Similar posts

GOP Tea Pub #fundie gop-tea-pub.tumblr.com

Ahhhh you poor poor delusional moronic douche canoe. It is truly sad that people LIKE YOU have access to the internet and refuse to do any actual research. Then have the audacity to post BS statements that have ZERO actuality to them. But, let me just school you and show you EXACTLY how asinine you and those that follow and believe you, truly are. Those that know the truth are laughing at you and your followers…laughing hysterically as a matter of fact. It must be painful to be that out of touch.

Prior to 2010, the following is what readers got when they clicked on the Democrats.org “History” button….
Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws, and every law that protects workers. Most recently, Democrats stood together to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act.
On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight. We support vigorous enforcement of existing laws, and remain committed to protecting fundamental civil rights in America.

This is the kind of BS spewed by Democrats on a daily basis, and unfortunately the media and other so-called watchdogs are so apparently ignorant of American history, Democrats continue to LIE through their teeth to their constituents, and via academia, to our kids. Despite the truth being out there for years, it’s probably not going to explode until some big shot news anchor gives us an “exclusive expose” bringing us all those facts first, so he/she can proudly receive a Pulitzer…

October 13, 1858 During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee

April 16, 1862 President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no

July 17, 1862 Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes Confiscation Act stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”

January 31, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition

April 8, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition

November 22, 1865 Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination

February 5, 1866 U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves

April 9, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law

May 10, 1866 U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th
Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to
all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no

June 8, 1866 U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no

January 8, 1867 Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.

July 19, 1867 Republican Congress overrides
Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans

March 30, 1868 Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”

September 12, 1868 Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell
and 24 other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a
Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by
Republican Congress

October 7, 1868 Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”

October 22, 1868 While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan

December 10, 1869 Republican Gov. John Campbell
of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to
vote and to hold public office

February 3, 1870 After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race

May 31, 1870 President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights

June 22, 1870 Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South

September 6, 1870 Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell

February 28, 1871 Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters

April 20, 1871 Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups
which oppressed African-Americans

October 10, 1871 Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands

October 18, 1871 After violence against
Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S.
troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan

November 18, 1872 Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”

January 17, 1874 Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government

September 14, 1874 Democrat white supremacists
seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated
administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed

March 1, 1875Civil Rights Act of 1875,
guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race,
signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican
support over 100% Democrat opposition

January 10, 1878 U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919. Republicans foil Democratic efforts to keep women in the kitchen, where they belong

February 8, 1894 Democrat Congress and Democrat
President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act,
which had enabled African-Americans to vote

January 15, 1901 Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans

May 29, 1902 Virginia Democrats implement new
state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing
African-American voter registration by 86%

February 12, 1909 On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP

May 21, 1919 Republican House passes
constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans
in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans
would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no

August 18, 1920 Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures

January 26, 1922 House passes bill authored by
U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate
Democrats block it with filibuster

June 2, 1924
Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by
Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native
Americans

October 3, 1924 Republicans denounce three-time
Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the
Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention

June 12, 1929 First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife
of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the
White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

August 17, 1937 Republicans organize opposition
to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black,
appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden
until after confirmation

June 24, 1940 Republican Party platform calls
for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in
office, FDR refuses to order it.

August 8, 1945 Republicans condemn Harry
Truman’s surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and
criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima
bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a
friend that “The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing
of women and children, revolts my soul.”

September 30, 1953 Earl Warren, California’s
three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential
nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown
v. Board of Education

November 25, 1955 Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel

March 12, 1956 Ninety-seven Democrats in
Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of
Education, and pledge to continue segregation

June 5, 1956 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law

November 6, 1956 African-American civil rights
leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican
Dwight Eisenhower for President

September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from
Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President
Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR
to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs
Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour,
around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats

May 2, 1963 Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff
of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American
schoolchildren marching for their civil rights

September 29, 1963 Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School

June 9, 1964 Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV)

June 10, 1964 Senate Minority Leader Everett
Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights
Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality. The Civil
Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority
of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern
Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of
them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on
Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen, the Republican leader from Illinois,
to get the Act passed.

August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose. Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

February 19, 1976 President Gerald Ford formally
rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order
authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

September 15, 1981 President Ronald Reagan
establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges
and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal
education programs

June 29, 1982 President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act

August 10, 1988 President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR

November 21, 1991 President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation

August 20, 1996 Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan
Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of
Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law

And let’s not forget the words of liberal icon Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood…We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably
with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The
most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious
appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate
the Negro population…so the next time any Democrat claims they’ve been supportive of civil rights in America (and been so all along), ask them to explain their past. “We’ve grown” is not gonna cut it, considering they continue to
lie about their past to this day, and only someone lacking in common
sense would believe two distinct political parties could juxtaposition
their stances on civil rights seemingly overnight.

The left is quite annoyed that myself and others dare link the racist, segregationist past in this country to Democrats, at that flies
in the face of everything they claim to champion, when it comes to civil
rights, racial tolerance, etc.

The Democrats’ own website,
to this day, attempts to take fraudulently credit for the civil rights
movement and legislation, and when called on it, the recitation is the
same: “we’ve grown” and “don’t forget about the Dixiecrats”.

Defensive liberals claim the Dixiecrats, as a whole, defected from the Democrat Party when President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (no thanks to Democrats), and became Republicans which they claimed were more accepting of segregationist policies.

Well, I decided to get some opinions on the matter from some historians.I contacted Professor Larry Schweikart of the University of Dayton for advice. Larry and I worked on a documentary based on a chapter on Ronald Reagan from his best-selling book, A Patriot’s History of the United States.

The idea that “the Dixiecrats joined the Republicans” is
not quite true, as you note. But because of Strom Thurmond it is
accepted as a fact. What happened is that the **next** generation (post
1965) of white southern politicians — Newt, Trent Lott, Ashcroft,
Cochran, Alexander, etc — joined the GOP.

So it was really a passing of the torch as the old segregationists
retired and were replaced by new young GOP guys. One particularly
galling aspect to generalizations about “segregationists became GOP” is
that the new GOP South was INTEGRATED for crying out loud, they accepted
the Civil Rights revolution. Meanwhile, Jimmy Carter led a group of
what would become “New” Democrats like Clinton and Al Gore.

Larry also suggested I contact Mike Allen, Professor of History at
the University of Washington, Tacoma (who also appeared in the Reagan
documentary) for input.
There weren’t many Republicans in the South prior to 1964, but that doesn’t mean the birth of the souther GOP was tied to “white racism.” That said, I am sure there were and are white racist southern GOP. No one would deny that. But it was the southern Democrats who were the party of slavery and, later, segregation. It was George Wallace, not John Tower, who stood in the southern schoolhouse door to block desegregation! The vast majority of Congressional GOP voted FOR the Civil Rights of 1964-65. The vast majority of those opposed to thoseacts were southern Democrats. Southern Democrats led to infamous filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The confusion arises from GOP Barry Goldwater’s vote against the ’64
act. He had voted in favor or all earlier bills and had led the
integration of the Arizona Air National Guard, but he didn’t like the
“private property” aspects of the ’64 law. In other words, Goldwater
believed people’s private businesses and private clubs were subject only
to market forces, not government mandates (“We reserve the right to
refuse service to anyone.”) His vote against the Civil Rights Act was
because of that one provision was, to my mind, a principled mistake.

This stance is what won Goldwater the South in 1964, and no doubt
many racists voted for Goldwater in the mistaken belief that he opposed
Negro Civil Rights. But Goldwater was not a racist; he was a libertarian
who favored both civil rights and property rights.

Switch to 1968.Richard Nixon was also a proponent of Civil Rights;
it was a CA colleague who urged Ike to appoint Warren to the Supreme Court; he was asupporter of Brown v. Board, and favored sending troops to integrate
Little Rock High). Nixon saw he could develop a “Southern strategy”
based on Goldwater’s inroads. He did, but Independent Democrat George
Wallace carried most of the deep south in 68. By 1972, however, Wallace
was shot and paralyzed, and Nixon began to tilt the south to the GOP.
The old guard Democrats began to fade away while a new generation of
Southern politicians became Republicans. True, Strom Thurmond switched
to GOP, but most of the old timers (Fulbright, Gore, Wallace, Byrd etc
etc) retired as Dems.

Why did a new generation white Southerners join the GOP? Not because
they thought Republicans were racists who would return the South to
segregation, but because the GOP was a “local government, small
government” party in the old Jeffersonian tradition. Southerners wanted
less government and the GOP was their natural home.

Jimmy Carter, a Civil Rights Democrat, briefly returned some states
to the Democrat fold, but in 1980, Goldwater’s heir, Ronald Reagan,
sealed this deal for the GOP. The new “Solid South” was solid GOP.

BUT, and we must stress this: the new southern Republicans were
*integrationist* Republicans who accepted the Civil Rights revolution
and full integration while retaining their love of Jeffersonian limited
government principles.

And what did Malcolm X say about the “Dixiecrats”…?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkgA2rUAY-o&feature=player_embedded


http://www.black-and-right.com/the-democrat-race-lie/

http://www.black-and-right.com/2010/03/19/the-dixiecrat-myth/

So, there you have it. YOU are WRONG. YOU are UNEDUCATED. YOU refused to do RESEARCH. YOU look like a FOOL. Next time, try actually looking something up, instead of blatantly spewing lies and expecting people to believe you. BUT, if you need more clarification…I have that too, because I, unlike you, am not afraid to search for the truth.

REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS DID NOT SWITCH SIDES ON RACISM By Frances Rice

As a result of unrelenting efforts by Democrats to shift their racist past onto the backs of Republicans, using the mantra: “the parties switched sides”, a lot of people have requested an article addressing this issue.

It does not make sense to believe that racist Democrats suddenly rushed into the Republican Party, especially after Republicans spent nearly 150 years fighting for black civil rights. In fact, the racist Democrats declared they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than a Republican because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks.

From the time of its inception in 1854 as the anti-slavery party, the Republican Party has always been the party of freedom and equality for blacks. As author Michael Scheuer wrote, the Democratic Party is the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. Democrats have been running black communities for the past 50+ years, and the socialist policies of the Democrats have turned those communities into economic and social wastelands.

An alarming view of what America will be like in a few years due to unbridled socialism being pushed by President Barack Obama and his Democratic Party cohorts, is contained in the article: “Detroit: The Moral of the Story” by Kevin D. Williamson that is posted on the Internet.

Democrats first used brutality and discriminatory laws to stop blacks from voting for Republicans. Democrats now use deception and government handouts to keep blacks from voting for Republicans. In his book, “Dreams From My Father,” Obama described what he and other Democrats do to poor blacks as “plantation politics.”

The racist Democrats of the 1950’s and 1960’s that Republicans were fighting died Democrats. One racist Democrat who survived until 2010 was US Senator Robert Byrd, a former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan. Notably, the Ku Klux Klan was started by Democrats in 1866 and became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party for the purpose of terrorizing and lynching Republicans—black and white. Byrd became a prominent leader in the Democrat-controlled Congress where he was honored by his fellow Democrats as the “conscience of the Senate.”

Byrd was a fierce opponent of desegregating the military and complained in one letter: “I would rather die a thousand times and see old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen of the wilds.”

Democrats denounced US Senator Trent Lott for his remarks about US Senator Strom Thurmond. However, there was silence when Democrat US Senator Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been “a great senator for any moment.” Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and, after he became a Republican, Thurmond defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. While turning a blind eye to how the Democratic Party embraced Byrd until his death, Democrats regularly lambaste the Republican Party about David Duke, a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

Ignored are the facts that the Republican Party never embraced Duke and when he ran for the Republican Party presidential nomination in 1992, Republican Party officials tried to block his participation. Hypocritical is the word for how Democrats also ignore Duke’s long participation in the Democratic Party with no efforts by Democrats to block him. Below is Duke’s political history in Louisiana, which has an open primary system.

Duke ran for Louisiana State Senator as a Democrat in 1975. He ran again for the Louisiana State Senate in 1979 as a Democrat. In 1988, he made a bid for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Then, on election day in 1988, he had himself listed on the presidential ballot as an “Independent Populist.” After his unbroken string of losses as a Democrat and an Independent Populist, Duke decided to describe himself as a Republican, then ran the following races where he lost every time: in 1989 he ran for Louisiana State Representative; in 1990, he ran for US Senator; in 1991 he ran for Governor of Louisiana; in 1992 he ran for president; in 1996 he ran for US Senator; and in 1999 he ran for US Representative.

Contrary to popular belief, President Lyndon Johnson did not predict a racist exodus to the Republican Party from the Democratic Party because of Johnson’s support of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Omitted from the Democrats’ rewritten history is what Johnson actually meant by his prediction.

Johnson feared that the racist Democrats would again form a third party, such as the short-lived States Rights Democratic Party. In fact, Alabama’s Democrat Governor George C. Wallace in 1968 started the American Independent Party that attracted other racist candidates, including Democrat Governor Lester Maddox.

Behind closed doors, Johnson said: “These Negroes, they’re getting uppity these days. That’s a problem for us, since they got something now they never had before. The political pull to back up their upityness. Now, we’ve got to do something about this. We’ve got to give them a little something. Just enough to quiet them down, but not enough to make a difference. If we don’t move at all, their allies will line up against us. And there’ll be no way to stop them. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”

Little known by many today is the fact that it was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Johnson, who pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In fact, Dirksen was instrumental to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968. Dirksen wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.

Democrats condemn Republican President Richard Nixon for his so-called “Southern Strategy.” These same Democrats expressed no concern when the racially segregated South voted solidly for Democrats for over 100 years, while deriding Republicans because of the thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party.

The “Southern Strategy” that began in the 1970’s was an effort by Nixon to get fair-minded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks. Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Bobby Jindal, a person of color, as governor in 2007.

As the co-architect of Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”, Pat Buchanan provided a first-hand account of the origin and intent of that strategy in a 2002 article posted on the Internet. Buchanan wrote that Nixon declared that the Republican Party would be built on a foundation of states’ rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense. Nixon said he would leave it to the Democratic Party to squeeze the last ounce of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.

The Claremont Institute published an eye-opening article by Gerard Alexander entitled “The Myth of the Racist Republicans”, an analysis of the decades-long shift of the South from the racist Democratic Party to the racially tolerant Republican Party. That article can be found on the Internet.

Another article on this subject by Mr. Alexander is entitled “Conservatism does not equal racism. So why do many liberals assume it does?” and is posted on the Internet.

More details about the history of civil rights can be found in the NBRA Civil Rights Newsletter that can be found on the Internet.
An excellent video about civil rights history entitled “A pebble in Your Shoe: Why I am a Republican” by Dr. James Taylor is posted on YouTube.


Frances Rice is a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel and Chairman of the National Black Republican Association. She may be contacted at: www.NBRA.in

KKK Terrorist Arm of the Democratic Party
By Frances Rice

History shows that the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the
Democrat Party. This ugly fact about the Democrat Party is detailed in
the book, A Short History of Reconstruction, (Harper & Row
Publishers, Inc., 1990) by Dr. Eric Foner, the renown liberal historian
who is the DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University.
As a further testament to his impeccable credentials, Professor Foner is
only the second person to serve as president of the three major
professional organizations: the Organization of American Historians,
American Historical Association, and Society of American Historians.
Democrats in the last century did not hide their connections to the Ku
Klux Klan. Georgia-born Democrat Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Grand Dragon
of the Ku Klux Klan wrote on page 21 of the September 1928 edition of
the Klan’s “The Kourier Magazine”: “I have never voted for any man who
was not a regular Democrat. My father … never voted for any man who was
not a Democrat. My grandfather was …the head of the Ku Klux Klan in
reconstruction days…. My great-grandfather was a life-long Democrat….
My great-great-grandfather was…one of the founders of the Democratic
party.”

Dr. Foner in his book explores the history of the origins of Ku Klux
Klan and provides a chilling account of the atrocities committed by
Democrats against Republicans, black and white.

On page 146 of his book, Professor Foner wrote: “Founded in 1866 as a
Tennessee social club, the Ku Klux Klan spread into nearly every
Southern state, launching a ‘reign of terror‘ against Republican leaders
black and white.” Page 184 of his book contains the definitive
statements: “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the
interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who
desired the restoration of white supremacy. It aimed to destroy the
Republican party’s infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state,
reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial
subordination in every aspect of Southern life.”

Heartbreaking are Professor Foner’s recitations of the horrific acts of
terror inflicted by Democrats on black and white Republicans. Recounted
on pages 184-185 of his book is one such act of terror: “Jack Dupree, a
victim of a particularly brutal murder in Monroe County, Mississippi -
assailants cut his throat and disemboweled him, all within sight of his
wife, who had just given birth to twins - was ‘president of a republican
club‘ and known as a man who ‘would speak his mind.’”

“White gangs roamed New Orleans, intimidating blacks and breaking up
Republican meetings,“ wrote Dr. Foner on page 146 of his book. On page
186, he wrote: “An even more extensive ‘reign of terror’ engulfed
Jackson, a plantation county in Florida’s panhandle. ‘That is where
Satan has his seat,‘ remarked a black clergyman; all told over 150
persons were killed, among them black leaders and Jewish merchant Samuel
Fleischman, resented for his Republican views and for dealing fairly
with black customers.“

Frances Rice is the Chairman of the National Black Republican Association and may be contacted at: http://www.nbra.info/


Care to try again? I will be waiting for your response of hyperbole and rhetoric with no facts. I also doubt you lack the balls to post this info on your own wall, lest you look more like a fool. The golden part is, the notes will show my response and the TRUTH will once again be out there. This is what you call: game, set, match. Buh-bye!!

polakfury #fundie reddit.com

Civil Rights History Test

BLACK POLITICAL HISTORY: THE UNTOLD STORY NOTE: All answers are "b."

1.What Party was founded as the anti-slavery Party and fought to free blacks from slavery?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

2.What was the Party of Abraham Lincoln who signed the emancipation proclamation that resulted in the Juneteenth celebrations that occur in black communities today?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

3.What Party passed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution granting blacks freedom, citizenship, and the right to vote?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

4.What Party passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 granting blacks protection from the Black Codes and prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations, and was the Party of most blacks prior to the 1960’s, including Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Booker T. Washington, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

5.What was the Party of the founding fathers of the NAACP?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

6.What was the Party of President Dwight Eisenhower who sent U.S. troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools, established the Civil Rights Commission in 1958, and appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

7.What Party, by the greatest percentage, passed the Civil Rights Acts of the 1950’s and 1960’s?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

8.What was the Party of President Richard Nixon who instituted the first Affirmative Action program in 1969 with the Philadelphia Plan that established goals and timetables?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

9.What is the Party of President George W. Bush who appointed more blacks to high-level positions than any president in history and who spent record money on education, job training and health care to help black Americans prosper?
[ ] a. Democratic Party

[ ] b. Republican Party

10.What Party fought to keep blacks in slavery and was the Party of the Ku Klux Klan?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

11.What Party from 1870 to 1930 used fraud, whippings, lynching, murder, intimidation, and mutilation to get the black vote, and passed the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws which legalized racial discrimination and denied blacks their rights as citizens?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

12.What was the Party of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and President Harry Truman who rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

13.What was the Party of President Lyndon Johnson, who called Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. “that [N-word] preacher” because he opposed the Viet Nam War; and President John F. Kennedy who voted against the 1957 Civil Rights law as a Senator, then as president opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. after becoming president and had the FBI investigate Dr. King on suspicion of being a communist?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

14.What is the Party of the late Senators Robert Byrd who was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, Ernest “Fritz” Hollings who hoisted the Confederate flag over the state capitol in South Carolina while governor, and Ted Kennedy who called black judicial nominees “Neanderthals” while blocking their appointments?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

15.What was the Party of President Bill Clinton who failed to fight the terrorists after the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, sent troops to war in Bosnia and Kosovo without Congressional approval, vetoed the Welfare Reform law twice before signing it, and refused to comply with a court order to have shipping companies develop an Affirmative Action Plan?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

16.What is the Party of President Barack Obama whose liberal socialist policies increased black poverty and devastated both HBCUs and charter school opportunity scholarships for poor black student after President Obama took office?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

17.What Party is against school vouchers and takes the black vote for granted without ever acknowledging their racist past or apologizing for trying to expand slavery, lynching blacks and passing the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws that caused great harm to blacks?
[ ] a. Republican Party

[ ] b. Democratic Party

And they never did switch. Remember Hillary gave praise to Robert Byrd as a Hero.

Louie Gohmert #racist conservativebrief.com

One top Republican in Congress is sick and tired of the Democratic Party — and he just made a serious move to take action.

Texas GOP Rep. Louie Gohmert announced from the House floor on Thursday that he has introduced legislation that would ban the Democratic Party from Congress because the party once supported slavery.

Gohmert also urged party leaders to change the name of the caucus, which he also said previously supported slavery.

The “Privileged Resolution” calls on Congress “to ban any political organization or party that has ever held a public position supportive of slavery or the Confederate States of America,” The Hill reported.

“A great portion of the history of the Democratic Party is filled with racism and hatred,” Gohmert said. “Since people are demanding we rid ourselves of the entities, symbols, and reminders of the repugnant aspects of our past, then the time has come for Democrats to acknowledge their party’s loathsome and bigoted past and consider changing their party name to something that isn’t so blatantly and offensively tied to slavery, Jim Crow, discrimination, and the Ku Klux Klan.”

Gohmert also included in his resolution more than a dozen instances of Democrats either standing in the way of civil rights reform or promoting racist policies.

These included Woodrow Wilson’s segregation policies in 1912, the Ku Klux Klan’s presence at the 1924 Democratic National Convention, and the prominence of Sen. Robert Byrd, who was one of the country’s most racist lawmakers.

“To avoid triggering innocent bystanders by the racist past of the Democratic Party, I would suggest they change their name,” Gohmert said. “That is the standard to which they are holding everyone else, so the name change needs to occur.”

Gohmert’s comments came after the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation this week to remove confederate statues from the U.S. Capitol.

The vote was 305-113.

Seventy-two Republicans and one Libertarian, Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, joined with all Democrats in passing the legislation.

The legislation would remove all statues of individuals “who voluntarily served the Confederate States of America from display in the United States Capitol.”

If passed by the Senate, the legislation would direct the Architect of the Capitol to identify and remove other statues of individuals who served as an officer or volunteer in the confederacy and deliver those statues to the Smithsonian Institution.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has previously said he does not support removing the statues.

Last week, President Donald Trump said he will veto the defense spending bill if lawmakers try to change the name of Confederate monuments or bases.

Trump said he would not sign a defense bill if there were any amendments that called for military bases to be renamed.

Spice Boy For JESUS [aka Justin] #fundie forum.myspace.com

[To the tune of the Spice Girls song "Wannabe"]

Yo, He'll tell you what he want What He really, really want

I'll tell you what He want what He really, Really want

He wanna
He wanna
He wanna
He wanna
He wanna really, really, really wanna see lost souls saved!

If you want your future, forget your past,
If you wanna be with him, better repent your sins
Now don't go wasting his precious time
Get your act together, we could be just fine

He'll tell you what he want what he really, Really want


He wanna
He wanna
He wanna
He wanna
He wanna really, really, really wanna see lose souls saved ah!

If you wannabe His lover, You gotta go repent your sins!,
you'll live your life forever, Friendship never ends
If you wannabe his soilder, You have got to give (your life to CHRIST)
taking is too easy, but that's the way it is

What you think about that? Now you know how He feel
Say you can handle your sin, are you for real?
I won't be lying, Just give him a try
If you really love Him then He'll say good Job!

Yo, I'll tell you what He want what He really, Really want


He wanna
He wanna
He wanna
He wanna
He wanna really, really, really wanna see lose souls saved ah!

If you wannabe His lover, You gotta go repent your sins!,
you'll live your life forever, Friendship never ends
If you wannabe his soilder, You have got to give (your life to CHRIST)
taking is too easy, but that's the way it is

So here's the story from A to Z you wanna be with him, you gotta
listen carefully we got Love in the place and He loves you very much,
You got everybody here who loves you very much..
Easy sin doesn't come for free that will kill you.
and as for me, haha, i'm saved

get down on your knees and raise your hands up high
get down on your knees and raise your hands up high

If you wannabe His lover, You gotta go repent your sins!,
you'll live your life forever, Friendship never ends
If you wannabe his soilder, You have got to give (your life to CHRIST)
taking is too easy, but that's the way it is

If you wanna be his lover, you gotta, you gotta, you gotta,
you gotta, you gotta, repent, accept, his son, thats it

get down on your knees and raise your hands up high
get down on your knees and raise your hands up high (uh uh)
get down on your knees and raise your hands up high
la la la la la la la

If you wanna be his lover

Hunter Wallace #racist occidentaldissent.com

[Commenting under "Obama Speaks At MLK Statue Dedication"]

White has always been a synonym for “Southern.”

In Dixie, whiteness was meaningful and important because our entire civilization was based on the racial caste system and plantation slavery. In a multiracial society, complexion became a logical marker of ethnic identity.

“Whiteness” was something that separated and unified Southerners from Indians and Africans. The ideal evolved in Tidewater in the mid-seventeenth century and it was brought to South Carolina from Barbados in the late seventeenth century. It spread from there across the Southeast.

Where would anyone get the idea that “White people” are their in group? Where would anyone dream of expelling all non-Whites from their midst?

This is a distinctively Southern concept. It is a cultural artifact of the South’s racial caste system where every single White man was socially superior to a nigger, where no nigger could ever lay his hands on a White woman, and where Whites were culturally expected to practice racial egalitarianism toward other Whites.

The idea has a long pedigree in the South. Under Andrew Jackson, the Democracy was explicitly the “White man’s party.” For over a century, Dixie was known within America as the “White Man’s Country.” Until the 1960s, the Alabama Democratic Party had a symbol of a white rooster with the motto of “white supremacy.”

These ideas didn’t come out of nowhere:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/eyesontheprize/reflect/r06_tactics.html

“George Wallace was then head of the Alabama Democratic party. The Alabama Democratic party was racist. Its symbol at that time had a white rooster, a white cock, and the words “White Supremacy.” That was the official emblem of the Democratic party of Alabama. So here it would be easy for us to tell our people, “Hey, look, this party is not for us. We need our own party.”

Subverted Nation #fundie subvertednation.net

We need to start a new program to combat communist jew gun control efforts. Many times their efforts consist of false flag shootings like Sandy Hook, followed by the jewish media screaming how we’ll never be safe as long as guns are around. In the near future, we will have a section where anti-gun jew fucks and their supporters can be exposed and properly ridiculed, until such time as they can face the consequences of their treason.

Recently a bunch of feminist jew cunts thought they would protest guns on campus by giving out dildos. They look like a bunch of dildos doing it, so let’s start with them. These dumb uneducated commie feminist infected pustules figured since dildos were banned on campus, but guns weren’t, they would protest by acting like whores and handing out dildos. They are flanked by feminized bitches with mustaches and beards that I won’t dare call “males”or “men”, but they dress like guys anyway. These freakish abominations have a name for their protest “Cocks not Glocks”. I guess even these guys like cocks. In the pictures they seem to enjoy playing with them way too much.

This is what you have to look forward to if you don’t stand and fight for freedom and righteousness. Your women will all be degraded to a pile of bottom feeding fake ass feminist tramps who will drop their pants to anyone. Your men will be girly little bitches who like sex with men, dogs, and children as much as they do a grown woman. To top it off, you’ll all be disarmed useless pussies crying in “safe zones” because your fake candidate lost a fake election that never happened. (oh yes, we’ll cover that soon too)

I’m not really mad though. Anyone that thinks handing out dildos to protest guns is funny needs shot, and the idea of that makes these whiny bitches mad. Wouldn’t that be ironic? Going before a firing squad for trying to ban guns? I think that is very fitting, but this article is Nooses for Gun Control so back to that.

These snakes always speak with a forked tongue. Remember, they walk among us, appealing to our sensibilities. There is a reason the Marcus Cicero quote has been displayed so long on the front of this site. An enemy at the gates is less formidable than one who pretends to be just another America with a differing view.

“I do believe in the second amendment and the right to own guns and bear arms, however I don’t think that public university is really the place for that,” said one commie lying fuck. This pile of shit doesn’t believe in the second amendment, or your right to defend yourself. She wants guns banned, and picking away at this little thing is her method of helping ban them.

This Hegelian dialect says one thing, then turns right around and says the other. People always ask me, “how do you know this/that”, and the answer is always the same. You need to listen to how someone says something, not what they are saying. This person above is saying she wants to ban guns, but only here and there. She “believes” in the second amendment, but that doesn’t mean she will let you have it. Even the commie jew professors were filing injunctions to stop people carrying firearms.

Anyway, let us get to the point. They want to give away dildos for gun control, we will give away free rides in a noose to all gun control proponents. Nooses for Gun Control will cover all the expenses. Rope. Trees or custom built gallows, and even a bucket to kick out from under them! Every expense will be spared to ensure the least amount of comfort, but any gun control nut wanting to show their psychotic little heads will get free rides. No questions asked. Bodies will be burned and the ashes spread to the four corners of the earth for good measure.

Listen folks. It is really this simple. The only reason for gun control is to make you easier to kill. Stop beating around the bush and acting like they give a fuck about your safety. The moment they have your guns, the open slaughter will commence. These people mean to kill anyone who resists their take over. If you’re confused as to what this will look like, have a look at this movie about the Katyn forest massacre.

Too many people want to argue the points on gun control. They want to break out all the statistics, and try to “win” an argument based on the truth. The truth they rely on is that gun control only causes more trouble, and the enemy will counter with appeals to emotion and cries about saving the children. This will go on for eternity, but slowly they will whittle away our gun rights to nothing if we continue to allow discussion. If I have to spell out how this is being done already, take a look at this current article HERE where Obama the dark skinned jew and Socialist Security criminal mob are making up their own “rules” to stop people from acquiring guns.

Rights are like facts. They aren’t up for discussion or debate. I seriously don’t care what whiny emotional bullshit they use. Rights aren’t something that can be debated, because they are set in stone. Anyone trying to debate your rights is your enemy. Nothing else needs said, but they will try!

There is nothing to argue with gun control. Anyone who wants you disarmed means you harm. Period. Taking guns makes people easy to kill, and serves absolutely no other purpose. Oh wait, it does make it impossible for you to fight back. Look at the draconian measures being treasonously imposed by the corporation posing as the legitimate government in Commifornia. These fools pick away at banning all kinds of things, including now magazine releases they call “bullet buttons”. These commie jew fucks even require background checks just to buy ammunition! Ask yourself who ever gave them that power? Some commerce clause? What?

This communist shit hole Commiefornia would be a great place to set up gallows to hang treasonous twits. By the way, under the definition of treason, almost anyone working in government can be hung until dead. They are literally aiding and abetting enemies of our country in the form of the private corporations they serve. There are NO legitimate “government” employees today. They all work for a private company, but we’ll cover that at another time.

Anyone who has any reason they want guns banned here or there, or blocked from carrying this way or that, or just doesn’t quite feel comfortable with people having guns or using them for whatever reason is already guilty of treason. Stop trying to discuss the finer points of gun control with people who want to take your guns, just so they can kill you with guns. Nobody gives a shit about statistics. They don’t matter. The only thing that matters is getting as many gun control nuts free rides in a noose as soon as possible.

From now on, when you enter a gun control conversation, it will go like this. The gun control freak will try to tug at people’s emotions, “those poor children that got shot in that school, we can never let this happen again”. Your reply will be, “You’re right! Gun control is a serious problem that can only be solved by judicious use of a noose!”

What else is there to discuss? Anyone who wants your guns out of sight, wants them banned. Anyone who wants their use or carry curtailed, wants them banned. Anyone who wants them banned, wants to kill you. No more discussion. Every discussion about gun control should end in discussions about nooses from here on out, because there is NO DISCUSSION.

No Quarter.

Jim Garlow #fundie joemygod.blogspot.com

Everybody on both sides of this issue full well knows the implications, that these are two locomotives coming at each other and those two locomotives cannot exist on the same track on the same time, and one is the radical homosexual agenda and the other one is religious liberty. They cannot be in the same country at the same time. People at the upper levels on both sides full well know that, they are fully, clearly aware that religious liberties, the capacity to worship God as we do, will be shut down if the radical gay homosexual agenda actually succeeds. If I were Satan, this is key, if I were Satan, I would want to destroy the image of God on the planet. How do you do that? You’ve got to destroy the institution of marriage. If I were Satan I would want to destroy marriage on earth with divorce, I would want to destroy it with redefinition.

Jared Taylor #racist #wingnut amren.com

Is It Time for Secession?

Are the United States ripe for partition? Francis Herbert Buckley, a lawyer and academic who has taught at McGill and is now at George Mason School of Law, thinks they are. “In all the ways that matter, save for the naked force of the law, we are already divided into two nations just as much as in 1861,” he writes. “The contempt for opponents, the Twitter mobs, online shaming and no-platforming, the growing tolerance of violence — it all suggests we would be happier in separate countries.”

It’s a great step forward that a separatist can find a respectable publisher — even if it claims to sell “books for smart conservatives.” American Secession reports that there is a lot of support for separation and offers good reasons for it but, alas, only hints at the most compelling reason.

Prof. Buckley makes much of a 2018 poll that found fully 39 percent of Americans — including 42 percent of Democrats — wanted to secede. Presumably there would have been fewer secessionist Democrats under President Obama. Another 2018 poll found that 31 percent of Americans thought there would be a civil war within the next five years. I don’t take these numbers very seriously; wild talk is cheap. But I think Prof. Buckley is right to underline a recent Gallup finding that only 44 percent of Americans would be wiling to fight for their country. Surely, he is correct to say that far fewer would fight to stop an American state from seceding.

Many people think that 700,000 dead Civil War soldiers settled the question of secession, but Prof. Buckley disagrees. He argues that the Framers clearly thought the states had the right to secede. James Madison believed any attempt to keep states in by force would be wrong and “would look more like a declaration of war.” Virginia joined the United States with the express proviso that it had the right to bolt. New England states that didn’t like the War of 1812 didn’t debate the legality of secession; only whether to do it.

Abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison thought the slave-holding states should be expelled if they didn’t have the grace to leave, and wanted to hold a national Disunion Convention to expel then. On July 4, 1854, he told an Independence Day crowd that because the Constitution implicitly recognized slavery, it was “a covenant with death and an agreement with hell.” He then burned a copy, saying “So perish all compromises with tyranny!”

James Buchanan, who was president when the Southern states began to leave, believed they should not be forced to stay:

The fact is that our union rests upon public opinion, and can never be cemented by the blood of its citizens shed in civil war. If it cannot live in the affections of the people, it must one day parish.

Before South Carolina hotheads fired on Fort Sumter, even Abraham Lincoln wavered: “Would the marching of an army into South Carolina . . . without the consent of her people, and in hostility against them, be coercion or invasion? I very frankly say, I think it would be invasion.”

Prof. Buckley reminds us that even now, there is one way to leave that everyone would agree is legal. The Founders believed the federal government would never give up power voluntarily — they were right — and that’s why they wrote Article V of the Constitution. It lets the states bypass the federal government to amend or even abolish the Constitution. If 34 state legislatures agree, there will be a constitutional convention at which anything goes. If 38 states then ratify the changes, that’s the new constitution — which could recognize secession or even sanction a partition. “Secession cannot be unconstitutional,” writes Prof. Buckley, “when there’s a constitutional way of making it happen, through a constitutional convention.”

I don’t think any of that would be necessary, because the federal government wouldn’t today invade a seceding state. As I wrote nine years ago, Americans don’t have the stomach to slaughter fellow Americans just to keep their corpses within the union. If a state wanted to make a serious go of it — especially for “progressive” reasons — the coast is clear, and as Prof. Buckley notes, these days, it is lefties who promote secession.

One of the best-known breakaway movements is in California, and Mr. Trump’s 2016 victory gave it a boost. The state already has legal marijuana despite federal drug laws and it loves illegal immigrants. The “Calexit” movement is run by people who think: “California loses billions of dollars every day [in federal taxes] supporting states whose people hate us and our culture. Let’s keep our taxes in California and invest in our people first.” Prof. Buckley notes that this sounds like “California first” or even “make California great again” and almost implies an anti-conservative immigration policy. The point is, many Californians hate Donald Trump and want out.

Vermont is so full of goofy liberals it has Bernie Sanders for a senator; it has also long been a nest of secessionists.

The Cascadia movement would make an independent country out of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia and would, as Prof. Buckley puts it “unite people with the same kinds of ideas about the environment, Starbucks and yoga.” If the President gets a second term, Prof. Buckley can imagine Democrats calling for resistance in the streets.

They already have. The manager of a Red Hen restaurant proudly refused service to White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, and a woman jostled and screamed at White House counselor Kellyanne Conway. Black congresswoman Maxine Waters then urged Democrats to mob and humiliate any Trump cabinet members they saw in public.

This is all part of the nastiness Prof. Buckley says is a sign of irreconcilable differences. Examples he cites are a 2017 article in Foreign Policy — not normally a crackpot magazine — claiming that “for the first time in America’s history, a Nazi sympathizer occupied the Oval Office.” Prof. Buckley also remembers that when Michelle Obama said that “when they [our opponents] go low we go high,” Attorney General Eric Holder corrected her: “No, no, when they go low, we kick them.” When Republican Senator Rand Paul was attacked and suffered six broken ribs and lung damage, MSNBC host Kasie Hunt laughingly said it was one of her “favorite stories.” Reporters routinely write vile stories about Republicans that would have got them fired in more civil times, but the point of today’s journalism is, in Prof. Buckley’s words, to let readers “feast on their hatreds.”

The last go at secession didn’t end well, and perhaps because he was born in Canada, Prof. Buckley understands something about it most Americans don’t: The further we get from the Civil War, the more we are supposed to revile the Confederates. The people who were actually trying to kill each other became friends. President Grant invited Robert E. Lee for a visit to the White House, and on the 50th anniversary of Pickett’s charge, veterans from both sides met on Cemetery Ridge and embraced each other. There was a popular television series, The Grey Ghost, in which Confederates were the heroes, and, as Prof. Buckley writes, “From their defeat, white southerners were permitted to retain some measure of dignity in the memory of their battlefield heroes.” Not anymore. Anything Confederate or even Southern is worse than leprosy, and “if millions of people in one section of the country are told they’re presumptively evil, and that the presumption really can’t be rebutted, they’re going to wonder if they belong somewhere else.”

But as Prof. Buckley recognizes, there is an even more testy divide: “Now the divisions are broader than North versus South. It’s liberals versus conservative and especially progressives versus Trump supporters.” “In our politics,” he adds, “we are already two nations.” One likely split would be to hive off the two coasts and leave the middle, making three countries.

That would make smaller countries, but Prof. Buckley says they would be better countries. He makes much of the fact that the people who claim to be the happiest in the world live in small countries (he ignores the fact that they live in white countries). They have governments that are close to the people and if they are homogenous, they have a sense of community. One disadvantage of big countries is that they spend more than they need to on weapons. America, China, and Russia don’t need anything like all the firepower they have, but their leaders like being able to swagger around the globe. Prof. Buckley thinks their citizens may not care. In the United States, it is the 700 to 1,000 defense-industry lobbyists — about two per congressman — who keep the defense budget fat.

The military-industrial complex is a good example of the dangers of size. Prof. Buckley argues that big countries have a lot of corruption because their governments spend huge sums people love to divert. He makes an interesting point: The kinds of political corruption that are actually illegal — bribery, extortion, mail fraud, vote-buying — are the least of our problems. Campaign contributions and lobbying are far worse, and are perfectly legal. After they leave office, about half of all congressmen become lobbyists, and make much more than they ever did as “public servants.” While they’re in office, they vote on bills with an eye to pleasing their future paymasters.

Prof. Buckley does note one clear advantage of size: free trade. Imagine, he writes, what it was like under the Articles of Confederation, with states taxing goods from other states. However, this problem could be solved through a common market of the kind that has enriched Europe.

Prof. Buckley recognizes that outright secession is unlikely, despite its advantages, so he proposes a middle ground: home rule. States would make all their own laws but leave foreign policy to the feds. All the hot issues — same-sex marriage, gun rights, abortion, public prayer, drug laws — would be thrashed out locally. If Americans were free to move to whatever state suited them, everyone could find a place to be happy.

This, is of course, was what the Founders wanted, and until the 20th century, and the federal government touched most people only when they went to the post office. Now, as Prof. Buckley points out, the feds want to run our lives for us. They are helped by a Supreme Court that has become the final arbiter of tough problems and forces the same solutions on every state. Federalism was supposed to be a compromise to get the best of both small and large government, but a ruthlessly centralizing United States is destroying all the advantages of smallness.

Home rule would be much better than what we have now. American Secession is fine as far as it goes, but it doesn’t go far enough. Prof. Buckley does note that “diversity” is not an advantage for a country, but I don’t remember a single occurrence of the word “race.” Prof. Buckley admits that at one time the country was coherent — British and Protestant — “but if we were ever that, we’re certainly not that today.” He goes on: “Our constitution has been justly admired, but it was made for a citizenry very different from the angry Americans of today.” And on: “The constitution was designed for another country, one in which people agreed on fundamental principles, and that’s not today’s America.”

