Whitey, Wake the **** Up Thread

Discussion in 'Happy Hour' started by Don Wassall, Jan 14, 2018.

  1. Don Wassall

    Don Wassall Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    22,800
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    According to The New York Times, Putin Rules America

    by Paul Craig Roberts

    When I first read this — https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/24/us/politics/cia-russia-midterm-elections.html — I thought it was a caricature of fake news. Then I realized it was a New York Times article, and being fairly certain that the arrogant presstitute organization was not taking the piss out of itself, as it is one of the main purveyors of fake news, I found the conclusion unavoidable that Julian E. Barnes and Matthew Rosenberg were so tightly bound inside The Matrix that they might actually believe the nonsense that they wrote.

    Here is an overview of the fantasy that the two presstitutes have penned in the New York Times:

    US intelligence (sic) had “informants close to President Vladimir V. Putin and in the Kremiln” who provided “urgent and explicit warnings about Russia’s intentions to try to tip the [2016] American presidential election.” The NYT presstitutes do not say why nothing was done by US intelligence which had inside information from the Kremlin itself that Putin was about to steal for Trump the US election. Certainly CIA Director Brennan and FBI Director Comey, both of whom are Hillary’s allies, would not have approved of Putin stealing the election for Trump. But there is no criticism from the NY Times’ presstitutes for this massive intelligence failure to act to prevent Putin from stealing the election from Hillary. Brennan and Comey sat on their hands and permitted Putin to steal the election for Trump. So, who is really guilty of “Russiagate?”

    Obviously, this NY Times article is a hoax written by imbeciles. The claim that the Putin/Trump conspiracy was leaked to US intelligence from inside the Kremlin is an invention to help to provide a background history in an effort to boost the credibility of the Russiagate orchestation that is directed against President Trump. The presstitutes in their effort to boost Russiagate’s credibility inadvertently portrayed US intelligence as negligent in its duty.

    Barnes and Rosenberg say that Putin is continuing with his dirty tricks, but the Russian traitors inside the Kremlin within Putin’s close circles “have gone silent,” depriving us of information about how the Russians are going to steal the midterm elections. The presstitutes suggest that Washington’s informers inside Putin’s government have “gone to ground” to avoid being murdered “like the poisoning in March in Britain of a former Russian intelligence officer that utilized a rare Russian-made nerve agent.”

    It is difficult to know what to make of presstitutes like Barnes and Rosenberg and the NYTimes who refuse to acknowledge the fact that there has been zero evidence produced that supports the alleged attack on the Skirpals, both of whom suvived a “deadly nerve agent.” There is no evidence whatsoever that the alleged deadly nerve agent was made in Russia, and there is no explanation why the deadly nerve agent was not deadly. The only possible conclusion from the total absence of any evidence is that no such attack occurred. It is just another propaganda hoax against Russia.

    More proof that there was no such attack is provided by the refusal of the British government to share its investigation, if there actually was an investigation, with anyone, not even with the accused Russians. Accusations without a shred of evidence are not a good basis for a trusting relationship with a nuclear power.

    Barnes and Rosenberg suggest that the House Intelligence Committee, encouraged by President Trump, chilled intelligence collection by “outing an FBI informant,” leaving Washington in the dark about Putin’s precise intentions.

    No, this is not a conspiracy story from the National Inquirer, now a more reliable newspaper than the New York Times. This utter nonsense is published in the New York Times, “the newspaper of record.” What a false record historians are going to have.

    What are the NYTimes’ sources for this fantasy? The presstitute organization cannot tell us. “American intelligence agencies have not been able to say precisely what are Mr. Putin’s intentions: He could be trying to tilt the midterm elections, simply sow chaos or generally undermine trust in the democratic process.” But the NYTimes knows that Putin is up to something, because “senior intelligence officials, including Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, have warned that Russians are intent on subverting American democratic institutions.”

    So here we have Trump’s own appointment, Dan Coats, undermining Trump’s effort to normalize relations with Russia. Who among Trump’s advisors advised him to appoint a Russiaphobic moron like Dan Coats? If Trump had any sense, he would fire both of them.

