any rising that you have accomplished has only been at the weighing down of others… you’re the most racist poster here, which never fails to bring it out in others.

        Like


      • Only a racist posits the existence of “levels of racism”. Greg, what level of pedophilia are you comfortable with?

        What level of murder?

        What level of rape?

        Either you are practicing racism, or you are not.

        Just because you are more sophisticated in your practice of racism than the other white people in the room don’t make you innocent. Matter of fact, it makes YOU the prime suspect.

        It also makes you by default the smartest white person in the room.

        You guys all piled on when I first came here, but one by one they all gave up until now its only you and me.

        Theres a reason for that and you know it.

        Im not here because you are here. Im here because you are everywhere.

        So I might as well be here.

        Don’t take it personally. Its just business.

        Like


      • Just because you are more sophisticated in your practice of racism than the other white people in the room don’t make you innocent. Matter of fact, it makes YOU the prime suspect.

        All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God… and the difference between our respective racisms is that mine stems more from a love of my own people and wanting to secure their existence and a future for white children… your racism, however, appears to stem from both an envy of my people and a disdain for your very own, whom you never miss a chance as referring to as niggers.

        You guys all piled on when I first came here, but one by one they all gave up until now its only you and me.

        Actually, there are still a few besides me calling you on your nonsense… and for the record, don’t mistake exasperating people so that they walk away as some form of victory.

        Don’t take it personally. Its just business.

        Like Michael Corleone remarked: “It’s always personal.”

        Like


      • “and the difference between our respective racisms is that mine stems more from a love of my own people and wanting to secure their existence and a future for white children… your racism, however, appears to stem from both an envy of my people and a disdain for your very own…”

        It’s a chain reaction, jealousy I mean. Maybe he’s jealous of your people. However, you’re definitely jealous of the Jew. Sigh….everyone is always jealous of the one above them. Why call the kettle black (no pun) when you yourself are whitewashing (no pun)? Hypocrisy much?

        Like


      • NiteLily, you’re an ass beyond even the usual shabbos goy mentality… you’d probably say Jesus was “just jealous” of the Pharisees when He called them out on their machinations, and inspired John to write of them: “they say they are Jews, but are a synagogue of Satan”.

        Like


      • Like blacks, jews think we’re evil yet they won’t leave us or let us leave them, we’re doubly evil if we want to free our poor victims from our evilness. They don’t want to leave us and they won’t let us leave them. Why? Because they want what we have. In other words, they’re jealous.

        Like


      • The Girl With The Dragon Mouth appears to be stalking me, so attention-starved is she.

        Pity, she need not try so hard… she need merely bring da movies. lloozozozzozolllloozozozollllzzz

        Like


      • @Greg

        What does Jesus have to do with your bullshit? Now you sound like a liberal, which I am suspecting you are, because you have a very bad knack at redirecting the argument and throwing insults that have nothing to do with the issue at hand, much like many tactics of the left. I guess, that’s what all useless people do in order to deflect away from their stupidity and lack of viable argument. Either it’s you cognitive dissonance, or you deliberately won’t stay on point.

        Now to the issue you DO want to discuss, Jesus.

        So….I didn’t realize you took everything the Bible said literally. The first Christians were Jews, and Christianity an offshoot of Judaism. One has to account for the fact that they were embarking on a new path and needed to disparage Judaism, the parent religion, in order to make theirs take hold with the Romans who were beginning to convert.

        I can also point to many verses directly taken (almost copied verbatim) from the Old Testament to prove how Jewish these people were, and how Jewish their theology was. If you want to justify Jewish hatred by using the New Testament, you won’t be able to do a good job of it because of verse like this:

        “‘Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?’ Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” Matthew 22:36-39

        These two commandments were directly lifted from Jewish teachings. Jesus taught Jewish theology, nothing less:
        .
        “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” is first found in Deuteronomy 6:5 (the last book of Moses) like this: “Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” So Jesus was re-quoting it for his Gentile followers.

        The second part, “Love your neighbor as yourself” is lifted verbatim from the Jewish Talmud.

        The list goes on. Most of the New Testament is a re-quoting of the Jewish Torah and The Talmud.

        Europe accepted Christianity and through Christ’s teachings learned Jewish values. Otherwise, they’d still be throwing people to the lions for their entertainment.

        However, throughout the ages, there were Christians like you; Christians who hated Jews because they were jealous of them. There is very little difference between you and the ignorant anti-Semite living in the middle ages. Most Christians, including me, have moved beyond that.

        You can try to change history all you want but it’s futile. Christianity is inseparable from Judaism, no matter how much haters like you want to make it look like it is. The soul of Christianity is Jewish and the brain of Christianity is Greek. The two have united under the Roman Empire, which transferred into the Catholic church. From there it developed into Protestantism and all its sections. And I think it’s God’s Will that it be so.

        Bottom line, most Christian theology doesn’t teach hatred of Jews. The only ones left are usually jealous losers like you who see the Jew as the devil because he himself hasn’t amounted to anything. So that brings me to my original point:

        “It’s a chain reaction, jealousy I mean. Maybe he’s jealous of your people. However, you’re definitely jealous of the Jew. Sigh….everyone is always jealous of the one above them.”

        Oh….and I’m not stalking you, but some of what you say needs refuting if not complete correcting.

        Like


      • More bloviating from the clueless shabbos goy Girl With The Dragon Mouth who isn’t stalking me?

        You keep missing most of my points and/or not catching on to the allusions I make because you’re too busy looking for a NAH-ZEE under every bed.

        One last time, toots:

        I say there are Jews out there who wield undue influence in government and media… an undeniable fact, and one which doesn’t take much more investigation that looking at a few of the names… and for no good reason, given your Rooney-rifle hate of Muslims and “libruls”, you then manfully come to the rescue of Jews, though a purported Christian yourself?