What happened to yesterday’s America? Prof. Buckley gives us a hint with one of his diagnoses of why the country is splitting apart politically: “With their identity politics, the Democrats have become the intersectional party of racial and sexual minorities, of immigrants and feminists.” This is certainly true, but Prof. Buckley fails to note that the most bitter and enduring fault line is race. Instead, he trots out nonsense: “Other countries have their common cultures or religions. What America has is an idea that constitutes our identity as Americans, and that idea is liberalism in the classical sense.” The Founders would have been astounded to be told that they were starting a country with an identity that was nothing but an idea.

Prof. Buckley also argues that no secession movement would repeal civil rights laws or follow racial contours. That might be true for goofy-liberal secessionists in California or Vermont, but a split along current political-party lines, would be implicitly racial. As the partition was worked out, the racial divide might even become explicit.

It is strange that conservatives are so unwilling to recognize the importance of race while liberals, in their perverse way, are often obsessed with it. Still, this book is progress. Anyone who recognizes that people are better off separate — for whatever reason — is preparing the way for the kind of racial separation that many whites yearn for.

Silence DoGood #fundie #sexist #wingnut #crackpot #pratt #conspiracy townhall.com

All the guns and armies in the world can’t defy God, and by pushing your absurd “rights” that have harmed women greatly, you are fighting with the Creator. Good luck with your losing battle.

...

So, you fight to vote, and can’t even think critically. Your emotion overwhelms your reason. Besides, 70% of single women vote Democrat, and the majority of married women do too. Without women voting there would be no Democrat party. It’s a nice game of the plutocrats, who weaken the family by discouraging women from getting married and having children. Makes us easy to control. Demography is destiny. While women like you are stubbornly fighting for the right to vote, you are stupidly neglecting your primary function, which is to marry and reproduce. And the bankers are laughing at you, as they make fortunes, and destroy America.

Today’s insane Democrat party is based on women being emotionally manipulated to vote Democrat. You are stupid if you think the Democrat party prior to women getting the vote is anything similar to today’s Democrat party.

Yes, because when women stubbornly divorce men, as 80% of divorces are initiated by women, that leads to single mother households, and angry criminal men, who mistreat women. It’s encouraged by the Government, as they throw welfare at you women to replace your husbands with Daddy Gubmint. Millions of silly women think that’s a great idea. Then they complain about why their children are so dysfunctional.

You can’t name a single movie or television show from 1980 on where a woman married a man and stayed home and had as many children as she could. Why? Because the bankers who control the media know that stable families would end their control. Wake up!

Men like me avoid poisonous women like you like the plague. You are hell to be around.

Donald Trump quoting LindseyGrahamSC #conspiracy #wingnut twitter.com

“We all know that AOC and this crowd are a bunch of Communists, they hate Israel, they hate our own Country, they’re calling the guards along our Border (the Border Patrol Agents) Concentration Camp Guards, they accuse people who support Israel as doing it for the Benjamin’s,....
....they are Anti-Semitic, they are Anti-America, we don’t need to know anything about them personally, talk about their policies. I think they are American citizens who are duly elected that are running on an agenda that is disgusting, that the American people will reject......
....What does it mean for America to have free Healthcare for Illegal Immigrants, no criminalization of coming into our Country - See how that works for controlling Immigration! They talk about Israel like they’re a bunch of thugs, not victims of the entire region. They wanted...
.....to impeach President Trump on DAY ONE. Make them the face of the future of the Democrat Party, you will destroy the Democrat Party. Their policies will destroy our Country!” @LindseyGrahamSC Need I say more?

Keith #racist mondoweiss.net

The reality is that Zionist Jews effectively control the Democratic Party and are almost as strong in the Republican Party. Let me quote myself from December 2016 when I discussed this and quoted and linked to Jim Kavanagh regarding Jewish Zionist control over even local California Democratic Party politics.

“Organized Jewish campaign contributions account for over 50% of the Democratic Party funding. If fat-cat Jewish Zionists withdrew their financial support, the Democratic Party would soon become a powerless Third Party. Support for Israel has become so ingrained in the Democratic Party as to be virtually automatic. I repeat a previous quote and link about how Tom Hayden had to curry Jewish approval to even run as a Democrat for the California State Government.”

Louie Gohmert #wingnut cbs7.com

WASHINGTON (KWTX) – U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler, introduced a resolution Thursday that calls on the U.S. House to bar Democrats from the chamber because of the party’s historical ties to slavery and racism unless the party is renamed.

The resolution, introduced in response to the Democratic-backed push to remove Confederate-era symbols and statues from the U.S. Capitol, isn’t likely to gain much traction in the Democratic-controlled U.S. House, however.

“Efforts by Democrats to destroy all public traces of their own history of supporting slavery, the Confederacy, and segregation in an attempt to shift blame onto Republicans must no longer go unchallenged,” Gohmert wrote in an article published on the conservative Breitbart website.

“It is time for Democrats to play by their own rules, and accept the standards they have forced onto everyone else. They must divest themselves of their name that has denied so many the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Gohmert points out the Democratic Party, the country’s oldest existing political party, defended the rights of states in the years before the Civil War to decide the issue of slavery for themselves and supported the expansion of slavery into U.S. territories.

After the Civil War the party resisted Reconstruction-era measures from a Republican-controlled Congress to protect the civil and voting rights of blacks and by the mid-1870s Democratic-controlled state legislatures in the South managed to roll back reforms and implement Jim Crow Laws, suppressing black voting rights for decades.

Democrats pivoted in the 1960s, however.

After Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, he told his aide, Bill Moyers, “I think we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come.”

Southern support for the Republican Party grew through the 1970s and 1980s, fueled in part by evangelical support for the party’s stand on such social and cultural issues as abortion.

Gohmert’s resolution calls on the speaker of the House to “remove any item that names, symbolizes or mentions any political organization or party that has ever held a public position that support slavery or the Confederacy from any area within the House wing of the Capitol or any House office building, and shall donate any such item or symbol to the Library of Congress” and says “Any political organization or party that has ever held a public position that supported slavery or the Confederacy shall either change its name or be barred from participation in the House of Representatives.”

Hotheads #racist hotheads.com.au

THE ISLAMIC INTERDICTION
It has to be understood from the outset that Australia is at war with Islam because Islam is at war with every non-Islamic nation. According to Muslims, the world is divided into Dar al Islam, the House of Islam and Dar al Harb, the House of War. Australia is Dar al Harb and under Muslim doctrine, Islam is at war with Australia until such time when Australia is conquered and becomes Dar al Islam. It doesn't get much simpler to understand than the fact that Australia is at war with a very insidious enemy who is already within the gates and working to subjugate the nation to Islam.
It must also be understood that every Muslim is a foot soldier of this death cult, therefore they need to be dealt with accordingly. There are no "moderate" Muslims - just Muslims and every last one of them will support the takeover of Australia by Islam. These are the measures that Australia has to take to implement rid itself of the dangerous menace of Islam and its soldiers.
Withdraw from any UN and other treaty that forces it to recognise Islam as a religion.
Withdraw from the UN Convention on Human Rights if it is a signatory.
Withdraw from the UN Convention on Refugees if it is a signatory.
Withdraw from the UN completely if it is not possible to revoke treaties that do not suit Australia.
Withdraw all recognition, services and funding to all Islamic entities internationally.
Declare Islam to not be a religion, but a malignant death cult and ban every aspect of it completely.
Close down and demolish every mosque without exception.
Close down and demolish every Islamic prayer room and meeting place without exception.
Close down all Islamic schools.
Close down all Islamic bookshops and destroy their contents.
Close down and ban all Islamic organisation and groups.
Close down all Islamic websites with servers in Australia.
Ban and destroy all Islamic publications and documents promoting Islam.
Ban and destroy the Koran and all other Islamic holy books.
Ban and destroy all Islamic symbols.
Ban the burqa, niqab, hijab and all other Islamic garments.
Ban Halal certification and any requirement for Halal food.
Ban all companies from paying for any Halal certification anywhere.
Ban Halal declarations and signs on any food products.
Ban the slaughter of animals by Halal methods.
Ban the export of live animals to Muslim nations.
Ban all Islamic proselytising.
Ban all Islamic imams and preachers.
Ban all immigration of Muslims.
Ban entry to Australia to all Muslims, even for vacations.
Ban all social service benefits to Muslims.
Ban all Muslims from government jobs.
Ban all Muslims from serving in any armed forces or police.
Ban the return of all citizen Muslims who travel overseas.
Deport all non-citizen Muslims without exception, especially Islamic preachers and imams.
Tag and maintain intrusive surveillance on all citizen Muslims - with their record of terrorism, they cannot be trusted.
Indefinitely intern as prisoners of war all citizen Muslims who advocate Jihad and support terrorism.
Indefinitely intern as prisoners of war all citizen Muslims who refuse to swear allegiance to the nation over Islam.
Impose an automatic death penalty on all convicted Muslim terrorists with no appeal.
Impose an automatic life sentence on all convicted Muslim rapists with no appeal.
Keep all Muslim in prison in solitary confinement to prevent them converting non-Muslim prisoners.
Cancel the citizenship of all citizen Muslims who are found to have committed treason or sedition and make them stateless persons.
Cancel the passports of all citizen Muslims and give them one-way documents for them to exit Australia permanently.
Require all Muslims to renounce Islam completely or be declared stateless persons

Brandon Straka #fundie walkawaycampaign.com

The #WalkAway Campaign is a true grassroots movement, founded by former liberal, Brandon Straka, dedicated to providing a place to share #WalkAway testimonials and personal journeys to freedom. It is inspiring, exciting, heart-wrenching, and extraordinary to watch and read the stories of the individuals who no longer accept the current ideology of the Democratic Party, what it has become, and are now bravely sharing their stories with the world.

Some of us left long ago, while many have only recently begun to reject the narratives of the left. Some people have wanted to #WalkAway for some time now, but have feared the consequences they may be forced to endure from friends or family if they were to share their true feelings and #WalkAway.

The #WalkAway Campaign encourages and supports those on the Left to walk away from the divisive tenets endorsed and mandated by the Democratic Party of today. Classical liberalism on the left is a thing of the past. Today’s leftist pseudo-liberalism is more committed to expanding the scope of government, pushing us into collectivism, and groupthink. The Democratic Party has gone astray, and it is time to recognize that there is very little true liberalism practiced there anymore.
?
The “liberal” agenda of today has become authoritarian and fascist: forcing people into government-controlled health care; restricting school choice to assigned government-run schools; stifling speech that challenges liberal beliefs and candidates; buying political support from corrupt interest groups; welfare programs that breed dependence upon the state; legal preferences for particular groups rather than equality for all before the law; establishing price floors and ceilings enforceable by law; using government to redistribute wealth just to satisfy their egalitarian instincts, and shaming anyone who dares to deviate from their obligatory way of thinking.
?
The Democratic Party of today has adopted a destructive belief system, happily and without skepticism, separating people into groups based on identity and organizing them into camps of victims and oppressors. If you are a person of color, an LGBT person, a woman, or an American immigrant; the Democratic Party wants you to know that you are a victim and destined to stay that way.

They will insist that you are a victim doomed to exist within a system that is rigged against you; that you are a victim of systemic oppression; that you are a victim of your circumstances; and that no amount of hard work or motivational action will ever allow you to overcome your victimhood or the privilege of those around you.

This is perhaps the Democratic Party’s greatest and most insidious lie.

If you are a minority in America today the liberal media and left-wing politicians don’t want you to ever discover this lie. So they bombard us with stories designed to reinforce the narrative that you are in danger, that you can not succeed. They manipulate your fears and concerns by telling you that you are disadvantaged, disempowered, and disposable… to everyone except them.

Minorities in this country, are told by the Left, their entire lives that they are not welcome on the Right. They are told that they are hated because anyone who isn’t a Democrat is racist, bigoted, homophobic, xenophobic, and sexist. It is now the time for us to help minorities recognize that they do not owe their subjugation and allegiance to the Democratic Party. Centrists, Libertarians, Independents, and Conservatives believe there is a seat at the table for everyone. It is time for us to show minorities that they are cared about, appreciated and welcomed by conservatives and Republicans alike.

We invite Americans who have never been Democrats to join the campaign to share their own written and video #WalkWith testimonials supporting those courageous enough to #WalkAway. We need Americans on the Right to stand up and use their voices to tell the world the truth about what it actually means to be a conservative in America. We must come together to declare, loudly and often, who we really are, our real values, and finally expose the lies the Left has tried to place on us for far too long.

The #WalkAway Campaign also serves another fundamental purpose. For far too long, the Left has controlled the narrative in this country within the news and media, while the “silent majority” on the Right have done what they always do – remain silent. The Left has been allowed to reinforce the narrative that everyone on the Right is a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a misogynist, and so on. This dangerous lie cannot be perpetuated any longer.

The Left has become so extreme and relentless that it is now the time for us to fight back!

The #WalkAway Campaign is a movement of Patriots from all walks of life – men, women, black, brown, white, straight, LGBTQ, religious, and non-believers – who share something very important in common.

WE ARE ALL AMERICANS, and we will not surrender our country.

tinyprayers #fundie raptureforums.com

I think those women, one being the newest youngest and really dumb member elected to Congress, are wearing white to show solidarity against the oppression of women in history. Which was really put in its place in Trump's speech when he said this year we have the most women elected in Congress ever in our history.
That's some oppression. Poor dears.

I'm so sick to death of this black face nonsense. But you notice it is getting a lot of legs in Left media because this month is black history month? Coincidence? I don't think so.
People want the VA governor to step down because over 30 years ago he supposedly wore black face while in school. Really? A 30+ year old "offense" and they want him to step down now nearly 4 decades later as Governor? But not a peep about his supporting and describing how infanticide would be practiced in his state should the new abortion bill have passed. And which he promised to sign into law.
He maybe wore black face nearly 4 decades ago! Off with his head!
He described how infanticide would be performed by law in Virginia after he signed the law as Governor. (crickets)

How about all this talk about equality and equal rights put up? Let's start with the Wayans Brothers. Years ago they made an entire more than hour long racist movie where two black men, Wayans brothers, wore white face. And, cross dressed as women.
APOLOGIZE! Donate all the net proceeds to St.Judes Children's Hospital so as to make amends.

Harvey Levin. Owner and creator of the Hollywood Gossip TV show , TMZ. Fire the racist who appears in your daily broadcast. His name is Van. Fire him for wearing white face just a few months ago during your Halloween costume show.

Or is it a matter of black privilege that they're entitled to wear white face.
While the Democrat party whom Irreverent All Sharptongue, (The "reverend" Al Sharpton) during Obama's first campaign stated in his speech before the DNC, that the Democrat party was the party choice of the black community.
Really? Black Democrats have voted for over 50 years for a party that has kept them enslaved since slavery was abolished. The chains are gone but the policies still hold firm.
And yet, the Dem's call Republican's racists?

Pastor Tom Estes #fundie hardtruth.squarespace.com

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that 99% of gays are ideologically opposed to the military. And not only do they believe the military to be evil, wouldn't you also say the military doesn't fit into the carefully crafted stereotypes that GAYS have made up about themselves?

1. They tend to be extremely fashion conscious. (Don't deny it, you know it's true.) So how many gays do you know that would want to wear dark green in the spring, or wear their desert whites in the winter?
2. They tend to be lovers of fine cuisine. With that in mind, how excited would most gays be when they open their army ration kit and find out that stale crackers is what they will be eating, and that it will be washed down with a dirty canteen full of rain water?
3. They are more emotionally connected than most. Do you think they will like their Drill Sergeant screaming in their face while being forced to scrub a bathroom floor with a toothbrush?
Folks, the vast majority of gays have no desire to join the military in the first place, which is why this issue will never go away. If President Obama actually ended the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, then gays would move on to their next issue, but if this issue continues to exist, it serves as a distraction from the issue gays really care about; gay marriage.

But let me tell you another reason that Obama will NEVER give gays this issue; because the straight people in the military would have a fit. And would you blame them? Think about it for just a second. How many of you ladies out there would want to change clothes and shower in front of strange men? How many of you men would want to have to strip down in front of women who aren't your wife? Perverts aside, no one would. Which is why no man would want to shower in the same room with men who were openly gay, and the same would go for women. Simply put, it would be a HUGE distraction, and I'm guessing that people who are about to put their lives at risk need as few distractions as possible.

Here's the HardTruth.

Obama has zero intention of giving gays what they want because he knows the public doesn't want him to. Don't get me wrong, I believe if Obama had his way he would give gays more than want they want. He would probably make it illegal to criticize them if he could, but I can thankfully say, he can't. As he as shown time and again, he can't do anything, which is great for the country, but bad for those who see him as their savior, and that's the HardTruth.

Staff Writer, #wingnut gilmer.fetchyournews.com

I stand back in amazement as the Democrat party implodes struggling to find a way to defeat Trump and still remain relevant to their hopeful changing America’s political position from a Representative Constitutional government to a socialist one. It can only end in a civil war!

The Democrat Party has almost been totally absorbed by Socialists but a major change is underway to move the party to Marxism. The childish new Marxists in their ranks are getting tired of the slow progress the Party is making in fundamentally changing America and want action now! Among other things, the Democrat party may soon be bereft of any remaining old white people (Liberals) who have run the party since the days of Jim Crow and the KKK.

The pointed attack on Nancy Pelosi as a racist, by the ‘Four Horsewomen of the Apocalypse’ clearly signals the new direction the Democrats are going. Some decrepit Party remnants like Chuckie Schumer, Steny Hoyer and a few more, remain to kiss up to the Marxists in what is a futile attempt to forestall the inevitable. The can’t because the purge is on.

To the new congressional radicals who are serving their true political leader, Saikat Chakrabarti, AOC’s Chief of Staff, the Democrat Party means nothing except the vehicle by which to gain votes and power. The Party’s political direction is changing and Nancy will not be its leader.

Sanctuary cities and states acting in defiance of federal laws on immigration are the front line of AOC’s socialist cabal’s assault on Federal legitimacy. The question becomes an issue found in the 10th and 14th amendments to the Constitution and there’s a lot of room for maneuver in how to interpret them. The 10th simply enumerates the powers retained to the states, or not, and the powers of “the people.” The 14th amendment is all about civil rights and includes, arguably, who is and isn’t an American. So, with the confusion found there, illegal immigrants can’t be illegal if they can come here, regardless of the laws forbidding it, and establish themselves as US citizens. Having a baby here help’s.

We already know, from existing video’s that Pelosi and Schumer once totally agreed with the position President Trump takes on illegal immigration enforcement, and did so until Trump tried to build the wall. We are approaching a state of anarchy with many “Blue” States and Progressive Federal judges interfering with Trump’s enforcing Immigration laws.

For a city or state to resist federal immigration laws and get away with it, is evidence enough that creeping Soviet style socialism is already here in our local governments. I’ve outlined this before but it can’t be said enough. Take Los Angeles for example. Mayor Eric Garcetti has ordered his Chief of Police, Michael Moore, to absolutely not cooperate with ICE on deportations of illegals even those who have criminal records and were ordered out by courts.

Garcetti is therefore not really a ‘Mayor’ but a “Commissar,” in the soviet mode, while Chief Moore has simply become his “Political Officer,” not to enforce the law, but smother it for the good of the Party. When these Commissars order confiscations of Constitutionally protected rights, like our guns, then anarchy will breakout and there will be blood in the streets. San Francisco, Seattle, Portland are all great examples of other cities embracing socialism and smothering their citizens with the threats of armed fascist hooligans swarming the streets to beat up people who disagree with them. Even now, some media voices are encouraging street thugs to emulate the Colonials at Concord and Lexington and resist the evil king Trump.

Remember, freedom is the goal, the Constitution is the way. Now, go get ‘em!

Gene #fundie worldmagblog.com

What the purging of Lieberman showed us is that the traitors, the terrorist lovers, and the America haters have completely taken over the Democratic party. The Democratic party has cast it's lot with the Axis of Evil and should be treated accordingly. Any American citizen who belongs to, supports, or votes for the Democrats might as well say that they want to see our country destroyed. I wish the President had the guts to declare the Democratic party as a terrorist organization and proceed to dismantle it. In any event, the Democratic party is finished in this country.

John L Jordan #fundie algemeiner.com

Tell it like it is; put the blame where it belongs: on the Democrat Political Party. There is nothing democratic about any Democrat leader. The Democrat Political Party has morphed into an instrument of poverty, oppression, and death. The Democrat enclaves of Detroit Michigan and Chicago Illinois are death camps; California & New York state are fiscal wrecks. Wherever the Democrat is in power there is poverty, oppression and death. It is time for reform. The only people who thrive in the Democrat Political Party are unionized bureaucrats who devise crooked rules and regulations that milk taxes. The taxes are used to hire more bureaucrats who write & enforce more rules to enslave those of us who are NOT bureaucrats. What Democrats practice now are the same practices Vladimir Lenin & Josef Stalin used against the Russian people. Lenin & Stalin lied and promised Russians a more prosperous life. What did the Russians get instead? Poverty, oppression and death. Repudiate the Democrat Political Party & defeat them overwhelmingly on November 6th 2012. Democrats are enemies of liberty, justice and prosperity for all.

David Barton #fundie rightwingwatch.org

Barton, who says that the Founding Fathers like Ben Franklin opposed Net Neutrality, claims he also knows the views of the Founding Fathers in the debate over whether schools should teach Creationism alongside evolution in public schools. Naturally, Barton says that the Founding Fathers “already had the entire debate on creation and evolution,” and sided with Creationism.

...

Barton continues to lash out at “deconstructionism” in the education system for distorting the truth about the Founding Fathers, arguing that the Founding Fathers did not support slavery or engage in the practice themselves. While Founding Fathers like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Patrick Henry were all slaveholders, Barton has created his own theory of the cause of the American Revolution: the Founding Fathers’ desire to reject the British Empire’s endorsement of slavery. “That’s why we said we want to separate from Britain, so we can end slavery,” Barton said:

He concluded his talk by saying “I want to see Christians take over the Democrat Party, I want to see Christians take over the Republican Party, I want to have a fight for who has the more Biblical candidate.” Barton, a proponent of Seven Mountains Dominionism, called on people “to move the most Godly candidate through” both parties.

BarrySoetoro #fundie imdb.com

[Part of a review of the movie "Last Ounce of Courage"]

Yes, things do get better when this thing we mistakenly call, the "democrat party" is finally packed into a closet of its own. It is a statistical fact, without the legions of immature, rebellious, "tolerant from their inherent ignorance" - youth, voting for people calling themselves democrats, the democrat party would quite literally, implode and cease to exist. Democrat's biggest fear, is a generation of youth finally comprehending their end game of tyranny and how they are being used to oppress themselves. It is the MATURE, ADULT people's DUTY to bring the reign of the terrorist organization otherwise known as, "The Democrat Party" to an end, and there is NO TIME TO LOSE! Any citizen who votes for ANY ONE in this terrorist organization, does so, thumbing their shameless noses, not just at God and their country, but at their own parents and grandparents, and every single person who STRUGGLED, FOUGHT, and DIED to make sure they'd be born into a nation we can all be proud of. Until we REVERSE Obama and gang's relentless pursuit of demoralizing our youth and criminalizing Christianity, we will pay with the lives of our children and grandchildren. Argue your God hating all you want, NO PERSON is better off in this immoral, fraudulent government's hands, and this movie goes a long way to show it, FINALLY, someone had the courage to say what politicians are either too immoral or too coward to say.

Several Malaysian organizations #fundie atimes.com

Race, religion still rallying cries in ‘New Malaysia’

Ethno-nationalist opposition forces have pressed PM Mahathir Mohamad to backtrack on a commitment to end all forms of racial discrimination as the nation's ethnic politics intensify

Tens of thousands of Malay Muslims took to the streets of Kuala Lumpur on December 8 to oppose Malaysia’s adoption of a United Nations (UN) convention against racial discrimination amid fears that privileges enjoyed by the Malay majority and Islam’s status as the country’s official religion would be threatened.

When Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad addressed the UN General Assembly in September, he pledged that Malaysia would ratify all remaining core UN instruments related to the protection of human rights, including the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

Although the nonagenarian premier admitted that ratification “would not be easy” owing to acute sensitives around race and religion in Muslim-majority Malaysia, the pledge was hailed both at home and abroad as an indication of the new Pakatan Harapan government’s commitment to human rights, reform and democratization.

Conservative ethno-nationalist and Islamist opposition parties, however, furiously took aim at the treaty and alleged, contrary to the facts, that it would threaten the special position of Malay Muslims, who account for around 60% of the population and are granted special status as bumiputera, or “sons of the soil”, in Article 153 of the country’s constitution.

After weeks of pressure by pro-Malay groups, the Mahathir-led Harapan government changed course, announcing in late November that it would not ratify ICERD. Saturday’s rally was originally intended as a protest against Harapan’s ratification plans but went ahead anyway despite the government backtracking on its earlier commitment to sign the treaty.

Seven months after the electoral defeat of the long-ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition – an event some heralded as the beginning of a “New Malaysia” – the country’s new multi-ethnic government is staring down the old specter of race-based politics as right-wing opposition parties double down on efforts to win over the Malay majority.

Organized by a coalition of Malay Muslim groups, Saturday’s rally was attended by leaders of the former ruling party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), and Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS), both of which urged Malays to unite in a bid to recapture political power after their failure to win May’s general election.

“If Islam is disturbed, if the [Malay] race is disturbed, if our rights are disturbed, then we will rise to defend our rights,” UMNO president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told rally-goers. Former Prime Minister Najib Razak and his wife, Rosmah Mansor, also participated in the rally; both face criminal charges for corruption and graft that could soon see them jailed.

A sea of UMNO and PAS supporters dressed in white converged on the capital’s Merdeka Square for afternoon prayers, holding up placards demanding protection of their rights to chants of “Allahu akbar” (“God is great”) and “Tolak ICERD” (“Reject ICERD”). Citing police estimates, media reported 55,000 participants attended the rally.

Other local media reports claimed a large segment of rally participants traveled by bus to Kuala Lumpur from PAS’ northeastern strongholds of Kelantan and Terengganu. Ahead of the mass gathering, neighboring Singapore issued a rare travel advisory to its citizens citing a “possibility that limited and isolated skirmishes might take place.”

While the rally was peaceful from start to finish, racially charged riots broke out days earlier on November 26 over the planned relocation of a Hindu temple on the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur for a property development, which saw vehicles torched and people injured in the ensuing fight. Dozens have been detained in connection with the riot.

Mahathir described the incident as “criminal” and having nothing to do with race or religion, while government ministers said exploiting the issue could incite further social unrest. With right-wing opposition parties fanning perceptions that the Malay Muslim community is under siege, race relations in the multi-ethnic nation are again on edge.

After deadly Chinese-Malay riots in 1969, race-based affirmative action policies, known as the New Economic Policy, were introduced that granted Malays preference over affordable housing, university scholarships and government contracts in a bid to eliminate poverty. Now, many in the Malay community apparently believe ICERD would imperil those decades-old Malay majority-favoring policies.

Dennis Ignatius, a veteran Malaysian diplomat, described ICERD in a recent article as “an aspirational convention rather than a binding treaty” in which signatories are given “wide leeway to carve out for themselves exceptions to satisfy their own local laws,” a reference to the constitutional special position enjoyed by Malays.

ICERD, in fact, allows race-based affirmative action, though the treaty stipulates that such measures “should not continue once the objective is achieved.” Countries are, however, allowed to ratify the treaty with reservations to ensure national laws are not superseded. Malaysia and Brunei are the only Muslim majority countries not to have ratified ICERD.

“ICERD has, undoubtedly, dealt a serious political blow to the [Harapan] government” and has also “allowed UMNO-PAS to burnish their credentials as the preeminent defender of all things Malay,” Ignatius wrote, adding that the government had “failed to agree on a game plan to manage the ratification process once it committed itself to doing so.”

Ignatius believes the issue has put Harapan on the defensive, giving UMNO and PAS an opportunity to “claw back some of the political power it lost at the ballot box.” As the two largest Malay parties collude to rebuild support and widen their political base, they could now “strongly influence national policies without even being in the Cabinet,” he argued.

The December 8 rally proves Malaysia’s opposition can mobilize supporters in their tens of thousands, a show of force that could put Harapan on its heels even as it grants concessions like pulling back from ICERD ratification amid plans to retain affirmative policies that critics have consistently argued are overdue for reform.

UMNO and PAS “forced the government to back down on ICERD and seized control of the [Malay] rights narrative, yet at the same time, the question feels unsettled,” says Amrita Malhi, a visiting fellow at the Australian National University’s College of Asia and the Pacific. “They achieved mixed results,” she believes.

Both parties have yet to formalize their alliance and aim to “demonstrate to the other that it is the stronger of the two,” she says of UMNO and PAS. “Malay Muslim sentiment remains divided and there is plainly still a fair amount of goodwill for the government, which I expect will begin investing in a counter-narrative to contest the way PAS and UMNO are framing the rights question.”

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) held a pro-ICERD event on December 9 attended by around 500 people. Mahathir was scheduled to attend but distanced himself from the event at a press conference a day earlier, explaining that his government chose to take a different stand on ratification.

While human rights activists surely regret the government changing course on racial discrimination, some see a silver lining in the anti-ICERD camp being able to exercise their right to freedom of assembly peacefully without harassment from police and authorities, proof that Mahathir’s “New Malaysia” is delivering the more open society it promised.

Tomi Lahren #conspiracy rawstory.com

The Blaze host Tomi Lahren accused the Democratic Party of being secretly “racist” by using a strategy of getting “black Americans dependant on government to get votes.”

On her Wednesday show, Lahren pointed to a video created by discredited conservative activist James O’Keefe, who alleges that a Democratic donor said that black Donald Trump supporters are “seriously f*cked in the head.”

“It’s not like it’s the mentality of the party, right?” Lahren quipped sarcastically. “Well it was Southern Democrats that fought for slavery. Oh, and the KKK, it was originally an arm of the Southern Democratic Party. The mission, to terrorize freed slaves and those who sympathize with them, which would be the radical Republicans.”

Ignoring the “Southern Strategy” that Republicans have used to attract white voters over the last 40 years, Lahren reminded her viewers that only 23 percent of Democratic lawmakers had voted to abolish slavery in 1865.

“But the Democratic Party has changed now, right?” she snarked. “They’ve switched on racism! Or did they just stop being overtly racist and move to a bigger strategy: get black Americans dependant on government to get votes while simultaneously deeming any Republican of any color racist.”

“Or their new favorite term: the alt-right,” Lahren continued. “Because somehow, border enforcement and ‘all lives matter’ and the right to bear arms and limited government have become alt-right positions for us redneck deplorables.”

various commenters #fundie breitbart.com

RE: Dreams of ‘Speaker Pelosi’ Return to Majority Shaken as Democratic Advantage on Generic Ballot Slips

(Roger Lepus)
Democrats are going to LOSE more seats in 2018. The economy will be on fire and getting even hotter. People will have more money in their pockets. The US will become energy independent. New higher paying jobs for all, including blacks and hispanics will be here. Democrats only have hate and fear to run on. That no longer works for the American people.

(EOD)
The Polls had Hillary Clinton skating to victory in 2016.
Even up to and including polls on Election Day.

I fail to see why Polling Companies keep believing that most of the Nation is Liberal?
When the facts show that most of the Nation is not Liberal.

(NationalCapitalist)
It's not that polling companies believe the US is liberal, it's that polling companies are liberal and they are purposely over-sampling Democrats in order to create a narrative of inevitable victory for their side.

Ignore the polls that put Hillary ahead in 2016, and get all your family and friends to vote in 2018. Only through sheer determination will we root out this evil that has taken hold of the Nation!

(Rob)
If you're Hispanic with a bunch of illegal aliens in your family, I can sort of see why you would be fooled to vote Democrat. If you're a transgender "male" who really enjoys dressing up "pretty" and going to the bathroom with little girls, I definitely see why you would vote Democrat. If you're white, black, Christian, employed, heterosexual, or just plain generally NORMAL, why the hell would you EVER vote for a Democrat?? The one commonality on all these vulgar, hate-filled, angry leftists is: ZERO FAITH IN GOD. They have hardened hearts. Why black Americans continue to throw their votes away on the party that has enslaved them (literally in the beginning and currently with welfare) is beyond explanation.

(Trump Train aka Honey Badger)
Release the Memo and find those Strzok deleted text prior to midterms and it’s all over for the Dems/RINOS and their Co-conspirators over at the FBI.
President Trump fighting diligently to return our Republic back to the people where it belongs!
Nancy and the Dems are delusional!
Businessman Trump’s economy will be over heated by mid year..even the fake news media is not going to be able to hide its Undeniable Strength!

(Frank Castle)
I died laughing when he called all those shitholes shitholes. We all know he isn't wrong yet these cultists shed crocodile tears about it for days. The faux outrage from individuals like Cory Booker was beyond comical yet these people double down on the antics. Whats gonna be the straw that breaks the camels back, the thing that one of these twits do that makes all the others stfu for awhile?

(roydenoral)
LOL. They know he is doing well so I think they will continue with their antics. One of the first things I liked about Mr. Trump was his lack of political correctness. He tells it like it is, agree those countries are shitholes. They will continue with the racist, homophobe, etc but people are not buying it. There are some great youtubes by Victor Davis Hanson about how Obama destroyed the Democratic party with his identity politics. I recently read that Nancy Pelosi is supposed to be a judge at something like a drag queen contest. It just does not get any funnier.

Clifford Russell #fundie progressive.org

The Democratic Party and Progressives know illegitimate children are a problem. Bill Clinton is very proud he got reduced costs for birth control. New York Major Bloomberg proposed a program to pay fathers to not abandon their responsibility to their children.

Now that it has been confirmed illegitimate children are a problem, the next question is what is the solution. I believe executing the parents is a better solution than the Democratic solution of abortion and handing out condoms (birth control). Abortion represents the killing of the only innocent person associated with the adultery or fornication that has occurred. Democrats have never explained how they are going to get people to use the birth control they hand out. Why should a man use a desensitizing condom when he know his child can get on welfare. I am still looking for a realistic method from Democrats and Progressive to deal with the problem of illegitimate children.

The Democratic Party is not about to realistically deal with the illegitimate children problem because the illegitimate children will be future voters for Democrats and the parents are the present voters for the Democratic Party.

I consider the Democratic Party to be the Merchants of Misery. The policies of the Democrat Party do not eliminate misery but rather support and encourage illegal and immoral activities that leads to misery.

You might think that to be unrealistic until you realize there is big money to be made off misery.

NeetSupremacist #fundie incels.co

Why current politics shouldn't matter to the incels, revolution is the only way.

So I made a topic yesterday about why politics shouldn't matter because we can't get the most important thing in our lives: Female validation. It was interesting to see the reactions and some people didn't dig into it deep enough and didn't understand what I meant to say with 'politics'. So here it is comes...

Current politics are a theater and won't make any difference to inceldom.

As the state of the world and society we live in today we see how politics are performed by leaders and by the institution called 'United Nations', we need to understand what this all means in order to find out if current politics will benefit us incels or not. The united nations perfoms as a world wide central judge between countries, the united nations created and still creates (((universal laws))) which every country on this planet should follow. All countries in this world are obligated to follow the constitution of the united nations, but what is the united nations exactly? Who created united nations? And who has the most influence in this central court? United Nations is a creation of rich world wide liberal policies and bankers, as long you don't destroy the united nations you won't destroy globalism.... And exactly globalism is one of the main reasons why inceldom has been increased so much.

The united nations commands every country to implement laws in favor of Chads and degenerates.

Current politics with current leaders is all theater, it's not real and it won't make a difference. Sure some politicians are populists and could shout and say some things that would make sense somehow, but all these politicians will never confront the real issues of globalist policies in terms of globalist foreign influences around the world. But of course these people don't want to destroy globalism, if globalism was destroyed and every nation should get sovereignty onto their own countries that would basically means that multinationals and other big companies would never get their hands so easily on certain resources which are not available in their own countries. America would not be allowed anymore to occupy foreign countries and set up military set ups in other places of the world, the same goes for Russia and China. All these big nations would never leave globalist policies because globalism is what made these countries strong and made their influence so big.

Feminism is a result of certain policies created by the united nations which obligates all the state members to implement female emancipation laws (AKA feminism) and this is not something new.

"Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls"

@www.un.org

United Nations: Gender equality and women's empowerment
United Nations 2015: Time for Global Action. Focus on gender equality and women's empowerment to achieve sustainable development

The united nations is basically a liberal institution which dictates the laws for every country in the world, united nations is the system that makes our lives miserable and every nation being part of this liberal institution is an enemy to the incel. Why globalist policies are an enemy to the incel? It's because they fucked the SMV of the male gender by giving female the rights to be sluts and to travel to other countries with men with higher SMV. If femoids were never allowed to travel and they would be obligated to stay and marry within their own countries than that would reduce the rate of inceldom. A small example:

Thailand is a country with a huge number of ricecels, lets say for example that 10% of the male gender in Thailand was an incel before globalist policies....

Globalism did it's work and opened the Thailand border and every other border on this planet.

People all over the world start to displace themselves to other countries.

Sexual Market Value changes dramatically because we know that the racepill is a truth, the white passing guys are higher on the SMV than the shitskins and ethnics.

Ethnic women have acces to white Chads.

Black tyrones from Africa displace to Europe

Resulting in more competition for the average white guy in Europe

Chaddams from middle east also join Europe resulting in higher competition for average white men

Average white men suddenly can't get a female

Resulting in him relocating to another country where he can boost his SMV (SEA)

White average guy right now a God in SEA because his SMV boost

Resulting in higher inceldom within the average Thai guy

And the circle continues......


This is what currently is happening, the only solution to destroy this circle of inceldom is to destroy the united nations. If we really want to make a difference in this world and on international theater, we need to initiate a worldwide revolution against the united nations and those who support it. Every country and every institution being part of the united nations is our enemy and they should be destroyed. If we really want to care about politics, we should only have 1 thing to concentrate on.... We need to make people revolt against the united nations. Yes we incels are weak but we can use our brains, if we can't fight we could at least make the Chads and the united nations faggots fight each other, and when they fight each other they will become weaker and vulnerable and that's where we incels take out chance for a revolution and revenge on humanity.

Revolution is the only way, current NPC politics will not care about you and will not do a shit about your situations. Caring about current politics while being a part of a worldwide elite globalist group is like mopping the floor while the tap is running....You will not achieve anything, you will only empower NPC politics.

Laura Lowder #fundie disqus.com

Laura Lowder: Uh .. . No. Sometimes abortions do not "work. Often conversion --- I prefer to call it reparative therapy --- does. Look. there is no evidence of a biological cause for homosexuality. None. There might be some down the pike, but right now it's wishful thinking. Twin studies have pretty much blown the idea out of the water. So - - - Reparative therapy. If we take a broad view, all psychological therapy is reparative -- repairing something that is damaged or not working at an optimal level. Maybe you want help to quit acting out in ways that are offensive to your spirit and self-sabotaging to what you really want out of life. Would you want to be denied help with that by a blanket ban on reparative therapy? Maybe "going straight" isn't what you want, but you want better-balanced relationships with the same and the opposite sex. Don't you have a right as a human being to be able to pursue that goal? Or maybe, like a lot of straights, you find yourself involved with jerks and want to overcome that disposition to become capable of fostering healthier relationships with a more decent sort of person. Isn't that your right? If you agree with me that it is, then you really want to leave reparative therapy as one of your options.

Chip01: Ummm no. Conversation doesn't work. The head of the conversion himself quit. (Exodus International)... I also don't agree with changing the name of something so it won't invoke as horrible of a reaction. (Example: Let's change the name of "torture" to "bunnies" so that it doesn't invoke as horrible of an image... )Nice trick, but a bit obvious. Reparative therapy should be for the group that attacks gay people, and makes them feel like being gay is bad. Donna Cambell of Tx should go first The rest of your comment is from "sex in the city"... Yes, dating is hard for both gays and straight... Why is that? Because people are people. Ps : love doesn't need a "cure". Go sell you're snake oil elsewhere.
...
Gay is natural. there is nothing wrong with being gay... Your Somme to show your ignorance, as hiv is in the straight community and in some countries rising higher than gay communities... Your mixing social behavior... And trying to use that as an agreement. It doesn't work...

Laura Lowder: HIV is the tip of the iceberg; gay men are vulnerable to a range of injuries and ailments the straight community doesn't think of. As more and more straight couples are being persuaded by pornography to go "creative" those diseases are showing up in more women than before. That is NOT "natural." And even if it were, behaviors are self-determined. And some behaviors are dangerous.

...