    Washington routinely subverts democratic institutions in other countries, such as Honduras, Nicaguara, Venezuela, Iran, Ukraine, Indonesia. Read Stephen Kinser’s The Brothers for a number of examples: https://www.amazon.com/Brothers-Fos...8&qid=1535400838&sr=1-1&keywords=The+Brothers

    Washington finances opposition candidates who are bought and paid for by Washington and uses various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) financed by the National Endowment for Democracy, George Soros, the International Republican Institute, and many other front groups for subversion of countries “uncooperative with Washington” in order to install a Washington puppet. Washington even has NGOs operating in Russia where they are even permitted by the Russian government to own newspapers. All anti-Putin protests are organized by Washington using the NGOs that Washington funds.

    Russia, however, has no NGOs operating in the US, and, unlike Israel, does not own the US Congress and White House. So how exactly, Director of National Intelligence (sic) Dan Coats, are the Russians going to subvert “American democratic institutions?”

    Don’t expect an answer.

    Try to understand the insults to Trump voters of the charge that they are puppets at the end of Putin’s string: Trump voters are portrayed as morons who are not capable of thinking for themselves. If they were, they would have voted for Hillary so that America could demonstrate its escape from misogyny and male domination by electing its First Woman President on the heels of the First Half-Black President. Instead the minds of American voters were warped by Putin. The $100,000 dollars spent by a Russian Internet company trying to attract advertisers prevailed over the multi-billion dollars spent by the Democrats and Republicans and by American economic interests focused on capturing the government for their agendas. The Russian plot is so powerful that a dollar spent by Russia is thousands of times more powerful than a dollar spent by Wall Street, the military/security compex, George Soros, Sheldon Adelson, etc., and so on.

    In the official story, no American voted for Trump because his/her job was sent to Asia or Mexico by global US corporations pursuing high monetary rewards for executives and shareholders at the expense of the American work force. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...s-record-profits-layoffs-outsourcing-continue The “Trump Deplorables” voted for Trump because they were brainwashed by a few Russian Internet ads directed at maximizing clicks in order to attract advertisers.

    No one voted for Trump because their son and daughter, on whose education the family used up its savings, acquired student loan debts and possibly a second mortgage, can only find a job as a waitress and bartender because the jobs for which they prepared at great expense are handed over to lowly paid foreigners in order that shareholders can receive large capital gains and a handful of corporate executives can receive multimillion dollar bonuses for raising profits by closing down America’s vaunted “opportunity society. Today Americans have debts and no opportunities.

    Assuming you have some sense and some ability to think independently of the lies that are fed to you daily, can you possibly believe that Americans voted for Trump because Putin tricked them with Internet ads that are unlikely to have been seen by as many as one percent of voters?

    Can you possibly believe that the loss of Trump voters’ jobs, their prospects, their children’s prospects, their home, their declining living standards, the insults heaped upon Americans by Hillary’s Democratic Party—“Trump deplorables,” “white male oppressors,” “Russia’s Fifth Column,” “misogynists,” “racists,” “homophobic,” “gun nuts” —had no impact on why Americans voted for Trump? How could any sentient American believe that Putin is the source of their problems?

    The NY Times pressitutes report without any evidence alleged efforts of Russia to create chaos in America. I could not stop laughing. There is no Russian National Endowment for Democracy operating in the US. There is no Russian funded George Soros operating in America. There are no Russian funded Non-Governmental Organizations operating in America. Yet Russis is full of Washington-funded organizations doing everything in their power to sow chaos in Russia.

    Why isn’t this most obvious of all truths reported in the NY Times?

    The answer is that no truth whatsoever, not even a tiny morsel, fits the fabricated explanations in which the insouciant Western peoples live. Everywhere in the Western World people are shielded from reality by controlled explanations handed down to them by the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, BBC, et. al, and the UK, EU, Canadian, and Australian newspapers, every one of which is a propagandist for American hegemony.

    A few years ago a famous philosopher concluded that the world lives in a constructed virtual reality. At the time I thought he was crazy, but I have learned that he is correct. The entire world—even the Russians and the Chinese and the Iranians—live in a world shaped by American propaganda. The truth is that a country, the USA, which endorses freedom of determination, is in fact determined to control the world and smother all self-determination. Every country, whether Russia, China, Syria, Iran, India, Turkey, North Korea, Venezuela, that resists Washington’s hegemony is declared by Washington to be “a threat to the international order.”

    The “international order” is Washington’s order. The “International Order” is Washinton’s hegemony over the word. Russia, China, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, and now Turkey and India are threats to “international order” because they do not accept Washington’s hegemony.