        You then project your own inanities upon me and attempt to dismiss my facts with lame cries of antisemitism and the usual suspect “you’re just jealous” tripe that has grown so very old on the internet and at the chateau in particular.

        My point about Christ is obvious. Jesus said, likewise, there are Jews who wield undue influence over the people and are vipers and sons of their father, the Devil.

        The point, dense one, is that you seem to think that merely calling certain powerful Jews on their deleterious actions makes one a “worshiper of Hitler”, and given your guppy-mind-cum-alligator-mouth binary mode of thought, if He were here today saying the same thing, you’d accuse Him of antisemitism.

        Now bugger off, you stupid harpy… and peddle your neocon shabbos goyism elsewhere.

        Like


      • …Greg, what level of pedophilia are you comfortable with?

        What level of murder?

        What level of rape?

        Either you are practicing racism, or you are not. …

        That would be an interesting point IF liberals had not badly messed up everything related to racism.

        You see if Chris Rock a black man goes on Oprah -as he did – as says in front of millions of people that he did not want no mixed children, that he would have never had kids with a white woman, that he wanted his kids to be black, really black and not mixed

        and it is not considered racism

        then how can you asses a level of racism?

        but if any white person were to say the same as Chris Rock it would be racism and that person’ s reputation would be destroyed and so would their career.

        when the definition of racism changes depending on which race is doing the acts

        how can you asses the level or racism?

        nothing non-whites do is ever racism, thus there are no levels of racism

        while everything whites do is racist, thus who cares about a level of racism since we are guilty for simply being born white???

        who needs levels of anything when only one race is always guilty of racism???

        Like


      • Canadian Friend

        You see if Chris Rock a black man goes on Oprah -as he did – as says in front of millions of people that he did not want no mixed children, that he would have never had kids with a white woman, that he wanted his kids to be black, really black and not mixed

        and it is not considered racism
        —————————

        Exactly. Because its not racism when you must depend on white people to ALLOW you to do it.

        Its the same as prison dynamics. Inmates say all kinds of bold and proud things… but at the end of the day, the guards decide what you will and will NOT be able to do.

        What you witnessed Chris Rock practicing was “childs play” and its understandable.

        This is what I hafta remind black people before they marry white people. Your children are going to eventually see that you are the weaker part of the equation and as such, they will grow away from you and towards white people.

        Its no different than a guard and an inmate having a baby in prison.

        To sum up; Chris Rock was expressing his unwillingness to argue with white people by argueing with his own halfbreed children.

        I don’t blame him.

        PS– A black female once told me that the reason she didn’t marry her white boyfriend was because (and I quote)

        “I didn’t want him to get all of the credit for the good stuff”

        Now take a minute to think about what she is really saying.

        Like


      • “I say there are Jews out there who wield undue influence in government and media… an undeniable fact, and one which doesn’t take much more investigation that looking at a few of the names… “

        Excuse me? Is that what you do all day long – “(it) doesn’t take much more investigation that looking at a few of the names” , so all you do is stalk Jewish name every time you see a film or read an article and by the German sounding names you decide they got to be Jews? You’re obsessed sir. Desperately obsessed. You’re hatred knows no bounds. Who sits there searching for Jewish names? LOL! That used to be done by the Germans. Let’s face it, you’re consumed with Jew hatred and that’s why you keep trashing them. Someone like you is part of the Liberal problem. Men like you have no solutions, just hate as they’re jealous they don’t measure up.

        Like


      • “and for no good reason, given your Rooney-rifle hate of Muslims and “libruls”, you then manfully come to the rescue of Jews, though a purported Christian yourself?”

        Unlike you, I am not a moral relativist. Muslims are directly injuring this country. Not only the obvious of committing terror against the US and other western targets, but also they want to convert us all to Islam. Sorry, but they are a lot more dangerous than the Jews who are not even 1% of the population. I BILLION Muslims in direct competition with Christianity is a hell of a lot more scary than the 16 million Jews worldwide, the same 16 million you are calling the evil Jews controlling and dominating the world. Wow! I can’t believe you asked me this. You’re beyond the pale.

        Are you honestly comparing 16 million Jews with 1 billion Muslims? Are you fucking crazy? From what planet did you fall from, Nazi? That’s the problem with you Neo Nazis, your hated is not objective or rational, that’s why your muttering can’t be taken seriously. You really have no objective argument other than just Jewish hate stemming from jealousy that you haven’t been invited to sit at the table.

        And Liberals, of course I am not happy with them. Yet, I never preach killing, like you do. You preach killing people symbolized by your incessant adulating of Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler. And don’t tell me you don’t do that, I have read enough of your sorry excuse for comments where your respect and adoration for Hitler borders on the bizarre, if it’s not totally revolting.

        Liberals are the issue here, not the Jews, or the Christians, or even the Muslims. In fact, the Muslims wouldn’t be an issue if it weren’t for liberals weakening America’s moral fiber, or opposition to racial profiling and immigration restrictions. The problem is liberalism, it’s not one group of people. If it were one group of people we could isolate and control, our job would be much easier. That’s why when people like you start that Jewish-controlling-everything nonsense and try to change the conversation form the intelligent to the conspiracy theory, it’s where we lost the war. We‘ll never be able to fix the problems of liberalism with neo-Nazi propaganda. A man like you is a False Flag.

        I come to the rescue of Jews because I find you extremely dangerous. People like you make things worse because they don’t let us focus on the real issues – liberalism and leftism. Either you are truly stupid or you’re exactly what I suspect you are – an angry hateful Nazi who is simply jealous he is not at the top with the rest of the movers and shakers.

        Like


      • And Liberals, of course I am not happy with them. Yet, I never preach killing, like you do.

        You’re the one who had a holiday in your heart about the women and children of Dresden and the Sudeten Germans, you insupportable bitch.

        And show me where I preach killing, beyond what the Lord foretells in Revelation.