Laura Lowder: There are a lot of people whose testimonies declare that reparative therapy DOES work. Maybe their goals were different from yours; maybe their therapists were more attuned --- Who knows? But your testimony does not legitimate the overwhelming effort to utterly ban reparative therapy for unwanted same-sex-attraction. Gays say, "Who in their right minds would WANT to be gay?" but then they are working hand over fist to prohibit help to get past SSA, to achieve a healthier, better-balanced orientation toward same and opposite sex in all dimensions of human relationship. You do realize that reparative therapy is applicable to someone who just wants help to quit acting out? It's not just about "getting a girlfriend," although learning to orient toward same and opposite sex in all dimensions of human relationship can be part of it.

Doug, New Jersey #conspiracy politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com

[re: Sarah Palin avoiding big cities on her book tour]

I would worry about Sarah Palin's safety in Democrat areas, just read the ticker, these angry liberals are known to act out their hate with extreme violence, as all of the most deadly areas of this nation with the highest murder rates are solidly Democrat.

Democrats have not just been wishing harm on Sarah, but her whole family, including her children as well.

Whereas the people wishing Obama harm are just Democrat plants pretending to be Republicans, a majority of Democrats want to see actual harm inflicted on Sarah Palin, and some of them will act out their intentions. They believe that it would be what Obama wanted, their god, and while maybe not what Barak would support, the same cannot be said for a majority of his cabinet, and Democrats in the house like Grayson. All throughout history, when leftist extremists are confronted with someone who speaks the truth about them, they feel a need to silence that person.

Terrence Walsh #fundie amazon.com

I don't know what the other people who have negatively reviewed this game are talking about. Jesus loves me, apparently unlike some other Christians who left reviews here. After I heard about this game I prayed and won the pick 4 lotto the same day. That allowed me to build a kicking system that could play this game. Seriously, my PC is worth more than my stepdad's trailer home. My theory is to not bother Jesus all the time unless you really really want something. What I really really wanted was a chance to virtually blow away some non-believers without all the messy real world consequences.

Man did this game deliver! I'm seriously thinking about holding back a bit on my religious views just so I get "left behind" for real during the rapture. A little white lie here, a bit of fornication there and I should be good to not go. All those people that get taken right to heaven are going to miss out on some serious guilt-free [...]-kicking of people who haven't embraced Jesus's message of love, faith and peace.

Ted Nugent #fundie rightwingwatch.org

As a large, in charge, Motown black man my bad-self, who honed my Sonic Baptizm, soul-cleansing soulmusic on the greasy rhythm and blues of the musical funk and roll gods James Brown and Chuck Berry et al., and who learned and then perfected the fine art of American defiance from my hero Rosa Parks, I continue to celebrate nonstop all things good and black.

My motto has always been: Black is beautiful. Minimal exposure to my killer Detroit guitar playing would immediately reveal why I was voted the No. 1 Guitarist Alltime in Michigan a few years back. No cracker can play like that!

If you don’t like it, well funk you very much.

February is the month some Americans celebrate black history. Remembering history is good. A wise person once said that those who fail to remember history are doomed to repeat it. And sadly, repeat it we do.

It’s been over 50 years that the modern slave masters known as the Democratic Party created policies and programs designed to keep black folk down. Through their scamming so-called anti-poverty programs, the Democratic Party has enslaved far too many black Americans into a life of poverty.

Poverty runs rampant in our communities. Unemployment amongst my black brothers and sisters is double that of white Americans. And what does the Democratic Party propose doing? The same scams it has been pulling off for the past 50 years: enticing black folk to look to Uncle Sugar for the cure when it’s been Uncle Sugar who has put black folk on the poverty plantation.

…

The Democratic Party has preyed on black brothers and sisters for too long. What they have done to black America is arguably a crime against humanity. They have essentially killed the dream of the promised land that brother Martin Luther King spoke about, yet the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus and others still support the Democratic Party. Simply amazing.

Black power begins with recognizing who our real enemies are and who are friends are. The Democratic Party is nothing more than a pack of wolves festooned in shiny, white sheepskin. The Democratic Party has conned us into voting for them for decades, and in every instance, our votes for them have been against our own economic self-interest.

Alice Friedmann #fundie smoloko.com

WHAT WOULD HAVE BECOME OF AMERICA IF NATIONAL SOCIALISTS WON WW2?

1. The Federal Reserve and all usurious banking would be halted immediately and replaced by debt-free currency backed by the hard work of the American man – not Gold

2. Hollywood would be shut down and replaced by patriotic Americans who cared deeply about our history, our people and the upholding of high moral standards.

3. Jews would be banned by law from working in many sectors, their Jewish identity should be shown when applying for Jobs, or they might be rounded up and deported to a homeland of their own where they would be isolated by the force of the US Military.

4. Israel would not have existed in 2016, simply because Israel power does not come from Israel, but from the Jewish lobbies ruling the western world. Israel would have been destroyed long time ago by the Arabs.

5. Education on the Jewish question would become mandatory and perpetual in the understanding that they must never, at any time in the future, be allowed to subvert the Western world again.

6. Capitalism & Communism destroyed, no oligarchs anymore, the government will take care of citizens from birth to death, free Universities, free health care… Bund Deutscher Mädel and Hitlerjugend will be implemented to educate youth on the love of nation, family, nature, sports…

7. The promotion of any and all kinds of perversions and degeneracy would be treated as an attack on the family thus an attack at the very foundation of civilization and the nation itself and as such would be ruthlessly crushed and suppressed. The blasphemy on Christianity & Islam would be banned by law.

8. Racial tensions, and Multiculturalism done only on European-ethnic majority countries would have been abolished, and by that the European race living all over the western world & USA would have been protected from the planned extinction by the Jewish-made miscegenation propaganda, homosexual propaganda, feminist propaganda

9. Democracy would be replaced with Meritocracy: Leaders would be chosen based on ability rather than on who could get the most campaign donations given by Jewish-run Banks, corporations & organizations.

10. The border to Mexico would be sealed. It would be announced that any illegal caught crossing the border would be shot. Poverty in the world is a cumulative problem that needs decades if not a century to be solved, it will never be solved by economic & illegal immigration which is a Jewish weapon to destroy the western people power to resist the Jew World Order

11. Arabs & Africans would become much more rich and happy because
American Jewish-Rothschild-Zionist interventions, wars and corruptions would have been abolished forever

12. EU Union, TPP, TTIP, NATO, UN and all Jewish made unions and globalization for the world government would have not existed

David Chase Taylor #conspiracy sites.google.com

Knights of the Ku Klux Klan
The Ku Klux Klan, commonly referred to as the KKK, was purportedly founded on December 24, 1865, by six Confederate veterans in Pulaski, Tennessee during the Reconstruction Era post American Civil War. The secret society was first known as the "Kuklux Clan", a name derived from the combination of the Greek words “kyklos” (??????), meaning “clan” and “kuklos” (??????), meaning “circle”, inferring a circle or a band of brothers. Aside from term “Knights”, which has historically been used by orders affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, the logo of the KKK bears a Roman Cross superimposed with an icon representative of the number “6” which equates to the letter "F" or the " ?" (i.e., the double-cross) in the Roman Score (i.e., the Roman alphabet). As witnessed by the numerous KKK members who were tried and convicted decades after their respective hate crimes, the double-cross is always in play. In other words, members of the KKK are routinely sacrificed once they have fulfilled their respective missions. Fifty years after its inception, the KKK re-established itself in Atlanta, Georgia in 1915 atop Stone Mountain. Founder William J. Simmons and other were members of the Knights of Mary Phagan, a secret society likely affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church. Consequently, the organization and its chapters adopted regalia featured in “The Birth of a Nation” (1915), including white costumes, robes, masks and conical hats which are coincidentally also Greco-Roman in origin. The KKK also began to use paraphernalia adorned with a white Roman Cross on a red shield. At its peak, Klan membership reportedly exceeded 4 million and was comprised of 20% of the adult white male population. However, as of 2012, the KKK was estimated to have between 5,000 and 8,000 members and 150 Klan chapters. It is classified as a hate group by the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center. Aside from the Southern Cross of New Orleans, Knights, orders and secret societies affiliated with the KKK include but are not limited to: the Bayou Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, the Church of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan; the Imperial Klans of America, Knights of Mary Phagan, the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, the Knights of the White Camelia, the True Ku Klux Klan. the United Klans of America (UKA), the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, and the Women of the Ku Klux Klan.


KKK Under CIA Control
Similar to most secret societies (e.g., Freemasonry, Rosicrucianism, etc.), the KKK claims that it is not one organization but rather that it is composed of small independent chapters. They also claim that they never operated under a centralized structure, despite the existence of the United Klans of America (UKA), one of the largest Ku Klux Klan organizations in the U.S. which admittedly had “tens of thousands” of members. Nevertheless, modern historical sources emphatically state that “there was little organizational structure above the local level”. Klan organizers entitled "Kleagles" reportedly traveled the country, signing up hundreds of new members who paid initiation fees, receiving KKK costumes in return. Historical sources state that “The organizer kept half the money and sent the rest to state or national officials”, further confirming a top down command structure within the KKK. Whether the Fraternal Order of the Eagles is connected to the Kleagles and the KKK is not known, but they both appeared in America around the same general time. The first national leader and Grand Wizard of the KKK, Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest, boasted that the Klan was a nationwide organization of 550,000 men and that he could muster 40,000 Klansmen within 5 day notice. Needless to say, this would not be possible if there was no centralized structure within the Klan. Although the KKK claims to be an "invisible" group with no membership rosters, no chapters, and no local officers, in 1925 a Klansman was bribed for the secret membership list and subsequently exposed Klansmen running in the state primaries. Modern historical accounts even state that the so-called “second Klan was a formal fraternal organization, with a national and state structure”, rendering the aforementioned claims of independence obsolete. During the Civil Rights Movement in the American South, the KKK forged alliances with the police department in the South (e.g., Birmingham, Alabama) and with Southern governors (e.g., George Wallace of Alabama). The fact that they conspired with the state to commit acts of terror across the South confirms that the KKK was in fact a state-sponsored terrorist organization. According to historian Brian R. Farmer, "two-thirds of the national Klan lecturers were Protestant ministers”, a statistic which suggests that there was a federal program to incite hate across the South. It has also been revealed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has paid informants within the Klan who were active in Birmingham in the early 1960s. In 1964, the FBI's COINTELPRO program admittedly infiltrated and disrupted civil rights groups from within while the KKK attacked them publically. In other words, the FBI and the KKK worked in unison to destroy the Civil Rights Movement which was bringing black and white people together, a threat to the establishment and the status quo. The notion that the KKK is intimately affiliated with the FBI was further confirmed when Bill Wilkinson of the Invisible Empire, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, was revealed to have been working for the FBI. Due to the KKK’s uncanny ability to avoid prosecution for their hate crimes and their intimate relationship with the U.S. government, namely the FBI, it can be ascertained that the organization is highly organized and under command and control of the CIA of Switzerland.

KKK & Prohibition
The KKK’s allegiance to the U.S. government was never more apparent than during prohibition which decimated rural America’s self-sustainability and caused widespread economic damage the country. Historian Prendergast stated that the KKK’s "support for prohibition represented the single most important bond between Klansmen throughout the nation”. This confirms, albeit in a de facto manner, that the KKK was on the payroll of the U.S. government. In 1922, two hundred Klan members set fire to saloons in Union County, Arkansas, terrorizing the South. Their use of violence against bars, bootleggers and distilleries was widespread, working hand in hand with the U.S. government against the people of America.

KKK Legislation
In response to KKK-related violence, the U.S. federal government passed the Force Acts in 1870 and 1871 which were allegedly used to prosecute Klan crimes. However, in 1876, the Supreme Court of the United States eviscerated the Ku Klux Act in “United States v. Cruikshank” (1875) when they ruled that the federal government could no longer prosecute individuals although states would be forced to comply with federal civil rights provisions. The result was that African Americans were at the mercy of hostile state governments that refused to intervene against their own private paramilitary groups. In other words, there would be no federal prosecution of the Klan and therefore they could continue terrorizing the South as they pleased. Six years later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in “United States v. Harris” (1882) that the Klan Act was partially unconstitutional. They stated that Congress's power under the Fourteenth Amendment did not extend to the right to regulate against private conspiracies. Again, the U.S. federal government openly allowed the Klan to operative with impunity, repealing all federal laws that could be used to prosecute them. Therefore, it must be concluded that the KKK was a federally funded program that they did not want to interrupt.

Terror Arm of Democratic Party
Evidence acquired to date indicates that the KKK was primarily used as the terror arm of the Democratic Party. According to historian Eric Foner: “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party…Its purposes were political, but political in the broadest sense, for it sought to affect power relations, both public and private, throughout Southern society. It aimed to…destroy the Republican party's infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life”. According to historical sources, “The members of the first Klan in the South were exclusively Democrats”, launching a "reign of terror against Republican leaders both black and white. Those political leaders assassinated during the campaign included Arkansas Congressman James M. Hinds, three members of the South Carolina legislature, and several men who served in constitutional conventions”. The Klan also attacked black members of the Loyal Leagues and intimidated southern Republicans and Freedmen's Bureau workers. They killed black political leaders, heads of families, and leaders of churches and community groups because they had prominent leadership roles in society. In North and South Carolina alone, within an 18-month period from ending in June of 1867, there were 197 murders and 548 cases of aggravated assault”. To add insult to injury, the KKK made people vote Democratic and gave them certificates of the fact. Again, the KKK was working hand in hand with a state-sponsored political party, further confirming that they themselves were in fact state-sponsored.

KKK Cover
Although a federal grand jury determined that the Klan was a "terrorist organization” in 1870, its member remained free to terrorize the South for over a century. Reason being, the KKK was a cover for federal intelligence operation being executed in the South. If a politician or labor party leader needed to be assassinated, their subsequent murder would be blamed on the Klan. In other words, the KKK was the scapegoat for thousands of acts of state-sponsored terrorism. The notion that the KKK was nothing more than federal cover was corroborated by historical sources which state in-part: “Many people not formally inducted into the Klan had used the Klan's costume for anonymity, to hide their identities when carrying out acts of violence…While people used the Klan as a mask for nonpolitical crimes, state and local governments seldom acted against them.” The fact that the government did not prosecute said crime further confirms that the KKK was a state-sponsored organization. This notion was also substantiated by a Georgia-based reporter who wrote in 1870: "A true statement of the case is not that the Ku Klux are an organized band of licensed criminals, but that men who commit crimes call themselves Ku Klux.” Historical sources also state that: “The "Ku Klux Klan" name was used by a numerous independent local groups opposing the Civil Rights Movement and desegregation, especially in the 1950s and 1960s.”

“The Birth of a Nation”
Just prior to the Ku Klux Klan re-establishing itself atop Stone Mountain in Georgia, a film entitled “The Birth of a Nation” (1915) was released nationwide on February 8, 1915. In short, the film served as the advertisement for the new and improved KKK. The film was allegedly based on Thomas Dixon, Jr.’s book “The Leopard's Spots” (1902), as well as his book and play entitled “The Clansman” (1905). Dixon stated that his purpose was "to revolutionize northern sentiment by a presentation of history that would transform every man in my audience into a good Democrat!" In other words, his work was designed to reignite racial and political tension between the North and South along the lines of the previously fought American Civil War. In “The Clansman”, Dixon falsely claimed that the KKK had used burning crosses when rallying to fight against Reconstruction. Nevertheless, film director D. W. Griffith repeatedly portrayed an upright Roman Cross on fire in “The Birth of a Nation” rather than the St. Andrew's cross which was historically accurate. Due to the movie, a burning Roman Cross has been associated with the Klan ever since. Consequently, William J. Simmons displayed an upright burning Roman Cross atop Stone Mountain during the KKK’s second founding. Because “The Birth of a Nation” (see movie) was a Hollywood propaganda film that mythologized and glorified the Ku Klux Klan, it made the terrorist organization a household name overnight. The film is credited with single-handedly reviving the KKK in America. By portraying the Ku Klux Klan a heroic force, the film created an artificially induced Klan craze, exactly as it was designed to do. Needless to say, the movie has been used as a recruiting tool by the KKK ever since. At the official premiere in Atlanta, Georgia, members of the Klan rode up and down the street on horses in front of the theater, a publicity stunt designed to invoke fear in the South. As depicted in the movie poster for “The Birth of a Nation”, much of the modern Klan's iconography, including the standardized white costume, the white cross on a red shield, and the burning cross, were all derived from the film. Under Democratic U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, the “The Birth of a Nation” was the first motion picture to be screened at the White House. In order to create even more racial tension and turmoil in America, Wilson, a Southerner, endorsed the film. According to a Hollywood press agent, Wilson stated after watching the film, "It is like writing history with lightning, and my only regret is that it is all so terribly true”. Naturally, Wilson's alleged remarks generated a national scandal, causing Wilson’s staff issued an official denial on April 30, 1915. According to a press release from Wilson's aide, Joseph Tumulty, "The President was entirely unaware of the nature of the play before it was presented and at no time has expressed his approbation of it”. Due to its phenomenal success in causing unprecedented racial division in America, the “The Birth of a Nation” is often ranked as one of the greatest American films of all time.

Anti-Catholic Agenda
In order to publically disassociate itself from the Roman Catholic Church, it’s alleged founder and funder, the Ku Klux Klan has disseminated various forms of anti-Catholic propaganda, especially since its second founding in 1915. Shortly after the pro-KKK Hollywood propaganda film entitled “The Birth of a Nation” (1915) was released in America, the KKK suddenly focused on the impending threat of teh Catholic Church, resorting to anti-Catholicism and nativism. Although a book entitled “Klansmen: Guardians of Liberty” (1926) was allegedly responsible for fostering the Anti-Catholic sediment, it’s far more likely that the Catholic Church wanted to distance itself from the KKK after funding the aforementioned film which generated an uncontrollable and unpredictable KKK movement. In a cartoon from 1926, the Ku Klux Klan is depicted chasing the Roman Catholic Church (personified by St. Patrick) from the shores of America. The "snakes" in the cartoon are labeled with the negative attributes of the Church, including superstition, union of church and state, control of public schools, and intolerance. In another carton from 1926 entitled "The End", a KKK member is depicted with an American flag and a Bible sitting atop a fat Roman Catholic priest. Historian Roger K. Newman stated that KKK politician Hugo Black "disliked the Catholic Church as an institution" and gave over 100 anti-Catholic speeches at KKK meetings in Alabama during his 1926 U.S. senate campaign. Black was subsequently rewarded for anti-Catholic rhetoric when he was elected as a Democrat to the U.S. Senate later that year. Although Black said he left the Klan when he became a senator, it is highly unlikely. In 1937, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Black to the U.S. Supreme Court despite his activity in the Klan.

KKK Bombings
During the Civil Rights Movement and the days of Martin Luther King, Jr., there were so many Klan bombings in Birmingham, Alabama, that the city's nickname was "Bombingham". During the tenure of Bull Connor, the police commissioner of Birmingham, Alabama, Klan groups were closely allied with the police and operated with impunity, showing once again that the KKK was and is a state-sponsored terrorist organization. In states such as Alabama and Mississippi, Klan members also forged alliances with the governors' administrations. When the Freedom Riders arrived in Birmingham, Connor gave Klan members 15 minutes to attack the riders before sending in the police to quell the attack. In Birmingham and elsewhere, the KKK bombed the houses of civil rights activists, also using physical violence, intimidation and executing assassinations. According to a report from the Southern Regional Council in Atlanta, the homes of 40 black Southern families were bombed between 1951 and 1952. The Ku Kulx Klan was responsible for numerous murders during the Civil Rights Movement, including but not limited to: the 1951 Christmas Eve bombing of the home of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) activists Harry and Harriette Moore in Mims, Florida, resulting in their deaths; the 1957 murder of Willie Edwards, Jr. Klansmen forced Edwards to jump to his death from a bridge into the Alabama River; the 1963 assassination of NAACP organizer Medgar Evers in Mississippi; the 1963 bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, which killed four African-American girls; the 1964 murders of three civil rights workers, Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner, in Mississippi; the 1964 murder of two black teenagers, Henry Hezekiah Dee and Charles Eddie Moore in Mississippi; the 1965 murder of Viola Liuzzo was transporting Civil Rights Marchers in Alabama; and the 1966 firebombing death of NAACP leader Vernon Dahmer Sr., 58, in Mississippi.

Knights of the White Camelia
The Knights of the White Camelia was purportedly founded on May 22, 1867 in Franklin, Louisiana by Colonel Alcibiades DeBlanc, a Confederate veteran. The name was derived from a snow-white flower of the genus Camellia, an apparent reference to the required skin color of its members. The secret society supported white supremacy, opposed to the Republican Party, and was very similar to the Ku Klux Klan with whom it associated with. Unlike the Klan however, which drew much of its membership from lower-class southerners and Confederate veterans, members of the Knights of White Camelia were mainly upper crust southerners, including doctors, landowners, newspaper editors, and officers. By 1870, the original Knights of the White Camelia allegedly ceased to exist. Like so many other secret societies, their alleged demise has likely been exaggerated. In other words, the Order appears to have gone undercover. Louisiana Judge Taylor Beattie, who led the Thibodaux massacre of 1887, and David Theophilus Stafford, the Louisiana adjutant general, were both member so the Order. In 1939, TIME magazine quoted West Virginian George E. Deatherage as saying that he was the "national commander of the Knights of the White Camellia", suggesting that the Order is alive and well. Based on their use of the Roman Cross and their close relationship with the Ku Klux Klan, it can be ascertained that the Order was founded and sanctioned by the Roman Catholic Church.

Andrew McCombs #fundie quora.com

Of course if God were truly good and WE were evil, an attempt by God to show us that we were not, in fact, good, would be met the majority of the time with hostility and rebellion.

Yet, since God in orthodox theory IS Good, there are two characteristics which He must embody: that of Justice and that of Mercy. If God were purely to act according to Justice, he has every right to destroy all evil. If, in fact, we are all evil, He has every right to destroy us without mercy.

Yet, God being Good, must also show Mercy. Therefore, it could be argued that if it were shown that in fact we ARE all evil, the more humble of us might see that they very fact that we have continued to exist and flourish DESPITE our evil, is proof that God is merciful, even if at times He has shown His wrath.

Jesus seemed to treat evil not as a wholly deliberate state, but more as a sickness. So… we must ask ourselves this: Is it possible that we ARE evil? If evil is a sickness, isn’t it a good thing that we know our true condition, so that we can seek a physician to heal us of our sickness?

If the Devil IS truly the adversary and destroyer of good, would he want us to know that we were evil? Or would he instead convince us that we were good, and that God was evil for judging us? Evil people rarely ever believe that they are evil. Hitler thought he was the savior of humanity. We all know that evil is highly unpleasant, and how pleasant is it for one who believes he is good to find out that he is, in fact, evil? I would assume it’s just about as pleasant as a seemingly healthy person finding out that they have terminal cancer. If it weren’t for the temporal authority of a medical doctor, we might well think that someone coming up to us and telling us we are going to die was evil for doing so, and we might react towards that person with hostility… not unlike they who believed they were righteous reacted towards Jesus.

Another thing to consider is this: If God created everything, everything is His to do with as he Wills. If, as it says in Genesis, He created everything good, and suddenly evil and death break out in the midst of his good creation, is it not within His perfectly Good authority to eradicate it? Some consider God’s wrath to be proof that God is evil… yet if Evil was destroying His good creation, it would not be God that was evil for destroying evil, but it would be those which were evil who were rebelling against Him, and in doing so, perpetuating the further degradation of His good Creation. Thus, God would still be Good if, by eradicating degrading elements from Creation, He was able to save His Creation.

Many people do not like the idea that they belong to God, and that they are both subject to His justice and at His mercy, but if this adversely affects them, why does that make God evil? If God is Good, and in fact they are evil, they have no basis for criticizing what God does with either them or the rest of His creation, because they seek to do evil and to destroy (whether or not they choose to see it that way).

Furthermore, it is logically inconsistent that God could possibly be evil, since if God were evil, everything that exists as a result of God’s will would also be evil, since there would be no other definition by which to counter an absolute evil source of all things.

Therefore, the claim that God is evil is self-refuting, since claiming evil presumes an absolute measure of good, yet an absolute measure of good implies God, thus proving that God is Good, not Evil.

Thus, to claim any moral superiority to God is also self-refuting, since claiming a moral superiority (especially an absolute one) depends on an absolute definition of Good, which implies the existence of God, the very being one is claiming moral superiority to. It is absolutely absurd to indirectly invoke God’s absolute goodness to directly condemn God’s supposed evil. Yet that is exactly what the argument presented in the post above does.

Whether or not one believes in God, one can use the logic of a hypothetical existence of God to come to the logical conclusion that, if God exists, He must be Good. Any conclusion other than that is either an appeal to emotion, an appeal to ignorance, or an appeal to absurdity.

As to whether humanity is inclined towards good or whether we are inclined towards evil, one only needs to study human history, especially the past 100 years, to come to the conclusion that it is extremely probable that humans are naturally bent towards evil, which is actually much more consistent with the Biblical view than it is with modern humanist views or even most other religious or philosophical views.

That being most likely the case, and since proving moral superiority inevitably rests upon an appeal to absolute transcendent goodness AKA God, could one really say they are in a position to declare that God is evil even in His wrath, when humans have shown themselves to be so utterly incapable of the goodness they hypocritically and hypercritically accuse God of lacking?

I thinketh not.

Shawntheimmortal942 #wingnut #dunning-kruger #crackpot deviantart.com

Also gotta love how the left leaning news shitheads went straight to “russian bots” when talking about people leaving the Democratic Party, it’s like they never considered that someone has a different way of thinking than them. That’s why they created bullshit like “Internalized misogyny” and “internalized racism” its because they blame society for the way you think and not you for being an individual who has different opinions. The Democratic Party is now a hive mind and if you dare to stray from the path then you’ll get shamed, demonized, you’ll lose your job, get de-platformed by people you thought were your friends. THIS is why Trump is winning so much! You can blame racism all you want but ask yourself this...do you really want to live in a world where the slightest disagreement turns into a major issue? Do you really want to live in such minefield because you’re scared of offending someone? Are you fine with people screaming “racist, sexist, homophobe, etc” just because they lost an argument? People like to act like they’re living in fear ever since Trump won and I think they are living in fear but it’s not because Trump, it’s because the left are pointing guns at each other with itchy trigger fingers just ready to tear each other down. Is that really a better alternative? “Well, don’t offend people, it’s easy!” The left made the O.K hand signal a sign of “white supremacy”...nuff said.

Kajm, Maxm2317, GalvaEmperor, Graeystone, Dagur-Berserker, LipsterLeo, TranquilityBass, and The-Darkwolf #wingnut deviantart.com

(submitter note: its’ Kajm again and his little group of fellow far-right trump loving circle jerkers)

[Kajm’s Journal]
'Impeachment' was a foregone conclusion. They've wanted it since the day he was elected- BECAUSE he was elected, and nothing else.

And now I understand they are stalling on sending it to the Senate and I will tell you why: The Senate will KILL it. There is ZERO chance of it going any further. And that means, the Democrats would be forced to focus upon actually DOING the work they are supposed to be doing, for the American people. Which means MORE WINNING for Trump.

They can't have this. They NEED to keep Trump's 'guilt' in the public eye, right up to the next election. They need people to BELIEVE that there is nothing Legitimate about Trump's presidency.

And that all GOES AWAY if they can't keep 'investigating' and calling witnesses who never saw anything but 'believe' the President acted (pick a crime! ANNNNNNNY crime!).

They are never going to stop. And presenting this to the Senate, is going to punch a massive hole in their narrative, when it FAILS on contact.

(Submitter notes: the comments, let the circle jerk begin!)
Maxm2317: Their narrative will wither up and die faster than any other piece of Democrat legislation that has gone into, as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer so often calls it, “Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s Legislative Graveyard.”

Kajm: And Thank God he's buried them.

GalvaEmperor: I hope so. We have very few wins to our name; losing Trump means the left will never stop ruining our lives,
We are dark times my friend

(argument between two users, leading to this)

Dagur-Berserker: False victim narrative? That's what you leftists play all the time about non-white people when you constantly excuse the crime they commit. There isn't even any evidence against Trump. You obviously don't know anything about American politics. All the democrats ever do is attack America.

Greatkingrat88: I'm not even a leftist, dude. I just hate Trump.

Dagur-Berserker: But you've yet to prove that he's done anything wrong.

Graeystone: If anyone thinks this will just stop with just Trump if he somehow magically gets fully impeached had better guess again. VP Pence's head is also on the democrat's chopping block. Line of succession if POTUS can no longer fulfill duties as president-
1) Vice President
2) Speaker of the House of Representative.
Don't like throwing around the C and T words but this does make me wonder what the democrats are actually up to.

LipsterLeo: The Democrats are actually into overthrowing the "racist, unfair" constitution, and throwing America into chaos. They believe, as Marx taught, that out of the ashes, they can build their utopia. Got news for 'em. Me, and 100 million other Americans, are armed and will not be disarmed.

Graeystone: The democrat party was the party that kept slavery going right from the start. When they started to think slavery was going to be gotten rid of, they basically triggered a Civil War. They founded the KKK. They wrote and passed the Jim Crow laws along with all the other 'legalized segregation/discrimination laws'.
As far as an Utopia goes, that is outright impossible. While its possible to imagine a perfect system it is impossible to bring one about because of humanity's imperfect nature. Imperfect people cannot create a perfect system.
Its like the democrats can never accept a good idea and if they do it will only truly benefit them and nobody else.

TranquilityBass: The House is meant to be the place of passion and rhetoric, thus the two year terms. The Senate is meant to be where the grownups live and can take long-term perspectives, thus the six year terms.
Of course, as that one doofus from Texas said, "We can impeach him more than once!" This may be necessary for the Democrats' survival, since wasting time in the House stops good work from being done for the American people. For instance, we currently have the lowest black unemployment ever recorded--but the party of the KKK, of Jim Crow, and of Lester Maddox wants to remove the president who made it so.

The-Darkwolf: Meanwhile Hillary walked away from Criminal negligence violating National Security ("I'm just a girl so I don't get all this technical stuff, but I am WOMAN so you owe me the Presidency!") Obama handed over tens of thousands of military-grade weapons to Narcos, ISIS and other terrorists ("It seemed like a good idea at the time, but I still stand for gun control!") and the collective hive-mind of 70-plus presidential candidates from the party all agree on ending the democratic process of the electoral college so that only Sanctuary Cities will matter during national elections....
The quote I love most was Clinton's campaign manager during the 2016 election finally admitting that America was socially, culturally and politically more divided than at any time since the Civil War... "But it's all the Republican's fault!".... maybe Nancy Pelosi could just order the FBI to open fire on Fort Sumpter and just get on with the inevitable... :shrug:
You gotta understand, I am not a huge Trump fan but at least he's managed to pull up the economy, unemployment is at an major low, based on full-time jobs, not part-time mcjobs and the biggest winners are young African-Americans, and he's pulling the US out of a foreign boondoggle without a hope of resolution. And apparently his great criminal act was to tell a foreign power that he was okay with their already on-going investigation into espionage involving the Democratic presidential frontrunner.....

Chris Roberts #wingnut #racist amren.com

Can Hispanics, Asians, and White Progressives Launch a Socialist Insurgency in the Western United States?

If not now, soon.

The fight for the Democrat presidential nomination is all but over. Joe Biden’s coalition of blacks, white suburbanites, and old people gave him one crushing victory after another, and — barring an act of God — he will face President Donald Trump in the general election. Senator Bernie Sanders failed to mount much resistance to Mr.. Biden nationally, but the democratic socialist’s successes in the West mean trouble for that region’s centrist Democrats. Mr. Sanders won the California primary and the Nevada caucus because of strong support from Hispanics and Asians in both states, neither of which had enough white moderates or blacks to stop him.

White advocates have long warned that America’s forthcoming non-white majority will end conservatism and destroy the Republican Party, but what is happening is more complex. Within the Democrat Party, a divide is forming along racial lines. There is a moderate wing backed by blacks and certain whites, particularly old people and suburbanites. Then there is a more leftist, or even socialist wing of younger and urban whites and non-black minorities. Mr. Sanders has twice demonstrated that the socialist wing can’t win at the national level — but it can win locally.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a good example. In 2018, with the backing of the Democratic Socialists of America, she launched a primary challenge against Joseph Crowley, a moderate white Democrat, in New York’s 14th Congressional district. Its racial makeup is 11 percent black, 16 percent Asian, 18 percent white, and 50 percent Hispanic. That makes it solidly blue (Hillary Clinton won it in 2016 with 76 percent of the vote), but it also means no black/white alliance backing a moderate can stop a progressive who attracts Hispanics and Asians. Two years ago, Mr. Crowley complained, “I couldn’t help being born white” and lost to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez by 15 points.

A similar election took place in California. Due to the Republican Party’s weakness and the state’s unusual election laws, in 2018, Senator Dianne Feinstein faced only one opponent in her bid for reelection: fellow Democrat Kevin de León, a progressive Hispanic. Though very few Americans would consider Mrs. Feinstein a “moderate,” her challenger ran to her left, claiming she didn’t oppose President Trump vigorously enough. He lost to her by less than ten points — 54.2 percent to 45.8 percent — and exit polls show that this race was similar to California’s primary:

Incumbents are very hard to beat; they win reelection at least 80 percent of the time. Mr. de León was running against a widely known figure who first won her Senate seat in 1992. You need a lot of money and staff to run against such an entrenched candidate, especially in a state of nearly 40 million people. Furthermore, as the more centrist of the two, Mrs. Feinstein presumably had the support of Republican voters in the general election. Even against all those obstacles, Mr. de León won with Hispanics — his own people and the state’s largest racial group — and lost most dramatically with blacks, the state’s smallest group. He also did better than Mrs. Feinstein’s last three Republican challengers, who won 37.5 percent of the vote in 2012, 35.0 percent in 2006, and 36.6 percent in 2000.

This November, another very prominent “moderate” white California incumbent will be tested against a younger, left-wing, non-white challenger. Nancy Pelosi is defending her seat against Shahid Buttar, a Pakistani democratic socialist. Her district covers most of San Francisco: 6 percent black, 15 percent Hispanic, 33 percent Asian, and 44 percent white. In other words, she has a good chance, but she’ll have to fight to win.

America’s Southwest will see more candidates like Mr. Buttar. Our nation’s rising tide of color is not uniform, and has plenty of internal divisions. That blacks are ending up in political coalitions at odds with Asians and Hispanics is an interesting development. But more important, far-left non-whites are increasingly challenging liberal whites. This should be a warning to those whites that this country is changing, and that no matter how enlightened they think they are, they’ll still be on the losing side in a non-white America.

Nya Major #sexist edendecoded.com

Many black women are leading black men to be anti-Trump because it's the end of the road for some of these women. These black women have been using their alliance with their Liberal white daddy for decades to checkmate the black man and to enjoy a false sense of power over him.

Check the lives of these type of women. They're the type who don't typically have a man, can't get a man or can't keep one. Nor do these women have a family. Because a family would consist of having a man as the head of it.

Instead what you have is female-led communities that are filled with: high crime, poverty, fornication, abortion, occult stores, liquor stores, hair stores, bars, nightclubs and trap houses: that are being presided over by rebellious women who've spent the last 40 years telling God how they don't "need a man" - which is precisely why they don't have one!

These women hate Trump for the same reason they hate every Republican: because Republicans don't cater to the dysfunction of black women.

Conservatives don't treat black women as victims the way liberals do. Instead they require accountability from black women just as equally as they do from black men and everyone else.

Sorry black men, but most of you are too easy. It's the truth, and every black woman in America knows it. A little batting of the eye lids, swishing of the hips, pedicured hands and feet, showing a little cleavage, and pretending to be a woman in distress is all that is usually needed to bring out the simp in most of you. Couple this with the fact that most black men today have been raised by single moms who teach you to actually hate yourselves - and we have the perfect recipe for creating the type of men who'll put up with any amount of dysfunction coming from today's black women.

Donald Trump has an agenda that he termed a New Deal for Black America. Look it up. It would effectively end decades of urban blight and economic depression that black Americans have been suffering under through racist policies carried out and overseen by Democrats. Just look at Flint Michigan for a perfect example. Years of Democrat leadership has given us one of the worst water crisis in history!

Notice how the liberal media never talk about Trump's New Deal for Black America? That's because it would actually help strengthen the black man's position.

Here we FINALLY have a U.S. sitting president who has a specific agenda to bring the African American community in urban cities out of the financial and economic dumps and into the modern era by:

•focusing on job creation,
•strengthening black families (which include the black man instead of excluding him), and
•encouraging entrepreneurship for black men and women - and now the Democrats want to be the party of opposition to everything Trump does?

This nonsense about Russia has less to do with Russia and more to do with attempting to stop Trump from rolling out his agenda to put working class black and white families on a better financial footing; which would effectively end much of the racial/class problems currently plaguing the nation.

Trump's New Deal for Black America would also end the destabilization of the black community by:

•helping black men become equally employed and earning healthy incomes.
•taking the power of provision away from black women alone.
•and redistributing that power equally along the sexes.

And Democrats can't have that now can they? They thrive from the basic discontent from Americans who feel isolate and ran over by governmental policies that were basically created and implemented by Democrats! It's the ultimate sleight of hand deception. Remember: Democrats are the party that fought FOR slavery and Jim Crow laws that completely disenfranchised black Americans.

The Democrats helped implement the current child support/child custody laws that deprive fathers of the right to have easy access to their own offspring. The only reason why any woman would oppose correcting these inequalities is because she wants them to persist.

SO BLACK MEN: steer clear from black women who support an anti-Trump agenda. They are a death trap for the black man's soul. These women don't honor black men, don't like black men nor respect black men.

These women are full of man-hate and have a great disdain for Jesus Christ too - though they'll claim to love and serve Christ with all their heart and soul. Because if they truly loved Christ as they claim, they would respect the divine order He placed in first the home and then the Church: which these type of women never do. And for this reason so many of them have started becoming pastors and preachers and are okay with creating households that women are the head over.

But to God be the glory; He'll make everything right. And what you see in the image below, will come to pass again to liberate Black Men: a time in history - 1869 to 1873 - when all black men had equal rights in the United States, and were elected and appointed to senatorial and representative positions in government.

Many black men have already removed the blinders and have realigned with their political party of freedom: for financial freedom, spiritual freedom, legal freedom, and simply freedom to be a man!

various homophobes #homophobia zeldadungeon.net

Would You Stop Playing the Legend of Zelda if Link Was Homosexual in the Next Game? Would this ruin the game series for you? Or would you just not play this one game?

link's Sister: “I just won't play that one game.”

locke: “If the gameplay etc. were good enough to make up for the awkwardness of playing as a character that I couldn't relate to then I might play it. Otherwise I'd just skip that game. One game I don't like isn't enough to ruin the series. Only if it becomes a trend.”

KawiNinjaZX: “That would be stupid, relationships and sexuality are never a point to the game, they are only minor and are implied. If Link straight up kissed a guy I would turn off the game.”

Dragoncat: “Yoai fangirls scare me...I'm no homophobe, but I dislike yoai and yuri. People that like it tend to just want to throw two characters who would never be together in a million years into sex scenes so they can drool. It's disgusting and it completely disrespects the characters. People who support hetero pairings tend to not be that way. So for that reason, I'd prefer Nintendo NOT doing that.”

Sir Quaffler: “I'm assuming you mean Link would be gay and only gay in the hypothetical game, rather than giving us the option to choose.If we would have no choice in the matter and Link would be gay no matter what we as the player would want, then I would not play that game. I tend to project my own preferences through the game, Link's (almost) blank slate allowing me to do so, so for him to suddenly be very forthcoming to other male characters would totally break me from the experience. I would never do that, why would I want to play as a character that does that? It would not tarnish the rest of the series at all (I already don't think it's infallible, AoL is an abomination in my eyes anyways so one hypothetical game would not "ruin" the series for me), but I would definitely be more cautious about picking up subsequent games.However, if that were optional rather than mandatory, then no I would not be against that and would definitely still pick up the game. Include it as an option for people who want the main character to feel more like them, just don't force it upon the rest of us who don't agree with that lifestyle”

Kylo Ken: “No, I wouldn't play this one at all. A very large reason why I play the Legend of Zelda is because I can relate to Link. And that's being objective considering I am Christian.”

Demise_ : “I'd definitely not play that one game, it would definitely not ruin the previous games, as for future games if they would be completely uninfluenced by that game then it's fine (e.g. if that one game was developed completely by another studio).”

Vanitas Remnant: “Yeah, it would really ruin it for me. I have nothing against gays, but that would just be... weird.”


Jennifer Louise Tonge #racist antisemitism.uk

Disgraced Baroness Tonge, who was twice suspended from the Liberal Democrats over allegations of antisemitism and eventually resigned as pressure mounted, has shared an antisemitic caricature on Facebook.