    Barnes and Rosenberg report that Coats is concerned about Russia’s effort to “weaken and divide the United States.” There is no sign of Russia doing any such thing, and there is no explanation of how Putin conducts “a broad chaos campaign to undermine faith in American democracy.” If the Director of National Intelligence is concerned about the forces of division in America, he should turn his attention to the divisive consequences of the Democratic Party’s Identity Politics, to ANTIFA, to the divisive consequences of the fabricated attack on President Trump by the military/security complex and presstitute media. Indeed, the constant drumbeat of lies from the New York Times alone has caused far move divisiveness than anything Russia is alleged to have done.

    Divisiveness is what happens when the military/security complex and its media pimps turn on a President for threatening their budget by proposing peace with the enemy that they have constructed in order to justify their power and profit. It is this divisiveness that the United States is experiencing.

    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/08/28/according-to-the-new-york-times-putin-rules-america/
     
  2. The Hock

    The Hock Master

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,855
    Location:
    Northern California
    Same where I live up in Northern California.
     
  3. Don Wassall

    Don Wassall Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    22,800
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Miss Finland 2018
    September 12, 2018 by CH

    [​IMG]

    This “Finnish” woman won the Miss Tampere 2018 beauty contest. Tampere is the second largest city in Finland.

    The globohomos are just taunting us now. Good. Their coming demise will be all the sweeter for it.

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/09/12/miss-finland-2018/
     
  4. Old Scratch

    Old Scratch Mentor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    898
    Looks like a drag queen. So stunning, so brave.
     
  5. NWsoccerfan

    NWsoccerfan Guru

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2014
    Messages:
    312
    Has the jawline of a 250 pound linebacker that's juiced to the gills. Disgusting.
     
  6. booth

    booth Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2015
    Messages:
    314
    Location:
    n.c.
    After seeing her ultra liberal parents on the news I have no pity for them what so ever, Mollie's father ask not to use the term illegal alien in describing the illegal alien who killed his daughter. What a disgrace to the white race.
     
  7. NWsoccerfan

    NWsoccerfan Guru

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2014
    Messages:
    312
    What a cuck. Well, at least she can't reproduce and pass on her cancerous ideology.
     
  8. DixieDestroyer

    DixieDestroyer Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    9,462
    Location:
    Dixieland
    I hope the filthy mexcrements grease that cowardly sack of crap too! P1$$ on his commie daughter...she got what she had coming. All SJW Pinkos deserve the exact same fate!
     
  9. Freethinker

    Freethinker Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    4,037
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York
    Rob Tibbetts is a disgusting man and a terrible father. He has has been separated from Mollie’s mother since she was young and has lived in California while they lived in Iowa. How heavily could he possibly be involved in her life?

    Additionally, while on his virtue signaling media tour, he made some ridiculous statement that Hispanic locals were “Iowans with better food”. Cheap and easily made peasant food is worth sacrificing your daughter on the alter of globohomo multiculturalism? Does he loves tacos more than his own flesh and blood?

    I don’t think it’s that great a stretch to say we care more about this young woman and her tragic death than her scumbag father ever has.
     
  10. NWsoccerfan

    NWsoccerfan Guru

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2014
    Messages:
    312
    If I was in his shoes, I'd be telling the media to leave me the heck alone while I grieve. The last thing I'd be doing is giving statements to the media. I'd want to be completely out of the lime light.
     
  11. Thrashen

    Thrashen Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    5,476
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The Mollie Tibbetts case reminds me of the murder of Eve Carson, the pretty, blond class president of UNC. Eve was a hardcore liberal Obama supporter who was vigorously working to “increase diversity” at her college. Two feral negroes car-jacked her, shot her dead, and robbed her. As Freethinker mentioned, it’s usually a case of everyone failing these young whites during their formative years...

    http://sarahmaidofalbion.blogspot.com/2008/03/when-american-drem-becomes-nightmare.html?m=1

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Eve_Carson
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2018
  12. BeyondFedUp

    BeyondFedUp Master

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,366
    Location:
    United States
    Worth the five minutes to watch:

     
  13. BeyondFedUp

    BeyondFedUp Master

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,366
    Location:
    United States
  14. Don Wassall

    Don Wassall Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    22,800
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Kavanaugh Gang-Rapes Collie in Satanic Ritual: College Boys in KKK Robes Chant 'Hitler! Hitler! Hitler!'

    by Fred Reed

    Oh God. Oh God. Is there no surcease? I know, silly question. Squalling protesters: Half of the country seems fifteen years younger than its chronological age. Staged ire. Sordid passion of the herd. Hysteria. Irrationality. Werid accusations. Savage feminists. As per custom, it is all about how horrible men are.