        … symbolized by your incessant adulating of Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler. And don’t tell me you don’t do that, I have read enough of your sorry excuse for comments where your respect and adoration for Hitler borders on the bizarre, if it’s not totally revolting.

        This is getting to be too much. You must have me confused with someone else… several weeks ago in a post, I mentioned remembering a quote from my college days (as I told you then when you accused me of having memorized Mein Kampf, llloozozozozolll) about the Big Lie that’s been attributed against Hitler, when he himself was the one who said it about his enemies.

        Other than that, I recall no “incessant adulation”, troll… links or STFU, you slanderous cunt.

        And keep in mind what “incessant” and “adulation” mean, you ignorant harpy./

        Like


      • “You’re the one who had a holiday in your heart about the women and children of Dresden and the Sudeten Germans, you insupportable bitch.”

        Ha Ha Ha… it’s called retribution Nazi-brain. Nothing me or any other human willed on them. They got their just deserts form God in heaven, the one you “worship” and think will revisit his anger on all your “enemies”, exactly as what you said below you wished for: “And show me where I preach killing, beyond what the Lord foretells in Revelation.”

        “Other than that, I recall no “incessant adulation”, troll… links or STFU, you slanderous cunt.”

        LOL! Yeah, after all, you’d know what slander is. It takes one to know one, doesn’t it?

        Oh….BTW, since when do they teach “Mein Kampf’ in college these days (or back in your day)? Was it in Nazi university?

        Like


      • Ah, just as I thought… no sign of “adulation” except in the tiny mind of The Girl With The Dragon Mouth… who, amidst her schooling here at the chateau, can’t comprehend that universities offer 300 and 400 level courses on WWII and The Third Reich.

        Like


  45. on November 21, 2012 at 11:37 pm Full-Fledged Fiasco

    You may like this, Heartiste: Barbara Pym.

    Like


  46. Heartiste” “This is the age of superficiality.”

    Speak for yourself.

    Like


  47. CH: “This is the age of superficiality.”

    Speak for yourself.

    Like


  48. “The left is Bad”
    What’s the “left,” exactly?
    The people who do all the bad things, that tell the pretty lies.
    (Chorus of applause)

    Why don’t you just discuss the pretty lies?

    Nah. Bring da movies.
    (Chorus of applause)

    Like


  49. You know, reading this site is like wading through the thickest treacle; and I keep on looking for opinions worth listening to here and it’s simply not forthcoming.

    Like


    • Bogart’s Liberal Tactic #3

      Like


    • For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

      Like


      • on November 23, 2012 at 6:21 am badluckwalksin

        Why answer with a Bible quote?

        Like


      • All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

        2 Timothy 3:16

        Get wise, young man… get wise.

        Like


      • on November 23, 2012 at 8:29 pm badluckwalksin

        lol I AM NOT A MAN!! lol if you went on my site, you would knoiw this. And I know my Bible fairly well, thanks ^^ Are you also a Christian? If so, why visit a negative site like this? Actually, I don;t exactly think of myself as a practising christian, but the Bbible is quite important to me.

        Like


      • In the grand scheme of things, it’s immaterial whether I say “young man” or “young woman” at this juncture. I would have little reason, and even lesser interest, for “going to your site” and never thought about clicking on your monicker.

        Like


      • no of course not; i’m not saying you should have. i was merely pointing out that if you DID, you would have known lol. anyway, it’s refreshing to see someone on this site who doesn’t seem like a total idiot.

        Like


    • I try not to stroll through molasses, myself… it ruins the shine on my Carolinas.

      Like


  50. So that’s why you waded through 170 posts.

    Like


  51. Any chance America may once have had, is certainly dead in it is the left who gets to ask “why do you hate freedom.” No amount of childish goat jokes will ever change that.

    Re. goat reframes. That kind of mindless plapper may (actually often will) work in a bar setting. But in a political debate of sufficient “importance” to be watched by more than your drinking buddies, there will be post-debate analyses. Good luck with that one.

    And as for falling into the left’s frame, why are the right talking about tax rates? he income tax itself is a leftist frame. As is each and every federal program created since at least 1900. Every darned one of them, from women’s suffrage to social security, to firearms restrictions, to American involvement in Europe in WW2. Until the right re frames, the left has won by default. When the supposedly conservative party’s only difference from those they decry as outright socialists are a few percent income tax differences on incomes of about 3 percent of the country, it’s way past over already. Who cares who wins. America has lost, either way.

    Like


  52. waaaah. Call the waaahmpulance for the Cons. or should I say pseudo-Cons aka Libertarians.

    Like


  53. This blog and the commenters have been instrumental recently. I appreciate it deeply. But I now ask for input if you’d be so kind: I had STRONG hand in a relationship for 2 years (cheated, dumped her for a bit, etc.) but lost it for about a month. We broke up as a result, mostly her call. After that, I went silent on her for a few months and about three weeks ago she called late night–I didn’t answer but sent a text that said “Sup.” (Her response was nothing special.) Then two weeks ago she sent a late night text that said “I can’t believe how much I think about you.” I didn’t respond. She has a long-distance boyfriend I’m pretty sure. If I want to grab a final bang or two, would you suggest responding or just keep the no contact thing going? I’m moving on for the most part, but still, a little pump and dump wouldn’t hurt. Open to your thoughts, gents.

    Like


    • Heartiste: please make exclusive the general area of disscussion on your blog the one you get into specifics about with this thread. It’s infinitely more important to most people who still follow you and if you do that, eventually you’ll be rid for good of inane OT posts like the one above.

      Like


    • Ball’s in your court. If you want a pump and dump, you’re already at the door. Keeping up no contact won’t get you further — what she said is obvious — unless you’re hoping next for, “Please come over here now and take me.”