The caricature was part of an image which claimed to expose the “AIPAC Jewish lobby” through a quote supposedly from Pink Floyd singer Roger Waters. In the bottom-right corner of the image, an antisemitic caricature of a big-nosed Jew clasping his hands together can be seen. The caricature is commonly used by neo-Nazis and far-left extremists in antisemitic social media memes.

The original post, which Baroness Tonge shared, was posted by Saeed Sarwar, who commented on the image: “I’ve checked with 4 specialist friends in case anyone tries to suggest this is antisemitism. It’s actually bang on.”

Baroness Tonge has a long history of using inflammatory, and sometimes antisemitic, language. In 2003 she compared conditions in Gaza to those in the Warsaw Ghetto, for which she was criticised by the chairman of the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum. The following year, during a spate of suicide bombings targeting Jews in Israel, she said that she “might just consider becoming [a suicide bomber] myself” if she was a Palestinian.

After her comments were condemned as “completely unacceptable” by her own Party leader, Charles Kennedy, she told the BBC that suicide bombers’ actions are “appalling and loathsome”. Two years later in 2006, she told a fringe meeting at her Party conference: “The pro-Israeli lobby has got its grips on the western world, its financial grips. I think they’ve probably got a grip on our Party.” Once again, her Party leader, then Sir Menzies Campbell, said that her comments had “clear antisemitic connotations”, but she was unapologetic.

In 2010, in response to an antisemitic blood libel alleging that Israeli soldiers providing aid in Haiti were secretly harvesting victims’ organs, Baroness Tonge suggested that Israel should conduct an inquiry to “clear the names of the team in Haiti”. The Party leader, who by then was Nick Clegg, called the comments “wrong, distasteful and provocative”, and removed her as the Party’s health spokesperson. In 2012, the situation worsened when Baroness Tonge told a group at Middlesex University: “Beware Israel. Israel is not going to be there forever in its present performance.” Party leader Nick Clegg challenged her to apologise or resign for her remarks, following which she resigned the Party whip.

In 2015, Campaign Against Antisemitism condemned Baroness Tonge for asking a written question in the House of Lords which held Jews collectively responsible for perceived wrongdoing by Israel by calling for “Jewish faith leaders in the United Kingdom [to] publicly to condemn settlement building by Israel and to make clear their support for universal human rights.” Last year, she used a speech in the House of Lords to again call on “Jewish faith leaders in the United Kingdom publicly to condemn settlement building by Israel”, for which we condemned her, however her Party refused to act.

When we called on our supporters to complain to the Liberal Democrat Party, the Party bizarrely responded that they would investigate if they received complaints. We then confirmed that our complaint was already a complaint and heard nothing more. Meanwhile Baroness Tonge wrote a misleading letter to The Independent claiming that Campaign Against Antisemitism was in fact an organisation which secretly opposed organ donation.

She then hosted a meeting in the House of Lords at which attendees compared Israel to ISIS and suggested that Holocaust victims provoked their own genocide. She was suspended from the Liberal Democrat party pending investigation, following which she resigned from the Party, but she remains in the House of Lords. Subsequently, the House of Lords Commissioner for Standards, Lucy Scott-Moncrieff, declined to take action against Baroness Tonge.

In October last year, Baroness Tonge responded to a report on rising antisemitism by the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee with a letter in which she wrote: “It is difficult to believe that a 75% increase in antisemitism [the Committee] reports, have been committed by people who simply hate Jewish people for no reason. It is surely the case that these incidents are reflecting the disgust amongst the general public of the way the government of Israel treats Palestinians and manipulates the USA and ourselves to take no action against that country’s blatant disregard of International Law and the Geneva Conventions.” The failure to act led a Liberal Democrat former candidate to quit the Party. One member of the public reported the letter to Sussex Police.

In February, after Baroness Tonge called for Campaign Against Antisemitism to be deregistered as a charity, Parliamentarians rallied to support us in the media.

In May, Baroness Tonge shared and then deleted an image belittling the Holocaust by equating it with the situation in Gaza. The cartoonist, Carlos Latuff, had won second prize in one of Iran’s repulsive Holocaust denial cartoon competitions.

Jim #fundie blog.jim.com

Still has to pass the Senate, but already the Democrats are terrified.

The essential and important feature of Trumpcare is that it “denies insurance to millions of Americans”. In other words, when you seek medical care, when those who pay for and operate our system of medical care seek medical care, they will not find one hundred drug addicts looking for free drugs and one hundred bums looking for free food, a free bed, and human contact in front of them. Those people, drug addicts, criminals, and suchlike, are still going to get subsidy, but they will go literally or metaphorically through a different door to the people who are paying.

Now even if Trumpcare passes the Senate, we still have to pass it to find out what is in it. The details are going to be filled in by regulators – regulators who are theoretically under Trump’s supervision, but are in fact far more answerable to the permanent government. So we still could be screwed nine ways from Sunday.

But like Trump himself, Trumpcare offers remote possibility of success, as compared to the absolute certainty of failure.

A possible outcome of this vote, a successful outcome of this vote, is that the marginal voter, the swinging voter, gets reasonable healthcare, or at least healthcare that is less outrageously terrible, and the Democrat voter core (vagrants, drug addicts, whores, single mums, and criminals) loses out – which of course is going to mean a major swing to Trump and Republicans, and a major swing away from Democrats. Hence the widespread abject pants-wetting terror among democrat politicians.

Trumpcare protects people with pre-existing conditions, without however giving them the same insurance you get. Which may in practice mean that people who don’t pay go in through the same door you do, or may not mean that. If it means that people who don’t pay go in through the same door, then that means that people who pay get treated like criminals, vagrants and drug addicts, in short like Democratic party core voters, that being the vast majority of non paying people showing up at hospital. People say that the very old are costing us a bundle, that the very sick are costing us a bundle. No, it is Democratic Party core constituencies that are costing us a bundle.

Not needing to pay for healthcare and having plenty of time on your hands makes a vastly greater difference to how much healthcare you consume than being old and sick does. In short, being a Democratic core constituency is the major variable determining how much healthcare a person is going to consume.

Any system that guarantees that some morbidly obese alcoholic on the street is going to get the same standard of healthcare as an affluent middle class person is going to guarantee that that affluent middle class person is going to get very little healthcare. If Trumpcare is going to provide a reasonable standard of healthcare for the median voter, it has to deny a reasonable standard of healthcare for the modal Democratic party voter. Whether it will do so is far from clear, but it is absolutely certain that Obamacare will not provide a reasonable standard of healthcare for the median voter.

Madoc #fundie starshipmodeler.net

And this why you should never rely on Wikipedia for anything politically related. The site is VERY well known for having an exceptionally gross bias against the right, against conservatives, against Republicans, and against anyone or anything that dares challenge the hive mind / group think of the Left and liberal orthodoxy.

The "Southern Strategy" was actually an attempt by the GOP to break the stranglehold the Democrats had on politics in the South. That hold was so strong the rest of the Democratic Party had to bend to it and thus progress on Civil Rights was always held back by the Democrats - with Southern Democrats at the lead in that.

The GOP attempted to make inroads in the South by appealing to moderates among Southern urban voters. Those "disaffected whites" were the absolute LAST people who would EVER be caught dead voting for Republicans. Look up the phrase "yellow dog Democrat" as an example of that mentality.

The GOP didn't get too far in the South in the 60s with that strategy. The South remained SOLIDLY a Democratic Party stronghold.

If the article's premise were factual you'd have seen the South change over to Republican by the late 60s or early 70s as the Democratic Party pulled a near 180 and suddenly became the pro-civil rights thing that the GOP had always been.

Instead, the South remained Democratic and Southern voters kept electing racist Democrats to office.

It was only in the 80s that things began to change as those Southern Democratic Party bigots began getting too old to hold to power. AND because or immigration patterns where millions of Northerners began moving in to the South in search of better jobs and lower taxes.

As that happened, only then did the voting patterns change and the GOP's message of smaller government / lower taxes take root in the South.

Arguing otherwise runs contrary to the actual facts and is also a staple of current Democratic Party talking points as they attempt to rewrite history and make the Republican Party a thing of racism. This, when it has consistently been the Democratic Party which was the racist of the two.

ForPersonalHelp #fundie forpersonalhelp.com

The following is from a newspaper obituary of a twenty year old girl, written by her parents:

“After four years, our cancer warrior Alice has left her earthly bounds and gone to heaven, where her body is healthy again, where the wind can blow through her hair, and where she can finally ride a horse on the beach and swim with dolphins. She was embraced in heaven by all the inspiring teens and children with cancer she met along the way.”

My question to atheists is: if her parents asked you for your true beliefs, would you really take that away from them? Would you really tell them that their daughter was just unlucky, and suffered heroically for years only to go out like a candle and be nothing more than dirt in the ground? If beautiful, loving Alice had been your daughter, would you really take that away from yourself? Would you really believe it? And don’t say that people have to face facts: atheism is not a fact, because no one can “prove” there is not a God any more than we can "prove" to you--by your earthly, material standards--that there is one.

Factology #conspiracy factology.com

(Why to vote Republican)

The devil has Nubians classifying themselves as Democrats while they vote as Republicans. They want you to vote as a Democrat because the symbol of a Democrat so-called reflects the Nubian. The democratic symbol is a donkey. This is an animal that is obstinate, hard headed and stubborn. The Republican’s symbol is an elephant. His personality and lifestyle is opposite the donkey. The elephant is a stable minded thinker, a conservative and vegetarian. The bearer of the Republican symbol is smart because he knows that in the U.S. there is only one party and that is the Republican Party. It is obvious to anyone who has an ear to hear and eyes to see that each time you say the “Pledge Of Allegiance,” you say “. . . and to the republic, for which it stands, one nation under God...” Yet most Nubians are Democrats and not Republicans. They are definitely under the SPELL OF LEVIATHAN.

RetroSpriteResources #conspiracy retrospriteresources.deviantart.com

Thanks to the liberals in crongress, we haven't been able to attack North Korea. We should've bombed them years ago and joined with South Korea to retake the island from the hands of the Soviet Union, but now they have neutron missiles capable of striking South Korea, Japan, Gum, Australia, Germany, Hawaii and the United States.

They also have neutron missiles pointed at Soul, the largest city in South Korea with over 20,000 people which they are holding hostage so that we don't attack them, but waiting has only made things worse. Far worse.

A lot of people think that sections of our big cities are the only things at risk if they decide to launch the nukes, but a single nuke could be used to destroy America as we know it...

I saw in the news today that North Korea has a weapon called an EMP which comes from detonating a neutron bomb in outer space. A single EMP from a neutron bomb would be enough to scatter across all the US and even though it doesn't kill anything, it destroys power grids.

Without power grids, there would be no way get food to everyone and we would all starve while Kim Jung-Un takes over South Korea and maybe even the North Pole and Japan.

At first, I was really scared that it would happen and my 3DS would be fried and Japan would stop making anime under Kim Jung-Un's rule, so I started crying really hard.

Then I watched a video where they set off EMPs on small electronics with the same voltage levels given by a neutron bomb and they were fine, so it turns out everything being fried was a myth and I stopped crying.

But then that same video said that anything plugged into the wall will still be fried and they did tests to prove it, so every time I charge my 3DS, a neutron bomb might fry it and I'm really scared.

I haven't been able to play it in days because I'm so scared to plug it in and have my New Leaf file fried, so I'm really bored and sad that Kim Jung-Un will probably destroy all the anime studios.

IT WOULD BE REALLY FUNNY IF HE WAS EATEN BY AN ANIME GIANTESS, LOL!

But even if I somehow save my 3DS, everything will still be destroyed without the power grids which really are fried under EMP voltage levels from nukes in the air. Everyone will starve and I won't be able to charge my 3DS anymore and I'll die of boredom.

Thanks to you liberals, I'm gonna lose my New Leaf save file and starve to death. Thanks a lot.

Peace! Save America!

David Harsanyi #fundie thefederalist.com

This week, the Democratic Party was unable to pass a watered-down, platitudinous resolution condemning anti-Semitism, due to “fierce backlash” from presidential candidates, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), and the now-powerful progressive base. Rather than censuring Rep. Ilhan Omar, the intellectually frivolous, Hamas-supporting freshman representative from Minnesota, she was rewarded and inoculated from party criticism.
More consequently, the Democrats deemed Protocols of Zion-style attacks a legitimate form of debate. That’s because Omar, despite what you hear, has repeatedly attacked Jews, not only Israel supporters, and certainly not only specific Israeli policies.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who would finally bring an “All Lives Matter” resolution to the floor, told reporters she didn’t believe the congresswoman’s comments were “intentionally anti-Semitic.” No educated human believes Omar inadvertently accused “Benjamin”-grubbing Rootless Cosmopolitans of hypnotizing the world for their evil. These are long-standing, conspiratorial attacks on the Jewish people, used by anti-Semites on right and left, and popular throughout the Islamic world.
Even the Democratic Party activist groups that typically cover for the Israel-haters, like the Anti- Defamation League, have condemned Omar. Yet it was the lie that coursed through the Democratic Party’s defense of Omar.
Presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren claimed that “branding criticism of Israel as automatically anti-Semitic has had a chilling effect on our public discourse and makes it harder to achieve a peaceful solution between Israelis and Palestinians.” Either Warren believes that accusing Jews and their supporters of dual loyalty and sedition is a legitimate criticism of Israel, or she is deliberately mischaracterizing Omar’s comments to gain favor with the growing faction of anti-Semites in her party.
“We must not,” the socialist Bernie Sanders argued, “equate anti-Semitism and legitimate criticism of the right-wing, Netanyahu government in Israel” because such a thing would be “stifling” debate. Does anyone believe that if left-of-center Kahol Lavan were running Israel, Omar would be less inclined to smear the bipartisan squishes at AIPAC?

Omar has mentioned Benjamin Netanyahu (who, incidentally, is in every way more of a genuine liberal than either Sanders or Omar) once in her Twitter feed, and then only to use this very talking point to defend her comments. As a political matter, no major party in Israel is going allow an independent Palestinian state run by theocrats and terrorists to exist, so Omar and her allies will never be appeased.
Of course, no one argues that Omar’s speech should be curtailed or stifled. The same can’t be said of her defenders, however, who not only falsely claim criticism of her tropes is “chilling speech,” but also decided to transform this 38-year-old firebrand into a helpless, childlike victim.
“We all have a responsibility to speak out against anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia, racism, and all forms of hatred and bigotry, especially as we see a spike in hate crimes in America,” said Sen. Kamala Harris, who, like many Democrats, tried to dilute criticism of anti-Semitism in a torrent of phobias. “But like some of my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, I am concerned that the spotlight being put on Congresswoman Omar may put her at risk.”
We shouldn’t exaggerate the prevalence of hate crimes in America, which is low, but it’s certainly worth pointing out that Jews are the target of 60 percent of those crimes—a far larger percentage than anyone else. In New York City, there have been at least 36 hate crimes against Jews so far this year so far. Shouldn’t Harris be more concerned about Omar’s rhetoric?

As Gad Saad noted yesterday, Omar’s brand of Israel criticism “is almost ALWAYS a cover of existential and definitional Jew-hatred.” This anti-Israel sentiment—opposition to the idea of a national Jewish state—is the most consequential form of anti-Semitism that exists in the world today. It has done more to undermine Jewish safety than all the dog whistles and white nationalist marches combined. Yet, many Democrats have now seemingly joined Corbynites and leftists around the world perpetuating this radicalism.
The normalization of Omarism is a long time coming. Omar’s defenders have been praising and participating in the Women’s March, led by Louis Farrakhan acolytes who believe Jewish people bear a special collective responsibility “as exploiters of black and brown people,” since Trump was elected. But it goes even further back.
When leaving the CBC meeting, “members formed a circle around Omar and Marcia Fudge literally stuck her arm out to prevent reporters from asking her questions. Then a few members hugged Omar, including Al Lawson.” It is unsurprising that Omar, who has great trouble answering simple questions, has the CBC running interference for her hatred. At least seven members of the CBC—a group seemingly immune from criticism—have coordinated and worked with Farrakhan, the anti-Semite preacher who believes “satanic” Jews are “termites” who “deserve to die.” Liberals keep telling me Farrakhan is just a conservative boogeyman, and yet his contingent is growing as Omar and allies like Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez join the ranks.
Democrats’ allies in media quickly came to Omar’s rescue, as well. The Washington Post ran three articles after Omar’s initial comments this week. All three defended her. “Want to combat hate? Stop the hazing of Ilhan Omar and start listening” wrote Wajahat Ali and Rabia Chaudry. Not only shouldn’t Jews censure Omar, the authors argued, they should shut up and listen to her wisdom. In the progressive worldview, Jews, who are successful and predominately white, should put up with a little bigotry for the common good.

As Rep James Clyburn (D-SC), who once also shared a stage with Farrakhan, noted, Omar should be given a free pass because she fled Somalia. “There are people who tell me, ‘Well, my parents are Holocaust survivors.’ ‘My parents did this.’ It’s more personal with her,” he explained. It’s personal to hate Jews when you fled Somalia? The number of people defending Omar on the risible grounds that Muslims should be immune from criticism isn’t surprising when you realize that identity politics demands strict adherence to the hierarchy of victimhood.
When New York Times reporters Sheryl Gay Stolberg (whose article in the aftermath of Omar’s dual loyalty remarks asked if Jewish people had too much power in Washington) and Glenn Thrush (who may or may not be taking diction from the Democratic National Committee) authored a piece about the resolution fight, they spent a large chunk of their space letting everyone know that President Donald Trump—whose daughter converted to Judaism and who moved the American embassy to Jerusalem and who stopped coddling the world’s most dangerous anti-Jewish terror-state—had also used anti-Semitic tropes.
While it’s not worth again debunking the fact that Trump never said neo-Nazis were “very fine people” or pointing out that most of the Jews at the Republican Jewish Coalition laughed at his jokes, it is worth mentioning that Democrats have embraced the worst kind of “whataboutism.”
NBC’s News’ Chuck Todd, in his “I’m obsessed with” segment, offered a jaw-droppingly misleading lecture accusing both parties of having an anti-Semitism problem by comparing elected officials like Omar and Tlaib — who have been embraced by their party, take part in policy making, and now widely defended on the mainstream left — to a fringe Nazi murderer who shot up a Pittsburgh synagogue, whom not a single Republican supports and has nothing to do with the GOP. The very fact that Todd was forced to shoehorn these comparisons is revealing.
In truth, Pelosi’s first watered-down resolution would have passed with most Republicans voting for it, and a number of Democrats defecting. This would have been embarrassing. So she promised to dilute it, and even that wasn’t enough for Democrats. Now, leadership is poised to pass some pointless resolution condemning all hatred.
Omar, an intellectual lightweight, is certainly a problem for America. But the fact that Democrats apparently believe what she says is fine is an absolute disaster.

The Plaquenil Scandal: The Democrat Party is Knowingly Murdering Their Own Members | Paul's Passing Thoughts #conspiracy #wingnut paulspassingthoughts.com

“The death of Democrat Americans is necessary collateral damage to achieve the greater good: getting rid of Trump at all cost…Democrat celebrities have spoken openly and often about the insignificance of Republican lives, but we should consider the newly revealed democide of the Democrat Party.”

The Democrat Party has now taken its place in the infamous history of socialist and communist democide. The greatest example is China’s Great Leap Forward between 1958 and 1962 when the economic policy of that socialist movement killed between 18 and 45 million people.

Regarding the present Plaquenil (hydroxychloroquine) controversy concerning the medication’s use to fight the Coronavirus pandemic, the evidence is in, and it is overwhelming. Three parties are guilty of outright murder: doctors who have book knowledge and lack commonsense, the Democrat Party, and doctors who hold to collectivist ideology.  Little space will be used in this post to address doctors who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel (the first party) as they pretty much speak for themselves.

First, we will look at the overwhelming and obvious proof that (as everyone knows) Plaquenil is effective in curing Coronavirus and is also a prophylactic. Fact is, this drug is a weapon that could likely stop this pandemic in the United States dead in its tracks. As Dr. Stephen Smith, founder of The Smith Center for Infectious Diseases and Urban Health, said recently, “I think this is the beginning of the end of the pandemic. I’m very serious.”

Yet, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and on Trump’s C-19 team, said the following on Face the Nation last week: “You know, as I’ve said many times, Margarate, the data are really just at best suggestive. There have been cases that show there may be an effect and there are others to show there’s no effect. So I think in terms of science, I don’t think we could definitively say it works.”

That, my friends, is a blatant lie, and I strongly suspect that he knows it.

Hunter Wallace #racist #wingnut occidentaldissent.com

[From "American History Series: The Fourteenth Amendment"]

I’m really enjoying Eric Foner’s new book.

This is probably the best book he has ever written.

The following excerpt comes from Eric Foner’s The Second Founding: How The Civil War And Reconstruction Remade The Constitution:

“Howard’s mention of the Bill of Rights highlighted the dramatic change in the federal system brought about by the Reconstruction amendments. The Bill of Rights had been designed to restrict the actions of Congress, not the states. Chief Justice John Marshall stated this unequivocally in the case of Barron v. Baltimore (1833): “these amendments demanded security against the apprehended encroachments of the general government – not against those of the local governments.” In legal terminology, Howard was described the “incorporation” of the Bill of Rights – that is requiring states to abide by its provisions – a process that has been going on for much of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first.”

As we previously noted, The First Founding and the Bill of Rights restricted the power of the federal government. The Tenth Amendment reserved all powers not explicitly granted to the federal government to the states. During the White Republic, there was no uniform definition of federal citizenship, no such thing as birthright citizenship and above all else there was no liberal state that had the power to enforce equal rights. Liberals appealed to the rhetoric of the Declaration of Independence.

[...]

The First Founding gave the sovereign states vast powers and enormous room to preserve illiberal institutions. It used to be a crime in the South to criticize slavery and to promote miscegenation. The Southern social order was based on patriarchy and paternalism.

“The Fourteenth Amendment for the first time elevates equality to a constitutional right of all Americans. It makes the Constitution a vehicle through which aggrieved groups and individuals who believe that they are being denied equality can take their claims to court.”

“Equality” wasn’t a part of the Constitution until the 14th Amendment except in the sense that each state had an equal number of senators and the possibility of a tie in the electoral college in a presidential election.

[...]

There were vociferous objections to the Fourteenth Amendment at the time:

“With equal persistence, Democrats contended that the amendment would destroy traditions of local self-rule and “invest all power in the national government. …”

[...]

As Eric Foner notes, the Reconstruction Amendments and federal civil rights legislation did all these things and much more by empowering the federal government to enforce the nebulous concept of “equal rights” and by depriving the states of their traditional powers. No one at the time anticipated how the Fourteenth Amendment could be stretched to legitimize sodomy, miscegenation, gay marriage and transgenderism. Every criticism that was lodged against it at the time ultimately came true.

This was also true of the Brown decision in the 1950s. The critics of the Brown decision denied the existence of racial equality. They denied that integrated schools would accomplish the goal of eliminating the racial gap in academic performance by eliminating racial discrimination. 65 years later, the critics of Brown have been utterly vindicated. And yet, Brown has become sacrosanct even though it never worked. How much money has been squandered on rebuilding entire metro areas to escape integration?

Avizvitoria #fundie moviebob.blogspot.com

I am not going to answer any of your question because we both know you don't care about the answers, let me tell you instead why you will fail:

Before non-whites become a voting block strong enough to render white votes irrelevant in the US general elections, they will render white leftists irrelevant in the decision making of the democratic party, in fact, with the utter failure of the overwhelmingly white leftist "Bernie movement" you might say this already happened.

This will transform the parties into explicit vehicles of racial politics, the GOP will become the white party, the Democrats, the non-white party, as i understand this was the plan of people like you all along but here is the problem: This was supposed to happen after white people became a plurality yet its happening now while they are still a majority able to secure some of the elections for the next decade even if they numbers diminish at the current rate.

The new White nationalist GOP will begin to win and put policies in place that reverse the march towards white minority status, closing the borders, mass non-white deportation, rendering the Democrats politically irrelevant.

This transformation is underway as we speak and it is unstoppable, the "POC" you so dearly recruited from the third world is just not interested in a "Joe Biden progressive", they want a brown face, just like them.

As for white people, they learned in this election to vote like a racial block, they in turn, want a white face, just like them.

You will never again be able to please both.

National Organization for Marriage #fundie nomblog.com

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Moving forward with a sweeping agenda they call "Beyond Marriage Equality" backers of redefining marriage have introduced new legislation, HR 3185, that would create special rights for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people and empower them to pursue legal action whenever they perceive an individual or businesses has "discriminated" based on "sexual orientation or gender identity."

Sponsored by the grossly-misnamed Human Rights Campaign special interest group, HR 3185 is breathtaking in its scope. It would allow gay and lesbian activists to persecute Americans in virtually every area of society — in employment, public accommodations, housing, credit, and a dozen other areas of civil life. Wherever federal law prohibits racial discrimination, it would also prohibit "discrimination" based on "sexual orientation and gender identity."

The legislation puts in the crosshairs anyone who believes God created people male and female. It would declare that a traditional view of human sexuality is hateful and bigoted and treat Christians, Jews and other people of faith just as the law treats racists. HR 3185 specifically denies someone who has been targeted the ability to rely on the provisions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a defense against the complaint of discrimination.
Defend Those of Faith Today!

Americans across the land are witnessing the persecution of wedding professionals who are being forced by homosexual activists to participate in same-sex ceremonies even though doing so violates their deeply held religious beliefs concerning marriage. Bakers, photographers, florists, inn keepers and others have been persecuted, sued and fined simply because they do not wish to personally participate in a gay 'wedding.' HR 3185 will extend this persecution far beyond the wedding industry and will impact Americans in virtually every area of life.

Under HR 3185, all that a gay, lesbian or transgendered person needs to do is allege that an individual or business has somehow discriminated based on sexual orientation or gender identity and the full force of the federal government can be brought down on the person accused.

Just imagine how this proposed law would be used. Virtually any time a LGBT person feels they have been discriminated against they would be able to pursue a special legal claim using the force of the federal government as a powerful stick to punish people.

What lies "beyond marriage equality" is persecution. And that's what HR 3185 should be called — The Persecution of Americans Act.

Please act today to help us defeat HR 3185. Click here to send a message to your federal representatives asking them to vote against this dangerous proposal that will result in rampant persecution of Americans in virtually every area of civil life.

It is imperative that members of Congress hear immediately that the American people will not tolerate the creation of powerful special rights for one segment of society, and allow them to use the power of the federal government to persecute anyone who disagrees with them.
Please act today to stop HR 3185

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

PS — Please help us defeat HR 3185 by making a much-needed financial contribution. The backers of this outrageous legislation expect that NOM will not have the resources to mount an effective fight. Please prove them wrong with your gift of $5, $10, $25, $50 or $100 or more. Thank you.

Eden Decoded #fundie facebook.com

Blacks sound stupid when they say that Republicans are racists. The Republican Party voted to free Blacks from slavery (they initiated the Civil War); The Republican Party voted against Jim Crow (meanwhile the Democrats pushed it into law); Republicans were the ones that voted for us to get land, political status, and voting rights (meanwhile the Democrats consistently passed laws to make it difficult and virtually impossible for Blacks to amass land and wealth to lead politically).

Meanwhile Blacks don't even know that the Democratic Party has over 150 years of White Supremacy and racist policies.

The reason why the Democrats want open borders and easy immigration, is so they can continue to NOT give Black Americans what's been owed to them for decades. The Democratic Party's mission was and will always be to keep Black Americans at the foot of society until they are no longer relevant.

It's absolutely embarrassing to see Blacks dancing on the Democratic stage! You don't know how foolish and ignorant that makes you look. You look like those rats that the Pied Piper led to their drowning death.

The love of sin is the reason why a Black Christian would vote for Hillary Clinton. She stays true to her Democratic roots: racism. She's just upgraded it to abortion (eugenics), NAFTA (closing tens of thousands of factories that employed Blacks; welfare (monetary reward for women that embrace whoredom and having bastard babies); and ObamaCare (giving the false illusion of free with a high price tag).

Too many Christians are showing God exactly how lazy they are. Pretending to be holy, when really they are just hiding behind their favorite sins.

Trump doesn't have a record of racism. Nor does he have a track record of disenfranchising Black Men. He's actually created a NEW DEAL contract with Black America: to make it possible for us to have viable businesses, stable families, and the ability to compete fairly in the workplace again.

So what do Black people have to lose by voting for Trump?

CertifiedRabbi #fundie reddit.com

I don't really think that this should be a debate over how friendly or intelligent an immigrant group is. Most White Western expats are extremely nice, are better educated than the local population, commit low crime rates, and contribute more to the society through taxes than they take out through government handouts. And yet non-White people still don't want millions of us to flood into their countries and make them minorities in their own cities.
Heck, I don't even like seeing White expats in non-White countries. It's fucking weird seeing White expats wearing traditional Japanese attire and taking part in traditional Japanese cultural events. It would be even weirder if these White expats had these "fuck you" attitudes that non-White immigrants have in White Western countries where they unapologetically colonize your country while maintaining their own native culture. Could you imagine if Americatowns spread across Japan where you have entire cities speaking English and refusing to adopt the native culture?
And brown and black people don't have any problems with being racist towards us in our own countries and openly declaring their desire to keep us out of "their" communities. Just look at the huge number of brown and black people that now live in White Western societies freaking the fuck out whenever we White people start to recolonize our own cities. Brown and black people are completely flipping their shit over "gentrification", which is obviously a euphemistic dog whistle for racist brown and black people wanting to keep White people out of "their" neighborhoods (even though those neighborhoods were White and better off a few decades ago).
Tolerating immigrant groups like Sikhs might seem harmless at first, but if you understand the long-term consequences of adopting these dangerously permissive and welcoming attitudes towards foreign immigrants, then you'll quickly realize that your permissive and tolerant attitudes will result in White people becoming minorities in one neighborhood after the next, and then one city after the next, and then eventually becoming minorities in one country after the next - as is predicted to happen in America, Canada, Britain, Sweden, et cetera, over the next few decades.
When is it morally acceptable for we White people to put our foot down and stop our racial dispossession? When we're down to comprising only 75% of our national population? 65%? 60%? 55%? 51%? Or is it never morally acceptable to close our borders and prevent our racial dispossession? Are we just supposed to warmly welcome and celebrate our racial demise because Sikhs are supposedly model minorities, and because not doing so is dangerously racist and akin to slavery, lynchings, and the holocaust?
Pushing all of those ridiculous - and yet commonly presented - arguments against White nativism aside, I'd argue that keeping Sikhs and other non-White groups out of our countries can be justified on simple demographic mathematics alone. After all, there's more Indians in the world than there is White people. One fucking brown country has more people in it than the entire global White community combined. And so obviously we have to be hyper-vigilant when it comes to preventing mass Indian immigration into our societies because only 1% of their population migrating to a small White country will cause those White people to become minorities in their own homeland. That's why it's extremely important to realize that a certain level of racism - such as opposing non-White immigration into our countries - is simply necessary if we want to exist 100+ years from now.
It's nothing personal, but you Sikhs (and non-White people in general) have to be kept out of our countries if we simply want to survive as a race. Go be model citizens back in your own countries. Your native countries need all of the help that they can get. We'll be just fine without you.
And besides, why would you want to be a minority anyway? Wouldn't you rather live in a country dominated by our own people where you're completely free to be yourself? Don't you yearn to be back in India surrounded by your own kind? Don't you wish that you could see people that look like you respected in the media that you consume? Why would you want to put up with racist stereotypes like Apu and "thank you, come again"? Why would you want to be forced to conform to our social norms? Why would you want to worry about some random yahoo confusing your turban as Islamic terrorist garb and assaulting you? And why would you want to live in a country that will never fully accept you?
And don't you care that you're making the native population feel uncomfortable by colonizing their country? I'd personally be racked with guilt if millions of White people flooded into Japan and tried to force the locals to bend to our will and represent us in their media. And yet I don't think that I've even seen a single non-White person express guilt for making White people minorities in their own countries. On the contrary, they act as if we White Westerners have some kind of moral obligation to just completely bend over for them even though they'd never bend over for us if the roles were reversed.
Non-White immigrants actually have the balls to get in our face, denounce us as racists, physically assault us, and even show up with loaded semi-automatic rifles to shut down our speech by force if we try to stand up for our own racial interests in our own countries. Non-White people would never tolerate that level of disrespect in their own countries unless we forced ourselves upon them through old school military imperialism.
What a perfect testament to how cucked White people have become, which non-White people have picked up on instinctually. Much like how wild animals have become increasingly aggressive towards man after the environmental and conservationist movement severely reduced hunting, so too have people of color lost their fear of the White man due to the liberal "anti-racist" cultural revolution in recent decades. They know that we've become a bunch of pathologically ethnomasochistic cowards. And they know that the liberal media and countless extremely well-funded "anti-hate" NGOs have their back. And so they have no respect for us and absolutely zero fear of us retaliating against them as they brazenly get in our faces and push us around in our own countries.
And it's not like appealing to them morally will make a difference. The only thing that they'll respect is a reemergence and reassertion of unapologetic White ethnocentrism. And that's ultimately why the Alt-Right exists, and that's why people of color and self-hating Whites are so militantly opposed to us. They know that we have a liberal boot on our necks which is keeping us down, and they have absolutely zero interest in letting us get back on our own feet again. They instead want to finish off we "bad" Whites ("good" Whites hate themselves and support open borders) and kill us off for good by putting even more weight on our necks through increased mass non-White immigration and suppression of our speech.
And the supposedly nice and friendly Sikhs will reveal their shared animosity towards we "bad" Alt-Right Whites as they join in with the other non-White and White leftist mobs that violently attack our real world events and advocate for laws that criminalize our speech. And that's why the "model minorities" rhetoric doesn't fool the Alt-Right. Whether these non-White people in our countries are model minorities or degenerate ghetto brown trash, they're completely united in preventing White Westerners from reclaiming their own countries and preventing their racial demise.
And as you pointed out in a previous post on this subreddit, a lot of these people are hardcore ethnic nationalists themselves who are basically only living in White Western countries in order to make more money. So they're a 5th column security threat on top of being a unwanted foreign colonizer.

M. Castrejon #racist amren.com

The Son of Illegal Honduran Immigrants on Race Realism, “Social Justice,” and White Identity

"It is impossible to fault whites for not wanting to be overwhelmed by Hispanics."

This is part of our continuing series of accounts by readers of how they shed the illusions of liberalism and became race realists.

College was where I first started to think about race. Certain things were immediately obvious to me, like that Asians were the biggest demographic on campus because they’re generally quite smart. But other racial patterns took me longer to understand. I was one of the only Hispanics in my dorm, a fact I didn’t find meaningful at first. However, when my dorm-mates and I discussed our high school achievements, I discovered that I had a lower GPA than all of them, and had done much worse on the SAT and ACT. Despite this, I was attending college for free through federal and state grants, while my friends had to work or borrow money from their parents to pay their tuition. It was then that I realized that affirmative action had helped me immensely.

I studied biology as an undergraduate, which meant my classes were relatively free of “social justice” propaganda — but I still had to deal with other students who were steeped in it. One instance that made a big impression on me was when an Indian dorm-mate posted something on Facebook about how a player on his fantasy football team had been arrested in real life. I left a comment on the post that went something like, “There are mainly black people in the NFL, and blacks do more crime than most, so it’s understandable that he would commit the crime.” I had been learning about statistics and probability, and was happy to apply it to something in real life — but my friend was outraged, deleted my comment, called me a racist, and blocked me. Later on, we spoke about it in person and reconciled, but it was still striking to me that stating something so obvious could cause such a problem.

As a biology major, I learned that race is not “skin-deep” the way so many people claim. It is not just melanin or skin tone that sets us apart, but so much more: height, hair growth, digestive abilities, resistance to disease, presence of hormones, facial characteristics, and even cognitive functions. All biology majors know that DNA yields RNA which gives us the proteins in our bodies, which determine everything else. I was learning all of this in the abstract while seeing examples of it all around me. In the world of biology and sciences, not only was I often the only Hispanic in social and academic settings, sometimes I was the only non-Asian. By the time I graduated, I was a race realist.

However, I didn’t immediately think that that biocentric perspective had any political implications. My entire family is Democrat, and they believe the liberal cliches about the two major parties: Democrats are the party of the poor and non-whites; Republicans are the party of the rich and white. Politics had never interested me very much, so I had never thought critically about any of this. Then, Donald Trump entered the scene and politics became impossible to ignore. As a Honduran born in America, the first thing I wanted to tackle was the claim that he was a “racist,” like so many people were saying. If it were so obvious, I should be able to find an undeniably obvious clip of him being rude or outright mean to Hispanics, blacks or some other group. I went looking for this smoking gun, and, to my complete surprise, I never found it. His notorious comments about crime and criminality in Mexico and Central America are true. My parents had told me all about those things well before Mr. Trump ever did. Smugglers and coyotes are committing crime at our Southern border. Hispanic countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Mexico, etc. do have corrupt governments. There are powerful and extremely violent gangs in those countries. These are the main reasons why my parents left their homeland for America. I am extremely fortunate to have been born in the USA, away from all that. Hearing Donald Trump tell the truth about immigration did not offend me at all.

All my life, I had been told that I was the smart kid in the family, the brightest kid in class. But I knew that if I wanted to get even smarter, I needed to engage with ideas that challenged my own assumptions. In 2016, I was still a bit of a Democrat and had a certain tribal loyalty to Hispanics. However, I felt if my beliefs were to remain solid they would have to stand strong against ideas put forth by the other side — so I took a dive into the right. I started with Alex Jones, and to my surprise, I could not get enough, and wanted more! Soon I discovered Paul Joseph Watson, James Allsup, Stefan Molyneux, Gavin McInnis, Lauren Southern, RedIceTV, Red Elephants with Vincent James, Nick Fuentes, Devon Tracey, Jared Taylor, and even the devil himself — Richard Spencer. At first, I mostly just wanted to understand their ideas in order to better refute them, but when I started doing research into what these people were saying, I realized they were telling the truth.

It was only these dissidents, these “deplorables,” that really understood IQ, crime statistics, wage differences as they relate to race, the problem of censorship, and what really constitutes “fake news.” I now realize how much the mainstream media sensationalizes stories that fit with their worldview, and ignore stories that break with it. When they find a video of a white man cussing out a black girl at a Walmart, they try and make it go viral. But they don’t talk about the countless murders and rapes of young innocent white girls all across the country by black men and illegal immigrants. I cried the first time I heard about the murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom from watching the American Renaissance video, “Do White Lives Matter?” If the media treated us as equals, Channon Gail, Mollie Tibbetts, Kate Steinle and so many other victims like them would have gotten the attention they deserve — but the media doesn’t care when the victim is white. At the same time, they perpetuate the myth that America is a white supremacist country that holds back people like me. I don’t buy it. I have never felt oppressed because of my race. I did my best in high school, and my reward was all expenses paid undergraduate degree at a prestigious public university, in no small part because I am not white.

Some of my family members consider me a “race traitor” because of my new-found beliefs (and my MAGA hat), but that is far from being the case. Aside from my Asian college friends, everybody in my social circles is Hispanic, as am I — we all eat beans, speak Spanish, watch soccer and grew-up attending Mexican churches. This culture I’m a part of has its problems: I have friends whose criminality landed them dead or in prison, but it is still indelibly mine, even if I sometimes feel more comfortable in “white society” than my own.

I am extremely fortunate to not only be born in the United States, but also be intelligent enough to see through the victim mentality my people are indoctrinated into holding. American Renaissance gives me hope. AmRen speaks the truth and demolishes most every liberal myth afflicting the US. Whites should have every right to defend themselves, establish their own home, and reproduce amongst themselves to ensure their people survive. It is impossible to fault whites for not wanting to be overwhelmed by Hispanics and all the dangers they bring with them. I like the white world, and wish it all the best.

Jesse Lee Peterson #fundie rightwingwatch.org

Right-wing commentator Jesse Lee Peterson kicked off his radio program this morning by heaping praise on President Trump for his State of the Union Address last night, while launching personal attacks on Democratic leaders and declaring that anyone who votes for a Democrat after last night “hates God” and “loves Satan.”

Peterson said that Trump’s speech reminded him of the good old days “when men where in charge” and they “didn’t take any crap.”

“Do you see the difference when a man is leading as opposed to when a woman is leading?” he asked. “Especially a liberal woman. It was the difference between night and day.”

After declaring that Democrats “looked like defeated brats” who “demonstrated that they do not love America,” Peterson attacked Rep. John Lewis as a “bug-eyed, fat black guy” who “looked like a dirty, old black trash man.” Later, Peterson turned his attention to Stacey Abrams, who delivered the Democratic response, blasting her for having supposedly “forgotten to straighten her hair.”

“She had this little nasty-looking nappy hair on her head like she just got out of the bathtub from washing her hair and didn’t straighten it,” Peterson carped. “Remember when black women used to … know not to go outside looking like that? Stacey Abrams didn’t straighten her hair. She left it nappy.”

“And she’s getting fat,” he added. “She’s just fat from the head to the toe.”

