Tag Archives: republicans

Conservative Lies About Tradition, Example 526

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/05/a-james-gregor-donald-trump-fascism-and-populism/

President Barack Obama, Trump’s predecessor, had made a point of his anationalism. For a time, by way of illustration, he refused to wear the traditional flag lapel pin worn by politicians in office.

You see how they lie? They flat out make up lies suggesting that wearing a flag lapel pin is a “tradition,” some long standing habit that US Presidents and Representatives have done. Ask the typical conservative moron and they will probably tell you that George Washington first wore a flag lapel pin until Barack Hussein Obama stopped doing it, probably because the Egyptian Brotherhood told him not to.

Wearing a flag lapel pin is not a “tradition.” It was started by Zionist neo-conservatives in the Bush administration, after 9/11, to make a claim on patriotism.

The same people who let 9/11 happen, on purpose, and in fact were almost certainly directly involved in the plot. They were the opposite of “patriots” – they were traitors. Which is of course why they had to wear a flag pin, to give the appearance of being patriotic while they were committing treason.

The “tradition” dates to October, 2001.

All the military-worship dates to the end of the draft. When American men had to actually join the military and go fight they were quite cynical about the military bureaucracy. But when the draft was ended, all of a sudden these same American men spent a lot of time publically announcing how much they “supported the troops” precisely because they were not about to actually sign up and go die in some third world mudhole because some corporation, headquartered in an off-shore tax haven, wasn’t meeting quarterly revenue goals because some government decided to raise taxes.

So if you aren’t actually going to put your own ass on the line “defending” a corporation you don’t own stock in, the easiest solution is to blabber in public about how much you “support our troops.” It’s easier to wear a two dollar flag pin – made in China – than actually inconvenience yourself joining the military.

And if you are a traitor working for a foreign government, the best way to hide is to wear a flag pin on your suit coat. After all, that is how stupid conservatives are. Literally. They think, “well, that politician is wearing a flag pin, he must support the troops!”

I’d feel a deep sense of shame if anyone were to ever confuse me with a conservative.

Beta Of The Year: Roy Moore

James Edwards of Political Cesspool is a good and solid pro-White advocate who is also a conservative Christian. Heartiste is the hilariously funny “game” blogger who has human sexual nature down to a science. Both of them have suggested that Roy Moore is an “alpha” – and both of them are comically wrong.

First, let’s get the feminist stuff out of the way. Roy Moore, at 30, courting for marriage women ten or twelve years younger than him is no big deal. In the secular world, if Roy More were say, Leonardo DiCaprio “dating” a succession of young starlets just this side of the legal limit, he’d be the envy of every red blooded man alive. Despite what over the hill cat ladies may say about power imbalances, those are the types of power imbalances that women LOVE. Those are the types of power imbalances that girls and women seek out.

Heartiste himself points out that a White father’s goals for his daughter, from acceptable to soul-thrilling, are either:

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2017/11/12/daughter-guarding/

3. Date a well-heeled man 10+ years her senior
2. Marry a well-heeled man 10+ years her senior
1. Briefly court then marry an Epic Chad with a square jawline and family money

Moore was described as “handsome” – ok, that’s an alpha trait. But of all the teenage girls he “dated,” the only one that had anything positive to say about him said that he was “sweet” and “played guitar” for her and that her mom approved. That’s not exactly a swooning endorsement for a “handsome” and up-and coming power alpha, the home town boy made good.

That’s the way women describe “beta bucks.”

It hardly matters if the press coverage is slanted against Moore, the basic facts scream “insecure beta.” At 30 years old, he’s prowling the malls and diners flirting with teenage girls who are a captive audience. They have to be nice to him, especially in a culture like Alabama in the 1970s, they can’t say “leave me alone, creep.” At least some of these girls say they complained to their boss to try to get him kicked out of the mall.