    One of the sillier sillinesses of feminists regarding us men, of whom they seem to know little, is that we hate women, scorn them, want to abuse and hurt them and, most especiall, gang-rape them. See, men view rape casually. It’s just something to do in a moment of boredom. Like scratching, or wondering where we left our keys. It’s because of our misogyny. The Sisterhood seems to love misogyny, pray for misogyny, invent misogyny because without it life would be bleak and devoid of meaning.

    What is wrong with these baffled ditz-rabbits? Men hate women? By and large, our mothers have been women. Yes, check it out. Also our wives and girlfriends, grandmothers, granddaughters, daughters and–this will astonish the more ardent among feminists–even many of our friends. And, often, our collies.

    As for regarding rape causally: If some dirtball raped anywoman close to me, I would favor subjecting him to a sex change with a propane torch, knee-capping him as a mobility-reduction measure, giving him a beating of the sort popular with dentists who want Porsches, and putting him in Leavenworth for thirty years. Sensitive readers will suggest that I am a psycho for proposing such effective and extremely meritorious measures. Admittedly they run counter to the trade winds of American jurisprudence. But a great many men will quietly say, “Right on, Fred.”

    But: Rape is a crime. The standard is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. As well as I can see, the Kavanaugh charges do not even meet the civil standard of preponderance of the evidence, since there seems to be little evidence to preponder. The accuser doesn’t remember when it was, or where it was, or just who was there, and those she thinks were there don’t remember the party.

    It would be uncharitable of me to note that she sure did pop up at a politically convenient time. So I won’t note it, as I am vey charitable. Anyway, such is the nobility of our democracy that no one would make phony rape charges to derail a judgeship. In Guatemala, yes, but not in America. Heaven forfend.

    Since I am actually in a mood for noting things, I will note that any girl in my high school class–King George High, class of 1964–could accuse me of raping her at a party, and do it with similar evidence: none. Equally with Kavanaugh, I would have no way to defend myself. How could I prove what I hadn’t done at a party nobody remembered after 55 years? This would be no defense against the presumption of guilt. Girls I dated would report that I had no such inclinations. Surviving teachers would remember–well, perhaps imperfect behavior, but nothing lubricious. This would prove nothing.

    However, this first accusation against Kavanagh has the virtue that it couldhave happened, since there is no proof that it didn’t happen. The same could be said of course of the charge that I raped whoever some girl might say that I had. Ah, but now we come to the gang-rape business. We have:

    “Swetnick, who attended High School in Gaithersburg, Maryland, swore under oath that she attended at least 10 parties where she says she witnessed Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, and others “cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be ‘gang raped’ in a side room or bedroom by a ‘train’ of numerous boys.” She added that she has a “firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room,”

    First, “cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented.” This displays a common theme among feminists, painting girls as helpless, easily manipulated victims, having no will of their own. Is this not truly insulting to girls? “He didn’t tell me beer had alcohol in it and I didn’t know boys were interested in sex, I thought it was just us girls….”

    But, just as the problem with the first story is no witness, the problem with the gang rape is too many witnesses. “At least ten parties….” Since it is unlikely that a girl would come back to be gang-raped a second time, this implies at least ten victims. While it is true that a rape victim often will not come forward because of embarrassment, it is curious that not one of the violated multitude said anything, even though everyone at the party would have seen the line-up. None of the other girls at the party said anything either, even though this was a frequent occurrence. Is it not odd that the author of this story, seeing long lines of boys engaging in rape, at party after party after party, saw no particular reason for reporting it? That the many other girls witnessing this also said nothing? This is a song sounding mightily of fabrication. Which must be obvious to senators who, though morally challenged, are not stupid.

    With this many victims, perpetrators, and witnesses, it is impossible that the FBI will not find proof. If Kavanaugh, and other boys, did it, they belong in jail. Bill Cosby went to the slam for proven rape committed many years ago So can Kavanaugh. But if they did not, perjury charges against the accusers would be salutary, or at the very least civil actions for libel. Given the immense hardship and often irremediable consequence of being falsely accused, the penalty for false charges should also be harsh.

    False accusations of rape are not uncommon. A few gain national attention. Most do not. A few: Tawana Brawley, a black woman, was gang-raped by four white (of course) men, except that she wasn’t. Next there is the Duke Lacrosse case, Then at Rolling Stone a feminist writer and a magazine not greatly given to fact checking published the story of rape at the University of Virginia, also discredited. It cost them a libel settlement. And so on.