“You could clearly see the difference between logical men and illogical women last night,” Peterson concluded. “The Democratic Party is the party of death. They’re the party of death, not of life. They want to kill God, they want to kill men, they want to kill women who are of God, they want to kill unborn children, and they want to kill children who are living already, that’s why they corrupt their minds and their souls in the public schools. They don’t want them to live, they want them to die and that was apparent last night. And if you didn’t see it, may God have mercy on your soul. You are truly blind. Anyone who votes for the Democratic Party now, after last night, woe unto you. Really. Because you are deliberately voting for evil and your heart, your soul, hates God and hates good and it loves Satan, it loves evil.”

David J. Stewart #conspiracy jesus-is-savior.com

DR. FRANKENFOOD WANTS TO DESTROY ORGANIC FOOD If Dr. Frankenfood was in charge, he would create biological warfare crops that would destroy organic foods, destroy the competition. Just as the evil genius would have hoped, the USDA has allowed genetically altered foods into the conventional market which threaten organic farmers. Scientists of virtually every persuasion realize that Bt soy, corn and potatoes predictably will create Bt resistant insects. Organic farmers use Bt as their main line of defense against insects. Bt resistant insects could wipe out organic crops and organic farming. Destroying the competition just makes good business sense, reasons Dr. Frankenfood.

CONSIDER STOCKING UP ON SAFE FOODS Frank Ford, in his book, "The Coming Food Crisis," says that events are pointing to a food crisis of unbelievable proportions. With genetic engineering of the food supply, only a relatively small part of the total food supply can be known to be safe. Since 95% of the food supply contains conventional corn or soy, the rules of supply and demand show that there could possibly be a shortage of safe food over the next several years. You may consider taking advice from Frank Ford's book. He advises stocking up on organic or safe conventional dry foods that are low in oil content--wheat, beans, lentils, grains, dried fruits. If possible, stock enough for yourself, your family, and if possible your friends to live comfortably for two or three years. Create local food co-ops so you can pool resources and make large bulk orders, saving everyone money.

Son of the 1st Revolution & SAVE WHITE SETTLER U.S.A. #racist amren.com

Re: Florida: Huge Majority of Hispanics Support DeSantis, Mandatory E-Verify

(Son of the 1st Revolution)

Makes complete sense. What if open borders is entirely a white liberal creation? Imagine you're a Mexican living in Mexico. Do you want a politician who allows open borders from Central America? Do you want more gangs and criminals pouring into your country? Do you want to compete with mass immigration for your job (which would lower your wages)? It's quite possible that only illegal Hispanics and white leftists want open borders. The legal Hispanics would be harmed by open borders.

California has a large number of illegal Hispanics, which is probably why it votes in favor of sanctuary cities and open borders, teamed up with the insane white liberal vote.

That DeSantis won (against a black guy for governor) by such a slim margin isn't good.

I believe the statistics here. I'm reminded of Carlos Mencia and his racial humor. During an interview, he once said that he made a joke making fun of black people. He looked out at the audience, the blacks were laughing, the Hispanics were laughing and the whites were sitting there with expressions on their face that said I can't believe he said that, so wrong.
Why don't Republicans do a better job of labelling the Democrats as the anti-white party or the party of white guilt. The sick whining the Beto-s of this world do is off putting.

(SAVE WHITE SETTLER U.S.A.)

Hispanics for this guy means nothing. The bottom line is that Hispanics want to be in control. My state of California was Republic when it was majority White. It became Democrat when it became majority Hispanic. I am not sure what games the site is playing but the reality is, that the majority of Hispanics vote Democrat.
And actually who cares what Hispanics think... 99% of Hispanics aren't even supposed to legally be in this country...
The real question is why are we letting the Hispanic Invasion grow and continue?

Don #fundie yahoo.com

https://youtu.be/LD8kgAx8dl8
DEMOCRAT Has BECOME A SYNONYM FOR HOMOsexual
After being a life- long Democrat, since Carter ,I’ll be voting Republican for several reasons such as the disproportionate proliferation of HOMOSEXUAL TV programs and movies and the GUN GRAB ATTEMPTS by the Democratic Party. But , these next reasons really burn me up ! Recently, an openly HOMOSEXUAL teacher in EFLAND , N.C. recently read the book,” KING AND KING “, TO HIS 3RD GRADE CLASS. It’s the story of TWO HOMOSEXUAL PRINCES getting married and it shows them kissing. Also The Girl Scouts of America has been FORCED, by HOMOSEXUAL Groups, TO ACCEPT BOYS WHO IDENTIFY AS GIRLS.
There even pushing to have sex education taught in Kindergarten "Chicago Passes Sex-Ed for Kindergartners -
ABC News"
"Obama: Sex Ed for Kindergartners 'Is the Right Thing to Do'

Obama directive forces schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms consistent with their gender identity !

In the state of California, heterosexual married couples can no longer be referred to as Husbands and Wives , Democrat Governor Jerry Brown has signed a bill into law that not only redefines marriage, but eliminates any reference to husband and wife, replacing each with the Generic Term Spouse !

People this is beyond the pale. The rampant proliferation of this kind of behavior is what we can expect if we continue to let the 2% TAIL OF THE HOMOSEXUAL POPULATION continue to WAG THE ENTIRE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. The REPUBLICAN PARTY is our last hope in maintaining some kind of MORAL COMPASS AND TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES that are the foundation of this Country . Voting in a another Democratic president will give them the opportunity to appoint 3-4 new Liberal Supreme Court Justices giving the Court a LIBERAL MAJORITY FOR GENERATIONS. Meaning we can expect more of this. The following is the Genesis of a Lawsuit filed in 2006 against the reading of the HOMOSEXUAL BOOK.”KING AND KING” TO 7 YEAR OLDS IN A CLASSROOM.

Funny how you can’t read a lesson from the bible in a classroom .but you can PROMOTE HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE TO 2ND AND 3RD GRADERS !!!!

In 2006 Robb and Robin Wirthlin and David and Tonia Parker filed a federal lawsuit against the school district of Eastbrook Elementary School, which their second graders attended in Lexington, Massachusetts. The Wirthlins' son's teacher had read King & King aloud to the class as part of an educational unit on weddings. Parents countered that the school's job was to teach about the world and that Massachusetts sanctioned same-sex marriage The plaintiffs claimed that using the book in school constituted sex education without parental notification, which would be a violation of their civil rights and state law. Robin Wirthlin appeared on CNN, saying
“ We felt like seven years old is not appropriate to introduce homosexual themes. My problem is that this issue of romantic attraction between two men is being presented to my seven-year-old as wonderful, and good and the way things should be. Let us know and let us excuse our child from the discussion. ”

HERE’S WHAT THE LIBERAL JUDGES RULED: IF THIS IS THE KIND OF RULINGS YOU WANT , ELECT ANOTHER DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT


The judge dismissed the lawsuit, saying "Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. The Wirthlins and the Parkers appealed the decision; a three-judge panel of the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in favor of the school. Judge Sandra Lynch, writing for the court, rejected the plaintiff's argument that their religious beliefs were being singled out as well as their argument that their First Amendment right to free exercise of religion was violated, writing, "There is no evidence of systemic indoctrination. There is no allegation that [the second-grader] was asked to affirm gay marriage. Requiring a student to read a particular book is generally not coercive of free exercise rights." The court also ruled that the parents' substantive due process rights were not violated, as these rights did not legally give them the degree of control they sought over the curriculum.

This same ruling could apply to reading a life lesson from the Bible !!!!!

TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS !

Here's a small % of shows with Homosexual Characters or Content without doing an in depth search ,let's see we have the one that started it all Will and Grace, then STAR TREK BEYOND, Guilt , The Interestings , Sequestered , Ballers,Transparent, Mr. Robot, One Mississippi, Aquarius , True Detective ,Bosch, Grace & Frankie ,Red Oaks, Zoo ,CSI- New Orleans ,Six Feet Under , Complications ,Entourage , Angels in America ,Community , Girls, The L Word, The Walking Dead , The Following, Empire , Backstrom , Chicago Fire , The Royals ,The Big Bang Theory, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Bored to Death , The Cleveland Show, King of the Hill, South park, The Simpsons, Glee, The 100,Black Sails, Madame Secretary , Gotham , Kingdom, How to get Away With Murder, The Modern Family, Dominion, Tyrant, The Night Shift, It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia, Penny Dreadful, Nurse Jackie ,Star Crossed, The Fall , Peaky Blinders , Wentworth , Defiance, Hemlock Grove, Hannibal , The Bridge , Under The Dome ,Ray Donavan , Orphan Black, Banshee, Betrayal , House of Cards , Alpha House , Masters of Sex , Nashville, Da Vinci's Demons , Arrow, Sons of Anarchy ,Orange is the New Black, Sherlock ,Skins , Lip Service, How I met your Mother, Xena ,Prison Break , Homicide Life On The Streets , East Enders , Teen Wolf , Torchwood, Sex and the City , Bad Girls ,True Blood , Spartacus ,Game of Thrones , The Vampire Dairies , Shameless , Queer As Folk , The Wire ,The Office , Weeds ,Ripper Street , Schitt’s Creek , Eye Candy ,Transparent, The Flash ,Chasing Life ,Hit The Floor ,Dracula , Dates , The Originals ,A Place To Call Home , The Fosters , The Carrie Diaries , Undateable , and American Horror Story just to mention a few there are dozens more.

The HOMOsexualS are 2-5% of the population ,but 90% of the TV Shows have HOMOsexual content . Don't you think that's a bit disproportionate.

francois #fundie sciforums.com

Is it wrong to be disgusted by homosexuals?

I’m not homophobic, but I’m not ashamed to say that I find many homosexuals to be obnoxious. I don’t have any problems with anybody who keeps his sexual inclinations to himself. However, I have a huge problem with homosexuals who impose their sexuality on me and others. Let me explain what I mean.

I don’t have a problem with women giving me the eye. What I mean by “the eye” is the look a person gives you when it’s clear that they’re interested in you, and they find you sexually appealing. When a person gives you the eye, a lot of communicated. When a woman gives a man the look, it means he can have sex with her if he puts in a little effort. It is unmistakable when it happens to you. Personally, I find it flattering, no matter who gives me the eye. Even if it’s an ugly chick, my ego gets a boost. If it’s a hot chick, it gets an even greater boost.

Usually men don’t give women the eye, because it’s presupposed that the man will have sex with the girl. A man giving a woman amorous eyes would be redundant. Thus, it is questionable when a man does it.

However, when I get the eye from homosexuals, I am put off. I don’t know why this would ever need to be explained to homosexuals, but here it is: Don’t ever assume a random person is gay. Don’t put the moves on another person, unless you’re sure he/she is also a homosexual. Heterosexual males don’t appreciate it when homosexual males hit on them. It is disgusting, because men know men. We know what they want to violate our corn holes and we are disgusted by it. It doesn’t just apply to being hit on. It also applies to compliments. If a homosexual man compliments me on my looks, I don’t take it the same way I would from a woman, or even a fat, ugly woman. I take it that he wants to violate my corn hole.

What pisses me off on top of that is sheer (I’m not talking about all homosexuals—I have no problems whatsoever with people who keep their sexualities to themselves, regardless of what they do in private.) audacity that some homosexual men have. One of my brothers told me a story about him in a bar one time. There was this one guy who joined my brother and his friends at a table. He was a nice enough guy who just wanted to make friends. Then the guy started talking to one of my brother’s friends. My brother’s friend was very drunk and the two of them were hanging out, talking and having a good time. And then suddenly, the guy said to my brother’s friend, “How would you like to give me a blow job in the bath room for 10?” Needless to say, the friend was stunned and stalled — completely caught unaware, not knowing how to respond. My brother then stood up and told the guy that he had to leave immediately. He did. Now, let's ignore the homosexual's lack of social graces. Let's say he was just hitting on him and he didn't actually ask him for a blow job for 10?” It’s still wrong because he was assuming he was gay. It’s stupid for a least a few reasons. One, heterosexual males hate being hit on by homosexual males. Two, chances are high that the male who is being hit on is heterosexual male. This is because we live in a world where most males are heterosexuals. There are a lot more heterosexuals than there are homosexuals. So why do they do it?

It’s arrogant. Do they think if they’re charming enough the heterosexual male might appreciate the effort? Do they think there’s a chance the heterosexual might turn into a homosexual? “Well, I’m not gay, but for you, I might make an exception.” No. Trust me, we don’t want your advances. We don’t appreciate your compliments. We don’t even like hearing you talking about sex in general.

I don’t care about what people do in private. If a man has raunchy dirty sex with another consenting man, that’s fine with me. But don’t talk to me about it. I can assure you, I’m not interested. You’re not special, and I’m not going to make an exception for you. While you’re at it, don’t tell me I’m good looking either. Don’t hit on me, and above all, don’t give me the eyes.

Am I wrong here?

[ Maybe you ping as fag on the gaydar, francois. ]

Perhaps you're right. However, that doesn't matter. The point is, gays should be sure that the person they're hitting on, complimenting or making some kind of advance on, is also gay. So hitting on and flirting with another person of the same gender is fine if you're in a gay bar or in some gay place. That's fine. That's what those places are for. But hitting on somebody or making some kind of advance on a person in a regular bar or any not explicitly gay public place should be absolutely, positively sure that the person he/she is hitting on is also gay. They should bend over backwards. Even if I do look gay (which I don't), a homosexual shouldn't hit on me. Unless a homosexual is in a gay bar, they should ask the people around "Hey, do you know if that person is gay/available for some man-on-man action?" And then when they've talked to enough people to be confident that the person in question is in fact, gay, then that person can go ahead and flirt and camp it up with said person.

[ You seem to have double standards. You're quite ok with heterosexual men "hitting" on girls in bars, it seems, trying to pick them up. But when it comes to homosexual men hitting on men in bars to try to pick them up, then you get all offended. ]

I don't have a problem with homosexuals going to gay bars to pick up homosexuals. That's fine. That's what gay bars are for. Heterosexuals picking up heterosexuals at a non-gay bar is what non-gay bars are for.

[ I can only assume that you feel somehow threatened by homosexuals showing interest in you. ]

You can safely assume that.

[ Yet, at the same time, you can't comprehend that a woman might equally feel threatened by your uninvited interest in her. ]

I can comprehend that, completely. However, it's different, because heterosexuals are a majority. Not only is heterosexuality more common, but heterosexuality is generally deemed less disgusting. A boorish heterosexual male hitting on a poor heterosexual girl is different from a boorish homosexual male hitting on a poor heterosexual male. The difference is huge.

You can call it a double standard if it pleases you. But I really don't see it as such. In the third page of the thread I introduced an analogy with the floggers/fuckers and the tour bus driving driving his sick friends across the country.

I agree with you that some women are disgusted by some males who hit on them. But let's compare that to the tour bus analogy. Sure those few women may suffer from these stupid men hitting on them. But those women are like the three or four out of the 25 people on the bus who are sick from the bus driver who is driving fast. The boorish man who is hitting on the poor girls are the bus drivers.

The homosexuals who are hitting on the horrified heterosexuals are like the bus drivers when the bus is full of 25 sick people. And those people are sick because of the speeding. The bus driver continues speeding, ever merrily to his destination, without a care in the world about the 25 people in the bus who are doubling over in their vomit. It's very inconsiderate in my opinion.

If you were that bus driver wouldn't you slow the bus down for your sick friends if it would make them more comfortable? Even though the bus driver is a minority, he should still take his friends' into consideration. It's really simple utilitarianism. You do what makes the most people comfortable.

[ And yet, you seem quite willing to impose your sexuality on other people. And you also seem quite happy for others to impose their sexuality on you - provided that you welcome their advances. ]

Well, there is a huge difference between assuming that a given person is a heterosexual and assuming he is a homosexual. Huge difference. If homosexuals were a majority, I would probably still hate being hit on them, but I would probably get used to it and eventually learn to tolerate it out of simple necessity. However, they are not the majority. They should try to make the majority comfortable by inhibiting their sexualities in our presence because it sickens us. It's simple utilitarianism.

[ So, it seems to me that what you really want is for people to read your mind and magically deduce whether you want sexual attention or not. If they are a "hot chick", then bring it on. But if they are a "hot guy", they should somehow just know that you're not into that ]

Lol, no. That's not what I want. I already explained what I want. What I want is really quite reasonable. I want homosexuals to find out whether or not I am gay before they grope, give me the eye, or make some kind of advance on me. That's what I want. Let me know if you're still confused. I don't know if I can make it any clearer to you. I have Skype. It might be easier to explain it that way.

[ If you're claiming that men never make sexual advances to girls - that it's always the other way around - you're living in a fantasyland. ]

Luckily, I never said or implied anything of that kind. Males are constantly throwing themselves at women in the hope of a favourable response - much moreso than vice versa.
It's called "trolling." It's a tried and true method.

[ But you're happy to "put the moves on" any women, I suppose. ]

Hold on now. You're being hasty and presumptuous. I'm not happy to put the moves on any woman. I'm not a prick. I only hit on women if they are receptive. I can usually tell very quickly in my interactions with women whether or not they are receptive. If they aren't, I don't waste my time or hers.

[ What if she is homosexual? Shouldn't you check, first, like you expect men to check your sexuality? Tell me - how do you propose that will work? "Hi, I'm Bernard." "Hi, I'm francois." "Just checking, francois - are you homosexual?" ]

Once again, I think you think it's a double standard. But it's really not. It's because homosexuals don't find heterosexuals nearly as disgusting has heterosexuals find homosexuals. That's reason number one. Reason number two is this: there are way more heterosexuals than there are homosexuals. Simple utilitarianism. Are you familiar at all with hedonistic calculus?

[ Why? There's no "violation" between consenting adults. ]

You took that too literally. I was just writing colorfully. I try not to bore the shit out of my readers. I am courteous. I consider others. I wish some homosexuals were the same way.

[ And you think that there aren't equally audacious heterosexual men who go around propositioning every woman they see and think might be fair game? ]

Not really that many guys do that. And yes, those kinds of guys are obnoxious, especially if the attention is unwanted. However, it's not on par with that of homosexuals hitting on heterosexuals. It's really not. I think I've already explained my reasoning to you. I think you can anticipate what I would say to that. If you need it again, let me know.

[ How hard is it to say "Thanks, but I'm not interested"? ]

It's not hard at all. My real problem is homosexuals that give me the look or grope me. Or homosexuals that make out in public places. Homosexuals making out in a public place is not the same as heterosexuals making out in a public place. Once again, I don't give a shit about what people do in private. However, in public, I think homosexuals should still be courteous and yielding to the horrified majority.

Well, it might be a 7 to 1 ratio, or something like that. Not terrible odds. From what I've heard and read, it's more like 1 out of 20, or 5%. They are a minority.

[ Do the men who proposition women think the same thing? ]

Get real man. A homosexual man hitting on a heterosexual man is not the same thing as a heterosexual man hitting on a heterosexual woman. If you think it's the same thing, you need to get outside. Take a walk.

[ I don't think many homosexual men would have a problem with that. They would be quite happy to avoid you. ]

Once again, I don't want them to avoid me. I've had gay friends. I'm not a homophobe. I've made it clear what I want many times, but you keep ignoring it, because you know that what I want is actually quite reasonable. Let me reiterate: I want homosexuals to find out whether or not I am gay before they grope, give me the eye, or make some kind of advance on me. They should be yielding to the horrified majority.

Still confused?

[ In fact, I wonder what francois's religious views are. ]

I have none. I'm an atheist. My disgust for homosexuals imposing their sexualities on non-homosexuals is natural and based on several bad experiences with homosexuals. It has nothing to do with Leviticus, as I'm sure you would love to think.

[ Do you think homosexuals have been accepted as a "norm"? I'll bet Prince_James and francois and Baron Max don't think homosexuality is "normal". ]

Then you would have lost money. That you would so flippantly assume that I would think that homosexuality is not natural or normal speaks volumes about you.

[ You rank people giving you the eye above people dry-humping you? Maybe you meant "and lastly"? ]

Strangely, yes. I've been groped, hit on, and stared at by homosexual men. And I think getting the eye is the worst.

Like this one time I got groped it was by this homosexual whom I know. It was at school. We weren't really friends, per se. But we were on a friendly basis with each other. He is openly gay and I knew he was gay. No problems.

However, one day, I was bending over to get a CD from my bag, and he couldn't resist apparently. He grabbed my ass. And I can completely understand my brother's friend at the bar, who was just completely shocked and stunned and didn't know what to do. I was just shocked and appalled for a good 20 seconds or so. After that, however, I composed myself and calmly told him to never do it again and that if he tried to do it again, I would likely beat the shit out of him. Overall, it was a pretty bad experience. But it wasn't the worst. The worst is getting stared at.

Like this one time I was working. And this homosexual who was buying something was staring at me, giving me the creepiest, depraved smile I've ever seen. Words can't describe how it made me feel. All I can say is that it made me feel really dirty. I felt like I needed to take a shower. I felt like I needed to peel off the first layer of skin cells that were infected by the treacherous photons which bounced off my pure, virgin skin and into this asshole's depraved pupils. Worst experience ever. This happened to me a few weeks ago in the bar. It wasn't quite as bad, but it still made me uncomfortable.

[ It's as wrong as being disgusted by heterosexuals, bisexuals, or asexuals.
It's a form of prejudice to be disgusted by a general group of people in that manner. You have to look at things on an individual basis.
]

I'm not disgusted by all homosexuals: just the ones that make it very apparent that they're sexually interested in me, and those who kiss their boyfriends in public and talk about their sexcapades in public. Normal homosexuals, I don't mind at all. Rude ones piss me off.

turalura #fundie rr-bb.com

The American people don’t want it. They don’t want Obamacare, they don’t want foreign oil, they don’t want indoctrination in the schools, they don’t want shariah, they don’t want America dismantled, they don’t want American hegemony destroyed, they don’t want international law, they don’t want to abandon Israel, they do not want their freedoms destroyed, they do not want free speech curbed, they don’t want Obama!

Bro Randy #fundie teens-4-christ.org

[How to tell if you are saved by Bro Randy. #6 is disturbing...]

1. When you prayed the prayer, were you sincere or did you just want to make someone else happy? If you were sincere, give yourself a point.
2. Did you really want to give yourself to God, or did you really want to not go to hell? If you really wanted to give yourself to God, add a point.
3. Would you do anything the Lord led you to do? If yes, add another point.
4. When you sin, does the Holy Spirit convict you? If yes, add another point.
5. Has the Lord shown you things in your life that are wrong? If yes, add another point.
6. In general, do worldly people love you or not? If worldly people do not like you, add a point.

Anonymous #racist #psycho archive.4plebs.org

[Responding to a Muslim poster]

We will exterminate you all. We will wipe out your cities, rape your women, rip the teeth out of your children's mouth and throw your men off helicopters.
We will commit blasphemy in your temples, we will erase your history, we will turn your countries into glass, we will bomb, rape, pillage and kill without mercy.
We will exterminate the dissidents, we will kill all those who oppose our destiny.

But you know, that still doesn't make us the terrorists. Terrorists are revolting against those in charge. But the thing is, we're in charge. And there's nothing you can do about it. We can get away with committing genocide because we're the master-race, and you're nothing but a shitskin.

We cooked 100.000 japanese people alive before breakfast, did the same thing two days later. Was this a war crime? Absolutely, but we can get away with it because we rule the world.
If we really wanted to destroy you, your country would cease to exist in ten minutes.
Thank us for our mercy.
Lick our boots for we allow your miserable existence to go unpunished.

We are the white people. We are the West.
Look upon our history, Muhammad, and despair.

Jason Kenney #fundie #homophobia washingtonpost.com

When Lea Cheeseman came out as bisexual in the ninth grade, her junior high school didn’t have a club for LGBT students. So she started the Calgary school’s first gay-straight alliance.

The student-run clubs, found in hundreds of schools across North America, provide a venue for gay students and their allies to meet — often without the knowledge of their parents. Studies suggest they can help reduce bullying, improve health outcomes and lessen the risk of suicide.

But across Canada and beyond, they have also been lightning rods for controversy, touching as they do on divisive debates around education, parental consent, religious freedom and students’ rights.

Now the United Conservative government of new Alberta Premier Jason Kenney, promoted by some on the Canadian right as a model for the nation, is proposing legislation that gay rights activists say would roll back protections for the groups. The education bill would eliminate a requirement that schools form clubs “immediately” when asked by students and would drop an explicit ban on notifying their parents.

Provincial Education Minister Adriana LaGrange has said that those provisions might have been well intentioned but were “unnecessary to begin with.” The aim of the new legislation, LaGrange said, “is to balance the need that, at times, students have around the way that they want to create their organization, but also to allow for occasions where there is a need for parents to be involved as well.”

Cheeseman, now 19, and others say gay-straight alliances are under assault in Alberta. Thousands have taken to the streets of Edmonton and other communities to protest.

“The end result of the changes will be that students will not feel safe,” Cheeseman said.

The education bill, which encompasses school policy, planning and funding, is one in a series of measures advanced by the United Conservatives to reverse the liberal policies of their New Democratic predecessors in Alberta, while also pushing back against the Liberal Party of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Ottawa.

In their first months in office, the United Conservatives have repealed a consumer carbon tax, cut the minimum wage for teenagers and introduced legislation to slash corporate taxes.

While federal Conservative leader Andrew Scheer struggles to connect with voters ahead of the federal election this fall, and Progressive Conservative Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s popularity plummets amid unpopular budget cuts and scandal, conservatives are pointing at Kenney, 51, as a model for effective leadership.

The former federal cabinet minister once promised not to legislate on “divisive social issues.” But in changing the rules on gay-straight student alliances (GSAs), his government is taking on one of the most divisive.

In 2015, Alberta’s Progressive Conservative government required school officials to approve the clubs in every school, public or private, where a student requested one.

Supporters of the clubs cheered the move — but their celebrations were short-lived.

“School administrators were dragging their feet on establishing GSAs, encouraging students to call them something else or suggesting to them that if they formed or joined GSAs, they would tell their parents,” said former education lawyer Rakhi Pancholi, a New Democratic Party lawmaker.

The New Democratic Party approved legislation in 2017 to close those loopholes. Bill 24 required schools to help students establish the clubs “immediately” and made it illegal for officials to disclose student participation to parents, except when students were at risk of harm. Failure to comply could cost a school its funding.

Zachery Yeung was president of the Pride Club at his Edmonton high school last school year. Before Bill 24, he said, friends were “on the fence” about joining a gay-straight alliance, because they feared they would be outed.

“They were more comfortable after the changes,” the 18-year-old said.

Not everyone was pleased. Some faith-based schools said the legislation infringed upon their religious freedom. Some parents said they had the right to know of their children’s participation.

The Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms sought an injunction on behalf of dozens of faith-based schools and parents until it could be determined that the law was constitutional. In filings, the group described the clubs as “secret spaces” that exposed students to sexually explicit material, caused “irreparable harm” and violated parental rights.

Justice Johnna Kubik denied the request. In her decision, she wrote that an injunction would send LGBT students the message that “their diverse identities are less worthy of protection,” which would be “considerably more harmful than temporarily limiting a parent’s right to know and make decisions about their child’s involvement in a GSA.”

Kenney said in March that he supported allowing schools to notify parents if their children joined a GSA. After he was elected premier in April, students at nearly 90 Alberta schools walked out in protest.

His government’s education bill, which is expected to pass before September, would repeal Bill 24. There would be no deadline for school administrators to grant a student’s request to establish a club, and students would no longer be assured the right to use words such as “gay” and “queer” in the names of their clubs.

The bill would also eliminate language that explicitly prohibited teachers from disclosing a student’s participation to his or her parents. Instead, schools would be required to follow other laws, which allow school club participation to be disclosed if it would not be an “unreasonable invasion” of privacy, to minimize the risk of harm to a student or to aid law enforcement investigations.

Critics say that the changes will allow schools to delay club formation indefinitely and that relying on current privacy legislation leaves too much open to the interpretation of teachers. What, for example, is an “unreasonable invasion” of privacy?

“Teachers are not legal experts,” said Greg Jeffrey, president of the Alberta Teachers’ Association. “So we appreciated the clarity of ‘You cannot disclose.’ ”

“Taking out the word ‘immediately’ allows for forming a GSA to be put off with the hopes that students lose interest,” he said.

LaGrange did not respond to questions from The Washington Post about whether there would be a deadline for a school to form a gay-straight alliance before the government stepped in. A spokesman said the government opposes “mandatory parental notification of any student’s involvement in an inclusion group, including GSAs.”

“Alberta will have the most comprehensive statutory protections for LGBTQ2S+ students in Canada,” spokesman Colin Aitchison wrote in an email. He said the government “trusts educators to navigate these situations and do what is in the best interest of kids.”

Kristopher Wells, a professor at MacEwan University in Edmonton who studies sexual and gender minority youth and health, said the government is “softening and obscuring the language” around gay-straight alliances, “creating confusion and ambiguity.”

The clubs represent “one of the most promising health interventions that we’ve seen in a long, long time in schools,” he said, and it would be a mistake to make it more difficult for students to join them.

“We’d expect to see something like this in Alabama, not Alberta in 2019.”

Stephen Steinlight #racist rawstory.com

A spokesman for the right-wing think tank the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) said in a pair of interviews with the Washington Times that immigration reform will cause "the unmaking of America." According to senior CIS policy analyst Stephen Steinlight, Hispanic immigrants are bad for the U.S. because they lack "strong family values."

Steinlight told Joseph Cotto of the Times, "We can expect disaster. In sum, we'll witness the unmaking of America. It would subvert our political life by destroying the Republican Party. The Hispanic vote will make the Democrats the PRI of America. A GOP relic might survive regionally, but could never successfully contest a national election."

PRI is Mexico's Institutional Revolutionary Party, the most powerful party in that country, which dwarfs all opposition and controls virtually every public office.

"America would turn into a One Party State which, like all others, would by tyrannical and corrupt," Steinlight warned. "The political center would lurch to the left. Political liberty, the freedom to choose among authentically different alternatives, would be lost."

In addition, he said, Hispanics aren't "natural conservatives," as some say they are, because they don't exemplify "family values."

"Illegitimacy is inimical to family values," Steinlight insisted, "yet Hispanics have a high rate and have witnessed the greatest increase of any group: 19 percent in 1980 to 42 percent in 2003. More female-headed single-parent households deepens Hispanic poverty resulting in anti-social behavior such as teenage child-bearing, the highest school drop-out rate, and high crime and incarceration rates."

Harmonica #wingnut identitydixie.com

[From "Notes on the Third Reconstruction"]

Previously, I took the view that there were three periods of Reconstruction on the South. The First Reconstruction began in 1865 at Appomattox and ended in 1877 with the withdrawal of the last Reconstruction soldiers from Dixie. The Second Reconstruction began in 1954 with Brown v Board of Education and ended in 1972 when George Wallace forced Richard Nixon to embrace an anti-busing position, something I previously outlined here. The Third Reconstruction began in 2015 with the Charleston Church shooting and is going on to this day, having picked up considerable steam in the past few months. However, the more I study, the more I am convinced that there are actually four Reconstruction periods. The first two Reconstructions remain unchanged, but I now realize that there was a Third Reconstruction during the 1990s, beginning in 1991 and ending in 2001. What I previously considered the Third Reconstruction is actually the Fourth Reconstruction (our present situation).

The true Third Reconstruction began in 1991, one of the most important years in human history. It is this year that the Soviet Union fell and Marxists had to abandon their economic focus and shift fully to the Culture War – embracing anti-racism (anti-Western civilization), feminism (anti-masculinity) and the alphabet soup identities (anti-procreation). It was also that year that, with the fall of the Soviet Union, globalism was left unchallenged . In the U.S., 1991 would also see the emergence of the Clinton takeover of the Democratic Party, completing the transformation of what was the pro-worker, pro-Dixie, virtually Christian Democratic Party of my grandfather to a party that was willing to sell out workers for free trade and celebrate infanticide. And, more directly related to Dixie, it was this same year the NAACP issued a proclamation condemning the use of the Confederate flag.

Part of the reason I didn’t think the 1990s constituted the Third Reconstruction was how idyllic that time period appeared to be when I was growing up. It was a world where the Old South still lived, Confederate flags were commonplace, and we still had men like M.E. Bradford with us. “Unreconstructed” was a compliment in those days. But, as I have studied the era with clearer eyes, I realize things were not as rosy as they appeared to be. It was a decade of several significant terrorist attacks, a ton of racial tension, and horrific school shootings just to name a few. It was also a time when the Republican Party began to win elections, outside the presidency, with some consistency in Dixie. While a surface level critique would suggest that this was simply the result of the national Democratic Party moving leftward and that Dixie just replaced conservative Democrats with conservative Republicans, the truth is much more complicated as there was a distinct difference between the conservative Democrats of Dixie’s past and the conservative Republicans of the 1990s onward. The former was a conservatism of a particular people and their preservation, the latter was a conservatism of corporate profits and military spending.

It was during the 1990s that these newly elected Republicans began to dole out the incentives to come to Dixie, under the auspices of “creating jobs” and being “pro-business.” It worked for a while, but with this job growth came new people that did not share our values. Until the 1980s, virtually the entire native population of Dixie could claim membership in the Sons of Confederate Veterans or the United Daughters of the Confederacy, now we’re being pushed out by newcomers to such a point that we joke if Atlanta is even still in the South, and how in Florida the farther south you go, the further “north” you get.

[...]

Now I see that what occurred in the 1990s helped create the political climate of today and what victories we did gain was merely an illusion. We lost because we allowed the subtle subversion of our culture to take place, the fruits of which are being felt today. I liken what happened during the 1990s to AIDS. When the body is first infected with the HIV virus, the person will have flu like symptoms for two weeks before they recover. That’s when the virus is working its way into the body. Years later, the problems really start as the immune system has been ravished. And, such is the case with Dixie (along with the rest of America). The battles we were fighting were small potatoes compared to what had gone on before, but it was even more destructive in many ways as it destroyed the long-term ability for Dixie to push back.

When future historians write about how efficient the Fourth Reconstruction was, I think the events of the 1990s will be seen as particularly important. Yes, I know the history of the Fourth Reconstruction has yet to be completed, but it isn’t looking good and that they were able to push things this far is remarkable and frankly frightening. It would have been unthinkable at any point in the past and it didn’t come out of the blue, it was simply the 1990s baring fruit. It was the era when we were promised that in exchange for assimilation, we could become wealthy. Far too many of our people took it, especially the politically well-connected. Due to the problems of that decade, Dixie was unable to produce a new generation of leadership to guide her during tough times, and boy are these ever tough times. The 1990s may have looked great at the time, but good times don’t forge strong men – were living through that now. The good news is that tough times do forge strong men.

Keep the faith. We’re not dead yet.

hayden #fundie bbs.payableondeath.com

I mean this with all sincerity, No God fearing man would or should run on the democratic ticket in today's world. It is not the same party that it once was. Ronald Reagan said at his 1981 ingauration..."I did not leave the democratic party, The democratic party left me."
Even if a Christian has good intentions, being on the democratic ticket is like being an ice cube in hell, it just dosen't work.

Angelica Zambrano #fundie christiscoming777.com

THE LOST

The Lord showed me a place where many people were walking to hell. I asked Him, “Lord, how is it that they walk to this place?” He replied, “I will show you.” He showed me a tunnel with many people walking through it. These people were chained from hand to foot. They were dressed in black and carrying a load on their back. Jesus said, “Look Daughter, those people that you see there, those people don’t know Me yet. That which they carry on their backs is sin, but go and tell them to turn their burden over to Me, and I will give them rest; that I am He who forgives all their sins…Daughter, go and tell those people to come to Me, for I await them with open arms, and go tell them that they are walking to this place.”

As I was watching the people walking, I said, “Lord, that person over there is my cousin; that young man is my cousin, Lord, and that young girl coming down is also my cousin; my family is coming to this place!” He replied, “Daughter, they are walking to this place, but go and them where they are walking, go and tell them they are walking to hell. Go and tell them that I have chosen you as my watchman…I have chosen you as my watchman, for it means that you are to tell the truth. You must go and tell all that I have shown you. If you do not speak out and something happens to that person, his blood will be poured over you, but if you go and do as I have told you, then that person has an account with me. If the person does not repent, then the responsibility resting upon you will be lifted, for the account will rest upon that person and his blood will not be poured over you. (Ezekiel 3:18)”

MICHAEL JACKSON IN HELL

Jesus told me that many famous people were walking to that place, famous and important people. Take for example, Michael Jackson. This man was famous all over the world but he was a satanist. Although many people may not see it that way, but it is the truth. This man had satanic covenants: He came to agreement with the devil in order to achieve fame and attract many fans.

Those steps that he performed, that’s the way I saw demons walk while tormenting people in hell. They would slide backward and not move forward, while they shout; enjoying the anguish they impose upon the people. Let me tell you that Michael Jackson is in hell. The Lord showed him to me after Michael died. He let me see Michael Jackson tormented in flames. I cried to Jesus, “Why?” It wasn’t easy to see how this man was being tormented and how he would scream. Anyone who listens to Michael Jackson’s songs or sings them or who is a fan of Michael Jackson, I warn you that satan is trapping you in his web so that you will end up in hell. Right now, renounce it in the name of Jesus! Jesus wants to set you free, so that you will not be lost.

The Lord said, “Daughter, there are also people who know Me, that are walking to this place.” I asked, “Lord, how can people who know You also come here?” He replied, “That person who has left My ways and that person who is living a double life.” He started showing me people who were walking to Hell. They were tied from their hands to their feet.

GO & TELL THEM

They each wore a white garment, but it was torn, stained and wrinkled. Jesus said, “Daughter, see how My people have walked away from Me. Daughter, I want to tell you that I am not coming for these people. I am coming for a holy people, ready, without blemish, without wrinkle and without defilement…Go and tell them to return to the old paths.” (Eph. 5:26-27) I started to see many of my uncles and many other people who had walked away from the Lord’s ways. “Go and tell them that I am waiting for them, to surrender their loads to Me, and I will give them rest.” Jesus was weeping, “Daughter, they are coming this way. Go and tell your uncles; go and tell your relatives that they are coming this way! Daughter, many will not believe you, but I am your faithful witness, I am your faithful witness. I will never leave you. Even if they do not believe you, Daughter, go and tell them the truth, for I am with you. I will also show you, Daughter, how people arrive at this place.”

We went to a tunnel where there were a multitude of people falling into the abyss. Not 1 thousand, not 2 thousand, but as many as the sand of the sea, countless. They were falling by the second, like handfuls of sand being thrown down. The souls were falling rapidly. Jesus was weeping, He said, “Daughter, this is how humanity perishes; this is how it is lost!…Daughter, it hurts Me to see how humanity perishes.”

Jesus said, “Demons also hold meetings in this place.” And I said, “Demons hold meetings?” Jesus said, “Yes, Daughter, they meet to plan, to plan what they will do to humanity. They hold daily secret meetings.” And with that, Jesus took me to a cell, where I saw a wooden table with chairs around it. And there were demons – all types of demons. Jesus explained, “Daughter, they are now planning to go and destroy the pastors’ families, the missionaries, the evangelists and all of those who know me. Daughter, they want to destroy them; they have many darts.”

The demons would laugh and mock and say, “Let’s destroy humanity and bring it to this place.” Jesus said, “Go and tell them that I am with them. Tell them to not leave open doors, to leave no place to satan, for satan walks about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.(1st Peter 5:8)” But the Word says, “he walks as”, because the only real Lion, is the Lion of Judah, Jesus Christ of Nazareth(Revelations 5:5)! Jesus said, “Daughter, they especially want to destroy the pastors; family.” I asked, “Why do they want to destroy the pastors’ family?” And Jesus responded, “Because they are in charge of thousands of people that are the sheep of the fold; the sheep of the fold that the Lord has given them. They want these people to return to the world again; to look back and end up in hell…Go and tell the pastors to speak the truth. Go and tell them to preach the truth and to speak everything that I tell them and to never keep to themselves what I tell them!”

Abi-albon #fundie rr-bb.com

[About the Peace symbol]

Let me ask you this? Why would anyone want nuclear disarmament? Why would someone not want us to use that which God has given us to destroy our, and his, enemies? Have you not noticed it was Christian countries who developed nuclear weapons? How can you ignore that it was God himself who provided the materials with which to build these weapons and then granted Christian nations the wisdom to develop them? If the muslim god or the buddhist god were the true God, I think we'd see muslim or buddhist nations as the nations who invented these weapons. As it is, the only reason they have them is because someone was a traitor to their God and their country and provided these heathens with the ability to build these weapons.

Charles Martel #fundie answers.yahoo.com

The Democratic party used to be home to the vast majority of Catholic voters.

2004 was the first time that a Republican (Bush), against Kerry (nominal Catholic) got the majority of the Catholic vote.

Atheists and anti-Christian bigots now dominate the Democratic Party. They say they aren't religous but public schools are their temples used to indoctrinate children via their secularist, anti-Christian views.