Again, handsome 30 year old, more money than average, a powerful political position, and he can’t ATTRACT women, even young women, but instead is forced to prowl around and harass teenage girls who mostly want nothing to do with him. The most he’s getting is polite rejection, “I have a boyfriend.” He even called up one of them at school, talking to her teacher, pulling her out of class, and asking her for a date. She says “no.”

From a Christian standpoint, Moore would have been ready for marriage by, say, 25 at the latest. But Moore didn’t actually “court” these young girls for marriage, apparently. In fact, it apparently took Moore something like 15 years to even find a wife.

And what sort of woman did Moore eventually marry? Surely, a beautiful, blushing Christian virgin a decade younger than him?

Nah.

http://www.newsweek.com/roy-moore-wife-kayla-facebook-victims-paid-709742

Moore eventually, at 38, married a divorced single mom of 24 and adopted her kid. He “manned up and married the slut.” OK, in traditional Baptist churches, divorce and remarriage is called “adultery” and would have both Mr. and Mrs. Moore ex-communicated. From a secular, game perspective?

Roy Moore is a literal cuck.

Who married a mid 20s divorced single mom after spending 15 years hitting on jailbait that did nothing but blow him off for being a “creep.”

It doesn’t get any more “beta” than that.
Roy Moore fails on both counts. From a secular perspective, as far as “game” goes, he’s an insecure and creepy beta with no game who couldn’t get either the hot women his age nor the “younger hotter tighter” gals a decade younger than him.

From a Christian perspective, instead of doing the Christian thing, courting a marriageable woman, he (supposedly) goes without female companionship … until THIRTY-EIGHT … then marries a divorced single mom, thus cucking himself and engaging in decades long adultery.

A loser on both sides of the social fence.

All that aside, if the allegations of sexual assault of minors are true, this does of course make Roy Moore even MORE qualified to serve in the US Congress, as a conservative Republican, in the grand tradition of Dennis Hastert, et al.

(The interview with Becky Gray, a conservative Christian Alabama native saying she got Moore kicked out of the mall, and that he was “creepy” “not Christian” and “not what he claims to be” puts it all in perspective. Not that it matters, of course. Moore’s defenders are like Scientologists, creepy brainwashed fanatics of low IQ and even lower EQ. It is what it is.)

More On Moore: The Evangelical Cult’s Denial Of Basic Human “Sin” Nature And Its Cost To White Culture

When the Washington Post article came out, I actually read it. Of the four women, three just said that Moore dated, or tried to date them, when they were 16-18. Frankly, I find the idea of a 30 year old man courting – for marriage – an 18 year old woman to be a big “meh.” It may not be something the culture should encourage, as it’s a pretty big age difference, but there’s nothing biologically strange about it and there are plenty of strong, healthy and fertile marriages that have such an age gap.

The only accusation that mattered was that of the 14 year old girl, and her story was somewhat corroborated by two other women, who said she told them at the time that she was “dating” Moore.

For the next 48 hours, Roy Moore issued a bunch of “non-denial denials” which frankly made him seem guilty. Hipster Racist isn’t a court of law, and I frankly could not care less about the Republican party or the Alabama elections, so I’m just calling it as I see it. The woman’s claims seemed quite credible to me, because I’ve had numerous women tell me stories of exactly such behavior on the part of men – yes, even men in socially conservative, Evangelical subcultures. In fact, that is exactly the sort of behavior I expect of men in that culture. No, of course, not all, nor even the majority or a large minority, of Evangelical men are rapists, or chase jailbait, but neither does Christianity or the Evangelical subculture change the nature of men. In fact, I thought that was an important part of Christianity – the idea that we are “born in sin” – and it’s particularly true of the Reformed/Calvinist theology.

Eventually, on Sean Hannity’s show, Moore specifically and categorically denied the accusations of the woman, said he didn’t know her, and I figured that was that. I did expect – and warned – that there were likely to be other accusers, but 40 year old “he said, she said” accusations can’t really be judged.