    Again, ff the accused men and boys had been guilty, long prison terms would have been a good idea. But they weren’t. The presumption of guilt for men and innocence for women are convenient for those who want to prevent confirmation of a judge but do not reflect reality. People, assuredly to include women, use what power they have to get what they want.

    The editor of a major paper once told me that he never allowed a woman into his office unless the door was open and a third person present. Why? If a disgruntled reporter says, “He groped me,” it will go viral. (Joyful headline headline in competing paper: “Editor of Daily Blatt allegedly….”) Months of furor will ensue. He will have large legal bills. The suspicion arising from that “allegedly” will never die. The paper’s board may well decide that regardless of guilt he is having too serious an affect on the advertisers. He will be permitted to resign, never to get a similar job. The Daily Blatt will settle as quietly as possible for a quarter million.

    Meanwhile, the Kavanaugh carnival is up and running. Now, Lord save us, we have USAToday trying to nail Kavanaugh for…yes…pedophilia. The evidence? Ain’t none. None needed. Hey, we’re talking the American media.

    Nuff said. I predict the soon headline: “Berkeley sychotherapist recounts seeing Brett Kavanaugh leading the entire Marine Division in gang-raping thirteen-year-old autistic orphans.”

    https://fredoneverything.org/kavana...boys-in-kkk-robes-chant-hitler-hitler-hitler/
     
  15. sport historian

    sport historian Master

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,566
    The feminists like to boast how "tough" they are. Then, when convenient, they portray themselves as delicate little flowers in constant peril.

    A major trope of feminism was girls and women should be as sexually aggressive as men. "Free love" was a concept they were all for. Saving themselves for marriage was viciously mocked by feminists.

    During the Clinton Impeachment, feminists declared "It was a wonderful experience for Monica Lewinsky to have an affair with a charismatic president."

    They have, for the moment, moved the goalposts. They'll move them again, when they think it convenient.
     
  16. Heretic

    Heretic Master

    Joined:
    May 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,145
    All projection and C1A psyops. Everything they have accused Kavanaugh (and Trump) of doing are things they are doing themselves. They are despicable and evil.
     
  17. Don Wassall

    Don Wassall Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    22,800
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The Dominatrix Party, AKA Party of Man-Haters

    by Ilana Mercer

    Throughout Brett Kavanaugh’s ordeal, Democratic women and their house-trained houseboys had attempted to derail the decent part of the process, rendering a U.S. Senate Supreme Court confirmation hearing a small-minded, mean-spirited, undignified and gossipy affair.

    In tenor, the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing resembled a tabloid, a woman’s magazine, or the female-dominated, Trump-watch panels, assembled daily by the Fake News networks.

    As to the women folk in the Gallery: They were plain gaga. These libertine “ladies” appeared constitutionally incapable of abiding by standards of decency and decorum, as demanded in such a solemn setting.

    Thank our lucky stars we must that Democratic distaff are not yet disrobing, as do their Russian heroines:

    Pussy Riot, the Putin-hating, all-girl pop band, specializes in desecrating holy places and flashing holey places.

    This kind of abandon, albeit moderated, extended to liberal lady senators. Sen. Kamala Harris and her soul sisters in the US Senate conducted themselves like kids who can’t quit interrupting the grownups, nagging for license to break protocol, so as to harangue and harass the “bad” man in the chair.

    On the day the Democrats lost—and Kavanaugh won his seat on the High Court—a primal, collective, atavistic howl rose from the Senate Gallery’s female quorum.

    In response, a journalist in attendance quipped that this is “what the Left sounds like.” He ought to have stated the obvious. Sure, there are a few male eunuchs among these girls gone wild. But this is predominantly what women of the left sound like.

    Half-truths tend to bleed into wholesale lies if uncorrected. So, let us be frank. The sounds emanating from the uterine core of the Democratic Party are the subhuman grunts and growls one hears from animals in estrus or mid-feed. Something is terribly wrong with them.

    This sound of willful insanity has spread throughout the land. It has signaled to the hordes of ill-bred Democrats across the country to holler at the moon. Or, harass and hit other Americans.

    This is the same quorum that donned genitalia-shaped dunce-caps and took to the streets in a tantrum over Donald Trump’s election. On January 21, 2017, a day after his inauguration, millions of them marched in the Women’s March.