America has had a long Judeo-Christian tradition. What is the cause of the big backlash against it?

Why is the Democratic party willing to lose Christian voters like it has in the last 30 years, especially of late?

How did the Democratic party become hostage to atheists and anti-Christian bigots?

Pale Rider #racist washingtontimes.com

You are truly ignorant if you don't understand the dynamics of the democrat party in the South.

I know what I am about to say is politically incorrect in every sense of the word, which is exactly why it needs to be said. Understand this:

After the South lost the War of Northern Aggression, it was a decimated, lawless land, for the most part. Whites, particularly women, were targets of the newly freed slaves and Yankee carpetbaggers who descended on the vanquished population, and rape and murder followed.

Seeing that the US Govt was in no mood to help save our families through committed law-enforcement (after all, abolitionists were in favor of murdering Southern slave-owners and their families anyway), it fell to what was left of Southern manhood to find an effective way to deal with the situation --- hence, the Brotherhood of the Ku Klux Klan was born.

Now let me stop a second and just say that none of this justification of the Klan is EVER mentioned on TV, in the press, popular media, etc. Hell, it pains me to say this, not even the current NRA leadership understands this. However, I know that many a rapist whose neck was stretched deserved just what he got (and still does today), and the fact that the very presence of the Klan on horseback in the moonlight in certain, shall we say, high-crime areas, kept others from straying was a huge benefit for deterrence.

Now, over the many decades since 1865, the South instituted certain laws to keep the races segregated (just as the dictator Lincoln believed they should be), because this is the most effective way to prevent miscegenation, among other degeneracies. These culminated in the very effective Jim Crow laws that are routinely dismissed, but make no mistake, they were effective. These lasted until the democrat LBJ enacted his so-called War on Poverty, and which dramatically changed, FOR THE WORSE, both white and black races in this country.

You see Southerners had identified with the democrat party since Thomas Jefferson started it, and they were naturally anti-Lincoln/Republican, but had started moving away when the Democrat Party of FDR began instituting his socialist policies, then continued to move away from the party of LBJ. You might say, Southerners did not leave the Democrat Party, the party left them.

I realize it's a very difficult mental exercise to understand the subtleties involved in these political machinations, but what is left of the the conservative South found a home in the Republican Party, and they still form the backbone of the party.

Wu Hu #racist lunaticoutpost.com

Now consider this……An interesting analogy:
You've been on vacation for two weeks, you come home, and your basement is infested with raccoons. Hundreds of rabid, messy, mean, raccoons have overtaken your basement. You want them gone immediately so you hire a guy. A pro. You don't care if the guy smells, you need those raccoons gone pronto and he's the guy to do it! You don't care if the guy swears, you don't care if he's an alcoholic, you don't care how many times he's been married, you don't care if he has plumber's crack...you simply want those raccoons gone! You want your problem fixed! He's the guy. He's the best. Period.

That's why Trump. Yes, he's a bit of an ass. Yes, he's an egomaniac, but you don't care. The country is a mess because politicians suck and we are all sick and tired of Tweedledee and Tweedledum choices. The Democrats are killing us, the Republican Party is two-faced and gutless, liberals don’t have a clue, and illegals are everywhere. You want it all fixed!

You don't care that Trump is crude, you don't care that he insults people, you don't care that he had been friendly with Hillary, you don't care that he's been married 3 times, you don't care that he fights with Megen Kelly and Rosie O'Donnell, you don't care that he doesn't know the name of some Muslin terrorist,...this country is weak, bankrupt, our enemies are making fun of us, we are being invaded by illegals, we are becoming a nation of victims where every Tom, Ricardo and Hamid is a special group with special rights to a point where we don’t even recognize the country we were born and raised in; “AND WE JUST WANT it FIXED”.

Trump is the only guy who seems to understand what the people want. You're sick of politicians, sick of the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, and sick of illegals. You just want this thing fixed. Trump may not be a saint, but no person or company he has ever done business with has come forward and called him corrupt, or hard to do business with. He doesn’t have lobbyist money holding him, and he doesn’t have political correctness restraining him. All you know is that he has been well educated at the university of Pennsylvania business school, seems to have boundless energy, has been very successful, a good negotiator, he has built a lot of things, and he's not a cowardly, deceitful, professional, politician. And he says he'll fix it.

You don't care if the guy has bad hair.

You just want those racoons gone.
Out of your house.

Various Incels #sexist incels.co

(mental_out)

[Blackpill] Article about suicide in people with arthritis, and how it makes women use more violent suicide methods

I've often seen citations that women attempt suicide more but succeed less, and this being put down to women using less violent methods.

I however found a journal study about the impact of arthritis on the likelihood of suicide, seemingly particularly in women. The fact that the suicide rate went up isn't shocking, however one particular sentence is.

Before their suicide, 50% of the female RA patients (vs 11% of the male RA patients) had experienced at least one suicide attempt. The method of suicide was violent in 90% of the RA females.

Suicides in persons suffering from rheumatoid arthritis

Now this particular passage says that in 90% of the female suicides were violent in women with RA. Why is this interesting?

To me this would suggest that in reality, womens low suicide success rate in normal cases is due to the fact that they don't want to die. As seen here, when women have an actual reason to die, like severe arthritis pain, they don't shy away from using more violent methods. Thus this would suggest that in most female suicide attempts, the reason for using less violent is not because of womens inherent lack of violent nature, but because they simply don't actually want to die. Meanwhile women who do actually want to die will use the same violent methods that men who want to die do.

While it shouldn't be too shocking, I think it's interesting to see an actual study that would corroborate the idea that the high attempt low success rate is due to women straight up just not actually wanting to kill themselves.

No matter woman or man people who have RA have to experience a hell few others do. These are some of the most understandable suicides out there.

I think the fact that success numbers went up pretty steeply and via mostly violent methods here really shows it's really just a matter of whether they really want to sui or not. Anyone who wants to sui will use violent methods, only attention seekers use crappy drugs to try and suicide really unless it's some seriously potent stuff they've gotten their hands on.

(Personalityinkwell)

Based thread.

There is almost never a reason for someone on tutorial mode to kill themselves

(Over_this_Life)

at the end of the day it's all about calling chad's attention

Imagine having everything you could ever want in life handed to you on a silver platter and yet you still kill yourself

(the black dog)

In terms of pain levels anything less than rheumatoid arthritis will not cause a toilet foid to commit seppuku. I'd say the psychic pain an incel suffers daily pales in comparison to RA. Foids don't suffer, they "attempt" suicide to get attention and pity points on and offline. A man could off himself in the middle of the street and people would walk over his corpse for days until being noticed.

(LiterallyASoyboy)

All but confirms what we've already suspected, the vast majority of women who "attempt suicide" just don't have a good enough reason to actually do it properly. Their attempts are usually nothing more than attention seeking behavior.

(FrailPaleStaleMale)

Fucking this thread needs it's spot on a plaque. The amount of bullshit I've heard about "muh less violent mefodz"... It's painfully obvious that the reason high failure methods are used is for attention. Here's the evidence.

(GoffSystemQB)

I think the fact that success numbers went up pretty steeply and via mostly violent methods here really shows it's really just a matter of whether they really want to sui or not. Anyone who wants to sui will use violent methods, only attention seekers use crappy drugs to try and suicide really unless it's some seriously potent stuff they've gotten their hands on.

This is something that is so obvious yet it sounds bad to say so people cry out when others say so.

I'd like to see what nonsense they'd try to throw out when presented with this study.

Angela Kaaihue #fundie rawstory.com

The chair of the Republican party of Hawaii is urging fellow party members to disavow his own congressional candidate in the 2nd District after the GOP candidate attacked Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) for her religion and faith.

GOP candidate Angela Kaaihue issued a press release last week saying that Gabbard and former Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa “worship the devil,” and called the Democratic Party the “Devil Democratic State.” Her meme, that has since been deleted from her Facebook page, read in part, “Some Christians say, a vote for Tulsi Gabbard is a vote for Satan, the devil do you agree or disagree?”

image

“Then Hawaii, YOU can have YOUR so-called ‘perfect’ pathetic Hindu 1000 GODS leader along with YOUR pathetic ‘career politician’ Buddhist Hanabusa, and your pathetic American Traitor, And my family and I will go our merrily way,” Kaaihue said according to the Honolulu Civil Beat.

“I am talking about God, preaching about God, restoring his kingdom back into Hawaii,” she said in an interview Saturday. “This is God’s country, America is God’s country. I am trying to educate people about that.”

The Republican party chair was quick to attempt to dissociate his party from her attacks. “I want it understood by the general public and the media that the recent inflammatory comments made by candidate for Congress (CD2) Angela Kaaihue do not represent the views, values, or the sentiments of our Party and its members,” GOP chair Fritz Rohlfing said in a release. “Her vulgar, racially-bigoted, and religiously-intolerant descriptions of Democratic Party candidates are offensive, shameful, and unacceptable in public discourse.”

Kaaihue shot back that the party chair should be cautious because he’s attacking the “messenger of God.”

“The biggest liar and deceiver is Satan, the Devil. To call one a racist bigot, when they have taken over our America, GOD’s Country, and while most people do nothing, and allow it to happen, YOU are guilty for NOT standing up for GOD,” the word-salad on Facebook continued. “The biggest liar to call one a Racist Bigot! Take a stand for GOD, Christianity is the birth religion of America.”

She further alleged that the state’s GOP is identifying themselves as “taking the mark of the beast.”

The Texas-born woman further condemned a “local dumb mentality,” claiming if “my neighbor Gov. Ige and his Japanese constituents” would settle a legal dispute over some land that she would drop out of the race.

jiaogulan #fundie godlikeproductions.com

Evolution VS High School Biology. Evolution Loses. Check My Math

The law of biogenesis. Have you heard of it? Louis Pasteur proved that living organisms come from other living organisms and do not spontaneously come to life from non-living material. 150 years later there are some that believe that all life arose from a cell or cells that spontaneously generated from non -living material. Perhaps the law of biogenesis is more of a guideline rather than a law. Or perhaps everything that has ever been observed in nature by scientists over the last 150 years affirms the validity of this law. So the spontaneous generation of a theoretical original cell is a violation of this law and is contradictory to scientific observation.
The End.

No, not really. Let’s look at several of the insurmountable problems associated with the theory of spontaneous generation (evolution)

Problem 1. Amino acids.

Amino acids would be needed to form the protein molecules contained in the first theoretical non-living cell. These amino acids would have been formed by natural processes. Dr. Stanley Miller performed a series of experiments to show how amino acids could be produced by generating electric arcs in a gaseous mixture of hydrogen, methane and ammonia along with water. The main problem with producing Amino acids by natural processes, apart from formation within a living organism is that a mixture of left-handed and right-handed amino acids will be formed. These two forms of amino acids are chemically the same but the component atoms of each are put together differently. In fact, mirror images of each other. In living organisms, virtually all amino acids are left handed. The Miller experiment produced a 50/50 mixture of both. Half left-handed and half right-handed. Typically one right-handed amino acid in in protein molecule will render the protein useless or inactive. In other words, if you have an enzyme molecule that performs a particular function in a cell or organism that contains only one right-handed amino acid, that enzyme will not work.

Problem 2. Specific sequence of amino acids in proteins:

Proteins are made of 20 different amino acids. The amino acids are chemically bonded together like links in a chain. The specific arrangement or sequence of amino acids determines the characteristics and function of each protein molecule. To calculate the probability of the correct amino acid sequence in a given molecule in the first theoretical non-living cell, you only need to know two things:
The probability of a particular amino acid in the sequence being the correct amino acid out of a possible 20 amino acid is one chance in 20.

Multiply all the probabilities together.
In other words, if one of the theoretical protein molecules in the theoretical cell had 50 amino acid links, multiply 20 x 20 x 20 etc. 50 times. So the probability of the first two links being in the correct sequence is 20 x 20 = 400 or one chance in 400. The probability of the first 3 links being in the correct sequence is 20 x 20 x 20 = 8000 or one chance in 8000. As a mathematical shortcut to visualize how big of a number you get when multiplying 20 x 20 fifty times, do this:

Multiply 2 x 2 fifty times (2 x 2 x 2 ……) and tack on 50 zeros to the end of that number.
To calculate the chance of getting all 50 sequences correct AND all left handed, consider that each link could be a right-handed version of any of the 20 amino acids or a left-handed version of any of the 20 amino acids but only one of the 40 possible amino acids is correct for each link. The probability of the first amino acid being correct and left-handed is one chance in 40. The probability of the first two amino acids being correct is 40 x 40 = 1600 or one chance in 1600. The probability of the first three links being in the correct sequence is 40 x 40 x 40 = 64000 or one chance in 64000. The probability of the first 4 links being in the correct sequence in one chance in 2,560,000 or about one chance in 2 and a half million. To get a handle on the probability of getting all 50 links in the correct sequence multiply 4 x 4 fifty times and tack on 50 zeros to the end of that number. That is a really big number. Please enter your answer in the comments section below.

A protein with only 50 links is relatively small in nature. Some enzymes are made up of thousands of amino acids. The first theoretical non-living cell must have had many protein molecules perhaps 100 or more. To give an unfair advantage to those who reject the law of biogenesis lets suppose the first cell or proto cell had only 50 protein molecules that contained 50 amino acids each. To get an idea of the size of the number that represents the probability of all the amino acids being in the correct sequence and all left handed in in all the protein molecules:

multiply 4 x 4 2500 times and tack on 2500 zeros on to the end of that number. I am no math whiz but I believe that would be a really big number. It is bigger than the estimated total number of fundamental particles in the observable universe”

So, if every particle in the universe represented a trial and error formation by natural processes of just two of the theoretical proteins, you could possibly get two molecules that were correct at the same time somewhere in there. The odds would still be against it. By the way, proteins have not been observed to form by natural processes apart from living organisms and isn’t that what scientific theory is all about? The observable and reproducible? How many universes of chances do we need to get the first cell right?
By the way. All of the above math is overkill. Just the left-hand, right-hand problem destroys any hope of spontaneous generation. The chance of all the links in all 50 protein molecules being correct can be calculated by multiplying 2 x 2 2500 times. Every time you multiply by two you cut the probability in half. Please write your answer in the comments section below. One more thing while we are on the subject of multiplying by two. How many times you would need to fold a piece of paper in half to make it thick enough to reach to the moon? The number of folds is as ridiculously small as the piece of paper needed is large.

Problem 3. Specific sequence of the genetic material.

DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid) is the molecule inside a cell that among other things contains the code for making protein molecules. As a cell grows it takes in nutrients and produces protein molecules. When the cell is large enough it splits into two cells. The ability for the cell to produce the correct amino acid sequences in the various protein molecules is dependent on the specific sequence of molecules in DNA called nucleotides. If the sequence of nucleotides is incorrect the cell will produce proteins with the wrong amino acid sequence. The DNA molecule contains the code for every type of protein in the cell as well as the code for the specific structure of the cell. The probability that the DNA in the first non-living theoretical cell contained the correct code for all the types of protein molecules in that cell is the combined improbabilities of at least one of each type of protein molecule in that cell having the correct amino acid sequences at the point in time the cell spontaneously transitioned from being dead to being alive. You may want to re-read that last sentence a few times so the implications become apparent.

Problem 4. All the component parts in the same place at the same time.

Cells contain structures called organelles. They are like small organs within the cell that have specific functions. Some of the organelles and other structures one might expect to find in this theoretical cell are endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi apparatus, mitochondria, nucleus, DNA, RNA, and cell membrane. At the very least, the theoretical minimum set of component parts to sustain cellular life needed to be present at the same time and place. The component parts needed to be structurally correct and needed to, by chance and unknown natural processes not associated with living organisms, be in a state of correct assemblage. That is a strange concept. The complete simplest theoretical cell needed to be produced by a set of natural processes, then transition from a dead state to a living state, and then grow and reproduce by an entirely different set of natural processes other than the ones that originally generated it. Highly improbable? No. Totally impossible.

Cornucopia of other problems:

Due to the fact that there is massive amounts of calcium on land and in the oceans, there would be no free phosphorus to form DNA. All the theoretically free phosphorus would end up in the form of calcium phosphate in no time.
The theoretical primordial earth atmosphere contained no oxygen. As useful molecules were theoretically being produced by bolts of lightning they would be destroyed by ultraviolet light since there would be no ozone layer. Some molecules would end up in the ocean and if submerged deep enough to be unaffected by UV radiation would be in the ocean along with other lucky molecules in a state of near infinite dilution. At some later time some of these molecules might end up on land in a muddy little evaporating puddle or pond with less dilution. Then they would be destroyed by ultraviolet light. If the atmosphere contained oxygen, these same molecules would be oxidized and useless.

The same lightning that could produce organic molecules could and would far more easily destroy previously generated molecules. That is just how the physics works. Some fortunate few would make it to the depths of the ocean.

Some might theorize that the first living cell might be of the type that would exist near a submerged volcanic vent far from the perils of the earths surface. This cell would reproduce and future generations of cells would produce oxygen by some method other than photosynthesis. As impossible as this is, you still have to get to that first cell. So all the afore mentioned problems still apply.

Misc. notes:

The math in regard to the left and right-handed amino acids is a little flawed. One of the amino acids, glycine, is left handed only. With that in mind the odds are slightly better so spontaneous generation is totally possible. Not. In all fairness, the Miller experiment produces several amino acids with left-hand and right-hand versions that do not occur in living organisms. In other words the Miller experiment produced all the right amino acids as well as some wrong ones. These could just as well be factored in.

Some researchers have concluded that under certain conditions amino acids could be generated with about 90 percent being left-handed. This does not help much. So instead of half of 2500 amino acids statistically being right handed in the theoretical cell, only 250 will statistically be wrong. Then we multiply the results with the probability of all 2500 amino acids being in the correct sequence.

A chemist once came up with this great party game to help illustrate math probabilities like those in this article. He suggested that you get 17 people to line up in a row. Then line up in a different order. Keep lining up in a different order until all the possible combinations have been used. How many unique arrangement of 17 people in a row are there? More than 355 trillion combination. This can be calculated by multiplying 17 x 16 x 15 x 14 x 13 x 12 x 11 x 10 x 9 x 8 x 7 x 6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x 2. Since guinea pigs are so well suited for scientific experimentation, guinea pigs can be used instead of people in this experiment. The results are the same.

One last thought. Someone once wrote something like this:

If you had an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of typewriters all the books that have ever been written and would ever be written would be written.

The problem is there is no such thing as an infinite number of monkeys and typewriters. Ok. Let’s deal with the finite. Start with a meaningful paragraph 2500 characters in length. Forget case and punctuation let’s just get the spelling correct. There is 1 chance in 26 of getting the first letter correct. What is the probability of getting the first two letters correct?.......

Chris Roberts #racist amren.com

Black Stranglehold on Democrat Party Dooms Bernie Sanders

Pat Buchanan put it bluntly in one of his recent columns: “Consider the most loyal of Democrat constituents in presidential elections: African Americans. They are 13 percent of the electorate but a fourth of the national Democrat vote.” That share may not seem like much, but in a crowded field for the presidential nomination, blacks are can play kingmaker, especially because more than any other group, they vote as a bloc. In general elections, blacks vote Democrat at rates never lower than 80 percent, and sometimes much higher, and during the party’s nomination process, blacks still vote together. In the 2016 race for the nomination, 75.9 percent of blacks voted for Hillary Clinton. The white vote was split almost exactly down the middle: 48.9 percent for Mrs. Clinton and 49.1 percent for Mr. Bernie Sanders.

In 2008, unsurprisingly, Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton among blacks by eight — and sometimes nine — to one. Vox noted that “Obama won every primary in the eight states where more than 20 percent of the population is black.” This included the very important early state of South Carolina. The nomination fight was very close; Mr. Obama beat Mrs. Clinton by less than half a million out of over 35 million votes. Hispanics supported Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Obama almost two to one.

This means that in 2008, black voters – all by themselves – kept Mrs. Clinton from winning the nomination, and eight years later they guaranteed her victory. To win the Democrat nomination, a candidate has to carry the black vote.

This makes the race hard for political outsiders, or even ordinary politicians who aren’t very well known by blacks. Mayor Pete Buttigieg is an example. He is a young, moderate who was in the military, and has earned plenty of support and attention from important media. But he was almost unheard of on a national level before 2019, and despite campaigning hard for months, blacks do not care for him. Politico put it bluntly in a recent article: “‘On life support’: Buttigieg’s struggles with black voters threaten his candidacy.” Its opening paragraphs explain:

Over the past month and a half, he has invested more money advertising in South Carolina, where a majority of Democrats are African American, than any of the non-billionaire Democrats running for president. . . . But the more than $2 million Buttigieg poured into TV and radio ads, some featuring black supporters touting the former South Bend (Ind.) mayor, hasn’t budged his stubbornly low poll numbers in the state — 2 percent among African American Democrats in a recent Fox News poll.

Last November, Michael Harriot, a black writer at The Root, wrote an article called, “Pete Buttigieg Is a Lying MF” — MF stands for “Mother Fucker.” Mr. Harriot wrote about how hard it is to be black and poor in the United States, and suggested that Mr. Buttigieg knows this, but lies about it. In response, the white presidential candidate called the author on the phone in hopes of mollifying him. Mr. Harriot then wrote a column about the conversation, saying he still couldn’t be sure how honest Mr. Buttigieg was, concluding, “The only thing I actually know about Pete Buttigieg is that he is a white man.”

Two months later, “Mayor Pete” has spent about one million dollars for each percentage-point gain in black support in South Carolina. Ethnomasochism rarely impresses non-whites — especially blacks — but Mr. Buttigieg doesn’t have a choice if he wants the nomination. For whatever reason, blacks do not like Mr. Buttigieg, who desperately needs them; all he can do is grovel and buy ads.

Mr. Sanders, whose consistent democratic socialist principles have inspired millions, faces the same problem. His support among blacks has never been high, and South Carolina polls suggest he has not made much progress. Vice President Joe Biden has a commanding lead, at 36.5 percent, with Mr. Sanders a distant second, at 16.2 percent. Meanwhile, in Iowa Mr. Sanders trails Mr. Biden by just 3.3 percent, and in New Hampshire Mr. Sanders is ahead of Mr. Biden by nearly 5 percent. Needless to say, the population of South Carolina is very different from that of New Hampshire and Iowa.

All the same, Mr. Sanders’s popularity has frightened many within the Democrat Party who think he’s a dangerous radical. But the anti-Sanders wing needn’t worry; there is one thing they can, and very well may, do that will certainly torpedo him: have Barack Obama endorse Joe Biden.

If this happens, whatever support Sen. Sanders has among blacks will evaporate and keep it well below 10 percent. As shown earlier, monolithic black support for Mr. Obama in 2008 won him the nomination, and in the general election, 95 percent voted for him. In 2012, 93 percent of blacks voted for Mr. Obama. Throughout his presidency, black approval always stayed above 80 percent — and was sometimes double that of Americans as a whole. Most blacks will do what Mr. Obama tells them.

By all accounts, Mr. Obama is not a fan of Mr. Sanders, and rumors have been swirling for months that he may step in to ensure that the Vermont Senator does not get the nomination. As CNBC reported in November:

Former President Barack Obama on Friday warned Democratic primary candidates to avoid leaning too far left in their campaigns, and raised concerns that certain liberal policy proposals on health care and immigration might have gone further than public opinion. In an unusual address to a room of wealthy Democratic donors, Obama urged Democratic candidates to be pragmatic in their messages to voters. While he didn’t mention any specific presidential primary candidate or proposal, Obama warned that the average American voter does not align with views from ‘certain left-leaning Twitter feeds or the activist wing of our party.’

He was obviously talking about Bernie Sanders.

So although Mr. Sanders inspires millions of whites to get involved in politics, he has a fatal weakness. If he wins Iowa and New Hampshire, Mr. Obama will almost certainly endorse Mr. Biden, and the Sanders campaign will almost immediately lose any chance of victory.

Mr. Obama’s power will not fade any time soon. He is young for a former President: only 58. Assuming he lives to be 80, he has another 22 years to play kingmaker within the Democrat Party, and there is no countervailing force. Former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are older, white, and less popular. Flouting the wishes of blacks within the party would require a candidate that brings together most whites and most Hispanics. It’s not impossible, but not likely.

Today, many white progressives are full of hope that Mr. Sanders can fight the media elites and the Davos class within their party and win. But for all their hatred of big business, the military-industrial complex, and special interest groups, what most stands in their way is the fact that blacks, unlike whites, vote as a group. To fix that problem they’ll need more than socialism.

CertifiedRabbi #racist reddit.com

There's glaring holes in the left's philosophy on segregation. The most obvious being their belief that every single racial group on this planet is inherently biologically equal in every way - at least when it comes to cognitive ability, since they don't seem to really get too worked up over the argument that blacks make the best sprinters and long-distance runners.

If every single race on this planet really was biologically equal in every way and the racial differences that we observe were merely the result of cultural, historical, and environmental influences (almost all of which, according to the left, ultimately boil down to White people being at fault), then what's the argument against racial segregation in the modern era?

If blacks and Hispanics are just as innately capable as Whites and East Asians of building and maintaining highly advanced societies with good schools, a diverse array of private businesses like tech companies and car manufacturers, and competent governance, then why would the creation of a black ethnostate within the Americas or Africa be a bad thing?

After all, both blacks and White shitlibs are constantly whinging about White privilege, racist cops, racist juries, racist judges, racist teachers and school administrators that are unfairly disciplining and marking down black students, racist university faculties that are discriminating against black students and black faculty, racist hiring practices and portrayals of blacks in the media, racist award ceremonies, et cetera. That's a lot of systematic anti-black racism!

White privilege and anti-black racism is not only systematic but omnipresent in the leftist worldview. And according to mainstream leftist philosophy on racism, every single White person on this planet is inherently and incurably racist. So, if you actually believed that, then why on Earth would you want to subject black people to that sort of racist oppression by forcing them to live in the same societies as Whites? I mean, even in South Africa where Whites now only comprise about 8% of the population, White shitlibs and blacks are still constantly whinging about inherent White supremacy and White privilege horribly affecting black South Africans - which implies that those problems will pretty much always exist as long as White people are still around, even in very small numbers.

Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to help blacks to completely escape the evaaal clutches of Whiteness by helping them to create their own ethnostate where they'd be free to have their own police force, their own courts, their own education system, their own financial and business sectors, their own media, their own government, and their own culture?

Of course I'm not the first person to make these points. Segregationists made these same exact arguments several decades ago, and the left responded to them by arguing that the separate but equal policies of the American segregation system still discriminated against blacks in numerous ways. For example, I remember being brainwashed in school about how black schools would receive the worn down chalk and old text books of White schools under these separate but equal policies. And the desegregationists argued that Whites had free access to all of the best agricultural land, businesses, schools, and government institutions under segregation - which made black inequality and failure inevitable.

Well, what if we could fix all of those problems by ensuring that black schools received not only the same amount of funding per student, but even more funding per student than White students? What if we ensured that this black ethnostate had access to arable land, trade ports, and natural resources? And what if we Whites agreed to give this black ethnostate a huge amount of financial and technological aid every single year in order to ensure that they had a good economy? And what if we agreed to do this for the next 500 years in order to more than compensate for the legacy of colonization, slavery, and discrimination? How would that be immoral or oppressive towards blacks in any way?

To reject that extremely generous arrangement, you'd have to lack confidence in the inherent aptitude of blacks to govern themselves and maintain a highly successful society. And that's the real underlying source of contention here. Deep down, both White libcucks and blacks know that blacks simply aren't capable of keeping up with Whites. I mean, there literally isn't a single highly successful black country anywhere in the entire world - which strongly points towards chronic black failure being biological rather than environmental. And the ugly science of intelligence testing proved that blacks really are inherently mentally inferior to Whites. And that's the dark undercurrent of this whole debate over segregation; both White shitlibs and blacks know that blacks tend to descend into 3rd world status when they're left to their own devices. And so that's why they view access to Whiteness as a fundamental human right that everyone on this planet is born with. And that's why they're so militantly opposed to segregation.

And the other dark undercurrent of this whole debate over segregation is how the left is using the concept of racism in order to destroy the White race. As I stated earlier, according to the mainstream leftist view on racism, all White people are inherently and incurably racist. And so if White racism and bigotry is the worse sin imaginable, and all White people are inherently and incurably racist and bigoted, then the only way to solve the problem of Whiteness is to completely destroy the White race and Western civilization. That's the real end goal here in this supposedly "noble" "anti-racism" (i.e., anti-White) "human rights" crusade; removing all obstacles to open borders, mass immigration, forced diversity, miscegenation, and wealth redistribution by demonizing, pathologizing, and literally criminalizing White racism and racial segregation.

Relentlessly crying about White racism and bigotry - both its omnipresent and everlasting nature - while simultaneously doing everything that you can to shove as many non-Whites as possible into White societies (including White schools) only makes sense if you lack confidence in the ability of non-Whites to create their own equally successful societies and are cynically exploiting the greatly exaggerated specter of White racism and bigotry in order to subvert the interests and very existence of the White race itself. If the races really are equal at the genetic level, and if White supremacy is an eternal evil, then you should actually support ethnonationalist movements like the Alt-Right and racial segregation in order to fully liberate black people. If you take leftist philosophy on race seriously, then opposing this form of benevolent segregation is a form of anti-black racism and oppression.

I also want to preemptively respond to anyone that would argue that agreeing to financially support this black ethnostate for hundreds of years is absolutely retarded because it would cost us billions upon billions of dollars.

Alt-Hype did a great job of estimating the fiscal impact of each race (excluding Asians) on America's annual budget. According to his very conservative estimates, blacks in America are taking at least $306.53 billion more out of the U.S. budget every single year through various handouts than they contribute through taxes. And according to his estimates, it's probably closer to $389.71 billion! And that doesn't even include our extremely generous foreign aid packages that we're sending to black countries all around the world. So, blacks are already costing us an absolute fortune every single year.

And so we'd actually probably save money if we agreed to give this black ethnostate $250 billion annually for the next 500 years. Heck, I'll be generous and agree to give blacks even more than that. How's $500 billion every year sound? Fuck it, have a full 1 trill every single year. If that's how much we have to fork over in order to entice blacks to finally get the fuck away from us, then so be it.

Also, you simply can't put a price tag on removing the cancer that is blackness from our society. We know for a fact that blacks are having a dysgenic effect on our gene pool. And according to Richard Lynn, the hidden crisis of dysgenics is affecting black Americans even more than it is White Americans. And so the chronic problems of black failure are just going to get worse and worse for us as time goes on. Jared Taylor also did an absolutely fantastic job of identifying the hidden costs of racial diversity in his opening remarks on a debate over whether or not racial diversity is a strength.

And while it's become popular to celebrate the cultural contributions of black Americans in recent decades, I don't see how it's possible for any sane and rational person to pretend that mainstream black culture (i.e., degenerate black hip hop [lack of] culture) has had a positive influence on America, Whites, or the world as a whole.

So, to White identitarians like us, preserving the uniquely beautiful White phenotype and bringing back our traditional high culture is absolutely priceless.

Uncensored2008 #fundie usmessageboard.com


democrats are the party of rape.

They want to put frat boys in prison for consensual sex with a drunk girl, but when it comes to violent, forced rape, the democrats are full on proponent. Just check out the threads on the Muslim rape jihad and you'll see all the forum leftists defending rape tooth and claw.

democrats are promoters of violent, forcible rape.


In the 2012 Todd Akin spoke of "real rape." The democrats savaged him for it. Now democrats are the party of rape, so it's not surprising.

Akin was right of course. What the left calls "rape" involves generally young people who drink too much or use drugs and end up having sex. If the girl regrets the sex then the boy is put in prison and called a "rapist." The left has created a climate of fear in what is essentially a Victorian era attack on normal sexual activity,

But rape, real rape, is a violent act. It's more about power and domination than it is about sex. And of course the left, the democrats, are major apologists and supporters of violent, forcible rape. Muslims are victimizing women all across Europe, but the democrats demand we be culturally sensitive and not complain.

The left is at war against women, and rape is just a political toy for them. If it can be used to create fear and oppression on American campuses, then the faux-rape will be pushed to absurdity. The goal is the neuter American men and create an environment of fear. But real rape is also a tool for the left. Real rape leaves women traumatized and often scarred for life. But the left excuses it as a cultural expression by their Islamist allies.

marti99 #fundie tv.com

(Seemed to fit both FSTDT & CSTDT, flipped a coin)

People are wayyy too dumb to understand that this show isn't So if an illumanti symbol is on a dollar bill, it's bad. But if it's on a KID cartoon, it's totally fine? If it's subtle bad language, nudity, or something along that line on a kid show, it's bad. But if it's subtle SATANIC symbols and secret messages, it's fine? Yeah, that totally makes sense. ILLUMINATI is ILLUMINATI no matter what. People think that it's just a cartoon, and it's nothing. They're just cutesy wittle symbols that don't mean a thing, even though it's been known that it's a satanic and symbol. But for some reason, if you wear a shirt with that symbol to school, you'll get in trouble?Open your eyes, dummies. Do you people really want kids to be drawing illuminati symbols? I remember going to the mall, and some dude was wearing a shirt with the pyramid and the eye. There was a kid who was like, "Mommy, mommy, look! He's wearing a Gravity Falls shirt!" Kids are innocent, and these so-called "kid-friendly" animators are destroying them. Do they really think kids 11 and under would de-code messages that appear for like a second? Will they get programs to play secret messages backwards? What's the point of even doing something like this for kids if they don't understand what's going on? Oh yeah, because it's brainwash. I think it would've been a great cartoon if they didn't add these symbols creepy secret messages. I mean, good plot, characters, animation, humor? Awesome. Also, it's cool to see Disney branching out to different genres. I think a mystery show for kids was a great idea. But satanic symbols and secret messages? Not so much.

Mick Williams #fundie disqus.com

Good evening. I shall begin with the astonishing assertion that the modern democrat party is the best thing going for Christianity. Before I prove my thesis, note my avoidance of "democratic", since these unwitting servants of the gospel are anything but. Don't bother with a Google search for "democrat party". They will immediately correct your spelling to "democratic party". If you seek anything critical of democrats, be prepared to wade through countless pages of glowing praise. One would think both the DNC and their big tech enablers were legitimate entities.

Their persecution of the faith confirms the Bible prediction, thus strengthening the believers' faith. Recall the Battle of Britain to know that human nature requires resistance to bullying and tyranny. Thirdly, we can reliably take our cue from folks seduced into a backward paradigm. If they oppose it, it has to be a good thing.

Then there are the consequences of unbelief. The Book confirms strong delusion, for one. No rational mind can change its sex or race on a whim. Is it rational to coddle Islam, which takes a sword to the sacred cows of homosexuality and feminism?--or to attack the patriots who espouse a strong border? It is a reprobate mind that lusts after children via drag queen story hours. Ditto for one that decides against parenthood at the moment of birth, taking advantage of democrat laws allowing termination. As the list is a long one, I shall move on.

Our leftist friends also confirm the supernatural in their gibbering hatred of the president, its kneejerk triggering of no earthly origin. Perhaps the unseen entities riding them are channeling their master's ire at the president's anti-globalist agenda. It's a pipe dream the left has nursed since the Tower of Babel.

Finally, scoffers confirm the prophetic account, be it Tribulation or Second Coming. Evil men are indeed waxing worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. Though long a truism, the end-times American model charts on an exponential curve. After all, the U S is the final obstacle to the left's communist hell on earth. Since the Evil One is the conductor of this infernal orchestra, this, ironically, makes him the greatest dupe of all.

I shall now return to the relative sanity of black and white vintage TV. Good night.

(Includes photo of Alfred Hitchcock, not included here)

Bob Smith #sexist returnofkings.com

9 Secrets About Female Nature Told By A Hot Girl Dying Of Cancer

Many years ago, I became friends with a very hot blonde in her early 30’s who was dying of cancer. Due to her impending death, she decided that it was okay to relay a vast amount of inside information to me, regarding what women were really all about. She volunteered this information. I have never forgotten what she told me, and it has served me quite well over the years.

Here is a summary of the ten things she told me about the true nature of women, which were related to me over the span of a couple of weeks, shortly before her passing:

1. Women are exactly like little children

We are constantly poking, prodding and testing a man, in order to find out what his boundaries are. If he has no boundaries, we will destroy him, especially if he loves us. A man has to have boundaries, and he has to outline them precisely, and he has to force us to adhere to them with the power of his conviction and the power of his action. If he doesn’t do that, we will beat him over the head with his weaknesses (his lack of boundaries) until he breaks.

2. Women put up a false front about virtually everything

Our faces are fake (makeup), our hair is fake (dyed), our boobs are fake (some of us), everything about us is fake. Most especially when it comes to what is inside of us. We lie constantly, because we are far worse, character-wise, than even our closest friends or lovers will ever know, and we desperately fight to keep all of that hidden.

We are looking for our true daddies, basically – the idealized daddies that we never had – somebody who can see through all of our false fronts and call us out on our bullshit and put us in our place. The problem is, those type of men are very few and far between.

3. If a woman ever tells you, “If we don’t have trust, we don’t have anything,” she is either cheating on you or planning to cheat on you

There are no exceptions to this rule. We use that as cover, to try and make the man feel guilty for questioning our fidelity. What we are really saying here, is, “I will fuck whomever I want and you’d better keep your nose out of it or I’ll cut you off from my pussy and I’ll ruin your freaking life if you keep pressing the issue.” If we really cared about you, and if we really weren’t cheating on you or planning to cheat on you, we would tell you something like, “I am not cheating on you, I love you, and I would never do that. I don’t care if we have to stay up all night, for the next week, and go over every single shred of doubt that’s currently troubling you about this. I have nothing to hide, I would never cheat on you, and I don’t want you thinking these things about me. Please tell me exactly why you think I am cheating, point by point, and I will do anything and everything that I have to do to prove to you that I’m not cheating, in order to ease your worried mind.”

4. Women are much hornier than men

Vastly, exponentially, hornier than men. A woman will do just about anything, sexually speaking, so long as she is fairly certain she won’t get caught. For example, we will occasionally go out of town in order to rendezvous with a man we’ve been longing to fuck, and/or to have multiple sex partners in the same evening, and/or at the same time.

This is something that hot women do, most especially. In our minds, it is a natural desire, and a natural thing, and so long as nobody else finds out, it’s “game on”. Women are receptacles for cock, that’s how we have been biologically designed. Nothing feels better to us than being completely filled up with multiple penises, than being the center of sexual attention, than being the object of unbridled group lust. Since it’s something we can’t risk doing on our home turf (don’t shit where you eat), we have to think outside the box, in order to get our boxes completely satisfied. And you might find this shocking, but many women – many, many women – have sex with dogs on a routine basis. This is just one example of how insatiable we truly are.

I can see why you might not believe it, to which I say, look really hard at all of the women you know who have dogs. Look at women who have dogs whenever you see them out on the street, in the act of walking those dogs. Or at the park. You will notice that most of them have male dogs – the vast majority, in fact. This isn’t a coincidence. And look at all the female teachers who are exposed in the media for having sex with underage students. We have no self-control when it comes to sex – or anything else, for that matter. To our way of thinking, losing control is what makes sex great. Doing anything that is taboo is what makes sex great.

5. Women do not have female friends—they have female competition

We lie to our so-called female friends and pretend we are loyal and faithful to them, just like we do with the men in our lives. Secretly, we are jealous of each other, and we want all of the desirable things that other women have—most especially when it comes to our female friends’ things.

And we consider men to be things. If one of our friends has a hot man, we want him to want us. We will do everything we can to seduce him. Not because we really want him—we don’t really want anybody. We do it because we are rarely happy, and we don’t want our girlfriends to be happy, either, and we want to boost our own egos more than anything else.

And after we get him to fuck us, when our girlfriends find out that he has had sex with us, that’s when we finally get what we wanted in the first place. If we break up the previously happy couple, that’s fine, too. It’s all about our pussy, not hers. It’s about winning.

6. Women always lie about the number of sexual partners they’ve had

They also lie about not wanting men with large penises. If we told the actual truth about the number of different men and women we’ve slept with, and if we told the actual truth about our fervent desire for big dicks, our pool of potential suitors would shrink drastically, to the point where it would completely dry up. So we lie. Most often, we will claim that we’ve had between three and eight sexual partners in our lifetime. And, to our way of thinking, it isn’t a lie, because if we had five sexual partners last Saturday evening, and our man asks us how many sexual partners we have had, and we answer, “Five”, well, technically, we aren’t lying.

7. All women dislike themselves

And because we dislike ourselves, we fervently hate any man who doesn’t see through our bullshit. The more a man loves us, the more we hate him. The more he overlooks our sins, and the more he fails to see how corrupt we are, and the more he gives us the benefit of every single doubt – the more we despise him. We will escalate our bad behavior until we finally break him and he wakes up and realizes how worthless we are and what a fool he has been for believing in us.