      Like


      • Thanks. I tend to agree with that but wanted to a wait a few weeks before saying anything. Would you recommend texting something light (obviously not responding directly to her last text) and going from there or just going direct e.g. a “come over” type of thing next weekend?

        Like


  54. Q: How do people think?
    A: Well, there’s the Left and The Right. The Right are Right, and the Left are liars.
    Q: But a lot of things seem more complicated than that..
    A. Nah. Bring da movies.

    Like


  55. Well, regarding mocking the leftists. It works better with some facts to back it up. Ann Coulter does this in her books. She mocks with facts, which is why “they” hate her so much. They call her books hate speech but she only hates on Liberals.

    For example, next time somebody talks about racial equality as a given, mock them, point out the complexion of the NBA, and tell them to read (just google) about the MLK Medical Center for starters. Scary thing for all, they simply dispersed all those incompetent medical professionals to the surrounding hospitals, so as to spread the incompetence around. Our country is not just about spreading the wealth these days.

    Of course, I am not really sure if anybody believes in racial equality anymore. But, you get the point.

    You can mock them about the unequal treatment of women in our society. Point out the inequality of pensions and health care for men and women. Do it in a mocking fashion, but with facts.

    Really, there is so much low hanging fruit here. That is why colleges have speech codes and the word racist is used indiscriminately.

    Of course, just pointing to the Federal deficit should be enough to win any rational argument. For mockery, how about: “Hey man, one in three is just free!”

    (One-third of the Federal outlays [There is no Federal budget anymore] is borrowed.)

    Like


  56. The first example where you respond with homosexuality is a bad response. A smart leftist (Hey, it could happen) would respond with the following: “We accept homosexuality because it promotes individual freedom while racism does not. Rape is also built into us but we chose to not practice this one either for the same reason.”

    Like


    • An argument against homosexuality that I’ve never seen refuted anywhere (and either results in an amen chorus from right-leaning echo chambers or getting booted from leftie forums and posts deleted) is that the rationale for retaining social stigma and legal restrictions against it is no less arbitrary/moralistic than the rationale for the same against bestiality. The only (lame) counterargument that the homophiles can come up with is that the animals don’t consent (made with a straight face by meat-eating, leather biker gear-wearing, foo-foo dog-breeding gays and lesbians).

      Like


    • Freedom is not licentious license that leads to heinous diseases and libidinous swinery.

      And the love of one’s own kind, which anti-whites invariably love to tar as “racism”, promotes true freedom… most importantly, freedom from predatory outgroups and cultural perversions that would corrupt impressionable youth.

      Like


  57. Oh. About the mockery. Next time you hear about us bad white males, just say that we white males are just another minority group, and should be treated no differently from say the gays, women, or blacks. To criticize us is hate speech.

    So, next time you hear some pompous a$$ telling us to man up or pay up, etc, just reply that we will man up and pay up when the black men man up and start supporting their own children for a change, and when, pleez, will wymen woman-up and stop being such irresponsible breeders. You know who you are. They are legion. “Single mother” is a polite name for women who are too stupid to keep their legs closed or take birth control pills or get an abortion or get married. If we can’t mock such people, who can we mock? Oh, oh… I “got” pregnant. They say that like they caught a cold. Hilarious.

    Frankly, I prefer to be a member of an oppressed minority. I am no longer responsible for anything. I am a victim. Having money doesn’t matter. Look at the Jews, Asians, and those very wealthy black athletes and entertainers who are never called to account for their lack of commitment to the common good because of their minority status. And, because they vote Democratic.

    Maybe, as the final mockery, tell your Democratic friends that now that I identify as a minority, I am going to vote Democratic. If enough white men do that, the Democratic party might jettison their support of blacks and switch back to racial preferences for whites, which was their preferred ethnic group until recently. And, when you think about it, seeing Democratic politicians torn between competing ethnic loyalties would be fun. It’s fun right now. Look at Cory Booker’s near riot in Philly a couple of days ago.

    Really, the mockery dimension with Democrats is huge. Problem is, Democrats are so stupid they might miss the joke.

    Like


  58. Those elderly people already PAID for everything they get, and then some. They’re angry because they were CHEATED

    No, Whiskey, they didn’t. They paid for the current expenses of the US Gov while they were young. Their money paid for US military agression against any country conceivable except those strong enough to resist and the incipient Welfare State. They also paid for the Marshall Plan and the Moon Landing. Amazing how American ufanism ignore the gigantic costs of those programs.

    If those old people use Medicare today, it is being paid by Americans of my own age (28). Who are certain not to receive the same service when they age. Actually, they may be paid for middle age Americans since those of my age are unemployed or doing some shitty job at MacDonalds, if they aren’t on Welfare.

    Like


  59. In what sense do you capitalise “the Other”? Because, canonically, your argument makes no sense, since babies are born with no conception of the Other, and only develop it 6-18 months after birth.

    Like


  60. Best tactic for ‘reframing’ politicos: Ignore.
    I’ve had the pleasure of experiencing many different politicians from many different parties, with many different ideologies , in many different countries and languages – some of which I understand in the original, no dubbing required.
    They’re all the same.
    Lying, two-faced, greedy crooks.
    Liberal, conservative, socialist, social democrat, communist, neo-fascist, doesn’t matter beans.
    Anyone who believes even just one syllable coming out of their mouths is intellectually deficient.

    Like


  61. on November 22, 2012 at 9:14 am Strong Beta/Fake Alpha

    Dudes, I just discovered this site. May I ask for some advice? I’m in an LTR with a 7.5 who I got beta style. She has a wickedly awesome ballerina body but a bit of a butter face. So it’s like 9 body (5’7″ and 118 lbs and six pack but not manly…totally hot body, perfect legs), so that’s why I rank her 7.5. Nice small little face, no manjaw, but little bit big nose. I’m an 8.5 in looks but naturally solid middle of the road beta. She loves to fuck, loves to get fucked, loves to be dominated, loves to give BJs. She’s insecure and aware that she’s a butter face. In fact, she sort of reminded me of that term, calling herself that. I had forgotten that term since college. We’re both 37 but have stayed in shape. I know she’s below me simply because of the age thing. I’m beta white knighting just to be with her to begin with, after her prior 3 LTRs who she was hoping to marry, of course dumped her to get a new 26 year old. So I’m Mr. White Knight expected to marry her at 37 when I could be with a 26 year old. Now, again, her body is still totally tight, but she can’t have more than 4 good years left. You can see the age in her face (crows feet).