    Lest anyone forget, this is the same XX-rated cohort whose “leader,” the menopausal actress Ashley Judd, rapped lewdly about her (alleged) menstrual fluids at an anti-Trump rally. Cheering her were libertine grannies in pussy dunce-caps. Women of a certain age used to command respect. Now, look at them.

    Since Mr. Trump’s election, more than 42,000 seething females, says The Economist ,“contacted EMILY’s List, a political action committee devoted to electing pro-choice Democratic women.”

    “Half the Democrats’ first-time House candidates this year are women, up from 27 percent in 2016 (and far higher than the Republican share of less than 20 percent). From a field that includes Senators Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand and Amy Klobuchar, the Democratic presidential ticket in 2020 will probably include at least one female candidate.”

    As has The Hill forewarned that “women are poised to take charge in a Democratic majority. … Female lawmakers [will be] in the driver’s seat for some of the most pressing issues facing Congress.”

    A Democratic takeover promises to be a bitch for ordinary men.

    Beware! Dem witches are preparing to mount their brooms and swoop down on Deplorable America.

    This is what the dominant, dominatrix wing of the Democratic Party sounds and looks like. You can’t fix ugly. The issue with these left-liberal females is how uncouth, shameless, vulgar, and cruel they are.

    In conduct, these Democratic women are more feral than female.

    The Democratic Party has come to be controlled by hysterical women and their domesticated man servants.

    The anti-Trump protest ongoing is not cerebral or visceral, it’s gynocentric. And it’s expressly anti-male.

    Yet, how did Republicans respond when these Democrat pack animals retreated, grunting and growling, baring bloodied fangs, from their prey, from Mr. Kavanaugh?

    Most quipped, genteelly, that Democrats had overplayed their hand: The American People were hip to their antics.

    Less-passive Republicans labelled the Democrats the party of mob rule.

    Is that all you’ve have got? Hardly fighting words.

    For heaven’s sake, Democrats have handed Republicans a winning issue. A huge winning issue. It is that that the Democratic Party, high and low, is dominated by militant, man-hating women. And they’re on the war path. In the words of Hawaii’s Sen. Mazie Hirono: “I just want to say to the men in this country: just shut up … for a change.”

    Republicans can’t just mutter in a muted manner about “mob rule,” and ignore the rival party’s gift to them!

    True, Democrats demonstrate daily that they’re not for the rule of law, but for the LAW OF RULE, mob rule.

    But more crucially, Democrats consistently show that their party is, very plainly, hostile—even dangerous—to men.

    The Dominatrix Party is out of the closet as a party whose very ideas pose a danger to 49.2 percent of Americans.

    Republicans should use it, or prepare to lose it.

    https://www.unz.com/imercer/the-dominatrix-party-aka-party-of-man-haters/
     
  18. BeyondFedUp

    BeyondFedUp Master

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,366
    Location:
    United States
    Excellent and spot on. I especially liked how he called their despicable toppers "genitalia shaped dunce hats". That was
    great. Truly the party of man-haters.
     
  19. Don Wassall

    Don Wassall Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    22,800
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Incredibly, nearly 10% of regular characters on TV series are now "LGBTQ." Even for anti-White, communist Hollywood that's way over the top.

    Broadcast TV Hits Record Percentage of LGBTQ Regulars, Study Finds

    Broadcast television is enlisting a record percentage of LGBTQ characters and featuring those of color more often than those that are white for the first time in the 2018-19 television season, a report published Thursday found.

    GLAAD's annual Where We Are on TV report found that LGBTQ characters make up 8.8 percent of all regular characters this season, up 2.4 percent from the 2017-18 season. (Last season had previously held the record for largest percentage in the report's 23-year history.)

    Among those characters, 22 percent are black, 8 percent Latinx and 8 percent Asian Pacific Islander, which represents a historical high for black characters and a tie with last year's findings on Latinx characters. LGBTQ broadcast characters have additionally reached gender parity, with women and men both accounting for 49.6 percent of characters; last year, men were in the clear majority, making up 55 percent of characters and women 44 percent. Overall, LGBTQ regular and recurring characters on broadcast are posting a 31 percent increase from the 2017-18 season. Meanwhile, on primetime cable shows, the report found that LGBTQ characters have increased 20 percent, from 173 to 208 characters. On Netflix, Hulu and Amazon — the streaming platforms monitored by GLAAD — these characters have increased 72 percent from the previous year, jumping from 65 characters to 112.

    full article: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/l...hits-record-percentage-lgbtq-regulars-1154545
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2018
  20. DixieDestroyer

    DixieDestroyer Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    9,462
    Location:
    Dixieland
    [​IMG]
     
  21. BeyondFedUp

    BeyondFedUp Master

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,366
    Location:
    United States
    Truthful meme to the max...
     