I wasn’t particularly surprised to see fans of Moore denying everything and suggesting the women were lying, but I have been somewhat surprised by the reaction of many so-called “Christian” conservatives. At least now three times, on Twitter and this blog, so-called “conservative Christians” have suggested that anyone giving any credence to the accusations, or suggesting that Evangelical men aren’t always angels, either:

1. Hates Jesus

or

2. are sexual perverts and want sexual anarchy, promiscuity, and only believe these women because they don’t want a sexually conservative society.

I think some are protesting too much. I also noted, here and on Twatter, that these reactions are EXACTLY THE SAME as the reactions of Jews and Scientologists. Anytime anyone says anything negative about Jews, the Jewish religion, Jewish power in America, or the Israel lobby, 100% of the time they are met with essentially the same accusation:

“You are just jealous of Jews because of your personal failures.”

Scientologists are trained to ALWAYS respond to any negative critique of Scientology with accusations that the critic is a “suppressive person” and Scientology has a “counter attack” strategy, laid out by L. Ron Hubbard himself, that is straight out of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.”

(1) Spot who is attacking us.
(2) Start investigating them promptly for felonies or worse using own professionals, not outside agencies.
(3) Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them.
(4) Start feeding lurid, blood, sex, crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press.

I was a little bit surprised to see otherwise normal seeming conservative Christians doing the same thing to me, for the “crime” of believing a bunch of Southern, conservative, Christian women that claimed Roy Moore, the GOP politician from Alabama, sexually assaulted them. All of a sudden it was ME on trial – even though it’s not ME accusing Roy Moore, it’s a bunch of conservative, Christian, southern White women from Alabama – most of them, in fact, Republican Trump voters.

But it’s all so telling that his partisans, instead of dealing forthrightly with the accusations against Moore, or even having the decency to look at their own culture and accept maybe there is some dysfunction, to immediately start accusing others of having immoral motives or … “hating Jesus.”

It’s pathetic, it’s un-Christian, and it really says more about them than it does about the people they are attacking.

Well, what do you know, another woman has stepped forward and gave a detailed allegation of Roy Moore sexually assaulting her as a 15 year old girl. Unlike the 14 year old, Moore cannot claim he’s never met her, because he SIGNED HER HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOK.

I find Beverly Young Nelson’s accusations to be VERY credible, because I have heard this story, from numerous women, for my entire life. Including and especially from women from the Christian and/or Evangelical subculture.

Not only have I heard stories, for my entire life, that match Nelson’s story, I practically witnessed it personally, myself, at a church meeting. Once, at a night time event, a young woman, about 16, came running into the church building, crying and hysterical, saying that she was attacked by one of the other church attendees, who was about 18. I knew both of them. The girl was an extremely beautiful and very sexy young woman – to be clear, I don’t believe she went out of her way to be “sexy” or “seductive” – she was just a beautiful and blossoming young woman and even I, at about the age of 12, was utterly mesmerized by her. She accused a young man, of 18, of offering her a ride to the church function, then he parked the car in a dark spot and assaulted her.

The boy was expelled from the church and the church school, although I don’t believe the incident was ever made into a legal case. I heard, through the grapevine, what happened, and it was virtually exactly the scenario that Nelson says happened to her. As far as I can tell, this is a very typical, very common, way that men sexually assault women. I knew the alleged attacker, and was in fact quite fond of him, even though he was much older than me. He was a “sincere Christian,” seemed somewhat like a “leader” to us younger boys, seemed quite serious about Christianity and the Bible, and it was shocking news to us.

But, now, as an older man with some experience under my belt, I think I can figure out what happened. He had a crush on this girl for a year, found her extremely sexy (as we all did) and one night he just “snapped” and made very aggressive sexual moves on her, and when she wouldn’t cooperate, became somewhat violent. His “Christianity” went out the window because his lizard brain – his testosterone, and his evolved biology, took over. Why? Because he was a human man with a strong, overpowering sexual drive and the naive culture he was a part of somehow thought that “Jesus” would prevent young horny teenagers from doing what comes naturally. I do also suspect that the Christian subculture simply had no way of dealing with the realities of sex, simply expecting that “faith in Jesus” would stop him from “lusting” after a highly lust-worthy young woman his age.