    My question is, even though all of the above is true, because of my betaness the past few years she’s a little bit close to dumping me, even though I’m the one who has thought about ending it for 2 years.

    But I wouldn’t mind continue to tie her to the bed and nail her until I find a new option.

    My question is, IS IT POSSIBLE TO TURN INTO AN ALPHA IN THE MIDDLE OF AN LTR WITH THE SAME GIRL WHEN YOU GOT HER BETA STYLE?

    I’m “almost” an alpha and know how to fake it, but it seems like she truly likes me to be ‘nice” and when I alpha style it a bit she doesn’t like it.

    Or am I just flat out wuss beta and you can tell from this post?

    Oh, also in the very beginnign I did get her alpha style, because I can fake it, but in a 3 year relationship my natural beta of course came out.

    thanks.

    Like


    • The fact that you know what to do but still need advice from other men proves you’re beta as fuck.

      Like


      • Actually I don’t. The question is whether a person in an LTR with a middle beta woman can change from beta to alpha 2.5 years into the relationship. Should I just let her go or can I start gaming her now? I guess the related question is whether it can be “too late” for game or whether it’s never too late.

        Like


      • It’s tough to escape any pigeonhole people put you in. That’s why people often change jobs in order to climb the ranks of their given calling.

        It’s especially tough with women, once they see you as a certain type, to change their perspective… remember, with the distaff side, perception invariably carries more weight than actual words and deeds, and trying to undo several years of impression can be an herculean task.

        That said, nothing’s impossible, if done skillfully enough.

        But experience often shows that a clean break and onto the next adventure, wiser now not to repeat past failures, is probably the best course.

        Like


    • on November 23, 2012 at 10:51 am Hugh G. Rection

      If you wanna be the alpha, why not be it with a younger, hotter, tighter woman? What you need first is options, she knows you are safe because you don’t have any other options.

      Like


  62. The problem with the reframe approach is that it can be tough to execute on the spot, which is probably why more folks don’t do it, or do it well.

    You have to have
    1) awareness of logic in order to spot the premises. this is important.
    2) enough of a grounding in your own position to see where the premises conflict and what the outcome should be. Probably the flaw in most mens’ internal framing when dealing with chicks.
    3) enough mental horses to turn your opponent’s premises to unPConventional ends, while maintaining logical consistency, in real time. a well-placed reductio ad absurdum is always good for putting someone back on her heels.
    4) *Bonus* a flair for creative language, a la goat pleasuring, always helps.

    I don’t know which is the bigger problem for most of the righty commentators out there. I suspect it’s the second point. They don’t have solid positions.

    Now, I hope I cross Anon’s IQ threshold above, but all this can be challenging when faced with a slippery, smart, verbally facile opponent, and particularly the one who knows his own position (as opposed to your typical lefty college vegan slut).

    Like


  63. off-topic but this woman is a hero for preventing drug addict women from giving birth:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention
    see the last 1/3 of this podcast here: http://www.radiolab.org/2012/nov/19/

    Like


    • on November 23, 2012 at 8:43 pm badluckwalksin

      lol how can you prevent someone from giving birth? if they’re going to give birth, they’ll give birth. you can’t prevent it 0_0

      Like


  64. “As I am a person who generally prefers to not make life miserable for the mediocre masses who are just trundling by trying to eke out a slice of joy without stepping on my toes, I instinctively recoil at those self-righteous social engineers who would attempt to reprogram certain classes of people (read: working class white men) to betray their essence as human beings in order to more properly mouth the hypocritical bleatings of the gated-community pompous elite.”

    IF you’ve ever been to Asia, you’d realize that white men don’t need a whole lot of cajoling.

    Like


    • Putting the pod in iPod.

      Like


    • There can be big women. There can be beautiful women. But there cannot be big, beautiful women.

      Like


      • Can you or anyone here suggest when we are shaming a fatty and she says what I have to do with her mammoth body? I mean have this girl who is fat and ugly but does not have issues as her parents are happy! why I have issues with her weight, she asks. Generally I am successful shaming fatties…ideas please.

        Like


      • Ok maybe I am way out of step with the other people who post here but I do not go out of my way to shame strangers who are fat, who are dressed slovenly, who are unemployed, etc. Now, if a fat women engages you because she is interested in you, there is nothing wrong with being direct and telling her you are not interested. There is nothing wrong with being polite in your refusals-heck, the fattie may have a hot friend and why fuck up your chances with the hot friend?

        Like


      • Shaming people for their vices is a mechanism by which a healthy society curbs the incidence of said vices. The idea is to mock people for things they can control, like sloth, gluttony, et al., but not for things they cannot control, like physical handicap.

        Like


  65. Reframing is only possible are interested in having an intelligent discussion something I cannot say for many leftists

    Like


  66. Heartiste, my friend – great post. Playing it like a Boy Scout may have worked 60 years ago, but not with today’s electorate.

    We need you at the national level to plot strategy for the right. You fundamentally understand the problem and can articulate an approach that can win.

    Like


  67. on November 24, 2012 at 10:46 pm Sitaram Goel Shah

    To some basic extent in-groupism is innate but alot of it is incalculated through culture.

    I come from a culture that has several layers of in-groupism. You can basically take your pick of about 200 different ways of being prejudiced against your fellow countrymen, mixing and matching at your convenience, if you are South Asian.

