After reading your post, it makes me wonder if the first sex robot won’t be a canine one designed for women.

Using big words when you talk to people of color is racist. Also, using small words when you tsk to people of color is racist.

Shut up, racist.

Pretty impressive that even with most of the Pacific Ocean between Mexico and Hawaii, Hawaiian Republicans still rate Immigration third.

The real question is, will the very first boxing match see its winner shot there on the property after the match?

Yes, Jews agree that being anti-abortion is a specifically Christian value: https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-alabama-s-anti-abortion-law-this-is-what-christian-rule-looks-like-in-america-1.7248187

You beat me! I’ll just add that even though our host is not a racist antisemite like I am, merely looking for objective truth can make one look that way. Because the Jews as a group are objectively horrible.

If the sexbot can cook, clean, and satisfy a man sexually, and make sandwiches; then the primary ways a woman could compete for a share of a man’s resources would be to demonstrate superior moral values and child rearing abilities. Total game changer. If not, then it’s just an expensive fleshlight, and not important.

High carb, high fat, low nutritional value foods are cheap and quick. High protein, low glycemic index foods with a lot of different vitamins and minerals are more expensive, and take more time and energy to prepare.

Hawaii is an ethnostate, with the tiny minority populations (whites in this case) acting as foreign guests.

True. My ideas about superiority don’t matter, the results do. I’m well above replacement, and when the environment doesn’t include government stealing food from whites and giving it to Africans, the gene replication for both groups will look a lot different than it does now.

White privilege is just a subset of genetic privilege. When someone points out white privilege, they are just acknowledging our (on average) genetic superiority over other races. I miss the days when we were such a majority that we could just judge people individually, rather than by their identity group. Oh well, these are the fruits of multiculturalism.

It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late,
With long arrears to make good,
When the Saxon began to hate.

They were not easily moved,
They were icy — willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the Saxon began to hate.

Their voices were even and low.
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show
When the Saxon began to hate.

It was not preached to the crowd.
It was not taught by the state.
No man spoke it aloud
When the Saxon began to hate.

It was not suddently bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the Saxon began to hate.

Seems short for a fanfic.

Parenthetically, Clinton beat Trump 71%-26% among voters who were born outside of the US.

That’s worth a graphic.

Here’s a solution: segregation. Black territories can make law enforcement illegal. They’ll only need two cops. One whose job is to investigate crimes, and one whose job is just to watch the first guy and kill him if he pulls out his handcuffs.

Early life and education

Prager was born to modern Orthodox Jewish parents.

Every single time.

Not your average Jew on the street. The ones that get into TV, film, and media moreso. Contrast with African Americans who proudly name their children such that you know their heritage immediately.

Polygamy only works if there’s a consistent way to kill off most of the male children born. Otherwise you end up with 20% of the men with 99% of the women, and 80% of the men with nothing to lose and no hope to gain.

He betrayed a different group of coeds and recent grads in 2016. He has a whole new crop of them to betray next year.

Parenthetically, is the post’s title anti-Semitic? If not, good. Let free expression be. If so, would it be more, less, or equally anti-Semitic to assert that AIPAC is bad at what it does?

Either way, it’s anti-Semitic. Noticing that there are Jews, working in a group, towards their own ends, is anti-Semitic, regardless of whether their outcomes are good, bad, or indifferent, for any party involved.

“I’m not on board with the Joo monomania polluting a lot of right-wing comment sections but even I don’t understand why pointing out that AIPAC does what AIPAC clearly and officially does is somehow anti-Semitic.”

It’s very simple: Jews operate by having a strong ingroup preference, in societies where the majority doesn’t have an ingroup preference. Then they hide their identities to obscure their group identification from their hosts. It’s like a secret society, it only works when it’s a secret. So pointing out that they are a) not part of the host society, and b) part of a secret society, which c) is exploiting their host society, spoils the game and puts them at danger of being made to leave once again.

It’s yet another case predicted by Goebbels:

The Jew is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Jew and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

Usually, if something helps you better understand the present and predict the future, you can consider it “true,” even if you don’t like the truth.