I also heard NUMEROUS TIMES of older men – adult men – doing very similar things to young teenage girls in that culture. Women and girls that I knew. They certainly had no reason to lie to me. I witnessed on NUMEROUS occasions very obvious strong sexual tension between adult men and teenage girls – the kind of sexual tension that you can cut with a knife. To my mind, the problem was that adult men simply shouldn’t be in positions of power over teenage girls. In fact, I think co-ed education itself is basically asking for trouble.

I attended an upper-middle-class Christian high school based around a very mainstream, but very conservative, Protestant church. I remember at 15, sitting next to 15 year old girls, in those little school girl outfits, absolutely unable to concentrate on my school work because the slightest flash of leg, the slightest scent of “girl,” the tiniest hint of curves, flooded me with testosterone. It was often PURE TORTURE and it somewhat amazes me that these Christians, supposedly well aware of “sin nature” and lust, nevertheless, forced young horny teenagers together and then expected us to NOT “lust” after each other.

I don’t think at all that Christians are “worse” than the secular world, and I don’t think that the “answer” is “sexual liberation” or the promotion of promiscuity or “safe sex” for teenagers. I think, in fact, what old fashioned and traditional (even Christian) culture did is best for everyone – sexual segregation, a frank understanding of human nature and sexuality, and a restoration of old fashioned courting and young marriage – and by young marriage, I mean that 16-20 year old girls should be married off to 20-24 year old boys. That sort of marriage worked quite well for a thousand years and it can work again.

To accuse me of wanting “sexual license” because I have zero respect for some grand-standing GOP political hack like Roy Moore – and I find the stories of White, conservative, Southern, Christian women to be credible because it’s a completely observed pattern of behavior on the part of men – just shows how morally bankrupt the GOP, as well as the Evangelical subculture, really is.

It’s not ME accusing Roy Moore, it’s White, conservative, Southern Christian women accusing Moore. It’s not the Washington Post, the liberal media, or the Democrats accusing Moore – it’s White, conservative, Southern Christian women accusing Moore.

It’s just that the Evangelical subculture can’t deal with biological reality because they have their heads in the clouds, expecting “Jesus” to fix everyone’s problems and keep everyone “free of lust.”

Which is, of course, highly ironic because Jesus Christ himself, in the Bible, said the exact opposite of that. The Evangelical cult, and “conservative” American culture, lost the culture war, and lost their culture to the sexual revolution, precisely because they didn’t even read their own Bible.

Why I Am Not A Republican

Don’t get me wrong, the Democrats suck ass too. But Republicans will always hold a special place of hate in my heart.

Whatever you think, there is no denying that it was under a Republican government that the worst attack on America happened, and not only did they fail to stop it – assuming they weren’t behind it themselves – they acted as if they were heroes BECAUSE the country was attacked on their watch.

In a just world, Bush and Cheney would have resigned in disgrace and apologized to the American people for being such utter failures.

http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

Watch Out, White Nationalists, Here Come The Republicans

Watch out, White Nationalists, election time is here again, which means you will see the Republican party trying to co-opt you. There are four things to watch out for:

1. Transparent Negro-baiting. Counter-currents had a great article about this. The author that wrote about “The Talk” you have to have with your kids about avoiding “youth” and “teens” got the author fired from the conservative magazine precisely because it was simple and honest about race – it wasn’t race-baiting. Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck will engage in all sorts of race-baiting – complaining about ghetto Negroes – while at the same time telling us all they really need is tax cuts and government de-regulation, then the Negroes will don tri-corner hats and wave “Don’t Tread on Me” flags next to their White Conservative Brothers while discussing the Black Founding Father. Race-realism will be a firing offense, but lots of talk about the Democrat Liberal Plantation will be rife. The goal is to rile up enough whites to vote for Jeb Bush, not to actually come to a consensus and deal with racial reality.