  22. Don Wassall

    Don Wassall Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    22,800
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Conservatism, Inc. Cheers on Persecution of Proud Boys and Dissident Right

    by Julian Bradford

    Lost amid the uproar over the alleged threat of right-wing violence revealed by crude bomb-like devices apparently mailed to CNN and some top Democrats: the speed with which Conservatism Inc. endorsed the Left’s Narrative (David Frum here, Bill Kristol here, Ben Shapiro here, Rich Lowry here). It’s a Thing: increasingly openly, Conservatism Inc. is making a de facto alliance with the Left in a last-ditch effort to stop its Dissident Right’s rivals’ takeover of the Right. Case in point: its disgraceful reaction to the New York authorities’ anarcho-tyrannical drive to suppress Gavin McInnes’ Proud Boys pro-Trump fraternity, while simultaneously exempting Antifa demonstrators from prosecution.

    The Proud Boys clashed with Antifa because the black-masked anarchists were robbing and assaulting people who were leaving an event addressed by McInnes at New York’s Metropolitan Republican Club. As soon as video emerged of the scuffle, the Left and their journalist auxiliaries and quickly went into histrionics. [Gavin McInnes and the Proud Boys: An Extremist Far-Right Group, Explained, by Christianna Silva, Teen Vogue, October 18, 2018] Conservatism, Inc. was all too willing to join in.

    Leading the Conservatism, Inc. charge against the Proud Boys: National Review editor-in-chief Rich Lowry. In an op-ed published at Politico, Lowry [Email him] sobbed over the “poisonous allure of right-wing violence” and dismissed McInnes as nothing more than an opportunistic huckster—unlike the very principled conservative-denouncing professional token conservatives in POLITICO. The cuckservative gatekeeper also attacked McInnes’ for writing for—GASP!—“rancid” sites like VDARE.com and Takimag (as opposed, presumably, to flaccid sites like NRO) before delivering his opinion on what real men do in the face of Antifa violence: apparently, nothing.

    “[P]atriotic suburban dads have better things to do than roam the streets of Manhattan getting into brawls with black-clad left-wingers, nor is this an activity conducive to meeting a nice girl and settling down,” Lowry lectured his audience. “The atavistic impulse of the Proud Boys is straight from the movie Fight Club, in which a violent men’s group represents a revolt against banal, overly feminized modern society”. [The Poisonous Allure of Right-Wing Violence, by Rich Lowry, POLITICO, October 17, 2018]

    Who knew there were so many conservatives opposed to “toxic masculinity”? Lowry concludes with the favorite Conservatism, Inc. admonishment that “two wrongs don’t make it right” without any acknowledgement that the Left and its MSM enforcers don’t see Antifa’s suppressing conservative meetings as bad—nor, of course, of McInnes’ constant efforts to position the Proud Boys as multiracial civic nationalists (which have done him no good whatever)

    Respectable conservatives prefer standing on imaginary moral high ground rather than fight for their own supposed interests. But turning the other cheek to Antifa and denouncing anyone who dares to punch back will not quell Leftist violence. It rewards it, and only makes conservatives look like cowards.

    Unfortunately for the Proud Boys, Conservatism, Inc. condemnation is the least of their concerns. The media paints them as Neo-Nazi thugs although they boast more racial diversity than HuffPost and have repeatedly disavowed white nationalism. The “Hate Group” label has stuck as usual, making anyone affiliated with the Proud Boys subject to employment termination—several in New York were arbitrarily fired from their jobs the day after Trump’s election—and other severe harassment. The Twitter accounts for the group, McInnes and several prominent members have been permanently suspended. More censorship will likely follow. [Twitter Bans Conservative Commentator Gavin McInnes, by Allum Bokhari, Breitbart News, August 10, 2018]

    Additionally, law enforcement is more zealous in prosecuting Proud Boys involved in brawls, such as the nine members charged with various crimes—now reportedly upgraded to felonies—in relation to the recent NYC skirmish. [3 more Proud Boys members arrested for violent NYC brawl, by Peter Martinez, CBS News, October 22, 2018] (You can donate to the Proud Boys’ defense here.)