    But what a man needs to ask himself: Do I really want to live like this? Do I really want to limit my associations and experiences to such an extreme degree?

    My personal answer is no.

    Its also a very low level on consciousness. If you read Ken Wilbur you come to understand why in-groupism works but also why it limits you to a certain level of consciousness that can and will stunt your spiritual growth and prevent you from having peak transcendent experiences.

    Like


    • New Age bullshit.

      Mixing with disparate influences and, at heart, incompatible cultures stunts spiritual well-being and leads to the corruption of peoples… when they mix, it’s not merely over table-talk and intellectual pursuits… it’s invariable physical miscegenation that dilutes the unique characteristics and capabilities of a given folk… and invariably, a leveling to the lowest common denominator, rather than an elevation of the higher traits.

      As the Book says,
      Be you not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship has righteousness with unrighteousness? and what partnership has light with darkness?

      And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? for you are the temple of the living God; as God has said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

      As nearly all of human history indisputably demonstrates, when strong republics of a given virtually homogeneous folk become empires and begin mixing with disparate peoples, that is when civilizations decline and fall.

      Like


  68. well the “equality” so loved by this “piece&love” wolves in sheep’s clothing is actually the n.1 freedom killer. if you are supposed to be as someone else want you to be than you are anything but free. so since they’re using irrational arguments they deserve to be confronted with irrational arguments: mockery.
    great post

    Like


  69. So What are you saying? The Jews don’t stand a chance?

    Like


  70. I like to respond to lefties who want to talk about non-issues like gay marriage, ‘How do you think the Greeks feel about gay marriage now that they are broke and unemployed as the country’s suicide rate skyrockets?”

    Like


    • The point is Republicans who claim they want small government; who want government out of people’s lives, should not devote so much time, energy, and focus on gay marriage. Government doesn’t tell you who you can fall in love with; it shouldn’t tell you who you can marry. Let gays marry and it will help the wedding industry, the hospitality industry, and eventually, divorce lawyers. So yeah Republicans own the issue that being ok with gay marriage equals being pro-business.

      Like


      • Only a lefty thinks like this since he’s not a deep thinker. Gays can marry if they want, leave each other their property, or visit each other in the hospital if they so wish. The issue is they want the imprimatur of the government, as once that happens it would be taught in schools, entered into textbooks, and become the mainstreams, as if it’s as normal as heterosexuality. C’mon, gay activists are trying to corrupt the culture and saying the same exact masked nonsense you say: ‘you can’t control who someone falls in love with.’ No one is making gay sex illegal, even though it should be, because once we relaxed the standards, the next step was let’s get married. All we’re saying is leave marriage alone. Having sex with your gay lover is not on the same level of marriage between a man and a woman. I can’t believe you liberals are pushing this and helping it become law.

        And if you think it doesn’t affect you that gays marry, think again, it will eventually. If you send your kids to any school in the country, even a private school, it’s going to be mandatory curriculum. Eventually it will become a problem for you, just like immigration is today. At first, people said let illegals stay, it doesn’t affect me. Now, if you live in any southwestern state it does affect you, but now it’s also too late to get them out. More than likely they will get amnesty and stay here for good. Anytime conservatives relent to the Left on any issue they are weakened morally and politically. No conservative should relent on gay marriage. Unfortunately, many shortsighted conservatives are.

        Like


      • No gays can’t always marry. And while gays can visit each other in the hospital, many, many times they are prevented from being in the loop treatment option wise. Why should someone who has been with someone else for decades be shoved aside for some distant relative who has had no contact with the ill person for a long time. Gays happen-they aren’t really made. Well some women after a large enough number of drinks might be the exception lol. But anyways, gays happen. Knowledge is power. Rather have kids learn that there are gays in the world versus being taught the world is only 7,000 years old.

        Like


      • First, gays can marry without a federal legislation. Look at how many married gay stars there are in Hollywood while CA doesn’t have gay marriage yet. They got married without federal legislation.

        Second, a sick person designates who he wants to visit him in the hospital. No one can supersede this decision. Also, you can designate who will make decisions for you at the end of life, called the “advance directive.” Every gay couple can direct their end-of-life care giver. So please stop with this fibbing.

        Third, contrary to what you believe, homosexuality is a learned behavior, especially in men. It’s not natural to them, like it might slightly be in women. I think women’s sexuality is much less fixed. Many, many, many men that were sexuality molested as boys end up becoming gay. The incident number is too large to ignore. The last thing we need is to teach it in schools like it’s the norm and take the stigma out of it, because that will only embolden boys to try it out when older men approach and tell them they should try it out before they say it’s not for them. If pro-gay legislation is accepted, you can’t teach against homosexuality any longer – the wet dream of every homosexual. It will be considered hate speech. That’s how the left operates. All time-tested value are being eroded by leftists operatives who tell the youth not to knock something before they had a chance to experience it first. They are very seductive with the way they present their arguments, and young teenagers don’t have enough experience yet to know how to handle being pressured by such people or to think logically whether or not something is good or bad. In fact, about a year ago one of Obama’s minions in education, a homosexual himself, trashed the Bible in public schools, especially the part about homosexuality being a sin. There is going to be much more of this as homosexuality is ordained by the federal government – gay activists/operative corrupting the minds of the youth in schools. That’s why homosexuality should not have the imprimatur of the government, and that’s why I am against gay marriage. It’s going to set a dangerous precedent if we pass pro-gay marriage legislation.

        Like


      • You are getting tiresome. While there is no federal legislation, in many cases there are state laws prohibiting gay marriage. Also, while doing some prep work about health treatments is admirable, sudden situations do occur where people are not prepared-and hence shut out of the process. http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/healthcare-equality-index-advance-healthcare-directives. And heck yes, leave the bible out of public schools. And seriously? Sexual abuse causes homosexuality? http://www.pandys.org/articles/abuseandhomosexuality.html So by extension, animals that exhibit homosexual behavior must have been abused as well?