Republicans are anti-White Nationalist. They are imperialists, and Empires are, by nature, multi-racial and multi-cultural . Sure, Republicans aren’t going to cater to Negroes, they prefer their imperial subjects a bit lighter and more Spanish-speaking. But make no mistake, to vote for a Republican is to vote AGAINST White Nationalism and AGAINST a White nation.

2. Jew ass-kissing Philo-semitism. Count the days until Jeb Bush shows up at the Wailing Wall with a Jew-Beanie on his head. Remember, while they pay lip service to Christianity, their real religion is Mammon, and Jews have the gelt. The Republicans will be praising the apartheid regime of Jew bigotry in Zionist-occupied Palestine to get all that Jew money. When Southerners want to send their kids to white schools – that’s bad “segregation” and “racism.” But if a Holy Jew deports Africans from Israel, sets up separate schools – hell, even separate roads for Jews and goyim – that is ok. For Republicans, White Nationalism is forbidden, while Jewish Nationalism – Zionism – is priority number one. Expect RINO neo-conservatives like Sheldon Adelson – and his neo-liberal counterpart Haim Saban, to give us the illusion of choice between supporting the shitty little country and its Jewish welfare state with our blood and money, or our money and blood.

Jews matter, Jews have rights. Whites have no rights – that would be “racist” – but instead have responsibilities to serve Jews. That’s the official Republican party platform.

3. Noise about “illegal immigration.” Republicans will go on and on about illegal immigration, but their solution is to replace the White population legally, not illegally. The easiest way to do that? Amnesty all the illegals right after the election, and increase legal immigration. If you complain about White people being replaced by foreigners, well, that makes you a racist. Remember, the GOP is the “color-blind party.”

Expect Jeb Bush to parade around his little Spanish-speaking children and his Latina wife. He’ll be promising amnesty and open borders to them in Spanish, while telling Whites something completely different in English.

4. We are already seeing this on the WN forums – the 9/11 Liars are back. The CIA Torture report is nothing but a fight over 9/11, by proxy. The torture program was instituted to get false confessions for 9/11, and to give credence to the myth of “Al Qaeda” – a super-secret conspiracy of Ragheads from around the world. They never did find a boogey-man on the level of Usama Bin Laden, the “former” CIA asset, so watch out if they start peddling some ISIS raghead as the “New Bin Laden,” etc.

TheOccidentalObserver have alread shown that the GOP are trying to pick an establishment, anti-white candidate now, before the primary even starts. So far, it’s Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, and Tony Soprano Chris Christie. Jeb Bush operatives, especially, are going to be going after 9/11 truth most viciously, especially now that it’s so wide spread and they simply can’t afford an honest discussion about it.

Don’t be a fucking sucker, White Nationalists.

As one would expect, once the United States of America became the world’s top superpower, threatened only by the Soviet Union, there was a major internal struggle for power.

George Herbert Walker Bush was recruited by the CIA straight out of Skull & Bones at Yale. Bush seems to have been a point man for the various anti-Castro activities and part of the Bay of Pigs. So when JFK tries to break up the CIA afterward, it’s decided to do something about him. As LBJ had to get rid of JFK to avoid being sent to prison for his many crimes – including murder – he was likely enthusiastic about the plot. The various organized crime rings that had Havana for a base before Castro, which JFK had no interest in going to war over, were also a perfect ally and an organization with practical, hands-on experience murdering people.

So JFK goes, then five years later his brother, who was now a Senator and a favorite for the next Democratic President, also goes. Another five years and George H. W. Bush is the head of the CIA, at a time when the CIA is getting its worst legal and public exposure. The main things they were being investigated about were assassinations. Slipping exploding cigars to Castro made the headlines, but everyone knew which assassinations were really the issue here – it’s just that officially that’s taboo to talk about on TV.