8. Women want what they can’t have

We want a man whom we can’t have. We want a man who honestly doesn’t give a fuck about us, who doesn’t care if we come or go. That’s the kind of man we will pursue. Call them bad boys or call them whatever you want, that’s the kind of man we want – period. The kind of guy who will make us orgasm, crudely, and give us a huge sexual thrill in the bedroom, and then discard us like used toilet paper, and fuck our female friends afterwards, just because he can. (Just like we would do with his male friends.)

9. All women are masochists

And all hot women are narcissistic masochists. We hate it when things are going well, especially if they continue to go well for long periods of time. We know down deep that we are fucked-up and not worthy of anything that is truly good. So when things are going well in a relationship, we eventually sabotage it. We just can’t help ourselves in this regard.

We could have the greatest, most handsome, most well-hung husband in the world—a one-of-a-kind man who makes all of our girlfriends jealous; we could have the greatest children in the world, who are beautiful, well-behaved and ambitious; we could have the most enviable career imaginable; we could have all of the money and prestige and the truly good things in life, and we could repeatedly tell ourselves over and over, and believe, on the surface, that we would never cheat on our husbands. But down deep we know that it’s a lie. Because one day, we could walk into a grocery store, and some bad boy could whisper just the right combination of words in our ear, and the next thing you know, we’re at the Motel 6 getting it in the ass. That’s just how we are, and any woman—especially a hot woman—who says otherwise, is a liar.

Over the years, my deceased friend’s words have proven to be spot-on, in the vast majority of cases. And if they ring true from your own personal experience as well, then I am more than happy that I shared them with you here today. I know that my deceased friend would be thrilled to know that I have shared this information with the manosphere. After all, she used to be a hottie, and she’s now dead, and by giving me the inside scoop on her female competition, she continues to beat them—she continues to “win”—even from beyond the grave.

many #fundie rr-bb.com

*eviticus International promises to help miserable straights become ex straights. Brother Richard of Leviticus, says anyone can become a happy well-adjusted gay or lesbian through the power of prayer and Jesus Christ.*

What???
Heterosexuality is the new sinful lifestyle???
Praying to Jesus to make you gay? Wow, that is definitely a new one. Many homosexuals used to pray to be straight!
Surely we must be near the Lord's return!
---
I am not sure how much more I can take of the Gay agenda. I might try to get a head start to see if I can meet the rapture half way.
---
I get so angry reading thees posts! It is frustrating watching your Lord and savior being trashed. I hurt for the people that are falling for lies, Satans and BO's. It seems so hopeless, and dark. I just need to focus on the light!! Yes the King of Kings and Lord of Lord's is coming!!! Hallelujah to the Lamb! I am so glad God is in control. I can't stand 10 minutes of all the heretical, self serving, world. Even so, Lord Your will be done. Give me strength, give me patience, renew me, set my heart ablaze. We can no longer be silent, You are uncontainable, Lord, give us the words to speak, and lead people to us because they want what we have, YOU.
---
I really, really, really don't want to be gay. I'd rather stay miserable and saved thank you very much.
---
That is just disgusting. Sometimes I wonder why we should even pray for people like that.

Various Commenters #racist amren.com

RE: Trump is ‘A Civil-rights Leader’ Because of Low African-American Unemployment, Fox News Guest Claims

(ky_native)

However, the president’s record on civil rights has repeatedly come under criticism from activists and campaigners.

In November, the FBI reported that violent hate crimes and threats in the US had reached their highest levels in 16 years, partly due to a surge in attacks on Hispanic people in 2018.

Activists and civil rights researchers have said Mr Trump’s hardline anti-immigration policies and controversial verbal attacks on Latino immigrants carried some responsibility for the rise.

Hate crimes on Hispanics by WHOM? There are none! How did the hate crime occur? Did an English speaker ask a Hispanic person at the register to speak English? The fact that more blacks are working is a miracle because work is like Kryptonite to negroes. Also, I am a Trump supporter, but I am advising him not to count on the negroes for votes! The negro vote belongs to their master the democrat party who wants to keep them on THEIR plantation.

(Cheri Rodriguez)

Wake up! Plenty of hate crimes on Hispanics. The Norteños hate the Sureños. The Mexican Mafia hates the Norteños. The Fresno Bulldogs hate the Mexican Mafia...

(HT)

I know the analogy of welfare to the plantation but to me blacks aren't on a plantation with the Democrat welfare system. It's more like they are on a permanent vacation resort living just like they want. Democrats have us on the slave plantation.

Blacks choosing wrong detrimental policies: This is because of misinformation spread by media ethics codes, police gag orders and lying politicians.
Any decent law abiding working Black would wish to keep Hispanics out of the country and to put Black thugs in prison. It makes no sense whatsoever to keep gangs and felons loose in your black neighborhood. Whites don't defend white robbers and rapists either.

No my friend. That is just who blacks are. They vote Democrat because they know Democrats allow them to do exactly what they want to do, namely nothing.

This conservative narrative that blacks are going to abandon the Democrats for Trump is as insane as the one when they claimed Mexican immigrants would all vote GOP based on their religion and family values.

(Polar Girl)

Yup, low unemployment rates for blacks and the hoarde of documented darkies is exactly why people voted for Trump. That and more wars for Israel.

This comment was deleted.

The way he is acting now, he may not wait for reelection. Since he thinks selling non-white unemployment rates pre-election is advantageous, I would not be surprised to see this delusion extend to war with Iran. That can more easily be hyped up in false jingoism of American flags minus the hidden Star if David superimposed over it and all the faux tough guy talk than non-whites love me for reducing the percentage of government responsibility for workers to an official all-time low.

(Honest_Bob)

Trump can try as hard as he wants but the blacks/browns don't crave equal opportunity, just equal outcomes.

AmericanBelle1 #fundie newsbusters.org

The left-wing sycophants of the Democrat party are wading in that cesspool of crime, murder, drugs and gang activity along with their mentors. Also throw in racism, bigotry, intolerance, hypocrisy, and pure and simple out and out lying! The Civil War was to end slavery (Democrats claim it was economic reasons, but that's a nice way of saying slavery). What Democrats and their sycophants like Madcow here totally ignore is that the South was run by the southern Dixiecrats...a party that faded away into the Democrat Party!!! That it was the rich, Dixiecrat plantation owners who fought to keep slaves. And that it was also the Democrats who came up with the bright idea of forming the KKK!!!

Every single thing the Democrats have ruined in history, they twist it to blame the conservatives/GOP. They take no ownership of their history because their history is no different than their present: they are racists, bigots, intolerant and hateful human beings who lie and manipulate facts in order to keep their minions (the poor, the illegals, the black misfits) enslaved in their socialist policies. They are a despicable group. Donald Trump recognizes their despicability and doesn't turn away from it...he tackles it...and it's scaring the hell out of them!

B®ent #fundie christianforums.com

The CPUSA wants to pollute childrens' minds with the so-called "GLBT" agenda by removing them from parental authority. Also, the CPUSA is not "democratic." A dictatorship of the proletariat can only exist in a single-party state. Meaning, if the CPUSA ever came to power, (and rest assured if it did, my rifle is ready), every other political party would be banned. Moreover, churches would be closed down, because they're part of the "super structure" responsible for a "false conciousness" of the "working class." Communism by its very nature is anti-Christian, and is of the Devil himself.

Mario Calvo #fundie quora.com

Is it okay for children to have sex? Why or why not?

I do not care who, how old, what gender, what ethnicity, what sexuality, or what zodiac sign you are. Anyone may be allowed to have sex with whomever they want to as long as All Individuals involved:
a) Consent to any and all actions they partake in
b) Know what they are doing
c) Understand what they are doing
d) Know the consequences of such actions

Yes, it is possible for children to meet all the above requirements. Yes, it is possible for adults to meet all the above requirements.
Yes, it is possible for children to not meet one, multiple, or all of the above requirements. Yes, it is possible for adults to not meet one, multiple, or all of the above requirements.

I also always suggest(even though it is not required for having okay, consensual sex) the 3C Rule. It will lead to a fun, comfortable, and free time.
Cleanliness, Consent, Compassion
Cleanliness- know and understand consequences of STIs, STDs, etc…; Understand and know about contraceptives and protection and how to use them!
Consent-Do not rape anyone. Also, keep within the comfort zones of participating parties.
Compassion- It would really help if all individuals actually wanted to be partaking in the sexual activities. They may consent…but are they actually into it? wanting it?

Natural News #quack naturalnews.com

In direct contradiction to the scare stories about carbon dioxide being relentlessly pushed by the climate change alarmists, a scientific study published in Nature Climate Change and highlighted by NASA reveals that rising carbon dioxide levels are having a tremendously positive impact on the re-greening of planet Earth over the last three decades, with some regions experiencing over a 50% increase in plant life.

The study, entitled, “Greening of the Earth and its drivers,” used satellite data to track and map the expansion of green plant growth across the globe from 1982 – 2015. Published in 2016, this study found that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide causes “fertilization” of plant life, resulting in a remarkable acceleration of increased “greening” across every Earth continent. As the study abstract explains:

We show a persistent and widespread increase of growing season integrated LAI (greening) over 25% to 50% of the global vegetated area… Factorial simulations with multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend…

In other words, the planet is getting greener, and we have rising CO2 levels to thank for it, since rising CO2 accounts for about 70% of the increase in planet-wide greening, according to scientists. The more CO2 we release into the atmosphere, the more nutrients are available for plants, and the more rapidly the Earth is re-greened.

The following compilation map shows which land masses have experienced expanded greening since 1982. As the legend explains, the light green areas represent a 25% increase in green plants, and the dark green areas represent a 50% or greater increase:

Sponsored solution from CWC Labs: This heavy metals test kit allows you to test almost anything for 20+ heavy metals and nutritive minerals, including lead, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, aluminum and more. You can test your own hair, vitamins, well water, garden soil, superfoods, pet hair, beverages and other samples (no blood or urine). ISO accredited laboratory using ICP-MS (mass spec) analysis with parts per billion sensitivity. Learn more here.

Image credit: Boston University / R. Myeneni

Natural News readers may note this is exactly what we’ve been reporting for over a decade. It’s basic science, of course, since plants use carbon dioxide to thrive. Higher CO2 means a greener Earth, since CO2 is the single most important molecule for sustaining plant life across the globe. It is beyond astonishing that the entire climate change cult denies the basic science of botany and photosynthesis.

Read my 2017 article which covers all this: All the biggest lies about climate change and global warming DEBUNKED in one astonishing interview.

To the shock of many climate change alarmists, even NASA scientists confirmed that carbon dioxide is “greening” the planet. As stated on the NASA.gov website in an article titled, “Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds“:

From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.

NASA explains almost exactly what I’ve been explaining for the last several years: That carbon dioxide is a necessary component of photosynthesis, the biochemical process by which plants produce metabolic energy. Via NASA:

Green leaves use energy from sunlight through photosynthesis to chemically combine carbon dioxide drawn in from the air with water and nutrients tapped from the ground to produce sugars, which are the main source of food, fiber and fuel for life on Earth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth.

Results showed that carbon dioxide fertilization explains 70 percent of the greening effect, said co-author Ranga Myneni, a professor in the Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University.

NASA even released a YouTube video that almost exactly mirrors the message Natural News has been advocating for years. The video is entitled, “Rising CO2 levels greening Earth”:

In direct contradiction to the real science on the greening benefits of carbon dioxide, Democrats routinely and mindlessly claim that carbon dioxide is a poisonous “pollutant” that will destroy the world. The anti-knowledge of lunatic Democrats demonstrates the extreme dangers of those who are scientifically illiterate yet spout “science” as their justification for demanding radical interventions in atmospheric chemistry.

In truth, rising levels of carbon dioxide will cause the following beneficial effects on Earth:

There are virtually no Democrats who recognize that carbon dioxide is the “miracle molecule” for plant life. “Green New Deal” proponents like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — who is scientifically and economically illiterate — think that carbon dioxide must be eliminated in order to save the planet. In fact, she warns that Earth only has 12 years to go before all life ceases to exist unless humans stop burning fossil fuels.

Not surprisingly, she has it all wrong: It’s the burning of fossil fuels that’s releasing beneficial CO2 into the atmosphere, causing the global greening that NASA has already confirmed (see above). If humans stop burning fossil fuels, the result would decrease atmospheric CO2, resulting in plants starving to death from lack of CO2.

This would, of course, lead to the mass global die-off of trees, grasslands, food crops and rainforests. The “Green New Deal,” in other words, would actually result in the mass killing of plant life across the entire planet. If the world were to follow the demands of Ocasio-Cortez, the world’s ecosystems would collapse, resulting in mass death of plants, animals and humans.

It turns out that climate change alarmists, by vilifying CO2, are demanding actions that would make the planet less green by killing plants everywhere. Instead of a warm, wet planet with abundant rainfall and rainforests, Democrat seem to want a cold, dead world that’s devoid of plant life.

As any competent scientist would openly admit, the elimination of CO2 from the atmosphere would collapse the global ecosystem, leading to the complete wipe out of nearly all plants, animals and humans. Those who are calling for the elimination of CO2 are, as I have previously warned, actually advocating the terraforming of planet Earth into a post-human, post-life status that would collapse human civilization and annihilate nearly all food webs around the world.

As reported by Natural News, AOC’s “Green New Deal” seeks to eliminate the very molecule that turns planets green: Carbon dioxide, the molecule of life.

People like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are not the saviors of the planet, it turns out: They are the death merchants who threaten to destroy all life as we know it. Carbon dioxide isn’t a threat to planet Earth, but people like Ocasio-Cortez surely are. If anything should be eliminated from the atmosphere, it’s the hot air coming from the mouths of the climate alarmists who are spewing their death cult quackery that would devastate our planet if deployed.

If you really want to “green” the planet, stop the climate change lunatics like Ocasio-Cortez whose proposals would quite literally murder nearly all life on planet Earth.

Simply put:

More carbon dioxide = more green plants

That’s why CO2 is called a “greenhouse gas.” It turns the planet into a lush, plant-filled greenhouse that’s warmer, wetter and more abundant across all plant life. Why don’t Democrats and Leftists want Earth to be more green?

Eden Decoded #fundie facebook.com

This is why they are in the streets 'protesting.' Don't let them fool you. It's ALL about homosexuals, witches and pagans trying to rally against Christianity.

Let us NOT forget those 'Bathroom Laws' where men can legally enter women's bathrooms in search of young girls, and all those Christian businesses that have been targeted and forced to close all by the hand of homosexuals; and definitely don't forget how homosexuals and witches have been targeting our children in school perverting them with sex and anti-christ rhetoric...don't have a short attention span!

They are in the streets crying right now, because they've been checkmated by God. Thank you Trump and Pence!

Here's is a quick glimpse at why homosexuals, witches and pagans hate Mike Pence (by the way WE love the boldness of Pence throughout his political career!):

[LGBT rights policy] Pence has been a staunch opponent of efforts to expand LGBT civil rights. In 2000, Pence stated "Congress should oppose any effort to recognize homosexuals as a 'discrete and insular minority' entitled to the protection of anti-discrimination laws similar to those extended to women and ethnic minorities."

Pence called for "an audit to ensure that federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus" and instead advocated for resources to be directed toward conversion therapy programs, "[for] those seeking to change their sexual behavior."

Pence has said that homosexuals should not serve in the military, saying, "Homosexuality is incompatible with military service because the presence of homosexuals in the ranks weakens unit cohesion."

Pence opposed the repeal of don't ask, don't tell, saying in 2010 that allowing gays and lesbians to openly serve in the military would "have an impact on unit cohesion."

In 2007, Pence voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would have banned workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Pence opposed the 2009 Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act, saying that Barack Obama wanted to "advance a radical social agenda" and said that pastors "could be charged or be subject to intimidation for simply expressing a Biblical worldview on the issue of homosexual behavior."

Pence opposes both same-sex marriage and civil unions. While in the House, he said that "societal collapse was always brought about following an advent of the deterioration of marriage and family".

John #racist amren.com

Multiculturalism, non-White immigration, gun control in any form, taxes, more government, affirmative action, diversity, miscegenation, amnesty for illegals, homosexuality (gay marriage), and a soft stance on crime are NOT conservative principles. Virtually all Republicans in power over the last few decades have increasingly supported these issues to the detriment of the nation.

What will it take to make the millions of Whites who vote for Blacks and Browns to stop hating themselves and realize that the White race builds the very best communities and countries on Earth with the very best qualities of life? Celebrating Blacks and Browns living among Whites is like celebrating a stray dog crashing a birthday party and defecating in the punch bowl. Would anyone care to "drink up"? Indeed, what sane White person would want to live in the squalor and savagery of a Black or Brown country?

The first step toward the goal of having Whites-only communities, stores, schools, and other facilities is to reaffirm the First Amendment and the right to freely associate with whomever we choose, based on our personal standards, not the government's. The government has absolutely no constitutional right to impose diversity, desegregation, etc. Of course, no Republican will stand up to their diversity gods who hold the purse strings. The Republicans are owned, and there isn't a hair of difference between today's Republican Party and the despicable Democratic Party (a.k.a. Marxist Party).

We need other options, my friends.

Derryck Green #fundie nationalcenter.org

May was a game-changer for the national conversation on homosexual marriage.

On May 8, North Carolinans overwhelmingly voted in favor of Amendment 1. The ballot measure changed the state's constitution to define marriage as a union existing solely between a man and a woman. The approximately 61 percent to 39 percent vote in favor of the Amendment 1 makes North Carolina the 30th state to vote against homosexual marriage.

The very next day, to the surprise of exactly no one, President Barack Obama finally stated this belief: "At a certain point, I've just concluded that for me — personally — it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married."

Of course, both of these incidents revved up the debate over the legalization of homosexual marriage and its consequences. But there are several issues regarding homosexual marriage that have yet to be given the proper discussion they deserve.

The first is the notion of "rights." Homosexual marriage advocates argue that marriage is a basic right. Denying this right to homosexuals would therefore be illegal. That's not true. There's no right to marry contained in the U.S. Constitution.

Every person who claims that the denial of the ability to marry is unconstitutional is misguided.

Getting married isn't a right. Marriage is a civil institution that all societies in history have recognized and used as the best way to legitimize, protect and raise children as well as to solidify familial and political connections.

Second, the North Carolina law doesn't unfairly deny anyone of the ability to marry. The law — and others like it — defines and recognizes marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It doesn't exclude anyone from marrying. The law treats a heterosexual person the exact same way it treats a homosexual person, with both prohibited from marrying a person of the same sex.

Traditional marriage laws simply define what constitutes a married couple. The laws are extended equally — regardless of sexual preference.

So the right that homosexual marriage proponents claim exists really does not. There is no right to marry someone of the same sex. The ability for a person to marry someone of the same sex is equally denied to everyone.

Another claim that is offered in defense of homosexual marriage is that consenting adults should be allowed to marry whomever they love. But at what point is it alright to arbitrarily move the discriminatory lines of demarcation, and how is it justified?

If it's acceptable for homosexuals to marry each other because of love and consent, then why is polygamy illegal when the parties involved are similarly in love and consenting? What about aunts and nephews or uncles and nieces when the same standards are present? If it is discrimination against homosexuals, why would it not be discrimination against these other parties?

Lastly, homosexual marriage advocates claim that legalizing homosexual marriage is a civil rights issue — equating it with the struggle to legalize interracial marriages of the past. The attempt to correlate race with sexual preferences doesn't hold up when properly scrutinized.

Legalizing interracial marriages fulfilled the legal requirement of marriage between a man and a woman because there's no difference between a white man and a black man or a white woman and a black woman. But there are enormous differences between a man and a woman, which is why there are separate bathrooms for men and women.

It's why there is an NBA and an WNBA and an PGA and an LPGA. In all the aforementioned sporting leagues, there is a logical separation by gender while races and ethnicities are not classified.

Race doesn't matter. Gender does.

The emotional desire to legalize homosexual marriage is understandable, but to do so would be to change the law for a specific group of people. That's really discrimination.

Unknown author #sexist whatswrongwithequalrights.wordpress.com

I don’t need to justify to anyone the way I choose to live my life or the beliefs that I hold inside. I’ll just let the results of the life I have lived speak for themselves.

People say I’m “lucky” to stay at home or believe my husband must have money or something, but neither of these things are true. We were dirt poor before we married yet I quit working entirely, even though we didn’t yet even know where we would live, and never for a single day were we ever out on the streets. I’ve always lived with what he could give to me, or what he chose to give to me, and over time we were blessed as a result of it. I believe we have been productive precisely because I stayed out of the workforce, but more than that, I believe it is because of my traditional beliefs in coverture. (Even though I had no idea what coverture was, or that it was really a legal thing once, I still felt it in my heart.)

Me being at home isn’t so much about my relationship with my child as it is about my relationship with my husband. It’s not about being a “stay-at-home mom.” I’m not a stay-at-home mom, I’m just a traditional wife. And this will hold true even when our daughter is fully grown.

For the brief period of time that I worked, I had no relationship with him. As my readers know, that is precisely why I started working- because in my heart I was separated from him and no longer willing to submit to him. But I felt in my heart I would be OK, that it was time to reconcile. He told me that, while he wouldn’t necessarily forbid me from working a couple of days if I really wanted to, he would really rather that I just put in my notice and quit entirely, so that’s what I did, because I couldn’t reconcile the beliefs and desires of my heart with having paid employment- even part-time employment. Part-time employment is still employment.

At the beginning, so many years ago, I chose to accept him as my guardian, my authority, my provision and protection. It can be scary sometimes, to give up that independence you once knew and rely entirely on a husband, but I did it, and I will do it once again. He tells me he wants me to stay close to him and to do what he tells me to do. I accepted that at the beginning and I told him that I would accept it once again. He’s not a pig or a misogynist, nor is he weak or “beta.” He cherishes me the way men have all but forgotten to cherish women in our world today, and I look up to him the way women have all but stopped looking up to men.

“What’s there to cherish?” the modern man will say.

“What’s there to look up to?” the modern woman will say.

So, yes, I’m coming home. I know he’s always provided well for me. There were things in the past that he told me I couldn’t do, so I didn’t do them. There were things in the past he told me we couldn’t afford, so I couldn’t have them. But that was ok with me. It’s still ok with me. While I did like having some money to spend, a paycheck could simply never compensate for the loss of love and passion I experienced. If I am to submit to him and allow him to protect me and take care of me, I can’t also be my own independent woman out in the workforce. And I sure as Hell am not going to work and submit to him. What a joke.

I know some scoff at me, I know some think me a fool- but that’s their problem. I’m a lot safer and secure depending on a husband than being independent. It’s like people feel sorry for me if I tell them I’m going back to my husband and quitting my job. But that’s their problem. They can think what they want. The results of the life they live show, as do the results of the life I have lived. Shall we compare them?

So, I am going home once again. In my experience people do what is in their hearts to do. If a woman has it in her heart to be home and relying on a husband and submitting to him, then that’s what she’s going to do, even if she’s poor- the same as I was poor all those years ago. The same people who talk about two incomes being “necessary” are the same ones who talk about how they could never give up their independence, and the women who say they wish they could be at home are the same ones who turn around and start talking about how they could never just “sit at home” depending on a man and how they love to cash in those paychecks. You do the math. I believe modern women work because of ideology, not necessity.

But that doesn’t matter. I don’t care what it is people might think or say. They are of no concern to me. I accepted to follow him and do what he told me to do. The outside world doesn’t concern me. For the brief time that I worked everything turned into a disaster. The house was a wreck. There was all of a sudden nobody there for the small errands that needed to be run, and entire schedules had to be re-arranged when our daughter wasn’t in school, was sick, or when my husband had doctor’s appointments and needed someone to drive him.

Never again. I cannot see how anyone could live that way. If I had worked since the beginning we wouldn’t be together today, and it’s doubtful that me working would have even helped us financially- unless I had some fancy career, which would have only been even more problematic.

Lastly, I won’t defend the words I say to anyone. I’m not going to apologize or give a speech about how I’m not really anti-feminist or anything of the sort. Because I’m pro-patriarchy. I’m against feminism. There’s nothing great about feminism and there’s nothing wrong with patriarchy. I don’t have to defend my words and beliefs to the over-sensitive PC crowd. They’ll get over it and find something new to bitch about ten minutes later anyway. I don’t believe that as a wife I should be in the workforce, not even part-time. Even part-time work takes me away from his guardianship.

Because femininity is passive, submissive, graceful, nurturing and beautiful– and that just isn’t compatible with being independent and career-driven in my book. I always felt it was right to be under the guardianship of a man that loves and cherishes me and I know that what I’ve always felt in my heart cannot be wrong, especially considering that it has been the way of so many cultures, including our own for so long. Feminist politics can’t protect women.

But I leave all these things I have written up, because they show the truth of what is in a woman’s heart and how she is made. And I hope that young women everywhere will truly listen.

CuttingEdge #fundie cuttingedge.org

Now, please understand this Biblical principle: if President George W. Bush were truly Born Again as he claims, and is led by the Holy Spirit, he would take the actions of righteous King Jehu, and would destroy the Washington Monument! He would have signed an Executive Order his first day in office to destroy and burn this huge obelisk. Further, if Reverends Franklin and Billy Graham were offering President Bush true Biblical advice, they would advise him that he had to destroy that obelisk, and begin the destruction of all symbols of Masonry now polluting America! For that matter, how could Dr. Franklin Graham "face the obelisk" when he offered his prayer prior to the Inauguration ceremony?

You protest that President Bush would encounter too much opposition to destroying such an historic piece of American history. You are right -- enormous opposition would be encountered -- but since when has that deterred a true man of God, on God's mission? Do you think King Jehu encountered no opposition? He did, but he rode the right hand of Almighty God on a righteous mission, and swept the opposition away! If George W. Bush were truly Born Again, he would have asked Christians all over the world to support him in this most courageous act!

The Washington Monument obelisk is a 555-foot erect penis of Baal in its sexually aroused state, for crying out loud! Why wouldn't God be offended?

Thus, when George W. Bush faced the obelisk like a good Illuminist would do, we are not convinced he is truly a Born Again Christian. When you hear President Bush announcing he is destroying the Washington Obelisk Monument, you may truly believe in your inner heart that he is Born Again.

David J. Stewart #conspiracy jesus-is-savior.com

America is no longer a nation. We are now a banker holding. They're just slowly sucking the life out of us, like a bloodthirsty vampire preying upon his victims. The American has their head buried in the sand. This includes Christians sadly. There's nothing worse than a fool who thinks that he is wise. So many Christian men today are 100% supportive of the government and military, with no concern for truth, justice or righteousness. God never told us to give blind alliance to government. Romans 13 says to submit to the higher powers. The U.S. Constitution is higher power than the government. Most Christians are gullible and naive, believing what Fox news tells them. They don't dare question authority, but they need to. .

PASTORS AND TROOPS BEING TRAINED AGAINST US for martial law | PART ONE

If You See Something, Say Something Spy Society is Here!!! (What a bunch of criminals!)

World War III is on the way! I believe that the Iran war will be used to drastically turn up the heat here at home. I believe we will see a false-flag terror attack on American soil. A “false flag-terror attack” is when the global elite are behind the attack, but blame their enemy as a pretext to carry out an agenda.

For Example: The 911 attacks were a false-flag terror attack by the global criminal elite, which they used as a pretext to start Homeland Security to police Americans. They also used the 911 attacks as a pretext for war against Afghanistan and Iraq, and to pass the treasonous Patriot Acts. The New World Order gang created a fictitious boogieman, slapped bin Laden's face on it, and gullible Americans bought it hook, line and sinker. Al Qaeda = CIA. It's so blatant for those who want to see the truth. It's as clear as day. I'm surprised more people don't see the truth of what really happened on 911. Hardly anyone is listening to the victim's families, 911 first-responders, 911 fireman and over 1500 architects and engineers...

The mainstream newsmedia are the most powerful force in the world next to God's Word. They are the only reason why the Bush administration got away with 911. The evidence is solid and concrete, but the mainstream newsmedia has whitewashed and downplayed everything through intellectual deceit and ambush journalism toward anyone who dare call for a legitimate investigation into the 911 attacks. The official investigation has been proven to be a big hoax by most of its own members. The problem is that most people don't care enough to become a VOICE for God, truth, liberty and righteousness...

AMERICA NEEDS VOICES!!!

Everything is backwards; everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information, religions destroy spirituality, and Bible publishers destroy God's Word.

Todd Strandberg #fundie raptureforums.com

I would put the phrase "Black lives matter" on par with "Work will set you free" at the former Dachau concentration camp. "Black manners matter" is a mantra that should be adopted instead.

[...]

The greatest reason why black lives don't matter is because of the power that the Democratic party has over them. The Democrat party created the Ku Klux Klan, poll taxes, Jim Crow, and they waged war against every major federal Civil Rights Act. Having the lost the battle over racism in the 1960s, the Democrats just switched from overt racism to a subversive strategy of getting blacks as dependent as possible on the government to secure their votes.

It can only be called slavery when you have a group of people locked into system that has done them untold harm. Despite the ravages of the welfare programs, blacks vote 93-98 percent of the time for the Democratic party.

Matt Forney #fundie mattforney.com

[A transcript of Matt Forney's speech at the recent Identitarian Ideas IX conference]

I don’t think I need to remind anyone that the election of President Donald Trump was a turning point in American and European history. For our entire lives, our overlords in the government and media have told us that we were on the losing side of history. That we were destined to fail. That the future of our civilization was rainbows, unicorns and chocolate chip cookies, fruits Frenching their boyfriends in front of empty churches, neon-lit mosques eclipsing the cities our forefathers labored to build, and finally, being finessed out of our neighborhoods by swarthy foreigners who stare at our sisters, wives and girlfriends the way lions stare at gazelles.

But for now, the arc of the moral universe has been redirected.

The arc of the political universe has also been redirected. One of the most important achievements of the past two years has been the total destruction of the mainstream American right-wing. My friend Edwin Oslan calls them “Conservatism, Inc.,” the alt-right calls them “cuckservatives,” but regardless of how we abuse them, they were the primary impediment to real, nationalist change in the West. It is they, not the left, who are the biggest losers in the age of Trump. Right now, the left is so excited about the prospect of “resisting” the President that they almost seem sexually aroused by it. It’s your National Reviews, your Weekly Standards, your Rick Wilsons and Rich Lowrys and rich finks in general who have lost everything in the God-Emperor’s ascent.

I’m not just talking about the neocons, the loudest, yappiest poodles echoing in the cuckservative kennel. There’s a whole world of inanity beyond the armchair quarterbacking of soft, pudgy Manhattan intellectuals renaming French fries to “freedom fries” or calling on poor men’s sons to fight their wars for them. Mr. Trump has helped sledgehammer the foundations of American cuckservatism, and we are now dancing among the ruins.

A common refrain during the election was that Donald Trump was not a “true” conservative. The myth of the post-National Review right-wing in America is that the United States was intended to be a different society than the nations of Europe, one bound not by blood and soil but by the liberties granted by the Constitution: the proposition nation. In the minds of the geldings who believe this myth, such as, for example, the guy at CPAC who denounced us as “left-wing fascists” a couple of days ago, Trump and the alternative right are a rejection of these core American values, a return to the bad old days of European nationalism, endless war and diminutive Austrian men with funny mustaches.

The problem with myths is that they have a bad habit of being false. The proposition nation so beloved of William F. Buckley and Norman Podhoretz is nothing but Saran wrap stretched over the casserole of white America. While it’s true that the Constitution represented a break from the European tradition of monarchy, the ideals that fueled the American Revolution were derived from Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke and implemented by Americans of European descent. Without Europe’s peoples or its philosophies, there is no Constitution, there is no right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and there is no United States of America.

The “golden age” of immigration to Ellis Island, so beloved of cucks and leftists and a fundamental underpinning of the proposition nation myth, is itself a crock of garbage. As Jim Goad detailed in his book The Redneck Manifesto, during the 19th century, corporations lobbied the U.S. government to bring in Italians, Chinese and other foreigners to break the backs of labor unions and lower wages for the average worker. The lie that immigrants do the jobs that Americans don’t want to do has a far longer history than you think.

But myths cannot take root unless they contain some truth. You may not believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the Romans didn’t nail him to the cross. Similarly, while the U.S. is hardly a proposition nation, bound together only by the Bill of Rights, its history as a colonial state has kept white Americans from forming a cohesive, rooted culture.

Rare are the Americans who are so attached to their hometowns that they don’t want to leave them. Packing your bags and moving to another state, even if it’s on the other side of the country, is as American a tradition as sportsball and diabetes. From the settlement of Jamestown and the landing at Plymouth Rock to the Louisiana Purchase to the California gold rush to the rise of the Sun Belt in the 1950’s and sixties, if white Americans didn’t like where they were, they went somewhere else. I know that when I was a kid, I dreamt of nothing more than getting out of my hometown of Syracuse, New York, that decaying Rust Belt ghetto midway between New York City and Toronto.

People who are constantly moving from point A to point B cannot put down roots and develop a sense of self. In fact, recent scientific research has shown that the brains of those who live in the same place their entire life develop far differently than those who migrate to new locales. White Americans never developed a unified sense of who they are because they’ve never stayed in one place long enough for the question to come up. And that’s before we get into mass immigration, media propaganda and the other myriad ways that cultural Marxists have tried to destroy the spirits of white Americans.

Now, we do have strong regional identities: as explained in the book Albion’s Seed, the United States was settled by four distinct groups from the British Isles, and our politics and culture is in many ways a continuation of the struggle between the Cavaliers and the Roundheads during the English Civil War. But no singular white consciousness has ever existed in the U.S. Ask a Swede, a Pole, or a Hungarian who he is and what his nation means to him, and you’ll get concrete answers rooted in cultural memory going back centuries. Ask the same question of an American and you’ll quickly find out that there’s no “there” there. At the moment, mindless consumerism is the only duct tape holding the U.S. together.

So, yes, the cucks have—had—a glimmer of a point: as a settler state of European mutts, the U.S. was not merely an extension of its fatherland. But that has come to an end, not because of Donald Trump or the alt-right, but ultimately because of the left themselves.

Years ago, when I was skeptical of white advocates and tribalism, I wrote on my old blog In Mala Fide that a political movement like the alt-right would never work because whites in the U.S. don’t define themselves by their whiteness, unlike blacks. A reader of mine interjected by saying that whites have already been defined as white, in the negative, by the left. And he was right.

To be white is to be the world’s whipping boy. It means being blamed for everything from poverty in Africa to environmental degradation to women not having enough space to sit down on the subway. It means being told to shut up and sit down, that your opinion is worthless because of your “privilege,” and that the eventual disappearance of your people and culture is a sign of progress.

To be white, straight and a man is even worse, because you’re told that your natural masculine instincts, your natural desires to bed and wed women make you an oppressive misogynist. In 21st Century Parody World, six-year olds are allowed to take dangerous hormones so they can become a funhouse mirror version of the opposite sex, but not asking your wife for permission before you kiss her can land you in prison for rape. And if you’re not happy with this arrangement, you’re expected to sate yourself with degenerate Japanese cartoons and pornography, the bread and circuses of the globalist empire. That’s how mad the Marxists are: they don’t merely want to destroy our culture and identity; they want to destroy the very things that make us human.

Sun Tzu stated that when you have surrounded your enemy, you must give him a way to escape, or else he will fight you to the death, having nothing to lose. The left never learned that lesson, because they’ve pursued whites—white men—everywhere they’ve gone, leaving them no quarter and no place to call their own. Even video games, long the province of virginal nerds, were not safe, which is what sparked the GamerGate movement three years ago, the first successful backlash against cultural Marxism in most of our lifetimes. The white men of gaming saw leftists trying to subvert their favorite hobby, one they retreated to after society rejected them, and said no more. Enough. This line you shall not cross.

It was this spark that ignited the pile of TNT that was the Trump campaign and the alternative right. The average Trump voter isn’t explicitly aware of all the issues that we are versed in. They don’t know everything that we know. But they know, deep down, that something is wrong. They know that fifty years of mass non-white immigration and globalist free trade have ruined them financially and placed their lives and that of their children in peril. And they see, day in and day out, the chattering classes tell them that they are the problem. They see liberal arts dilettantes in Brooklyn brownstones, rent paid courtesy of Daddy’s credit line, banging out “thinkpieces” every day claiming that all the world’s ills are thanks to those stupid white rednecks in Kentucky, Michigan or Pennsylvania, and as soon as they kick the bucket and give way to all these newcomers from Mexico, we’ll be all better off.

White Americans saw this repulsive display and they said no more. Enough. This line you shall not cross. And they turned out to support a champion who would fight for them. Donald Trump is the first politician in years who treats white Americans as a group with interests of their own, interests that are worth defending. While he is far from the alt-right ideologically, Trump’s nationalist presidency is aiding the maturation of white America from an empty, consumerist frontier into a people with an identity of their own, one that runs deeper than pop culture effluvia and waxing autistic about “muh Constitution.”

I’ll end with an interesting anecdote.

Over the past few years, I’ve noticed an increasing number of houses in upstate New York flying Confederate flags. Seems absurd on the face of it. Why are white New Yorkers adorning their homes with the flag flown by the Southern rebels that their ancestors fought in the Civil War? After all, you don’t see many Poles flying the Hammer and Sickle, or many Koreans paying obeisance to the emperor of Japan. Then it hit me: the U.S. has become so deracinated and so debauched that rural Northern whites are reaching for any emblem of culture that they can get their hands on, anything that they can call theirs.

To the cultural Marxists, the Confederate flag represents white America, the white America they seek to destroy and replace with foreigners, a symbol that drives them insane with hatred. To rural whites across the U.S., lambasted as the embodiment of everything wrong with the world, the Confederate flag is a gesture of defiance to those who would see them dead and buried. A symbol of implicit white identity, transcending the petty regional differences between North and South, united against the forces of globalism, multiculturalism, and degeneracy.

None of us can say for certain whether this a struggle our people will win. But I can say this: we will not lie down and die either. Regardless of how the next eight years play out, the dragon of white identity has been roused from his slumber, and he’s not going back to bed anytime soon.

As my friend the Bechtloff says, I’ve made my peace with God. Let’s dance.

Thank you.

Kurt Schlitler #racist #wingnut townhall.com

We should all be ready to do our duty as American citizens and, when duty calls, each of us should embrace our inner Rooftop Korean.

The year was 1992, 27 years ago right about now, and the city was Los Angeles. Several police officers who got into a videotaped brawl with a petty criminal named Rodney King were acquitted of beating him up. The city exploded. It was chaos.
I was a first-year law student, back a year from the Gulf War, and I had just joined the California Army National Guard. My unit was the 3rd Battalion, 160th Infantry, and we got called up early the first night and were on the streets for three long weeks. Making it even more delightful was the fact that the unit was in Inglewood, which was pretty much on fire. They burned most everything around, except our armory – that would have gone badly for them – and the Astro Burger.
My battalion commander grabbed then-First Lieutenant Schlichter, and we went all over the city in his humvee as he led his deployed and dispersed troops. Our soldiers came, in large part, from the areas most effected by the riots, and they were notably unpleasant to the thugs and criminals who quickly discovered our guys had no patience for nonsense. One dummy discovered that the hard way when he tried to run over some Guard soldiers from another battalion; he had a closed casket funeral.
The city went insane. Order simply ceased to exist. It was Lord of the Flies. I remember a cop totally breaking down because everything was completely out of control.
But I had a M16A1 – a real assault rifle – and I had a bunch of buddies with M16A1s. The regular folks … not so much. The decent people of LA were terrified, and with good reason. See, the dirty little secret of civilization is that it’s designed to maintain order when 99.9% of folks are orderly. But, say, if just 2% of folks stop playing by the rules…uh oh. Say LA’s population was 15 million in 1992…that’s 300,000 bad guys. There were maybe 20,000 cops in all the area agencies then, plus 20,000 National Guard soldiers and airman, plus another 10,000 active soldiers and Marines the feds brought in. Law enforcement is based on the concept that most people will behave and that the crooks will be overwhelmed by sheer numbers of officers. But in the LA riots, law enforcement was massively outnumbered. Imposing order took time.
And until then, our citizens were on their own, at the mercy of the mob. Betting that the cavalry was going to come save you was a losing bet.
LA’s Korean shopkeepers knew that. They operated many small businesses in some of the least fashionable areas of Los Angeles, and they were already widely hated by activists, being scapegoated for problems and pathologies that long pre-dated their immigration to Southern California. So, they became targets for the mobs.
Bad decision by the mobs.
See, most of these Koreans had done their mandatory service in the Republic of Korea’s Army. Those ROK soldiers are the real deal – the Norks are not a theoretical threat and the South Korean army does not spend a lot of time talking about feelings. They were some solid dudes. So, when the local dirtbags showed up for some casual looting, they noticed the rooftops were lined with hardcore guys packing some serious heat, including the kind of scary rifles that the Democrats want to ban.
The Rooftop Koreans.
It did not take long for the bad guys to realize that the Rooftop Koreans were not playing games – they were playing for keeps. The mob went away in search of softer targets.
There’s a lesson there.
Our first responders are awesome, but it takes nothing away from their heroism to point out that the title “first responder” is a misnomer. The citizens on site are the first responders. And they should be ready to respond. We all should. Personally.
Some duties of citizen should never be outsourced. If you are an able-bodied adult, it’s your duty to know how to stop the bleeding and give CPR until the pros who do it for a living arrive. And it’s your duty (and right) to defend yourself, your family, your community and your Constitution. With guns – effective guns, which sometimes means your concealed pistol and sometimes means the guns that those who want you defenseless call “assault weapons.”