        Like


      • “You are getting tiresome. While there is no federal legislation, in many cases there are state laws prohibiting gay marriage.”

        Let’s put it this way, every gay that wants to get married, can. If there is a will there is a way. Stop spreading misinformation.

        Of course I am getting tiresome – because I won’t let you get away with it. But, you don’t have to reply either, yet you choose to, which means that while you complain about my being tiresome, it’s important for you to spread your lies around. Fat chance.

        “Also, while doing some prep work about health treatments is admirable, sudden situations do occur where people are not prepared-and hence shut out of the process.”

        Bull shit. Again, just false information spread by the Left. If you are gay and you know situations might arise, you prepare yourself ahead of time. It’s no different than straights getting caught not prepared and then their families fight over who makes the decisions. Gays don’t need special treatment. It’s called being responsible, not fucking you boyfriend for 10 years until you get AIDS and need testaments, and even then you can still designate a care giver before hospitalization or hospice care is needed, as AIDS develops slowly. You can sell this nonsense to some of your stupid emotional leftists, but it won’t fly with people who know the facts and have common sense.

        “And heck yes, leave the bible out of public schools.“

        Again another lefty attempt to confuse the truth. The Bible is left out of the public schools. Obama’s gay emissaries brought it into the discussion in order to make it look obsolete. It might be obsolete for gays, because it speaks against their gay lifestyle, but some of the kids in that high school come from traditional families and they were outraged those gay activists attempted to indoctrinate the rest of the kids by trashing their religion. It was pure deception. How come the left has no respect for other people’s believes and religions, yet they want complete acceptance and understanding?

        “Sexual abuse causes homosexuality?”

        No questions about it. Out of the mouth of many gays who tell that exact trajectory took place for them. Gay activists are not being honest about it. They are trying to cover up the truth.

        Look at ancient Greece. Most of the older men had young boy lovers, eventually homosexuality became very rampant in ancient Greece. In fact, it was the norm. Most men only married to have kids. The rest of the time they had sex with men. Eventfully, the whole society declined because men even refused to get married for procreation. Now don’t go and argue the Greek “race” was born gay. Homosexuality is a learned behavior,period.

        “So by extension, animals that exhibit homosexual behavior must have been abused as well?”

        Oh, no! That same bogus argument again, some gay activists keep referring to. Again, I call it bullshit. In some lesser species when there are no males, females convert to males, like with sea horses. Show me a mammal that exhibits homosexual tendencies.

        With your reply all you did was put stupid links from leftists gay organizations that attempt to dispel fears about their lifestyle , no matter how wrong and full of propaganda it is. You accomplished nothing more.

        But honestly, what is a gay activist/homosexual doing posting on such a blog? And if you’re straight, that’s even more shameful. Nothing can be more beta than a man insisting homosexual sex is fine.

        Like


      • I am not gay and and I am not an activist It amuses me to point out shortcomings in people’s arguments. Look – if something were to happen to you right this second, do you have either a living will or regular will? I don’t-an lots of other people don’t as well. Here’s a list of animals that exhibit homosexual behavior. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior. Namecalling the sites I cited doesn’t accomplish anything for you. And actually what other people do in their personal life is no concern to me as long as they are not acting in harmful ways -that meaning, if two gays or lesbians want to marry and live together and have the same rights as heterosexual couples, I am fine with that. It isn’t alpha to try to make life miserable for other people so therefore my mindset is alpha enough

        Like


      • Speaking of the gays

        take a look at these recently updated numbers from the CDC (Center for Disease Control )

        […] gay and bisexual men are 40 times more likely to have HIV than other men.

        […] About 87% of young males got HIV from male-to-male sex, 6% from heterosexual sex, 2% from injection drug use,

        what a healthy lifestyle!!!

        for which there is no cost to society!!!

        not even a financial one!!!

        lets teach kids that fucking men in the ass is a great thing!!!

        /sarcasm

        Are we a civilization in complete decay or what?

        Like


      • Or-we can teach people that homosexuals are a small part of society-and that is nothing new – and that engaging in homosexual behavior can result in severe health risks and here are ways to minimize those health risks. I just don’t get some of the mindsets on this blog-certain things are reality and no amount of bitching about things are going to change them. Women will continue to vote; homosexuals will continue to exist, America is a land made up of immigrants. So we aren’t getting millions of Norwegians and Germans coming here now and instead are getting Hispanics. Earlier, no one here liked the Irish coming here-America survived.

        Like


      • “I am not gay and and I am not an activist It amuses me to point out shortcomings in people’s arguments.”

        Fair enough, but all the arguments for gay marriage fall short, not the opposition to it. There isn’t a need for it if you are willing to admit that homosexual sex degrades societies. If indeed there wasn’t any harm in it, I wouldn’t be so against it. In fact, if it weren’t such a bad idea, gay activist wouldn’t need to do so much convincing. It hits people the wrong way subconsciously, without them really knowing why it’s a bad idea, just instinctively it feels wrong. I think most of us know deep down inside it’s not nature but nurture that causes it. That’s why the gay activists are able to convince the young in schools, as teens haven’t formed strong opinions yet and their sexuality isn’t firmly fixed yet.

        Think about it this way, if gays admitted they weren’t born that way, but were somehow made gay along the way early in childhood, people wouldn’t accept them, especially their families. Their families would insist they seek help for their condition. The only way their lifestyle could be accepted without question by their friends and families is if it’s an accepted consensus that one is born gay, not made. That’s the only way to shut up their critics. That’s why I say their argument is transparent and dishonest.

        “Look – if something were to happen to you right this second, do you have either a living will or regular will? I don’t-an lots of other people don’t as well.”