So, Democrat Carter appoints William Colby and he basically spills the beans to Congress. So the Godfather runs for President, loses to Hollywood actor Ronald Reagan, then runs as his VP. Reagan wins in a landslide, then John Hinckley, a family friend of the Bushes, tries to assassinate him. John Hinckley doesn’t go to jail, he’s declared insane, and sent to private mental hospital that he’s allowed to leave to “visit his family.”

Reagan survives and continues to make TV appearances but most seem to acknowledge that Bush is in charge of things. He serves a term of President himself, but in a highly unusual three-way race, Clinton – who seemed to know quite a bit about George Bush’s Iran-Contra criminality via the Mena airport – beats him.

So a few years later, JFK’s son, JFK Jr. decides to get into magazine publishing. There is definite speculation that JFK Jr. wanted to prove something about his father’s assassination, and he puts out a political magazine and names it “George.”

No, not after George H. W. Bush, the man who many think killed his father and uncle, but after George Washington.

JFK Jr. makes a major speech before the Democratic Convention in 1996 and is widely seen as a contender for becoming their next nominee, and likely President. It’s pretty much conventional wisdom that he would win the primary and was seen as an extremely likely winner – nostalgia over his father and uncle would prove catnip for the media.

Then, JFK JR., his wife, his unborn baby, and his wife’s sister, all die in a plane crash. The Navy takes control over the search and rescue and takes days to find the crash site. Then they bury them all at sea.

George H. W. Bush’s son, George W. Bush, runs for President against Vice President Al Gore, and the race it so close it all depends on Florida, where Bush’s other son, Jeb Bush, happens to be governor. It’s basically a tie, the Supreme Court of Florida declares a recount, but the US Supreme Court overrules them and declares George W. Bush the President.

The Washington Post, the New York Times, the Miami Herald and the Wall Street Journal subpoena all the ballots from Florida and do their own recount. The results are supposed to be released on Thusday, September 13th, but the greatest terrorist attack in US history happens, with US ally Saudi Arabia sending 19 hijacker to America, to train on CIA-affiliated airbases, and hijack four civilian airplanes, where one hits the Pentagon, two hit the towers of the WTC in New York, and one disintegrates over Pennsylvania. Then both towers at the WTC disintegreate themselves. Then, later that day, another skyscraper, World Trade Center 7, demolishes itself.

A few months later, anthrax from a military base in Maryland is sent to the two Democratic senators who were blocking passage of the PATRIOT Act, thus changing their minds.

A year later, a crazy sniper called “John Muhammed” – whose real name is actually “John Washington,” a former US Army soldier declares his belief in Allah, changes his name, then goes around DC shooting random people, including some FBI agents investigating the terrorism.

Then, George W. Bush reclassifies all the records from his father’s administration.

Did I leave anything out?

You see, none of the facts themselves are even all that controversial. That all happened, and everyone acknowledged that they happened. But putting it together in the obvious way – writing the narrative in the obvious and simple way, well, it just doesn’t seem like America.

Sure, if it was the USSR or Russia , if someone said, yeah Putin, former KGB, killed that politician that was going to run against him, or if, say, Stalin had someone liquidated, no one would bat an eye. If Manuel Noriega’s henchmen murdered some opposition party leader, we’d just snicker and say, sure, it’s a banana republic.

But to even tell the story – even though most of these facts are pretty much openly acknowledged – is by definition, heresy, unpatriotic, and a conspiracy theory.

So we have the CIA coming up with all sorts of subtle and not-so-subtle ways to assassinate people, sometimes looking like an accident and sometimes looking like a message. We also know the CIA has worked with organized crime – gangsters that murder people for hire.

So, there’s no surprise there, really. The surprise isn’t even so much that it’s taboo to discuss these things in the paper. What’s surprising in how the public has accepted this taboo internally. In the old Soviet Union, no one believed what Pravda said and everyone know the KGB would kill their opposition.

Here in America, we think “someone would have talked” and “some newspaper man would make a name for himself by telling the story.”

Lesson for Democrats: unless you’re willing to assassinate your opponents, you’re probably not going to really wield power.