Ban them? We should insist non-felon adult, able-bodied citizens own them and become proficient with them because all that law and order you see around you can disappear in a heartbeat. I watched it happen up close and personal, in one of America’s biggest cities. And as the Rooftop Koreans recognized, groups of citizens with (preferably) semi-auto rifles with 30-rounds mag is the only thing that is going to keep a mob in check.
It’s your duty to be prepared to defend our community. Your duty. Yes, being a citizen of a free country is sometimes hard. Too bad. Tighten up and be ready and able to pick up a weapon. Whether it’s a riots and disaster, or whether it’s some scumbag who decides to shoot up your house of worship or a shopping mall, it’s on you.
You have a job to do when chaos comes – no shirking your responsibility and outsourcing it to the local police or the Army. Being a citizen is not a spectator sport.

Now, the left does not see things that way. The mere idea of a good guy with a gun makes them wet themselves. The left hates the notion that we citizens might take personal ownership of, and responsibility for, the security of our own country – that we might act like citizens. See, citizens are unruly. Stubborn. Uppity. We’re hard to control at the best of times. Armed, 300 million of us are impossible to control, unless we consent to it.
Now, the Founders, who enshrined the natural right of free men to keep and bear arms in our Bill of Rights preceded only by the rights of free speech and freedom of religion, knew this. To them, an armed citizenry that is prepared, mentally and logistically, to respond to threats to the people is a feature.
To the liberal elite, it is a bug.
The elite wants serfs, not citizens. It recognizes the threat in our possession of modern weaponry. But it’s not a threat of us causing evil but of us quelling it. An armed people is a free people, and a free people demands its rights and its say in its own governance. Liberals talk about “gun control,” but what the really want is total control.
Of us.
There are two models to which Americans can aspire. One is to be citizens, armed and sovereign. The other is to be serfs, disarmed and obedient to their liberal elite overlords. Choose wisely.
Choose to be a Rooftop Korean.

The New Communist Order #fundie forum.nationstates.net

Would Slavery Exist in the Ideal Minarchical Society?

Minarchism is a form of Libertarianism, with the philosophy that the ideal government would exist to provide only a few necessary services to the people. It often limits the State to three institutions, that could not be handled properly by the free market, the military, the police, and the courts. The actions that these three institutions would provide would be to protect citizens from aggression, and protect their property laws and natural rights. Now, I go back and forth between whether or not slavery would exist in this ideal Minarchical society, as the government would ideally protect citizens' natural rights to life, liberty and, property, and therefore, society would not allow slavery. Yet, this line of thinking becomes problematic, because who/what would decide who is a citizen and who is not? I go back and forth in my mind and was wondering what you guys think? Ultimately, I believe slavery would exist as there is no definite way to define who or what would be a citizen in this society, yet my mind is open and my opinion is subject to change on this topic.

Rev. Louis Farrakhan #crackpot #racist #fundie finalcall.com

There was someone else, on Twitter, who “tweeted” me: “Oh, you shouldn’t use the term ‘the making of the devil’, you should say ‘create’.” I want to say to our Twitter person: We used the proper terms, because “the devil” is not a created being, he is made from a created essence that was in The Original Man. So, he is called a “made man from” The Original Man Who is The Creation of Allah.

The Black Scientists (Gods) and their determined Ideas that serve as ‘signs of significant change’

In Part 27, we mentioned that there was a “wobble” or an imperfection in the original creation, but, that Almighty God Allah—knowing what we could not know, that what He originated yet needed “some work” to be done on it to perfect it: He set in motion a Course… And, the Honorable Elijah Muhammad taught us that the number “6” represents “incompletion,” “imperfection”; thus, it continues to bring about dissatisfaction that continues to move The Creation toward perfection. This tells us that since everything is imperfect, because it is incomplete, yet it is moving towards completion, and towards perfection.

We also mentioned that the greatest experiments were experiments on “The Self”; and that one of our Scientists, 66 trillion years ago, tried to kill all on the planet that was then called “Moon.” Because he could not get the people to speak the same dialect, out of his frustration with his inability to accomplish what he willed he literally became so frustrated and so disappointed that he decided to destroy the planet and himself.

What that Scientist did was “prove the impossible,” because in The Black Man, The Original Man, is a “built-in safeguard” against total self-destruction. So even though The Enemy today may think that he can do what that great Scientist could not, for thinking such and planning such, and trying to do such, The Enemy will be totally destroyed. He will never be able to destroy The Black Man, for in destroying Us he would be destroying that which is The Creator of all that you see.

Also, we stated that there were two stars that The Great Mahdi, Master Fard Muhammad, showed the Honorable Elijah Muhammad in the southeastern sky; a “red” and a “blue” star. He said whenever these stars appear, it is a sign of “a universal change”—and that those stars appear every “50,000 years.” In Message To The Blackman in America, in the chapter titled “Devil,” the Honorable Elijah Muhammad taught us that 50,000 years ago one of our Scientists (or “Gods”) wanted to make a people close to nature; that could conquer “the jungle life,” and master it.

This Scientist was one of The 12 Major Scientists; and when he took his Idea before the other Scientists, the other 11 disagreed with him, and They would not allow him to do what he desired to do in the Holy Land. So he, with his family, was exiled into the jungles of East Asia, as we now call it “Africa,” where he made a new people out of The Original Black Man of that time. His name was Shabazz—and what he did was make a people that were so strong, so powerful, that just as you cannot destroy “nature”: No matter what would be put on this people, you would never be able to destroy them.

Guest #racist amren.com

This isn't what blacks really want. What blacks REALLY want....and MOST of the black AA scum in law, especially those that manage to infiltrate law schools (where this is now taught as standard doctrine in almost all law schools now) and judgeships, is to have some form of this for CRIME.

It's outrageous and insane but most people have no idea its going on because the media censors it but this is out in the open now, although purposefully distorted. When you hear anyone comment that blacks are disproportionately in jail, especially for violent crime, understand that they don't mean that a large number of innocent blacks end up in prison due to racism. No no no.....what they mean is that a large number of GUILTY blacks should not go to prison because it is not fair that so many more of them are in prison than whites. Only retarded blacks can't figure out that the reason for the arrests and punishment is guilt, not random. They literally don't understand guilt. A common saying is "I din' do nuffin....followed by sucking their gums".....meanwhile their dead victim is 2 feet from them and the whole thing is on video. They aren't lying. They don't understand morality, law, or that punishment is anything but arbitrary. Heck, they are raised like this....beaten and sodomized at random while bad behavior (and good) is completely ignored. They are taught and told, early and often that, whatever you can get away with or whomever you can get away with hurting is right.

It's the jews and handful of white liberals that support this that understand full well what is going on. THEIR goals is to hurt white people. There is not a single anti-death penalty advocate that doesn't have this goal as his real one. Not a single person who works on behalf of prisoners who doesn't keep this goal (to get vicious scum out of prison to kill, rape, and hurt white people) in the back of their head at all times.

White people have not acted appropriately to these things for a long long time. A good beginning would be to arrest everyone who wants race equal punishment in schools and give them 10 lashes with a cane....malay style.

Mencius Moldbug #fundie unqualified-reservations.blogspot.de

(Extract from A gentle introduction to Unqualified Reservations (part 1))

The triangle of professors, bureaucrats, and public opinion is stable, because the professors teach as well as advise. Of course, there is a time lag. The system experiences some strain. But it will stay together, so long as the polarity does not randomly reverse - ie, because Cthulhu decides to suddenly swim right rather than left.

But no. Cthulhu may swim slowly. But he only swims left. Isn't that interesting?

In the history of American democracy, if you take the mainstream political position (Overton Window, if you care) at time T1, and place it on the map at a later time T2, T1 is always way to the right, near the fringe or outside it. So, for instance, if you take the average segregationist voter of 1963 and let him vote in the 2008 election, he will be way out on the wacky right wing. Cthulhu has passed him by.

Where is the John Birch Society, now? What about the NAACP? Cthulhu swims left, and left, and left. There are a few brief periods of true reaction in American history - the post-Reconstruction era or Redemption, the Return to Normalcy of Harding, and a couple of others. But they are unusual and feeble compared to the great leftward shift. Nor, most important for our hypothesis, did they come from the universities; in the 20th century, periods of reaction are always periods of anti-university activity. (McCarthyism is especially noticeable as such. And you'll note that McCarthy didn't exactly win.)

The principle applies even in wars. In each of the following conflicts in Anglo-American history, you see a victory of left over right: the English Civil War, the so-called "Glorious Revolution," the American Revolution, the American Civil War, World War I, and World War II. Clearly, if you want to be on the winning team, you want to start on the left side of the field.

And we are starting to piece the puzzle together. The leftward direction is, itself, the principle of organization. In a two-party democratic system, with Whigs and Tories, Democrats and Republicans, etc, the intelligentsia is always Whig. Their party is simply the party of those who want to get ahead. It is the party of celebrities, the ultra-rich, the great and good, the flexible of conscience. Tories are always misfits, losers, or just plain stupid - sometimes all three.

And the left is the party of the educational organs, at whose head is the press and universities. This is our 20th-century version of the established church. Here at UR, we sometimes call it the Cathedral - although it is essential to note that, unlike an ordinary organization, it has no central administrator. No, this will not make it easier to deal with.

This strange chiral asymmetry implies some fundamental difference between right and left. What is that difference? What does it even mean to be left rather than right? How can an entire system of independent thinkers and institutions, without any central coordinating agency, recognize that everyone should go left rather than right?

Rep. Rodney Garcia #psycho #wingnut billingsgazette.com

ELENA — A Billings Republican legislator said Saturday he believes the U.S. Constitution calls for the shooting or jailing of those who identify as socialists.

State Rep. Rodney Garcia, from House District 52 on the South Side, first made a statement in the form of an unprompted question at a state party gathering in Helena Friday meant to kick off election season and offer training for party members and candidates.

In his question after a speech by former Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke, who was Montana’s representative in the U.S. House for two years, Garcia said he was concerned about socialists “entering our government” and socialists “everywhere” in Billings, before saying the Constitution says to either shoot socialists or put them in jail.

The Montana Republican Party later condemned Garcia's remarks.

In this year's presidential election, President Donald Trump has often called Democrats "radical socialists" in an attempt to use the term socialism, which is defined as theories about collective or government ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution, as a boogeyman-like phrase to criticize proposals from Democrats where the federal government would play a larger role in areas like health care or education.

All but one of the Democratic Party candidates have repeatedly explained they are not socialists, while Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist.

After Zinke responded with a non sequitur “You know, Montana’s a great state,” Garcia said back: “We have to do something.”

Zinke’s answer to Garcia didn’t engage in Garcia's statement and pivoted to talk about the former Secretary's effort to open satellite offices of the Interior department in the western part of the U.S.

On Saturday, a reporter asked Garcia to clarify his remarks.

“So actually in the Constitution of the United States (if) they are found guilty of being a socialist member you either go to prison or are shot,” Garcia said.

Garcia could not to point to where in the Constitution it says socialists could be shot or jailed.

Asked to clarify if he thought it was fair to shoot or jail a socialist, including those who live in Montana, Garcia said yes.

“They’re enemies of the free state,” Garcia said. “What do we do with our enemies in war? In Vietnam, (Afghanistan), all those. What did we do?”

Asked if that was an appropriate response to his opponent from the last election cycle, Garcia said “according to the Constitution, I’m telling you.”

“I agree with my Constitution,” Garcia said. “That’s what makes us free. We’re not a democracy, we’re a Republic Constitution.”

In 2018 Garcia ran against Amelia Marquez for the House District 52 seat in Billings.

Marquez said Saturday she is associated with the Montana Democratic Party and is an eastern member at-large with the party’s executive board. She said she is also a democratic socialist and her political views align with those of Sanders.

Marquez said Saturday after being told about Garcia's statements she wished the state legislator would spend more time talking to his constituents about their needs.

“I wish Rep. Garcia would continue to focus on the issues rather than this constant worry over things that are somewhat ludicrous,” Marquez said.

Garcia said he views what he sees as an influx of socialism in Montana as a “very dangerous” situation and that socialism has destroyed countries like Venezuela.

“They’re teaching that to kids. Thank God my grandkids know it’s wrong because I teach them. And it’s a very dangerous situation," Garcia said.

Garcia added he believes socialism is growing, citing advertising he says is done by socialists on Facebook.

Garcia is not new to controversy. During the 2019 state legislative session in the midst of debate over child protective services, he went on a conservative radio show to accuse child protection workers of kidnapping children. He was forced to return a $3,000 campaign contribution in 2018. He also proposed a bill during the 2019 session that would have had the state of Montana buy the Colstrip power plant. It was tabled in committee.

The Montana Republican Party issued a statement Saturday censuring Garcia’s comments. When Garcia spoke Friday there was laughter after his question; some of those asked by a reporter about it said it was a response to an uncomfortable situation.

“The Montana Republican Party wholeheartedly condemns the comment that was made and under no circumstance is violence against someone with opposing political views acceptable,” said Spenser Merwin, the MT GOP executive director. “It’s disappointing that this isolated incident took away from the weekend’s events which showcased the strength of our statewide candidates and the importance of the upcoming election.”

The Montana Democratic Party on Saturday evening released a statement decrying Garcia.

John Ramirez #fundie search.stillsmallvoicetriage.org

John Ramirez, Escape from Hell Ex-Satanist

I grew up in a neighborhood that, first of all, the first killing that I experienced was feet away from me when I went to go in and get a gallon of milk. Was only 10 feet away from me, they shot a guy, like, 7 times. They shot him 7 times, it was a young boy. I've seen killings after killings after killings. In order to survive in the streets of the South Bronx you had to be a killer, you have to be a murderer, you have to smart, you have to be slick. On my father's side, it was all witches and warlocks. We lived on witchcraft, we had a contract right with the devil himself. I remember when I was younger, 8 or 9 years old, I seen him going through the room to worship the devil. I could see the presence of the devil come into that room. And my father was worshipping, speak in demonic tongues and worship and put flowers and put candles and put water out. 7:00 at night until 5:00 in the morning. I was already going to demonic church, I was going to witchcraft church. I was being trained to be a warlock, I was being trained with witches in the religion for 30 years, 40 years, 50 years. It was training me to know how to speak to principalities, spirits in the ground, the devil himself. You couldn't speak to the devil right away, you had to earn your right to speak to the devil.

In the first mass killing that they did in my neighborhood was at this house right here. The husband stabbed a lady 52 times and cut her ears off - here. And then me, my brothers would hang out with their daughter and we came to the house to walk them back home, to go hang out with the daughters right here and the daughters found their mother cut up to pieces here, in this house.

I was in a schoolyard playing with some friends in a schoolyard. A pastor came and they had this band came in, they were singing songs and people started to gather in the schoolyard. It was an amazing atmosphere, you know. Amazing joy in the schoolyard. I came from a broken home. This pastor's up on stage and he's talking about some Bible story and some Bible book and he's talking about how God loves everybody, ya know, this other stuff. And for the first time I'm getting kind of captivated. "Wow, maybe God does love me. Maybe God does want me. Maybe God wants my family. Maybe God wants to touch me and my family. Maybe He wants to change my family around." I said, "Wow, I can get some of that, I can get some of that. 'Cause He's coming my way." and for the first time ever I felt an incredible love that was indescribable. There's pastors coming off the stage, praying for people, touching people. So I said, "Now, it's my turn. Now he's gonna touch me." Ya know? Now Jesus is gonna accept me, Jesus is gonna show me what love is about. And this pastor passed me by. Never touched me, never laid his hands on me. He went down the line, and when he came up to me, he passed me by, he touched the other person. And I said, "Jesus don't love me, either. My dad don't love me, Jesus don't love me." I come from a broken home. Jesus - he likes the fact that my mother gets beat up. He likes the fact that I go to bed hungry. He like the fact that, you know, there's no heat in my apartment. he likes the fact that when we go to school, we're rejects, we're misfits in school.

So, this Jesus guy - he's just like my father. He's no different. He's just like my dad.

So, I went home, broken. I went home sad. I remember a week later, a couple of weeks later - two weeks later, I went to the schoolyard, hanging out, playing with a friend of mine's. I heard something fell and hit the ground. It was a voodoo necklace. So, I took the voodoo necklace - it had many colors - I took it, I put it on and the necklace was my first contract with the devil.

We went to a Tarot card reading, and when I went to a Tarot card reading, I was a little boy, I was 10 years old - we went in. The lady doing the Tarot card reading, called the witch lady, doing the Tarot card reading she was fascinated - had her eyes fixed on me. And she said, "This boy's got, this boy - we want him. We want him, we want him. The ___ which is Santeria want him. Spiritualism___ is Spanish, Santeria they call it worship of the saints, but it's not worship of the saints, it's worship of demons. We want him. And if you don't give him to us, he's going to lose his eyesight in 30 days." So, my mother was so desperate as a mother, my mother sold her furniture. My mother sold her bedroom set to get $250 to do my first ceremony, because this lady put so much fear in us, so much fear in my mother that my mother had to sleep on the floor, because there was no bedroom for her to sleep on, because she didn't want me to lose my eyesight.

So, they initiated me to the dark side. I was 8 to 10 years old. Their first love, the first contact I had, as a 10 year old boy, the devil showed up and took the offering of giving my life to him. And they put five beads around my neck. The five worst demons of principalities that are under Satan. They put them right around my neck, which is Santeria. They put them right around my neck and they said, "These are your spiritual guides. These are going to be your guardian angels, and they are going to take care of your life from now on."

(driving downtown) This is the building, this corner building here? Used to be almost abandoned, this building here - it's in the book. It used to be so broken down, my brother used to get the water from the pump - the pump (fire hydrant) right there. The apartment was all empty, all the apartments were abandoned, Only me and my family lived here. My whole childhood was stolen, my whole childhood was worshipping the devil, going to demon church. I would go to demon church from 7:00 in the evening to 5:00 in the morning, being trained by witches and warlocks, powers, principals, rites - who owned this region, who's in this region, who's running this principality, what principality name is this? I had...how to channel powers. By the age of 13 years old I was astro-projecting, my body - I would leave my body home and go to regions, in through the spirit and curse regions, curse a neighborhood, put the spirit of prostitution, the spirit of drugs onto the neighborhood. Homosexuality spirits here, demonic spirits here, a spirit of murder, spirit of suicide. I knew how to channel all these spirits into a neighborhood. At the age of 15, 16 years old, I was going into hospitals and putting death and ICU, death in one room so this person could die, because I wanted to be promoted with the devil. To move up the ranks, to be the biggest devil worshipper in New York City. The devil became my daddy. He replaced my dad, because I prayed - I said, "You kill my dad..." At the age of 33 years old my dad got shot in a nightclub, in the face, a woman that wasn't even his, when he had a good woman home - the devil took him out. The devil said, "I replaced the old to keep the new." And the devil became my daddy.

There was a club here, and my father died there. 33 years old. And we lived over there. And then, when I was 11 years old little boy, there was a store right here on the corner and a guy got shot in the street right there, right there - on the little corner here? Guy got killed there when I went to get the gallon of milk.

And I moved up the ranks, through devil worshipping, I moved up the ranks - I moved up through principalities and demons to the point that I was able to just sit with the devil like I'm sitting with you today. And the devil would manifest himself in human form, his presence would come into the room. And I would speak to the devil all night long. He would give me assignments. I would go to five clubs, five lounges a night, to look for people to recruit for the dark side. I would tell people their fortune. I would tell people their lifes, tell people the things that they did, things that was going to happen to them. Then they had no clue who I was, they didn't know who I was, I just had the demonic powers. I had a taste for blood. I would kill animals and drink their blood every week. If I didn't have money, didn't had time to buy an animal, I would cut myself and drink my own blood. The ring of the people that I was with, there was this demonic world: doctors, lawyers, principals, judges, police officers - they were all into witchcraft. Even singers today that are very well known. I would move principalities on that region to control demons on the ground operate to cut down the church, to cut down the growth of the church. To cut down the opportunity for people to get saved. I would be drunk, I'd come out of a club, half demon possessed, drunk. I was standing in the middle of the street and say to God, "Come down. You want some of this? You want me to slap you in your face? You want me to spit in your face? You come and mess with me."

I got married on Halloween. I had a demonic wedding on Halloween. I got married on Halloween. All the demons and principalities from different regions of around the work came to my wedding. No human beings came to my wedding, they were afraid to come to my wedding. So, I had a crazy...I sent out invitations, no one showed up. There were no wedding gifts. But demons came to my wedding, they baptized(?) my wedding. So my wife was a witch, I was a witch and then my daughter was born and I was training her to be a witch, too.

I remember the first time that I was going to sacrifice my first human being. The devil was sitting in the passenger side of my car when I parked. He said, "You love me?" I said, "Of course I love you, Dad." He said, "The guy on the rooftop, he's trying to...he's going to try to take you and hurt you and take your money. You'll kill him if you love me." So when I went up there to the rooftop, I lived on the 12th floor, I remember that. When I went up to the rooftop, I remember the part that he was hiding behind. He was hiding behind the stairway. This guy was 6'5", 250 pounds. I was half demon possessed. I felt that the demon went into me, it wasn't me anymore. So I was going to drag him into my apartment and stab him in the neck, 'cause I had a _____pot - it weighed about a hundred pounds plus, plus I had 9 machetes in it, it had knives in it that I ____ the roosters with. But when I went to grab this guy, I wanted to bring him to my apartment, he got off my hands, and just disappeared. He went down the stories - I mean this guy was like an Olympic athlete, he just - woosh - gone, he just disappeared. And I couldn't grab him and kill him. I was very disappointed that I couldn't kill my first human being.

(walking down a street, pointing to the side of a building) People wrote graffiti over it - this is a demon right here. Look at the demon that runs the gates of Hell. This is the one I was telling you about that is in my book on Santeria, right here. This little demon. This is the demon that runs Haiti. The principality over Haiti. The one that's over there is the principality over Islam. Look at this. To trap the people. The Truth. The Truth will set you free. They put that up there so that people can think they're part of this. (the cross.)

What is this place?

This a place where everyone in the park comes here to __? in witchcraft to hurt people, kill people. This is the place. We can go inside. Come on.

If I tell you I was going to kill you in 30 days, you prepare for your funeral, you was going to die in 30 days. I don't care who you were, I don't care who you knew, I don't care what religion you call yourself - you say you were Catholic, you were Christian, you say you were a believer - I was going to kill you. UNLESS you had a real relationship with Jesus Christ.

The lady that lived downstairs, she came up, she told me her husband was cheating. I want you to kill the woman he's cheating with, put a witchcraft spell on her and kill her. How much you charge me?

I said, "Look. Come back, I'm going to speak to the devil, my Daddy, for a time. Come back and I'll let you know in a couple days." The lady came back, the devil told me what to buy, he said to buy a coffin box, buy 21 black candles. Buy an image of the lady, put in the box, you know, to do the witchcraft to kill this lady. So we were going to do her for 21 days, she was going to die. after 21 days we were going to do her funeral. So the lady came to my house, we were going to charge her $10,000 dollars, I told her, to kill the lady. I said "Sure. I tell you what - I know you, you been good to me, everybody house parties...give me $7,000. I give you 30% off. I said, "I'll kill her. Give me - I'll take 30% off the 10, give me $7,000." So, when the lady was going to leave my house, she said, "By the way, the lady's a Christian. The lady's a Christian." I said, "I'll kill her for free." I said, "I don't need the money. I'll kill her for free. I'm going to teach these Christians a lesson they're gonna learn. I'll kill her for free." I told her, I don't want your money -I'll kill her for free.

So I did the voodoo thing, I did the witchcraft thing and 21 days went by and the lady didn't die. A month went by, the lady didn't die. And I was like, wow - what's going on? I mean, my reputation's on the line. So I called the devil, I called the demons that were assigned - I increased the witchcraft. I increased the witchcraft, I doubled the witchcraft on her, so she could die, like, overnight. Nothing was going on, nothing was going on. I was home at night and the devil shows up, the presence of the devil comes into my house. He tell me, "We have to abort the plan on the lady you want to kill." And I said, "Why would we want to abort the plan? My reputation is on the line. I'm a witch, I'm a warlock. If I don't kill the lady, people won't think that I have any powers." The devil say, "You don't understand. The God that she serves said don't - leave her alone. Don't touch her." And I said, "Who's this God?" He said, "The God that she serves."

I was so angry, I said no, give it one more week, but let's kill her. He said, "No. The God that she serves said leave her alone." From the witchcraft that I did on the lady, she should have been dead in less than 21 days.

(In a store)This is Jezebel. This is Jezebel in their religion. This is how it works. See these statues here, they don't mean nothing, but it's the demon behind it. So in order for me to identify with this, this has to be created, because i can't identify to a spirit. I can't identify to the spirit, we have nothing in common. I'm humanity, a spirit is immortality. A spirit is a spirit demon. I can't relate to it, so in order for me to relate to it, you have to put this guy in the middle, so I can relate to it, because he's human form. He looks like a human being. There's a story behind this guy, so you and I can related to him. so the demon operates through him. Understand? Same thing with these guys. And then they give themselves names and days and birthdays. The American Indians can get caught up with demonic forces, they can get caught up into the occult. These are the entrapment of the Native American Indians. But those are statues that the people use in demonic ways, in demonic religion. There's nothing in here that is holy, there's nothing...the only thing holy here is us standing here.

What happens in this place?

This here in the back, they do witchcraft in the back, they do voodoo, they do with spells in the back, they do cleansings in the back. All these demons they want you to buy a new statue so you can take a demon home. See, selected prayers. They make you believe that you're praying to God. Look. I used to use this book, selected prayers. They make you think that you're praying to God, but these prayers are not Godly prayers. Nothing in the Bible here, say nothing about the Bible, the crucifixion.

We had a book in New York City, in American. I was the third person to get this book that had symbols in the book of different demons, different principalities, of different ways of killing people with the witchcraft. I mean this book was so...no one had a copy of this book. You couldn't have a copy of this book unless the devil signed off on you. And I was the third person to receive that book. And I would take symbols in that book and do witchcraft to people, put people...make people lose their mind. I put witchcraft on people, make people get diseases out of nowhere. I put witchcraft on people, make people get leprosy. I put witchcraft on people, make people get cancer. I mean, I gave witchcraft to people, I gave people miscarriages, I gave people abortions, I put people in hospitals for surgeries, that didn't even have to go for surgeries. I did witchcraft so people would lose their minds. I spirits of bi-polar, of schizophrenia, spirits of disease on people. I put suicide spirits on people. I'd be up all night long, praying and talking to the devil - when Christians can't even go to church for one hour. When Christians can't even pray for one hour.

The spirit realm is more real than the natural realm. And we fail to see that. In whatever's not covered with Jesus Christ is an easy target to bring down. Like, and atheist - I could kill him easily. They are easy to kill. The Jehovah Witness was easy to destroy. The Mormon was easy to destroy. The people that walk around and say, "We don't believe in the devil." they were easy to destroy, because they didn't know how to seek any spiritual help.

I remember a time when Nicky Cruz came to...a Nicky Cruz group came into my neighborhood and they were called TRUCE. They would come and do drive-bys in my neighborhood. They would do, like, worship and then they would preach a word and then go to another corner and do the same thing. And I came after these groups to try to put, to try to bring them down, this group. And they were young kids, they were like 18, 17, 16, 20 - I mean. So I said how do they dare to place this junk, this filthy music in my neighborhood - see, they would call worship. This filthy music in my neighborhood, I would go after them. I would destroy these kids. So when I went up to where they were at, there was a wall of fire around them. I couldn't penetrate against them. And there was something that pushed me back, every time I try to throw demonic forces against them, something there would just push me back and I was never able to touch these kids. And I said, there was something here. It's not right. Something is not falling into place. So I walked away, I left them alone. I didn't want to deal with them, I said, okay - they won this first round.

(back in a store) So, it's obvious there are spirits here watching us.

Oh yeah, of course they're watching us.

Yeah, and so we're all protected, we're all...

Yeah, we're protected. We're under the Blood, brother. There ain't nothing like the Blood of Jesus. Amen? There's nothing that can touch us. We got a hedge of protection around us and we can walk into this place, we can chase demons out of here, we can curse the place to the ground, in Jesus' name and there's nothing that the devil can do.

I mean, I had so much money. Beautiful cars, beautiful woman, I had it all. I lived in a world that people...my neighborhood, my neighbors were terrified of who I was. They said, you mess with that guy, your family will die. You mess with that guy, he gonna get a gun, he'll kill you in your sleep. My daddy was awesome, my daddy was...he knew had had...he give me powers beyond what I could imagine. He gave me powers that people have fear of me, police have fear of me, the securities in my neighborhood fear me. People that knew that I was a devil - they would call me the devil's son. I brought Christians to their knees, not to pray, because they had no power. It wasn't because their God wasn't all powerful, don't get me wrong. Because their God was all powerful - the vessel was weak. The vessel had no prayer life, the prayer had no fasting life. And they had no relationship with God. There was a form of godliness in the person, but no power. The person was weak, the person had nothing going. He had a Bible, he had the right suit on, she had the right dress on - but there was no connection with Jesus Christ. Because they was out of His will, they was out of His promises and they was out of His divine purpose, and I had you. I owned you. I had you as a slave, I broke you, I put witchcraft on you. I kept doing that to Christian after Christian after Christian after families after churches. I'd chase everything down that represented the Cross of Jesus Christ.

(driving)Very demonic place.

So that place has an effect on the whole neighborhood, is what you're saying?

Oh yeah, of course. Oh yeah. This whole region unlocked that. That's the devil's throne, we just went into the devil's throne. (referring to the store they had been in)

That throne been there since the 80's. And then they go spend $100, $200 buying these things, and then they broke, they on welfare, public assistance. But they got money to buy all this junk, because they think their life is going to get better, they think that their life is going to improve, they gonna make progress in life, they think that they're going break generational curses. They think they're going break vex, spells, voodoo - they think they're gonna break all that, and basically, God says "I come. I'll do that for you for free."

He says give your life to Me, and I'll set you free. But they don't want that, that's too difficult for them. That's too complicated for them. But they can walk into a place like this and drop $200 and think that their life is gonna be free. And they're gonna live a life of abundance.

I had contact with the principality that runs Haiti. His name is Condero(?). I had contact with demons in Miami. I had contact with demons in Africa. I had contact with demons in New York City, principalities that run crossroads of the world. He owns 42nd street. Okay? There's a different principality that runs crossroads of the world here on 42nd street than the one that tries to run this neighborhood.

I didn't have a conscience. I remember I did witchcraft to my brother, I put him in jail for 5 years. Witchcraft - to my own brother, my own flesh and blood. I did witchcraft and put him in jail for 5 years. My other brother, there was a warlock. He came into my house one time with an attitude and the demon jumped on him. He ran out the house, he couldn't hold the pain in his stomach. My mother can bear witness to that. I did so much ceremonies in my body. I did so much ceremonies in my body, the last ceremony I did - I not only sold myself to the devil, I did a ceremony were I had to swallow animal blood and gunpowder. It was called (?) This is a ceremony of Haitian and French. If you do this ceremony with a demon - so when I go to people's houses and eat, they can't put witchcraft on the food. I did all the ceremonies you can do.

I would go to demon church. Every year, we would have a meeting, a secret meeting. All the high witches and warlocks would have this meeting to find out what principality was gonna usher out and bring in to run the region. We were more organized than the church itself. The kingdom of darkness was more organized than the church of Jesus Christ. We knew how to do ceremonies, we knew how to do things before the year was over to prepare ourselves for the next year. When Christians couldn't go to church and pray for one hour. When Christians couldn't go to church and have a consistent relationship with God. I even took a sabbatical from witchcraft and the devil punished me - took my eyesight for one year. I was completely blind for one year. Was registered with the Commissioner for the Blind. I was completely blind. They were training me to use a Seeing Eye dog, they were training me to use one of these sticks that you use to walk the streets. My mother took care of me for one year. My eyes went black. And a mist of gray went over my eyes. I was completely blind. And when I gave my life back to the devil, after 7 surgeries, the devil gave me back my eyesight. And I could see again. And that was my punishment for taking one year off, I wanted to take off. The devil said, you want one year off? I give it to you. He took my eyesight.

And that's the world I lived in. If you mess with the devil, he'll kill you, he'll kill your family. It was a fear that was great beyond measure, that you could not leave this religion. You could not leave Santeria, you could not leave ______, you could not leave spiritualism. The doctors could not explain how I lost my eyesight. Meanwhile, Christians - and would say, what Christians do bad, Christians sometimes missed the mark, and the only thing that shows up in their house is grace and mercy. When you're short with the devil, you do something the devil don't like - he kill someone. He kill your family member. I remember the devil warned this lady, he said you can't be with that person no more and she didn't care, 'cause she was in love with the person - the devil demon-possessed a homeless guy in the street. He took a hammer and hit her 17 times on her head, killed her.

One day, I was sitting home. It was amazing. I came from a nightclub the night before. I was sitting home watching a show called Jerry Springer, a crazy show - people beating each other up. I got joy outta that, I was getting joy outta that, laughing. For the first time I heard a voice say to me, "Son. I am coming soon. What are you going to do with your life?" An audible voice, shouting from across the room. And I thought it was the TV talking to me..But then I saw it can't be the TV, these people were beating each other up. This voice... I knew the voice of the devil, I would sit with the devil like I'm sitting with you today. He would come into human form, he would come in the room, he would come in sometime, the presence come into the room. The atmosphere changes and I now he was there for me, and he was talking to my conscience. I would talk back and we would talk all night long. I knew that, too. I knew him like you knew the back of your hand. I knew every demon, every principality that ran the region, that ran everything in America. Everything in Canada. Everything that ran - I know every principality that ran every occult, wicca, new age, buddhistism, Islam, Andria, spiritualism - I knew every principality that ran. I had a contract with every principality with them, I had straight A marks with every principality, with every demon in the ground, the devil, Jezebel. I had every - I knew demons that I couldn't even tell you names, because you wouldn't know who they are. I knew them all by name. And this voice was very different than any other voice. When I heard that voice come out of nowhere - it came out of the air. The Voice.

I went into shock. And then I saw a vision from the other side of the apartment like the sky was on fire, and people underneath - I saw people running for cover but there was no cover, where to hide. And I think, why did I see that vision? So I shook it off. But I remember I went to sleep, like a deep sleep, like someone put on anesthesia and I went to sleep. I ended up in a train full of people. I couldn't believe I was in a train full of people. And this train was going faster than you could ever imagine. I'd never been on something this fast on Earth. And it went into hell. And Jesus Christ took me to hell. And when I got to hell, the doors opened. I mean, there was a slam in the doors, there was an unspeakable echo that struck all the doors open and there was heat that came out of nowhere. It felt like you were gonna suffocate, the heat that came out. I ran, I got out the train and the people on the train, they had no faces. But you could see the fear on the people on the train. You could feel the fear, the impact of the fear that they were going to a place that they were never going to return. And the place was packed.

And then, I tried, I said, "I can't die here. I can't die here. This is not for me. I wasn't born to be in this place." I was saying this to myself, I was not born to be here. So I tried to find like a tunnel, a tunnel in hell. I was walking, trying to run through the tunnels in hell, trying to find a door. Maybe a window. Maybe there was a gap somewhere that I can come out and come back to reality. But there was no gap. I remember as I...the more I went into the tunnels, the more the fear gripped me, the more the suffering. I heard suffering, just draped over you. This fear drapes over you like you're wearing a garment. This fear drapes over you, something you can't even control. You have no control over. Something like, it grabs you. It don't let you go. I couldn't see the hand in front of my face. But I hear the wailing - I hear wailing. Like, you ever hear like a kid wail, an animal wail at the same time. It's like, they're kinda wailing, it's indescribable. And there was heat and a smell that was like...like if you was in the sewers or the gutters in New York City. I mean, but crazier than that. As I came to a part of the tunnel, the devil showed up. He said, "I was your Daddy. I gave you everything you needed. I took care of you. I blessed you. I protected you. I killed people for you. I did...I give you powers, I give you a name in the darkness, the kingdom of darkness. I gave you a name. When people came against you I destroyed them, because I knew you were going to be the vessel I was going to use to move my kingdom on the Earth. And now you want to leave me? Now you want to betray me? In demonic tongues, and I'm talking back to him in demonic tongues and telling him no, I'm not leaving, I'm just confused. I don't know what's going on. And he said, "No. I know what you're going to do. You're going to leave me and you're going to expose my religion. You're going to expose who i am and how I operate in the realm, in the spirit realm. Because I taught you things that I never taught no one else. I showed you. I trusted you with the things that I needed you to know so you can further my kingdom. Because I wanted to use you in a greater measure way." And in the confusion, he went to grab me. He went to grab and destroy me and the Cross of Jesus appeared. I didn't understand how a cross, a three foot cross appeared in hell, when I was wearing blue shorts and a T-shirt. And I put it on him. And when I put it on him, the devil melt like he was an infant, like an infant he melt and fell on the floor. Like, no powers. So I took that opportunity and I ran deeper into the gates, I ran deeper into the tunnels of hell, hoping that there was a door. I had...my hope was being...there was not hope in the hope at all. There was no place saying I'm coming out of here! This was it, this was the end. I had a fear that gripped me that was indescribable - I never felt fear like that, ever felt a despair - it was the opposite of what Heaven is, opposite of Joy, opposite of gladness, opposite of Peace. It was opposite of light and darkness. It was a place of torment, a place of...if I'm here, my family won't know I'm here. My daughter won't know I'm here. How would they find me? How would they look for me?

As I went deeper into the tunnel of hell, hoping that there was a door, a window, a crack somewhere that I can get out, the devil showed up again. "So now, we'll destroy you." I told him in the demonic language, I've got these marks, these are my contracts to protect me, to destroy you. He said, "Fool! I gave you those marks. Those are my marks that I OWN you. I OWN YOU. No one owns you, I do. And you're gonna live for me or you die." And he went to grab me a second time around. I said, this is it. He went to grab me a second time around - the Cross of Jesus Christ appeared in hell. There's no greater love than the Cross that would come for a sinner like me, in hell. So when David says, "If I make my bed in hell, He knows I'm there." Grace and Mercy showed up in hell. Grace and Mercy knew my address. Grace and Mercy have a plan for my life. To my unspeakable, demonic, selfish ways. Arrogant, self-centered ways in hell, when I was down for the count. Jesus Christ loved the misfit. And He said, "I have a plan for you. I love you more than you can ever imagine." And He showed up in hell. And when I woke up, my spirit came back into my body. I woke up and I bend my knee to Jesus Christ. I had $100,000 of witchcraft in my house. I threw witchcraft away, I threw religion away. I threw everything that had to do with darkness away. The people from Haiti, the people from Cuba, the people from Miami and New York said, "we have to kill him, because he knows too much. We have to destroy him. We have to kill him, because he knows too much. He's not one of us anymore."

And they came for the kill. They did their best, they came for the kill. I was asleep in the day. It was day and night when the demons showed up and tormented me 30 days. They tormented me for 30 days. They would grab me by my throat, pick me up off my bed. The room grew cold, I would lay in my bed. I'd feel another person laying next to me, ice cold, another person. I would look like this, and feel the presence. The presence was the devil himself, laying in my bed for 30 days. On and off, on and off trying to torture, trying to steal my mind, trying to rip my soul out of my body, trying to rip my spirit out of my body. I would tremble at night, like I never trembled before. 30 days. And I would cry out, I didn't know how to pray? I said, "Jesus! Jesus! Jesus!" I didn't know how to pray. I say, my sister prays - I heard her in church, she pray this way. I heard that person pray this way - I would bring all these prayers together, to try to pull them together like a puzzle, trying to fight for my life.

One day, I was in church worshipping. And I asked the Lord, "Lord, why are You letting this happen to me?" And one day I heard the voice of God again. He said, "I want to see how much you love Me. I want to see how much you trust Me." And never again, I was tormented by the devil. And I became an evangelist for Jesus Christ. Fourteen years serving the Lord and I would never trade it for nothing in the world. Over on Hallelujah Boulevard, there's a mansion for John Ramirez. And one days says, Welcome Home, well done faithful servant. And I tell you, there's nothing - I'm not talking about Christianity - I'm talking about a relationship with Jesus Christ. He is my Lord. He is my beginning and end. No weapon formed against me will ever prosper. I die when Jesus say I go Home. Not because of a witch. Not because of a person. Not because hex, voodoo, incantation - none of that can separate me from the love of God.