    But the persecution of the Proud Boys is no concern for Conservative Inc., even though they are the only group willing to defend patriots from Antifa violence. The Respectable Right are clearly more than happy with the Left taking out the “disreputable” elements of its Dissident Right competition.

    Conservatism, Inc. also demonstrated this unmanly behavior this summer when Alex Jones’ Infowars was banned from multiple social media outlets. Most conservatives—like Ben Shapiro—mustered up a lukewarm disapproval for Big Tech’s silencing of Jones, hardly equal to the outrage they directed toward Jones himself.

    But a few prominent voices went so far as to praise Facebook and Google for their suppression of free speech.

    Weekly Standard digital editor Jonathan Last [Tweet him] argued that the Internet was right to ban Alex Jones and “that there’s no reason for conservatives to defend this guy.” Last claimed that these tech giants are private companies who can ban whoever they want, and free speech doesn’t mean you are free from consequences. He also insisted Infowars wasn’t denied equal access because it’s still on the Internet—just not on social media—in a profoundly out-of-touch statement on modern communication [The Case for Banning Alex Jones, by Jonathan V. Last, Weekly Standard, August 8, 2018]

    Last’s primary argument for banning Jones was that he violates “minimum standards of decency” and conservatives should not worry about a slippery slope. In fact, conservatives should urge Big Tech to go further in censorship because “[t]he conservative view isn’t just that communities have the right to create standards—we have always believed that there is wisdom and virtue in doing so.” Thus YouTube is truly a haven of virtue thanks to its elimination of right-wingers. [YouTube is still plagued with disturbing kids' videos, by Mallory Locklear, EndGadget, March 23, 2018]

    Daily Beast contributor Ben Howe, a former Red State writer purged for hating Trump, echoed Last’s opinion in a more self-serving, less intelligent way in an August column. Howe spent most of his time in the column using the word “I” and making dumb arguments about respecting private enterprise is the core virtue of conservatism. He ends his argument with a paean to himself and his supposed bravery for standing athwart the Right’s opposition to corporate censorship. In his nonsensical conclusion, he also dismisses conservatives for tweeting because they’re nobodies who just want relevance. [Conservatives Should Shed Absolutely No Tears for Alex Jones, by Ben Howe, The Daily Beast, August 9, 2018]

    A more nuanced take for censoring uncouth right-wingers came from National Review’s David French. In an op-ed for the New York Times—the dream of all Respectable Right types—French [Tweet him] offered a “better way to ban Alex Jones.” Instead of relying on hate speech grounds, the conservative lawyer said social media should ban Jones for libel and fake news.

    It apparently did not occur to French that this argument creates another double-standard. It’s doubtful he would dare to advocate that this standard applied to mainstream outlets that spread erroneous reports, so only right-wing sites would be subject to these rules. One report deemed false by a Leftist “fact-checker” could doom a conservative site’s access to social media. [A Better Way to Ban Alex Jones, by David French, New York Times, August 7, 2018]

    So once again, a conservative made an argument against his supposed side’s own interests to gain respect from his enemies. That’s a fitting summary of Conservative Inc.’s efforts against the pro-Trump Right.

    Trump is transforming the American Right and is well on the way to overturning the decadent Conservative Establishment. The Left and the media are dedicated to stamping out these challenges because they’re “racist” and don’t respect their hegemonic authority. Conservatism, Inc. thinks it can just sit back and watch, comfortable in the delusion it will be preserved from the persecution.

    Of course, it’s stupid if them to think this, given the censorship of PragerU and the violence inflicted against Charles Murray and Heather Mac Donald. But Conservatism Inc. is stupid. That’s how they let Trump take the GOP away from them. And on present form, when Antifa comes for them, the Proud Boys won’t be around to attend them.

    https://www.unz.com/article/conserv...ersecution-of-proud-boys-and-dissident-right/
     
  23. BeyondFedUp

    BeyondFedUp Master

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,366
    Location:
    United States
    Excellent article.

    These "conservatives" are cutting their own throats. These pandering-to-Leftists twits would probably scold and despise Christ for driving out the money-changers from the temple. I'm glad they state their positions in writing and in public because it lets us see the enemy "within". I go the opposite direction and let them be exposed for the counterproductive spineless twits they are.
     
  24. DixieDestroyer

    DixieDestroyer Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    9,462
    Location:
    Dixieland
  25. Extra Point

    Extra Point Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    4,100
    "Hate speech" against whites is perfectly okay to these leftist tech companies. They're not against "hate speech," they're against white people.
     

Share This Page