        Exactly, so what do you think happens? That’s why members of the family might fight over who is the one to make the decisions. That’s why in all families it’s wise to designate your care giver, should something happens to you, not just gay people. Don’t you think regular families go through this too? To use this argument as the reason to change the definition of marriage is weak. Many states even allow gays to designate their pension beneficiaries their gay lovers. Some life insurance companies too. I think we can make such rules without changing the definition, since changing the definition is being pushed only so that homosexuality gets air time in school curriculums. I don’t see any reasons for it, other than to brainwash the minds of teens. Also, if a hospital is informed that one is gay and their lover is to make the decisions, the hospital is not going to say no.

        The link to the Wikipedia article about animals displaying homosexual behavior is a total joke. C’mon, you can’t be serious. Look at the first sentence from that article, “there is documented evidence of homosexual or transgender behavior of one or more of the following kinds: sex, courtship, affection, pair bonding, or parenting.”

        homosexual or transgender behavior in animals, are these people serious? transgender behavior??? So do animals understand the meaning of transgender?

        Anyway, anyone can write a Wikipedia article, even gay activists trying to give their lifestyle “scientific” support.

        If you are foolish enough to believe this Wikipedia article as truth, you’re a dupe. I recommend you wait to get more confirmation. Another study will show this is greatly exaggerated. For instance, playing between members of the same sex was skewed to show it was a mating dance. I don’t believe any of it at all. I think these are gay activists fishing for something that proves their lifestyle is “normal” and “natural” because it “exists” in the animal kingdom. Also, the people conducting these studies are probably trying to prove their beliefs. Most scientists are liberals so many studies on hot-button issues like homosexuality and global warming is very skewed to the left. So no, I am not convinced at all.

        “Namecalling the sites I cited doesn’t accomplish anything for you.”

        Completely the opposite, it does accomplish a lot. I like calling a spade a spade. I never take the word of gay activists as truth. They are nothing but liars, and dangerous ones at that – using deception to try to receive acceptance for their lifestyle. They need to be called out.

        “And actually what other people do in their personal life is no concern to me as long as they are not acting in harmful ways -that meaning, if two gays or lesbians want to marry and live together and have the same rights as heterosexual couples, I am fine with that.”

        I agree with you on this point if it were true, but it’s not the case. It does affect each and every one of us and this is how. If they simply wanted to get married and be done with it, fine. But we all know it’s not going to be the end of it. Their lifestyle would find its way to text books and school curriculum, as is happening in CA now. That’s not acceptable. In CA they’re already re-writing history to include someone was gay, even if just rumored. That includes many famous people from history who were rumored to be gay. So instead of focusing on their contributions , like a piece of music, art , or scientific discovery , now the text books include whole paragraphs on their supposed sexual preference. It’s not even fact, yet the crazy liberals in the CA school system seem to be obsessed with making sure kids knew about gay sex, how “normal” and how “good” it is. I am sorry but they are engaging in brainwashing and indoctrination, and all this is taking place when there isn’t any gay legislation yet. It seems gays can get married, as well as have their lifestyle taught in schools even before the Federal Government making it mandatory to be pushed on us. So your arguments about them not having any rights are false. They have plenty of rights; they just want to remove our right to disagree with their lifestyle. They’re pushing their lifestyle on us like the totalitarian intolerant lefty liberal bunch they are. No one is stopping them from their lifestyle if that’s what they want, yet they are forcing us to accept it as normal and anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle is going to be charged with hate speech if this legislation is adopted.

        Just today I read that In the State of WA, the words husband and wife, bride and groom, are going to be removed from any reference of marriage Now, you tell me the gay lobby is NOT trying to force their lifestyle on us.

        Why don’t you respond to whorefinder, he just commented in a new thread about homosexuality and says mostly the same things, just with lots of cussing.
        https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/feminist-fallacy-3-i-use-men-for-sex/#comment-390811

        Like


      • “And actually what other people do in their personal life is no concern to me as long as they are not acting in harmful ways

        well it is harmfull to others in a few ways

        according to the very recent new numbers published by the CDC

        86% of men who have HIV are gays

        and most women contract HIV from bi-sexual men

        so the gay lifestyle is making a lot of people sick with a deadly degenerative disease

        ans some of those women transmit HIV to their newborn

        but that is not all,

        We also all pay a price in tax dollars for obvious reasons, health services, medical research etc etc…

        they do harm others that is why I always say they should have stayed in the closet instead as opposed to where they are now;
        in bathhouses where they have sex with 20 or 100 different men in one night and then infect a woman who infects her newborn

        Like


      • Canadian Friend,

        Excellent point about spreading AIDS. And let’s not forget that they also have high incidents of many other STDs.

        I agree with you completely, as always. Instead of trying to push their lifestyle down our throats, why don’t they just go back to the closet? It’s not like their lifestyle should be emulated or revered in any way. I am aghast that straight liberals encourage them to act out their gay-pride parades in various cities throughout the world, as if their lifestyle should be celebrated. Their lifestyle is not equal to ours. It’s an inferior lifestyle.

        I feel sorry for them for being gay, but if they keep their lives private and away from the media they can live their gay lifestyles without hindrance. But it’s not what they are after. They are after homo-sexualizing the culture. That was my point to Rick. If their lifestyle truly had no effect on us, many of us wouldn’t say anything. However, because their activities pose a danger to society and humanity, we need to speak out. That’s why I’m not referring to it as gay marriage anymore. I am calling it gay sex. Gay marriage is just the next step. It’s gay sex that has entered the mainstream and accepted by society. Once gay sex became accepted, the logical trajectory is to accept gay marriage. That’s why making gay sex an accepted form of sex was the first step for gay activists, now gay marriage. It’s the next logical step for most people who can’t think logically and just follow the liberal media.

        Like


  71. wot’s a “logic trap”?

    Like


  72. […] politically by reframing and mockery. Vox offers his opinion on […]

    Like